Leader management styles. Leadership styles in management Leadership management style types

"Each broomstick sweeps differently" - this popular proverb hides the idea of ​​the variety of personality types of leaders and their management styles. By carefully observing the work of several managers in a team, you can see the difference in the formation of working relationships. the head directly affects the results of the company. This fact can explain why some companies are closed, while others live and prosper even in times of crisis.

The personality of a leader, management styles, and company results are closely related things. By combining several methods of leadership, you can get closer to the ideal result. After all, the style of the leader and the effectiveness of management are inseparable things. If you are a boss, then it is important for you to understand what kind of person you really are. This will help you understand your strengths and weaknesses, and you will be able to achieve better results.

A Brief Description of Leadership Styles

Management style is a complex of relations between management and subordinates and methods of influence of these two groups on each other. The performance of subordinates, the atmosphere in the team and its ability to achieve the set goals and objectives depend on the quality of these relations. There are five types of leadership styles in team management.

The famous American-German psychologist and writer in the 30s of the last century published and identified three leadership styles that later became classics. A little later, the inconsistent and situational were added to them. Having studied the table with a brief description of the manager, you can find yourself and go straight to reading the desired section. And it is better to read all the material - in life you will have to deal with different people, and it is better to be prepared. What are the managerial management styles?

Authoritarian

(from Lat. auctoritas - power, influence) - domineering, who does not like to discuss, so that they object to him, and even more so resist. If the boss belongs to this type of people, then the manager's management style is authoritarian. This type belongs to one of the three classic ones.

Manager characteristic

This management style of a leader - authoritarian - is justified in stressful situations: wars, crises, epidemics, and so on, because such a person acts quickly and takes responsibility. In conversations, tough and irreconcilable. Authoritarian leaders climb to the highest levels of government and successfully maintain their position. This style of leadership is more prevalent in Russia than others. This can be fully justified in large companies, factories, creative teams and the army. Negotiations on purchases or approvals are carried out in a tough regime, in an atmosphere that is heated to the limit.

The authoritarian leader collects all power in his hands and does not even allow anyone to encroach on its part. Subordinates are under strict control and constantly undergo various checks. But the authoritarian style is divided into two more models: exploitative and benevolent.

The "exploiter" fully justifies its name, it is directly "Pablo Escobar" in the company. Such a manager squeezes all the juices out of his subordinates, does not consider the interests of people, the opinion of anyone does not interest him at all. Can stimulate workers with threats, blackmail, fines and other harassment.

Never allows even the slightest independence in making decisions or performing tasks. Everything should be done exactly as the "exploiter" said. Any authoritarian leader constantly issues orders, decrees and other regulations. Everything is certified by seals, paintings and dates. In the matter of completing tasks, he is extremely demanding and impatient, although he is able to make concessions if he is not under emotions. If the leader is not in the spirit, then he can say and do anything, and then there is no need to wait for an apology. At the same time, this behavior should not be confused with manipulative techniques, when all emotions are just "theater" - authoritarian leaders love to use this. Subordinates are deprived of the opportunity to take the initiative.

A leader's “supportive” management style creates a more welcoming atmosphere, if you can call it that. Such a leader is already interested in the opinion of subordinates, but can act in his own way, even if the opinion was expressed correctly. In general, such a boss communicates with his subordinates condescendingly, “in a fatherly manner,” he can sympathize, but dryly and literally for a second, and then he will immediately remind that the subordinate is now at work, and no one is interested in his experiences. Do not think that the second model is very different from the first - for all its benevolence, this is still an authoritarian leader: tough, domineering and demanding.

Any of these types adore letters, signs, stamps, paintings, abbreviations and abbreviations. All of this should be big, sweeping, imperial. Such leaders are people with paranoid personality patterns - power-hungry, distrustful and unprincipled. As a rule, workaholics who do not know how to rest, who love and are able to impose their opinion and will on others.

Relations with subordinates

If in relations with subordinates a “benevolent” leader builds a distance that cannot be crossed by anyone, then for an “exploiter” this distance becomes intergalactic. The conversation is built in a commanding, rude form. Employees are depressed and deprived of motivation, while the risk of conflicts in the company is high. Criticism, even constructive criticism, is absent as a concept.

Not everyone has the courage to ask such a manager about personal matters, and this is justified - “Pablo Escobar” does not want to know anything about his subordinates, and even more so to think about the difficulties of his employees. The possibility of getting something even for an enterprise is almost zero, if the autocrat himself did not speak about it. And if he said before, then he himself will decide when, to whom and what to receive. It is useless to argue with such a type - he has excellent training in tough negotiations, and his subordinate cannot talk to him. If the subordinate continues to insist, he will quickly receive a fine or reprimand, and still have to follow the instructions. It is useless to show emotions in front of such a leader - he will look at a person like a carpet. Empathy is zero.

A “benevolent” type can listen to a subordinate, but he will have to go straight to the heart of the matter and not pull rubber, otherwise everything - “your time is up,” and with your question it will be possible to get to him only in the next life. It happens that the leader may even give advice. A "benevolent" can grant leave, leave on urgent matters, or receive over and above the due - but for this you need to "protect" your plan in front of him, how to sell him the idea of ​​why he should do it for you. But even if everything is done brilliantly, there is a great risk that the manager will do it his own way, and it is impossible to find out the reasons for the decision.

Solving problems

For the “exploiter” and the “benevolent”, everything is simple - everyone must work without rest or interruption and lay down their lives for the good of the enterprise. Those who disagree with this are declared "enemies of the people" and must leave the company.

Subordinates are obliged to carry out the decrees without question. The faster and better the duties are performed, the more success the company achieves. And the more new tasks the autocrat will lay on the shoulders of his subordinates. In solving problems, authoritarian leaders have no principles - the end justifies the means. This should be remembered, because the greater the level of influence of the autocrat, the harder he will act.

Way of communication

It's not worth playing around and showing duplicity with such managers - he'll figure it out in no time. Let not today, but tomorrow, and then it will not be good. An autocrat knows how to weave intrigues better than anyone, so it is not worth competing in this direction either. By the way, about competition - this is the strong point of an authoritarian (and paranoid too) person, it is better not to get in his way. Why? Because there are no principles, and the autocrat justifies any means to achieve the goal. Attempts at suggestion will fail - autocrats have zero suggestion. The best approach is collaboration. It will be easier this way, and career opportunities will appear on the horizon. Examples of leaders: Donald Trump, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler.

Democratic

The work and management style of a democrat leader is mirrored from an authoritarian one. This style of work implies an equal distribution of duties and responsibilities among the employees of the company. A democrat leader gathers a team of subordinates around him that he can rely on. A team that solves problems and launches even complex projects, and for this you do not need to coerce or intimidate employees. At the same time, there will still be responsibility, because a democrat is not a liberal-conniving person, but a leader aimed at a specific result.

Democratic managers also reach great heights in business and politics, as well as authoritarian ones. Only they create a more welcoming atmosphere than autocrats.

Manager characteristic

People with pronounced but at the same time do not put their Ego in the first place gravitate towards the democratic style. A democratic leader is a peaceful warrior: he does not start the war first, but if they attacked, then they will have to answer to the fullest extent of the law. This management style of the leader creates a friendly atmosphere in the team and helps to preoccupy the staff with solving problems with a certain amount of creativity. Such a manager can, without any special pretensions, consider taking time off, helping or buying new equipment for the company. If you provide your ideas or requests with an evidence base, then the leader can be persuaded to make a positive decision on your issue.

Relations with subordinates

Comradeship, business relationships are formed, which can flow into friendships, although this is a rarity. Whatever the manager’s management styles, remember that this is the manager and you don’t need to cross the line. A democrat leader uses a humane approach to subordinates, enters into their position up to a certain limit, easily arranges motivational contests or gifts for overfulfilling plans.

People with this management style feel best in middle-level positions, for example, head of a department or head of a city district. Even in companies with an authoritarian management style, in departments with a democrat leader, "their own atmosphere" develops - while the authority of the head of the department is higher than that of the head of the organization.

