The term “leadership style” is intuitively clear to most of us, although, perhaps, not everyone will be able to “disentangle” the meaning of such related (close) concepts as “management”, “management”, “leadership”, etc. P. Let's clarify their meanings.

Under management It is generally accepted to understand the process of organizing any influences aimed at achieving the goals pursued. Leadership is only a part of management activity, and precisely that part in which various management issues are resolved by influencing subordinates.

And the distinction between the concepts of “management” and “leadership” is associated with the existence in any organization of two types of relationships - formal and informal. Leadership - This is a process of influencing people, generated by a system of informal relations, and leadership implies, first of all, the presence of clearly structured formal (official) relations through which it is implemented. The role of the manager is, as it were, predetermined by the formal structure, his functions, as a rule, are clearly defined, the right to apply sanctions is not disputed, etc. Leadership, on the contrary, is formed spontaneously, spontaneously, at the level of semi-conscious psychological preferences. However, leadership and related problems were discussed in detail in the previous chapter, but in this chapter we will talk about the socio-psychological problems of leadership. In a long list of them, one of the leading places is occupied by the problem of developing an optimal leadership style.

Under leadership style we will understand the totality of methods used by the leader to influence subordinates, as well as the form (manner, character, etc.) of the execution of these methods. There are a great variety of specific methods of management influence. For analytical purposes, three main types are usually distinguished:

• administrative (command);
• economic (negotiable);
• socio-psychological.

Management methods of each of the above types have their own scope, their own advantages and disadvantages, which may manifest themselves depending on the specific situation in the work group. The art of management consists in selecting at a given time, in a given place and for a given group of workers such a complex of management influences (of three types) that will ensure maximum efficiency of the group. At the same time, the objective need to choose management methods of one type or another is superimposed on the manager’s subjective predisposition to his “favorite” business communication skills. All this together forms in each case the unique nature of business communication with subordinates, which is called the leadership style.

People holding senior positions in our country develop their own leadership style mostly intuitively, through trial and error, accumulating positive experience over the years. What about science?

For more than half a century, the phenomenon of leadership styles has been studied in social psychology and management. A huge amount of empirical material has been accumulated, and many theoretical models have been built that distinguish between different types of leadership styles.

Typology of Kurt Lewin. The most popular typology is still individual leadership styles, developed back in the 30s by a German psychologist who emigrated to the USA Kurt Lewin(1890-1947). The longevity of this, which has become a classic, typology is most likely explained by its extreme simplicity and clarity. It identifies three leading leadership styles:

• authoritarian;
• democratic;
• neutral (or anarchic).

(Later, politicized Americans replaced the term “neutral” with “liberal.” In addition, the same styles often came to be labeled “directive,” “collegial,” and “permissive.”)

These styles are distinguished from each other by many parameters: the nature of decision-making, the degree of delegation of authority, the method of control, the set of sanctions used, etc. But the main difference between them is the preferred management methods. The group of so-called command methods corresponds to the authoritarian style of leadership; contractual and socio-psychological methods are more consistent with the democratic style; neutral (or conniving) is characterized by a generally unsystematic choice of management methods.

For greater clarity, we will use T.N.’s diagram. Lobanova and Y. V. Mikhailov 1,

1 Lobanova TN. , Mikhailov Y.V. Fundamentals of management. - M-, 1995. - P. 15.

which compares the characteristic features of authoritarian and democratic leadership styles (they are the most common; the neutral style is very rare).

The differences between the two main leadership styles are clearly visible. Moreover, the characteristic features of the democratic style, of course, should be dearer to the heart of a Russian leader who has not been spoiled by democracy. Well, who would willingly want to be known as a rude boss, intolerant of criticism and suppressing publicity? However, the undeniable advantages of the democratic leadership style do not mean at all that the authoritarian style should be relegated to the archives.

Oddly enough, almost half a century of research into leadership styles has not revealed a clear connection between the effectiveness of a group and a particular leadership style: both democratic and authoritarian styles give approximately equal indicators of productivity. As a result, the so-called situational approach: there are no management solutions suitable for all occasions; everything depends on the specific situation, which in turn is determined by many different factors. These include: the conditions of the group’s activities, the nature of the tasks to be solved, the qualifications of the performers, the duration of joint work, etc. A set of such factors creates a unique situation for the group’s activity, which, as it were, sets and requires certain features of the leadership style.

