Individual characteristics of leadership style. Individual leadership style

At the heart of the formation of an individual style of work of a manager in managing the motivation of hired personnel is the development of his professional system of activity.

The formation of the motives of a manager's professional activity involves, first of all, a shift of the motive to the goal of labor activity, as a result of which the manager finds "his" subject of activity. For the formation of professional motivation, it is important for the manager to “accept” the profession and find the personal meaning of the activity in it. As a result of the formation of professional motivation, a holistic behavior of the manager is formed.

The formation of the goal of professional activity involves the selection and consideration of the following points. The central point of activity is the goal. The goal itself is seen as an ideal image of the result; level of achievement to be striven for. The goal of professional activity also acts as an image of the result; a production task given under certain conditions. The main stages in determining the goal are the selection of the field of acceptable results and the specification of a specific goal (as the most optimal).

The formation of an idea about the program of activities involves:

• - formation of an idea about the components (structure) of activity;
• - formation of ideas about the ways of performing activities;
• - formation of ideas about the program of activities.

The formation of the information basis of activity (IOB) involves the selection and consideration of the following points. Levels of IOD formation: sensory-perceptual (perception of information); cognitive (assessment of the significance of information); figurative-operational (processing of information and construction of information samples). Features of the formation of the IDI: information changes frequently, which requires the flexibility of the IDI; the diversity of information makes it necessary to quickly switch from one type of activity to another.

Formation of the block of decision making. General decision scheme:

• a) awareness of the problem;
• b) problem solving. This assumes: the development (development) of the decisive rule, the solution method; formation of a criterion for achieving the goal and the preference for choosing a solution method;
• c) verification of the solution;
• d) selection correction.

The formation of a system of professionally important qualities is based on the following assumptions:

• 1) a person already has certain qualities, and when mastering the profession of a manager, they are restructured in accordance with the characteristics of this professional activity;
• 2) the general logic of such a restructuring of activity: the reconfiguration of qualities in accordance with professional activities, the emergence and development of new qualities and abilities, the formation of an individual style of activity.

There are three aspects in the formation of an individual style of activity:

• 1) the formation of "symptom complexes" that characterize individual personality traits;
• 2) change in the intensity and frequency of manifestation of individual properties as they develop;
• 3) the emergence of new relationships between individual properties.

Style reflects the ratio of objective requirements of activity and personality traits. Depending on the various objective requirements of activity, the same personality traits are expressed in different styles. An individual style of activity should be understood not as a set of individual properties, but as an expedient system of interrelated actions, with the help of which a certain result is achieved. Separate actions form an integral system precisely due to the expedient nature of their connection. When forming the psychological structure of a manager's professional activity, the very development of a profession is considered as a process of “disobjectification, individualization of a normatively given mode of activity. The main stages of mastering the profession of a manager:

1) cognitive and 2) practical stage, as the central moment in the formation of the psychological structure of activity. At the same time, individual actions are mastered, and then actions as a whole.

The development and formation of professional self-awareness is one of the central moments in the formation of a professional manager. The term "self-consciousness" is in many respects close to the terms "I-image", "I-image", "I-concept". The images of a person's self-consciousness (along with the images of the surrounding world) are a necessary basis for expedient regulation, self-regulation of his labor activity and interaction with other people, because this interaction is essentially determined by how a person understands his place among people, "for whom he takes himself", what he thinks about how he looks "in the eyes" of others.

An important role in understanding professional identity is played by "professional ideology". Professional ideology is a system of statements that are outside the categories of truth and are aimed at substantiating social position, status, professional or non-professional grouping. A. Meneghetti describes a phenomenon close to professional ideology - a "stereotype of a professional association", which "configures and prescribes behavior and relations within the framework of any public institution, law, religion, any social group."

Professional self-awareness is the self-awareness of a person for whom a specific labor activity is the main means of establishing a sense of self-worth as an accomplished personality.

Apparently, none of the main or even intermediate leadership styles can be optimal in itself. Only a dynamic style can be optimal, changing in accordance with changing situations and objects of leadership. In particular, the correct idea is "... the ability to lead is the ability to change the leadership style." None of the leadership styles should be firmly "glued" to the leader. The style must be flexible, dynamic.

Thus, a boss who always manages only in an authoritarian style will have undoubted success as long as the situation remains acute.

In a calm, business environment, highly qualified, thinking, proactive subordinates will perceive the autocratic boss as a person of low culture, rude, and even, perhaps, not smart enough. In a calm atmosphere among intelligent subordinates, an authoritarian boss cannot achieve success.

A leader who uses an exclusively democratic leadership style achieves the highest results in a calm environment and with initiative, thinking, highly qualified subordinates who are interested in the common cause.

In a tense, acute situation, such a leader will be considered a person indecisive, timid, unassembled, unable to lead, lost.

A leader who strictly adheres to an exclusively liberal style will be highly appreciated only by pronounced creative personalities: inventors, scientists, writers, designers, architects. The leader in such a case should interfere as little as possible in the creative process. But at an industrial enterprise or in a construction organization, a liberal leader will be perceived as a weak-willed person, completely unsuitable to be a leader.

Considering that the circumstances in which the leader is located and the people who are subordinate to him are dynamic and changeable, a good leader of the production team must own various leadership styles and know under what circumstances and in relation to which subordinates this or that leadership style is most appropriate.

Nevertheless, the basis of an optimal leadership style should be a democratic style. It is characterized by an organic unity of management theory and practice, close ties with the organization's personnel, a developed sense of responsibility to society, the ability to make contacts with different people, a respectful attitude towards subordinates, and constant concern for them.

An individual leadership style based on a democratic style, which is dynamic, turns into an authoritarian one in acute situations, and acts as a liberal one in relation to creative individuals of high qualification, can be considered the optimal leadership style.

When evaluating the individual leadership style, special importance is attached to the ability of the leader to find a common language, to achieve mutual understanding with the elderly and young people, with men and women, with workers of different professions, with people of different education, marital status, temperament, qualifications; the ability of a leader to convince people, to inspire them to carry out even unpleasant assignments, to carry them along with them, to help them replace their usual course of action with a new, more rational, more efficient one, to help them make contact is also valued.

The importance of forming an effective individual leadership style is explained by the fact that such a style is able to actively contribute to the rallying of the managed team, turning it into a single whole. It is often assumed that the main task of the manager is, first of all, the implementation of the production plan. Meanwhile, even the best leader will not be able to fulfill such a plan without a workable, cohesive team. It is more correct to consider that the main task of the leader is not only the implementation of the plan, but also the creation of a team capable of performing high tasks.

So, the secret of effective leadership is not to limit yourself to the rigid boundaries of any one style - traditional or modern, autocratic, liberal or democratic. In the end, all styles fit into the framework of the general theory of management, all of them can be useful and even necessary in one situation or another. For example, criticism and praise are two sides of the same coin. This "medal" is a feedback between the manager and the subordinate, it allows the subordinate to know the assessment of his work.

The formation of the correct individual style will be facilitated by the observance of a number of principles.

Feedback. Subordinates, as a rule, seek to quickly find out the assessment of their work directly from their supervisor. Psychologists have found that such feedbacks are key to the work process. Subordinates often ask themselves the question: "How, in fact, do I work?" The leader must be able to answer this question in a timely and accurate manner.

Determination of freedom of action of a subordinate. Some subordinates need more, others less freedom in their work. Some people tend to make their own decisions. Others are shocked by the possibility. Based on a deep study of the nature of his subordinates, the leader must decide in each case what will make the work of the employee more effective: whether to give him some freedom of action or to keep an eye on him "doing only what is ordered."

Consider the attitude of the subordinate to work. This is a very delicate, but also a very important point. Of course, work is a part of our life, but not the whole life. Some people sometimes say: "For me, my personal life is much more important than work." It is advisable to occasionally correct the attitude of subordinates to their work, resorting to the remarks for this: "Work first of all!" A leader who soberly assesses the role of work in people's lives, without exaggerating or underestimating it, helps his subordinates develop the right psychological orientation, establish a school of life values, and clearly define the place of work in their lives.

Orientation to the final results of the work. A good leader knows how to correctly celebrate the labor achievements of his subordinate. It is not the preparatory stages, not just work or performance, but the end result that has practical value.