Of the minuses, the following can be noted: a democrat can play into a "friend", and then more and more often disputes and conflict situations will arise, instead of work. A shift in focus from achieving goals to focusing on employees does not bring the team closer to achieving goals. In this case, a democrat leader loses his authority and level of influence on the team, but he will still have a bonus in the form of a fine or an order up his sleeve, although such bosses rarely use it.

Solving problems

Solving problems comes down to the fact that at first a collective action plan is developed. After that, performers are selected taking into account skills and abilities. Without any resistance, such a leader invites an outside expert to the team and listens to his opinion. By the way, none of the subordinates is prohibited from expressing their opinion, because the manager is concerned with achieving the result, and realizes that he risks missing something important.

When planning the deadlines, it puts in the plan a margin of time, because it takes into account the likelihood of errors from the staff, and it still takes time to fix them. If, in the course of the work, difficulties arise or it becomes possible to do everything differently, then the manager quite easily rebuilds according to the situation, although he does not really welcome it.

Way of communication

A Democrat leader chooses a generally accepted communication style. You can go to his office and "steal" some time. He listens to the opinions of the staff, especially if the words are supported by facts and figures - this is worth using. You should not put pressure on such a leader - although he is soft, he bends like bamboo, and if you press hard, he will seriously answer. Whatever the leader, he will have a variety of styles and methods of management. The best way to communicate is through collaboration. You need to act within the framework of the task, without interfering with the deadlines. If you can improve or redo the work, you need to immediately contact your boss, keep him informed. Examples of personalities: Vladimir Putin, Evgeny Chichvarkin, Lavrenty Beria.

Liberal-anarchist

This management style is similar to the democratic one, but there are differences. It is characteristic that the leader, having set the task clearly and precisely, setting the time frame and speed of implementation, fades into the background. Thus, he allows subordinates to act independently, while almost without limiting the means and methods of performing tasks.

The liberal style is suitable for management It is not necessary that it will be a song and dance team, the editorial office of the magazine, and the design bureau, and other similar groups will do.

Manager characteristic

The liberal style can be divided into two areas: anarchist and expert. In the first case, the leader is a person of weak character, non-conflict, conformist. He postpones the solution of important issues until the last moment or tries to completely relieve himself of responsibility, shifting it onto the shoulders of deputies or subordinates. Such a leader can sit in his office for days and not go out to the workers - let them work for themselves.

The second type is more suitable for the role of an expert or an invited manager for temporary tasks - he gives instructions on how and what to do, how and in what time frame. For the rest, he does not climb into work, does not pull subordinates, only if the situation is out of control. The authority is kept at the level of his expertise, knowledge and skills in the current work.

Relations with subordinates

The liberal expert develops a friendly, informal and lasting relationship. In such collectives, leaders grow up, who then either take power from the liberal or leave for new collectives - as practice shows, these are authoritarian leaders.

The liberal leader hardly interferes in the work of his subordinates, providing the maximum possible freedom of action. Provides subordinates with information, tools, trains and instructs, reserves the right of the final decision.

Solving problems

Do not think that a liberal leader will sit in his "shell" and not show his nose. This happens, but this does not characterize all liberal leaders. On the contrary, in the current situation, the popularity of this method of leading people is growing. This is especially noticeable in scientific, creative or other teams where the level of knowledge, competence and experience is high - a high-class specialist does not tolerate slavish treatment, as well as excessive care.

In a leader-organization relationship, the liberal's management styles are well known. Soft management, trust, collaboration and cooperation are the foundations of a liberal style of company management. There is no bad way of managing people, there is just the wrong use of tools in your hands. You should start defining the manager's management style as early as possible - this will make it easier to adjust to the situation or quickly find a new place of work.

Way of communication

The liberal leader does not attach much importance to the chosen method of communication, because the influence of this on the result of work is minimal. It is worth communicating with the leader himself, based on the goals of communication and what type of personality the leader has. In this case, management styles can be different - either an anarchist or an expert. Do not worry too much if you suddenly called your boss to "you" - he will correct you, but will not punish you with a fine, like an authoritarian one. Examples: Roman Abramovich, Robert Kiyosaki.

Inconsistent

The name speaks for itself - there is no consistency and logic in actions. Such a boss moves from one management style to another, but does so out of inexperience, and this is the difference from the situational style.

Manager characteristic

Today such a manager is an authoritarian leader, and tomorrow he is an anarchist with a developed conniving nature of work. The results of the work of such a team are extremely low, and there is every chance of ruining the work of the enterprise or even ruining it. If the manager has experience in such a position, but he adheres to an inconsistent style of work, then he can be called an suggestible, weak-willed manager who cannot achieve goals.

Relations with subordinates

The team of an inconsistent leader is dissatisfied with its manager, does not know what to expect from the boss, moreover, everyone has little idea of ​​the ultimate goal and their opportunities for growth. Relations are developing very tensely, all this causes the growth of a negative atmosphere in the team. There is a high probability of omissions, intrigues and scandals.

Solving problems

It is impossible to achieve goals with such a leader, because he has a vague idea of ​​how the team should work. The solution of tasks is shifted to deputies and subordinates, and then undertakes. Then some tasks are canceled, replaced with new ones, and so on. This management style of the leader gives rise to confusion and anarchy.

Way of communication

The same is ambiguous and depends on the state of affairs in the company and the mood of the boss himself. Today he can tell stories about how he spent the weekend, and tomorrow he can play the role of the authoritarian "Pablo Escobar". A subordinate with developed leadership and manipulative skills is able to unsettle such a leader for a long time. And then from my own chair. Examples: such people rarely achieve serious heights, but there is still a vivid example - Mikhail Gorbachev.

Situational

The management style in which the policy of relations adjusts to the current state is called situational. This is the best way to manage people and enterprises - in times of crisis it helps to get together, and during a market upsurge to strengthen competitive advantages.

Do not confuse a situational approach and a leader's duplicity. In the first case, the boss chooses a communication style based on the behavior of a specific person or group of persons, in order to start the work as efficiently as possible. In the second case, the boss takes different positions based on his own benefit.

Manager characteristic

They are experienced managers with many years of experience who have worked in different areas in several areas. In some people, management skills are inherent in nature - these are the so-called managers from God. But talent is replaced by diligence and constant learning. Knowing how to influence a person now comes with experience. This is one of the most acceptable ways to lead a team. In case of inept attempts to copy the style, there is a danger that the leader will turn into a opportunist who says what is profitable at the moment.

Relations with subordinates

They develop confidentially, openly and easily - the team constantly feels that their work is literally burning in their hands, and the leader always knows what to do, how to punish and cheer the team up. Due to their great practical experience, such leaders really seem to see through their subordinates and have the gift of foresight. Such bosses enjoy authority in the team.

A situational leader knows how to best communicate with a given group of subordinates or a single employee. In which case it is possible to remain silent or even condone in some way, but it only seems to an inexperienced eye that the leader has given up the slack.

Solving problems

Disputes, problems and tasks are resolved quickly and professionally. An experienced manager is able to quickly debug most of the work processes, and if force majeure happens, then people are assigned to correct the situation, based on the abilities and experience of employees, and not personal preferences.

In general, the manager himself is more like a shadow - he hides his personal and does only work. He has no favorites, and if he does, then one can guess for a long time who was awarded such a role. He does not show any obvious negativity, on the contrary, such a manager tries to find a common language with every problem worker. Thanks to experience, this often succeeds. It seems that such a person does not think about himself at all: where are all the "Wishlist" and other complexes? The situational manager will only smile and shrug at this question.

Rarely is such a manager not a workaholic.

Way of communication

Like the liberal expert, the situational manager chooses a simple communication style. Despite their high rank, such people are simple and open, and often optimistic and endowed with a sense of humor. They are often in the position of an employee and can help outside of the work relationship. With age, managers become too kind and easy-going, sometimes they can lose their grip, which is used by unprincipled workers. But the team usually stands up for the leader, and if they see meanness in relation to their patron, they immediately take action.

