Another name for the democratic management style. Team leader management styles

Managing people is not at all as simple as everyone used to assume. First of all, this is a colossal responsibility not only for employees, but also for the organization as a whole. The scale of the enterprise’s activities or the number of personnel does not matter, because management is a whole science. Every company has a leader. The types of leaders and the management styles they choose have a direct impact on the development of the organization, as well as on relationships with subordinates.

The manager of the company bears enormous responsibility for the decisions he makes. Beginning managers often stumble because they do not yet understand what exactly they need to do. Over time, experience comes, and with it new management issues. Leadership style is a fundamental concept in this science. Only the right choice and its successful implementation will help the manager direct all the talents of employees in the right direction, which will lead to excellent results.

The ideal manager

The manager who manages the company must understand the essence of all ongoing processes, as well as know the structure of departments and divisions. Naturally, the manager does not have to have a great understanding of the work of each employee. Sometimes this is simply not possible due to the size of the organization.

As already noted, types of leaders and leadership styles are very important concepts in management science. We need to make sure that employees feel comfortable working in the company, then they will try their best. And staff efficiency is expressed in labor productivity. The formula is simple: the higher the job satisfaction, the better the result.

To succeed, a leader must have the following qualities:

• The desire and ability to regularly engage in the interests of clients, improve the company’s status in the market, and work tirelessly in this direction.
• Be a good organizer. This means that the manager must be able to properly coordinate his subordinates, organize their work, take care of the timely payment of wages, etc.
• Be enterprising and creative. A leader must see several steps ahead and make non-standard decisions. Sometimes it's worth taking risks for the sake of results.
• Have a strong, stable character. It is necessary for employees to feel protected at any period of development of the enterprise. During a crisis, it is the manager who needs to reassure people and assure them that together they will cope with any difficulties.

The Importance of Leadership Style

The fact is that not a single manager in the world has all of the above qualities. But the point is different: every manager makes certain mistakes, here are the main ones:

• the management style is incorrectly chosen;
• incorrect positioning as a leader;
• inattention to psychological characteristics workers.

In fact, the other two follow from the first problem. Types of leadership power are divided into three well-known types: authoritarian, democratic and liberal. If a manager makes the wrong choice in favor of one of them, then the following consequences are inevitable:

• Incorrect distribution of responsibilities.
• The manager considers his employees to be insufficiently experienced and performs most of the work independently, which does not give him the opportunity to control the process from the outside.
• The manager overloads the staff with tasks, as a result of which the employees do poor quality work in order to meet deadlines.
• Subjective attitude towards employees. Unfortunately, this fact cannot be disputed. Each manager treats an employee based on a personal system of likes and dislikes, which in some situations can have a negative impact.

Management styles are determined by the personal qualities of the manager. Types of leadership behavior will be discussed below.

A manager who cares about production but is dismissive of staff

There are a huge number of classifications of manager types. If we summarize them, we can distinguish five main ones. Types of leader power are characterized by individual abilities. The manager of the first group has a pedantic character. He knows how to achieve success and directs all his strength and efforts towards it.

Subordinates in such an organization do not have the right to vote; all decisions are made personally by the manager. It demands blind obedience for the sake of productivity. The staff is constantly being checked to find mistakes and then punish them for it. Considering the types of relationships "manager - subordinate", in this case we can draw an analogy: "warden - prisoner".

Managers of this type help the organization in a crisis situation when it is necessary to improve production. Also, this management method is quite effective in the short term. If the repression continues long time, an unfavorable situation arises in the team, anger and reluctance to work grow.

The promotion of such managers occurs at an average pace. However, in most cases they succeed and get promoted to higher positions.

A manager who is attentive to staff and indifferent to production

In this case, the manager creates a favorable atmosphere in the team and tries with all his might to please the employees whom he himself chose on the basis of sympathy. He will always support the employee, help with advice and listen. He is quite generous with various kinds of bonuses, and tries to immediately smooth out any misunderstandings with the help of a positive mood. However, this method is not always correct.

Considering the types of managers and their relationships with subordinates, it should be noted that in such an organization they are friendly. The manager always listens to the opinions of employees and in all situations makes a decision that will satisfy everyone. Despite having his own position, he is in no hurry to defend it. He is slow to move and does not want to change anything on his own until others tell him to.

