Authoritarian style examples. About management styles in management in simple words

Specific features The authoritarian management style is unity of command and high power distance. The authoritarian style is characterized by the fact that the leader takes the reins of power into his own hands, demanding complete obedience from his subordinates. This management style implies that all decisions in the organization are made by the manager without taking into account the opinions of employees.

Characteristics of an authoritarian management style

Control is also clearly expressed in an authoritarian management style - strict, driving ordinary employees into strict boundaries and depriving them of the opportunity to exercise initiative. As for communication in an organization, it is only a means for employees to carry out common activities.

Friendly relationships are not welcome, since it is not the interests of the individual, but the interests of the company that are valued above all else. The manager, in turn, also prefers to maintain a certain distance between himself and his subordinates, which no one has the right to violate.

Methods of authoritarian management style

Unlike other management styles, the authoritarian style is more focused on punishment for any faults of employees, rather than on rewards for any achievements. Among the main methods of this management style are: reprimands, orders, comments, deprivation of all kinds of bonuses and benefits.
The main psychological factor affecting employees of an organization is fear - fear of shame, punishment, dismissal. Thus, it cannot be said that the authoritarian management style is characterized by a lack of motivation. Motivation exists, but it represents the reinforcement of employee activity by fear.

Because the authoritarian management style comes in two forms (benevolent and exploitative), management methods depend on which type of authoritarian style operates in the organization. It is easy to guess that the benevolent form of the authoritarian style implies a softening of management methods, as well as a significant reduction in the number of punishments.

Disadvantages of an authoritarian management style

Of course, the authoritarian style is by no means the best management style for the normal functioning of an organization. Experts believe that this style can be used in working with subordinates only in certain cases:

1. In emergency situations, which are understood as all kinds of emergency circumstances and disruptions to the company’s work, requiring prompt action and quick decision-making, as well as in conditions of limited time.

2. Anarchic sentiments of the organization, requiring immediate restrictions on workers by introducing strict discipline that prevents the occurrence of various riots, strikes, etc.

In a company that does not have clearly defined problems, an authoritarian management style can lead to internal discord in the functioning of the organization, the destruction of self-control, decreased performance, deterioration of the socio-psychological climate, lack of initiative and creativity of subordinates, increased staff turnover, and decreased responsibility of employees for the work they have done.

Leadership style– a set of methods used by a manager to influence subordinates, as well as the form (manner, nature) of the execution of these methods in order to effectively perform managerial functions and assigned tasks.

The study of leadership style and the very emergence of this concept are associated with the name of the famous psychologist K. Levin, who in the 30s. XX century Developed a typology of individual leadership styles. German psychologist Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) conducted a series of experiments, on the basis of which he identified three management styles that have become classic:

Ø democratic (or collegial);

Ø conniving (or liberal-anarchist, or neutral).

Based on issuing orders to subordinates in the form of an order without any explanation of general connections with the goals and objectives of the organization. It is characterized by strict individual decision-making by the manager (“minimum democracy”), strict constant control over the implementation of decisions with the threat of punishment (“maximum control”), and a lack of interest in the employee as an individual. Employees must only do what they are told to do. At the same time, they receive a minimum of information. The interests of employees are not taken into account.

This style is characterized by centralization of power, the manager demands reports on the work performed, and gives preference to the official nature of relations. The leader maintains a distance between himself and his subordinates and perceives everything new with caution. Due to constant monitoring, this management style provides quite acceptable performance results according to the following criteria: profit, productivity, product quality can be good.

Style Features:

Ø the prevailing methods of management are orders, instructions, reprimands, threats, deprivation of benefits. The interests and wishes of employees are not taken into account;

Ø when communicating with people, a harsh tone of communication, harshness, tactlessness, even rudeness prevails;

Ø the interests of the business are placed significantly above the interests of people.

Advantages of the style:

Ø ensures clarity and efficiency of management

Ø minimizes decision-making time, in small organizations provides a quick response to changing external conditions

Ø creates a visible unity of management actions to achieve set goals.

Style Disadvantages:

Ø high probability of erroneous decisions;

Ø suppression of initiative, creativity of subordinates, slowdown of innovations, passivity of employees;

Ø cumbersome control system,

Ø people’s dissatisfaction with their work, their position in the team;

Ø unfavorable psychological climate (“sycophants”, “scapegoats”, intrigues) causes increased psychological stress and is harmful to mental and physical health.

