Bad advice: how not to behave with subordinates. How to behave with subordinates and manage a team

Many managers, especially beginners, ask themselves: why do their subordinates not obey? How to behave with subordinates, and what nuances of management you need to know in order to establish the work of the team, we will try to determine in this article. When a manager manages the work of his department, it is much easier than directing an employee in a multi-level management system. Here you can directly see the result of the work of each of them, and they report directly to their boss. But when several levels are subordinate, the management process becomes much more complicated.

The manager has a problem with how to properly behave with subordinates so that people at all levels work efficiently and efficiently. To do this, it is necessary to control not only the heads of departments, but also managers and employees of lower positions. Sometimes it may depend on them how the company will be able to achieve results. So let's take a look at the most topical issues who confront managers.

1. How not to make a mistake in the number of staff?

When a manager at the beginning of his career is faced with multi-level structures of subordinates, then most often his first goal is to recruit the largest number of key, leading employees. In fact, this is not only a wrong step, but even dangerous. When too many bosses are recruited and the company is subdivided into a large number of departments and divisions, control and attention is scattered, and there is simply not enough time for all the nuances. Managing subordinates implies their constant direction and supervision of actions. And when you manage to allocate five minutes of time for each department, this can cause discord in the work of the entire company.

Therefore, it is enough to recruit a staff of four subordinates, a maximum of eight, who will be under constant supervision. And some departments to combine with each other, so that it is more accessible to control their activities.

2. How to behave with subordinates?

If you are the boss of other managers, then you should take into account the fact that the employees of their departments are used to performing tasks given by their immediate supervisors, and not yours. It is necessary to take into account the hierarchy of a multi-level management structure. If you behave with subordinates at all levels, as a direct superior, you may encounter a number of problems. Even if one of the department managers is not at the workplace, one should not entrust tasks to his subordinates directly.

Let's say an employee didn't do the right job, and you were counting on him. He will not be responsible himself - as he will reasonably explain that he is not used to performing tasks from other managers. And his boss is also not responsible, because he was absent and did not know that any work was needed from his department that he was not aware of.

Consider the best situation if the task is completed correctly and on time. Thus, you give the right to your subordinate to always justify his unfinished work of the department by the fact that he thought that now you will independently control the process and give instructions. At the same time, his subordinate in this case will say that your instructions do not coincide with the requirements of the head of the department, and he, due to the fact that your position is higher, decided to carry out the tasks received only from the main head. In any case, in order to behave correctly with subordinates, it is necessary to strictly observe the subordination and management hierarchy. Otherwise, disciplinary violations, failures in the corporate culture and the organizational system of the company as a whole may occur.

3. How to get out of some situations?

All heads of the department must be given instructions that in case of their absence, departure, being outside the access zone, they must inform their boss. In addition, in such a situation, it is necessary that the head of the department leave one of his employees in the role of deputy, informing all his other employees and senior management about this. The head himself decides who exactly will be the deputy in this case. You can choose one person who will constantly occupy such a position, or you can appoint different employees all the time - it all depends on the organization and relations in the team. Perhaps, by appointing the same deputy, the chief himself risks losing his place.

It happens that the head of the department copes with his duties worse than any of his subordinates. Perhaps he has a higher qualification, level of knowledge or professionalism. But this is not a reason to entrust cases directly, without the participation of the head of the department. Such a policy can lead to disruption of relationships in the team, as well as undermine the reputation of senior management. Behaving properly with subordinates on the basis of appointments and instructions, so if there is a desire to cooperate with another leader, and not the current one, just officially replace him with positions.

When you encounter an appeal from one of your subordinate's employees, it is not advisable to resolve any issues without the presence of his supervisor. Very often, even the most innocent treatment can lead to a conflict situation with the head of the department or somehow compromise him. Suppose a manager asks you to increase the volume of goods of a certain group, while the head of the department indicated to reduce it. But in fact, the reason for the reduction was that in other retail chains it sells much better, and you, without understanding, could undermine the authority of the head of the department and violate the work plan.

4. How to work with newcomers in the management field?

And now your company is expanding and it becomes necessary to create a new division or branch. You have an excellent and reliable person in mind in order to send him to a managerial position, but the minus is that you know him as an excellent performer, but you have never seen him as a boss. It is not known whether he will be able to properly behave with subordinates, manage affairs and clearly build a sequence of tasks. AT new department it is necessary to take not only a manager, but also to recruit a team. On the one hand, it is dangerous to trust a newcomer, and on the other hand, recruiting the staff of those who will work with him is also wrong.

Given that subordinate management it is he who will lead, it is necessary to give him the right to set a team, but at the same time control the process. Be present in the role of a consultant during the interview process with candidates and in parallel with it, keep your notes and draw conclusions. After that, you can compare the results, discuss them, but do not make a decision for the future manager and do not give direct hints. Let the newcomer take his first management decisions independently, but at the same time slightly pushing and directing.

Do not forget that you are coordinating the future manager who will manage subordinates, take important independent solutions and find ways out of the most different situations. It is his duties, as a branch manager, that will include building a work strategy, motivating staff, building a team.

Therefore, it is impossible to act here as with new employees for a regular position, clearly regulating his actions and giving a list of duties and tasks. If you have chosen a person for the position of manager, then for sure he is already strong in qualifications and professional skills, so you should behave with subordinate leaders according to the following scheme:

Do not give direct answers, but direct the train of thought of a person, citing arguments and examples from own experience;
Do not regulate his actions, but let him tell on his own how he sees the strategy for further work;
To adjust the strategy, use leading questions, but not direct corrections;
Of course, control will be needed, but in the form of consultations and discussions, not orders and instructions. An unmotivated employee who is not allowed to make his own decisions and put in a position just like that will never show good results;
Be at meetings, conferences, which the newcomer holds, but do not correct his actions in the team, but in private you can discuss something;
Do not criticize, but nonetheless suggest various improvement techniques as a consultant.

Motivational methods are divided into different classes. For example, there is a series natural conditions labor, which are also motivators. This can be said about the level of wages, working conditions, paid leave, medical insurance.