In most cases, in such a situation, employees stop working hard and try to create the most comfortable conditions for themselves, because management allows this. Types of leaders, as already noted, can be varied, this one is the softest. Career advancement is weak; promotions occur only with the loyalty of the highest authorities.

Absolutely indifferent manager

The types of behavior of leaders depend on their character. In this case, the manager’s abilities do not manifest themselves in any way. He is indifferent, does not interfere anywhere, takes a neutral position in disputes, and tries to avoid conflicts. These are the type of people who expect everything to be resolved by itself. I am not inclined to perform any actions or deeds unless there is instructions from above. Although most often he simply transfers the execution to his deputies, and he himself again finds himself on the sidelines.

It is unfair in the selection of employees, hires everyone and has virtually no control over their productivity. Characteristics of types of leaders involve a description of their personal qualities. This type of manager simply tries to “survive” in the organization for as long as possible. Most often these are people working until retirement or who are disillusioned with work.

The promotion of such managers is extremely poor. They are usually ballast for the company. If the top management is quite attentive, such managers do not stay at the enterprise for long.

"Intermediate" manager

This leader is distinguished by his attentiveness to all details. He is neither scandalous nor inert. Tends to solve problems by reaching a compromise. Strives not to stand out from the general picture, but tries to make a good impression. Stabilizing all processes in the organization and avoiding extremes is an “intermediate leader.” The types of leaders and the styles chosen significantly influence the company. The position of compliance with existing rules and smoothing out conflicts is welcomed among the employees of the enterprise.

People are selected based on their suitability to the rest of the staff. During work, he does not look for errors, but gives advice and helps. It’s easy for a newcomer to get comfortable in such a company, because the manager will always point you in the right direction and explain incomprehensible points.

The personality types of a leader are of great importance for creating a comfortable environment in the team. This type of manager tends to listen to the opinions of employees and make a decision based on the best offer. He can sacrifice his principles for the common good.

Communication with the manager takes place face-to-face. He does not like to communicate with the crowd; it is easier for him to talk with each person and hear all points of view separately. The conversation usually takes place in an informal setting, there is no pressure. Such a leader advances well in his career due to his views.

A manager who brings priorities together

This is a kind of collective image of the best qualities of the first and second types. The types of behavior of managers differ from each other in their attitude towards the choice of employees. Such a manager is very attentive in this regard. He selects workers personally or entrusts the job to a trusted person. He needs professionals with strategic thinking to join his team.

He helps them open up and supports them in their endeavors. It gets to the point where the staff sincerely wants to achieve the set goals and works tirelessly. Employees develop communication with each other, and by helping each other, they improve their professional level.

This type of manager is energetic and knows what he wants. Slowly but surely he is moving towards his goal - fulfilling the strategic objectives of the organization. He strives for harmony in the team and the absence of conflicts. Quite creative, constantly looking for new ways and ways to solve problems.

What types of leaders are the best? This question is impossible to answer. Each company needs its own manager with a certain character and individual abilities. In some places there is a need for emphasis on labor productivity, in others there is a lack of simple human relationships.

Types of organizational leaders

There is a very interesting classification proposed by the famous scientist D. Cairsey. It is based on psychological qualities and is characterized by the mention of Greek ancient names:

1. Ethymetheus. Doesn't have a sharp mind, Greek mythology is the brother of Prometheus. Such a leader is conservative in nature and takes into account all the details. Doesn't like to take risks, doesn't want to change anything. Usually has a competent deputy subordinate to him.
2. Dionysus. This type of manager is distinguished by the ability to make decisions in difficult situations. Performs well during a crisis. However, monotonous routine work is not his element. Success is achieved only if there is a deputy who understands planning and precise activities.
3. Prometheus. This manager focuses on strategic tasks. Completely immersed in work, does not like to be distracted by unnecessary conversations. He rarely communicates with staff and deputies, only when necessary. He doesn’t like and doesn’t know how to relax, he works 24/7. He can achieve success if he learns to support and help people.
4. Apollo. Such a manager is aimed at individual communication with each employee. Tries to solve all personal and organizational problems that arise. Sometimes he takes on too much and fails to complete it on time. He needs an assistant who will tell him how to correctly share responsibility among everyone.