Use Cases:

This is required by the production situation (in critical situations - accidents at the production site)

The staff voluntarily and willingly agrees to authoritarian management methods. Subordinates trust the leader, but he is sure that they are not able to act in the right way on their own.

This style is effective for military service, in the activities of some government agencies(military operations, etc.).

Democratic management style:

Management decisions are adopted on the basis of discussion of the problem, taking into account the opinions and initiatives of employees (“maximum democracy”), implementation decisions taken controlled by both the manager and the employees themselves (“maximum control”); The manager shows interest and friendly attention to the personalities of employees, taking into account their interests, needs, and characteristics.

The democratic style is the most effective, as it ensures a high probability of correct informed decisions, high production results, initiative, employee activity, people's satisfaction with their work and team membership.

This management style involves interaction based on trust and mutual understanding. The leader behaves in this case as one of the group members; Each employee can express their opinions on different issues. The manager delegates some of the managerial functions to his subordinates, creating situations in which they can perform at their best. Implementation democratic style possible with high intellectual, organizational, psychological and communication abilities of the leader.

Style Features:

Ø Important production problems are discussed and on this basis a solution is developed. The leader stimulates and encourages initiative on the part of subordinates in every possible way;

Ø regularly and timely informs the team on issues important to them;

Ø communication is conducted in a friendly and polite manner;

Ø With this style, a favorable psychological climate and cohesion develops in the team.

Advantages of the style:

Ø stimulates the manifestation of initiative, reveals creative potential

Ø allows you to more successfully solve innovative, non-standard problems

Ø includes psychological mechanisms of work motivation

Ø increases the satisfaction of performers with their work

Ø creates a favorable mental climate in the team, etc.

Conditions for using the style:

Having a stable, established team

Highly qualified employees

Availability of active, proactive, out-of-the-box employees

Under non-extreme production conditions.

Permissive management style:

The permissive management style is characterized, on the one hand, by “maximum democracy”, i.e. everyone can express their positions, but they do not strive to achieve real consideration and agreement of opinions, and on the other hand, there is a “minimum of control” (even the decisions made are not implemented, there is little control over their implementation, a collective method of decision-making is used to evade responsibility). Softness in managing people prevents a leader from acquiring the desired authority.

Style Features:

Ø communication is conducted in a confidential tone, in a polite manner, the manager is indifferent to both the needs of employees and criticism addressed to him,

Ø this style of leadership is acceptable in creative teams in which employees are distinguished by creative individuality;

Ø there is almost complete freedom of performers with very weak managerial influence;

Ø this management style is characterized by lack of initiative, non-interference of the manager in the process of certain works.

Style Disadvantages:

Performance results are usually low;

People are not satisfied with their work, their manager

The psychological climate in the team is not always favorable;

There is no cooperation;

There is no incentive to work conscientiously;

Sections of work are made up of the individual interests of leaders;

There is a stratification into conflicting subgroups.

This style is justified when the staff is very competent and responsible and the manager himself is poorly trained. Also when leading scientific and other creative teams in the presence of strong and disciplined workers.

In general, the leader's style is flexible, individual and situational. He must master all three styles and skillfully apply them depending on the specific situation, the specifics of the tasks being solved, the socio-psychological characteristics of employees and his own personal qualities.

Customized Style:

This style is not distinguished by science, but it will always exist.

We can say that the individualized style is a creative mixture of all the above-mentioned leadership styles. The leader uses authoritarianism at certain moments, takes the blow, and bears all the responsibility. Then, to solve some problems, he convenes the company’s management and puts before them a whole series of issues for consideration, i.e. uses a passive, liberal style. And, finally, the leader assigns some of the responsibilities to the heads of departments, including giving them the right to resolve certain issues and responsibility for making decisions, and he himself controls the progress of their work.

The strength of this leadership style is its creativity, because... the leader can vary various styles management depending on the situation that occurs in the company.

Weakness: the manager must constantly show a certain flexibility and speed of reaction, for example, if in situations that require authoritarianism, he shows a passive style, then he will quickly lose his influence and authority in the company.