It is clear that the more difficult and complex the working conditions of the team (non-payments, disruption of deliveries, threat of bankruptcy, etc.), the more people tend to rely on a “strong hand”, on an authoritative and firm leader, capable of taking full responsibility for solving practically impossible problems. problems. And if even partial success is achieved, then it is even more worthwhile to endure the various dictatorial habits of the “owner”. The situation is similar in cases of low qualifications of performers (“let the management think, they pay him a salary for this”) or conflicts that flare up between them, as well as in many other similar situations.

In other words, authoritarian leadership style quite appropriate if at least two conditions are present: a) the production situation requires it; b) personnel voluntarily and willingly agree to authoritarian management methods. Indeed, with all the “costs”, the authoritarian style also has important advantages:

• ensures clarity and efficiency of management;
• creates a visible unity of management actions to achieve set goals;
• minimizes decision-making time, in small organizations ensures a quick response to changing external conditions;
• does not require special material costs;
• in “young”, recently created enterprises, it allows you to more successfully (quickly) cope with the difficulties of formation, etc.

• suppression (non-use) of initiative and creative potential of performers;
• lack of effective labor incentives;
• cumbersome control system;
• in large organizations - bureaucracy of the management apparatus;
• low satisfaction of performers with their work;
• a high degree of dependence of the group’s work on the constant strong-willed pressure of the leader, etc.

Economic and socio-psychological management methods inherent in democratic leadership style. This style allows you to:

• stimulate the manifestation of initiative, reveal the creative potential of performers;
• solve innovative, non-standard problems more successfully;
• more effectively use material and contractual labor incentives;
• also include psychological mechanisms of work motivation;
• increase the satisfaction of performers with their work;
• create a favorable psychological climate in the team, etc.

However, the democratic leadership style is not applicable in all conditions. As a rule, it works successfully under the following conditions:

• stable, established team;
• highly qualified workers;
• the presence of active, initiative, out-of-the-box thinking and acting employees (even if in small numbers);
• non-extreme production conditions;
• the possibility of significant material costs.

Conditions of this kind are not always available, and besides, these are precisely the conditions that make the use of the democratic style only possible. Turning this possibility into reality is also not an easy task.

The concept of typical leadership styles includes a third type - neutral, or conniving. Little attention is usually paid to it, since it is extremely rare in practice. This style is characterized precisely by the absence of any system in the application of these methods. Its typical features:

• avoidance of making strategically important decisions;
• giving things the opportunity to take their own course, of their own accord;
• little control of subordinates;
• using collective decision-making to evade responsibility;
• indifference to criticism;
• indifference to staff, etc.

It is not for nothing that K. Levin called this style anarchic, since its indispensable conditions are almost absolute freedom of performers with very weak managerial influence. It is generally recognized that such uncontrolled freedom of personnel in production is almost always harmful. However, situations are possible when such a leadership style is justified, for example, when the staff is very competent and responsible and the manager himself is poorly trained. It is also likely that this style may be suitable for leading scientific or other creative teams, provided, however, that there are strong and disciplined performers.

So, the acceptability of a particular leadership style is ultimately determined by the production situation, which is described by many factors. It should follow from this that a leader must be able to apply any leadership styles, changing them depending on the situation. But is this possible in practice? But what about the famous aphorism: “Style is a person?

Apparently it should be recognized that absolute categorical judgments are inappropriate in this case. It is impossible to change leadership styles “like gloves” for psychological reasons. The fact is that a person’s personal predisposition to authoritarian, democratic or neutral forms of behavior is largely determined by his temperament, which in turn depends on the type of human nervous system. And this is an innate characteristic and, in principle, cannot be changed. Therefore, the preference for one style or another is largely predetermined by the psychological characteristics of the leader’s personality. It is obviously clear that if you are, for example, a phlegmatic person, then authoritarian methods of leading people will work out much worse for you than democratic or neutral ones. For people of a choleric nature, on the contrary, it is easier and more natural to apply directive methods of management than to play at democracy. Thus, nature itself seems to direct each of us towards one or another style of behavior, and, consequently, leadership. Therefore, if you are a leader and feel an irresistible need for authoritarian or democratic methods, do not try to radically change your style even if the situation requires it - nothing will work.

However, to assert on this basis that nothing at all can be done about the existing leadership style would be a gross mistake (and, by the way, a very common one). It may not be possible to transform overnight from an autocrat to a democrat, but it is possible and necessary to adjust your leadership style if circumstances require it! The more diverse the “palette of managerial colors” of a leader, the wider the arsenal of ways to influence subordinates, the greater the guarantee of success in leadership activities. But this breadth does not come by itself, it needs to be formed and trained.

