Leadership style is the manner in which a leader behaves towards subordinates in order to influence them and encourage them to achieve the goals of the organization.
1. Autocratic (authoritarian) style - centralization of power in the hands of one leader; rate on administration and limited contacts with subordinates. The autocrat single-handedly makes or cancels decisions, does not allow subordinates to take the initiative, is categorical, often harsh with people. Always orders, disposes, instructs, but never asks. The new is perceived with caution, in the work he practically uses the same methods. At the first favorable opportunity, he tries to get rid of strong workers and talented people. In his opinion, the best employee is the one who knows how to understand the thoughts of the boss. In such an atmosphere, gossip, intrigue and denunciation flourish.
Style benefits:
Provides clarity and efficiency of management;
Creates a visible unity of management actions to achieve the goals;
Minimizes decision-making time, in small organizations provides a quick response to changing external conditions;
Does not require special material costs;
In "young", newly created firms, it allows you to quickly and successfully cope with the difficulties of becoming.
Obvious style flaws.
Suppression (non-use) of the initiative, the creative potential of performers;
Lack of effective labor incentives;
Cumbersome control system;
IN large firms- bureaucratization of the administrative apparatus;
Low satisfaction of performers with their work;
High dependence of the group on the constant pressure of the leader.
To overcome these shortcomings allow economic and social - psychological methods democratic style controls.
2. Democratic style - characterized by the division of power and the participation of employees in management, while responsibility is not concentrated, but distributed in accordance with the delegated powers. Instructions - in the form of sentences, speech is not dry - but a comradely tone, praise and blame - taking into account the opinion of the team. Orders and prohibitions are carried out on the basis of discussions. In exercising control, a democrat pays attention to the end result. Such an environment creates conditions for the self-expression of subordinates, they develop independence - this contributes to the perception of the achievement of the goals of the organization as their own. This style is based primarily on the initiative of the team, not the leader. The interaction between the leader and subordinates is based on cooperation.
Democratic style allows:
Stimulate the manifestation of initiative, reveal the creative potential of performers;
Successfully solve innovative, non-standard tasks;
It is more efficient to use material and contractual labor incentives;
Include psychological mechanisms of labor motivation;
Increase the satisfaction of performers with their work;
Create a favorable climate in the team.
3. Liberal style - characterized by complete freedom of collective and individual decisions of employees with minimal participation of the head. This style suggests a tendency to excessive tolerance, indulgence, undemanding. The liberal manager usually takes decisive action only at the direction of higher management and seeks to evade responsibility for the unsatisfactory results obtained. In an effort to acquire and strengthen authority, he is able to provide subordinates with various kinds of benefits, pay undeserved bonuses. In relationships with subordinates, he is correct and polite, responds positively to criticism, does not like to control their work, cannot refuse an employee without feeling guilty. He cares more about what his employees think of him. Liberals are unprincipled, under the influence different people and circumstances can change the decision on the same issue. He can do the work himself for a negligent subordinate, tk. does not like to fire bad employees. The main thing for him is maintaining good relations with subordinates, and not the result of work. Arsenal of means of influencing the team - requests, persuasion. In crisis situations, when energetic actions of the whole team are required, good personal relationships will disappear, but there are no business ones with this style.
Each specific leader cannot have only one style. Depending on the specific situation, different styles are applied in certain situations:
1) Autocratic - appropriate if there are two conditions:
A) the production situation requires it;
B) the staff willingly and voluntarily agrees to authoritarian methods.
2) The democratic style is not applicable under all conditions, as a rule, it works under the following conditions:
A) with a stable, well-established team;
B) with high qualification of workers;
C) in the presence of active, enterprising, non-standard thinking employees, even if there are few of them;
D) for non-extreme working conditions and etc.
Effective leaders respond to situations flexibly, that is, by changing styles. The most effective style in a mobile external and internal environment is adaptive - reality-oriented.
Management grid (characteristic types of managerial behavior):
Labor activity unfolds in a "force field" between production and man. The first line of force (horizontal) determines the manager's attention to production (orientation towards completing tasks at any cost, regardless of the staff).
The second vertical - determines the attitude of the manager to the person (concern for working conditions; taking into account desires and needs). The presence of a contradiction between the two "power" lines allows you to build space and identify five characteristic types of managerial behavior.
Point 1.1 corresponds to the behavior of the leader, defined as the minimum attention to the results of production and to the person. The manager does not care about anything, working in such a way as not to be fired (purely theoretical style - occurs in cases when the enterprise closes, the manager retires, and the like).
Point 9.1 - the style of strict administration (autocratic, authoritarian), for the leader the only goal is the production result. Nothing related to the employee (his needs, well-being) is taken into account. Decisions by such a leader are taken unilaterally. Characteristic features are an orientation towards unconditional diligence, suppression of initiative, the search for the guilty, and more. The style is effective in emergency situations (accidents, natural disasters, bankruptcy, etc.), at the initial stages of production development.
Point 5.5 is the position of the "golden mean" between the methods of "hard" and "soft" managers. The manager tries to reach a compromise in everything, at which average results of labor are achieved, there can be no sharp breakthrough forward. At the same time, this leadership style promotes stability and non-conflict.
Point 1.9 - liberal (passive) leadership style. The leader focuses on human relations. Such a leader gives subordinates complete freedom, tries to protect the team from disagreements, but at the same time avoids personal discussion of the causes of conflicts in the hope that everything will work out by itself. The atmosphere in the team is almost family, under the leadership of such a leader it is convenient to do nothing. This style can be effective in a highly motivated team, in creative teams.