Examples: most of the military, directors and managers of factories and factories of the war and post-war times, such as Konstantin Rokossovsky, Ivan Romazan, Avraamy Zavenyagin and others.

What style leader are you?

No matter how the manager behaves, it is worth remembering that the individual management style of the manager is made up of the peculiarities of upbringing and the character of a person, so you should not hang labels.

Management as the implementation of an individual leader's style is a complex and multifaceted process, accompanied by a high level of stress, psychological and physical stress. Becoming a leader is time-consuming, time-consuming and energy-consuming, and carries a high level of risk. Therefore, support from higher-level managers and ongoing training are needed.

What if you find yourself on this list? Take your strengths and focus on strengthening and developing them. Weaknesses should be given a lot of attention - problems are points of growth. The faster you reconsider your attitude to your negative traits, the faster and better you will become as a leader.

What if you find your manager on the list? Now you know how to better build a relationship with him, and what moments should be avoided.

All leaders are distinguished by their individual management style. Leadership styles are determined depending on this. The methods may be different and may not belong to the same direction. In modern business, a variety of shapes are welcome. The focus is on the result.

Leading companies optimize internal communications, create their own self-training and personnel reserve systems, form unique mechanisms for their motivation. The meaning of this is to combine the goals of the enterprise and the desires of the employee. The task of the head of the organization is to achieve a positive financial result using modern personnel management tools.

Manager's responsibility

The manager has many functional responsibilities. The most important ones are budgeting, implementation of decisions of the parent company, monitoring, communication with clients, mass media, control of compliance with legislation, safety measures. It is clear that one person should not do everything.

For this, there are various departments and services. The director of the enterprise solves any problem with the help of qualified managers. Each of them has its own degree of responsibility for team leadership.

Leveraging the organization's potential is an effective tool.

There are three levels of management:

1. Technical. Direct interaction of managers with line specialists. They solve specific narrow issues of managing a group, department, team, shift.
2. Managerial. The director regulates the activities of the structural unit (branch, department, representative office). The form of organization of such divisions has several structures controlled by the heads of production, departments, projects.
3. Institutional (highest).

The authorities of the company are most responsible for strategic management. Their activities are to control, analyze and manage the entire company. The main directions are finance, resource management, development strategy, choice of sales markets.

At any level, specific tasks are assigned to the boss. Their execution is mandatory. The most successful ones quickly climb the career ladder, go to another level of power. The principle of work of top management is translated into the activities of all divisions of the organization. The individual contribution of each manager is important. Only his personal qualities and competent personnel management can lead the company to success.

K. Levin's system

The order of interaction between employees is determined depending on the company's management system. The principle of team leadership implies a system of influence of the leader on subordinates.

Team management styles according to K. Levin are:

1. Authoritarian. This form provides for rigidity, unacceptability of any initiative from subordinates, a ban on their discussion of decisions of their superiors. The difference is the exactingness to subordinates, the predominance of power, strict discipline, control, a clear focus on the result, indifference to social or psychological factors.
2. Democratic. It involves collegiality, joint discussion of issues, decision-making, creativity in the course of work, encouragement of initiative subordinates. Based on their self-discipline and conscientiousness. Allows publicity, active discussion of issues with staff, focus on the process, not the result.
3. Liberal. This form is, in fact, a refusal to control. Characterizes the activity by the absence of exactingness, elementary discipline, the passivity of power, the inability to control. This state is called connivance.

K. Levin's observations drew attention to the problem of quality in management. A search began for methods that would help increase work results on the one hand, and solve the needs of the organization's employees on the other. In the 21st century, a manager must be not only an organizer, but also a leader. These two properties are related. Which one is more important is difficult to determine. But the lack of one can lead to ineffective results of work with personnel. Each manager or government official chooses his own style. But the most effective way is to make a choice depending on the situation.

R. Likert system

In the middle of the 20th century, R. Likert proposed a new assessment system. According to her, there are 4 options. One of them characterizes the priority of focusing on the fact of work, and the other - on the person. Everything else varies between the two.

Classification according to Likert theory:

1. Exploitative authoritarian. Characterizes the boss as a self-sufficient person who does not trust his employees, rarely allows him to participate in the discussion and resolution of issues. He always sets the tasks himself. The main incentives are the threat of punishment, fear of dismissal. There are no rewards. There is mutual mistrust in the organization. This is the reason for the state of confrontation between the authorities and the collective.
2. Paternalistic-authoritarian. This form provides for the periodic participation of workers in some decision-making. They are motivated by real rewards, potential punishments. Sometimes the informal part of the organization is opposed to the authorities.
3. Advisory. The director makes major strategic decisions independently. For their implementation, attracts, demonstrating trust, subordinates. This is a reward for the results of work. Since participation in making important decisions of the company increases the self-esteem of employees and motivates them. Disagreements between representatives of the authorities and the collective are minimal.
4. Democratic. This form of work is most distinguished by trust, the active involvement of the organization's specialists in the discussion. Basic decisions can be made at any level, of course, taking into account the competencies of the employee. Communication is well built not only between specialists of the same level, but also with representatives of the authorities. Managers and subordinates interact in a collaborative and constructive manner.

Which management style is the most effective is difficult to determine. Because there are many factors affecting this.

Psychotypes

Each boss chooses a suitable manner of work for himself. There are many reasons for his choice. For example, the number of staff members, their age or education, regional characteristics, document flow, logistics, etc. The format of the relationship between the authorities and the staff is influenced by the psychological type of the boss's personality.

All leadership styles and types of leaders vary by personality. What types of leaders are most successful can be understood by looking at how they manage people and what effective methods they use.

1. Charismatic leader. The form of activity of such a leader is most aimed at achieving high results. A strong-willed, self-confident person does not suffer defeat or failure. Its goal is to bring the company to a new level by introducing modern technologies. He will listen to the opinion of the employee, but not necessarily agree with him.
2. Diplomat. This boss is a model of competence, benevolence and poise. In relations with the staff, he is always calm. He considers collective types of work to be an effective way of leadership.

The form of activity in such an organization is usually characterized by a team spirit.

• Humanist. The characteristic of such a boss is to create friendships. He perceives the employees as one family and tries to maintain warm relations with the personnel. Corporate parties and holidays are often held. He does not use tight control or a system of penalties, but finds some other way of influencing.
• Democrat. For such a manager, the main task is to establish trusting relationships with the team. In such an organization, the form of responsibility is equally distributed between employees and their superiors. With what accuracy the specialist will execute the order, this will also be the form of encouragement.
• Bureaucrat. The form of activity of such a chief is ordered, which does not tolerate reflection and discussion. Rules, references, reports are an important part of the work. He prefers that all instructions and directives are followed by staff.

Such a concept as leadership styles in management until recently was a separate category. A combination of democratic and corporate options is relevant now.

What is the format of management, for the head to decide depending on the goal set for the business.

"One-Dimensional" Leadership Styles

Using different sources for analysis, different classifications of leadership styles can be defined. There are two approaches to learning styles: traditional and modern. The traditional approach includes "one-dimensional" management styles. "One-dimensional" styles, characterized by one factor, they include: authoritarian, democratic and liberal-conniving

To begin our discussion of leadership styles, consider the Douglas McGregor system. His writings on Practical Management contain statements that subordinates behave in ways that are forced them to behave by their superiors. A subordinate of any rank can try to meet the requirements of his leadership and carry out the tasks assigned to him. McGregor's research shows that the primary driver of a set goal is, first of all, the desires of the leader. If a manager believes that his employees will cope with the task at hand, he subconsciously manages them in such a way as to improve their performance. But if the actions of the management are notable for their uncertainty, this leads to reinsurance, and, consequently, inhibits development.

McGregor's work helps managers avoid insecurity and strive for maximum success. He describes the management system from two opposite positions, each of which can be taken by a leader in relation to his subordinates. One of the extreme positions is called theory X, and the other theory is called W.

The theory of H.

Theory X describes a type of leader who takes the position of directive, authoritarian methods of management, since he is distrustful of his subordinates. Most often, they express their attitude as follows.

Every person naturally has a reluctance to work, so he tries to avoid labor costs where possible.