Passive managers

Based on their focus on specific actions, experts distinguish between passive and active managers. The first type includes those who want to maintain their position in the company at any cost. They are ready to commit base acts, act according to a pattern and are weak specialists.

The face of the company is the manager. Types of managers, according to Western experts, who are passive:

1. Specialists. These are people who can be called professionals in their field, are quite peaceful, and know how to listen to other people. But they are immersed in work and do not devote time to management as such.
2. Masters. Such managers try to maintain their position by creating the most unfavorable atmosphere. That is, total control over subordinates, demands to unquestioningly carry out orders, refusal of any innovations, work strictly according to the plan.
3. Company people. These leaders speak in general terms and do not take specific actions. By creating the illusion of eternal employment, they try to maintain their position.

Active managers

Managers of the proactive type constantly challenge themselves, strive to expand the scope of their activities, and improve the production process. The following types of managers and subordinates are distinguished:

1. Jungle fighters. These are people seeking to gain unlimited power, to “take over the world.” They destroy competitors while using their own workers.
2. Players. Such managers are passionate; they are interested in the process of moving up the career ladder, and not the power they receive. They tend to make immediate decisions and like to compete with other companies. They develop innovations and implement them to stay ahead of their enemies. Mostly they harm the organization, since everything can change at any second.
3. Open managers. As a rule, these are experienced specialists who see the real state of affairs. They listen to advice, take criticism into account, and encourage new ideas. Instills trust and respect among staff.

In any company, the most important issues are dealt with by management. The types of leaders and their influence on the work process largely determine the success of the organization. What management style will the manager choose? Will he be able to achieve his strategic goals? The existence of the company and its position in the market depend on this.

Authoritarian leadership style

It is historically the first and still the most widespread. This style is considered universal by many. Its essence lies in the fact that the manager issues orders and instructions to employees without any explanation. In turn, employees carry out actions without asking unnecessary questions.

The relationship between such a manager and the staff is formal, and a certain distance is maintained. Regardless of the manager's personality type, he will apply rigor and steadfastness in his decisions.

The types of leaders and management are interrelated. Only a strong, charismatic personality can use the authoritarian style in their organization. Subordinates do what the manager says, thereby increasing his personal power. In some situations, workers simply have no choice; they are obliged to follow management’s orders. The simplest example is military service.

The employee usually feels disgusted with his duties and wants the day to end quickly so he can go home. He tries to avoid work due to his reluctance. Therefore, the leader has to force him to act in various ways.

Democratic management style

This type is the opposite of authoritarian. There is a division of initiative, responsibility and authority between the leader and the subordinate. The manager is always within the team. When making a decision, he is based on the opinion of the staff.

The atmosphere with this management style is almost always friendly. People are ready to help each other and their leader. Communication takes place in the form of requests and advice. Only in exceptional cases can a leader express his thoughts in a commanding tone. Employees in the organization do not fear the manager, but respect him. And this makes a big difference. Relationships based on respect are much stronger than any other.

The main functions of a leader are coordination and easy control over the actions of subordinates. You need to interest them, and then they will do their job responsibly.

At any time, an employee, regardless of his position, can approach the manager and propose his idea on a particular problem. The initiative is welcomed, and if the idea is really good, then it will definitely be used. The management has no secrets from the staff; the actual state of affairs is constantly discussed. This has a positive effect on the execution of production tasks. In addition, in such a company access to information is almost always open.

The types of leadership styles are quite varied. The use of democracy in management is relevant if subordinates are well versed in the work that needs to be done. They can also bring new ideas and options for solving the problem that will be used in the future.

Liberal leadership style

Here the passivity of the manager comes to the fore. That is, he does not take an active part in the life of the company and prefers to remain on the sidelines. As is known, main man in any organization - the leader. Types of leaders and management style are important aspects in the development of the enterprise. In this style, employees are left to their own devices and, by and large, do what they want.

The system of punishments and rewards is completely absent. In such a situation, the manager is recommended to focus on improving human relations with his subordinates, rather than on the organizational factor. If there is a good relationship between the administration of the enterprise and the staff, labor productivity will increase by itself.

With this style, delegation of authority becomes especially important. The main types of managers, regardless of character traits, tend to delegate their responsibilities to performers. In this case, decisions are actually made by the employees themselves. They just need to clear them with the manager. The success of an enterprise with a liberal management style depends on the personal interest and competence of employees.