Point 9.9 - democratic management style (most effective). The leader tries to build the work of his subordinates in such a way that they see in it an opportunity for self-realization and confirmation of their own significance. Goals are defined jointly with employees, different opinions on how to achieve goals are taken into account.
(Appendix No. 12 "Management Grid")
Questions for consolidation:
1. What is leadership style?
2. What advantages and disadvantages of the autocratic style do you know?
3. List the distinctive features of the liberal style.
4. What are the main characteristics of a democratic style?
5. What types of managerial behavior do you know?
Choose one correct answer:
1. The manner of behavior of the leader in relation to subordinates in order to influence them and encourage them to achieve the goals of the organization is ...
A) leadership
B) qualities of a leader
B) leadership style
D) management ability
2. What are the three leadership styles? (choose one wrong answer):
B) democratic style
B) liberal style
D) communist style
3. In what style of leadership is there a centralization of power in the hands of one leader; rate on administration and limited contacts with subordinates?
B) democratic style
B) liberal style
D) communist style
4. What leadership style is characterized by the division of power and the participation of employees in management?
B) democratic style
B) liberal style
D) communist style
5. Is it effective to use the same leadership style consistently?
How do you communicate with employees? Do you control every step imperiously, let everything take its course, practice an individual approach? Well, how does it work? Today we will talk about management styles of the leader. Get comfortable, let's get started!
Or maybe you have not thought about leadership style at all? Business is going on, the online store is developing, why complicate something? Let's Let's look at the main management styles, as well as the pros and cons of each. This will help you understand the strengths and weak sides your guide and determine what style to follow in the future.
Authoritarian style, or "As I said, so be it"
Gennady Pavlovich P. has been leading the team for many years. How did he get into management back in Soviet times, and leads. It is clear that for so many years his style has already been formed and is not subject to change. And it would be necessary: Gennady Pavlovich is one of those bosses who firmly believe in the instructions from the joke: “Point 1. The boss is always right. Point 2. If the boss is wrong - see point 1”. Yes, yes, there are still. No wonder that in the team he has a turnover: young people come, brought up in a new society, who are not afraid to offer their ideas and are very surprised when they encounter the principles of the boss. They are surprised and leave - to more loyal leaders. Only the main backbone is delayed in the team - people who have been working for more than a dozen years and have long been accustomed to Gennady Pavlovich's quirks. And everything would be fine, only this backbone is almost entirely pensioners. alien to them - the company has no development, everything goes the old fashioned way. The company is not doing well.
Do you know such Gennadiev Pavlovich? They are also found among the younger generation of entrepreneurs. Usually, very authoritarian, harsh in judgments, recognize only their own opinion. They do not allow the slightest deviation from instructions, regulations, charters and the order established in the company. They tremblingly observe subordination - they do not allow liberties with the common people, this is not a master's business. Here's the paradox: they don't trust own employees, but at the same time they want their work tasks to be done flawlessly.
Disadvantages of an authoritarian style
- A child can be thrown out with water: one who is used to not listening to opinions risks not hearing valuable ideas that will bring profit to the company. Someone who does not allow informal relationships with subordinates may not notice the love of their life or someone who can become a best friend. Human relationships sometimes go beyond subordination.
- Stubbornness is not perseverance. Fanatical following instructions a step to the left - a step to the right is equal to execution - a disastrous position for the company. Read the biographies of great entrepreneurs: they all recognize the need to break the rules, think big, allow creativity.
- Not everyone agrees to work with a dictator- In companies where the authoritarian style of management reigns, the percentage of layoffs is higher. And leave, as a rule, the most talented. In such a collective, opportunists or conservatives survive, who do not care.
- Employees in such companies do not develop, do not offer ideas, do not learn new things. Maybe they would be happy - but why, because it will still be the way the local god ordered. And since the initiative is punishable - why show it at all?
Advantages of an authoritarian style
- Iron discipline. You can't spoil a dictator: either you fulfill all his requirements, or the door to the street is open. As a rule, fines for the slightest violation bloom in such a team. Total subordination makes employees obedient and agreeable to any demand from management.
- Clarity and transparency of all business processes. The boss-dictator knows exactly how and what happens in the company at each stage, what tasks are solved and who performs them.
- The employees do not get confused, but they will clearly follow the orders of their superiors - they are no strangers. Under democratic or liberal style leadership is more difficult to implement: in the event of force majeure, both bosses and employees can storm like a ship in bad weather. And this is fraught with hastily made and erroneous decisions.
Democratic style, or "Let's think together"
Aleksey K., a young leader, resigned from the company of Gennady Pavlovich and founded own business. He decided to learn from the mistakes of others and realized that he would not allow such a dictatorship that reigned in his former place of work. Alexey recruited young employees who were more like-minded than his subordinates. From the first days, he began to adhere to a democratic leadership style: he discussed the company's development strategy with employees, listened to their ideas and opinions, trusted him to independently work on projects. For the workers, he was not a strict boss, but his own boyfriend Lekha. Once, this almost ruined the company: the employees relaxed and stopped taking Alexei seriously. Some people started to be late, miss the deadlines for completing tasks, and to the bewilderment of the boss he said: “What are you doing, don’t worry!”. When deals with profitable clients began to fail and the company lost profits, the young businessman realized that it was time to change something.
