authoritarian style. HR styles: how to choose the right one. Likert Styles of Management

17.04.2022

The path that the leader chooses for effective work with subordinates is called management style. Each of them has its own tools and methods. The authoritarian leadership style is characterized by high level disciplines.

What is an authoritarian leadership style

It is believed that the way of one-man leadership with the establishment of strict discipline is an authoritarian style of leadership. His main principle- absolute authority, the primacy of the leader. Authoritarianism is based on the ability to make quick decisions, on clear and precise orders, while not allowing objections, as well as on the denial of any manifestations of initiative on the part of subordinates. This leadership style is considered effective in cases where the organization has reached a crisis in labor discipline. However, it is this style of management that is considered dangerous due to the occurrence of staff turnover.

In pedagogy

However, this pedagogical approach has disadvantages - the socio-psychological atmosphere of such a class is unfavorable, since the student simply does not have the right to express his own opinion. Any initiative coming from a student is perceived by an authoritarian teacher as an act of self-will, which is unacceptable for the latter. Suppression of the student's will has a detrimental effect on his further socio-psychological development.

in personnel management

Management and personnel management is the area in which the authoritarian method of management is most often used. In order to increase the efficiency of the workflow, to streamline the provocative behavior of employees, a decision is made to apply a directive style. Thus, the chief himself is responsible for the progress of work, excluding the delegation of his powers in any form. An authoritarian leader gives clear instructions that staff members are required to follow unquestioningly.

Note! There are cases when the leader abused his power, which led the organization into decline - employees left their positions, from which the organization's activities as a whole suffered.

Advantages and disadvantages of such management

One of the main advantages of this management style is the effective behavior of the leader. The advantage of an authoritarian leader is that he is aware of the level of his responsibility and, in problematic, even crisis cases, is able to quickly orient himself and make certain decisions as soon as possible. It happens that companies that are in decline decide to accept help by hiring an authoritarian leader for the post of head. Undoubtedly, any existing democracy ceases to function, since the new leader assumes the only goal - to raise the company and achieves this, first of all, through tight control of the implementation of work on instructions.

Naturally, it is not without drawbacks. First of all, the psychology of a modern person in the era of freedom of speech and action is not able to work in conditions of an authoritarian attitude, which a leader can achieve through insults and humiliation. professional qualities employee. In this case, staff turnover may occur, expressed in the constant departure of employees. At the same time, newcomers do not have time to get comfortable, gain experience, and either they are fired or they leave on their own. Sooner or later, in this state of affairs, the company will cease to exist.

Basic Mistakes

An authoritarian leadership style is a tool that is expedient to use for a limited time, otherwise an authoritarian leader can cross the line, feeling the power, starting to abuse it. Given that the authoritarian style does not allow the usual friendly conversations with subordinates, many leaders often forget, and instead of issuing the usual order, they resort to sharp criticism, including insults and humiliation. Encouragement with this style of leadership is also not welcome, however, punishments for disobedience or improper execution of an order may take an inadequate form.

An authoritarian leader is a person with a huge amount of responsibility. It is unacceptable to neglect this responsibility, as well as an attempt to place it on subordinates. However, in the pursuit of performance, some leaders may lose their temper, taking out anger for existing failures, missed deadlines, etc. on employees. The only thing this will lead to is the loss of employees one by one, which clearly will not benefit the organization. It is one thing to punish or fire an employee for insubordination. Another is to intimidate him so that other team members decide to leave the workplace, devoid of motivation and faith in the positive result of hard work.

When is it effective?

There are a number of reasons why you should adopt an authoritarian leadership style. Among them, there are periods at the enterprise when the discipline of employees decreases, along with it financial indicators the organization itself, its income. An autocratic director is required to get the team working, albeit at the expense of tough measures. As a last resort, the weakest links will leave their places, to which other employees will be hired. With characteristic management, an organization that is in decline will soon take up its former positions and rush towards progress.

Note! Employees who have undergone a change in leadership style should remember that this is a temporary phenomenon. With maximum patience, obedience and skills, each member of the team will be able to become part of that historical moment when the organization emerges from the crisis.

Examples of authoritarian leadership

One of the clearest positive examples of authoritarian leaders is Henry Ford. He approached the selection of employees so carefully that he literally studied all their ins and outs. Focus on structural detail, efficient and thoughtful work allowed him to found a world-famous company.

Another example belongs to another car company, Chrysler, which was in crisis for some time. In the end, a specialist was invited who managed to combine authoritarian and democratic governance. As a result, this commonality of management orientations helped the company break out to the world level.

The authoritarian leadership style is characterized as contradictory. Many consider this style to be cruel, since the opinion, experience and skills of subordinates are not taken into account. On the other hand, there are many examples where this type of government pulled organizations out of decline. One way or another, it has its place among leaders, it is often resorted to in cases where the company is in crisis.

Video

INTRODUCTION

The effective formation of market relations in Russia is largely determined by the formation of modern managerial relations, increasing the manageability of the economy. It is management that ensures the coherence and integration of economic processes in organizations.

Management is the most important concept in market economy. It is studied by economists, entrepreneurs, financiers, bankers and everyone related to business.

“To manage means to lead an enterprise towards its goal, extracting the maximum from the available resources.” Specialists of the new time need deep knowledge of management, and for this it is necessary to clearly understand the essence and concept of management.

Personnel management at an enterprise is a type of activity that allows you to implement, generalize a wide range of issues of adapting an individual to external conditions, taking into account the personal factor in building an enterprise personnel management system.

THE CONCEPT OF MANAGEMENT STYLE

In the literature, there are many definitions of the concept of "management style", similar to each other in their main features. It can be viewed as a set of decision-making methods systematically used by the leader, influencing subordinates and communicating with them.

Management style– This is a stable set of traits of a leader, manifested in his relationship with his subordinates.

In other words, this is the way in which the boss manages subordinates and in which a pattern of his behavior is expressed, independent of specific situations.

The management style characterizes not the leader's behavior in general, but precisely the stable, invariant behavior in it. Constantly manifested in various situations. The search and use of optimal management styles are designed to increase the achievement and satisfaction of employees.

The concept of management styles was intensively developed after the Second World War. However, its development still faces a number of unresolved problems. The main problems:

Difficulties in determining the effectiveness of management style. The results to be achieved with a particular style include many components and are not easily summarized and compared with the results of applying other styles.

Difficulty in establishing cause-and-effect relationships between management style and the effectiveness of its use. Typically, management style is seen as the cause of achieving a certain result - the performance of employees. However, this causal relationship is not always true. Often it is the nature of employees' achievements (minor or high achievements) that prompts the manager to use a particular style.

The variability of the situation, especially within the organization itself. Management styles reveal their effectiveness only under certain conditions, but these conditions do not remain unchanged. Over time, both the manager and employees can change their expectations and attitudes towards each other, which can make the style ineffective, and the assessment of its use unreliable.

Despite these and some other difficulties, management styles are an important guideline in solving the problems of improving the effectiveness of leadership.

You can define the style of management in 2 ways:

By clarifying the features of the individual management style that the boss uses in relation to subordinates.

With the help of the theoretical development of a set of typical requirements for the behavior of the leader, aimed at the integration of employees and their use in the process of achieving the goals of the organization.

You can also consider the style of leadership as "stably manifesting features of the interaction of the leader with the team, formed under the influence of both objective and subjective conditions of management, and individual psychological characteristics of the personality of the leader."

Among the objective, external conditions that form the management style at a particular managerial level, one can include the nature of the team (production, research, etc.), the specifics of the tasks ahead (next, habitual or urgent, unusual), the conditions for fulfilling these tasks (favorable, unfavorable or extreme), methods and means of activity (individual, pair or group). Along with those indicated, such a factor as the level of development of the team stands out. Individually psychological features of this or that manager bring originality to his managerial activity. On the basis of the appropriate transformation of external influences, each leader manifests his own individual management style.

The study of leadership style has been conducted by psychologists for more than half a century. So researchers have accumulated to date considerable empirical material on this issue.

Management style- a method, a system of methods for influencing a leader on subordinates. One of the most important factors in the effective operation of the organization, the full realization of the potential of people and the team. Most researchers distinguish the following management styles:

Democratic style (collegiate);

Liberal style (anarchist).

Management style- This habitual the behavior of a leader towards subordinates in order to influence them and encourage them to achieve the goals of the organization. The extent to which a manager delegates, the types of authority he uses, and his concern primarily for human relations or, above all, for the accomplishment of a task, all reflect the management style that characterizes that leader.

Every organization is a unique combination of individuals, goals and objectives. Each manager is a unique person with a number of abilities. Therefore, management styles can not always be attributed to any particular category.

Authoritarian (directive) style Management is characterized by high centralization of leadership, the dominance of one-man management. The head demands that all cases be reported to him, single-handedly makes decisions or cancels them. He does not listen to the opinion of the team, he decides everything for the team himself. The prevailing methods of management are orders, punishments, remarks, reprimands, deprivation of various benefits. Control is very strict, detailed, depriving subordinates of initiative.

The interests of the cause are placed much higher than the interests of people; harshness and rudeness prevail in communication.

The manager who uses it prefers the official nature of relations, maintains a distance between himself and his subordinates, which they do not have the right to violate.

This leadership style has a negative impact on the moral and psychological climate, leads to a significant decrease in initiative, self-control and responsibility of employees.

Authoritarian management style - a leadership style in which the manager determines the goals and the entire policy as a whole, distributes responsibilities, and also for the most part specifies the appropriate procedures, manages, checks, evaluates and corrects the work performed.

1) in extreme conditions (crisis, emergency, etc.), when quick and decisive action is required, when the lack of time does not allow meetings and discussions;

2) when, due to previous conditions and reasons, anarchist moods prevail in this organization, the level of performance and labor discipline is extremely low

Historically, the first and until now the most common in practice is the authoritarian style, which is considered universal.

Experts distinguish two types of authoritarian style. "Exploitative" assumes that the manager completely concentrates the solution of all issues in his hands, does not trust his subordinates, is not interested in their opinion, takes responsibility for everything, giving only instructions to the performers. As the main form of stimulation, he uses punishment, threats, pressure.

If the leader makes a decision alone, and then simply brings it to his subordinates, then they perceive this decision as imposed from the outside and critically discuss it, even when it is really successful. Such a decision is carried out with reservations and indifferently. Employees, as a rule, rejoice at any mistake of the leader, finding in it confirmation of their negative opinion about him. As a result, subordinates get used to being executors of someone else's will, fixing in their minds the stereotype "our business is small."