Drawing a conclusion, it can be noted that the role of the manager here is similar to the role of a consultant or appraiser. This style can be effective, but the organization must employ highly qualified employees who will receive internal satisfaction from the work performed. In this case, the system of punishment and reward does not play a role.

The authoritarian style of managing an organization is characterized by excessive centralization of the manager’s power and autocratic resolution of all issues. This style is characteristic of powerful and strong-willed people who are tough towards others. This article will examine its advantages and disadvantages in detail.

You will learn:

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

Authoritarian management style - This is, first of all, strictly defined regulations of the organization, under which employees conscientiously perform their duties, meekly recognizing the authority of the manager.

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

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

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

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

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

A tough manager increases competition between sales employees. A calm and friendly boss supports the teamwork of the sales team. The editors of the Commercial Director magazine have compiled a test for you so that you can find out which management style will bring you more profit and how to maintain a balance in your management style.

Methods of authoritarian style of managing an organization

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

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

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

Economic methods management is control over the activities of personnel using a system of bonuses and fines. In this way, you can stimulate the employee and develop his interest in work. The advantage of this method is that subordinates voluntarily perform the tasks assigned to them. The disadvantage is the additional financial costs. In addition, the introduction of fines is not legal.

Social-psychological methods management - motivating employees using psychological techniques and simple “human” communication. Effectiveness depends on the abilities, experience and charisma of the leader. It requires a competent approach, without which you can only aggravate the situation, becoming “one of our own” for everyone, which will lead to a loss of authority.

Social or collective methods influence. Theoretically, they can serve as a means of authoritarian management, since the boss always has the opportunity to exercise leadership, using boards and councils as intermediaries. However, formally this conflicts with the very definition of authoritarianism. However, indirect management deserves mention as one of the methods available to the manager.

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

1. "Exploitation" authoritarian style.

It consists in the fact that the boss takes responsibility for the entire work process and gives orders to his subordinates, without considering anyone’s opinions, even if they are reasoned. Punishment is used as the main form of motivation.

All orders are carried out by employees blindly, from the position of “our business is small.” The manager's mistakes cause schadenfreude among his subordinates.

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

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

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

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

• Managing a women's team: psychological characteristics

A few words about the authoritarian-democratic management style

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

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

However, with an authoritarian-democratic style, if the need arises, the leader will easily ignore the opinions of his subordinates and make a decision alone. It is also possible to use reprimands, comments and orders as management methods.

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

Authoritarian management style: modern modifications

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

1. Bureaucratic leadership style

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

The bureaucratic style can be called a weakened version of the authoritarian style, since the boss can give orders through documents, but he delegates the main powers to the drafters and controllers of regulations. In Russia today, the bureaucratic style is characteristic of government controlled, where it is used, as a rule, selectively.

1. Autocratic leadership style

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

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

1. Patriarchal leadership style

An organization with this leadership style exists on the principle of a large family, where the head is the leader. He looks after his subordinates, cares and demands respect, gratitude and diligence from them. Within this style, employees are stimulated by creating personal dependence and devotion in them.

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

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

1. Charismatic leadership style

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

In our country, the charismatic style is common in enterprises created on the initiative of the leader himself. As the company grows, there is a need to tighten and regulate the organization of the work process, since the capabilities of charismatic leadership weaken.

Expert opinion

Russian leaders are negatively affected by stereotypes

Galina Rogozina,

Head of Leadership Development Practice at the consulting company RosExpert, Moscow

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

• Organizational management system in modern business conditions

How to Know if an Authoritarian Management Style Is Suitable for You

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

The following factors need to be considered:

1. Nature of activity

The type of activity of the company's employees has a significant influence on the choice of management style. For example, a liberal management style is perfect for a creative team, but at times it needs to be given a shake-up by a democratic or even authoritarian style. Lack of boundaries for creativity is necessary, but everything is good in moderation. If it turns out that for every mistake of employees the company suffers losses (not necessarily financially), then it would be more appropriate to use an authoritarian style. However, no team can survive on punishments alone, so don’t forget about rewards.

1. Difficulty of the task

As a rule, the most difficult problems have many possible solutions. It becomes difficult to choose the most effective one. If it is difficult to say which is better, a democratic management style will do. Solving a problem alone is dangerous; it is much more effective to think about the issue together, considering different points of view.