Democratic management style is a deceptive thing. Young and modern, it seems the only acceptable and in line with the spirit of the times (well, don’t work the old fashioned way!), but it’s worth loosening the reins a little - and it will turn out like in the example above. So that democracy does not turn into anarchy and permissiveness, the leader must have managerial experience.
In general, the democratic style is really a priority in young people. modern companies. The leader does not make decisions alone - he consults with the team, arranges brainstorming sessions, tries to ensure that each employee reveals his potential. He himself works on an equal footing or assigns himself the role of a consultant, mentor. If the Democrat boss is wrong, he does not blame the staff for everything, but draws conclusions. At the same time, he remains a leader - he does not remove himself from the main role, he does not emphasize that "we are all equal here, guys." That is, a team is a team, but the hierarchy must be built clearly.
Cons of democratic style
- The possibility of anarchy, belittling the role of the leader, the emergence of opposition in the team. In general, everything that is described on the example of Alexei K.
- Decisions can take a long time. The more people involved in the discussion, the longer the process can take. The case will be saved by clear deadlines for setting tasks. For example, 3 days are given for discussion and introduction of rationalization proposals - and not a second longer. This disciplines employees and speeds up business processes.
Advantages of democratic style
If no mistakes are made, a democratic style can become the basis for creating.
- Strengthens team spirit makes employees real like-minded people united by one goal. Well, if the company has worked out - the mission and values, the main tasks for the coming years, the common Big Idea.
- Reduces the number of errors in the work. The more people involved in solving the problem, the greater the chance that there will be best option. Just remember, the discussion should not be delayed.
- Minimum staff turnover. Why leave the team if you share its values and tasks, feel involved in one common goal? That's right, no need. Employees rarely leave companies with a democratic management style (unless, of course, they join the team and share common values).
Person-centered style, or "Don't be afraid, I'm with you"
Olga B. worked with both Gennady Pavlovich and Alexei. The woman realized that both authoritarian and democratic styles have their pros and cons, and decided to act differently. Actually, she did not come up with anything new - she used a completely individual approach. Olga realized that each employee needs to work in their own way, and what is suitable for one is categorically unacceptable for another. For example, a quiet person may be shy at general planning meetings and brainstorming sessions, but in a personal conversation, she will begin to gush creative ideas. It is difficult for an owl man to come to the office by 9 am - his head does not understand, things are not being done, but in the evening the most fruitful time comes. Olga organized a free schedule for several comrades, she allowed introverts not to speak at the planning meeting in front of everyone. The employees appreciated the good attitude and began to call the boss “our mommy”. But without a fly in the ointment, there was a group of people who quickly found a good attitude as a weakness and began to openly score on work. Olga was worried, held soul-saving conversations, and only when the team filed a collective request for the dismissal of the offenders, she decided to take a bold step.
Practicing an individual approach is the right thing to do. Typically, bosses of this type (usually women) like to conduct psychological tests, arrange corporate parties and joint gatherings in order to get to know their employees better. However, you should not overprotect workers: you are not a hen, and they are not helpless chickens. Trust, but verify, be not a mom, but a boss - this is the moral of this fable.
Cons of a person-centered approach
- As a rule, bosses of this type are soft, sensitive people. Good relations are more important to them than the profit of the company and its development. Therefore, as sad as it is, a soft boss can quickly be “eaten” his more resourceful colleagues or one of the number of subordinates.
- Absence . Instead of giving clear instructions and controlling the process of completing tasks, such leaders either do everything themselves or forgive endless delays. Wake up guys, this is business! Here you need to make difficult decisions and take big risks, otherwise there is a risk of burnout and.
Advantages of an individual approach
- Good relations in the team. Human relations are almost the main thing for half of the employees. If you are lucky enough to find an understanding boss, many will hold on to this place with their hands and teeth, even despite the low salary and small career prospects.
- In a crisis situation employees will stand behind the boss with a mountain and will not let the company fall apart. “One for all and all for one” - this slogan still works.
So how should you?
In each of the three styles, we found our flaws. So what management style to choose, how to behave with subordinates? Much, of course, depends on your personality and type of character. A dictator by nature will never “deliver snot” and take care of the personality of each employee. And a quiet, intelligent woman is simply not able to crack her fist on the table and force her subordinates to work.
What to do? Combine management styles depending on the situation. This is called situational management. For example, if a force majeure event occurs, you need to turn on the dictator mode and give clear instructions that can save the situation. If you see that an employee is not coping with work, use an individual approach, talk to the person personally, find out what worries him. If you need to solve a new problem - stick to a democratic style, get the opinions of all employees and solve the problem together. Moreover - even in interaction with the same person it is possible to apply different management styles - again, depending on the situation. Somewhere to be a tough leader, somewhere - a wise mentor, sometimes to provide the necessary paternal support. Here is a table to help you skillfully navigate between several management styles.
Of course, for this you need to be an experienced leader and a fairly flexible person. All this comes with time. Good luck to you, let everything work out!
The choice of management style is a very important stage in the development of any manager. Style and character have a huge impact on your team. Most importantly, knowing your style and character, you can accept people who fit your style, thereby reducing the number of managerial errors. Despite the importance of management style, novice managers tend to simply copy the behavior of their boss. Such imitation sometimes turns out well. But more often it does not look natural, it does not allow to establish relations with subordinates, and most importantly, such a manager will not be able to reveal his talents.