People try to avoid direct responsibility, prefer to be led. Each person strives to ensure himself complete safety.

To force each of the team members to work towards a common goal, it is necessary to apply various methods of coercion, as well as to remind of the possibility of punishment.

Managers who adhere to such a position in relation to their subordinates, as a rule, limit the degree of their freedom, autonomy in the organization, try to prevent employees from participating in the management of the company. They strive to simplify goals, break them down into smaller ones, set a separate task for each subordinate, which makes it easy to control its implementation. The hierarchy in such organizations, as a rule, is very strict, the channels for collecting information work clearly and efficiently. This type of leader satisfies the basic needs of his subordinates and uses an autocratic management style.

The theory of W.

She describes an ideal situation in which relationships in a team develop, as partnerships and the formation of a team takes place in an ideal environment. This theory represents an optimistic view of the performance of an organization and includes the following provisions.

Work is not something special for any of us. A person does not refuse to perform certain duties, but seeks to take on a certain responsibility. Work is as natural for a person as it is to play.

If the members of the organization strive to achieve the set styles, they develop self-management, self-control, do everything possible to achieve the goals.

The reward for the work will strictly correspond to how the tasks facing the team are completed.

Ingenuity and creativity remain hidden in subordinates due to the high development of technology.

Significant success in work is achieved by managers who adhere to both theory X and theory Y. But each manager must first assess whether it is possible, in the conditions in which the organization is, the application of theory Y, and also what consequences the application of theory X can cause.

There are conditions under which the development of the organization is carried out according to the principles of the theory of W. Leaders in this case, in conditions of equality, have full support from subordinates and middle managers. In this case, the leader for the subordinate is a mentor. They may have different positions on other issues, but they must respect each other's opinions. A manager who adheres to Y theory allows the subordinate to set deadlines for tasks if he wants to combine various activities.

Concepts that correspond to the theory of Y are most effective in a situation where all team members are adapted to a similar management style. Professions such as a research worker, teacher, and physician are best suited to guiding the theory of W.

Low-skilled workers requiring constant supervision and control tend to adapt better to management according to the theory of H.

The wide application of the theory of Y in management work allows you to achieve a high level of productivity, develop the creative potential of employees, create flexible jobs, encourage teamwork, and also achieve a high level of personnel qualifications.

Within the framework of "one-dimensional" management styles, two models can be considered. The classical model for the classification of leadership styles proposed by K. Levin and the alternative model for the classification of Likert styles. Consider and analyze these models. K. Levin's model is based on the fact that the main role in the classification of leadership styles was given to the personality traits and character traits of the leader. In the Likert model, this basis is based on the leader's reference point either to work or to a person. Both models under consideration relate to the behavioral approach that provided the basis for the classification of leadership styles. The effectiveness of leadership according to this approach is determined by how the manager treats his subordinates.

Model K. Levin

The research carried out by K. Levin and his colleagues was carried out earlier than M. Gregor divided the actions and behavior of leaders into two theories. Let us consider the main styles of leadership that K. Levin identified in his studies: authoritarian, democratic, liberal.

An Autocratic Liberal Leadership Continuum

Authoritarian leadership is characterized by excessive centralization of the leader's power, autocratic resolution of all issues related to the activities of the organization, limitation of contacts with subordinates. This style is characteristic of decisive, domineering, strong-willed people, tough in relation to others. The autocrat "knows everything himself" and does not tolerate objections. Does not trust anyone, does not inform about his intentions; gives business, brief orders; prohibitions are often accompanied by threats. Praising and blaming employees is highly subjective. The emotions of subordinates and colleagues are not taken into account. Cases in the team are planned in advance in all their scope, only the immediate goals for each employee are determined. The leader's voice is decisive, and his position is outside the group.

The "exploitative" authoritarian style boils down to the fact that the leader, not trusting his subordinates and not asking for their opinion and advice, decides all issues on his own, and takes responsibility for everything, giving the executors only instructions on what, how and when to do it, as the main form of incentive is using punishment.

Employees treat the orders of the head indifferently or negatively, rejoice at any of his mistakes, find in it confirmation of their innocence. In general, as a result of this, an unfavorable moral and psychological climate is formed in the organization or unit, and an atmosphere is created for the development of industrial conflicts.

With a softer "benevolent" variety of authoritarian style, the leader treats his subordinates condescendingly, is interested in their opinion when making decisions, but, despite its validity, he can act in his own way. If this is done demonstratively, the psychological climate worsens. This leadership style provides subordinates with a certain degree of independence, albeit to a limited extent. Motivation by fear is present here, but it is minimal.

The emergence of an autocrat leader is associated with the peculiarities of his character. In most cases, these are domineering, persistent and stubborn people, with exaggerated ideas about their own abilities, with a great desire for prestige and power. By temperament, they are choleric.

Democratic leadership style (collegial)

The democratic style is formed among people who do not like to take responsibility upon themselves, responsibility is not concentrated, but distributed in accordance with the delegated powers. The management is characterized by a high degree of decentralization of powers, active participation of employees in decision-making. An atmosphere is created in which the performance of the job becomes attractive and the achievement of success is rewarding. This style provides instructions in the form of sentences, not dry speech, but a friendly tone, praise and censure - taking into account the opinion of the collective. Team events are planned. Orders and prohibitions are based on discussions. The position of the leader is within the group, i.e. leader, behaves like one of the group members; each employee can freely express himself on different issues with him. By his nature, such a leader is absent-minded, careless, cannot really set goals, too soft in character, communicative, but a weak organizer. When exercising control, a democrat pays attention to the final result. Such an environment creates conditions for self-expression of subordinates, they develop independence, which contributes to the perception of achieving the goals of the organization as their own. Such interaction between the manager and subordinates can be defined as cooperation.

In practice, there are two types of democratic style "consultative" and "participatory".

In a “consultative” environment, the manager trusts his subordinates, consults with them, and strives to use all the best advice that the subordinates offer. Among incentive measures, encouragement prevails, and punishment is used in exceptional cases. Employees are satisfied with this management system, despite the fact that most decisions are prompted by them from above. Subordinates try to provide their boss with help and support morally when necessary.

The “participatory” version of the democratic leadership style is based on the fact that managers fully trust their subordinates in all matters, always listen to them and use all their proposals, organize the exchange of comprehensive information, involve subordinates in setting goals and monitoring their implementation.

Typically, a democratic management style is used when the performers are well versed in the work being done and can bring novelty and creativity to it.

Liberal leadership style (neutral, conniving)

It is formed in people who do not like to take responsibility for themselves. The manager poses a problem to the performers, creates the necessary organizational conditions for their work, sets the boundaries of the solution, and he himself fades into the background. He retains the functions of a consultant, an arbitrator, an expert evaluating the results obtained.

At the same time, encouragement and punishment recede into the background in comparison with the internal satisfaction that subordinates receive from the realization of their potential and creative possibilities. Subordinates are relieved of constant control and "independently" make decisions and try to find a way to implement them within the framework of their powers. They do not realize that the manager has already thought of everything in advance and created the necessary conditions for this process, which predetermine the final result. Such work brings them satisfaction and forms a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team.

The use of this style is becoming more widespread due to the growing scale of scientific, technical and development activities, which are carried out by high-class specialists who do not want to be under pressure and tutelage. Its effectiveness depends on the real desire of subordinates to this, a clear formulation by the manager of the tasks and conditions of their activities, his fairness in relation to the assessment of results and remuneration.

But this style can turn into a bureaucratic one, when the leader completely retires from business. He transfers all management into the hands of independent leaders who, on his behalf, manage the collective, using tough authoritarian methods of leadership. He himself pretends that the power is in his hands, but in fact he becomes more and more dependent on his assistants.

The rise of a liberal leader can be attributed to many reasons. By their nature, such leaders are indecisive, good-natured people, afraid of quarrels and conflicts, who do not like to take responsibility for themselves, are scattered, careless, really cannot set goals that are too soft in character. They underestimate the importance of the team's activities and the fact that the team needs them. But it may turn out that this is a highly creative person, captured by some sphere of his interests, but devoid of organizational talent. For this reason, the duties of a leader are overwhelming for this leader.