"Multidimensional" leadership styles(they simultaneously take into account a number of criteria for assessing a leader’s behavior)

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

Management grid by R. Blake and J. Mouton.

In the early 80s, the concept of the “management grid” appeared, created by American psychologists Robert Blake and Jane Mouton.

Focus on

person
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Task orientation

The vertical axis of this scheme ranks “caring for people” (the manager’s concentration on employees, their needs, expectations, positive and negative qualities) on a scale from 1 to 9. Caring for people can be expressed in the creation of favorable working conditions, job security, and improvement of the structure salaries, etc.

The horizontal axis ranks “concern for production” (the manager’s concentration on production indicators - productivity, profit, efficiency) also on a scale from 1 to 9. In total, there are 81 leadership styles, which are determined by the degree to which these two factors are manifested. Blake and Mouton describe the middle and four outer grid positions as:

1.1. poverty of management (little management): involves minimal concern for production and the needs of workers. The manager makes the minimum effort required to maintain his job in the organization.

9.1. work management: Maximum concern for production efficiency is combined with minimal concern for subordinates. The 9.1 type leader prioritizes maximization. production results By dictating to subordinates what and how they should do, the moral microclimate in the team of the manager is of little concern.

1.9. people management: maximum care for people is combined with minimal care for production; attention is paid to creating a comfortable and friendly atmosphere in the organization, due to which a fairly smooth work rhythm can be maintained.

5.5. middle control: the manager finds a balance between production efficiency and a good microclimate in the group. This style is quite conservative, it presupposes a system of assumptions that ensure peaceful coexistence between the manager and subordinates, and a focus on reliable average results in work (both in terms of work achievements and employee satisfaction).

9.9. collective management: The effectiveness of work is determined by the high level of commitment of people and their interaction. The manager ensures that employees accept the organization's goals as their own, thereby ensuring high productivity. A high degree of employee satisfaction leads to high work achievements. An atmosphere of general trust and respect is created.

Thus, the management grid includes two components of the manager's work. The first is attention to solving production problems and tasks and the second is attention to people.

Blake and Motton assumed that the most effective leadership style - the optimal style - was the behavior of a leader in position 9. 9. In their opinion, such a leader combines high degree attention to his subordinates and the same attention to productivity. The term “production” means not only the production of material goods, but also sales, payments, customer service, etc. The researchers believed that professional training and a conscious attitude towards the goals of the organization allows all managers to move closer to the 9. 9 style, thereby increasing the effectiveness of their work.

Theoretically, the attractiveness of the style in position 9.9 is obvious, but the question arises - what then prevents it from becoming the most widespread in practice? The German researcher U. Stopp identified seven main obstacles to its use:

1. low level of education of employees

2. insufficient managerial preparedness of managers

3. low identification of employees with the goals of the organization

4. unsatisfactory condition information system enterprises

5. low degree of employees’ readiness to take responsibility

6. difference in value orientations of the manager and employees

7. emotional incompatibility between the manager and subordinates arising from hierarchical relationships in the organization.

Most of the listed obstacles are, in principle, removable, but require long-term and serious work, both on the part of the manager and on the part of subordinates (for example, in parameters 1, 2, 4). However, among them there are also those that practically do not depend on the efforts of the leader (parameter 6, 7). This means that the effectiveness of leadership is affected by additional factors, which are usually called situational. This means that in the developed models of leadership styles, one more variable should appear - the situation. Let's look at some situational models of leadership styles.

Any team has its leader, this is the simplest truism. A leader is needed to make decisions and direct the activities of society. At an enterprise, these functions are performed by a manager (foreman, department head or chief specialist). Scientists have noticed that each manager leads in his own way. And leadership characters were combined into management styles in management. Read more about what management is in the article:

Management styles in management: authoritarian style

An authoritarian manager is characterized by a dry character and lack of trusting relationships with subordinates. The process of working in this spirit is reminiscent of the rigid army style: orders are not discussed. True, even such a working mood has its advantages.

Advantages. Clarity of orders given, high speed of execution, does not require large financial costs. Promotes team unity “against the authorities.”

Flaws. Lack of motivation for employees, no work to create a favorable climate. In such companies, many subordinates cannot withstand the pressure and quit.