What a leader should know
I am often asked: what should a new leader know first of all? As a rule, everyone is very interested, especially and. You can also hear questions about. They like to ask these questions on. Much less often, young managers think about what style of personnel management they should choose. In most cases, a novice leader simply copies the behavior of his boss. He simply did not see another. The fact that people can be controlled in different ways is taught very rarely.
Training of operational management is the task of middle managers, training of middle managers falls on top management. You should not hope that a person brought some practices from the university or found them somewhere on the street. Manager training should include several fundamental things.
Understanding the goals and objectives for the current position
An explanation of what tasks the manager solves and what tools he uses will help the manager understand how he new position different from the previous one. At this stage, the manager needs to explain the difference between an operations manager and a subordinate, between a middle manager and a lower level manager. When moving from one position to another, the employee does not always understand how his duties have changed. Often an employee tries to continue doing what he can and what he can do. For example, the seller was promoted to , but he is still eager to sell in the fields.
Thoughtful team building depending on the temperament of the manager
First of all, you need to pay attention to the formation of the team, the definition of the management style, the definition of the portrait of a candidate for a new team. The main task of a manager is to manage resources, and people are the most difficult resource. A young leader often does not understand how important it is to him. The direct manager always talks more about daily operational goals, and team building is important, but not urgent, so it often falls out of sight. It is rare when a leader helps his subordinate to decide on his management style and draw up a portrait of an ordinary member of his team.
The style of management depends primarily on the temperament of the person. Temperament has a decisive influence on the selection of people. Now imagine that the temperamentally phlegmatic is trying to use an authoritarian management style. First of all, it will be hard for the employee, as a result, the young leader quickly. The consequences of such management for the team can be very deplorable.
There is an opinion that a good leader should be a choleric. In fact, there are many examples of successful managers of various temperaments. But the most important thing is that people with pronounced features of the same temperament are very rare. Rather, you can see a mixture of different temperaments from which the character is formed. Temperament is the innate features of the psyche, character is a set of human behavior, developed on the basis of his temperament and habitat. Character can be changed both consciously and unconsciously under the influence of external environment. Temperament will always be with a person, all you can do is learn to control it.
Leadership styles in management
Leadership styles (management styles, management style, leader styles) are a set of behavior and interaction methods between a leader and a subordinate. We have already talked about management styles in an article about.
In general, it is customary to distinguish three main managerial styles: democratic, liberal and authoritarian. These three styles balance between two important characteristics of the staff: and the initiative of the employees.
Good discipline forms high manageability, it is easy for the manager to implement any of his ideas. The working day of the staff is fully scheduled and everyone knows what to do. We discussed the importance of discipline in the article -. But discipline completely suppresses the initiative of the staff. What does it mean? Employees will not make suggestions for improving and optimizing work, they are passive and, as a rule, are not interested in the overall success.
Authoritarian management style
The authoritarian style of management implies full attention to the task being performed to the detriment of the interests of the personality of the performer. The attributes of the authoritarian style are: ignoring the opinions of the team, suppressing dissent, strictness and even bias in assessing the activities of subordinates. The consequence of such management is a non-initiative staff, incapable of independent action. In general, in the realities of the modern labor market, an authoritarian management style is possible only with the recruitment of personnel ready to endure such an attitude. As a rule, these are melancholic, although it happens that completely different people are ready to endure a charismatic dictator.
The authoritarian leadership style is great for quick one-time tasks, also in situations where there is a very strong charismatic leader, and also when nothing more than executive discipline is required to achieve results.
Democratic management style
The word democracy is in every news release, in the 21st century, wars begin for the sake of democracy. The word itself has Greek roots and means - the power of the people. The leader of the democrat makes all his decisions jointly with the team and relies on its opinion and support. All decisions are supported by the team, the team makes suggestions for improving work processes and takes the initiative. It is worth noting that in fact, being a democrat is much more difficult than being a dictator. Since he is a democrat, he must still lead the people, that is. It is not so easy to achieve this, the team will initially reject all new leaders. That is why novice leaders often slip into an authoritarian style.
The democratic style is the most flexible, it is suitable for solving various problems. The most important thing is good managerial competencies a manager who preaches this style. For a democratic style, it is very important that all team members are interested in the final result. The democratic style is applicable in sales, in the management of managers, in teams where non-trivial tasks are solved and creativity is required.
Liberal management style
The liberal style of government is often called free, sometimes even anarchist. The bottom line is that the subordinate is given maximum freedom of action. Sharp corners are smoothed out, management does not conflict with subordinates due to minor misconduct. In such a team, discipline as such does not exist. In general, this type of management is in demand when the subordinate is motivated to complete the task. As a rule, these are creative teams, as well as narrow-profile highly qualified employees, a kind of genius. For the work of such personnel, broad autonomy is needed, since driving them into a common framework reduces their creativity and creativity.
INTRODUCTION
Effective becoming market relations in Russia is largely determined by the formation of modern managerial relations, increasing the manageability of the economy. It is management that ensures the coherence and integration of economic processes in organizations.
Management is the most important concept in 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 the available resources.” Specialists of the new time need deep knowledge of management, and for this it is necessary to clearly understand the essence and concept of management.
Personnel management at an enterprise is a type of activity that allows you to implement, generalize a wide range of issues of adapting an individual to external conditions, taking into account the personal factor in building an enterprise personnel management system.
THE CONCEPT OF MANAGEMENT STYLE
In the literature, there are many definitions of the concept of "management style", similar to each other in their main features. It can be viewed as a set of decision-making methods systematically used by the leader, influencing subordinates and communicating with them.