In addition, we must not forget that the typical leadership styles highlighted in the analysis are “ideal types,” constructive abstractions that are not found in their pure form in the nature of business relationships. Any real style of a particular leader is always a certain combination of techniques from many styles, but, of course, with the predominance of one. Therefore, a leader can potentially develop almost any qualities or style traits that are required in a particular situation -

Let us also note that choosing the optimal leadership style in the range of “authoritarianism - democracy” is not at all an easy task, since its initial conditions contain a contradiction. Different parameters of the work of subordinates are regulated by different methods: “awakening” initiative and creating a creative atmosphere can only be done by democratic means, while strengthening discipline, diligence, and precision in work can be done primarily by administrative (i.e., authoritarian) means. In practice, this contradiction can be resolved either by ranking situational factors (we choose what is more important for the group’s work at the moment - strengthening discipline or stimulating creative search), or by combining command and contractual management methods (we ensure maximum democracy at the decision-making stage and use authoritarianism at the decision-making stage). stage of execution of decisions made).

It is no coincidence that the three-dimensional model of leadership styles developed by K. Levin was later transformed into continuum concept(i.e., a continuous sequence) of these styles, with the help of which researchers tried to more accurately reflect the variety of style options that develop in real life. U R. Likert, for example, there were four types of styles in the authoritarian-democratic continuum:

c) consultative-democratic (greater trust in subordinates, delegation of minor powers to them);

d) based on the participation of subordinates in decision-making, including the most important ones (democracy in its purest form).

As we can see, this “Likert list” only refines the original authoritarian-democratic model of leadership styles. When it was established that there is no direct dependence of work efficiency on one style or another, and everything is determined by the production situation, fundamentally different models of leadership styles began to be developed.

Situational models. IN their basis was no longer the behavior of the leader (like Levin), but the nature of the current situation - the so-called situational models.

We have already become acquainted with one of them - the Hersey and Blanchard model - in the previous chapter. It, you remember, takes into account one of the leading situational factors - “the maturity of the performers” - and proposes four style gradations of leadership corresponding to the four degrees of maturity of the performers.

In another model of the same situational type, developed by an American specialist in the field of social and managerial psychology Fred Fiedler, Three situational factors are already taken into account:

relationship between manager and subordinate;

familiarity of the production task, clarity of its formulation and structure;

official powers of the manager (the ability to control the actions of subordinates, stimulate their activity, etc.).

According to F. Fiedler's model, the effectiveness of the chosen leadership style depends on the degree of control the leader has over the situation, which can be quantified using all three of the parameters listed above (using specially developed scales). Empirical research has confirmed that the overall amount of situational control exercised by a leader correlates with the effectiveness of traditional leadership styles as follows: authoritarian leadership is most effective in extreme situations, i.e. with high or low situational control, while in the case of average, moderate situational control, the democratic leadership style is more effective.

Participatory management - This is a variant of the modern leadership style, actively discussed in the scientific literature since the 70s. Its main features: 1

1 See: Krichevsky R.L. If you are a leader.... - M.: Delo, 1996. - P. 59-60. 163

regular meetings between the manager and subordinates;

• openness in relations between the manager and subordinates;
• involvement of subordinates in the development and adoption of organizational decisions;
• delegation by a manager to subordinates of a number of powers;
• participation of ordinary employees in both planning and implementation of organizational changes;
• creation of special group structures endowed with the right to make independent decisions, etc.

The above-mentioned features of the participatory leadership style are very attractive and modern, but we should not forget about the conclusion made by researchers of traditional leadership styles: in the abstract there is no best style in leadership, but the optimal use of one or another style is determined by the specific situation. It is clear that the participatory style can be very effective, but, like all others, only under certain favorable conditions. And these conditions, by the way, should be greater than for traditional styles. Under what conditions should it work? Obviously, in this case, at least three situational factors should be taken into account: the level of qualifications and maturity of the team, the nature of the tasks being solved, and the personality of the leader. Probably, it makes sense to develop “participation” in groups characterized by a fairly high degree of qualification, a manifestation of interest in innovation, a desire for independence, etc. The tasks for which the use of this style is justified should most likely be complex, requiring high professionalism in execution, involving multiplicity of solutions. Only a manager who is sufficiently experienced, authoritative, and inclined to collegial methods in work can cope with all this. Thus, the “participatory” leadership style can show its advantages only at a certain level of production, organizational and management culture.

What if you don’t have any of these conditions, but you want to practice the “participatory” style? Practice. Especially if you are committed to working for the future. After all, in the end, the professionalism and maturity of the team do not appear by themselves, in a ready-made form - they need to be cultivated long and hard. And the wisdom of experience does not come to a leader right away. So, no one is forbidden to try to apply such a leadership style. Just don’t expect immediate positive results from this.