Democratic management style

Democracy is the official form of people's power in the state. At the enterprise, this style is reflected in similar features, only the boss is still not elected. Democracy is expressed through trade unions or similar associations, through periodic meetings and collective decision-making.

Such companies are characterized by rapid career growth, active motivation and the latest management formulas. This style is considered best for modern society Therefore, many leading companies are actively working to get as close to democratic management as possible.

Advantages. Psychological motivation for work, creating a favorable climate for work. Prospects for career growth for the employee, due to which there is no professional “stagnation” at the enterprise. Natural competition in working conditions, which additionally encourages you to work better.

Flaws. Democratic governance requires a lot of effort and attention to control. Moreover, to create the best atmosphere in the team, it requires careful selection of workers.

Liberal management style

This management style is the most destructive for the firm's economy. A liberal manager differs from a democrat by his apparent detachment from the work process. In such a company, management plays a minimal role, entrusting everything to subordinates.

Typically, this management style is characterized by a timid manager without obvious leadership traits. In this case, subordinates' hands are freed and they receive complete freedom of choice. Not to be confused with the democratic style. In both cases, there is no visible pressure and suppression of initiative, but the democratic manager still remains extremely attentive to the team and controls them with an “invisible hand.” For a liberal, the manifestation of such traits is a consequence of a weak character or lack of interest in work.

Advantages. An excellent opportunity for a subordinate to realize his potential, take the place of a manager or lead a team without official authority. Loyalty from superiors is often the reason for generous pay.

Flaws. This style does not contribute to improving the efficiency of the company as a whole. Liberalism in an enterprise creates duality in management: formally the manager has the authority, but the leader (one of his colleagues) actually manages the team.

In accordance with the most common characteristic in management science, the following leadership styles are distinguished: authoritarian (autocratic, directive), democratic (collegial), liberal (liberal-anarchic, permissive, neutral, permissive).

An authoritarian leadership style is characterized by centralization and concentration of power in the hands of one leader. He single-handedly decides all issues, determines the activities of his subordinates, without giving them the opportunity to take the initiative. Subordinates do only what is ordered; at the same time, the information they need is reduced to a minimum. The activities of subordinates are strictly controlled. An autocratic leader uses coercion-based or traditional power.

From a psychological point of view, an authoritarian management style is unfavorable. An autocratic manager has no interest in the employee as an individual. Due to the suppression of their initiative and creative manifestations, employees are passive. As a rule, the majority of them are not satisfied with their work and position in the team. With this leadership style, additional reasons appear that influence the emergence of an unfavorable psychological climate: “sycophants”, “scapegoats” appear, intrigues are created. All this causes increased psychological stress, which is harmful to the mental and physical health of people.

An authoritarian leadership style is appropriate and justified: 1) in situations requiring maximum and rapid mobilization of resources (in conditions emergency situations, accidents, combat operations, production during war, etc.); 2) in the first stages of creating a new team; 3) in teams with a low level of consciousness of the members of this team; 4) in the army.

The democratic leadership style is characterized by decentralization of power. A democratic leader consults with his subordinates and consults with specialists involved in making decisions. Subordinates receive sufficient information to have an idea of ​​their job prospects. Employee initiative is stimulated. The manager delegates part of his authority to subordinates. When exercising control, it introduces elements of collective self-government. A democratic leader uses primarily reward-based power and reference power (the power of example).

From a psychological point of view, the democratic management style is the most favorable. A democratic leader shows interest and provides friendly attention to employees, takes into account their interests, needs, and characteristics. This has a positive effect on the results of work, initiative, activity of employees, their satisfaction with their work and position in the team. A favorable psychological climate and team cohesion have a positive effect on the mental and physical health of employees. However, with all positive characteristics democratic management style, its implementation is possible only with high intellectual, organizational, psychological and communication abilities.

It is advisable to use a democratic leadership style in production teams, regardless of industry and type of products (services) produced. This leadership style achieves its greatest effectiveness in established teams with microgroups and informal leaders.