For the leader, all this also does not pass without losses, since he finds himself in the position of the culprit, responsible for all the mistakes, not seeing and not knowing where and how they were made. Subordinates, although they know and notice a lot, keep quiet, either getting moral satisfaction from this, or believing that he still cannot be re-educated. The leader understands the current situation, but is powerless to blame others for the mistakes made, since the subordinates did not participate in the development of the decision. Thus, a kind vicious circle which sooner or later leads to the development of an unfavorable moral and psychological climate in an organization or unit and the creation of grounds for conflicts.

Softer "benevolent" kind of authoritarian style. The leader treats his subordinates already condescendingly, like a father, sometimes he is interested in their opinion. But even if the opinion expressed is justified, he can act in his own way, often doing it defiantly, which significantly worsens the moral and psychological climate in the team. When making decisions, he can take into account individual opinions of employees and gives a certain independence, however, under strict control, if the general policy of the company is strictly observed and all requirements and instructions are strictly followed.

Threats of punishment, although present, do not prevail.

The claims of an authoritarian leader for competence in all matters generate chaos and, ultimately, affect the effectiveness of work. Such a boss paralyzes the work of his apparatus. He not only loses the best workers, but also creates a hostile atmosphere around him that threatens himself. Subordinates depend on him, but he also depends on them in many ways. Disgruntled subordinates can let him down or misinform him.

Special studies have shown that although under the conditions of an authoritarian style of management it is possible to perform a quantitatively larger amount of work than in a democratic one, the quality of work, originality, novelty, and the presence of elements of creativity will be by the same order lower. An authoritarian style is preferable for directing simple activities focused on quantitative results.

Thus, the basis of the authoritarian style is the concentration of all power and responsibility in the hands of the leader, which gives him an advantage in setting goals and choosing the means to achieve them. The latter circumstance plays a dual role in the possibility of achieving efficiency.

On the one hand, the authoritarian management style is manifested in the order, the urgency of the task and the ability to predict the result in conditions of maximum concentration of all types of resources. On the other hand, there are tendencies to curb individual initiative and one-way flow of information from top to bottom, there is no necessary feedback.

The use of an authoritarian style, although it ensures high labor productivity, does not form the internal interest of performers in effective work. Excessive disciplinary measures cause fear and anger in a person, destroy incentives to work.

This style is applicable when subordinates are completely in the power of the leader, for example, in military service, or have unlimited trust in him, like actors to a director or athletes to a coach; and he is sure that they are not capable of acting in the right way on their own.

DEMOCRATIC MANAGEMENT STYLE (COLLEGE)

Democratic style management is characterized by the distribution of authority, initiative and responsibility between the head and deputies, the head and subordinates. The head of the democratic style always finds out the opinion of the team on important production issues, makes collective decisions. Regularly and in a timely manner informing the members of the team on issues important to them. Communication with subordinates takes place in the form of requests, wishes, recommendations, advice, rewards for high-quality and efficient work, kindly and politely; orders are applied as necessary. The leader stimulates a favorable psychological climate in the team, defends the interests of subordinates.

Democratic management style - a leadership style in which the leader develops directives, commands and orders based on proposals developed by a general meeting of employees or a circle of authorized persons.

DEMOCRATIC: CONSULTATIVE AND PARTICIPATIVE

Organizations in which the principle of democratic leadership dominates are characterized by a high degree of decentralization of powers, active participation of employees in decision-making, the creation of such conditions under which the performance of official duties is attractive to them, and success is a reward.

A true democratic leader tries to make the duties of subordinates more attractive, avoids imposing his will on them, involves them in decision-making, gives them the freedom to formulate their own goals based on the ideas of the organization.

As part of "advisory" the leader is interested in the opinion of subordinates, consults with them, seeks to use the best that they offer. Among incentive measures, encouragement prevails; punishment is used only in exceptional cases. Employees are generally satisfied with such a management system, despite the fact that most decisions are actually prompted from above, and usually try to provide their boss with all possible assistance and moral support when necessary.

"Participatory" a form of democratic management assumes that the leader fully trusts subordinates in all matters (and then they answer the same), always listens to them and uses all constructive suggestions, involves employees in setting goals and monitoring their implementation. At the same time, responsibility for the consequences of the decisions made is not shifted to subordinates. All this unites the team.

Usually, the democratic style of management is used when the performers are good, sometimes better than the leader, understand the intricacies of the work and can bring a lot of novelty and creativity to it. A democrat leader, if necessary, can compromise or even abandon the decision taken if the logic of the subordinate is convincing. Where the autocrat would act by order and pressure, the democrat tries to convince, to prove the expediency of solving the problem, the benefits that employees can receive.

At the same time, the internal satisfaction received by subordinates from the opportunity to realize their creative abilities is of paramount importance. Subordinates can independently make decisions and look for ways to implement them within the framework of the powers granted, without paying much attention to trifles.

As a rule, the environment created by the leader-democrat is also educational in nature and allows you to achieve goals at low cost. There is a positive resonance of power: the authority of the position is reinforced by personal authority. Management takes place without brute pressure, relying on the abilities of employees, respecting their dignity, experience and skill. This forms a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team.

Research has shown that you can get about twice as much work done in an authoritarian style than in a democratic one. But its quality, originality, novelty, the presence of elements of creativity will be lower by the same order. From this we can conclude that the authoritarian style is preferable for simpler types of activities focused on quantitative results, and the democratic style is preferable for complex ones, where quality comes first.

Subsequent developments led to the substantiation of two new styles, in many respects close to authoritarian and democratic.

The style in which the manager focuses on solving the task assigned to him (distributes tasks among subordinates, plans, draws up work schedules, develops approaches to their implementation, provides everything necessary, etc.) was called task-oriented (instrumental). The style when the leader creates a favorable moral and psychological climate, organizes joint work, emphasizes mutual assistance, allows performers to participate in decision-making as much as possible, encourages professional growth, etc. was named focused on subordinates (human relations).

A subordinate-oriented leadership style close to democratic contributes to increased productivity, as it gives room for people's creativity and increases their satisfaction. Its use reduces absenteeism, creates a higher morale, improves relationships in the team and the attitude of subordinates to management.

The potential benefits of a task-oriented leadership style are much like authoritarian leadership. They consist in the speed of decision-making and action, strict control over the work of subordinates. However, it puts performers in a position of dependence, generates their passivity, which ultimately leads to a decrease in work efficiency.

The leader here basically informs subordinates about their responsibilities, tasks, determines how they need to be solved, distributes responsibilities, approves plans, sets standards, controls.

Typically, leaders use either a democratic style, focused on human relations, or an authoritarian style, focused on work.

LIBERAL MANAGEMENT STYLE (BUREAUCRATIC)

liberal style management is characterized by the lack of active participation of the head in the management of the team. Such a leader “goes with the flow”, waits or requires instructions from above, or falls under the influence of the team. He prefers not to take risks, “keep his head down”, shirks the resolution of urgent conflicts, seeks to reduce his personal responsibility. He lets work take its course, rarely controls it. This style of leadership is preferable in creative teams, where employees are distinguished by independence and creative individuality.

Liberal management style - a leadership style in which the head develops directives, commands and orders that are subject to strict execution by subordinates on the basis of their own opinion, taking into account the opinions of subordinates.

LIBERAL, INCLUDING BUREAUCRATIC

When it comes to the need for incentives creativity performers to their work, most preferred liberal management style. Its essence lies in the fact that the leader sets a task for his subordinates, creates the necessary organizational conditions for work, defines its rules and sets the boundaries of the decision, while he himself fades into the background, leaving behind the functions of a consultant, arbiter, expert evaluating the results and in case of doubts and disagreements of the performers makes the final decision. It also provides employees with information, encourages, trains.

Subordinates, freed from intrusive control, independently make the necessary decisions and look for ways to implement them within the framework of the powers granted. Such work allows them to express themselves, brings satisfaction and forms a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team, generates trust between people, and contributes to the voluntary acceptance of increased obligations.

The use of this style is becoming more widespread due to the growing scale of scientific research and development, carried out by highly qualified specialists. They do not accept command, power pressure, petty guardianship, etc.

In advanced firms, coercion gives way to persuasion, and strict control to trust, subordination to cooperation, cooperation. Such soft management, aimed at creating "managed autonomy" of departments, facilitates the natural application of new management methods, which is especially important when creating innovations.

At the same time, this style can easily be transformed into bureaucratic, when the leader is completely removed from affairs, passing them into the hands of "nominees". The latter, on his behalf, manage the collective, while applying more and more authoritarian methods. At the same time, he himself pretends that the power is in his hands, but in fact he becomes more and more dependent on his voluntary assistants. A sad example of this is army hazing.

IN real life There is no “pure” leadership style, so each of the listed ones contains elements of the others to one degree or another.

One can understand why both the autocratic approach and the human relations approach have won many adherents. But now it is already clear that both those and other supporters sinned with exaggerations, drawing conclusions that were not fully supported by the facts. There are many well-documented situations where the benevolent-autocratic style has proven to be very effective.

The democratic style has its advantages, successes and disadvantages. Certainly, many organizational problems could be solved if improved human relations and worker participation in decision-making would always lead to greater satisfaction and higher productivity. Unfortunately, this does not happen. Scholars have encountered situations where workers participated in decision-making, but nevertheless, the degree of satisfaction was low, as well as situations where satisfaction was high and productivity was low.

It is clear that the relationship between leadership style, satisfaction, and performance can only be determined through long-term and extensive empirical research.

There are no "bad" or "good" management styles. The specific situation, type of activity, personal characteristics of subordinates and other factors determine the optimal ratio of each style and the prevailing leadership style. A study of the practice of managing organizations shows that each of the three leadership styles is present to one degree or another in the work of an effective leader.

Contrary to common stereotypes, the prevailing leadership style is practically independent of gender. There is a misconception that female leaders are softer and focused primarily on maintaining good relationships with business partners, while male leaders are more aggressive and result-oriented. The reasons for the separation of leadership styles may be more likely to be personality traits and temperament, rather than gender characteristics. Successful top managers - both men and women - are not adherents of only one style. As a rule, they intuitively or quite consciously combine various leadership strategies.