But there is not only, but also demotivation, which must be taken into account. In order to describe this term, it is better to consider it with an example. For example, a standard situation in the office, when a computer program went wrong in one of the departments, because of which the accountant mistakenly calculated all employees' salaries without interest. The head of the department considered that in this way he was pointed to his bad job or not in demand, and did not dare to talk with the chief boss. But at the same time, all employees in the department began to show lower rates, believing that now they are not charged interest on the transaction. And the boss begins to wonder why sometimes the subordinate does not obey, the indicators fall, not even knowing about the system failure.

Another situation is even simpler: all employees are used to the fact that at lunchtime they can drink coffee from a coffee machine and use the kitchen, but the kitchen room was needed to store equipment and it was closed. fell. Because an unmotivated employee works poorly, and a demotivated one works worse than before, which should not be forgotten.

But, given that we are talking about how important staff motivation is, we turn directly to the issue of motivating subordinate managers. Here, most likely, corporate evenings, bonuses and awards are no longer so relevant, as they are perceived as natural factors. But team events perfectly motivate managers. What exactly:

Management of subordinate managers on the basis of the formation of their competition between departments. This encourages each manager to show that his team is better, it forms the corporate spirit. The winner can be awarded and highlighted during the event;
In the process of team events, managers share experiences, discuss each other's achievements and shortcomings;
The chief manager has the opportunity to communicate, correct the employees of the departments, while not risking the authority of their immediate superiors;
And employees, in turn, can communicate with the main management, while not risking negative feedback from their direct supervisor, since the whole team is together.

How to behave with subordinates at team events, and how to organize them - the choice of the leader, but here are a few examples that experts offer:

A small conference attended by managers of all levels, which ends with a discussion - a great way to discuss important points;
Training, advanced training programs;
Sport competitions;
Joint excursion trips;
A corporate trip to a restaurant or a trip to a recreation center.

In order to organize such meetings, you do not need to invest too much a large sum, but they will really help to unite the team and raise the team spirit. How the program will be set, and what impressions it will leave with subordinates, almost completely depends on the main leadership, so here it is necessary to clearly control the policy of one's behavior. How to behave with subordinates to the chief boss:

Do not refuse to participate in a variety of team games and events: run a race, consume alcohol in moderation, take pictures with subordinates;
Present an excellent, bright report at the conference;
Distribute your time evenly so as to pay attention to all employees;
In every possible way show your satisfaction and joy from this event;
Do not refuse to answer the questions of any of the employees, but at the same time control so as not to run into provocative;
Communicate more with employees of lower levels, so that they also feel their importance in the overall life of the company. Do not gather a company of managers, abstracting from the rest. In addition, you can find the information you need in a relaxed atmosphere.

6. Workflow control.

Of course, staff motivation is important, but do not forget that employees need to be controlled. Moreover, if you are not a source of instructions and instructions for the company's employees, and they have their own manager, this does not mean that you should not control their work. Certainly, most yet the one who leads direct control subordinates, but there are still some nuances. They are necessary in order to:

Thus, monitor the performance of the head of the department;
Avoid arbitrary actions on the part of the head of the department, find out if the subordinate does not obey, does not follow the orders of his superior or does not work well;
Expand your zone of control, but at the same time not undermine the bosses, due to the fact that you do not indicate directly to subordinates, but simply audit to get the full picture.

What is the best way to exercise such control?

This is either the presence at meetings, meetings of the department in the person of an external observer;
Or the use of written reports for the purpose of debriefing.

We should not forget that you do not have enough time for all the reports, and you will not have time to come to every branch to come to the meeting. Therefore, try to make the verification of the work of this or that employee spontaneous and unpredictable, by random selection. With this approach, none of the subordinates at all levels will assume that you have loved and disliked employees or departments. But at the same time, all subordinates will be ready for the test at any moment, knowing that it is spontaneous, so they will not relax and reduce work efficiency. This kind of motivation is constantly in good shape, because an unmotivated employee is unlikely to bring much benefit to the company.

The main difference from the traditional style here lies in the division of responsibilities of the manager. The matrix style involves the control of each of the bosses over how all subordinates perform a particular job. This style can allow for each employee to have four supervisors. On the one hand, the motivation of the staff is much lower, but on the other hand, each stage of their work is subject to strict control by a professional. It is acceptable to use the matrix style of management, but within reasonable limits. So what are the positives and negatives:

Arguments for:

All duties assigned to each employee are clearly separated;
Managers have a narrower profile, hence a high level of professionalism in a particular area;
Complex official duties grouped in a separate organizational structure;

Arguments against:

The subordinate does not obey any one boss, which allows him to influence several representatives of the leadership;
Given the interconnectedness of all links unified system organizations, inconsistencies and conflicts between the tasks of different managers are likely;
The level of control is much lower.

8. Let's summarize.

The management system for superiors differs significantly from the personnel management system;
The effectiveness of management management directly depends on the number of managers: the fewer there are, the better management is moving forward;
There are cardinal differences in the training of ordinary specialists and beginners in managerial positions;
The best motivation for managers is team events;
Supervision of the work of department employees should be spontaneous and impartial;
The matrix style is useful if you need to highlight the most complex structure in the work of the organization;
We answer the question: what to do if the subordinate does not obey? How to behave with subordinates, not every manager masters right away, so it is necessary to experiment, study and master the most various ways influence on employees.

) at the last job in the magazine there were constant clashes with the director of the photo service. “It is impossible to develop any kind of strategy in dealing with a person who does nothing in the workplace and who has in his blood to pour mud on everything that he encounters, without stepping on the throat of his own opinion rushing out,” she is sure.

Sveta recalls that the "difficult" boss, firstly, had a very loud voice, and secondly, he was very fond of talking - it was impossible to shout down, get through to him. “I had to just hush up conversations, turning purple with indignation,” she says. “You just have to ignore such people and pretend that you are listening to music. referring to emergency." Sveta never managed to get along with the conflicting boss: as a result of clashes with him, she was fired.

For those who don't want to lose their jobs because of "difficult" colleagues, Timesonline offers 10 behavioral tips that can help you not only get along with a difficult person, but also change your attitude towards him internally.

1. Look deeper

“People don’t come to work on purpose to do their job as badly as possible and ruin your life,” says Matt Brown, director of the YSC consulting company. “You need to try to understand the root of the problem. That is, to understand what drives a person, what are his motives, why He's not at his best right now."