To assess the effectiveness of each of the management styles, R. Likert suggested calculating the liberal-authoritarian coefficient (LAC). It is determined by the ratio of the sums of liberal and authoritarian elements in the behavior of the leader. In his opinion, in modern conditions, the optimal value of this coefficient is 1.9. Thus, today, leaders must use twice as many elements of persuasion as coercion to obtain effective results.

In his research, Lewin found that authoritarian leadership did more work than democratic leadership. However, under authoritarian management, there is low motivation, less originality, less friendliness in groups, lack of group thinking, and other negative factors. With a liberal leadership style, the workload decreases, the quality of work decreases, and there is more play.

More recent research has not fully supported the findings that authoritarian leadership is more productive but less satisfied than democratic. Levin's research provided a basis for the study of this issue by other scientists.

Thus, Levin's research was based, first of all, on the study of the influence of a leader's personal qualities on the choice of a leadership style. In each specific case, there is a certain balance between the authoritarian, democratic and liberal styles, and an increase in the proportion of elements of one of them will lead to a decrease in others.

All of the above leadership styles can be presented in the form of a summary table proposed by the researcher E. Starobinsky.

Table 1.1.

Leadership styles

The job-focused leader (or the task-oriented leader) takes care of the task design and the design of the reward system to increase productivity.

In contrast to the first type of leader, Likert puts a person-centered leader whose main concern is people. He focuses on increasing productivity by using the improvement of human relations. This type of leader allows employees to participate as much as possible in decision-making, avoids custody and sets a high level of labor productivity for the unit. It also helps subordinates to solve problems, and encourage their professional growth.

Thus, Likert concluded that the leadership style would be either work-oriented or person-oriented. A people-centered leadership style enhances productivity. But this management style is not always the best behavior for a leader. As an extension of his research, Likert proposed four basic leadership styles.

Likert Leadership Styles

Let's consider each system separately.

System 1 leaders have the characteristics of an autocrat. System 2 is called supportive authoritarian. These leaders may maintain an authoritarian relationship with their subordinates, but they allow subordinates to have limited participation in decision-making. System 3 leaders show significant but incomplete trust in their subordinates. Important decisions are made at the top, but many specific decisions are made by subordinates.

System 4 is characterized by group decision making, the participation of employees in the development and implementation of decisions. Leaders fully trust their subordinates. Relationships are friendly, trusting. Leaders are people-centered, as opposed to work-centered System 1 leaders. According to Likert, System 4 is the most effective in managing organizations, but according to his research, its practical application is rare. FZ Turdukulov, ER Kasymova "Fundamentals of Management" Bishkek - 2000

"Multidimensional" Leadership Styles

In modern conditions, the success of a business is predetermined not only by the nature of the relationship between the leader and the subordinate and the degree of their freedom that is given to them, but also by a number of other circumstances. An expression of this is “multidimensional” management styles, which represent a complex of complementary, intertwining approaches, each independent of the others.

Initially, the idea of ​​a “two-dimensional” management style was formed, which is based on two approaches. One of them focuses on the creation of a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team, the establishment of human relations, and the other - on the creation of appropriate organizational and technical conditions under which a person will be able to fully reveal his abilities.

F. Fiedler's Leadership Model

Fred Fiedler is known as one of the first management experts who believed that the effectiveness of a management style can be judged if the chosen style is appropriate for the given situation. He also believed that the success or effectiveness of a particular management style depends on three factors: the relationship of the leader with subordinates, the structure of production tasks, and the level of authority of the leader.

The attitude of the leader and subordinates.

One of the most important factors in determining the effectiveness of management is the degree of loyalty of the manager to the team members. When the relationship between them is close, the leader can count on support and understanding at any moment, but if this relationship cannot be so, then the power of the leader's word automatically decreases.

The structure of production assignments.

In this case, the structure of production tasks is understood as the degree of routine (simple and voluminous) or non-routine (complex and unique) work. Difficult tasks require coordination, sensitive participation of the leader, initiative and enthusiasm from subordinates, additional investment of time. On the other hand, they are designed for a high level of responsibility, are not routine, and require the use of a democratic management style.

The level of authority of the leader.

The amount of formal and informal power of the leader is of great importance. The amount of this power is measured by the authority of the leader. This power allows him or her to give orders, reward, or punish. A high level of power allows the use of authoritarian management methods and vice versa.

Fiedler believed that these three factors, in combination, could provide an image of the ideal leader.

When the tasks are clearly formulated, the managerial authority is significant, and his relationship with subordinates is favorable, then the subordinates are easy to influence. In the opposite case, it is better for the leader to focus on solving organizational and technical problems, without paying special attention to the issues of team building and the establishment of human relations. This ensures the unity of goals, efficiency in making and implementing decisions, and reliability of control.

In this situation, you do not need to spend time building relationships, and employees act in conditions of clearly formulated simple tasks and instructions. A leader can simultaneously adhere to an authoritarian style, but a light dictatorship is also necessary.

A management style focused on strengthening the team and maintaining human relations is most suitable in situations that are moderately favorable for the leader, when he does not have enough power to provide the necessary level of cooperation with subordinates, but if the relationship is good, people do what is required of them. In these conditions, orientation to the organizational side can cause a conflict, as a result of which the weak influence of the leader on subordinates will only fall even more Seiner R. Styles of behavior of managers in conflict situations. // Questions of theory and practice of management. -1994.-№3. S. 168-172. An orientation toward human relations, on the other hand, can increase his influence and improve relations with his subordinates.

Like all other models, Fiedler's model is not without flaws and has not received full support from theorists. By identifying that an organizational-technical leadership style would be appropriate in less favorable situations and that a relationship-oriented style would be more useful in moderately favorable situations, Fiedler laid the foundation for a future situational management approach. His approach shows that there is no optimal leadership style regardless of the circumstances. Fiedler developed a unique but controversial method for assessing leadership style. He asked managers to describe their least favorite colleagues, work assistants. Fiedler argued that a leader who describes disliked subordinates in a more restrained style is predisposed to a democratic management style. These are people who are positively disposed towards communication, exchange of opinions, i.e. communication-oriented leaders. In contrast, those who describe their subordinates in a vicious, unsympathetic manner are considered production-oriented leaders. Their description can be found in Tannenbaum and Schmidt. It was the research methodology that Fiedler used that did not inspire confidence in many researchers.

Life Cycle Model by P. Hersey and C. Blanchard

P. Hersey and C. Blanchard developed a situational theory of leadership, which they called the theory of the life cycle. In accordance with this model, the use of style depends on the maturity of subordinates, their ability to take responsibility for their behavior, education and experience in solving specific problems, and the desire to achieve their goals. Hersey and Blanchard formulated four basic leadership styles: instruct to sell, participate, delegate.

The essence of the first style is to instruct immature, incapable and unwilling employees to be responsible for the results of their work what to do and how. Here the leader should be guided by the solution of organizational and technical problems, and not by the establishment of human relations and the creation of a team.

The second style - “selling” - is effective for employees when subordinates want and can be responsible to work independently without the help and direction of the manager. Hersey and Blanchard recommend delegating authority and creating conditions for collective management.

In general, critics of this life cycle model point out the lack of a consistent method for measuring maturity; a simplified division of styles; and the lack of clarity as to whether, in practice, managers will be able to behave as flexibly and adaptively as the model requires.

Life Cycle Theory. Hersey and Blanchard have developed a model according to which the most effective leadership styles depend on the "maturity" of the performers. Maturity implies the ability to take responsibility for one's behavior, the desire to achieve a set goal, as well as education and experience in relation to the specific task that needs to be completed.

Model of decision making by the head of Vroom - Yetton.

According to the authors of this model, depending on the situation, the characteristics of the team and the characteristics of the problem itself, five management styles can be distinguished. These five styles represent a continuum, starting with autocratic decision-making (A and B), then consultative (C and D), and ending with full participation (E).

A - The manager himself makes decisions based on the information available.