THEORY OF MANAGEMENT STYLES

The outstanding psychologist K. Levin, who created the theory of personality, developed and substantiated the concept of management styles. On the basis of experimental data, he identified and described 3 main styles: authoritarian (directive); democratic (collegiate); liberal (neutral). Below is a comparative description of the main management styles according to K. Levin.

The authoritarian (directive) style is characterized by the centralization of power in the hands of one leader. The leader single-handedly makes decisions, rigidly determines the activities of subordinates, fettering their initiative.

The democratic (collegiate) style is based on the fact that the leader decentralizes his managerial power. When making a decision, he consults with subordinates, who get the opportunity to take part in the development of a decision.

Liberal (permissive) style is characterized by minimal interference of the leader in the activities of subordinates. The leader acts, most often, as an intermediary, providing his subordinates with the information and materials necessary for work.

It is easy to see that the main criterion that distinguishes one management style from another is the way the manager makes a decision. There are two ways, ways of making managerial decisions - democratic and authoritarian. Which one is more efficient? Some researchers tend to believe that the democratic path is more effective: the risk of making the wrong decision is reduced, alternatives appear, new solutions appear during the discussion that are impossible with individual analysis, it becomes possible to take into account the positions and interests of everyone, etc. At the same time, further studies have shown that the concept of K. Levin, despite its clarity, simplicity and persuasiveness, has a number of significant drawbacks: it has been proven that there is no reason to believe that a democratic management style is always more effective than an authoritarian one. K. Levin himself found that the objective indicators of productivity are the same for both styles. It has been found that in some cases an authoritarian style of governance is more effective than a democratic one. What are these cases?

emergency situations that require immediate solutions;

the qualifications of workers and their general cultural level are quite low (an inverse relationship has been established between the level of development of workers and the need to use an authoritarian management style);

some people, due to their psychological characteristics, prefer to be led by an authoritarian.

It was found that both of these management styles do not occur in their pure form. Each leader, depending on the situation and his personal qualities, can be both a "democrat" and a "dictator". Sometimes it can be very difficult to recognize what management style a leader actually adheres to (both effective and ineffective).

It happens that the form and content of the leader’s work do not coincide: an authoritarian, in fact, leader behaves outwardly democratic (smiles, politely, thanks for participating in the discussion, but makes the decision alone and before the discussion itself) and vice versa. In addition, much depends on the situation - in some situations, the leader may act authoritarian, and in others - like a "democrat".

Thus, the effectiveness of management does not depend on the style of management, which means that the method of decision-making cannot act as a criterion for effective management. In other words, management can be effective or ineffective, regardless of how the leader makes the decision - authoritarian or collegial.

CONCLUSION

The science of management is based on a system of basic provisions, elements, models, styles of leadership, inherent only to it, while related to management. The behavior of one of the main and most complex subjects of management - a person is also based on certain activities, internal beliefs that determine his attitude to reality.

Close attention is paid to the development and practical application of the main basic provisions of managerial activity, correlated with the characteristics of social interactions of individuals. At the same time, importance is attached to ensuring the effectiveness of management activities: the preparation and adoption of decisions, their scientific validity, their practical implementation, and control over their implementation.

Managers must now pay more attention to the human qualities of their subordinates, their dedication to the firm and their ability to solve problems. The high rate of obsolescence and constant change that characterizes almost all industries today force managers to be constantly ready to carry out technical and organizational reforms, as well as to change the leadership style. Even the most experienced leader, who is fluent in management theory, is not immune from an unreasonable, emotional reaction to a situation.

Not only the authority of the leader and the effectiveness of his work depend on the choice of leadership style, but also the atmosphere in the team and the relationship between subordinates and the leader. When the whole organization works efficiently and smoothly enough, the manager discovers that in addition to the goals set, many other things have been achieved, including simple human happiness, mutual understanding and job satisfaction.

A modern specialist, even if he is not a leader, can fully show himself at work, but, actively interacting with the team and management, he must also have the necessary culture of communication.

Personnel management is a universal science. It covers the issues of 3 areas of business activity:

public services

Commercial organizations

non-profit organizations.

Convergence of the organizational and managerial foundations of the 3 sectors business activity requires knowledge in the field of management of employees of commercial and non-profit organizations.

The performance of a company largely depends on internal organization, the adopted system of relationships and the clarity of the distribution of duties of employees. All these factors are determined by the manager and his style of personnel management.

Under the style of personnel management is meant the nature of communication between the leader and subordinates, ways of distributing powers, responsibilities in the team. The same entrepreneur at different stages of business development may experience different management styles.

Despite the fact that in many small companies the team may have only a few people, the entrepreneur should understand the different styles and adapt their features to your business. But effective personnel management is not only communication with employees. It is also the ability to correctly distribute responsibilities, not to dump all the work on several subordinates due to a banal lack of hands. In a small business, where it is not possible to maintain a large staff, a convenient solution is to outsource some of the functions. For example, it is very convenient to entrust accounting and reporting to professional accountants and pay only for services actually rendered.

Basic styles of personnel management

IN economic theories and management textbooks describe a fairly large number of styles of personnel management. The main ones are authoritarian, democratic, liberal, business. Each system has its own advantages and disadvantages. Consider how styles and methods of personnel management are formed, change depending on the goals and stages of business development.

Liberal or family style of personnel management.

This style is based on the principle: one team - one family. How does it work in practice? Almost every novice businessman, organizing his first enterprise, gathers partners from a close circle of friends into a team - these are relatives, friends, former classmates or colleagues.

On initial stage such a company is united by a common desire to realize a common idea, earn money, resist circumstances and competitors. Since a novice entrepreneur has no experience in management and leadership, he introduces the only available knowledge and methods into management - building a team on the basis of equality of votes, an equal contribution of time and effort. The basic foundations of the family style of personnel management:

relaxed friendly style of relationships, the team is one family, all friends;
the atmosphere in the company is homely, friendly;
corporate culture- family values, comfort and coziness for everyone;
manager - a comrade with a small priority (gives a salary).

This atmosphere in the company continues until the first serious results are achieved and a solid profit is received. As the business develops, the tasks become more complicated, the number of projects increases, the first troubles begin - deadline failures, failure to fulfill obligations, problems at the external and internal levels. The usual everyday principle comes into force: we share the profit for everyone, we are one team, and troubles and losses are the problems of the owner or manager.

The result is the dismissal of friends and relatives, the recruitment of professionals, the introduction of a different management system.

Priorities	Employees
Manager's communication style	Friendly, trusting
	Transparency of personal relationships, teamwork
Making decisions	General approval
unifying idea	Family corporate culture, team spirit
	Average professional, high psychological
Employee initiative	Low or medium (no incentive)
Communicating Management Decisions	In the form of a request

Many Japanese companies serve as an example of the successful implementation of this system. But unlike start-up companies, they have a hierarchy:

manager, owner - father who cares about the company and subordinates;
the staff is united by common interests;
improvisation of employees is allowed;
the basis is trust and confidence in the future, an objective assessment and collective responsibility.

Conclusion: in most cases, the family style of personnel management works in cases where the company has long been formed, has established connections and strong market positions.

Authoritarian style of personnel management

This style is the exact opposite of the family system of government. The leadership position in the authoritarian style of personnel management is built on the principle of strict discipline and unquestioning obedience to the orders of the boss. The authoritarian system is characterized by:

rigid hierarchy;
result orientation;
clear distribution of responsibilities;
suppression of employee initiatives.

The main unifying idea with an authoritarian style of personnel management is to achieve maximum results, achieve high performance, overtake competitors. The advantages of the system include the rapid achievement of goals, the disadvantages are the difficult psychological climate in the team, the concentration of all management functions on the leader, and a high staff turnover.

Priorities	goal, result
Manager's communication style	Remote
	Closed
Making decisions	sole proprietorship
unifying idea	Having a common enemy (competitor)
Personnel qualification level	Low due to high turnover, the most talented leave
Employee initiative	Low, not encouraged
Communicating Management Decisions	In the form of an order

Conclusion: the authoritarian style of personnel management is justified and gives excellent results in crisis situations and in unstable conditions, when the main goal is to overcome difficulties and it is necessary to quickly achieve results.

Business style of personnel management

One of the most effective management styles that is used in most American companies. For a businessman who has already used the two previous systems, who has understood the shortcomings of a rigid vertical management system, the business style of personnel management is the next stage. With this management system, the level of professionalism of each employee and the general desire to make a profit come to the fore.

Main features:

focus on success and profit;
evaluation of the effectiveness of each employee;
career growth is proportional to the professionalism and initiative of the employee;
wages are distributed in accordance with the efficiency and usefulness of employees (depends on personal results).

The priorities of the business style of personnel management include increasing the contribution of each employee and a significant increase in profits through a clear system of interaction and encouragement of personal results. The disadvantage is rapid burnout, workaholism.

Priorities	Result, profit, development
Manager's communication style	Business cooperation without rigid framework
	Transparency of the business sphere, closeness of personal relationships
Making decisions	Sole or collegial according to circumstances
unifying idea	professionalism, profit
Skill level	High professional level, low psychological contact
Employee initiative	High, enthusiasm encouraged
Communicating Management Decisions	Form business etiquette, dialogue

Conclusion: this system is effective for established companies that are actively growing and developing, covering new market segments.

Democratic style of personnel management

With a democratic management system, the leader acts as a coordinator of business processes, directs, delegates obligations and gently controls. Companies that have already reached a high level of profitability come to this style, paying great attention new developments in business, technology or manufacturing. The main characteristic of this style is the collegial methods of personnel management:

a high degree of trust between the leader and subordinates;
decisions are made in the process of general discussion;
comfortable atmosphere, low staff turnover;
support for new ideas, initiatives of employees.

The main unifying idea of the democratic style is not only the value of the result, but the methods of achieving it. The advantages include - an ideal environment for professionals, the possibility of introducing new creative ideas. Cons - the slowness of the processes, due to lengthy discussions and the search for the most correct solutions.

Priorities	Result and methods to achieve it
Manager's communication style	Open, accessible, moderately friendly
	Openness and transparency of all processes
Making decisions	Collegiate decision making, frequent general meetings, meetings
unifying idea	Uniform principles of company development
Skill level	High qualification of employees in the professional and psychological sphere
Employee initiative	High and encouraged initiative
Communicating Management Decisions

Conclusion: the democratic style of personnel management is suitable for companies whose activities are related to modern technologies and research, where surplus value is created by creative and creative people.