2. Change the way you think

If you enter into a conversation thinking of the other person as a difficult person, you immediately become defensive, which can create tension between you, and this will not help the cause. "Change your angle of view," says CEO company Inspiring Potential Marielena Sabatier. “Maybe this person is not at all difficult, but simply not like you.”

3. Change your actions

"When we're dealing with problem colleagues, it's easier to get them to understand by focusing on understanding what they need from us," says Gareth English, senior consultant at OPP. ?" However, the bottom line is that they are your problem, and if you want to solve it, the most effective method to do so is to take responsibility for the change. Often the solution is to first change something about your behavior."

4. Don't put off solving the problem

The longer you ignore a problem, the more intractable it becomes. Often a simple conversation can be enough to resolve the issue on the spot. "If you're in conflict with someone who's in control, you just need to get to the bottom of it," says Brown.

5. Communicate at their level

Most people react to difficult situation with their usual communication patterns, only intensifying the degree. "It's better to try to identify how your communication style differs from theirs and try to adapt it accordingly," says English.

6. If you have bad news to tell, prepare for the worst.

Tell a difficult person bad news- always an unpleasant occupation. However, negative side effects can be smoothed out with the help of directness in their actions. You need to remove all the emotional part and focus on the main thing.

7. Don't reward bad behavior

Stop solving other people's problems, or you will have to do it again and again. And do not let yourself be drawn into arguments by people who are trying to attract attention in this way. Even if you win this fight, you will lose the battle.

8. Be consistent and clear

If the problem is in the person's behavior, say what he needs to change in it. If a colleague continues to display bad behavior, say so directly and immediately - do not wait for the next formal audience.

9. Focus on goals, not methods

Problems can arise when the discussion starts to revolve around ways to do something rather than what should be done. You must have a clear idea of ​​what you want to achieve. Focus on the purpose of the conversation, not on getting things your way.

10. Some things can't be fixed.

"Maybe the person is behaving this way because the organization doesn't suit them," says Williams. In some situations, for example, when it comes to aggression, there are practically no ways to resist a "difficult" person. And there can be only one solution here - to leave yourself or (if it is in your competence) to fire your "difficult" colleague.

Fall in love!

However, assistant photo editor Olga has one last (and wonderful) way to get along with a difficult colleague. “If a person is difficult to communicate, I fall in love with him, this is not at all difficult to do, because everyone has good and bad qualities,” she says. “You need to evaluate a person in a complex and understand how extraordinary and amazing he is. difficulties are not difficulties, but joys :) Every moment of communication gives pleasure and happiness, and when people see what happiness they bring you, they change for the better!"

» The art of ordering

© Viktor Sorochenko

The art of ordering.
How to manage subordinates

Long gone are the days when subordinates were ready to endure all the nit-picking and whims of their boss because of the danger of being on the street. Today, the leader is increasingly dealing not with the uncomplaining "gray mass", but with ambitious and ambitious employees who know their own worth. By the level of intelligence, education or professional experience, and in general, as a person, as a person, a subordinate can in no way be inferior to his boss. And often surpass it in all these parameters. Threats, claims from the authorities and the prospect of dismissal do not frighten him at all. A highly qualified specialist is so confident in his abilities and professional viability that, on occasion, he can easily “slam the door” and leave you to work for another company. Therefore, experienced leaders today are interested, first of all, in soft and conflict-free management methods. The creation of a non-aggressive, non-offensive atmosphere creates a favorable psychological climate of mutual trust and cooperation. Methods of gentle "stroking" are much better stimulating work than insults and punishments.

The reason for the failure of young leaders is not necessarily due to low professional qualifications and lack of knowledge, psychologists say. Much more often, newly-minted bosses fail because of the inability to properly build relationships with subordinates. Not the last role in this is played by the ability to order. This is an art that every leader needs to master.

Why are orders not being followed?

The success of any organization largely depends on the clear and coordinated execution of the orders of the leadership. And the higher managerial link, the more expensive the non-execution or incorrect execution of orders. The average leader issues dozens or even hundreds of orders per day. Most of them, at first glance, are so obvious that they do not require special efforts for their understanding and implementation. Therefore, managers rarely think about the value that the correct formulation of their requirements has. And absolutely in vain! What mistakes can the leadership make when formulating orders? What should be taken into account when issuing orders?

There are several reasons for non-execution or poor execution of orders. The first is a simple misunderstanding of your order. It just seems like we all speak the same language. In fact, different people can perceive the same words in completely different ways. There are a number of conditions that determine whether subordinates will understand the essence of your order:

• unity of the professional language,
• intelligence level,
• the level of education,
• logical presentation,
• concentration of attention (because often the subordinate listens to the boss, but does not hear him, but “hovers in the clouds”, because his mind is blocked by his thoughts)
• and many others

The most common reason for misunderstanding is non-specific orders. Unfortunately, many leaders are like characters from a children's fairy tale, constantly demanding from subordinates something like: "Go there - I don't know where, bring that - I don't know what." The result is the same. Leaders often confuse an order (which is always specific: “dig from the fence to lunch…”) with an abstract call (“work efficiently…”). The function of the first is administrative and incentive, and the second is evaluative and motivational.

However, understanding the order is not the most important thing. Experienced leaders know that subordinates can understand very well what the boss wants from them. It's just that they don't always do it. Often they just pretend that they don't understand, they play "not understanding". You can talk about the reasons for a long time. Most often, the problem lies at the level of interpersonal likes/dislikes.

Hence follows the second reason for the failure to comply with orders - the non-acceptance by the subordinate of the requirements of the leader (and the leader himself as a person). After all, understanding is not the same as accepting. The point is usually not a lack of understanding (which many leaders complain about), but to achieve agreement between the subordinate and the position of the boss.

Non-acceptance can take various forms: from publicly challenging the received order to covert sabotage. Here, leaders often make a big mistake: they say “Now I will prove to you ...” and begin to pour out a stream of arguments on the head of a subordinate. And the point is not at all to convince a person of the benefit for the cause! Rejection usually does not occur because the employee misunderstood something or does not see practical benefits for the organization. First of all, he does not see benefits for himself personally! It is important to understand that the staff, for the most part, has completely different goals and objectives: they did not come to do a BUSINESS, but somehow work out their salary. It's NOT THEIR FIRM!