However, it is important not to give people the idea that the labor process itself has no value. An experienced leader, evaluating the work of subordinates, takes into account both the result itself and the element of labor competition.

Promotion. "My subordinates are so preoccupied with their careers," complains another manager, "that I can't get them to do their daily work!" This is one of the most dangerous consequences of the method of stimulating subordinates with the prospect of promotion. There is a lot of wisdom in the old slogan that the best way to make a career is to do your day-to-day duties well. If we supplement it with slight hints of the possibility of promotion for those who have a chance of it, then we will get the best option.

Leader's personal behavior. Should a manager be purely official with his subordinates, as they say, buttoned up "with all the buttons", or is it better for him to establish semi-official and even friendly relations with them? The question seems to be put so straightforwardly. It makes no more sense than the question, "Should a manager wear small or large shoes?" You need to wear shoes that fit well on your feet, and behave with subordinates - based on the situation, on what you are, on what your subordinates are. Life shows that violence against one's own nature does not lead to good results.

Relationships between people at work, as in personal life, should be based on reciprocity. The only difference is that the manager is obliged to treat all subordinates without exception with a certain interest and respect. We have no right to say about any of them that he is not interesting to us. A good leader cannot afford personal likes and dislikes. Employees want their manager to be scrupulous and impartial: they should never feel that personal likes and dislikes play a role in decision making. Even if he hates someone in his soul, then in actions he should treat everyone equally.

This does not mean, of course, that the leader must be a friend to each subordinate. In the end, his attitude towards the subordinate to a certain extent depends on the attitude of the subordinate towards him. In an experienced leader, relations with subordinates and not purely official, but not purely friendly, depend on the specific personal characteristics and behavior of subordinates.

Repeat and repeat. It would be good to work if it was enough for the leader to say something once, and not repeat it many times. A leader should not expect people to understand everything the first time. It needs to be repeated over and over again until the desired results are achieved.

Approach work with a light heart. Any work should be approached with a light heart. Nobody likes to work with a manager who is always sombre and serious. A little humor helps to soften the most tense situations.

Forming his individual leadership style, a leader of any rank has no right to lose sight of the fact that his behavior - whether he wants it or not - will be imitated by his subordinates, that his leadership style and the characteristics of his behavior as a leader will spread in the team, like circular waves. stone thrown into the water.

The individual leadership style adopted by the boss has a strong influence on the group value system adopted in the team, on those unwritten norms and rules of conduct that are accepted by the majority of members of this team and which then have a significant impact on their joint work activities. In relation to such a general collective system of values, the individual style of the leader acts as a kind of tuning fork, he sets, to a certain extent, the tone, determines the nature of the rules of conduct for the entire production team.

Personal characteristics of the leader to a significant extent affect the style of his leadership. This applies, first of all, to his interests, inclinations, beliefs, ideals, to his worldview. Also important is the nature of the leader's moral self-assessment of his actions, usually called conscience. Such personality traits as sociability, criticality, frankness, responsiveness, contact, purposefulness, accuracy, initiative, curiosity, also have an important influence on the formation of the individual style of a particular leader. Finally, the temperament of a person, his character traits, his abilities and habits are also reflected in the individual style of any leader.

A person, as you know, is prone to psychological infection, to unconscious imitation of other people. This tendency is especially pronounced if the one who is being imitated enjoys special respect for the imitator, is his leader, a generally recognized authority, the bearer of public positions, government awards, honorary titles, etc. Such imitation of a person is most often not critical enough; imitate both good and bad; they adopt positive experience, and bad habits, and positive character traits, and obvious shortcomings, which are usually not without well-deserved people.

Subordinates, in particular, are characterized by active imitation of the style of their respected leader. It is in this sense that we can say that the individual style of the leader is significantly influenced by the style of his superior. The style of the boss affects the style of the subordinate even when the latter does not accept his boss and, therefore, tries to differ from him as much as possible in his behavior.

Why do we pay so much attention to the style of working with people, the personality of the leader? Because a leader, no matter what scale he may be - a foreman, foreman, head of an organization - is a person, on whose successful or erroneous decisions, as a rule, much more depends than on each of the persons managed by him. Therefore, the mistakes of the leader cost society much more.

Let us recall the reasoning of L.N. Tolstoy in the novel "War and Peace" about the role of M.I. Kutuzov. The wisdom of the chief, the writer reasoned, does not lie in the fact that he can come up with something unusual, but in the fact that "... he will listen to everything, remember everything, put everything in its place, will not interfere with anything useful and nothing harmful will allow." Great idea! Tolstoy reduces the role of the boss to a kind of sieve that divides information, thoughts, passions and intentions into useful and harmful. For those initiatives that need to clear the way, and for those that need to establish an impenetrable barrier.

A real, thinking leader approves of the common good, truth, goodness. With a conservative boss, good makes its way with great difficulty, while evil often gets the green light. If every boss knew how to differentiate the motives of his employees into truly good, good and bad, then this alone would already advance our economy, culture and all areas of our life at a faster pace.

Of course, this principle cannot be followed literally. The leader must think for himself. But a person does not come to any idea on his own, but only by linking everything that he once and somewhere heard, saw or read. It is difficult to recommend who should consult with others more, and who should rely on himself. Psychologists have convincingly proven that people are divided into generators of ideas and those who are more able to deepen and develop the ideas of others. For example, the author of the project of the Ostankino TV tower N.V. Nikitin mostly himself generated ideas in abundance, defended them himself and directed their implementation. But Academician S.P. Korolev, as you know, often arranged consultations, encouraged the participants to discuss the issue, wrote down opinions, and then thought them over on his own.

It is clear that the division of human actions and aspirations into useful, useless and harmful is often complex, controversial and contradictory. It often happens that some proposal seems to the author almost a deliverance from all troubles, while "on common sense" and careful analysis it turns out to be nothing more than a naive conjecture. Much here depends on the experience, intuition and conscience of the boss himself. However, it is indisputable that all organizational and administrative activities of the leader should be based on the mind, experience and opinions of all members of the work collective. And in order for this subjective potential of the team to be connected to management, it is necessary to fulfill one very important condition: information from its members to the boss must be transmitted without delay and distortion. A smart, passionate boss keeps the "gates" open for the information coming to him. In his conversation there is democracy, equality to objections, and not the principle of that subordination, in which "I am the boss, you are a fool." He is not afraid of criticism, does not shun advice. Moreover, he even encourages his advisers with attention to them, a sincere desire to implement useful advice.

The inaccessibility of the boss, who revels in his instructive speeches, is a warning symptom of his inferiority. Moreover, observations show that it is precisely such a leader who, as a rule, does not see a rational grain in the proposal of his employee. Someone else's opinion usually does not interest him.

Thus, the formation of an individual style of a leader is a rather complex psychological process, which ultimately entails permanent changes in the behavior and actions of a leader, therefore, that individual style that not only increases production efficiency, but also contributes to development, improvement of the personality of both the leader himself and each of his subordinates.

The authority of the leader. An individual leadership style that corresponds to the general production environment and the characteristics of the managed team actively contributes to the formation of a high authority of the leader.

The true authority of a leader is a well-deserved respect for him and is based on such components as: knowledge, experience, mind of the leader, his trust in subordinates and his exactingness towards them, caring for them, high personal qualities.

The authority of the leader does not, of course, make his instructions, orders and advice more binding, but gives them weight. It is known that subordinates fulfill the instructions and instructions of an authoritative leader more willingly, faster and more thoroughly.

An ineptly formed individual leadership style contributes to the appearance of a false authority in the head, which, in essence, is only his illusion, a ghost. False authority does not increase, but, on the contrary, reduces the effectiveness of leadership. With false authority, subordinates often flatter the leader, fawn, disrespecting him in their hearts.

At first, such a leader is afraid, and then, seeing that he cannot fulfill his threats, they laugh behind his back,

The false authority of reasoning associated with a special predilection of some leaders for a long, long and beautiful talk in front of employees, read long lectures to them, give lectures, give examples from their lives, etc.