The choice of the style of personnel management depends on many factors, mainly on the urgent tasks and problems. At different stages of development, one company and one leader can use different systems. By defining goals and methods for achieving them, management can implement mixed company management systems.

For small business news, we launched a special channel in Telegram and groups in

The authoritarian style of managing an organization is characterized by excessive centralization of the leader's power, autocratic decision of all issues. This style is characteristic of imperious and strong-willed people, tough in relation to others. This article will discuss its advantages and disadvantages in detail.

You will learn:

What is an authoritarian management style?
In what form can it be presented?
What are the features of mixed forms of authoritarian management style.

Authoritarian management style - this is, first of all, a strictly designated organization's regulations, in which employees conscientiously perform their duties, resignedly recognizing the authority of the leader.

Provisions found among the main characteristics of the authoritarian style of managing an organization:

any issue is resolved by the head;
team members are completely or partially deprived of the opportunity to contribute to organizational work;
the solution of important tasks is not entrusted to employees;
the manager himself determines the conditions and methods of work.

documents and accounting are always in order;
the quality of manufactured products is under control;
the number of conflicts on work issues in the team is minimal, because the tasks are set from above and are strictly regulated;
management is carried out centrally, which avoids disputes and objectively sees the big picture.

a huge waste of time and effort by a leader who makes decisions alone;
a high probability of errors in decision-making, because management is carried out by only one person;
pressure from superiors, suppression of initiative, constant control over workers;
the helplessness of the work team in the absence of the boss;
tense environment, as many can be oppressed by the dictatorship of the leader.

Quiz: Are you more tough or soft as a leader?

A tough manager intensifies the competition between the employees of the sales department. A calm and friendly boss supports the teamwork of the sales team. The editors of the magazine " Commercial Director» put together a test for you to find out which management style will bring you the most profit and how to strike a balance in your management style.

Methods of authoritarian style of organization management

Management methods- these are techniques that a leader can use to effectively influence subordinates. Among the methods of authoritarian management style are the following:

organizational and administrative;
economic;
socio-psychological;
public or collective.

Organizational and administrative methods management is control over the activities of personnel with the help of orders, instructions, orders, directives, resolutions, instructions, etc. In other words, the essence of the method is the use of administrative documentation. The advantage is that subordinates do not have the right to ignore official orders.

Economic Methods management is the control over the activities of personnel through a system of bonuses and fines. Thus, you can stimulate the employee, form his interest in work. Advantage this method in that subordinates voluntarily perform the tasks assigned to them. The disadvantage is the additional financial expenses. In addition, the imposition of fines is not legal.

Socio-psychological methods management - motivating employees with the help of psychology techniques and simple "human" communication. Efficiency depends on the abilities, experience and charisma of the leader. It requires a competent approach, without which one can only aggravate the situation, becoming “one’s own” for everyone, which will lead to a loss of authority.

Public or collective methods influence. Theoretically, they can serve as a means of authoritarian control, since the boss always has the opportunity to exercise leadership, using collegiums and councils as intermediaries for this. However, this formally contradicts the very definition of authoritarianism. However, indirect management deserves to be mentioned as one of the methods available to the manager.

It should be noted that there are two types of forms of authoritarian management style: benevolent and exploitative. Depending on which of them the company works with, management methods are selected. The benevolent form of the authoritarian style is represented by relaxed methods of administration and a significant reduction in the number of punishments.

"Exploitative" authoritarian style.

It consists in the fact that the boss takes responsibility for the entire work process and gives orders to subordinates, without considering anyone's opinions, even if they are reasoned. As main form motivation is punished.

All orders are carried out by employees blindly, from the position of "our business is small." Mistakes of the leader cause gloating among subordinates.

A great responsibility can burden the leader, because he alone pays for all the mistakes and is not always able to identify their cause. Workers, even if they are able to help, often prefer to remain silent, believing that they will not be listened to. This situation is regularly repeated and leads to the formation of a tense psychological situation in the team: some feel unfulfilled, others feel overworked.

Thus, mistakes in the exploitative-authoritarian style have a double price:

psychological trauma due to constant stress;
economic losses.
"Benevolent" authoritarian style.

This type of authoritarian leader style implies a parental attitude towards subordinates. The boss is interested in the point of view of the staff, but he can ignore even a reasonable opinion and do it his own way. The manager provides some freedom of action, but tightly controls the work process and monitors compliance with the company's charters and the requirements of the work algorithm. Various methods of punishment and encouragement are used.

Women's team management: psychological features

A few words about the authoritarian-democratic style of governance

Unlike the usual mixed authoritarian style, it supports staff innovations and initiatives, employees are part of a common cause and are aware of their responsibility for the result. Workers will be able to cope with the case even in the absence of the boss.

For example, the following situation is possible: the main power is concentrated in the hands of the chief, but the rights and duties are distributed between him and deputies or subordinates. The team is constantly aware of all important issues.

However, with an authoritarian-democratic style, if the need arises, the leader will easily leave the opinion of subordinates without attention and make a decision alone. It is also not excluded the use of reprimands, comments and orders as methods of management.

However, the authoritarian-democratic leadership style helps to achieve success only if the leader is a knowledgeable and experienced person, able to maintain harmony in the team and make the right decisions. It is also possible that a “side effect” of the democratic management style can manifest itself, when the boss reduces control too much and subordinates relax.

Authoritarian management style: modern modifications

In modern management theory and practice, there are many leadership styles and their modifications, but the following are the most common:

bureaucratic leadership style

The relationship between the leader and subordinates is formal and anonymous, the personal power of the boss is minimal. The bureaucratic style is an extreme degree of structuring and regulating the actions of company employees. This is achieved through a careful division of responsibilities, the creation of job rules and regulations that detail who, what and how should do. Information to employees comes through formal sources. Control is exercised by checking written reports and through communications.

The bureaucratic style can be called a weakened version of the authoritarian style, since the boss can give orders through documents, but he transfers the main powers to the compilers and controllers of regulations. In Russia, today the bureaucratic style is characteristic of public administration, where it is applied, as a rule, selectively.

Autocratic leadership style

It is rare and more typical for large companies. The head has a management apparatus that acts on the basis of his orders, which violates official subordination, since the head indirectly performs the function of a subordinate structure.

A distinctive feature of this management style is the underdeveloped personal communication between the boss and subordinates. The autocratic style was often seen during the command-administrative system in the Soviet Union, as well as in other states. Nowadays, it has been preserved in large companies and state corporations.

Patriarchal leadership style

An organization with this leadership style exists on the principle of a large family, where the leader becomes its head. He takes care of his subordinates, cares and requires respect, gratitude and diligence from them. Within the framework of this style, employees are stimulated through the formation of their personal dependence and devotion.

The positive side of the patriarchal style is that it can be effective in a low-competence team, where the professionalism and responsibility of the staff are poorly expressed.

The negative side of this management style is that guardianship can act as an obstacle to the development of the initiative.

Charismatic leadership style

Similar to the patriarchal style, but in this case, the authority of the boss is higher and more personal. The style is based on the belief of subordinates that their boss is special and unique. A charismatic leader does not entrust the main issues to management structures and tries to connect the success of the company with his own qualities, nourishes the impression of himself as an outstanding person. There are no clearly defined statutes and rules. The governing apparatus is a kind of headquarters, where the boss and associates have approximately equal responsibilities. Such leaders are especially in demand in critical, crisis times.

In our country, the charismatic style is common in enterprises created on the initiative of the leader himself. As the company grows, it becomes necessary to tighten and regulate the organization of the work process, as the possibilities of charismatic leadership weaken.

Expert opinion

Russian leaders are negatively affected by stereotypes

Galina Rogozina,

Head of Leadership Development Practice at RosExpert Consulting Company, Moscow

The General Director, due to the specifics of his activities, often appears as a public figure. And then the stereotypes of a leader typical for Russia are applied to him: authoritarian, imperious, demanding, tough. Russian managers are credited with the role of a "strong hand", a "strict but fair" boss. Therefore, in an effort to conform to prevailing opinions, the Russian leader in public relies only on his own views, turning a blind eye to the point of view of others and not involving them in resolving issues. He is used to assigning duties and depriving him of authority, and in disputes to defend his opinion to the end. If it is possible to do without controversy, the general director shows patience, gives the opportunity to speak to all participants in the meeting, and in the end independently and unconditionally makes a decision.

Organization management system in modern business conditions

How to know if an authoritarian leadership style is right for you

The ability to adapt to a specific situation, choosing the appropriate management style, is not inherent in the leader from the very beginning. In order to learn this, you need to work hard and gain experience.

The following factors must be taken into account:

Nature of activity

Sufficient influence on the choice of management style is provided by the type of activity of the company's employees. For example, for a creative team, a liberal management style is perfect, but at times it needs to be shaken up with a democratic or even authoritarian style. The lack of boundaries for creativity is necessary, but everything is good in moderation. If it so happened that for each mistake of employees the company incurs losses (not necessarily in financial plan), then it would be more appropriate to use an authoritarian style. However, not a single team can survive on punishments alone, so do not forget about rewards.

The degree of complexity of the task

As a rule, the most difficult tasks have many solutions. There is a difficulty in choosing the most effective of them. If it is difficult to say which is better, a democratic management style will do. Solving the problem alone is dangerous, it is much more effective to think about the issue together, considering different points of view.

And if the issue is simple, then the manager is able to solve it on his own, or by entrusting it to employees, but in this case their competence is important.

The specifics of the team

A big plus for the leader if he is personally acquainted with all subordinates. Then it will be easy for him to choose an approach for everyone and reveal his potential. Some work more fruitfully when they are given clear tasks, someone is stronger in improvisation. A prudent boss should keep in mind such features of each employee. Naturally, this is easier to implement in a small team.

When a team consists of newcomers who have little understanding of the matter, management is best done in an authoritarian style. If the majority of the team are professionals, it will be more efficient to work with a democratic management style.

Force majeure situations

Unfortunately, force majeure situations happen to everyone, as a rule, not a single business can do without it. The main thing is to be able to find the right way out. In emergency conditions, the time to make a decision is limited, there is no time to gather advice, and it is better for the leader to make the decision personally. This is inherent in the authoritarian style.