Be sure to find out why the subordinate does not accept your point of view. What is behind the rejection? Disagreement with your views on doing business or purely “selfish” interest and ambitions of a particular employee, no matter how beautiful arguments they are masked (“I care about the good of the organization”, etc.)? Disagreement with management methods or personal dislike for the boss? Hence the conclusion: it is necessary to act not on external manifestations(“does not understand anything ...”), but on an internal reason.

It should be remembered that conflicts between a leader and a subordinate are not so much open as hidden, veiled. The reasons are clear - after all, not everyone will dare to openly oppose the boss. And most often they arise just when issuing orders. After all, it is at this stage of managerial communication that the leader most intrudes into the privacy of another person, i.e. actively coerces to any actions that may radically contradict his views, beliefs, life values.

A few secrets

To increase the effectiveness of orders, psychologists advise sticking to several simple rules. They can be productively used in managerial practice at the level of interpersonal contacts. First, to raise the image of the leader. Secondly, to mitigate the form of coercion, which, alas, no boss can do without. Thirdly, to eliminate contradictions between the personal desires of subordinates and the goals of the organization.

1. Accounting for the information fund of the communication partner

All words addressed to him, a person correlates with his own information dictionary, formed on the basis of a unique life experience. It contains interpretations of very many terms. In order to avoid misunderstanding, the boss always needs to take into account the intelligence of the subordinate, the level of education (a person graduated from grade 5 or university) and adjust his speech accordingly.

2. One meaning

The order should not carry irony or double meaning. Moreover, it should not contain abstract metaphors and other artistic images that can be perceived differently by different people. The order must be as specific as possible, excluding double interpretation. Remember the old adage: "If something can be misunderstood, it is bound to be misunderstood."

3. Don't personalize

It is not necessary to say in a peremptory tone "I want ...", "I need ...", "I said ...", because in the mind of the subordinate there is immediately a transformation of "I want ..." into "Oh, you see, he wants...". Emotional rejection occurs. The leader involuntarily translates the official order into the plane of interpersonal relations. And the personal desire of the boss may not be fulfilled, and if it is done, then purely formally, somehow. The following options are more preferable: “This is necessary for our company ...”, “It would be better if you ...”, “It is necessary that we do not have ...”. Thus, the requirements are not related to the whim of the big boss, but to the needs and goals of the organization.

4. Remember about intonation!

It happens that the leader says quite the right things, but does it very rudely, aggressively, in a form that is insulting to the employee. This includes hurtful jokes about a subordinate accompanying an order, and ironic remarks, and sarcastic smiles, and a politely dismissive tone of orders, and contemptuous notes in the boss's voice ... The process of giving orders is often used as an extra reason to show one's superiority. In this way, some leaders try to solve their own psychological problems at the expense of their subordinates.

Understanding an order given in this form is always difficult. All the attention of the subordinate is concentrated not on the essence of the order, but on the attitude towards his personality. Immediately there is a protective emotional reaction, which blocks the analyzer activity of the brain, and the words are almost not recognized. Understanding of the order is blocked. This is how Mother Nature made us all. human brain can simultaneously work either with logic or with emotions. Moreover, the emerging negative emotions always block the logic of thinking!

It is important that the order fulfills its function and at the same time does not psychologically injure the employee, is not offensive or offensive. Gone are the days when subordinates were ready to endure all the tricks of the authorities because of the threat of being on the street! It's in the second half of the 90s qualified specialists I was scared to death by the specter of unemployment. Today, the leader is increasingly dealing not with the uncomplaining "gray mass", but with ambitious, ambitious, self-aware employees. In terms of the level of intelligence, education or professional experience, and in general, as a person, as a person, a subordinate can in no way be inferior to the leader, and often surpasses him in all respects. Threats from the authorities and the prospect of dismissal do not frighten them at all. Therefore, an experienced leader is interested, first of all, in soft methods management, sparing the pride of the subordinate. The creation of a non-aggressive, non-offensive atmosphere creates a favorable psychological climate of mutual trust and cooperation.

We should also not forget that an employee offended by the boss's too harsh behavior may try to take revenge. For example, not so long ago, an employee of a large Russian pharmaceutical company, outraged by the boorish habits of his boss, did not find anything better as a revenge than to inform the interested authorities about the “peculiarities of work” of his company. The result is a trial with all the consequences. Of course, no one is immune from "snitches", but to behave with those who have access to confidential information, the leader should still be careful not to provoke a “setup”.

5. No negativity!

The order should not begin with negative words, so as not to form a negative attitude in the subordinate even before he has learned its content. Perception should not take place against a negative emotional background (see the previous paragraph). For the same reason, it is impossible to combine issuing an order with criticism, to speak simultaneously about the essence of the work ahead and about the personal or professional shortcomings of the employee. When formulating orders, critical "seasonings" of the type - "Do this, but not like last time ..." should be avoided.

6. The rule "Proper name"

Addressing a subordinate by name and patronymic is always preferable to faceless: “Hey you, how are you ...”. For a person there are no more pleasant sounds than the sounds of his name, the ancients claimed. Addressing a person by name emphasizes respect for his personality, implicitly gives rise to a sense of satisfaction, positive emotions (which, by the way, are not always realized) and, as a result, causes an arrangement to a source of positive emotions. Psychologists have found that, other things being equal, subordinates more easily accept the orders of the leader to whom they have a positive attitude and much more often reject (dispute) the demands of the one to whom they feel antipathy.

7. Use of compliments

If a subordinate is highly negative, leaders may try to reduce resistance by giving praise or compliments early in the conversation. The most effective compliment is a compliment in the background of a small anti-compliment to yourself (especially with those employees who supposedly dislike their boss). Example: “How do you manage to solve these issues so quickly? I spent two hours yesterday, and you settled everything in ten minutes. Please do more…” Naturally, each employee is pleased to look better in a particular issue than his boss. Especially if the boss himself emphasizes this. This satisfies the human need for recognition.

Let me remind you that a LITTLE exaggeration of the real-life virtues that the interlocutor sees or wants to see in himself is considered a compliment. This compliment is different from rude flattery, which is much more likely to be rejected. All people love praise. This satisfies their need for positive emotions. And positive emotions, as already mentioned, give rise to a disposition towards their source. There is a suggestion effect.