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

1. Team specifics

It is a big plus for a manager if he personally knows all his subordinates. Then it will be easy for him to choose an approach for everyone and reveal their potential. Some work more productively when they are given clear tasks, while others are stronger at improvisation. A prudent boss should keep in mind such characteristics of each employee. Naturally, this is easier to do in a small team.

When a team consists of newcomers who have little understanding of the business, it is better to manage in an authoritarian style. If the majority of the team are professionals, working with a democratic management style will be more effective.

1. Force majeure situations

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

• Problems of business management: how mentality affects work

Expert opinion

You need to be able to apply different management styles depending on the situation.

Galina Agureeva,

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

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

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

The transition to a different leadership style should be smooth. A person needs time to change. You cannot be a despot today and tomorrow pat your subordinates on the shoulder and ask their opinion on every issue. Moreover, it is also easier for employees when changes occur gradually. For example, when managers learning to manage in a coaching style begin to be interested in the point of view of employees, instead of giving instructions, this sometimes causes confusion among subordinates - they are not ready for such a relationship. In such situations, if the head of the company understands that he is authoritarian and non-public, you can first place a more flexible and communicative person next to him, for example an HR director. Otherwise, anyone can take on the role of “idea mastermind” and the situation will get out of control.

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

• How can a leader gain authority in a team?

12 tips on what an authoritarian management style should look like

1. Don't contradict your principles.

A leader who has achieved love and respect should not neglect his principles. Write a list of things that are completely unacceptable for you when communicating with your team. If, for example, you are determined not to be late for work, communicate this to your team. Punishments for such offenses are another matter. The main thing is not to give in to your principles under any circumstances. Once you turn a blind eye to an employee being late and leave him without sanctions, your rule will immediately lose its meaning for the entire team. It is better not to overdo it with such principles, five are enough, otherwise you can create the image of a despot, and this is of no use to you.

1. Set clear time frames.

Spend a clearly defined amount of time in any meeting, for example, 30 minutes. It is possible that some issues will require more careful consideration and will take longer, but such cases will be the exception. If employees keep in mind that they have only 30 minutes to resolve the issue, they are almost 100% likely to complete the task within this time frame. Give them an hour to discuss and they will think the whole time. Give a task without limiting the time for solving it, it will not be ready the next day.

1. Don't be afraid of conflicts in your team.

You should not be afraid of conflicts arising in the team. After all, they can sometimes be beneficial. Even a conflict within a team can create healthy competition, which will significantly increase labor efficiency if supported.

1. Reward everyone for their achievements.

If a solution proposed by an employee turns out to be successful, you should not attribute its success to the entire team or to yourself personally. This can completely discourage you from taking initiative and will reduce your efforts at work.

1. Treat every employee equally.

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

1. Everyone should get what they deserve.

Everyone should receive what they deserve. If your subordinates have made a mistake, you don’t need to console them like children. Employees must realize that they are responsible for their misconduct and all consequences fall on their shoulders. But successes should be dealt with according to the same principle: the efforts and achievements of employees should be encouraged. Morally or financially - it's up to you. If a subordinate has achieved success, you should not pretend that this is how it should be. Every team needs emotional reinforcement to be effective.

1. Don't change yourself.

A person who is good-natured by nature is unlikely to make a strict authoritarian boss. If he tries to become like this, it will look unnatural. The same as if a tough and powerful person, who is listened to outside the work team, tries to look after his subordinates like a father who is lenient towards all mistakes. Choose a management tactic that you feel comfortable with. And remember the main thing: the best management style is a balanced mixture of all styles.

1. Take even more interest in your work.

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

1. Be clear about your instructions.

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

1. Learn to make decisions.

It is your responsibility to solve problems, you are responsible for them. For this reason, you should communicate your wishes to employees through verbal and non-verbal means.

1. Monitor the work of your subordinates.

Always be aware of what is happening. Put procedures in place to ensure you always have access to the information you need to evaluate each employee's diligence and performance.

1. Draw the attention of your subordinates to any cases of non-compliance with the rules.

Let them know what behavior is not acceptable. Insist on strict adherence to the organization's rules.