Management style– This is a stable set of traits of a leader, manifested in his relationship with his subordinates.
In other words, this is the way in which the boss manages subordinates and in which a pattern of his behavior is expressed, independent of specific situations.
The management style characterizes not the leader's behavior in general, but precisely the stable, invariant behavior in it. Constantly manifested in various situations. The search and use of optimal management styles are designed to increase the achievement and satisfaction of employees.
The concept of management styles was intensively developed after the Second World War. However, its developments still face a number of unresolved problems. The main problems:
Difficulties in determining the effectiveness of management style. The results to be achieved with a particular style include many components and are not easily summarized and compared with the results of applying other styles.
Difficulty in establishing cause-and-effect relationships between management style and the effectiveness of its use. Typically, management style is seen as the cause of achieving a certain result - the performance of employees. However, this causal relationship is not always true. Often it is the nature of employees' achievements (minor or high achievements) that prompts the manager to use a particular style.
The variability of the situation, especially within the organization itself. Management styles reveal their effectiveness only under certain conditions, but these conditions do not remain unchanged. Over time, both the manager and employees can change their expectations and attitudes towards each other, which can make the style ineffective, and the assessment of its use unreliable.
Despite these and some other difficulties, management styles are an important guideline in solving the problems of improving the effectiveness of leadership.
You can define the management style in 2 ways:
By clarifying the features of the individual management style that the boss uses in relation to subordinates.
With the help of the theoretical development of a set of typical requirements for the behavior of the leader, aimed at the integration of employees and their use in the process of achieving the goals of the organization.
You can also consider the style of leadership as "stably manifesting features of the interaction of the leader with the team, formed under the influence of both objective and subjective conditions of management, and individual psychological characteristics of the personality of the leader."
Among the objective, external conditions that form the management style at a particular managerial level, one can include the nature of the team (production, research, etc.), the specifics of the tasks ahead (next, habitual or urgent, unusual), the conditions for fulfilling these tasks (favorable, unfavorable or extreme), methods and means of activity (individual, pair or group). Along with those indicated, such a factor as the level of development of the team stands out. The individual psychological characteristics of this or that manager bring originality to his managerial activity. On the basis of the appropriate transformation of external influences, each leader manifests his own individual management style.
The study of leadership style has been conducted by psychologists for more than half a century. So researchers have accumulated to date considerable empirical material on this problem.
Management style- a method, a system of methods for influencing a leader on subordinates. One of the most important factors in the effective operation of the organization, the full realization of the potential of people and the team. Most researchers distinguish the following management styles:
Democratic style (collegiate);
Liberal style (anarchist).
Management style- This habitual the behavior of a leader towards subordinates in order to influence them and encourage them to achieve the goals of the organization. The extent to which a manager delegates, the types of authority he uses, and his concern primarily for human relations or, above all, for the accomplishment of a task, all reflect the management style that characterizes that leader.
Every organization is a unique combination of individuals, goals and objectives. Each manager is a unique person with a number of abilities. Therefore, management styles can not always be attributed to any particular category.
Authoritarian (directive) style management is characterized by high centralization of leadership, the dominance of one-man management. The head demands that all cases be reported to him, single-handedly makes decisions or cancels them. He does not listen to the opinion of the team, he decides everything for the team himself. The prevailing methods of management are orders, punishments, remarks, reprimands, deprivation of various benefits. Control is very strict, detailed, depriving subordinates of initiative.
The interests of the cause are placed much higher than the interests of people; harshness and rudeness prevail in communication.
The manager who uses it prefers the official nature of relations, maintains a distance between himself and his subordinates, which they do not have the right to violate.
This leadership style has a negative impact on the moral and psychological climate, leads to a significant decrease in initiative, self-control and responsibility of employees.
Authoritarian management style - a leadership style in which the manager determines the goals and the entire policy as a whole, distributes responsibilities, and also, for the most part, specifies the appropriate procedures, manages, checks, evaluates and corrects the work performed.
1) in extreme conditions(crisis, emergency, etc.) when quick and decisive action is required, when time constraints do not allow for meetings and discussions;
2) when, due to previous conditions and reasons, anarchist moods prevail in this organization, the level of performance and labor discipline is extremely low
Historically, the first and until now the most common in practice is the authoritarian style, which is considered universal.
Experts distinguish two types of authoritarian style. "Exploitative" assumes that the manager completely concentrates the solution of all issues in his hands, does not trust his subordinates, is not interested in their opinion, takes responsibility for everything, giving only instructions to the performers. As the main form of stimulation, he uses punishment, threats, pressure.
If the leader makes a decision alone, and then simply brings it to his subordinates, then they perceive this decision as imposed from the outside and critically discuss it, even when it is really successful. Such a decision is carried out with reservations and indifferently. Employees, as a rule, rejoice at any mistake of the leader, finding in it confirmation of their negative opinion about him. As a result, subordinates get used to being executors of someone else's will, fixing in their minds the stereotype "our business is small."
For the leader, all this also does not pass without losses, since he finds himself in the position of the culprit, responsible for all the mistakes, not seeing and not knowing where and how they were made. Subordinates, although they know and notice a lot, keep quiet, either getting moral satisfaction from this, or believing that he still cannot be re-educated. The leader understands the current situation, but is powerless to blame others for the mistakes made, since the subordinates did not participate in the development of the decision. Thus, a kind of vicious circle is formed, which sooner or later leads to the development of an unfavorable moral and psychological climate in the organization or unit and the creation of grounds for conflicts.