Unfortunately, in our country there is a tradition of rather harsh treatment of subordinates. Many managers do not like to praise an employee, and even more so publicly. They are afraid to "overpraise", "spoil". Much more often, our bosses resort to goading and intimidation, trying to “motivate” the staff in such a simple way. At the same time, it has long been established that the methods of soft “stroking” stimulate labor much better than insults and punishments.

8. "Knight's move"

If passive or active resistance to the order is expected, it is better not to give the order "on the forehead", but to use a cunning detour: first ask the subordinate for advice. Something like "What do you think...?" etc. When someone on a higher hierarchical level is consulted with a person, this always evokes a feeling of self-respect, which, naturally, is accompanied by positive emotions, which, by the law of association, are associated with their source. This tactic guarantees the leader the loyalty and gratitude of the employee. But it is far from possible to practice such a method with everyone, and it loses its power of influence over time. There are people who do not appreciate generous gestures. They can take the “human” attitude towards them for the weakness of the leader and the opportunity to “sit on his head”.

9. Interrogative form

In most cases, subordinates are best perceived by the interrogative form of the order. Everyone understands that the request of the boss is a veiled order, however, with such a form it is psychologically more difficult to refuse: “Dear V.V., could you tomorrow ...?”, “Would you agree ...?”, “Do you have You the opportunity...?”

10. Rule of self-interest

The order will be executed much more effectively if the subordinate sees in it not only a benefit for the organization, but also a benefit for himself personally. When a person works without personal interest, he does only as much as necessary (for a “C grade”) in order to formally satisfy the requirements of his superiors.

Aerobatics

In the best way, an employee performs what he himself considers necessary, and not what his superiors tell him (as you know, this does not always coincide). Therefore, it is desirable that the subordinate himself come to a decision that meets the intent of the leader. The task of the latter is to push the employee to independent actions, to help him do it on his own. correct conclusions. Ideally, the leader should not order, but create a situation in which the subordinate himself comes to the desired decision. This is a specific style of management - in a special way organized process communication between the leader and his subordinates. In the West, this style is currently very popular. Employee management is built in such a way that they actually act independently, while remaining under the supervision of a mentor manager. Such observation is included in the daily business conversation managers and subordinates: consulting during meetings, negotiations, current control over the performance of their duties by employees, etc.

Naturally, this requires a good knowledge of psychology, motivation of subordinates. This is real art top class leadership of people who in this case feel completely independent. The trust that they feel, demonstrating respect for subordinates is the best motivation for their effective work. And they are more willing to go to work, more proactive and satisfied with their work.

Unfortunately, with the current level of development of managerial and business culture in our country, this style of leadership is perceived only as science fiction. Alas. Therefore, in our conditions, the creation of desired situations can be carried out, for example, by simply asking a chain of questions that allow us to lead the interlocutor to the desired solution. The logic of sequentially asked questions is such that after each answer, the number of degrees of freedom of the respondent narrows, because, answering each question, a person determines his position, becomes a prisoner of previous answers.

For example, you need to give a task to a negligent employee who (this is known from experience) will definitely begin to resent, prove that this is not part of his duties, etc. Here is a dialogue option:

Chief: "Of course, you are familiar with the job description, which outlines your job duties?"
Subordinate: "M-m-yes, of course."
Operations: “In that case, should you remember well the fifth paragraph of the fourth section of the second?”
Subordinate: “Uh, what is it?”
Chief: “This item is directly addressed to you: you need to do ...” (an order is given and a deadline is determined).

A negligent subordinate, of course, is not familiar with the job description, and if he ever read it, he has long forgotten the contents. But he will not dare to say “no” to the boss. And by saying "yes", he cuts off his escape routes.

The target of influence can also be various personal qualities of a subordinate: ambition, ambition, the desire to prove one's exclusivity, temperament and character, etc. The author of these lines once witnessed a situation when the head of a department told his employee: “Vasily Ignatievich, you need to complete one task. I will not hide, this is a very difficult task. Therefore, you, obviously, cannot afford it (a transparent hint: they say, not with your qualifications ...). What do you think, which of your colleagues can be entrusted with it? An ambitious and ambitious employee who loves to contradict his boss in everything and looks for an opportunity to show that he should have been appointed boss, and not the current one, immediately flashes:

From what? I can do it too!
- Are you joking?
- No, I'm not kidding. I know how to get things done quickly!
- Really?
- Exactly!
- Blimey! Fantasy! (boss pretends to be genuinely surprised)
- In 3 days I will bring you the result!
- You're just great! Well, thank you! A weight has been lifted from my soul! Report back in 3 days! etc.

To “fill up” such a case means to sign one’s complete professional insolvency, therefore, the employee will approach the fulfillment of this task much more responsibly than to the usual order of the management, lowered “from above”.

Conclusion. What can you learn from Japanese samurai?

In ancient times, Japanese samurai improved their martial arts by constantly performing special exercises. The possession of a samurai sword was divided into separate techniques, which were carefully practiced until mastery was achieved: perfection, automatism, ease and ease of execution.

The art of managing people also requires constant training. The ability to order lies in the dosed and differentiated use of the techniques listed above. It is easy to understand (including with the help of this article) what the necessary skills are. But understanding does not mean mastering skills! Knowing and being able are not the same thing! Ideas can easily be learned today and forgotten tomorrow. Only by adding patience and practice can they be mastered. Remember: the skill of a samurai requires that every sword technique be honed to perfection!

In Bernard Shaw's play Pygmalion, Eliza Doolittle explains: correct speech etc.), the difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how they behave, but how they are treated. To Professor Higgins I will always be a flower girl, because he treats me like a flower girl, and always will; but I know I can be a lady with you because you treat me and always will treat me like a lady.”

Some managers always treat their subordinates in such a way that they do an excellent job. But more often than not, managers, like Professor Higgins, though unintentionally, treat their subordinates in such a way that they perform worse than they could, based on their abilities. The manner in which a leader treats subordinates is subtly determined by what he expects from them. If a manager expects a lot from his subordinates, their performance is likely to be excellent. If the manager's level of expectations for subordinates is low, then they are more likely to perform poorly. Approximately as if there was a law of improvement or deterioration of production indicators for subordinates, depending on the expectations of the leader.