Federal Agency for Education

GOU SPO "Isovsky Geological Exploration College"

Course work

in the subject "Managerial Psychology"

“Style and socio-psychological problems of leadership”

Completed by student: M.S. Fedina group MN -1-(07)

Checked by: N.A. Korobeynikova

INTRODUCTION

1. PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ACTIVITY OF A MANAGER

1.1 The concepts of “leader”, “effective leader”

1.2 Typology of individual leadership styles

1.2.1 Democratic leadership style

1.2.3 Liberal leadership style

1.3 Social and psychological problems of leadership

2. PRACTICAL RESEARCH OF LEADERSHIP STYLES

2.1 Toolkit

2.2 Progress of the case study

CONCLUSION

LITERATURE

INTRODUCTION Perhaps today there is no more difficult profession than that of a manager; it is complex because it requires a person to master many and different activities and skills. A manager must know, albeit a little, about everything - from the secrets of marketing to the tricks of financial science, from methods of organizing modern production to the secrets of human psychology. The leader is called upon to pay great attention to promising issues, to think big, to be more aware of new needs and tasks than others, to develop and indicate ways and means of increasing the effective activities of groups, and to have a sense of the new. He must be able to put his beliefs, plans and ideas into practice. Modern conditions place increased demands on a leader; his activities are very complex and varied. His responsibilities include the following: - the ability to pay great attention to social, moral, ethical problems; be able to correctly plan and organize the work of the management apparatus, distribute responsibilities and rights, establish the level of responsibility of subordinates, create a cohesive, efficiently working team; develop ways and methods of increasing the creative initiative of employees, take into account individual abilities, interests, psychological characteristics of people, take an active part in strengthening relations of cooperation and mutual assistance.

This work is devoted to the daily activities of a manager. It examines the main leadership styles that managers use in their practice, as well as the psychological problems of leadership that arise when working with subordinates. This problem is relevant at the moment, since special attention has now begun to be paid to the most effective interaction between a manager and his subordinates.

The structure of the work includes two parts: theoretical and practical, therefore, the goals and objectives of the work will be as follows: Goals research:- study the relationship between leadership style and conflict resolution; - conduct a mini experiment.

In accordance with the purpose of the study, the following were identified

tasks :

Select literature and study it;

Select methods for conducting a mini experiment;

Compare and analyze the results obtained and draw appropriate conclusions. Subject of study: management style. Research hypothesis: People with a democratic leadership style are characterized by a strategy for getting out of conflict - compromise. 7 subjects took part in the experimental study, all students of the MN-IV-1-(07) group, aged from 20 to 35 years. The experimental study took place in a classroom.

Description of research methods:

In the experimental study we used the following methods:

To study leadership style - the “leadership styles” test;

To determine tactics for exiting a conflict - the “method of K. Thomas and R. Killman.”

1. PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ACTIVITY OF A MANAGER

1.1 The concepts of “leader”, “effective leader”

In science, two concepts are accepted - leader and manager. Management- this is mental and physical activity, the purpose of which is for subordinates to perform the actions prescribed to them and solve certain problems.

Leadership- this is the informal position of a “star” in a team: a person’s ability to influence the team in a system of interpersonal relationships based on feelings of sympathy or antipathy, acceptance or non-acceptance, etc. A leader is an official recognition of a person’s professional and organizational merits.

Supervisor- this is a position that allows a person to have certain powers and use the power given to him. To effectively manage an organization, a manager must have leadership qualities. However, a manager does not become a leader only because of these qualities.

A modern leader is at the same time:

Managers with authority;

A leader who is able to lead his subordinates (using his authority, positive emotions, high professionalism);

A diplomat who establishes contacts with partners and authorities, successfully overcoming internal and external conflicts;

A teacher with high moral qualities;

An innovator who understands the role of science in the modern business world, who knows how to evaluate and immediately implement know-how, inventions, and rational proposals into production;

Just a person with a high level of culture, honesty, decisive character, and strong will.

Let's compare the functions performed by informal leaders and official leaders in teams.

The new attitude to management in our country required the introduction of serious changes in the training and advanced training of managers. Today, the concept of “manager” is understood as a fairly wide range of definitions that are considered in the direction of management, this is management, management, board (directorate, administration), but, very importantly, this includes the ability to wield a tool, and the ability to cope with work, and cunning, trick, and careful, sensitive, caring attitude towards people.

The human factor is playing an increasingly important role in management, which requires a manager at any level to have knowledge of psychology. Modern psychology is organically included in management methods and shows a variety of psychological approaches to the life of organizations and their management. Leaders today are required to be able to find optimal methods of effective management.