Softer "benevolent" kind of authoritarian style. The leader treats his subordinates already condescendingly, like a father, sometimes he is interested in their opinion. But even if the opinion expressed is justified, he can act in his own way, often doing it defiantly, which significantly worsens the moral and psychological climate in the team. When making decisions, he can take into account individual opinions of employees and gives a certain independence, however, under strict control, if the general policy of the company is strictly observed and all requirements and instructions are strictly followed.
Threats of punishment, although present, do not prevail.
The claims of an authoritarian leader for competence in all matters generate chaos and, ultimately, affect the effectiveness of work. Such a boss paralyzes the work of his apparatus. He not only loses the best workers, but also creates a hostile atmosphere around him that threatens himself. Subordinates depend on him, but he also depends on them in many ways. Disgruntled subordinates can let him down or misinform him.
Special studies have shown that although under the conditions of an authoritarian style of management it is possible to perform a quantitatively larger amount of work than in a democratic one, the quality of work, originality, novelty, and the presence of elements of creativity will be by the same order of magnitude lower. An authoritarian style is preferable for directing simple activities focused on quantitative results.
Thus, the basis of the authoritarian style is the concentration of all power and responsibility in the hands of the leader, which gives him an advantage in setting goals and choosing the means to achieve them. The latter circumstance plays a dual role in the possibility of achieving efficiency.
On the one hand, the authoritarian management style is manifested in the order, the urgency of the task and the ability to predict the result in conditions of maximum concentration of all types of resources. On the other hand, there are tendencies to curb individual initiative and one-way flow of information from top to bottom, there is no necessary feedback.
The use of an authoritarian style, although it ensures high labor productivity, does not form the internal interest of performers in effective work. Excessive disciplinary measures cause fear and anger in a person, destroy incentives to work.
This style is applicable when subordinates are completely in the power of the leader, for example, in military service, or have unlimited trust in him, like actors to a director or athletes to a coach; and he is sure that they are not capable of acting in the right way on their own.
DEMOCRATIC MANAGEMENT STYLE (COLLEGE)
Democratic style management is characterized by the distribution of authority, initiative and responsibility between the head and deputies, the head and subordinates. The head of the democratic style always finds out the opinion of the team on important production issues, makes collective decisions. Regularly and in a timely manner informing the members of the team on issues important to them. Communication with subordinates takes place in the form of requests, wishes, recommendations, advice, rewards for high-quality and efficient work, kindly and politely; orders are applied as necessary. The leader stimulates a favorable psychological climate in the team, defends the interests of subordinates.
Democratic management style - a leadership style in which the leader develops directives, commands and orders based on proposals developed by a general meeting of employees or a circle of authorized persons.
DEMOCRATIC: CONSULTATIVE AND PARTICIPATIVE
Organizations in which the principle of democratic leadership dominates are characterized by a high degree of decentralization of powers, active participation of employees in decision-making, the creation of such conditions under which the performance of official duties is attractive to them, and success is a reward.
A real democratic leader tries to make the duties of subordinates more attractive, avoids imposing his will on them, involves them in decision-making, provides freedom to formulate own goals based on the ideas of the organization.
As part of "advisory" the leader is interested in the opinion of subordinates, consults with them, seeks to use the best that they offer. Among incentive measures, encouragement prevails; punishment is used only in exceptional cases. Employees are generally satisfied with such a management system, despite the fact that most decisions are actually prompted from above, and usually try to provide their boss with all possible assistance and moral support when necessary.
"Participatory" a form of democratic management assumes that the leader fully trusts subordinates in all matters (and then they answer the same), always listens to them and uses all constructive suggestions, involves employees in setting goals and monitoring their implementation. However, responsibility for the consequences decisions taken not passed on to subordinates. All this unites the team.
Usually, the democratic style of management is used when the performers are good, sometimes better than the leader, understand the intricacies of the work and can bring a lot of novelty and creativity to it. If necessary, a democrat leader can compromise or even abandon the decision taken if the logic of the subordinate is convincing. Where an autocrat would act by order and pressure, a democrat tries to convince, to prove the expediency of solving the problem, the benefits that employees can receive.
At the same time, the internal satisfaction received by subordinates from the opportunity to realize their goals is of paramount importance. 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 trifles.
As a rule, the environment created by the leader-democrat is also educational in nature and allows you to achieve goals at low cost. There is a positive resonance of power: the authority of the position is reinforced by personal authority. Management takes place without brute pressure, relying on the abilities of employees, respecting their dignity, experience and skill. This forms a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team.
Research has shown that you can get about twice as much work done in an authoritarian style than in a democratic one. But its quality, originality, novelty, the presence of elements of creativity will be lower by the same order. From this we can conclude that the authoritarian style is preferable for simpler types of activities focused on quantitative results, and the democratic style is preferable for complex ones, where quality comes first.
Subsequent developments led to the substantiation of two new styles, in many respects close to authoritarian and democratic.
The style in which the manager focuses on solving the task assigned to him (distributes tasks among subordinates, plans, draws up work schedules, develops approaches to their implementation, provides everything necessary, etc.) was called task-oriented (instrumental). The style when the leader creates a favorable moral and psychological climate, organizes joint work, emphasizes mutual assistance, allows performers to participate in decision-making as much as possible, encourages professional growth, etc. was named focused on subordinates (human relations).