Physicians and behavioral scientists have long recognized that one person's expectations of another strong impact on the behavior of the latter; teachers have recently agreed with this. But the importance of the leader's expectations regarding the performance of individual or collective work by subordinates is still not really understood. We have documented this phenomenon by examining many case studies on behalf of large industrial enterprises over the past decade. These cases, along with other evidence gleaned from scientific research, show that:

the expectations of managers in relation to subordinates and the manner in which they are treated to a large extent determine the production indicators of subordinates and their career growth;

a characteristic distinguishing feature of the best leaders is the tendency to have a high level of expectations regarding the work of subordinates, which they justify;

less successful managers are unable to develop such a propensity in themselves, and as a result, their subordinates work less efficiently;

subordinates most often do what they think is expected of them.

The influence of one person's expectations of another on the behavior of the latter is by no means a discovery in business. More than half a century ago, Albert Moll, based on his clinical experience, concluded that people tend to behave in the way they think they are expected to. The phenomenon of self-fulfilling prophecies studied by him in recent times has attracted great scientific interest. For example:

In a series of scientific experiments, Robert Rosenthal of Harvard University has demonstrated that "a teacher's expectations of a student's intellectual capacity often play the role of a self-fulfilling prophecy in that student's education."

In an experiment as part of the Headstart summer program for 60 preschoolers, the performance of students in two groups was compared. Teachers of the first of these tended to expect relatively slow progress in learning from their students. In the second group, teachers believed that their students had excellent intellectual data and learning abilities. The students of the second group learned much faster.

In addition, physicians have long understood that the expectations of a therapist or psychiatrist can have a huge impact on the physical or mental state of the patient. The way patients and doctors think, especially if their expectations are the same, can largely determine the results of treatment. For example, after a doctor's pessimistic prognosis, the patient's condition often worsens dramatically. It is also well known that the effectiveness of a new drug or a new treatment method depends largely on the expectations of doctors (what medical workers called the placebo effect).

"Planning for Failure" Scheme

If leaders make it clear to the people who work for them that they are “super employees,” the latter try to live up to this idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthemselves and do what they think the leaders expect from them. But if low-performing agents are treated by their managers as having "no chance" of success, these negative expectations also turn into self-fulfilling prophecies of managers.

Unsuccessful sales people have serious difficulties in maintaining self-confidence and high self-esteem. Responding to low expectations of managers, they usually try to prevent further infringement of their ego, avoiding situations that could lead to even more failure. They either reduce the number commercial inquiries, or try to avoid closing deals if it could lead to another painful failure, and sometimes they do both at the same time. Low expectations and hurt egos shape them into a behavior that increases the likelihood of failure, in line with the expectations of management.

Managers cannot prevent the adverse impact of low expectations on the performance of subordinates by simply hiding their feelings from them. If they assume in advance that subordinates will perform poorly, they are practically unable to disguise their expectations, because this information is usually transmitted unintentionally, without any conscious action on their part.

In fact, leaders often give a clear signal just when they think they have reduced communication to a minimum. For example, if a leader does not speak much, becomes cold and uncommunicative with a subordinate, this usually serves as a sign that he is dissatisfied with him or is generally sure that it is impossible to rely on him in terms of work. In many cases, silence conveys a negative attitude even more effectively than an outspoken rebuke. The most important information regarding the boss's expectations is not expressed in what exactly and how much the boss says, but rather in the style of his behavior towards subordinates. The indifferent and detached demeanor of the leader most often informs subordinates of low expectations for them and indeed causes a deterioration in performance.

Before managers' expectations can be translated into improved performance for subordinates, they must be tested by reality. To turn into “self-fulfilling prophecies,” these expectations must take on some clearer form than just positive thinking and general trust in subordinates (although for other purposes, these concepts themselves can be quite useful). Subordinates will not be motivated to achieve more high level performance if they do not consider their boss's high expectations realistic and achievable. If they are encouraged to strive for a sky-high goal, they eventually stop such attempts and are content with results below what they are able to achieve. This confirms the experience of one large electrical equipment company: its management found that if productivity standards are too high, then production actually decreases, because workers simply stop trying to meet them. In other words, the practice of “hanging the carrot a little higher than the donkey can reach,” as many managers confirm, is not the best motivational technique.

The degree of motivation and effort increases until the expectation of success reaches 50%, then the decline begins, even if the expectations continue to increase. If the goal is perceived as achievable without any effort or practically unattainable, this does not cause motivation and a positive reaction.

In addition, if subordinates cannot meet the expectations of managers close to their own level of aspiration, they begin to lower the bar of their work goals and be guided by lower standards. At the same time, production indicators will gradually begin to fall, and a negative attitude towards work or towards this species activities. Therefore, it is not surprising that if subordinates cannot meet the unrealistically high expectations of their superiors, the dropout rate, voluntary or involuntary, increases.

The Secret of Efficiency

The mind of an excellent leader contains something that is missing in the minds of less effective leaders. If great leaders are able to consistently set high expectations for the work of their subordinates and they meet them, then weak leaders fail to achieve similar effect. What is the reason?

The answer probably lies in the fact that the best leaders are more confident than their less effective counterparts in their ability to develop the talents of their subordinates. Contrary to other possible assumptions, the high expectations of the best leaders are based primarily on what they think about themselves, that is, about their own ability to select, train and motivate their subordinates. And what managers think about themselves subtly influences how they treat subordinates, how they expect and treat them. If a manager is confident in his ability to develop the talents and motivation of his subordinates, encouraging them to achieve high performance, he will expect a lot from them and, communicating with them, he will be sure that his expectations will be met. If he doubts his ability to stimulate subordinates, he will expect less success from them and treat them with less confidence.

To put the same thing in a slightly different way, the best managers' own successes and confidence in their abilities make them more likely to form high expectations of their subordinates. As a result, their subordinates perceive these expectations as realistic and persistently try to achieve the expected performance.

Leadership expectations affect young people the most magically. For mature subordinates who already have considerable experience, their self-image gradually “hardens”, and they begin to look at themselves, so to speak, through their track record. Their own aspirations and the expectations of their superiors are increasingly determined by the "reality" of their past performance. Therefore, it becomes increasingly difficult for both themselves and their leaders to set mutual high expectations, unless they have achieved outstanding results in the past.