• How to Easily Increase Your Authority: The Secrets of Benjamin Franklin

Authoritarian management style using examples of global companies

Corporation "Chrysler»

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

Lee Iacocca consulted with various experts and came to the conclusion that the main problem of the corporation was the liberal management style. The new leader changed this approach, focusing on a combination of democratic and authoritarian principles. This led to the fact that the Chrysler Corporation was able to quickly regain its lost positions and become one of the leaders in the automotive industry.

Henry Ford

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

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

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

Steve Jobs

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

Bill Gatesand companyMicrosoft

Bill Gates stands out from other leaders because of his democratic approach. But this democracy is selective: the creator of the Microsoft company introduces concessions for representatives of the position he likes most - programmers. It gives them significant freedom, both in terms of their work schedule and in their approach to completing assigned tasks.

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

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

Company information

TOconsultingand IcompanyIRosExpert, Moscow. Area of ​​activity: selection of top managers, development of the leadership potential of managers, attraction of independent members of boards of directors and consultants. Territory: Moscow, Kyiv. Number of staff: 50. Number of implemented projects: 120 (in 2009).

TorganizationalIsetb"Thing!", MoscowA. Field of activity: sale of clothing and accessories for adults and children in the lower middle price segment. Form of organization: LLC. Territory: the head office is located in Moscow, stores are located in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Vladimir, Volgograd, Voronezh, Voskresensk, Yekaterinburg, Kazan, Klin, Kostroma, Krasnodar, Krasnoyarsk, Mytishchi, Nizhny Novgorod, Novosibirsk, Rostov-on-Don, Tambov, Ufa, Chelyabinsk, Yaroslavl. Number of stores in the chain: 46. Number of staff: 1033 people.

South Russian Club of HR Managers. Scope of activity: creating an effectively functioning professional community of HR specialists in the region. Form of organization: regional public organization. Territory: head office – in Rostov-on-Don; representative offices in Volgograd and Taganrog (Rostov region). Number of staff: 114. Implemented projects: 18 events, 6 educational and 1 social project(in 2009).

Management style is a stable system of ways, methods, and techniques of a leader influencing a team, organizing joint activities to achieve significant goals. The correct choice of management style largely determines the success of management, and therefore the efficiency of the enterprise.
Undoubtedly, management style is influenced by the personality of the leader, who, even by his character or temperament, can determine one or another style. Not the least important place in the formation of management style is occupied by moral and business qualities leader. In any case, management style is a rather complex phenomenon that is studied by management psychology and other sciences that study the relationships between people in the field of production, management, and economics.

American psychologists are quite decisive about the potential for shaping management style. Their position is clear - the management style should be shaped. This must be done by the manager himself by restructuring both his personality and by making appropriate decisions to change the structure of the work group, daily routine and other factors that affect production.

Characteristics of the main management styles

American scientists in the field of management psychology R. Blake and D. Mouton developed a table of management styles, with which you can choose the most effective management style depending on the individual qualities of the manager and the needs of production.

They took as a basis two properties of a manager that he exhibits in the process of managing an enterprise. This is a concern for people and concerns for production efficiency. Depending on this, scientists have identified five main management styles. At the same time, there are many intermediate options between them, because those properties that Blake and Moonton took as starting points are rarely found in their pure form.

The meaning of their classification is that the manager is constantly faced with a choice: either increase production volume by increasing the efforts of workers, or choose a policy towards people, but in this case, the interests of the manufacturing company will certainly suffer.

Another important factor in the Blake-Mouton system is the collective management factor. It is decisive when the manager is faced with the task of significantly increasing production volumes and at the same time causing less harm to people.

When choosing a management style, a manager must know what he needs more time for: improving relations with workers or completing production tasks. Thus, the Blake-Moonton system is quite flexible and allows the manager to constantly change his tactics and management style.

Authoritarian management style

An authoritarian management style is characterized by excessive centralization of power: the manager concentrates all power in his own hands, takes on all, even partial, management functions and tries to exclude all the necessary self-regulatory mechanisms of this process.

The autocrat autocratically decides most issues in the life of the team, does not consult with anyone, and does not strive for collegiality in work. When working with subordinates, the manager tends to exaggerate administrative methods of influence. When stimulating the labor activity of subordinates, he uses predominantly negative incentives: remark, warning, reproaches, threats, reprimands, punishments, deprivation of benefits, prohibitions, which cause feelings of anxiety, anxiety, fear, and oppression in subordinates.