A subordinate-oriented leadership style close to democratic contributes to increased productivity, as it gives room for people's creativity and increases their satisfaction. Its use reduces absenteeism, creates a higher morale, improves relationships in the team and the attitude of subordinates to management.
The potential benefits of a task-oriented leadership style are much like authoritarian leadership. They consist in the speed of decision-making and action, strict control over the work of subordinates. However, it puts performers in a position of dependence, generates their passivity, which ultimately leads to a decrease in work efficiency.
The leader here basically informs subordinates about their responsibilities, tasks, determines how they need to be solved, distributes responsibilities, approves plans, sets standards, controls.
Typically, leaders use either a democratic style, focused on human relations, or an authoritarian style, focused on work.
LIBERAL MANAGEMENT STYLE (BUREAUCRATIC)
liberal style management is characterized by the lack of active participation of the head in the management of the team. Such a leader “goes with the flow”, waits or requires instructions from above, or falls under the influence of the team. He prefers not to take risks, “keep his head down”, shirks the resolution of urgent conflicts, seeks to reduce his personal responsibility. He lets work take its course, rarely controls it. This style of leadership is preferable in creative teams, where employees are distinguished by independence and creative individuality.
Liberal management style - a leadership style in which the head develops directives, commands and orders that are subject to strict execution by subordinates on the basis of their own opinion, taking into account the opinions of subordinates.
LIBERAL, INCLUDING BUREAUCRATIC
Right where we are talking on the need to stimulate the creative approach of performers to their work, it is most preferable liberal management style. Its essence lies in the fact that the leader sets a task for his subordinates, creates the necessary organizational conditions for work, defines its rules and sets the boundaries of the decision, while he himself fades into the background, leaving behind the functions of a consultant, arbiter, expert evaluating the results and in case of doubts and disagreements of the performers makes the final decision. It also provides employees with information, encourages, trains.
Subordinates, freed from intrusive control, independently make the necessary decisions and look for ways to implement them within the framework of the powers granted. Such work allows them to express themselves, brings satisfaction and forms a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team, generates trust between people, and contributes to the voluntary acceptance of increased obligations.
The use of this style is becoming more widespread due to the growing scale scientific research and experimental design developments carried out by highly qualified specialists. They do not accept command, power pressure, petty guardianship, etc.
In advanced firms, coercion gives way to persuasion, and strict control to trust, subordination to cooperation, cooperation. Such soft management, aimed at creating "managed autonomy" of departments, facilitates the natural application of new management methods, which is especially important when creating innovations.
At the same time, this style can easily be transformed into bureaucratic, when the leader is completely removed from affairs, passing them into the hands of "nominees". The latter, on his behalf, manage the collective, while applying more and more authoritarian methods. At the same time, he himself pretends that the power is in his hands, but in fact he becomes more and more dependent on his voluntary assistants. A sad example of this is army hazing.
In real life, there is no “pure” leadership style, therefore, in each of the listed ones, elements of the others are present to one degree or another.
One can understand why both the autocratic approach and the human relations approach have won many adherents. But now it is already clear that both those and other supporters sinned with exaggerations, drawing conclusions that were not fully supported by the facts. There are many well-documented situations where the benevolent-autocratic style has proven to be very effective.
The democratic style has its advantages, successes and disadvantages. Certainly, many organizational problems could be solved if improved human relations and worker participation in decision-making would always lead to greater satisfaction and higher productivity. Unfortunately, this does not happen. Scholars have encountered situations where workers participated in decision-making, but nevertheless, the degree of satisfaction was low, as well as situations where satisfaction was high and productivity was low.
It is clear that the relationship between leadership style, satisfaction, and performance can only be determined through long-term and extensive empirical research.
There are no "bad" or "good" management styles. The specific situation, type of activity, personal characteristics of subordinates and other factors determine the optimal ratio of each style and the prevailing leadership style. A study of the practice of managing organizations shows that each of the three leadership styles is present to one degree or another in the work of an effective leader.
Contrary to common stereotypes, the prevailing leadership style is practically independent of gender. There is a misconception that female leaders are softer and focused primarily on maintaining good relationships with business partners, while male leaders are more aggressive and result-oriented. The reasons for the separation of leadership styles may be more likely to be personality traits and temperament, rather than gender characteristics. Successful top managers - both men and women - are not adherents of only one style. As a rule, they intuitively or quite consciously combine various leadership strategies.
THEORY OF MANAGEMENT STYLES
The outstanding psychologist K. Levin, who created the theory of personality, developed and substantiated the concept of management styles. On the basis of experimental data, he identified and described 3 main styles: authoritarian (directive); democratic (collegiate); liberal (neutral). Below is a comparative description of the main management styles according to K. Levin.
The authoritarian (directive) style is characterized by the centralization of power in the hands of one leader. The leader single-handedly makes decisions, rigidly determines the activities of subordinates, fettering their initiative.
The democratic (collegiate) style is based on the fact that the leader decentralizes his managerial power. When making a decision, he consults with subordinates, who get the opportunity to take part in the development of a decision.
Liberal (permissive) style is characterized by minimal interference of the leader in the activities of subordinates. The leader acts, most often, as an intermediary, providing his subordinates with the information and materials necessary for work.