False distance authority arises when a manager hides the most ordinary information from subordinates, tries to stand out among them with the decoration of his desk, the color of his telephone, the shape of his ink utensil, the design of his chair, etc.

The high authority of a manager in a subordinate group or organization is the basis of his high reputation in society. The essence of the concept of "reputation" is the opinion of society about the merits and demerits of someone or something. Reputation is a broader concept than the authority of the leader. It can be used in relation to an individual, but also in relation to an organization and even an entire country. The manager's reputation can be either positive or negative. The positive reputation of the manager inspires trust and respect of the staff, increases his own self-esteem.

If the authority of a manager is determined by his assessment by members of a group or organization, then reputation is formed from communication and interaction in all areas of his interaction with society - in the organization, family, politics, region, everyday life, and even on business trips.

In general, the components of the formation of a positive reputation of a manager can be his: professional competence, leadership qualities and personal authority in a subordinate organization, leadership style, image, performance and a healthy lifestyle, his assessment by society in various contact areas and situations. Therefore, constant personal self-control should be inherent in the manager in all life situations.

So, success in the work of a manager depends not only on professional, but also on his psychological readiness for leadership or the organization as a whole.

First of all, he should never forget that he himself is not only a leader, but at the same time a subordinate, therefore he must be able to obey, carry out the instructions of his leadership, and be personally disciplined.

The psychological preparedness of a leader is, first of all, the culture of management, the upbringing of the personality, the ability to manage one's feelings and emotions. The necessary minimum of personality traits that ensures success in work also includes a taste for organizational activity, a sense of responsibility, and collectivism.

If a person works without interest, without passion, without love for his work, his performance and performance are reduced.

The leader is subject to various emotional influences. Uncontrolled emotions can take on a different character, up to outbursts of anger, a state of passion. This is dangerous, because being in the power of emotions a person loses control over his behavior and can make a rash decision.

Of great importance for the leader is his ability to speak correctly, simply, accessible, taking into account the interlocutor and at the same time expressively, emotionally, clearly and briefly. It is good if the manager uses a joke, but the joke should not be offensive. Offensive, mocking tone should be excluded from the manner of conversation.

If the leader speaks quietly and calmly, this gives his words weight and business character.

In a conversation, you should not rush to switch to "you". "Poking" by the manager leaves a bad impression. It must be remembered that when referring to "you" and the interlocutor receives a formal right to address to "you". It becomes embarrassing if the subordinate uses this right.

The appeal to "you" in a different situation can express psychological intimacy, the cordiality of the relationship, but in some situations (for example, the appeal of a young boss to an elderly subordinate) it is insulting.

The leader should not allow familiarity: for example, pat the interlocutor on the shoulder, pull the button, gesticulate excessively, etc.

You need to be extremely careful and patient. So, if a subordinate came with an unreasonable request, the leader should not directly tell him, for example, that his desire is absurd. This will cause natural resentment, and the next time the subordinate will not approach the leader, even with a good, useful proposal. A calm explanation is needed, this is the best way to respond to an unrealistic request.

The leader must be able not only to speak, but, no less important, to be able to listen. This skill can and should be learned. A person who does not know how to listen demonstrates indifference to the interlocutor. It is important to be able to call a subordinate to a conversation. A silent person is always a difficult object to manage; he does not allow the leader to understand himself.

The appearance of the leader also has a psychological impact on the subordinate. If cleanliness, tidiness, elegance create goodwill, cause a pleasant feeling, then untidiness, on the contrary, causes negative emotions in subordinates. The clothes of the leader should be, first of all, comfortable for work, modest, but modern and solid.

The psychological preparedness of a manager for work is also determined by the culture of his behavior, the ability to behave in society. This skill involves a combination of naturalness with respect for others. A tactful person avoids situations that may embarrass or embarrass other people.

The style of managerial activity of the head reflects his individual style in the implementation of his functions. It is a stable system of characteristic approaches and methods of management activity, formed under the influence of external and internal factors. The concept of "style" (Latin stylus, Greek stylos - rod, stick for writing) means a set of methods of activity, behavior.

The concept of "style" was introduced into psychology in the mid-20s of the XX century by the creator of individual psychology, the Austrian psychologist A. Adler. In the school of K. Levin in the 30s and early 40s (USA), they first began to study the style of managerial activity. K. Levin, R. White and other researchers identified three leadership styles: democratic, authoritarian, neutral. By style, they understood that side of the leader's interaction with the group, which is associated with decision-making, instructing and organizing its implementation. The decisive parameter in the typification of styles by the supporters of this direction was the degree of division of managerial functions between the leader and members of the group.

Since the late 40s, foreign scientists have introduced the concept of "cognitive style" of management activity (cognitive, analytical). Here, it was proposed to put cognitive processes at the basis of the management style, and to use specially selected tests for control. At the present stage in Western psychology, there is a separation of cognitive and evaluative styles, that is, styles based on cognitive strategies and actualized emotional experience. The rational components of these approaches are widely used in the analysis of activity styles in psychological practice.

In the mid-1950s, the problem of styles began to attract the attention of Russian psychologists. V.S. Merlin and E.A. Klimov put forward the idea and created a holistic concept of individual style. It is based on the results of a psychological analysis of the individual characteristics of a person who is actively involved in activities. An analysis of the progress and results of research into the problem of style of activity by domestic scientists allows us to distinguish three stages in the development of the concept of style of individual activity.

The first stage (late 50s-60s) consisted in a theoretical study of the problem and typology of approaches. The fact that domestic scientists have chosen their own research approaches indicates that the problem is recognized in domestic psychology as one of the priorities.

At the second stage (70s - 80s), the main efforts of scientists and practitioners were focused on the experimental study of the concept proposed by V.S. Merlin and developed by E.A. Klimov, called the theory of integral individuality. Its essence lies in the fact that individuality, on the one hand, is an independent system. On the other hand, it acts in interaction with the environment, with other individuals. In studies during this period, however, there is a tendency to prefer foreign concepts of cognitive and evaluative styles against the background of a general decrease in interest in the problem. For our study, relevant are the conclusions that a person, influencing the surrounding reality, experiences a counter action on its part. They considered such mutual influence in the whole set of connections. This concept opens the way to the disclosure of the most important essential characteristics of the manager's style of managerial activity.

The third stage, which began during the years of radical socio-economic reforms in the country, is characterized by the integration of knowledge about the essence, content of style, the real diversity of its manifestation, conditions and factors of improvement.

In a generalized form, various approaches are distinguished in the study of style. It is considered from the standpoint of personal qualities, behavioral approach and depending on the situation. The personality traits approach assumes that the best leaders have a certain set of personal qualities common to all. These include: the level of intelligence and knowledge, reliability, responsibility, activity, initiative, honesty, self-confidence, impressive appearance, etc. Such qualities, on the one hand, are predetermined by the physiological data of a person, and on the other hand, they are formed in the process of training and education. The complexity of this approach is that: firstly, there are several hundred qualities characteristic of a particular manager, and it is rather difficult to identify which of them and to what extent manifested themselves in a managerial situation; secondly, even having revealed the totality of such qualities, we see that often not only they determine the effectiveness of the activity.

Consequently, the presence of personal qualities is one thing, quite another is which of them and how they will manifest themselves in various managerial situations. The personal qualities of the leader reveal only one aspect of the style of managerial activity. Today, scientists do not disregard this approach. So, one of the research centers for training managers, developing an ideal model of a manager includes a number of mandatory qualities. Among them: humane treatment of employees; friendly relations with employees, but not familiarity; self-affirmation due to personal results of work; ability to manage the situation; obtaining job satisfaction; focus on a person, etc. The approach from the standpoint of personal qualities is justified by the fact that it emphasizes the presence of a subject in managerial activity, although almost no attention is paid to other elements of activity.

Proponents of the behavioral approach note that the style of management depends not so much on personal qualities as on the manner of behavior towards subordinates. It is they who subdivide leadership styles, depending on the degree of delegation of their powers to subordinates, into authoritarian, democratic and liberal. The behavioral approach is the most common and therefore we will dwell on it in more detail.