The same stereotypes of behavior also take place in schools. Rosenthal's experiments with "self-fulfilling prophecies" in education clearly demonstrate that teachers' expectations have a stronger effect on children's intellectual growth. younger age than older kids. In the lower grades, especially in the first and second grades, the influence of teachers' expectations on children is extremely high. In high school, teachers' predictions do not seem to have a very strong effect on children's intellectual development, but they do affect their motivation and attitudes towards school. Although such a decrease in the impact of teachers' expectations on children is difficult to fully explain. It is reasonable to conclude that younger children are more obedient, they do not have a final definition of their abilities and reputation in the classroom. As they age, especially if students are placed in ability or interest groups, as is now often done in mainstream schools, their belief in their own intellectual ability and teachers' expectations of them are beginning to take hold and are less and less influenced by outsiders.

Pledge of future achievements

The first years of work, when young people are easily influenced by the expectations of leaders, are critical to determining their future performance and career development. This is evidenced by the results of a study conducted at AT&T.

Burlew and Hall found that it was the company's initial expectations of the 49 college graduates hired as managers that greatest influence on the performance of their subsequent work and future successes. The researchers concluded that the relationship between the positive that the company expects from its employee in the first year, and the contribution of this employee to the company over the next five years, "is too obvious to be ignored."

Later, Burlew and Hall also followed the careers of 18 graduates who were accepted as interns in another AT&T operations division. Here again, they found a strong relationship between expectations for young employees and their performance in the first year, on the one hand, and performance in subsequent years and career advancement, on the other.

“Something important happens in the first year ...,” Berlu and Hall state. - Striving to meet the high expectations of the company during the crucial first year of operation leads to the formation of a positive attitude towards work and high standards; these attitudes and standards, in turn, lead first of all to high quality work, which further strengthens them, and later contributes to a brilliant career. It also follows that a new manager who is successful in one responsible job will be given an even more demanding task, and his contribution to the company will increase as he responds to the company's growing expectations of him. The key factor... understanding that the first year is the most important period of training, the time when the trainee has a unique willingness to develop and change in the direction that meets the company's expectations.

A young man's first supervisor is likely to have the greatest impact on his career. If the manager is unable or unwilling to develop in young employees the skills necessary for effective work, they form low personal standards compared to their capabilities. The same thing happens with self-esteem, they develop a negative attitude towards work, their company and, most likely, their entire career in business. Since with such a first leader, the chances of successful promotion through the ranks of young employees are sharply reduced, if there are ambitious aspirations, they will leave for other places in the hope of finding better opportunities for themselves. Conversely, if the first manager helps newcomers to reach their maximum potential, he thereby lays the foundation for their future successful career.

To confirm the importance of the role of the first boss in shaping the personality of a manager, let us turn to sales, because achievements in this area are easier to measure than in most other areas. Consider the following examples:

In a study of the career paths of 100 insurance agents who started under very strong or very weak bosses, the Life Insurance Management Association found that employees with average commercial ability test scores who started under good managers were almost five times higher than similar employees who started under a weak boss, and employees with excellent commercial skills who worked under good managers were twice as likely to succeed as those who fell under a weak boss.

The Metropolitan Insurance Company found in 1960 that the difference in productivity among novice insurance agents of roughly equal commercial ability could be explained solely by differences in the ability of the heads of the offices to which they were assigned. It turned out that agents whose performance was high, compared to the test scores for their abilities, worked only in offices that, according to their performance indicators, belonged to the top third of the company's offices. Conversely, those agents whose performance, based on their test scores, was low, as a rule, worked in the least efficient offices. After analyzing all the factors that could explain these differences, the company's specialists came to the conclusion that the differences in the performance of new agents are primarily due to differences in the level of training and leadership between local managers.

A study I did of the performance of car salespeople at Ford's New England locations showed that the best salespeople were concentrated in the few departments that were operating at the highest efficiency. For example, 10 of the top 15 salespeople in New England worked in three branches (for a total of about two hundred), and five of these 15 employees worked in the same, very successful one. Of these, four had previously worked for other dealers without being distinguished by their commercial achievements. There is no doubt that the ability to train and motivate subordinates in the leaders of the best dealerships plays a decisive role.

Training of young employees

Noting that, according to a study conducted at AT&T, "a company's initial performance expectations (with real accountability) for an employee shape subsequent expectations for that employee and their behavior," R. J. Walters, Jr. at AT&T, argues that "the first bosses of newly hired graduates should be the best managers in the company." Unfortunately, in most companies the practice is just the opposite.

Graduated newcomers rarely work under the direct supervision of experienced middle-level managers or senior company executives. Usually their immediate superiors are managers lower level, as a rule, having minimal experience and working with the least efficiency. Of course, there are exceptions, but usually lower-level managers are either “old pros” incapable of more responsible work, or young employees at the stage of transition from performers to managers. These managers often lack the knowledge and skills necessary to develop the business abilities of their subordinates. As a result, many graduates start their careers in business under the worst possible circumstances. Seeing that their abilities are not developed and used, they naturally very soon begin to have a negative attitude towards their work, their employers and their careers in business.

Although most senior leaders have not yet realized this, the most important challenge for the industry is to stop this practice of "underdevelopment and underutilization", inefficient management and inefficient use of its most valuable resource: the organizational and professional talents of the young.

For top managers in industry concerned with the performance of their enterprises and the careers of young employees, the core of the problem is clear: there is a need to accelerate the training of managers who can treat their subordinates in a way that will lead them to high performance and ensure their career ambitions are met. Managers not only shape subordinates' expectations and ideas about effective work but also affect their attitude to their work and to themselves. If the manager's qualifications are low, he leaves a kind of scars on the careers of young employees, deeply hurts their self-esteem and diminishes their self-image as a person.

If the leader is highly qualified and the level of his expectations in relation to subordinates is also high, the self-confidence of subordinates grows, their abilities develop, and their effectiveness will be high. The leader acts as a Pygmalion much more often than he himself realizes.

retrospective commentary

When I described the “self-fulfilling prophecy” phenomenon of leaders 19 years ago, it was something of a mystery. At that time, the powerful influence of superiors' expectations on the development, motivation, and performance of their subordinates was not yet widely recognized. However, now the "Pygmalion effect" is already well known.

Recent research has confirmed that effective leaders have the ability to set high performance expectations for subordinates that they meet. Therefore, every manager must understand how the Pygmalion effect works.