A liberal leadership style is characterized by minimal interference from the leader in the activities of the group. A liberal manager does not take an active part in the production activities of his subordinates. He sets tasks for them, indicates the main directions of work, provides them with the necessary resources and gives employees independence in achieving final results. His role comes down to the functions of a consultant, coordinator, organizer, supplier, controller. A liberal leader tries to use power based on rewards, expert power, or reference power.

From a psychological point of view, the liberal leadership style can be viewed from two sides, depending on which team the liberal leader is at the head of. This style gives positive results if the team consists of highly qualified specialists with great creative abilities independent work, disciplined and responsible. It can also be used in the form individual approach to the employee.

The most successful liberal leader manages a team that has energetic and knowledgeable assistants (deputies) who can take on the functions of a leader. In this case, the team is practically led by deputies and decisions are made, and they also resolve conflict situations.

With a liberal leadership style, a strong informal leader can also take over. In this case, the liberal leader must identify the leader’s “platform” and skillfully influence him in order to prevent anarchy, weakening of discipline and the emergence of an unfavorable socio-psychological climate. The most effective liberal style of management is in scientific and creative teams consisting of recognized authorities, talented, gifted people in specific fields of science, technology, culture and art.

If the team has not “grown up” to the liberal style of management, but is still headed by a liberal leader, then such a style turns into a liberal-anarchist (permissive) one. At the same time, “maximum democracy” and “minimum control” lead to the fact that: 1) some employees do not consider it necessary to implement the decisions made; 2) the lack of control on the part of management leaves the work of subordinates to chance; 3) work results are reduced due to lack of control and systematic evaluation; 4) people are not satisfied with their work and their leader. As a result, all this negatively affects the psychological climate in the team.

In some teams, a liberal leader is commanded by his subordinates, and he is known among them as “ a good man" However, this continues until a conflict situation arises. In this case, dissatisfied subordinates become disobedient: the liberal style turns into a permissive one, which leads to conflicts, disorganization and deterioration of labor discipline.

The above description of leadership styles does not exhaust the variety of forms of interaction between managers and subordinates.

In this rapidly changing world, a situational management style is used, which flexibly takes into account the level of psychological development of the team of subordinates.

In addition to the situational management style, the innovative-analytical style is popular and effective (especially in successful Japanese companies), which can ensure organizational survival in conditions of intense market competition. It has:
generation large number ideas;
the ability to logically analyze the feasibility and prospects of these ideas;
energy, innovation, sensitivity to new ideas and information;
tolerance for failure;
ability to work with people.

According to the majority of foreign management experts, an effective management style is a participatory (participatory) management style, which is characterized by the following features:
regular meetings between the manager and subordinates;
openness in relations between the manager and subordinates;
involvement of subordinates in the development and adoption of organizational decisions;
delegation (transfer) by the manager of a number of powers and rights to subordinates;
participation of ordinary employees in both planning and implementation of organizational changes;
creation of special groups with the right to make independent decisions (for example, “quality control groups”);
providing the employee with the opportunity to autonomously (separately from other members of the organization) develop problems and new ideas.

The participatory leadership style is most effectively used in scientific organizations, innovative firms, and in knowledge-intensive industries under conditions if:
1) the manager has a high educational and creative level, knows how to appreciate and use creative suggestions from subordinates; self-assured;
2) subordinates have high level knowledge and skills, the need for creativity, independence and personal growth, interest in work;
3) the goals and objectives facing the organization’s employees imply multiple solutions and require theoretical analysis and high professional performance, intense effort and creativity.

Thus, considering leadership styles in their entirety, we can conclude that they act as opposites: autocratic-democratic, participative; innovative-analytical - liberal.

An effective person, when choosing a management style, must keep in mind the following circumstances:
- know yourself;
- understand the situation;
- evaluate the chosen management style adequately to the situation and level of subordinates;
- take into account the needs of the group;
- take into account the needs of the situation;
- take into account the needs of subordinates.

INTRODUCTION

The effective development of market relations in Russia is largely determined by the formation of modern management relations and increased controllability of the economy. It is management that ensures coherence and integration of economic processes in an organization.

Management - the most important concept in a 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 available resources.” Modern specialists need deep knowledge of management, and for this they need to clearly understand the essence and concept of management.

Personnel management at an enterprise is a type of activity that allows you to implement and generalize a wide range of issues of adaptation of 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 considered as a set of decision-making methods systematically used by a leader, influencing subordinates and communicating with them.