A leader with an authoritarian style of managerial activity mainly relies on his own strengths, capabilities and psychological qualities, he strives for sole leadership, as a rule, ignores the initiative and creativity of his subordinates. Authoritarianism is not a synonym for unity of command, for the latter is one of the important principles of management and a necessary condition for organized activity. The hypertrophy of unity of command leads to an authoritarian style, the main means of control of which are orders, strict directiveness and regulation. If at the same time, focusing on socially significant goals and objectives, he proceeds only from regulatory requirements, then his style can be characterized as administrative-authoritarian. The essence of authoritarian control is the concentration of power in the hands of an individual or group of individuals. Moreover, he is endowed with power, as a rule, by hierarchically higher structures and is accountable to them.

The results of the managerial activity of such a leader are quite high, but not long-term, since the behavior of subordinates is strictly limited by a huge number of rules, instructions, and some of them may be contrary to common sense. The threat of punishment creates a sense of fear among staff and leads to constant tension. As a result, the effectiveness of their activities is reduced, which causes irritation of the head and the corresponding sanctions on his part.

In relation to their subordinates, such leaders believe that people do not like to work, they avoid responsibility, they themselves prefer to be led, and therefore, in order to make subordinates work, they must be forced to work, controlled and threatened with punishment. Psychological pressure, distancing from subordinates, high conceit and the desire for absolute power are a vivid example of an autocratic manager. A leader with an authoritarian style is characterized by a thirst for subordinating people to his will, intolerance to criticism and objections. He lacks respect for people, for their opinion. The autocrat argues this way: broad power minimizes my mistakes, increases management efficiency and gives a high end result.

The appearance of such a style is associated not only with personality traits, but also with objective conditions, when the result of the activity of the economic system is considered the most important, and no special attention is paid to the means of achieving it. The autocrat believes that focusing on the task will allow him to effectively solve it, while changing it, especially for a short time he is powerless to human nature. It should be noted that an authoritarian leader focused on human relations in certain situations gives a fairly high result.

The head of the democratic style, unlike the authoritarian style, has different ideas about subordinates. He believes that people: under favorable conditions will seek to take responsibility; if they understand and accept common goals, then they will use self-government and self-control; subordinates are capable of creative problem solving and it is necessary to use their creative potential. Such a leader is focused on the team and its psychology. He believes that performance will improve if employees are satisfied with it. Here, a high degree of decentralization of powers is clearly expressed. Subordinates are granted independence commensurate with their qualifications and functional duties.

When making managerial decisions and organizing their implementation, collective forces, initiative and creativity of subordinates are involved, who enjoy wide freedom in performing tasks. The leader, as a rule, cares less about current control. He evaluates the end result. The essence of the democratic style of management is manifested in its humanistic orientation and the use of means of influence focused on the interests and needs of subordinates, creating an atmosphere of openness and trust.

Encouraging the initiative, the leader emphasizes his respect for subordinates. He gives instructions not in the form of an order, but in the form of a request, proposal, advice. Delegation of authority, taking into account the opinions of subordinates is not a desire to relieve oneself of responsibility, but a firm conviction in the optimality of such a management style. He constantly and thoroughly informs his subordinates about the state of affairs and development prospects, thereby mobilizing them to solve the tasks ahead, and contributes to the formation of a corporate spirit in the team. It is important to note that in this case, a certain leveling of value orientations and people's needs occurs, a sense of belonging to a common cause increases, and a sense of the owner is brought up. The results of the managerial activity of a leader who has mastered the democratic style of leadership are formed not only from the personal qualities of the leader, but also cover the personal development of each employee, the sphere of relationships in the team and the objective conditions of activity.

The liberal (neutral) style of managerial activity is characterized by a wide degree of delegation of managerial powers to the team. Such a leader is characterized by a lack of scope in activities, a lack of initiative, a desire to evade responsibility in general and especially under adverse conditions. He is inconsistent in his actions, resigns himself to circumstances, under pressure cancels his decisions. He is not active and tries not to interfere in the affairs of others. In relationships, both horizontally and vertically, it is characterized by passivity. He constantly awaits instructions from above and does not seek active interaction with subordinates. In an effort to gain authority, the leader can provide subordinates with various benefits, pay undeserved bonuses, easily makes promises, although he is not always able to fulfill them. If the subordinates do not want to follow his instructions, he does this work himself, avoiding the conflict.

He is not capable of decisive and independent action, is weak in the organization of labor and liberal in relationships. A full-time manager does not have a coherent, effective system in managerial activity - it is anarchic. The results of managerial activity do not meet the needs of subordinates and the interests of the case. Such a leader is cautious, unsure of himself and his position.

Management practice confirms that this or that type of style is rarely found in the form described above. Most often, there are common features inherent in different styles, but one of them has a dominant role.

Within the framework of the behavioral approach, the style of managerial activity is analyzed depending on the orientation of the manager to work (task) or to a person. A work-focused leader takes care of completing tasks and rewarding productive work. Such a technocratic approach to the role of a person reduces him to the position of a "cog" and human resources are not fully disclosed, and, consequently, labor efficiency is low. A person-centered leader puts interpersonal relationships at the forefront. He focuses on mutual assistance, avoids petty guardianship, when making decisions, subordinates participate as much as possible in its development. Such a leader constantly studies the needs, requests, moods of subordinates, helps them solve problems. There are leaders who are both work-oriented and human-oriented. This is another aspect of the problem of the style of managerial activity and its optimality in modern conditions.

Another aspect of style analyzed from the position of a behavioral approach is its two-dimensional or multi-dimensional interpretation. He considers the interdependence of orientations to the task or to the person and the satisfaction of employees with the results of work. In the first case, we are talking about the planning and organization of work by the manager (drawing up a work schedule, determining personal tasks and the order of their implementation, the distribution of roles and their own anxiety) on the one hand, and on the other, about attention to employees (building relationships with subordinates based on which lies trust and respect, the opportunity to participate in decision-making). Further development of the two-dimensional model led to the creation of a multidimensional model called the "management grid", where "care for the person" and "care for the task" are ranked within nine positions. Group management of people united in a team is considered optimal, where, thanks to attention to people, they realize the tasks as their own and the achievement of personal interests is directly related to the solution of a common task. These are the aspects of the style of managerial activity of the manager, the analysis of which is based on the behavior of the leader. The most characteristic aspects of styles can be represented in a schematic form.

Attempts to find the optimal management style led to the conclusion that the behavior of the leader is influenced by the situation. The situational approach indicates that, depending on the specific situation, different management styles should be selected. This means that the leader must be able to behave differently, so to speak, to vary styles. It is envisaged that the personal qualities and behavior of the leader are essential components of success in managerial activity, and the situation acts as an additional factor influencing management. In general terms, situational factors include: firstly, subordinates with their personal characteristics, and secondly, the influence of the external environment.

A detailed analysis allows us to identify such factors as: the relationship between the leader and members of the team (respect and trust in the leader, his attractiveness); the structure of the task (its familiarity, clarity of formulation); official powers (scope of rights and powers); influence on the motivation and increase in the personal benefit of everyone in achieving the goals of work; "maturity" of subordinates (this is not age, but the ability to bear responsibility, level of education, desire to complete tasks and experience in solving them); the degree of participation of subordinates in decision-making.

The authors of situational approaches offer various options for applying management styles. The former proceed from the fact that the leader cannot adapt his style to the situation, and therefore it is necessary to place him in situations where he, with his inherent style, could effectively manage. It follows that, after analyzing the situation, it is necessary to determine the list of managerial qualities that will contribute to effective management.

Here, the use of, let's say, an authoritarian style in conditions of time shortage in an extreme situation or democratic, in a traditional situation, productive labor is justified. It is important to consider what variables influence the behavior of the leader.

The second, based on the theory of expectations (expectations), offered to master and apply such styles as: support (personal orientation); instrumental (work orientation); participatory (encouraging participation in group decision-making); achievement-oriented (setting a tense goal and motivating to achieve it). They believe that common goals can be achieved through the satisfaction of personal goals of employees. In the process of interpersonal communication, the motivation of employees is formed, obstacles in the way of their work are destroyed, and, in general, they are mobilized to solve problems.