The authoritarian style is characterized by a very high intensity of control over the work of subordinates by the manager. He strives to personally control everything and everyone. He doesn’t trust anyone, he constantly keeps all aspects of the team’s life in his field of vision. By doing this, he achieves the exact and mandatory fulfillment of his requirements, but at the same time increases the dependence of his subordinates on himself.

Democratic management style

A study of the performance of each style has proven that the most effective is the democratic management style, which creates conditions for efficient production and a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team.

Typical of a democratic management style is the use of positive incentives for work: encouragement, prospects for tomorrow's joy, relying on a person's natural attraction to pleasant things, more fully satisfying his needs. The democrat most often expresses his demands in a soft, consultative form: wishes, advice, recommendations. Democratic style means that the leader has the desire to take into account the opinions of other specialists, to check his thoughts, ideas, and decisions collectively. In this case, compromises are mandatory.

In a democratic management style, there is a tendency to spread transparency: the decision-making process should be open to everyone. Constant meetings with targeted information improve relationships between people, coherence in actions, group orientation, and develop a sense of shared responsibility among employees, which has a positive effect on labor productivity.

The democrat constantly cares about the cohesion of the workforce, strives to maintain the unity of workers, and prevents complications in human relations. Good relationships help them cooperate. A democrat works with the team as a whole, does not separate anyone in particular, does not violate official chain of command, does not pit his deputies against their subordinates, and is not stereotypical in his assessments and behavior.

He has a good understanding of people, knows how to abstract from personal qualities, subjectivity in assessments and adequately understand other people. The democrat takes into account the individual personality traits of his subordinates in his work: he studies their needs, interests, reasons for social activity and strives to reconcile them with the interests of the cause. When organizing production activities, he takes into account the psychology of the subordinate’s personality, selects assignments and tasks for him, determines the means of influence, and the content of the requirements.

Liberal management style

The liberal style is often called permissive, anarchic. Its main difference is the insignificant activity of the manager in management. He is little interested in the process of daily work, he does not often visit production units, and weakly exercises control functions.

Such a manager spends most of his working time on meetings and desk work. The result is poor awareness of the state of affairs at the enterprise. A liberal is an undemanding person. Often such a leader, at his own discretion or through the indirect initiative of the informal leader, delegates or entrusts his powers to him. At the same time, the degree of personal participation of the manager in management does not reach the optimal level.
Often it comes to the point that he is forced to persuade his subordinates to do this or that work and even himself takes on assignments that were not completed by his subordinates.

Thus, knowledge of the psychology of people and oneself personally helps a manager choose the right management style, on which the effectiveness of the structures under his control largely depends. Psychology allows you to carry out scientific basis choosing a management style taking into account factors that are already defined and developed in scientific theories and concepts.

Each leader has a certain management style.

Management style is a relatively stable system of ways, methods and forms of influence of a manager on subordinates in accordance with the goals of joint activities. This is a kind of psychological style of working with subordinates. The famous German psychologist K. Lewin described three main management styles:

1. Authoritarian style. The decision is made by the head alone. He acts with authority towards his subordinates, rigidly assigns the roles of participants, exercises detailed control, and concentrates all the main management functions in his hands.

This style is most effective in well-ordered (structured) situations, when the activities of subordinates are algorithmic in nature (according to a given system of rules). Focused on solving algorithmic problems.

2. Democratic style. Decisions are made by the manager together with his subordinates. With this style, the leader seeks to manage the group together with subordinates, giving them freedom of action, organizing a discussion of their decisions, and supporting initiative.

This style is most effective in loosely structured situations and is focused on interpersonal relationships and solving creative problems.

3. Liberal style. Decisions are imposed by subordinates on the leader. He practically removes himself from active management of the group, behaves like an ordinary member, and gives the group members complete freedom. Group members behave in accordance with their desires, their activity is spontaneous. This style is most effective in situations of searching for the most productive areas of group activity.

Authoritarian style: Business, short instructions. Prohibitions without leniency, with threat. Clear language, unfriendly tone. Praise and blame are subjective. Emotions are not taken into account. The leader's position is outside the group. The group’s activities are planned in advance (in their entirety). Only immediate goals are determined, distant ones are unknown. The leader's voice is decisive.