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

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

Management style does not characterize the leader’s behavior in general, but rather what is stable and invariant in it. Constantly manifested in various situations. Finding and using optimal management styles is designed to enhance employee achievement and satisfaction.

The concept of management styles received intensive development after the Second World War. However, its development still faces a number of unsolved problems. The main problems:

Difficulties in determining the effectiveness of management style. The results to be achieved by a particular style involve many components and are not easily reduced to a single value and compared with the results of other styles.

The difficulty of establishing cause-and-effect relationships between management style and the effectiveness of its use. Typically, management style is viewed as the reason for achieving a certain outcome - employee productivity. However, such a cause-and-effect relationship does not always correspond to reality. Often it is the nature of employee achievements (low or high achievements) that prompts a manager to use a particular style.

The variability of the situation, primarily within the organization itself. Management styles are effective 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 problems of increasing management effectiveness.

You can determine your management style in 2 ways:

By identifying the characteristics of the individual management style that the boss uses in relation to his subordinates.

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

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

The objective, external conditions that shape the management style at a particular management level include the nature of the team (production, research, etc.), the specifics of the tasks at hand (urgent, habitual or urgent, unusual), the conditions for the implementation of these tasks (favorable, unfavorable or extreme), methods and means of activity (individual, pair or group). Along with the above, the factor that stands out is the level of development of the team. The individual psychological characteristics of a particular leader bring originality to his managerial activities. Based on the corresponding transformation of external influences, each manager exhibits his own individual management style.

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

Management style- a method, a system of methods of influence of a leader on subordinates. One of the most important factors for the effective operation of an organization, the full realization of the potential capabilities of people and teams. Most researchers identify the following management styles:

Democratic style (collegial);

Liberal style (anarchic).

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

Every organization is a unique combination of individuals, goals and objectives. Each manager is a unique personality with a number of abilities. Therefore, management styles cannot always be classified into any specific category.

Authoritarian (directive) style management is characterized by highly centralized leadership and the dominance of unity of command. The manager demands that all matters be reported to him, and makes decisions alone 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, and deprivation of various benefits. Control is very strict, detailed, depriving subordinates of initiative.

The interests of the business are placed significantly above the interests of people, harshness and rudeness predominate in communication.

The leader who uses it gives preference to the official nature of the relationship and 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 and leads to a significant decrease in the initiative, self-control and responsibility of employees.

Authoritarian management style is a leadership style in which the manager defines goals and policies 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 circumstances, etc.) when quick and decisive action is required, when time constraints do not allow meetings and discussions;

2) when, due to previous conditions and reasons, anarchic sentiments prevail in a given organization, the level of executive 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. "Exploitation" assumes that the manager completely concentrates the solution of all issues in his hands, does not trust his subordinates, is not interested in their opinions, takes responsibility for everything, giving only instructions to the performers. He uses punishment, threats, and pressure as the main form of stimulation.

If a manager makes a decision alone and then simply conveys it to his subordinates, then they perceive this decision as imposed from the outside and critically discuss it, even when it is truly successful. This decision is carried out with reservations and indifferently. Employees, as a rule, rejoice at any mistake made by the manager, finding in it confirmation of their negative opinion about him. As a result, subordinates get used to being executors of someone else’s will, perpetuating in their minds the stereotype “our business is small.”

For the manager, 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. His subordinates, although they know and notice a lot, remain silent, either because they receive moral satisfaction from this, or because they believe that he still cannot be re-educated. The manager understands the current situation, but is powerless to blame others for the mistakes made, since his subordinates did not participate in the development of the decision. This creates a kind of vicious circle, which sooner or later leads to the development of an unfavorable moral and psychological climate in an organization or department and creates the ground for conflicts.

Softer "benevolent" a type of authoritarian style. The manager treats his subordinates condescendingly, in a fatherly manner, and is sometimes interested in their opinion. But even if the expressed opinion is justified, he can act in his own way, often doing it demonstratively, which significantly worsens the moral and psychological climate in the team. When making decisions, he can take into account the individual opinions of employees and gives a certain independence, but 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 to competence in all matters create chaos and, ultimately, affect work efficiency. Such a boss paralyzes the work of his apparatus. He not only loses his best employees, but also creates a hostile atmosphere around himself that threatens himself. His subordinates depend on him, but he also depends on them in many ways. Dissatisfied subordinates may let him down or misinform him.