Still others believe that the leader chooses a management style, taking into account, on the one hand, the level of development of the team, its maturity, and in accordance with this, to a greater or lesser extent delegates authority to it. On the other hand, it focuses on specific employees or jobs. So, with a low level of development of the team and the orientation of the leader to the task, the latter manages using authoritarian methods. When the leader is oriented both to the task and to the person, with a low level of development of the team, both authoritarian and democratic features are noticeable in his style. When the leader is focused on the person and the average level of development of the team, elements of a democratic style are used, employees participate in decision-making. With a high degree of development of the team, many rights can be delegated to it, and the leader may not be focused on either the task or the person.

Fourth focus on the decision-making process and the participation of subordinates in it. Styles are offered from sole decision-making to full participation of the entire team, and the leader himself can be focused both on work and on people. The final decision on the choice of style rests with the manager, who must identify a number of criteria: determine the requirements for the quality of the solution; sufficiency of information and experience; the degree of structure of the problem; the degree of importance and consent of subordinates in decision-making; the likelihood of employees supporting a single decision; the degree of motivation of subordinates to solve the problem; the likelihood of conflicts between subordinates.

The disadvantages of this approach are in the behaviorist methodology, focused on the principle of "stimulus - reaction", where the role of the leader is to "expect" disturbing factors. The undoubted advantage is the need to predict the development of events, in advance to "lose" solutions.

New opportunities for a comprehensive study of the style of managerial activity are opened by the acmeological approach. V.S. Merlin, E.A. Klimov, having developed the theoretical and methodological foundations of an individual style of activity, laid the foundation for such an approach. Its fundamental difference lies in the fact that a person in such activity acts as its original subject. His style is a unique, original way of realizing creative potential in a certain type of activity. The nature of this method is determined, first of all, by the qualitative parameters of a particular person, which correlate with reality.

We agree with K.A. Abulkhanova that the mode of activity is a more or less optimal integral, the composition of these basic parameters. “The subject is an integrating, centralizing, coordinating “instance” of activity,” the scientist emphasizes. He coordinates the whole system of his individual, psycho-physiological, mental and, finally, personal capabilities, characteristics with the conditions and requirements of activity, not in a partial way, but in a holistic way.

When analyzing the features of a manager's individual style of managerial activity, it seems important to us to use the advantages and productive components of all approaches, models and experience. At the same time, one should proceed from the need to identify the main components of a holistic acmeological model of the style of managerial activity, which we recognize as the most optimal for specific conditions, environment and managerial situation. The structure, content and features of such a multidimensional functional model of leadership style are determined by the action of internal and external factors. These factors are the main determinants of the style of managerial activity.

We single out and consider the main internal and external determinants that determine the style of the manager's managerial activity. The style determinants are hierarchically linked individual psychological characteristics of the leader. The results of research by various scientists show that in their composition, first of all, it is necessary to single out the following components: morphological and functional features and orientation; a set of general and special abilities; expressiveness of emotional-volitional qualities and motivation; formation of psychological components of professionalism; level of anxiety and mental tension; reflexivity and relaxation. All of them together play the role of an internal determinant of the style of a particular activity, including the managerial activity of a manager, being at the same time his multi-level basis.

The role of the external determinant of style is performed by the entire surrounding reality. In its composition, one can single out, first of all, involvement in official relations in human-human systems; man - sign systems; man - technology; man is nature. In addition, the formation of the manager's style of managerial activity is influenced by relations - general social, service-functional, interpersonal and domestic. The specificity of life also affects the style of managerial activity. The components of the external determinants, along with the internal ones, determine the essence, content and nature of the manifestation of the style of the manager's managerial activity.

The real multidimensional-functional model of managerial activity style has a well-defined stable profile. In a particular state, combination and ratio, various components are present and manifest in it. The most significant components give the manager's style of managerial activity a unique, original, individual profile inherent only to him. It is formed and changed under the influence of internal and external factors. Their impact is holistic in an interconnected unity.

An analysis of approaches to the style of managerial activity allows us to formulate a number of conclusions aimed at the formation of effective management in modern conditions.

First, the approaches to management style discussed above are limited. It lies in the fact that the style is not analyzed in a complex way: a) from the point of view of the subject of activity (the study of personal qualities and behavioral approach); b) from the standpoint of the object of activity or the external environment (situational approach); c) taking into account the nature of the real relationships that develop in the management system in a particular situation.

The explanation for this limited nature can be: the command-administrative system that has been operating for many decades, based on the cult of personality and interested in the fact that a person is a “cog” in it, and an authoritarian style is preferable to manage the “cogs”. It was used with a sufficiently high efficiency to restore in a short time the national economy in our country, destroyed during two wars. The historical roots of the administrative system, growing out of the strictly centralized system of administration of the Russian Empire, can also serve as an explanation. A thousand-year history has formed the corresponding Russian mentality. The personal qualities of a person - as a result of ideological work, have always occupied a leading position in the selection of leaders. At the same time, Soviet leaders have a noticeable tendency to focus both on work and on the person, and the delegation of authority was carried out through the work of various public bodies.

Western theorists attribute the persistence of this style to the historical tradition of Europe. Events in the USSR and other countries have shown the perniciousness of idealizing style along a continuum from authoritarian to liberal. It is not a question of deleting these concepts from the theory. In practice, we will always find them in management activities. The point is to realize that this one-sided approach to style is a thing of the past, and therefore one should take a step forward towards a more effective management style.

Leadership from the position of the situation in the theory of our science has not found a worthy place. It was assumed that we know the laws of the development of society, the prospect is clearly visible, and the leader works according to a well-established scheme that does not provide for unplanned situations. Certainty, plannedness are the characteristic properties of managerial activity. In specific areas of activity associated with high responsibility, such research and practice existed. These are military, space and others, distinguished by the use of advanced technologies. This traces the dependence, consisting in the fact that everything new, advanced will demand a more perfect style of work, the essential feature of which is flexibility, variability, due to the need for an adequate impact on disturbing factors.

Secondly, as a methodological principle for studying the concept of “style”, one should take its understanding as a characteristic of activity. The latter presupposes not only a goal, a means, a result, the process itself, but also a subject and an object that are in a system of active relations. The activity of relations implies both a feature of an individual attitude to the self-expression of creative potential, and a special attitude to the use of all the capabilities of the management system in solving managerial problems. This shows the systemic nature of the manager's activity. The applied means of influence also characterize the peculiarity of the leadership style, which manifests itself through the peculiarity of the manager's attitude towards them.

Under the methods of activity, they usually understand the techniques, methods, approaches, norms, principles, etc., which the subject uses to achieve his activity. These are the stylistic features. The individuality of style is manifested in the originality of the methods of activity used by a particular leader (methods, techniques, principles, etc.), which is determined by: individual psychological characteristics of the personality (its orientation, character, type of temperament, abilities, etc.); ideological views, motives that determine the application of certain principles and norms for organizing the methods used in the system of their activities; situational features of the control object and environmental factors affecting the activity.

Consequently, the main characteristic of style lies not so much in the totality of separately used means and techniques for solving particular problems of the organization, but in the integrity of the system of methods of activity, united by a single strategy, tactics and technique of their application. Such an understanding of style is close to the concept of activity technology and provides for the optimal organization of managerial activity, taking into account internal factors and external conditions affecting it.

In the style, traits, manners, habits, tastes, inclinations of the manager are steadily fixed and reproduced. Style reflects, first of all, the individuality of the individual, emphasizes its independence and originality. Typically, the style is stable, found in the frequent repetition of certain leadership techniques. But this stability is relative, since dynamism is usually inherent in style. Such a view of the problem reduces the style entirely to the personality of the leader, to his individuality. However, the characteristics of the leader's personality, for all their significance, do not exhaust the components of style.

Among the objective conditions that determine the management style, the following stand out: the requirements of society and the state, enshrined in regulatory documents and social norms (morality, traditions, public opinion, etc.) on the relationship of people in various spheres of life; the specifics of the existing management system - its goals, objectives, structure, management technology in this area; features of production activities, the surrounding production environment - the applied production technologies, forms of labor organization, etc.; the originality of the led team - its formal and informal structure and relationships, traditions and values, the level of professionalism and other social and psychological characteristics. So, only a comprehensive, systematic study of style will allow us to determine its optimal model.