It is easy to see that the main criterion that distinguishes one management style from another is the way the manager makes a decision. There are two ways, ways of making managerial decisions - democratic and authoritarian. Which one is more efficient? Some researchers tend to believe that the democratic path is more effective: the risk of making the wrong decision is reduced, alternatives appear, new solutions appear during the discussion that are impossible with individual analysis, it becomes possible to take into account the positions and interests of everyone, etc. At the same time, further studies have shown that the concept of K. Levin, despite its clarity, simplicity and persuasiveness, has a number of significant drawbacks: it has been proven that there is no reason to believe that a democratic management style is always more effective than an authoritarian one. K. Levin himself found that the objective indicators of productivity are the same for both styles. It has been found that in some cases an authoritarian style of governance is more effective than a democratic one. What are these cases?
emergency situations that require immediate solutions;
the qualifications of workers and their general cultural level are quite low (an inverse relationship has been established between the level of development of workers and the need to use an authoritarian management style);
some people, due to their psychological characteristics, prefer to be led by an authoritarian.
It was found that both of these management styles do not occur in their pure form. Each leader, depending on the situation and his personal qualities, can be both a "democrat" and a "dictator". Sometimes it can be very difficult to recognize what management style a leader actually adheres to (both effective and ineffective).
It happens that the form and content of the leader's work do not coincide: an authoritarian, in fact, leader behaves outwardly democratic (smiles, politely, thanks for participating in the discussion, but makes the decision alone and before the discussion itself) and vice versa. In addition, much depends on the situation - in some situations, the leader may act authoritarian, and in others - like a "democrat".
Thus, the effectiveness of management does not depend on the style of management, which means that the method of decision-making cannot act as a criterion for effective management. In other words, management can be effective or ineffective, regardless of how the leader makes the decision - authoritarian or collegial.
CONCLUSION
The science of management is based on a system of basic provisions, elements, models, styles of leadership, inherent only to it, while related to management. The behavior of one of the main and most complex subjects of management - a person is also based on certain activities, internal beliefs that determine his attitude to reality.
Close attention is paid to the development and practical application of the main basic provisions of managerial activity, correlated with the characteristics of social interactions of individuals. At the same time, importance is attached to ensuring the effectiveness of management activities: preparation and decision-making, their scientific validity, their practical implementation, control over their implementation.
Managers must now pay more attention to the human qualities of their subordinates, their dedication to the firm and their ability to solve problems. The high rate of obsolescence and constant change that characterizes almost all industries today force managers to be constantly ready to carry out technical and organizational reforms, as well as to change the leadership style. Even the most experienced leader, who is fluent in management theory, is not immune from an unreasonable, emotional reaction to a situation.
Not only the authority of the leader and the effectiveness of his work depend on the choice of leadership style, but also the atmosphere in the team and the relationship between subordinates and the leader. When the whole organization works efficiently and smoothly enough, the leader discovers that in addition to the goals set, many other things have been achieved, including simple human happiness, mutual understanding and job satisfaction.
A modern specialist, even if he is not a leader, can fully show himself at work, but, actively interacting with the team and management, he must also have the necessary culture of communication.
Personnel management is a universal science. It covers the issues of 3 areas of business activity:
public services
Commercial organizations
non-profit organizations.
Convergence of the organizational and managerial foundations of the 3 sectors business activity requires knowledge in the field of management of employees of commercial and non-profit organizations.
Management style is the way in which the leader manages subordinates and the pattern of behavior of the leader. With the help of the adopted management style, satisfaction of subordinates with work is achieved, labor productivity is encouraged.
There are the following management styles: autocratic, democratic and liberal (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Types of management styles
The choice of management style is based on a specific situation and a set of factors. Subjective factors include the temperament of the leader and subordinates, human abilities, communication style. Among the objective factors include the content of the work performed, the complexity of the task being solved, the complexity of the working conditions of the organization or unit, the hierarchy of management, the socio-political situation.
Characteristics of organizational management styles
The authoritarian (directive) style of management is characterized by the concentration of power in the hands of one leader, subordinates do not participate in the organization of activities. Signs of using an authoritarian style are:
- the leader, by virtue of his authority, manages employees and expects them to carry out orders,
- there is no justification of the decisions made to subordinates,
- decisions of the head are orders that must be followed,
- in case of non-compliance with the orders of the head of subordinates, sanctions are awaited,
- a significant distance between the leader and subordinates.
At the same time, the following requirements must be imposed on the leader: consciousness, self-control, the ability to make decisions and take responsibility for them. The advantage of using this style of management is the speed of decision-making, especially in emergency cases. The disadvantages are the low level of independence and initiative of the performers, the excessive demands of the manager on his subordinates, which leads to a high turnover of personnel.
The democratic style of management is based on the interaction of a leader and a subordinate, in which the powers and responsibility for their implementation are transferred to the company's employees. At the same time, the burden is removed from the manager, the initiative of employees is encouraged, their labor motivation and readiness to bear responsibility are enhanced.
The factors for the successful application of a democratic management style are: delegating powers and responsibilities to subordinates, establishing a procedure for regulating relations in a team, coordinating decisions made by a leader, using reasonable discipline and a differentiated approach to people.
The advantages of using this management style include unloading the head, the emergence of work motivation among members labor collective. The disadvantages include a strong focus on tasks, and not on the staff of the team.
The liberal style of management is characterized by a slight intervention of the head in the functioning of the organization. Most often, the tasks of the leader come down to mediation and providing performers with the necessary information.
A feature of this style is that an informal leader or deputy liberal leader is singled out from the team, who assumes authority and responsibility in making managerial decisions.
In cases of control creative teams this style is more effective than others, in other cases its effectiveness is low.
Loading...