Business management problems: how mentality affects work

Expert opinion

Different management styles need to be able to apply according to the situation

Galina Agureeva,

President of the South Russian Club of HR Managers, Rostov-on-Don

The structure of business in Russia is improving, in connection with this, the leadership abilities of top managers are developing. Our firms won by margin, price, assortment. Now our staff is competitive. The degree of professionalism of the working team and their boss has become our main superiority. At the same time, an effective manager must be able to use all management styles. For example, most of today's authoritarian leaders come to the conclusion that it is impossible to keep subordinates in a tight rein all the time - it is necessary to be lenient with them from time to time.

The crisis has become an additional reason to reconsider the leadership style. Many CEOs faced with the need to lay off people, cut compensation packages, freeze projects, resist employee depression. The heads of companies simply had to “go out to the people”, explain what was happening, use non-material means of motivation. However, in order to succeed along this path, the leader must clearly understand what results he wants to achieve. Only then will it be clear to him what management and communication technologies need to be applied. At the same time, you can’t speak once and lock yourself in the office again. You have to be in front of people all the time. Such activity requires a lot of effort and time and often distracts the head of the company from the performance of immediate duties.

The transition to a different leadership style should be smooth. A person needs time to change. You can't be a despot today, and tomorrow you can pat your subordinates on the back and ask their opinions on everything. Moreover, it is also easier for employees when changes occur gradually. For example, when coached managers begin to take an interest in the point of view of employees, instead of giving instructions, this sometimes causes confusion among subordinates - they are not ready for such a relationship. In such situations, if the head of the company understands that he is authoritarian and non-public, for starters, you can put a more flexible and sociable person next to him, for example, an HR director. Otherwise, the function of "ideological inspirer" can be taken over by anyone and the situation will get out of control.

As for me, the head of a public professional organization simply cannot be an armchair leader. He must manage a community of professionals, many of whom enjoy enormous prestige in the business environment. Directive communication and an authoritative tone are impossible with such people. It must also be remembered that the leader of a public organization does not have a large budget, and therefore, in order to stimulate people to perform complex organizational and intellectual work, it is necessary to skillfully use non-material means. It is necessary to capture the needs of community members, formulate common goals, inspire, direct and organize people, and then constantly keep them active.

How can a leader gain credibility in a team?

12 tips for what an authoritarian style of management should look like

Don't go against your principles.

A leader who has won love and respect should not neglect his principles. Write a list of things that are completely unacceptable for you in communicating with the team. If, for example, you are determined not to be late for work, let the team know. Punishment for such misconduct is another matter. The main thing is not to give in to your principles in any case. It is worth at least once to close your eyes to the lateness of an employee and leave him without sanctions, and your rule will immediately lose its meaning for the entire team. It is better not to overdo it with such principles, five are enough, otherwise you can create an image of a despot for yourself, and this is useless to you.

Set clear time frames.

Spend a fixed amount of time in any meetings, such as 30 minutes. It may be that some issues will require more careful consideration and take longer, but these cases will be an exception. If employees keep in mind that they have only 30 minutes to resolve the issue, they are almost 100% likely to cope within this period. Give an hour for discussion - and they will think all this time. Give a task without limiting the time for its solution, it will not be ready the next day.

Do not be afraid of conflicts in the team.

Do not be afraid of the emergence of conflicts in the team. After all, sometimes they can be useful. Even conflict within the team can create healthy competition, which will significantly increase labor efficiency if it is supported.

Reward each for his merit.

If the solution proposed by any employee turned out to be successful, you should not attribute its success to the whole team or to yourself personally. This in the bud can discourage initiative and reduce diligence in work.

Treat every employee equally.

Avoid familiarity from subordinates. Absolutely everyone should be at an equal distance from you in communication, you should not make exceptions for anyone. If one of the employees is close to you in real life, try to agree with him that at work you are the boss and subordinate, and outside of work - close people.

Everyone should get what they deserve.

Everyone should receive according to their merits. If subordinates make a mistake, do not comfort them like children. Employees must be aware that they are responsible for their misdeeds, and all the consequences lie on their shoulders. But success should also be treated according to the same principle: the efforts and achievements of employees should be encouraged. Moral or monetary - you decide. If a subordinate has achieved success, do not pretend that this is how it should be. Emotional reinforcement is necessary for every team to be effective.

Don't change yourself.

From a good-natured person, it is unlikely that a strict authoritarian boss will turn out. If he tries to become such, it will look unnatural. Just as if a tough and domineering person who is listened to outside the work team, try to patronize his subordinates like a father who is indulgent to all mistakes. Choose a management tactic in which you feel comfortable. And remember the main thing: the best management style is a balanced mix of all styles.

Be even more interested in your work.

You should know more than anyone about the duties of your subordinates. Your point of view on a particular work issue should be the highest priority.

Be clear about your instructions.

You need to express yourself very clearly - there is no time to have empty talk.

Learn to make decisions.

It is your responsibility to solve problems, you are responsible for them. For this reason, you should convey your desires to employees in verbal and non-verbal ways.

Supervise the work of subordinates.

Always be aware of what is happening. Establish procedures to ensure that you always have access to the information you need to assess each employee's diligence and performance.

Draw the attention of subordinates to all cases of non-compliance with the rules.

Let them know what kind of behavior cannot be considered satisfactory. Insist on strict adherence to the organization's rules.

How to easily increase your authority: the secrets of Benjamin Franklin

Authoritarian style of management on the examples of global companies

Corporation "Chrysler»

In 1978, Lee Iacocca took over as CEO of the Chrysler Corporation. At that time, the organization faced significant difficulties: its position in the American market was rapidly declining and the situation threatened to lead to bankruptcy.

Lee Iacocca consulted with various experts and came to the conclusion that the main problem of the corporation is the liberal style of management. The new leader changed this approach, emphasizing a combination of democratic and authoritarian principles. This led to the fact that the Chrysler Corporation succeeded in short time regain lost ground and become one of the leaders in the automotive industry.

Henry Ford

Henry Ford's approach to organizing the activities of his company is curious in many respects. The introduction of conveyor production, the mechanization of transport operations, the meticulousness in the selection of personnel, right down to the study of their living conditions - all this led to the emergence of a powerful, efficient and thought-out structure.

No less remarkable is Ford's dictatorial management style. Any links from managers and heads of departments had very narrow powers in the company and rather performed the nominal role of intermediaries between the manager and workers than any managerial functions. Ford aggressively rejected almost all intermediate management elements in the company and sought to ensure that the workforce consisted almost entirely of workers.

The success of Ford Motor was ensured by the stability of production, but by the end of the 20s, the social and market environment of America had changed. The lack of flexibility in the company's policy made it difficult to adapt to new circumstances, and the leading position was lost.

Steve Jobs

Steve Jobs was a unique figure among leaders. He was not only the media face of the company, but also its ideologue, as well as a tough leader who rejected the democratic style of management. However, his authoritarianism did not lie in the absence of intermediate bosses with significant powers. It was in this respect that Jobs gave them sufficient power and freedom. Much more significant is the fact that the leader was the face of Apple, indispensable due to personal charisma and strength of character. In addition to his leadership qualities, he also possessed considerable commercial competence, enabling him to effectively manage the company.

Bill Gatesand companyMicrosoft

Bill Gates stands out from other leaders with the democratic approach he takes. But this democracy is selective: the creator of the Microsoft company introduces concessions for representatives of the most attractive position for him - programmers. It provides them with considerable freedom, both in terms of work schedule and approach to the implementation of tasks.

However, it should not be assumed that this approach is based solely on the preferences of Bill Gates. The head of Microsoft is well aware that a programmer, unlike many other employees, does not have to be at the workplace all day long. If his tasks are reduced to achieving a certain result by a given time, then it is permissible for a person to build his own schedule and create the most comfortable atmosphere around him.

Thus, the Gates reward system can at first glance be perceived as an authoritarian management style, where the leader is selective towards employees and forms a certain elite among them, neglecting the interests of others. However, all these actions, on the contrary, are signs of a democratic approach with a maximum degree of freedom based on logic and common sense.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Federal Agency for Education of the Russian Federation

State educational institution

higher professional education

Kuzbass State Technical University

Department of State and Municipal Administration

Course work

On the topic of: " Management Styles»

Performed:

student gr. MUo-54

Ozhogina Olga Alexandrovna

Checked:

Koneva Natalya Viktorovna

Mezhdurechensk, 2007

Introduction

1. The concept of management and management styles

1.1 Governance in the organization

1.2.2 Democratic management style

1.2.3 Liberal management style

2. Efficient management

2.1 Factors affecting management effectiveness

2.2 American experience

2.3 Low-level personnel management

3. Leadership style example

3.1 Leadership style in management practice

3.2 Leadership Style of the Chairman of the Economic Policy Committee

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

The assessment of personal qualities and problems associated with the selection of leaders is one of the most difficult aspects management activities. The Polish research journalist D. Passent wrote that "the director must be a diplomat when he asks for something from higher authorities for his enterprise; tough when he requires the fulfillment of his orders and orders from subordinates or the fulfillment of contracts from suppliers; quirky when talking with representatives of the press; promising when meeting with young workers; an important statesman when receiving foreign delegations; a holy father when receiving complaints from visitors.

In these assessments, although playful, there is a significant amount of truth. The study of leadership style in the last decade has become an important direction in the process of optimizing human activity, as well as in the integral study of personality. Knowing the leadership style allows you to solve the problem of professional suitability of the administrative reserve. It is difficult for a leader to develop a style of activity that is able to satisfy all members of the team subordinate to him. A person's awareness of the causes and patterns of his behavior can radically change his attitude to production situations. An understanding of the possible variety of causes and methods of management, a clear and at the same time flexible vision of problems make the manager freer and his activity more successful.

Each leader in management activities performs job responsibilities in a certain style of work peculiar only to him. Chesterfield said that "style is the dress of thought." And Buffon even argued that "style is the man himself." The validity of these aphorisms is also confirmed by the modern interpretation of the style of work, which is assessed as a set of typical and relatively stable methods of influencing a leader on subordinates in order to effectively perform managerial functions and tasks.

In his term paper I will try to consider management styles, their concept, application. Find out which management style is best to apply in practice. What are the pros and cons of each.

1. The concept of management and management styles

1.1 Management in the organization

Activity management consists of planning activities, setting production targets, creating a system for measuring production work and monitoring the implementation of tasks. Performance management cannot be successful if people are managed incorrectly.

People management is the activity of managing the personnel of an organization. This area of management is directly related to the work of the head. TO this species management include: ensuring cooperation in the team, personnel policy, training, informing, motivating staff and other components of the manager's work.