Thirdly, we formulate the main provisions of the optimal management style. The theory and practice of managerial activity makes it possible to identify the leading patterns of functioning and development of the manager's style of activity:

conditionality of the style of managerial activity by the nature of the activity itself. Only in the process of activity can one master and apply a set of methods of interaction between the subject and the object. The nature of the activity determines the specifics of the methods of management used;

social conditioning of style. Style - is the formative result of the social environment, the dominant ideas of society and its groups. Style reflects the interaction in the social system "man - man";

the dependence of style effectiveness on the degree of adequacy of the level of professionalism to the requirements of the managerial situation. Professionalism, as an integrated indicator of the total characteristics of a person, manifests itself not so much in standard, pre-known situations, but in non-standard, especially critical ones, when a managerial decision can affect the severity of social and other consequences;

style - is a priority way of self-expression of the manager's creative potential in real conditions;

the variability of the style of the head of the organization is determined by the individual styles of personnel activity and determines the nature of the management of the entire system. Here, the dialectic of the general and the special, of the individual element and the structure as a whole, is manifested.

Manager's activity style It is presented as a stable system of characteristic approaches, methods and techniques, reflecting the individual style of the manager in the implementation of managerial functions, which has been formed and is developing under the influence of internal and external factors. The choice of the best style by the leader is carried out in accordance with the criterion of optimality, which is expressed through the structural-functional, psychological, procedural and productive indicators of optimality.

In accordance with this criterion and indicators, the style of a modern manager has such properties as: adaptability - the ability to adequately adapt to the situation; flexibility - the use of one or another type of style, depending on the capabilities of the leader, the characteristics of the object and disturbing environmental factors; social orientation - in addition to economic indicators, each leader bears a certain measure of social responsibility to people, society; innovativeness - search and mastery of new ways of activity; predictability - foreseeing and preventing a negative impact on the activities of personnel, creating favorable conditions for it; presentability - the representation of the individual I, its self-expression. This is the essence of the acmeological approach to the analysis and implementation of the style of management activity, which assumes its optimality.

Thus, the optimal style of managerial activity is highly consistent with the creative potential and unique individuality of the manager, expresses the social expectations of the staff and is aimed at solving the tasks of the activity. Its distinctive feature lies in the fact that a leader who possesses this style strives for flexible, maneuvering management. At the same time, the more extreme the situation, the more professionalism of the manager is manifested.

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

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

• Introduction
• 1. Leadership styles
• Conclusion

Introduction

The work of a manager is presented as the performance of managerial functions in the "man-man" system. This leaves its mark on the choice of the style of management of the firm. It is impossible to predict managerial activity with a high degree of probability, since each person to whom the control action is directed is unique in its own way, and its behavior in space and time depends on both subjective and objective factors. Therefore, such a subtle management tool as management style should be used with great care and at a high professional level.

The word "style" is of Greek origin. Its original meaning is "a rod for writing on a wax board", and later it was used in the meaning of "handwriting". Hence, we can assume that the style of leadership is a kind of "handwriting" in the actions of the manager.

A more complete definition of the concept of "leadership style" is a relatively stable system of ways, methods and forms of practical activity of a manager.

In addition, management style is understood as the manner and way of behavior of a manager in the process of preparing and implementing management decisions.

All definitions of management style are reduced to a set of techniques and methods characteristic of a manager for solving management problems, i.e. style is a system of constantly applied methods of leadership.

As you can see, the style and method of leadership exist in a certain unity. Style is a form of implementation of management methods adopted by this manager in accordance with his personal subjective-psychological characteristics.

Each of the established management methods is adequate to a well-defined management style. This means that each method for its implementation needs individuals with specific qualities. In addition, the method of management is more mobile and sensitive to new needs in the field of managerial relations than the style of leadership. Style as a phenomenon of the production order to a certain extent lags behind the development and improvement of management methods and, in this regard, may come into conflict with them, i.e. due to a certain autonomization, the leadership style, as a reflection of outdated management methods, can introduce new, more progressive elements into them.

The unity of methods and leadership style is that the style serves as a form of implementation of the method. A manager with a leadership style inherent only to him in his activities can use various management methods (economic, organizational-administrative, socio-psychological).

Thus, the leadership style is a strictly individual phenomenon, since it is determined by the specific characteristics of a particular person and reflects the peculiarities of working with people and the decision-making technology of this particular person. The style is regulated by the personal qualities of the manager.

In the process of labor activity, a certain strictly individual "handwriting" of the leader is formed, whose actions are almost impossible to repeat in detail. Just as no two fingerprints are the same, no two managers have the same leadership style.

It should be borne in mind that there is no "ideal" leadership style suitable for all occasions. The style applied by the manager or the symbiosis of styles depends not so much on the personality of the manager, but on the corresponding situation (situational position).

I chose this topic so that when managing a company there would be no questions about what methods to manage, what style to choose. I set myself the task of deeply studying the modern classification of styles. My main goal is to develop my own management style.

The "correct" leadership style cannot be determined in advance, since life managerial situations are not standard, and the personal qualities of a manager and subordinates tend to change adequately to changes in the managed environment.

The choice of leadership style largely depends on what task the manager sets for himself:

manage - the manager gives precise instructions to subordinates and conscientiously monitors the fulfillment of his tasks;

direct - the manager manages and oversees the execution of tasks, but discusses decisions with employees, asks them to make suggestions and supports their initiative;

support - the manager assists employees in the performance of tasks, shares with them responsibility for the correct decision-making;

delegate authority - the manager transfers part of his authority to the performers, makes them responsible for making private decisions and achieving the goal of the enterprise.

1. Leadership styles

K. Levin and F. Fiedler were the first to classically expressively describe the main leadership styles and their backbone features. In their approaches, K. Levin, like F. Fiedler, broadly covered the topic and identified such important, key features of the style behavior of the leader, which many other researchers of the problem continue to use with different options and contexts.

Experts distinguish between several approaches to the problem and a different number of styles, highlighting them on different grounds. These approaches are not always independent of each other. More often they overlap, but still differ in their dominant ideas. Accordingly, we distinguish four approaches:

1) personal (determined by highlighting the individual characteristics of the leader as the main determinant of his style);

2) behavioral (connects the behavior of the leader with the situations of activity, the structure of production tasks, as well as with the professionalism, attitudes and motives of subordinates);

3) complex (expressed in an effort to generalize the most well-known determinants of style);

4) structural - functional (characterized by raising the question of the internal organization of style, while usually their number is not specified).

One of the first descriptions of leadership styles (leadership) is given by K. Levin and co-authors. They distinguish two aspects of leadership styles: the content of the solutions proposed by the leader to the group, and the technique (techniques, methods) for implementing these decisions. Let's denote the formal aspect of different styles. Authoritarian style: instructions are given by the leader in a business-like manner, briefly, directly and openly; prohibitions and orders are given and implemented without condescension and with a threat; a laconic and clear (command) language is characteristic, an unfriendly tone, praise and censure are subjective. Reactions of subordinates are ignored; The socio-spatial position of the leader is above the group. Democratic style: all events are dressed in the form of proposals, in a comradely tone; the form of praise and censure - taking into account the intention and reaction of people, their opinions; prohibitions are made in the form of a proposal or discussion. There is joint activity, the position of the leader is in the group. Liberal style: conventional tone, lack of praise, censure, suggestions; prohibitions or orders are not expressed, but are replaced by presence; there is no cooperation, the position of the leader is, if possible, outside the group.

Content side of leadership styles. Authoritarian style: activities are planned by the leader in advance or are decided and carried out in the course of activities; usually only immediate upcoming actions are indicated; job prospects are unknown to the performers; The leader's opinion is decisive. Democratic style: most important events are planned and discussed in the group, all participants are responsible for their implementation; the leader does not seek to use the decisive influence of his voice. Liberal style: performers are left to themselves, the leader does not give verbal instructions and suggestions and influences only by his presence; work is made up of individual interests.

Another of the most famous is F. Fiedler's situational model.

Assuming that different types of leadership can be effective in different situations, that group dynamics is not determined only by the personal qualities of the leader, F. Fiedler identified three key situational variables:

1) The relationship of the leader and subordinates - the degree of trust and respect that subordinates have for their manager, the loyalty of the group towards the leader.