B - The leader informs the subordinates of the essence of the problem, listens to their opinions and makes a decision.

B - The manager presents the problem to his subordinates, summarizes the opinions expressed by them and, taking them into account, makes his own decision.

D - The leader, together with his subordinates, discusses the problem and, as a result, a common opinion is developed.

D - The leader constantly works in conjunction with the group, which either develops a collective decision, or makes the best, regardless of who is its author.

When choosing a style, leaders use the following basic criteria:

availability of sufficient information and experience from subordinates;

the level of requirements for the solution;

clarity and structuredness of the problem;

the degree of involvement in the affairs of the organization and the need to coordinate decisions with them; the likelihood that the sole decision of the head will receive the support of the executors;

interest of performers in achieving goals;

the degree of likelihood of conflicts between subordinates as a result of decision-making.

This model differs from other situational models in that its basis is decision-making, but it is similar to other approaches in that it once again shows the manager that there is no optimal method of influencing subordinates. The optimality of the style depends on the changing variables of decision-making situations.

Thus, in this section, we looked at the management styles that exist within the traditional approach to classifying leadership styles. They belong to the classic models. The increasing complexity of a leader's activities and an increase in his responsibility for the quality of decisions made and the choice of leadership style gave a new impetus to conducting more detailed and extensive research in this area. Many scientists and renowned researchers in the field of management constantly conduct surveys of managers and their direct reports in order to identify the characteristic methods and techniques used by managers at various levels.

Now you can move on to looking at modern models for classifying leadership styles.

Model R. Tannenbaum and W. Schmidt

Robert Tannenbaum and Warren Schmidt research concluded that managers have a hard time solving problems within different management styles. Before deciding whether to act - democratic or autocratic - in different situations, a leader needs to consider three series of questions.

1. Questions of a personal nature.

The leader should evaluate his own views, inclinations, the level of self-confidence on the part of subordinates, the degree of his decisiveness.

2. Questions concerning subordinates.

The leader should assess the inclination of his team members to independence, responsibility, the interests of subordinates, the level of knowledge, the desire to be involved in the decision-making process.

3. Questions concerning the specifics of a particular situation.

The most important thing to consider when choosing a style of behavior is the cause of the problem. It is necessary to pay attention to the competence of the group on this issue, the time frame allotted for making a decision, the type and history of the development of the organization.

Researchers have combined these questions to create a continuum of leadership styles. It helps the manager to consider all possible options for behavior, from completely authoritarian to completely democratic.

An authoritarian regime is when, a manager: has full power and no barriers to its use; reserves the right to any emergency powers; has a certain set of unique knowledge and skills; Leads formally, is not a real leader, does not have support and understanding.

Subordinates: dependent on their leader; do not have the opportunity to express their opinion; have low qualifications; may be subject to the use of emergency powers; do not have independence; become followers of an authoritarian regime.

Workplace situation: Strict discipline reigns through strict control. The profit level is not high. The volume of production costs is tightly controlled. There is a constant risk of injury. The work does not require high professional skills; re-equipment is often carried out, and the production process is changed. Possible consequences of using this style: communication becomes poorer, workers' adaptation to abrupt changes decreases; the activity is routine; creative growth is excluded.

A democratic regime is when, a manager: has limited power, can set the framework for its use, or accepts conditions; the group can remove him from office and replace him with team members; is time-dependent in its activities; can apply a limited number of sanctions in relation to subordinates.

Subordinates: exercise control over management methods; most often have such professions as scientists, engineers, managers, etc .; have high professional skills; love strict order, but not authoritarian; have high social needs.

The situation in the workplace: the goals of the activity are accessible and understandable to everyone. Responsibility and control are shared between managers at different levels. There are always time limits for completing a task. The transformations are progressive, progressive. The real health risk is low. Collective labor is used. Possible consequences of using this style: a person adapts to dependence on the team, loses the ability to think independently. In extreme situations, decision-making problems are possible.

The regime of weak, lack of initiative leadership is when the manager: does not have real power; not limited by time frames; we do not change to positions, since everyone is satisfied with this situation; cannot apply any sanctions; does not have knowledge of the specifics of production.

Subordinates: have more power than the leader; do not accept order; easily raise a mutiny, a strike; poorly organized; they are usually scientists or other workers with rare knowledge, realizing their need.

Workplace situation: there are no clearly defined goals of the organization. There is no structure in the organization. There is only a self-control system. There is no time limit for completing tasks. There are practically no transformations and changes in the labor system. The atmosphere in the workplace is mild and supportive. To perform professional functions, high skills and special knowledge are required. Possible consequences of using this style: fragmentation of the team, isolation of the individual, misunderstanding, chaos. Lack of mutual understanding, mutual assistance, unified leadership. This can lead to the fact that efforts in professional activity will be directed at a useless struggle and defending their interests and views.

Mitchell and House's "path-to-target" hike.

The leadership model is in many ways similar to Fiedler's. Their approach directs managers to apply the leadership style that is most appropriate for the situation. Techniques by which a leader can influence the ways or means of achieving goals:

1. An explanation of what is expected of the subordinate.

2. Providing support, mentoring and removing hindrances.

4. Creation of subordinates such needs, which are in the competence of the leader, which he can satisfy.

5. Satisfying the needs of subordinates when the goal is achieved. MP Pereverzev, NAShaidenko, LE Basovsky. "Management" M: Infva - M 2006 P.235

The decision-making model of the Vroom-Yetton leader.

The model focuses on the decision-making process, it is similar to the previous models in that it emphasizes the absence of a universal optimal method of influencing subordinates. The optimality of the style depends on the changing variables of the decision-making situation.

Further study of the effective leadership process led to the creation of a systems model. She largely absorbed the ideas discussed above and significantly expanded her view of leadership. At the end of 1995, in the United States, on the basis of research, broad surveys of practitioners, scientists developed a leadership model.

The “Fundamentals of Effective Leadership” model was developed within the framework of a unified state program for five years by a special commission under the leadership of Vice President Gorne. The program had the following tasks:

creating a flexible and reliable recruitment system;

transformation of the qualification system;

improvement of the system of execution of decisions;

improving the system of training and development of employees;

ensuring equal opportunities for all working employees;

reduction of paper flows;

the formation of partnerships between employees and managers.

Nowadays, the concept of an attributive approach to the choice of a leadership style is becoming more widespread. This concept is based on the manager's reaction not to the behavior of subordinates itself, but to the reasons that caused it. In this case, the leader is based on three types of information: about the extent to which the subordinate's behavior is conditioned by the specifics of the task; how stable it is and how unique it is. If the behavior of a subordinate is caused by serious internal reasons, the manager takes the necessary measures in relation to him and further carries out their correction in accordance with the response of the subordinate. If the reasons are caused by external conditions, the leader directs efforts to change them.

Thus, moving from one model to another, one can notice their complication, the inclusion in consideration of an increasing number of factors influencing the leadership style that a manager will adhere to in a specific situation and in a specific team. This means that the leader must be able to behave differently in different situations.

Leadership style- the way, the system of methods of influence of the head on subordinates. One of the most important factors in the effective work of the organization, the full realization of the potential capabilities of people and team. Most researchers identify the following leadership styles:

• Directive style (authoritarian);
• Democratic style (collegiate);
• Liberal style (conniving or anarchic).

Directive management style characterized by high centralization of leadership, dominance of one-man management. The manager requires that all cases be reported to him, individually makes decisions or cancels them. He does not listen to the opinion of the team, he decides everything for the team himself. The predominant management methods are orders, punishments, remarks, reprimands, deprivation of various benefits. Control is very strict, detailed, depriving subordinates of initiative. The interests of the case are put much higher than the interests of people; harshness and rudeness prevail in communication.

Democratic management style characterized by the distribution of powers, initiative and responsibility between the head and deputies, the head and subordinates. The leader of the democratic style always finds out the opinion of the team on important production issues, makes collegial decisions. The members of the team are regularly and timely informed on issues of importance 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 needed. The leader stimulates a favorable psychological climate in the team, defends the interests of subordinates.