Management requires a lot of mental effort, no matter what area it concerns - the management of activities, environments or people. Managing the activities of an organization means striving to achieve maximum results of work. The job of a leader is to achieve people's personal goals.

In order for management activities to be carried out well, a number of conditions must be met:

1. The subject and object of control must correspond to each other. If they cannot understand each other in the process of work, then they will not realize their potential. So, if the leader and the subordinate are not psychologically compatible, then conflicts will begin between them, which will have a bad effect on the results of work.

2. The subject and object of management must be independent. The subject of management is not able to foresee all the interests of the object and possible options for its actions in different situations. When people with their own views on the situation, aspiration, thinking are the object of management, they should be able to realize their capabilities in practice. In the absence of such an opportunity, people either suppress their activity or try to get their opinion.

3. The subject and object of management should be interested in a clear interaction; one - in the return of the necessary commands, the other - in their timely execution. The ability of the subject to control is due to the readiness of the object to execute incoming commands. The degree of achievement by the participants of management activities of their goals should be directly dependent on the degree of achievement of the goals of the management itself. And this is the whole problem of management in the case when its subject and object are not connected by property relations.

Thus, we can conclude that management accompanies human activity everywhere. And every human activity needs to be controlled. Management makes this activity possible. The better the management is, the higher the likelihood of success. The reality of predicting the result, the clarity and consistency of people's actions depend on management. As well as the interest of a person - a participant in joint work in the general result. That is why, starting from a certain stage in the development of production and society, more and more attention is paid to management. The tasks of improving management, searching for new forms, determining the possibilities for its development using the means of new technology, enriching information, and so on are set.

Management style - is a set of techniques that a leader uses in relation to his subordinates. The effectiveness of a particular style is determined by how much it helps to influence employees in order to solve the existing problem. this moment task time.

Management style- this is the way in which the head manages the employees subordinate to him, as well as a pattern of behavior of the head, independent of the specific management situation. Through an established management style, job satisfaction can be achieved and employee productivity is encouraged. At the same time, there is no optimal management style, and it is possible to talk about the advantage of one or another management style only for a certain management situation.

There are the following management styles:

1. Task oriented.

Bisani argued that with this style, the leader:

Reproaches insufficient work;

Encourages slow-working employees to put in more effort;

Emphasizes the amount of work;

Leads with an iron hand;

Draws attention to the fact that its employees work with full dedication;

Encourages employees through pressure and manipulation to even greater efforts;

Demands more from low-performing employees.

Research by Halpin-Wiener and Peltz shows that such leaders are often more positively characterized by their superiors than person-centered leaders. They are positively evaluated by their employees if the leaders have influence "at the top".

2. Learner-centered.

The focus is on employees with their needs and expectations. According to Bisany, Head:

Pays attention to the health of employees;

Cares about good relations with his subordinates;

Treats his subordinates as equals;

Supports its employees in what they are doing or should be doing;

Stands up for his employees.

A leader who manages on the basis of personality cannot, however, immediately count on the full satisfaction of his employees. For this, the influence and respect of the manager “at the top” are important, on the basis of which he must protect the interests of employees.

Management style has three problems:

1. The results to be achieved with a management style have several components that cannot be put together.

2. Absolute management style is seen as a way to increase productivity.

3. The management situation is regarded as unchanged, while over time it can change and the manager must accordingly change his attitude towards individual employees.

1.2 Management styles

With this style of management, all production activities are organized by the head without the participation of subordinates. This style of management can be used in solving current problems and implies a large distance in education between the leader and subordinate, as well as material motivation of employees.

A leader is one who knows how to serve, one who knows how to establish harmony in the relations of employees in an enterprise or people in a different situation, so that there is maximum productivity and a holistic result.

1. The leader, by virtue of his legitimate authority, governs his subordinates and expects obedience from them. He makes decisions without justifying them to his subordinates, while proceeding from the fact that, unlike his subordinates, he has great understanding and knowledge of the matter, which, of course, should not be. The decisions of the head have the character of orders that must be unconditionally carried out by subordinates, otherwise they may expect sanctions against themselves.

2. The leader keeps a distance in relations with subordinates, informs them of the facts that they must know in order to fulfill their tasks. He controls whether his orders are followed and to what extent. Signs that emphasize the position of a person in the eyes of the people around him (for example, a car) support the reputation of a leader with power.

Subordinates are the recipients of orders. According to the "theory of x and xy":

The average person is lazy and, as far as possible, shirks from work;

Workers are unambitious, afraid of responsibility and willing to be led;

Pressure on subordinates and sanctions against them are necessary to achieve the goals of the enterprise;

Strict management of subordinates and private control over them are inevitable.

In this style of management, the motivation of subordinates is often limited because the leader socially separates, delegates, as a rule, less interesting work to subordinates and maintains in them the fear of threatening sanctions. Subordinates become indifferent to the leader, as well as to the enterprise. They get information because of the information barriers set by the head in unofficial ways.

Recognition of the head by the sole authority;

Recognition and implementation of orders of the head;

Lack of desire to possess the right to control.

Disadvantages of an authoritarian style lie in a weak motivation for the independence and development of subordinates, as well as in the danger of erroneous decisions through excessive demands from managers regarding the quantity and (or) quality of work.

1.2.2 Democraticmanagement style

With a democratic style of management, production activities are organized in the interaction of a leader and a subordinate. This style of management can be used when the creative content of the work prevails and assumes an approximately equal level of education of the manager and subordinates, as well as non-material incentives for the employee.

Typical features of a democratic management style:

1. The leader manages subordinates, including them in the decision-making process for which he is responsible. He expects concrete help from his subordinates, makes decisions taking into account their suggestions and objections. He delegates his powers as far as possible, and orders only when necessary. At the same time, he recognizes the abilities of subordinates and realizes that he cannot know everything and foresee everything. Only the result of the work is controlled, self-control is allowed.

2. The manager not only informs in detail about the actual state of affairs, which must be known in order to complete the tasks, but also provides other information about the enterprise. Information serves as a means of control. The leader does not need signs that emphasize his position in the eyes of the people around him.

Requirements for a democratically managing leader, according to Shtopp:

openness;

Trust in employees;

Waiver of individual privileges;

Ability and willingness to delegate authority;

Official supervision;

Results control.

Subordinates are seen as partners who are able to carry out "daily tasks" relatively independently. When evaluating subordinates with this leadership style, they most often proceed from the "theory y theory xy, according to which:

1) the unwillingness to work is not innate by nature, but the result of poor working conditions, which reduce the natural desire to work;

2) employees take into account the target settings, have self-discipline and self-control;

3) the goals of the enterprise are achieved in the shortest possible way through monetary incentives and providing opportunities for individual development;

4) with a favorable experience, employees are not afraid of responsibility.

The active position of subordinates increases their motivation, which leads to improved work results.

Requirements for democratically controlled subordinates, according to Shtopp:

Desire and ability to bear personal responsibility;

Self-control;

Use of control rights.

The advantage of democratic style- making appropriate decisions, high motivation of employees and unloading of the head. In addition, the development of employees is supported. Flaw-- democratic management style can slow down decision making.

1.2.3 Liberalmanagement style

Such management is a technique in which competences and responsibility for actions are transferred, as far as possible, to employees who make and implement decisions. Delegation can be directed to any field of activity of the enterprise. However, one should refuse to delegate typically managerial functions of leadership, as well as tasks with far-reaching consequences. When delegating authority, the burden is removed from the manager, the employees' own initiative is supported, their labor motivation and readiness to bear responsibility are strengthened. In addition, employees must be given the confidence to make decisions on their own responsibility.

In order to successfully apply delegation management, you must:

Delegation of tasks to employees;

Delegation of competencies to employees;

Delegation of responsibility for actions to employees;

Elimination of the possibility of revoking delegated powers or transferring them from one employee to another;

Establishing the procedure for regulating exceptional cases;

Elimination of the possibility of intervention by the manager with the correct actions of the employee;

Mandatory intervention of the manager in case of error and obtaining results, settled in a special manner;

Acceptance by the manager of responsibility for leadership;

Creation of an appropriate information system.

The transferred tasks should correspond to the abilities of the employees, be predominantly homogeneous, complete in form. Delegated competences and responsibility for actions should correspond to each other in scope.

Advantages delegate method control:

1) unloading the head;

2) the ability to quickly make informed decisions; employees are transferred competences and responsibility for action;

3) assistance in the development of one's own initiative, labor motivation among employees.

Disadvantages of managing the delegation method:

1) the leader delegates as few interesting tasks as possible;

2) hierarchical relationships can be approved;

3) strong focus on tasks, not on employees;

4) establishment of hierarchical relations "horizontally".

The application of a particular style, as well as its results, depend on many factors. This is, first of all, complete mastery of one of the leadership styles, the predisposition of the team to perceive the management and leadership style sometimes imposed on it from above. When mastering the science of management, it is very important to avoid mistakes. An analysis of the activities of managers at different levels and various enterprises allowed specialists to identify the most common mistakes made by managers.

2. Efficient management

2.1 Factors affecting the effectiveness of management

These objective factors include the size of the enterprise and the number of its employees. They also include features production activities. industrial enterprise, stock Exchange, an agricultural cooperative, a department store or a research institute objectively differ in the nature of labor, the quality of the workforce, and the specifics of management mechanisms. The management is influenced by the features of the production tasks performed, the conditions for their implementation, the methods and means of activity.

In management theory, not enough attention is paid to the study of factors influencing the achievement of management results. The grounds for selection are the position in relation to the subject of control (factors external and internal), as well as the vectors of the subject's activity (structural and activating). Each organization, each subject has its own external and internal factors of influence on the effectiveness of managing the situation. They are shown in the table.

Management of structural factors for the subject means, first of all, management of affairs, and activating - people.

Structural management factors require a rational approach, logic, objectivity and systematization. Possession of activating factors implies the dominance of creativity, knowledge in the field of human behavior, a sense of the situation and the problem. Positive activity is possible when the manager professionally owns the methods of managing both types of factors. A good result is ensured by effective activity only for a short period of time.