2) Structured tasks, i.e. the degree of their formalization. The structuring of tasks is determined by four criteria: to what extent, in the views of the group members, the decision chosen by the leader looks correct; how the group understands all the requirements for this solution (clearness of the problem statement); what are the restrictions regarding the actions to complete the task; Is this solution the only one, or are alternatives possible?

3) Official power as the ability of the leader to make decisions related to the punishment or encouragement of subordinates. Power is determined by the scope of the leader's official powers, the position of the group in the overall organizational structure, tradition or informal recognition of the leader's authority. The three situational variables are dichothymic (either one or the other): the relationship between leader and subordinates can be good or bad; task structure - complex or simple; official power - strong or weak.

Managers themselves (leaders) may be more focused on solving production problems or maintaining warm relations with the group, which determines the leadership style. Manager effectiveness is a function of the above three variables. With certain combinations of them, task-oriented leaders are more effective, with others - relationship-oriented. Considering the leadership style as an innate characteristic, F. Fiedler saw two ways to increase efficiency for specific managers: a) selection of managers according to organizational conditions, b) changing the situation itself (restructuring production tasks, expanding or reducing power, etc.).

In contrast to the theory of F. Fiedler, who singles out style as a stable characteristic of the behavior of the subject, according to the theory of R. House - T. Mitchell "The path is the goal", the leader can and should use different styles that are most appropriate for the production situation. The main situational factors that determine the leader's behavior are: a) personal qualities of subordinates; c) ambient pressure; c) requirements for subordinates. According to the authors, the personal qualities of the manager are not significant, they do not prevent or limit the manager's manifestation of flexibility in managing production processes. The manager can encourage subordinates to achieve the goals of the organization, using four main styles as means of influence:

1) support style (similar to the "human orientation" style). Leader is friendly and approachable, showing genuine concern for subordinates;

2) instrumental style (corresponds to the "task orientation" style). The leader is authoritarian, gives clear instructions. Subordinates do not take part in decision making. They clearly know what is expected of them;

3) a style that encourages subordinates to make decisions. The leader shares information with subordinates, uses their suggestions, but makes decisions independently;

4) Achievement-oriented style. A feature of the style is the setting of rather intense goals for subordinates, the emphasis on the need to increase the level of individual development, and the leader's demonstration of confidence in the success of solving problems.

Most preferred by subordinates and appropriate to the situation, the leadership style depends on their personal qualities and the requirements of the environment. The support style is more effective when the task is sufficiently structured, and its greater structure is already perceived as excessive control. Supportive leadership has a better effect on subordinates working on tasks that cause stress and frustration. The directive style is effective and subjectively acceptable for subordinates performing vague tasks. When the task is sufficiently structured, and its greater structure is already perceived as excessive control, the style negatively affects the satisfaction and expectations of subordinates. A participatory style is more appropriate for non-standard tasks that require the involvement of workers, when subordinates want to participate in the decision-making process. The achievement-oriented style is more appropriate when subordinates strive for a high level of performance, when they expect that their effective performance will be adequately rewarded.

Using one of four styles, depending on situational variables, the manager influences the perception and motivation of subordinates, leading them to clarity of role behavior and target expectations, satisfaction and effective action.

According to the theory of "Life Cycle" by P. Hersey - C. Blanchard, leadership styles depend on the "maturity" of the performers: their desire to achieve their goals, education and experience, their willingness to be responsible for their behavior. Accordingly, two main factors ("Tasks" and "Relationships") and four styles are distinguished:

1) "Instructions" (directive) - with immature performers with a high orientation of the leader to the task and low - to the relationship with the group;

2) "Sales" (supporting style) - the average maturity of the performers, the orientation of the leader, both on tasks and on relationships;

3) "Participation" (orientation to participation in decision-making) - a moderately high level of maturity of subordinates, a strong orientation of the leader to relationships and a weak one to tasks;

4) "Delegation" - with a high maturity of subordinates, the leader's style is characterized by a low orientation of managerial influences, both on tasks and on relationships. The leader is inactive and provides minimal guidance and support to subordinates, since "mature" - highly professional and motivated employees themselves are quite active and organized, a significant part of management functions has been delegated to them.

D. Misumi's RM-theory is also based on a two-factor model of behavior: P (erfomance) - activity and M (aintenence) - support. Developed independently in the 1940s, the RM theory has strong empirical foundations. Combinations of the degree of expression of the two factors give four main styles, similar in content to the styles identified in the "path - goal" and "life cycle" approaches.

R. Blake and J. Mutton offer a two-dimensional model. The "management grid" has two axes: a) the degree to which the interests of production are taken into account and b) the interests of people, according to which five styles are distinguished. Managing in the spirit of a country house: meticulous attention to the satisfaction of people's needs leads to the creation of a comfortable and friendly atmosphere and working rhythm in the organization. Impoverished management: applying the minimum amount of effort to achieve the required production results is enough to maintain membership in the organization. Power-submission: the efficiency of production depends on the creation of such working conditions, where the human aspects are present at a minimum degree. Organizational management: Good organizational management can be achieved by balancing the need for production results and maintaining people's morale at a satisfactory level. Group management is the most optimal and most effective style: production success is due to dedicated people; interdependence through a common stake on organizational goals leads to the creation of relationships based on trust and respect.

According to N.V. Revenko, leadership styles are an integrative characteristic of the leader's activity, which expresses his personal qualities, relationships with subordinates and features of activity. The severity of leadership styles in terms of the factor "authoritarianism - liberalism" can be different - to its extreme forms, however, the style cannot be fully described only within the framework of this factor. The general classification can be based on several factors: "authoritarianism - liberalism", "public - egocentric orientation", "business activity - inertia", "contact - remoteness", "dominion - subordination", "orientation to work - to human relations", "stress resistance - intolerance".

It is believed that managers use different sides of styles depending on their personal qualities, situation, specific task, individual characteristics of subordinates.

The most stable signs on the factor "authoritarianism - liberalism":

1) centralization of power - decentralization, delegation;

2) propensity for sole decision-making - collegial;

3) efficiency in resolving issues - not efficiency;

4) control - weak control;

5) use of organizational and administrative methods - moral and psychological;

6) the desire to ensure performance discipline and personal responsibility - setting on the consciousness and independence of employees;

7) orientation to higher management - to the team;

8) resolving issues in accordance with official subordination - in accordance with the informal structure;

9) activity of personnel policy - passivity;

10) increased conflict - the desire to avoid conflicts;

11) the predominance of negative motivations in managing people - positive motivation, lack of coercion and pressure;

12) the desire to concentrate all information - the tendency to transfer information down;

13) great sociability from above - from below;

14) the desire for a single line of conduct - a tendency to disagree and fight opinions.

The nature of the work influences the formation of style: among the heads of research institutes and design bureaus, the authoritarian style is less common than in the group of production and construction managers. Style does not depend on the hierarchical level of management and on professional knowledge. Both liberal and authoritarian (more often) leadership styles can be effective. For lower-level managers, efficiency is positively associated with authoritarianism and negatively with liberal style.

Three attributes of leadership style are named by A.L. Zhuravlev:

1) integrity: style is unity, internal interconnectedness of all interactions of the leader with the team;

2) stability: the system includes the most characteristic, relatively stable options for a particular leader;

3) individuality: the system of interactions is characterized by its specificity in each case. Style is an integral characteristic in which the features of both the subject of leadership and its object are manifested. Leadership style is understood as individual-typical features of a holistic, relatively stable system of ways, methods, techniques for influencing the leader on the team in order to effectively perform managerial functions.

Implementing the structural-functional approach, A.A. Rusalinova believes that the type or typical style can be defined as a stable manifestation of the interaction between the leader and the team, formed under the influence of both objective and subjective conditions of management, personal characteristics of the leader. Style affects relationships both vertically and horizontally. Leadership style is not strictly related to the personal characteristics of the leader. In the structural-elementary analysis of activity, the main situations of interaction between the leader and subordinates are distinguished: the choice of tasks; making decisions; group organization; choice of motivation methods; exercising control; stimulation of activity; establishing relationships with subordinates; establishing feedback with the team; regulation of information flows; interaction with public organizations. Two bipolar factors stand out in style: orientation towards production or towards interpersonal relations.