What managers think about themselves and their abilities has a direct bearing on the effectiveness of their self-fulfilling prophecies. Our study of effective leaders has made it clear that the key factor... is what we call... positive self-esteem... The power of positive self-esteem seems to be in building a sense of trust and high expectations in others. , which is very reminiscent of the legendary "Pygmalion effect".

Your organization can help you identify the knowledge and skills you need to do your job effectively. Supervisors can give tasks that stimulate your development as a specialist. But the responsibility for professional and career growth still lies with you.

A few more words of caution need to be said. Managers often unwittingly demonstrate to subordinates their low expectations towards them, even if they themselves do not notice it. At the same time, they become "negative Pygmalions", that is, they undermine employees' self-confidence and reduce their efficiency. Therefore, managers must be extremely careful about their own behavior and its impact on subordinates. They should avoid any form of treatment of subordinates that makes them feel like inefficient employees, reduces their self-esteem and productivity.

The difference between a good and a bad worker is determined not so much by the salary as by the attitude towards him. Any manager can learn to treat his subordinates in such a way as to form both in himself and in them mutual expectations of excellent work results. The most successful leaders do just that.

John Sterling Livingston, lecturer at Harvard Business School

Why do some leaders have subordinates perform work quickly and enthusiastically, while others work much worse than they are actually capable of? Some managers don't know how to deal with subordinates.

Poor performance, the atmosphere in the team depends on the manner of communication of the leader, his expectations. Scientists who study problems in interpersonal relationships, they say that subordinates choose tactics of behavior that meet the requirements of the leadership.

Leadership Methods

There are two guide lines:

1. democratic;
2. authoritarian.

In a democratic system, there is no subordination between a leader and a subordinate. The line of persuasion is used to increase productivity. In such a team, subordinates consider themselves full-fledged partners in a single cause.

The responsibility that lies with them is perceived as the highest trust and equality on the part of the main persons.

The authoritarian method of management is often present in large companies. Each employee plays the role of a small detail in a single mechanism. Subordinates carry out their own duties and achieve the goals that management sets for them.

In such organizations, the main problem is the lack of initiative among employees. If there are no incentive systems, the performance of the team is reduced.

In any mode, you can achieve high performance if you stick to the golden mean. Avoid extremes when it leads to "familiarity", and authoritarian methods stifle the initiative of employees.

Promoted: how to deal with subordinates?

It is believed that climbing the career ladder in one company is easier than moving from firm to firm. It is easier to entrust a more responsible post to an enterprising, stress-resistant colleague. Yes, and it is more convenient for management to work with someone who knows the internal charters and procedures. It is important to immediately determine how to behave with subordinates if you are promoted. Psychologists give topical tips that help solve career problems.

• Don't be afraid to stand out.

Working in a close-knit team creates comfortable conditions to complete the assigned tasks. However, not everyone is able to stand out and create a career. As soon as a team member receives an award or an appointment, he automatically falls out of his comfort zone.

Habitual communication with colleagues disappears for various reasons, but psychologists believe that changing communication with others with significant changes is normal course situations.

• Do not hold on to the old "friendship" with employees.

The system of work in most large companies is based on a friendly principle. Employees cover for each other when things need to be done without the knowledge of management.

The principles laid down in childhood make you stay in the team. As soon as an employee rises up the career ladder, he faces a dilemma: to maintain friendship, covering up the “sins” of his subordinates, or to show tough tactics.

Remember that a leader will not be able to manage people if he treats them as equals.

• Do not be afraid to change externally and internally.

After receiving a promotion, some feel uncomfortable in relation to the team. Remember that employees are driven by jealousy that someone nearby got a promotion. Having received a position, it is necessary to prepare for internal changes.

Learn to accept the situation from the boss. People who are sincerely friends and related will understand the desire to climb the career ladder and will always help.

• Unleash your ambition.

Having received a position, you can change the work of the team for the better, get rid of what hinders performance. Just don't start breaking established principles overnight. Make gradual decisions that will be less painful.

• Appropriately assess the capabilities of employees.

Having risen to a new career level, take the opportunity to create a strong team. Aim for positive result leaving in the past grievances and conflicts. At the same time, people should be useful to the company, so inefficient employees should be parted without regret.

• Find out the specifics of the position.

Meet with the leaders and discuss the points that are specific to your position. It is necessary to imagine the scope of goals and objectives that are in front of you. Be prepared to lay out a thorough plan of action.

How to lead in a conflict situation?

The team includes people with different characters and ambitions, so it is natural that conflicts arise between employees. It is important to notice and stop them in time.

Therefore, the question arises of how to behave with subordinates in conflict situation? There are no universal algorithms. It can only be considered among subordinates by examples.

• Conflict between subordinates.

There are differences when misunderstandings occur in mid-sized businesses and among white collars. In the second case, the situation is easier to solve, since it occurs in a huge mechanism, where individual parts of the nodes can be replaced or reinstalled in another place. It is more difficult to correct the situation in a small organization, where each employee was selected exactly for his place.

You need to get into the problem. And do it discreetly. Find out the cause of the conflict and think about what you did if the conflict occurred outside the office.

Try to sum up the situation so that the employees end the conflict on their own. In this case, the glow dynamics will go through a full cycle and everything will take its place.

• Conflict with the leader.

How to deal with a subordinate who goes against the will of the management? To solve the problem, it is worth inviting a psychologist who will establish the positions of each side and find a common solution. In the SMB examples, organize meetings at an outside location. This will allow you to throw out emotions without harming your reputation.

• Conflicts between leaders.

The situation is widespread and arises as a result of defending the interests of one's own resources and powers. This is due to the fact that the heads of the logistics departments do not understand the buyers, the head of the sales department does not delve into the capabilities of the logisticians. You can solve the problem for round table, where the chairman will be the owner of the company or the CEO.

• Clearly design tasks and goals.
• Study the abilities and capabilities of each employee in order to give an appropriate amount of tasks. When an employee is not confident in his own abilities, the motivation is lost.
• When criticizing the mistakes of subordinates, point out ways to correct them.
• It is impossible to single out one of the employees so as not to cause discord and conflicts in the team.

Express criticism without prying eyes. Praise everyone for a job well done on time.

Having taken a leadership position, you need to achieve. To do this, clearly express what you require from subordinates so that there is no misunderstanding. Otherwise, employees are able to declare you incompetent among themselves.