Table 1

Factors affecting the effectiveness of management

EXTERNAL FACTORS	INTERNAL FACTORS
Active competitor policy	Psychological climate in the team
Sudden changes in the economic situation of customers	Irregularity, irregularity of deliveries and overload in work
Economic, political crises affecting the efficiency of the enterprise	Employee absenteeism, unmotivated absences and loss of working time
Socially Significant Events	Diseases of managers and employees
Structural changes in society	Events held trade union movement(strike, rallies, etc.)
Adverse weather conditions	Industrial conflicts
Situation in the labor market: surplus of specialists, unemployment, insufficient qualification of workers	Dismissing or hiring new employees
Government measures to regulate social processes at the expense of employers	Expansion or contraction of the organization's activities
Repressive and aggressive to business legislation	Malfunctions of machinery and equipment, office equipment, communications
Migration processes that worsen the quality of the population	Criminal behavior of customers or staff: theft, fraud, embezzlement, technical vandalism
Sharp fluctuations in financial markets	Actions of influential persons assisting or interfering with the activities of the organization (lobby)
Unexpected changes in the market conditions for energy resources and raw materials	Factors of property protection and labor safety
Changes in the balance of political forces influencing the industrial policy of the state	Social initiatives of the team, invention and rationalization
New technologies for the production of goods and services	Development of management strategies, coordination of development plans with the team
Trade Union Requirements for Safety and Working Conditions	Administrative control, reward and penalty system
Impact of funds mass media on the formation of the image of the enterprise and its management	Positive motivation for creative and productive work of employees

Activating factors characterize the process of managing people, structural - the area of technical skills. The relative share of the factors of the management process itself is growing due to the reduction of technical skills as the organizational level increases. Usage strengths The personality of the leader is essential for achieving high results. Factors influencing leadership style cannot be of the same order, identical. Some of them are permanent, while others are temporary. Constant influence factors include: environment, social norms, typical personality traits, work situation. By temporary - leadership experience, emotions, psychological climate in the team.

2.2 American management experience

In the process of formation and development of the United States of America, the American style of management was formed. The features of this style are due to such factors in the creation of American society as the absence of remnants of feudalism, as well as the development of the country's territory and wealth by energetic and resourceful immigrants. For a long time, the United States remained the "Mecca of the organization", where specialists and creative teams came to not only see for themselves this skill of American managers, but also to adopt their organizational and managerial experience.

Scientific and technological progress leads to profound changes in labor methods, which, in turn, requires new forms of organization and management of personnel, directions to improve the efficiency of the use of human resources. The search for appropriate motivators that would stimulate the purposeful behavior of individuals necessary for the successful functioning of the organization becomes a task of paramount importance.

IN different countries this task is solved on the basis of the peculiarities of the historical, socio-political, scientific and technological development of these countries, as well as the psychological, moral and ethical norms and styles of behavior of people, as well as their upbringing, traditions and foundations.

In recent decades, in developed capitalist countries, and in recent years in Russia, interest in the socio-psychological aspects, the "human" factor of management has increased dramatically.

An analysis of the American style of personnel management is of particular interest. Firstly, this is the area of management where the differences between the American style and the fairly well-known Japanese style are most striking. The initial premises of personnel policy, as well as the specific methods of its implementation, at American enterprises differ significantly from those in Japan. Secondly, the results obtained at American enterprises (for example, the growth rate of labor productivity) indicate that the methods of personnel management used there are quite effective. It is efficiency that attracts more and more attention of foreign researchers who, studying American methods of personnel management, are considering the possibility of using them in their countries.

The purpose of the work is to identify the features and characteristics of the American style of personnel management. To achieve the goal, the following tasks are set:

Analyze the system of personnel selection in the USA;

To identify the features of the system of remuneration and incentives for labor;

Consider the system of training and advanced training of personnel;

To reveal the features of the service of senior leaders in the United States.

American companies highlight the acceleration of the turnover of invested funds and the increase in the value of shares as the main tactical task. It is by these indicators that the effectiveness of the work of the administrative apparatus is determined. For an American company, in accordance with the chosen tactical goals (focus on current profitability), a predominant focus on the maximum flexibility of the management system in terms of distribution and redistribution of all types of resources to increase profits in the short term is characteristic.

A fundamentally important point that determines the approach to management practice is that traditionally American managers are focused on certain individual values and results. At the same time, all management activities in American companies are based on the mechanisms of individual responsibility, evaluation of individual results, development of clear, quantitatively expressed and, as a rule, short-term goals. The ideal American manager usually appears as a leader - a strong personality who closes the entire management process and is able to force his subordinates to work intensively to fulfill their specific goals.

US experience in working with higher education administrative staff could be useful for Russia, where very little is being done in this important area today. The most important thing here is to choose the right development strategy and determine the nature of the service of top managers.

Thus, identifying the most effective methods management will allow, if necessary, to further consider their use in the management of other countries, including Russia.

2.3 Low-level personnel management

In most works on general management, personnel management, management psychology and business administration, as well as in similar academic disciplines, the emphasis is on the relationship "manager - subordinates". However, both practically and theoretically significant are the relations “one's own leader - one's own subordinate” and the so-called low-level organizational structures and personnel management technologies.

Structures oversaturated with bosses

There is such an informal assessment of the functioning of the unit and / or the enterprise as a whole. When the leader for some good reasons absent from his workplace for a week, two or three, how does the system subordinate to him work?

Option A:

If the system continues to function normally and does not fail in the absence of its helmsman, then, as they say, it does not rest only on its boss.

Option B:

If it cannot do without continuous guidelines, spacing, "infusions", it means that the system is completely closed on the boss and envy only from him.

The first remedy is "everyone carries his suitcase". This suitcase contains job tasks, duties, rights and responsibilities, that is, the well-known tools of organized management - official powers.

The second remedy is "I'm carrying my suitcase." The management suitcase also contains this toolkit, which specifies cases of absence for good reasons, organizational procedures for replacement, and a “substitution suitcase”.

Thus, one of the important regularities can be formulated organizational management: the better the work of the system is, the less it needs "its" leader. And, conversely, the worse the system is debugged, the more it feels the need for leadership or bosses.

The inability to organize the work of subordinates necessitates an increase in their number, which, in turn, requires ... more bosses. That is, by its unsettledness, it, as it were, proves to itself the need for a guiding principle.

The leadership system is quantitatively swelling. And in such “swollen” conditions, the law of reorientation comes into play: the system, increasing quantitatively, begins to work more and more for itself or for solving its own problems. internal problems. Therefore, the success/failure of solving these problems becomes the main limiter for solving those tasks for which the system itself was created (subdivision, organization, enterprise, institution).

In structures oversaturated with bosses, there is another very important problem - the interaction of leaders with each other. Management consulting shows. That the most common organizational disease not only in our country, but also in the world is the “farm syndrome”: each boss considers his own unit in the system to be the most important, and all the rest to be secondary. Therefore, the relationship and interaction of farms are small and / or big wars with each other, which negatively affects the current and final results.

President of one big company, having taken the reins of government, saw that he had 23 deputies or vice presidents. Everyone seemed to be responsible for their areas of work, but this “leading team” could not really agree on a single issue! To ensure the effective management of the company, they applied the transition to a low-level management structure by enlarging and establishing interaction between managers in it.

Leader as a hindrance

In practice and in theory, a stereotype has been established: if a boss appears, it means that the management process has “started”. And there are certain reasons for this. However, the practice itself gives many examples of the fact that the management process has not "gone", but even "went down".

If we take the situation of a division or enterprise functioning for some time, then the appointment of a new leader does not automatically mean:

a) that its work will improve if it worked poorly;

b) that it will still work normally if it worked well before.

In the practice of public management of a number Western countries There is such a rule: politicians - leaders, for example, ministries, come and go, but the apparatus remains. Having a so-called good politician does not automatically mean a professional leader. However, a politician appointed to a leading position in some structure is rescued by a professional apparatus. To create a new apparatus "for oneself" does not mean to preserve and/or increase the professional traditions of the former apparatus.

Some leaders who have headed one or another well-functioning division begin, willy-nilly, to feel ... their uselessness. This is the so-called pleasant-unpleasant organizational feeling. In those organizational structures where each employee has "his own suitcase" of official authority and where responsibility belongs to an important place, they retain a low-level organizational structure.

It happens that a completely incompetent person is appointed to the position of head of a department. Such a situation can be considered not only as a kind of experiment on the self-survival of a group (collective), but also as functioning in the “almost without a boss” mode. Experienced subordinates sooner or later learn the characteristics of the "appointee" and, if he has the necessary abilities and motivation, using his "subordinate means", teach him ... management. In similar situations, when the leader does not have the necessary abilities and "traction motivation" and, most importantly, he is not inclined to "bad administration", there is a process, in fact, of self-government, which does not require a strong leadership.

Therefore, in the understanding of "minor management" it is necessary to highlight two important aspects:

1) undersaturation organizational structure leaders, or the lack of a "leading fat";

2) activity, work is carried out by competent people who do not need detailed or petty guidance.

"Supervisory management" can take place: for the benefit of the system; neither for good nor for harm; and maybe - only to the detriment. Therefore, low-level management also needs to be considered variably, without at all absolutizing its advantages and disadvantages.

Disobedient subordinate

There is a type of people who are not genetically predisposed to submission. Nature created them, as it were, according to the scheme “You are your own leader, and you are a subordinate in yourself.” The common attitude in social management or management "leader - subordinate" they consider an anachronism that does not allow their professional abilities and individuality to manifest. If for some reason such a person finds himself in a situation of submission, then it becomes a severe stress for him. That is, such employees are not motivated either to the position of a manager as a subordinate in relation to the top boss, or to the position of a specialist reporting to someone. Usually such people gravitate to positions:

a) in low-level organizational structures, where the leader is “far and high”, and they are distinguished by a high degree of independence, responsibility and effectiveness;

b) where trifles of guardianship, everyday guidelines, far-fetched forms and methods of control, etc. are not required.

In principle, their "philosophy of insubordination", as it was possible to find out in conversations with such workers, boils down to the following provisions.

The first position is the rejection of dullness.

A lot in the relationship "leader - subordinate" is required for a certain grinding, adjustment, or "psychological coordination". A highly professional leader is a rarity. Quite often, especially in modern Russia, leaders do not have leadership qualities, representing grayness, both professionally and individually. So why connect "official fate" with such a person?

The second position is the rejection of the double standard.

In practice, there are many leaders who tend to say one thing and do another. At the same time - if you do, then in favor of your pocket or your career. A subordinate or poorly subordinate employee, as a rule, has non-standard thinking, since the degree of influence on him by the manager is minimal or equal to zero. It is impossible to “code” him with some dogmas or a far-fetched “leading position”, since the most important evaluative subjects for him are real behavior and actual results.