Special studies have shown that although under conditions of an authoritarian management style it is possible to perform a quantitatively greater amount of work than under democratic conditions, the quality of work, originality, novelty, and the presence of elements of creativity will be the same order of magnitude lower. The authoritarian style is preferable for managing 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, urgency of completing a task and the ability to predict the result in conditions of maximum concentration of all types of resources. On the other hand, tendencies are being formed towards restraining individual initiative and one-way movement of information flows from top to bottom, and there is no necessary feedback.

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

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

DEMOCRATIC MANAGEMENT STYLE (COLLEGIAL)

Democratic style management is characterized by the distribution of powers, initiative and responsibility between the manager and deputies, the manager and subordinates. A leader of a democratic style always finds out the team’s opinion on important production issues and makes collegial decisions. Team members are informed regularly and in a timely manner on issues that are important to them. Communication with subordinates takes place in the form of requests, wishes, recommendations, advice, rewards for high-quality and efficient work, in a friendly and polite manner; orders are applied as necessary. The leader stimulates a favorable psychological climate in the team and defends the interests of subordinates.

Democratic management style is a leadership style in which the manager 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, and the creation of 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 responsibilities of subordinates more attractive, avoids imposing his will on them, involves them in decision making, and provides freedom to formulate their own goals based on the ideas of the organization.

Within "advisory" the manager is interested in the opinions of his subordinates, consults with them, and strives to use the best that they offer. Among incentive measures, encouragement predominates; punishment is used only in exceptional cases. Employees are generally satisfied with this management system, despite the fact that most decisions are actually prompted to them from above, and usually try to provide their boss with all possible assistance and moral support in necessary cases.

"Participative" a form of democratic management presupposes that the manager fully trusts his subordinates in all matters (and then they respond in kind), 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 decisions made is not shifted to subordinates. All this brings the team together.

Typically, a democratic management style is used in the case when the performers are well, sometimes better than the manager, understand the intricacies of the work and can bring a lot of novelty and creativity to it. A democratic leader, if necessary, can compromise or abandon the decision altogether if the subordinate’s logic is convincing. Where an autocrat would act with orders and pressure, a democrat tries to convince and prove the feasibility of solving the problem and the benefits that employees can receive.

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

As a rule, the environment created by a democratic leader is also educational in nature and allows one to achieve goals at low cost. There is a positive resonance of power: the authority of the position is reinforced by personal authority. Management occurs without harsh pressure, relying on the abilities of employees, respecting their dignity, experience and skills. This creates a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team.

Research has shown that in an authoritarian style, you can get about twice as much work done as in a democratic style. But its quality, originality, novelty, and the presence of creative elements will be the same order of magnitude lower. 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 justification of two new styles, in many ways close to authoritarian and democratic.

The style in which the manager is focused 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.) is called task-oriented (instrumental). A style when a leader creates a favorable moral and psychological climate, organizes working together, emphasizes mutual assistance, allows performers to participate as much as possible in decision making, encourages professional growth, etc. got the name focused on subordinates (human relations).

A subordinate-oriented leadership style that is close to a democratic one helps to increase productivity because it gives room to people’s creativity and increases their satisfaction. Its use reduces absenteeism, creates higher morale, improves team relationships and the attitude of subordinates towards management.

The potential benefits of a task-oriented leadership style are much the same as an authoritarian leadership style. They consist in the speed of making decisions and actions, 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 manager here mainly informs subordinates about their responsibilities and tasks, determines how they need to be solved, distributes responsibilities, approves plans, sets standards, and controls.

Typically, managers 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 manager 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,” avoids resolving urgent conflicts, and strives to reduce his personal responsibility. He lets his work take its course and rarely controls it. This leadership style is preferable in creative teams where employees are independent and creative.

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

LIBERAL, INCLUDING BUREAUCRATIC

Where we are talking about the need to stimulate the creative approach of performers to their work, the most preferable liberal management style. Its essence is that the manager sets a task for his subordinates, creates the necessary organizational conditions for work, defines its rules and sets the boundaries of the solution, while he himself fades into the background, reserving the functions of a consultant, arbiter, expert who evaluates the results obtained and in case of doubts and disagreements between performers, makes the final decision. It also provides employees with information, encouragement, and training.