Democratic style: Orders and prohibitions - with advice. The leader's position is within the group. Activities are not planned in advance, but in a group. Everyone is responsible for the implementation of proposals. All sections of the work are not only offered, but also collected.

Liberal style: The tone is conventional. Lack of praise and blame. No cooperation. The leader's position is inconspicuously away from the group. Things in the group go by themselves. The leader does not give instructions. Sections of work are composed of individual intervals or come from a new leader.

Each specific leader cannot have only one style. Depending on the specific situation, a combination of traits is most often observed various styles with dominance of one. One of the three styles finds its real embodiment in an individual management style.

Let us highlight a number of important comments in this regard:

In their pure form, these leadership styles are extremely rare. As a rule, there is a combination of different styles, but the signs of one style still predominate;

Among the management styles outlined, there is no universal one, suitable for all occasions, no bad or good. All styles have their own advantages and problems;

The effectiveness of leadership depends primarily on flexibility in using the positive aspects of a particular style and the ability to neutralize its weaknesses.

For example, in extreme conditions An authoritarian leadership style is vital. In the conditions of everyday life, when there is a friendly and prepared team, a democratic leadership style is successful. The conditions for creative search are dictated by the advisability of using elements of the liberal style

Social management, as we know, is based on the subordination of people to common interests. Sometimes this does not require any official intervention. For example, residents of many houses voluntarily go to cleanup days and clean the area around them. However, local authorities may not know anything about this.

This example shows that self-government (illegitimate governance) can assist the official authorities in solving social problems, in particular, problems of environmental pollution. However, many managers try not to notice the existence of self-government in the territory subordinate to them, considering it as their potential adversary or competitor (a contender for power). In such cases, they use an authoritarian management style, making their decisions regardless of initiatives from below. This management style characterized by the fact that the leader forcibly introduces and tries to consolidate his OOC, hoping that this will lead to a solution to the problems facing society. In this case, social tension usually arises associated with the forcible introduction of new values ​​and institutions, which, as a rule, contradict the old ones. For example, the forced introduction of the values ​​and institutions of a market economy led to social tension in a society raised on socialist values.

The second style of management is democratic, when the leader tries not to show his own initiative, but supports initiatives from below. In fact, the head of the organization is endowed not only with power, but also with certain resources that he must direct to in the right direction, and most initiatives “from below” point precisely to these directions. This management style is characterized by the fact that the manager, through his decisions, chooses and consolidates not his own OOC, but those that “naturally” arose in the organization and are supported by public opinion. Official recognition and consolidation of such OOC occurs smoothly, without social conflicts, because there is support for what has already happened.

The third style of management - mixed - is based on a combination of authoritarian and democratic styles, when the leader resorts to authoritarian management to solve some problems, and democratic management to solve others. This management style is predominant.

Despite the fact that all countries in the world use a mixed style of governance, authoritarian or democratic principles predominate in each of them. Thus, in eastern countries, authoritarian governance is predominant, and in western countries, democratic governance is predominant. It depends on the mentality of the nation and its social values. In Eastern culture, social values ​​dominate (a person should work for the good of society), and in Western culture - individual values ​​(society should work for the good of a person). In Eastern countries, people are afraid of power, considering it evil, in Western countries- the authorities are afraid of people who are always ready to replace them.

Each of these styles has advantages and disadvantages. The advantage of an authoritarian management style is the ability to maximally mobilize society's resources to solve specific social problems or achieve certain goals set by the country's leadership, and ensure their most effective use. The disadvantages of the authoritarian style are the suppression of democracy, fear of power, and most importantly, the unpunished commission of gross mistakes, for example, the privatization of state property, the war in Chechnya, GKOs.

The advantage of a democratic management style is reliable protection against making rash decisions and the absence of social tension when introducing new OOC. The disadvantage of the democratic style is the relative slowness of social processes.

A mixed management style allows you to combine the advantages of authoritarian and democratic styles. However, this requires appropriate knowledge.

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 emergencies, accidents, military 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 of an 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 fulfill 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 a high level of knowledge and skills, the need for creativity, independence and personal growth, interest in work;
3) the goals and objectives facing the organization’s employees require multiple solutions, require theoretical analysis and high professional performance, hard effort and a creative approach.

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.