Liberal management style characterized by the lack of active participation of the leader in the management of the team. Such a leader "goes with the flow", waits or demands instructions from above, or falls under the influence of the collective. He prefers not to take risks, "not stick his head out", dodges the resolution of urgent conflicts, seeks to reduce his personal responsibility. He lets the work take its course, rarely supervises it. This leadership style is preferable in creative teams, where employees are distinguished by independence and creative individuality.

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 style of leadership. The study of the practice of managing organizations shows that in the work of an effective leader, to one degree or another, each of the three leadership styles is present.

Contrary to popular stereotypes, the prevailing leadership style is virtually gender-independent. (There is a misconception that female leaders are softer and more focused on maintaining good relationships with business partners, while male leaders are more aggressive and focused on the final result). The reasons for the separation of leadership styles may be more likely to be personal characteristics and temperament, rather than gender characteristics.

Successful top managers - both men and women - are not adherents of just one style. As a rule, they intuitively or quite deliberately combine different leadership strategies.

Leadership style is a set of methods and techniques for solving problems arising in the management process.

Types of leaders

Supervisor - Autocrat(autocratic management style):

Makes decisions himself. Picky, cruel, he controls himself, does not trust anyone, often not tactful, does not like criticism, surrounds himself with conformists, narrow performers. Around him are mediocrities and sycophants. Poorly supervises work within his competence.

Supervisor - Democrat(democratic management style).

Believes that labor is a natural process, Creates an atmosphere of openness and trust. Working methods: request, advice, recommendation. In the case of control, the emphasis is on the positive. Demanding, fair, benevolent, strict.

Supervisor - Liberal(liberal management style).

Liberal style means conniving. Does not lead the team. Passive, afraid to change the existing order, afraid of instructions from above, seeks to shift responsibility to subordinates, prone to managerial work and embezzlement. Methods of work: - begging, persuasion, lack of control, familiarity, formalism.

Leadership styles

In management theory, there are several styles of leadership. Leadership style is a set of methods of behavior of a leader in relation to subordinates.

Each manager, by virtue of his individuality, has his own management style. However, despite this, it is possible with a certain degree of approximation to distinguish several typical leadership styles. In life, as a rule, these styles do not appear in their pure form, moreover, the manager can use certain options in different situations.

In an authoritarian style, the manager is committed to the formal nature of the relationship with subordinates. He provides his employees with only a minimum of information, since he does not trust anyone. At the first opportunity, he tries to get rid of strong workers and talented people who lack servility. At the same time, in his opinion, the best employee is the one who knows how to understand the thoughts of the boss. In such an atmosphere, gossip, intrigue and denunciations flourish.

Individual workers owe a lot to the manager. However, such a management system does not contribute to the development of the independence of workers, since subordinates try to resolve all issues with the management. None of the employees knows how their leader will react to certain events - he is unpredictable, rushes from one extreme to another. People are afraid to tell him bad news, and as a result, he lives in the naive confidence that everything turned out as he intended. Employees do not argue or ask questions, even if they see serious mistakes in the manager's decision or behavior.

As a result, the activity of such a leader paralyzes the initiative of subordinates, interferes with their work. He creates a negative environment around himself, which, among other things, threatens himself. Disgruntled subordinates can deliberately misinform their leader at any time and, ultimately, simply fail. In addition, intimidated workers are not only unreliable, but also underperform, which naturally lowers production efficiency.

2. Democratic leadership style(from the Greek demos - people and kratos - power). This style is based primarily on the initiative of the team, not the leader. The democratic leadership style is characterized, first of all, by collective activity, in which the active and equal participation of all employees in the discussion of the planned goals for the implementation, determination of tasks and the selection of performers for their solution is ensured. The leader tries to be as objective as possible towards his subordinates, emphasizing his involvement in the opinion of the team.

A democratic leadership style presupposes interaction. In this case, the manager and the subordinate have a sense of trust and mutual understanding. But the desire to listen to the opinions of his employees on a variety of issues is not due to the fact that he himself does not understand something. The manager is convinced that when discussing problems, new additional ideas can always arise that will improve the process of implementing a solution. Such a leader does not consider it shameful for himself to compromise or even abandon the decision made if the subordinate's logic is convincing. Where an authoritarian leader would act by order and pressure, a democrat manager tries to convince, to prove the feasibility of solving the problem, to show the benefits that employees can receive.

Having a good knowledge of the business and the situation in the team, when exercising control, he pays special attention to the final result of the work. Thanks to this, conditions are created for the self-expression of subordinates, who develop independence. Such an environment, created by a democratic style of leadership, is educational in nature and allows you to achieve goals at low cost. In this case, the authority of the managerial position is supported by personal authority. Management takes place without harsh pressure, taking into account people's abilities, experience and respect for their dignity.

3. Liberal leadership style(from Lat. Hberalis - free). This style suggests a tendency towards excessive tolerance, indulgence, undemanding, connivance.

This leadership style is characterized by complete freedom of individual and collective decisions of employees with at the same time minimal participation of the manager, who, in essence, withdraws himself from leadership functions. Usually, such a role is played by people who are not competent enough, not confident in the strength of their official position. A liberal manager usually only takes decisive action at the direction of senior management and seeks to evade responsibility for unsatisfactory results.

In the organization in which such a manager works, important issues are often resolved simply without his participation, therefore, familiarity will most likely reign in the team headed by this manager. In an effort to gain and strengthen his authority, he is able to provide subordinates with various kinds of benefits, pay undeserved bonuses. The leader rarely comments on the actions of subordinates and does not try to analyze and regulate the course of events. In relations with subordinates, a liberal is correct and polite, reacts positively to criticism, is undemanding to employees and does not like to control their work.

Such a leader cannot refuse an employee without feeling guilty. Most of all he worries what employees think of him, and he does his best to please them. Liberals are not principled, they can change their decision on the same issue under the influence of different people and circumstances. Such a leader can even do the work himself for a negligent subordinate, because he does not like and does not want to fire bad workers. The main thing for him is maintaining good relations with subordinates, and not the result of work.

A semblance of a family environment is created in which everyone is friends and feels relaxed. Psychological comfort envelops employees and overshadows business. While everything is calm, the team may function properly. But as soon as a crisis situation arises, in which energetic, friendly actions of the whole team are required, good personal relationships will disappear. There was simply no business relationship. There is a good rule: there can be no friendly, familiar relations between a manager and employees at work.

Planning, forecasting, design as types of management activities

Planning is a management function.

Planning is systematic preparation of decision-making about goals, means and actions.

Planning - determination of the goal and ways to achieve it for a certain period of work.

Planning tasks:

1. Determination of the resource base (where and in what state the organization is currently located).

2. Determination of the direction of activity (mission, super task).

3. Determination of what ways we will go to achieve the goal, with the help of what (forms, methods, means).

The main planning task- determination of measures to further improve the efficiency of the cultural enterprise.

The CM plan should to determine the main goals and specific planning tasks, indicators for all areas of activity. The plan should become a concrete expression of the adopted management decisions.

The importance of planning.

Planning is one of the management functions, serving as the main means of using economic laws in the economic process; systematic preparation of decision-making about goals, means and actions in expected conditions.

Planning becomes practically the only condition that introduces a certain stability in the implementation of production and economic activities of a cultural institution.

Design is a specific technology, which is a constructive, creative activity, the essence of which is to analyze problems and identify the causes of their occurrence, develop goals and objectives that characterize the desired state of the object, develop ways and means to achieve the set goals. In this case, the project is a means of preserving or recreating social and cultural phenomena that correspond to the prevailing norms.

Designing e - it is a procedure for planning, distributing and regulating the resources involved in the project (labor, material, etc.), taking into account all the limitations of this project (technical, budgetary and time).

The project can be defined as a sequence of interrelated operations aimed at achieving a specific significant result and it takes a long time to complete them.

Forecasting is a process scientific foresight.

It includes:

1) The state of this organization.

2) In which direction we are moving, the tasks that we will solve to achieve.

3) What can hinder the implementation of the tasks.

4) What resources (main or additional) were required to solve these problems.