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 creates a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team, generates trust between people, and promotes the voluntary assumption of increased obligations.

The use of this style is becoming increasingly widespread due to the growing scale scientific research and experimental design developments carried out by highly qualified specialists. They do not accept command, forceful pressure, petty supervision, etc.

In leading companies, coercion gives way to persuasion, strict control to trust, and submission to collaboration. 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 manager completely withdraws from affairs, transferring them into the hands of “promotes”. The latter manage the team on his behalf, using increasingly authoritarian methods. At the same time, he himself pretends that power is in his hands, but in reality he becomes more and more dependent on his volunteer assistants. A sad example of this is army hazing.

In real life, there is no “pure” leadership style, therefore, each of those listed 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 supporters. But it is now clear that both supporters committed 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 own attractive sides, successes and disadvantages. Of course, many organizational problems could be solved if improved human relations and worker participation in decision making always led to greater satisfaction and higher productivity. Unfortunately, this does not happen. Scientists 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 balance of each style and the prevailing leadership style. A study of the practice of leading organizations shows that each of the three leadership styles is present to varying degrees in the work of an effective leader.

Contrary to popular stereotypes, the prevailing leadership style is largely independent of gender. There is a misconception that female managers are softer and focused primarily on maintaining good relationships with business partners, while male managers 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 - do not follow only one style. As a rule, they intuitively or quite consciously combine different leadership strategies.

THEORY OF MANAGEMENT STYLES

The outstanding psychologist K. Levin, who was involved in the creation of personality theory, developed and substantiated the concept of management styles. Based on experimental data, he identified and described 3 main styles: authoritarian (directive); democratic (collegial); liberal (neutral). Below is a comparative description of the main management styles according to K. Lewin.

The authoritarian (directive) style is characterized by the centralization of power in the hands of one leader. The manager makes decisions alone and strictly determines the activities of his subordinates, constraining their initiative.

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

The liberal (permissive) style is characterized by minimal interference by the manager in the activities of subordinates. The manager 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 decisions. There are two ways of making management decisions - democratic and authoritarian. Which one is more effective? Some researchers tend to believe that the democratic path is more effective: the risk of making a wrong decision is reduced, alternatives appear, during the discussion new solutions appear 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 research has shown that K. Levin’s concept, despite its clarity, simplicity and persuasiveness, has a number of significant shortcomings: 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 established that the objective indicators of productivity for both styles are the same. It has been found that in some cases the authoritarian management style is more effective than the democratic one. What are these cases?

extreme situations requiring immediate solutions;

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

Some people, due to their psychological characteristics, prefer to be led authoritarianly.

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 a leader’s work do not coincide: an essentially authoritarian leader behaves outwardly democratically (smiles, is polite, thanks for participating in the discussion, but makes decisions individually and before the discussion itself begins) and vice versa. In addition, a lot depends on the situation - in some situations a leader can act authoritarian, and in others - like a “democrat”.

Thus, the effectiveness of management does not depend on the management style, 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 manager makes a decision - authoritarian or collegial.

CONCLUSION

Management science is based on a system of basic provisions, elements, models, leadership styles that are unique to it, and at the same time 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 management activities, correlated with the characteristics of social interactions of individuals. At the same time, importance is attached to ensuring the effectiveness of management activities: preparing and making decisions, their scientific validity, their practical implementation, control over their implementation.

Nowadays, managers must pay more attention to the human qualities of their subordinates, their dedication to the company and their ability to solve problems. The high rate of obsolescence and constant changes that characterize almost all industries today force managers to be constantly prepared to carry out technical and organizational reforms, as well as to change their leadership style. Even the most experienced manager, 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, but also the atmosphere in the team and the relationship between subordinates and the leader depend on the choice of leadership style. When the entire organization works quite efficiently and smoothly, the manager discovers that in addition to the set goals, much more has been achieved, including simple human happiness, mutual understanding and job satisfaction.

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

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

Civil services

Commercial organizations

Non-profit organizations.

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