The third position - a lot of time at the work of the head is spent simply on nonsense, which for some reason is considered a management process.

Why tell an employee how and when to do it, if he, having a high degree of professionalism and independence, knows this very well? Why hold empty meetings on “strengthening”, “strengthening”, “improving”, if the so-called installation information can be transmitted by local network on Personal Computer? Why waste precious time on transmitting important information such as “An auditor is coming to us”, collecting and tearing it away from the workplace, and not using other information technologies for this?

Thus, nonsense is such types of work that bosses come up with in order to prove their need in one or another management system. And what is most surprising:

1) the less bosses there are in the system, the less time these bosses and their subordinates spend in principle on nonsense;

3) the less the employee is involved in the "nonsense" relationship "head - subordinates", the more he manages to do during working hours and the more effective his work is.

Experienced and well-versed in people managers carry out the so-called selective leadership, in which attention is paid to weak, less qualified and less responsible employees, and not predisposed to total obedience to employees who work effectively in “autonomous navigation”. Therefore, low-level management can take place within the framework of the organizational structure, where, in principle, there are not so few bosses. However, these "many bosses" in their guiding technologies work like "small bosses".

Concentrated and non-concentrated leadership technologies

A sore point in Russian management practice is that many managers do not have special managerial training or managerial education. In a number of systems, they work like amateur managers and try to manage professional subordinates. As in every profession, there are talented nuggets and capable self-taught people among them. But they do not constitute the so-called critical mass in the total amount. Therefore, amateur leaders de facto prove with their weak skills how to manage ineffectively.

The most undesirable thing is that an amateur leader tries to turn a subordinate professional worker into an insolvent performer. This phenomenon is called "re-educational management", in the process of which efforts are directed not to achieve the required results, but to subjugate competence for themselves.

In practice, both professional and amateur managers use one of two technologies for managing subordinates - concentrated or deconcentrated. The leading concept in these technologies is the scope of rights vested in the leader, or in other words, "a piece of governing power."

If the manager uses a concentrated technology, in which subordinates act only according to his instructions, then he forms in them the psychology of a subordinate work style.

When another leader is appointed who uses a deconcentrated system, then subordinates experience an organizational and psychological shock, since they are required to have a high degree of independence and responsibility. The change from deconcentrated technology to concentrated technology is also associated with certain problems.

Combined work

For centuries, managers have developed a stereotype: if an employee is in front of their eyes, it means that they are working. However, in modern practice, more and more (if the specifics of the activity allows) “combined” work is used, when a person works part of the time from the working week in the workplace, and part - at home. So far, the most common five-day schemes working week are "4 + 1" and "3 + 2", where the first digits mean the number of days in the workplace, and the second - at home. The same schemes also began to be used for lower-ranking leaders.

The main reason for the transition to a combined work model is the growth of labor efficiency, which is based on more convenient, attractive and flexible conditions for a person. Perhaps, in the emergence and development of this system there is “work in the future”, when the current idea of work, management, leadership, subordination will look dense and naive.

As you know, labor itself, its content and technologies, willy-nilly, have an impact on a person.

The use of "combined" work for poorly obedient people turned out not only in their favor, but inspired the idea of \u200b\u200b"well-obeying workers" about other possibilities and the need (due to the second part of the scheme or work at home) of greater independence, conscientiousness and responsibility.

On the other hand, the heads of departments where “combined” work is used and who themselves work according to the scheme, sooner or later began to understand that there are not only other labor technologies, but also manuals. After all, the meaning of managing a “working person” is not to constantly monitor him, keep him in a subordinate tension, but to create such conditions that contribute to the achievement of the necessary results. That is, the following formula works: do not manage totally subordinates in order to get the necessary results, but evaluate and manage according to the results in order to have a well-functioning management process.

In modern scientific literature, according to E. Komarov, there is a lot of idealism and romanticism about the so-called managerial relations. In practice, there is a completely different content of these relations.

When a person who is not inclined to obey is literally pressed into a tougher relationship “leader - subordinate”, he, depending on the situation, tries to get away from these relationships in one way or another, because he values the results, not the relationship. And, on the contrary, there are structures where relationships are of paramount importance, and the result of the work leaves much to be desired.

Thus, low-level management is a phenomenon of achieving high results with minimal leadership. professional workers. And no matter how hard the theoretical and practical sages of management press on the traditional strengthening of the leading principle, the factor of little leadership with weak or autonomous subordination plays a very important role in the results of work.

3. Leadership style example

3.1 Leadership style in management practice

The essential difference between managerial activity and other forms of human activity is the adoption of socially significant decisions affecting the interests of many people and responsibility for their correctness and effectiveness to the owner. The resolution of the contradiction between the general and particular characteristics of managerial activity, as well as the influence of the leader's personal qualities on the decision-making mechanism, is expressed by the concept of "management style". It is important to emphasize the integral nature of the decision-making process, which requires special personal qualities. In the style of management, both general, algorithmic operations, as well as single, unique ones, reflecting the individual characteristics of the manager's professionalism, are fixed. They characterize his behavior not in general, but typical, "stable, invariant in him, constantly manifested in various situations." Researchers traditionally distinguish three classic style governance: authoritarian, democratic and liberal. Of course, the existing styles are only an outline of the many shades and specifics of managerial interaction.

When analyzing leadership styles, a number of authors find the most negative in the authoritarian leadership style. Authoritarianism underlies the vast majority of industrial conflicts due to the desire of the subject for autocracy. The autocrat's claim to be competent in all matters breeds chaos and, ultimately, negatively affects performance. The autocrat, by his willfulness, paralyzes the work of the collective on which he relies. He not only loses his best workers, but also creates a hostile atmosphere around him that threatens himself. Dissatisfied and offended subordinates can let him down and misinform him. Intimidated workers are not only unreliable, but also do not work with full dedication, the interests of the enterprise are alien to them, at the slightest opportunity they exercise the "right" to borrow the owner's property.

In the modern interpretation, the authoritarian style also has strengths: it makes it possible to quickly make decisions and mobilize employees for their implementation, and it allows you to stabilize the situation in conflict teams. This style can be effective in crisis situations, as well as in conditions of low professional level and low work motivation of employees. It is necessary in conditions of a low cultural level of the control object, weak managerial ties in extreme situations (accidents, man-made disasters, labor conflicts). A variant of the authoritarian management style is paternalistic. It involves treating subordinates as "children" and mediates their labor motivation through personal dependence on the leader. Service information is distributed from top to bottom, depending on the "favor" of the management, control of activities is carried out selectively, at the request and intuition of the head. Power is not delegated to anyone and is concentrated in the head, who is "king, god and military commander." This style of management is characteristic of a traditional society, and according to the author's observations, it is still widely used in Kazakhstan, especially in rural areas.

IN Lately assessments of management styles among researchers have changed significantly. If the liberal and authoritarian not so long ago were characterized mostly negatively, and the democratic one was considered the most positive, now it is understood that the optimal management style is the one that brings the enterprise more profit, ensures the stability of production, and the progressive nature of the development of the company. Increasing attention is paid to the subjective, psychological features of the manifestation of the manager's professional activity, his personal characteristics. The Russian psychologist R. Shakurov notes that each individual mental quality is not included in the composition of the style in its entirety, but only to the extent and form in which it is necessary for this activity. The forms and degree of manifestation of mental properties are regulated quite strictly, since managerial roles have an increased social significance. It doesn't cancel general position that the effectiveness of manager's decisions in a specific production situation depends, first of all, on objective external conditions and factors.

Since there are many views on management styles, in terms of results, it is necessary to strive for their synthesis. A good result can be achieved not only thanks to good governance people, but also simply under the influence of chance.

From the point of view of many researchers, there is no universal, best management style. Non-linear development of social events and poor predictability of social relationships, especially in the medium and long-term periods, require from the manager an adequate assessment of the situation, a creative analysis of objective limitations and subjective opportunities to overcome them, and forecasting the consequences of decision-making. In other words, the current situation requires the manager to put into practice the entire arsenal of managerial science, coupled with the conscious use of the strengths of the manager's personality. This approach is designated by us as an individual-situational style of management.

3.2 Leadership Style of the Chairman of the Economic Policy Committee

Each leader has his own individual style, the individuality of management styles is manifested, first of all, in the process of communication between the leader and subordinates. The leadership style of the Chairman of the Economic Policy Committee can be defined as democratic. Subordinates are given independence, in proportion to their qualifications and functions performed, they are widely involved in the preparation and decision-making. The committee encourages initiative and creative activity. The Chairman of the Economic Policy Committee treats employees with respect, he has a business-like level of communication, that is, communication on an equal footing, tries to help his subordinates in emerging issues, takes into account their opinion and advice.

However, in practice there is no leadership style in its pure form, therefore, for the Chairman of the Committee, the features of liberal and authoritarian management styles are traced, depending on the situation. In relations with subordinates, one could see the features of a liberal style - the desire to help everyone, to please, influences subordinates often in the form of requests and by satisfying their needs.

In recent years, thanks to surveys of managers conducted abroad, it has been possible to identify a number of characteristics that are necessary for doing business in the field of business and management.

They are:

1) Breadth of views and a global approach - a characteristic that indicates the importance of a leader having a broad vision of problems that go beyond the tasks of the company. This feature management involves overcoming a narrow, technocratic understanding of their tasks, the formation of a sense of responsibility not only for the economic, but also social, environmental, moral consequences of their activities.

2) Long-term foresight - resists the modesty of some leaders, as they say, bury themselves in current problems and lose sight of the prospects for the development of the organization in a changing market environment, technological progress, the discovery of new energy sources, etc.

3) Decisiveness - firmness and courage in making decisions. A very important characteristic of any leader. Since the lack of determination, courage can lead to the fact that the decision will be made late or will not be taken at all, which can negatively affect the enterprise.

4) Hard work and continuous study is necessary due to the constant updating, replenishment of laws, regulations, with the release of any decrees, orders, resolutions of higher organizations.

5) The ability to clearly formulate goals is one of the ways to increase people's motivation to work. This quality is mainly the result of self-improvement of the leader.

6) Willingness to listen to the opinions of others, especially when those others are subordinates. At the same time, the demonstration by the leader of this quality in relation to any person, including a subordinate, means satisfaction of the important social need of the latter - the need for respect.

7) Impartiality, disinterestedness, loyalty. In the impartiality of the head lies an important resource for the effectiveness of the organization's personnel policy.