Type-forming characteristics of style are: activity - passivity; unity of command - collectivity in decision-making; directive permissive character of influences; orientation to positive - to negative stimulation; distant - contact relations with subordinates; centralization - decentralization of information flows; presence - lack of feedback from the team. It is noteworthy that the different characteristics of the style are not mutually exclusive, but can be combined in different combinations. Types of leadership receive multidimensional characteristics that determine the effectiveness of the style in specific conditions. The types of attitudes of the leader in relation to subordinates also differ: actively positive, latently negative, functional, neutral, situational, which can change.

The structural-functional approach also includes the works of B.B. Kossov, who singles out the "stages of the manager's work" (in our approach - managerial functions) and his personal characteristics as style variables. Blocks of variables are statistically identified: "social-psychological functions and characteristics of the leader"; "features of the cognitive sphere", "volitional qualities", "efficiency in various activities", "prestige". The method of style self-assessment developed by the author makes it possible to distinguish between effective and ineffective leaders and make appropriate forecasts.

Summarizing the ideas about the essence of the leadership style of a number of authoritative specialists, we can distinguish two independent general factors that determine the style behavior of a manager:

1) Technologies of production activities ("tasks")

2) Interactions with personnel ("relationships"). It is significant that most of the styles described by researchers are localized in the space of the above factors. At the same time, the relative success of different styles is determined by the greater or lesser representation in the perception of the subject and his style of the totality of conditions, requirements, patterns of one of two areas - "production-technological", or object and "interpersonal", or subjective. In the internal psychological plan, this representation of two spheres of human life, or more broadly - two psychological worlds, will be reflected in the manager's professional and psychological competence. It is clear that different people, due to a combination of reasons, will be more or less competent in these independent and completely different in their nature areas. The latter circumstance largely determines both the nature of training programs and the types of interaction of individuals in an organization, taking into account the stages of its development, tasks to be solved, etc.

The two identified general determinants of the behavior of subjects in conflict situations are, in essence, confirmed by the "Thomas-Kilman grid" - orientation towards oneself or others, otherwise - towards one's goals ("tasks") or the interests of others ("relationships").

2. Approaches to the definition and classification of styles

" One-Dimensional Leadership Styles.

Using various sources for analysis, it is possible to determine different classifications of leadership styles. There are two approaches to learning styles: traditional and modern. The traditional approach includes "one-dimensional" management styles. "One-dimensional" styles are characterized by one factor - they include: authoritarian, democratic and liberal-permissive (see appendices, scheme No. 1).

The study of leadership style and the very emergence of this concept are associated with the name of the famous psychologist K. Levin. In the 30s, together with his employees, he conducted experiments and identified three leadership styles that have become classic: authoritarian, democratic, neutral (anarchist). Later, terminological changes were made, and the same leadership styles are referred to as directive, collegial, and permissive (liberal).

It is necessary to begin our consideration of leadership styles by looking at the system of Douglas McGregor. His writings on practical management contain claims that subordinates behave in the way that their leaders force them to behave. A subordinate of any rank may strive to meet the requirements of his superiors and perform the tasks assigned to him. McGregor's research shows that the initial driver of the goal is, first of all, the desires of the leader. If the leader believes that his employees will cope with the task, he subconsciously manages them in such a way as to improve their performance. But if the actions of the leadership are characterized by uncertainty, this leads to reinsurance, and, consequently, slows down development.

McGregor's work helps managers avoid uncertainty and strive to achieve maximum success. He describes the leadership system from two opposing positions, each of which can be taken by the leader in relation to his subordinates. One of the extreme positions is called theory X, and the other theory Y.

Theory H.

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

Every person has a natural reluctance to work, so he tries to avoid the expenditure of labor wherever possible.

People try to avoid direct responsibility, they prefer to be led.

Each person seeks to ensure complete security for himself.

To make each member of the team work towards a common goal, it is necessary to use various methods of coercion, as well as to remind about the possibility of punishment.

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

Theory U.

It describes an ideal situation in which relationships in a team develop as partnerships and the formation of a team takes place in an ideal environment.

This theory is an optimistic view of the work of the organization and includes the following provisions.

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

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

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

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

Leaders who adhere to both theory X and theory Y achieve significant success in their work. But each manager must first evaluate whether, in the conditions in which the organization is located, the application of theory Y, and also what consequences the application of theory X can cause.

There are conditions under which the development of the organization is carried out according to the principles of the theory U. Managers in this case, in conditions of equality, have full support from subordinates and middle managers. At the same time, the leader for the subordinate is a mentor. They may have different positions on other issues, but each other's opinions must be respected. The Y-theory manager allows the subordinate to set deadlines for tasks if he wants to combine different activities.

Concepts according to Theory Y operate most effectively in a situation where all members of the team are adapted to a similar management style. Professions such as a researcher, teacher, physician are most adapted to guide the theory of W.

Low-skilled workers who require constant supervision and control tend to adapt better to Theory X management.

The wide application of Y theory in management work allows to achieve a high level of productivity, develop the creativity of workers, create flexible workplaces, encourage teamwork, and achieve a high level of staff qualification.

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

Conclusion

Studies have shown that in their practical activities, managers do not use one established leadership style. They are forced to constantly adjust it in accordance with changing both internal and external conditions. 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 the 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. Using the models discussed in this paper, which have been studied by various researchers, the manager will be able to analyze, select and evaluate the results of using a particular leadership style in a particular 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.

By studying this topic, I made a huge contribution to my own self-development. I studied a lot of information on this issue. Now I understand more about the psychology of management and am able to apply different management styles in different situations. Studied the modern representation of the classification of management methods.

Bibliography:

1. ????? ? ?????? ???????????: ??????? / ????. ????? ?., ????????? ?., - ?.: ?????????? ???????, 1985.

2. ???????? ?.?. ????? ? ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?.: ???????????? "?????????" 1994

Similar Documents

The concept and essence of leadership style. Factors that shape leadership style. A combination of methods for the development and implementation of management decisions. Comparative analysis of different leadership styles. Improving the leadership style on the example of JSC "VMZ".

term paper, added 12/21/2013


Classification of leadership styles, the essence of "one-dimensional" and "multidimensional" styles. The content of the management grid R. Blake and Mouton. Features of F. Fiedler's effective management model. Conclusions and recommendations in choosing an effective leadership style.

term paper, added 04/01/2013


The concept of leadership style. Correlation between the concepts "style of activity" and "tactics of behavior". The main types of leadership styles: democratic, cooperative, authoritarian, bureaucratic, etc. Manager's attitude to leadership style.

abstract, added 09/26/2010


The concept of leadership style. The study of the features of the use of different leadership styles in various management situations and their impact on the formation of the manager's image. Development of proposals for improving the procedure for managing the organization.

term paper, added 03/18/2015


Essence and types of leadership styles, factors of their formation and methods of implementation. Analysis of management styles used in LLC "UAZ-service". Selection and diagnosis of the applied leadership styles, assessment of the socio-psychological climate of the team.

term paper, added 10/22/2014


General characteristics of the manager's specialty, his inherent character traits and qualities for effective management. A variety of leadership styles and factors influencing their formation. Classification of leadership styles, assessment of advantages and disadvantages.

term paper, added 03/28/2010


The problem of finding effective management of an economic entity. The essence and features of leadership styles and management methods in the organization. Assessment of factors and conditions for the transformation of management styles. Coaching as a new style of leadership in the enterprise.

thesis, added 03/14/2011


Study of the theoretical aspects of styles and types of leadership. Analysis of the features of authoritarian, democratic and liberal leadership styles. Development of recommendations and measures to improve the management culture for the director of OOO "Sportland".

term paper, added 11/06/2013


Classification of leadership styles depending on the specific situation. Situational model of leader's behavior. Factors influencing leadership style. Management style of a superior leader, social background, upbringing, temperament.

abstract, added 12/19/2008


Leadership as a socio-psychological phenomenon, its classification. Types of management in the organization. Determination of the most effective leadership style. Forms and stages of making managerial decisions. Basic principles for improving the effectiveness of leadership.