Forecast is a scientifically grounded judgment about the future and ways to achieve it.

Forecasting- This is a method of anticipating the possible directions of development of an organization, institution.

Forecasting happens : long-term (over 5 years; sometimes up to 15-20 years), medium-term (from one to 5 years), short-term (usually for a year). Its accuracy is only probabilistic.

In the process of forecasting, the following main tasks are solved:

1. Setting development goals.

2. Determination of rational ways and means of achievement.

3. Calculation of the required resources.

Types of forecasts. Forecasts are classified according to the following criteria:

1. By appointment:

Scientific and technical;

Socio-economic;

Demographic;

Political.

2. By the scale of actions:

International forecasts;

National forecasts;

Cross-sectoral forecasts;

Industry forecasts;

Forecasts of independent economic units (firms, etc.).

3. By the forecasting period:

Operational forecasts (up to 6 months);

Short-term (up to 2 years);

Medium-term (up to 5 years);

Long-term (over 5 years).

Planning principles

Planning should follow the following principles (rules):

- flexibility, providing for constant adaptation to changes in the environment of the enterprise. Changing it requires adjusting the plan for various changes in the external and internal environment;

- continuity, assuming a rolling nature of planning, primarily in terms of the systematic revision of plans, "shifting" the planning period (for example, after the end of the reporting month, quarter, year);

- communication, which is understood as the coordination and integration of efforts. Everything should be interconnected and interdependent;

- participation, assuming the importance of involving all possible participants in the process of functioning of a cultural institution;

- adequacy, those. reflection of real problems and self-esteem in the planning process;

- complexity, as the relationship and reflection in terms of all areas of the financial and economic activities of the enterprise;

- multivariance, allowing you to choose the best of the alternative options for achieving the goal;

- iteration- provides for the repeated linking of already drawn up sections of the plan (iterations). This determines the creative nature of the planning process itself.

- principle of unity - predetermines the consistency of planning, which means the existence of a set of structural elements of the planning object, which are interconnected and subordinate to a single direction of their development, focused on common goals. A single direction of planned activities, the commonality of the goals of all elements of the enterprise become possible within the framework of the vertical unity of departments, their integration.

When developing plans, it is necessary to use such planning principles as:

1) Timeliness

2) Reasonableness

3) Purposefulness

4) Informativeness

5) Rationality

6) Complexity (organizational, technical, personnel aspects)

Sources of planning

When planning their future activities, cultural institutions should take into account some social aspects, namely:

Demands, interests and needs of the population;

Educational and cultural level of the population living in the cultural service area;

Free time for potential visitors;

The real possibilities of the institution of culture itself;

Various trends in the development of a cultural institution and its role in the system of cultural and leisure activities.

Obviously, these tasks will help to complete the collection, analysis and processing of various sources of planning, which include:

Of various kinds research(free time budget, education, range of interests, needs, etc.);

- financial plan cultural institutions for the coming year (estimate of income and expenses);

- analysis of the enterprise cultures over the past year;

- social and creative orders, outgoing from public organizations, enterprises and firms located in the cultural service zone of a cultural institution, municipal government, veteran and youth organizations, etc .;

- holidays and significant dates in the life of a country, region, city, district of a separate labor collective, etc .;

- federal and regional cultural programs;

- work plans of departments, club formations of the cultural institution itself and other sources.

Planning methods

In the field of culture, several groups of planning methods have developed:

1. Analytical planning

The method of analytical planning involves the analysis of the content and results of the activities of a cultural institution in the previous period. The analytical method involves the study of the labor process, the study of factors affecting labor costs, the calculation of the time to complete work, the development of measures to create conditions for more efficient activities of workers and cultural institutions

2. Normative planning

The method of normative planning consists in justifying planned indicators using norms (financial, material, labor, etc.) and standards (as a set of produced or consumed services and goods per consumer unit, financing, area, equipment, etc.)

Regulatory planning involves a system of quantitative indicators, labor rationing: time rates, production rates, service rates, controllability rates, production resource consumption rates, financial resources, etc.

3. Balance planning methods.

These methods are an important part of justifying the reality of the plan and bringing in line (balance) the available resources and costs. To solve this problem, three main types of balances are used: material (natural), financial (cost), and labor.

- Labor balance helps to identify and plan the degree of provision of a cultural institution with qualified personnel capable of implementing the plans of the enterprise.

- Material balance helps to compare the planned amount of work and the possibility of its implementation using the available material resources.

- Financial balance allows you to compare the income and expenses of a cultural institution. In case of discrepancy between income and expenses, they are adjusted: either they reduce the volume of expenses, or they plan receipts in the income part to cover the missing financial resources.

Types of plans. Types of plans in cultural institutions

There are many types of work plans.

Types of plans created in general at enterprises, organizations and institutions, regardless of their industry.

They can differ:

This could be:

Financial plan (drawn up by departments that implement financial functions);

Business plan (by the department of economic functions);

Advanced training plan (by the personnel department);

Thematic plan (departments organizing events dedicated to a particular topic, event);

Comprehensive plan, program (general plan of the organization, including the plans of all its divisions).

2. By the level of making a planning decision

Federal plans;

Republican;

Regional and regional;

City and district;

Plans of institutions and organizations;

Individual plans.

3. By the degree of directivity:

a) forecast plans(expressing approximate ideas about the planned period). These plans represent the identification of the most probable trends in the development of the sphere of culture, organization, etc., are a theoretical prerequisite for making specific planning decisions of a directive and recommendatory nature;

b) recommendation plans(usually contain installation recommendations). The indicators of recommendatory plans are of a control nature, since, usually, the minimum values ​​of certain indicators are recommended for inclusion in the plan. And this means that it is impossible to have indicators below the target figures (thus, the amount of work for a cultural institution is planned by a higher authority).

c) directive plans.

Are subject to mandatory implementation. They contain a clear definition of tasks in numerical indicators and the timing of their completion. The allocation of funds from the state budget, contractual obligations, tasks related to construction, and other tasks related to the use of material, cost and labor resources of the activities of cultural institutions are planned in a directive manner. Indicators of recommendatory plans are of a control nature (usually the minimum values ​​of such indicators are indicated). This means that the firm in its activities must structure its work in such a way as to ensure the achievement of indicators not lower than the benchmarks. In this way, the volume of cultural and leisure activities is usually planned.

4. according to the terms for which the plans are designed:

Promising (medium and long term);

Current (short-term and operational) and calendar plans.

5. A business plan is used as a program for the implementation of a specific project,which is the necessary set of documents, facts, analysis of information, market assessment - collected in a single document, which, if approved and supported, can receive a loan, and therefore - the initial capital for the development of a company, program or one-time event.

Long term plans- are being developed for a period of 3 to 5 years or more. In the cultural sphere, such plans are usually developed at the federal and regional levels. In such plans, the most common indicators are indicated. Long-term planning is carried out on the basis of strategic planning.

Strategic planning - vision of the enterprise in the future, its place and role in the economy and socio-economic structure of the country, region.

Medium term planning covers a period from 1 to 3 years and is more detailed.

To short-term plans include plans developed for a period of up to 1 year inclusive, as well as operational plans for a quarter, month, week. Short-term plans are also called current work plans.

To operational plans includes plans developed for a decade, a week, a day, and individual plans.

We list examples of the names of plans drawn up in cultural institutions:

1. Work plan of the cultural institution for the year.

2. The work plan of a cultural institution for the 1st or 2nd half of the year (these plans, as a rule, are drawn up in large cultural institutions, or at the insistence of the founder).

3. Work plan of the cultural institution for the quarter.

4. Work plan of a cultural institution for a calendar month.

5. Work plan of a department or subdivision of a cultural institution.

6. Work plan of the club formation (circle, collective, studio, amateur association or club of interest.

7. Work plan of a cultural institution for a week, a decade (for example, Days of culture, Week of music for children and youth, Week of books for children and youth, Week of science and technology for children and youth, etc.).

8. Work plan of a cultural institution for the period of political or economic campaigns.

9. The plan for the preparation of a separate event.

10. Plan for a single event.