The manager must clearly understand the criteria for the effectiveness of leadership or management. According to the author Bykov A.V. they are divided into two classes: psychological and non-psychological.

Psychological criteria include:

Satisfaction of team members with various relationships with colleagues and managers, working conditions, wages, etc.;

Motivation of team members, their desire to work, maintain relationships in the team, etc.;

Team self-esteem.

Non-psychological criteria include team performance

Reducing staff turnover;

Productivity, product quality;

Economical;

Innovations;

Cost reduction;

Profitability;

The study by psychologists of the psychological qualities that ensure the effectiveness of leadership has made it possible to identify the following necessary qualities and personality traits: dominance (the ability to influence subordinates), self-confidence, emotional balance and stress resistance, creativity (the ability to creatively solve problems, high practical intelligence), desire to achieve goals and entrepreneurship, ability to take risks (reasonable, but not adventurous), willingness to take responsibility in solving problems, honesty, loyalty to promises and guarantees.

Qualities contraindicated for a leader are: hypersensitivity, high imbalance, anxiety

One of the fundamental signs of management effectiveness, which allows achieving the desired results taking into account psychological criteria, is the leadership style.

Under management style (leadership) understand a set of certain principles, the most characteristic and sustainable methods for solving typical tasks and problems that arise in the process of implementing management functions. The management style is predetermined by the characteristics of the organization and its divisions, the existing order of business in them, the positions of managers, the prevailing value system, the type of culture, as well as some random circumstances

1.2 Typology of individual leadership styles

To this day, the most popular typology of individual leadership styles, developed back in the 30s of the 20th century, remains the most popular. German psychologist who emigrated to the USA Kurt Lewin. The longevity of this, which has become a classic, typology is most likely explained by its extreme simplicity and clarity. It identifies three leading leadership styles:

Liberal

These styles are distinguished from each other by many parameters: the nature of decision-making, the degree of delegation of authority, the method of control, the set of sanctions used, etc. But the main difference between them is the preferred management methods . The group of so-called command methods corresponds to the authoritarian style of leadership; contractual and socio-psychological methods are more consistent with the democratic style; liberal is characterized by a generally unsystematic choice of management methods.

1.2.1 Democratic management style

Let us turn to the characteristics of the democratic management style. Author B.Z. Zeldovich dwells in detail on its features.

Democratic The style is based on a combination of scientific management principles and the maximum use of initiative and creativity of subordinates. A leader using a democratic management style treats his subordinates in a comradely manner, his tone of giving orders is conducive to cooperation, he does not resolve all issues alone without thorough discussion with his subordinates, he systematically informs his subordinates about the state of affairs in the team, including difficulties that have to be overcome.

The democratic style of management involves providing subordinates with independence commensurate with their qualifications and functions, involving them in such activities as setting goals; evaluation of work performed; preparation, adoption and implementation of decisions; creating the necessary prerequisites for performing certain work.

A manager who prefers a democratic management style shows respect for his subordinates, encourages their initiative and creative activity, takes care of timely information from subordinates on a wide range of issues, and always takes into account the opinions and advice of subordinates on emerging production problems. With such a communication system, it is much easier to mobilize subordinates to implement the tasks assigned to them, and to cultivate in them a sense of true masters.

The leader of the democratic style, in all his activities, personally deals with only the most complex and important issues, leaving his subordinates to decide all the rest. Among incentive measures, encouragement predominates, and punishment is used only in exceptional cases

Organizations and enterprises in which a democratic management style dominates are characterized by a high degree of decentralization of powers and the active participation of employees in management decision-making. In such teams, an atmosphere of cooperation and sensitivity reigns, and subordinates show creativity and initiative.

Analyzing the authoritarian leadership style, author B.Z. Zeldovich especially notes that authoritarian The style is characterized by the predominance of individual methods of management and the use of administrative means of influence on subordinates. The manager, as a rule, is committed to exaggerating the role of administrative methods. He autocratically resolves most issues of the life of the team without prior discussion with team members, and deliberately limits contacts with subordinates. The autocrat considers it superfluous and unnecessary to inform his subordinates about the state of affairs in the team.

In production activities, it is not always possible to immediately recognize the leader of this management style. Such managers are quite smart, energetic, have a good appearance and personal charm, and often achieve significant success in their production activities. However, if you look closely, you will notice that they are characterized by the ability to divide their subordinates into favorites and dislikes. As a rule, autocrats are favorable to sycophants and generously give them promises: someone will be promised a promotion, someone will be given an increased salary, someone will be given a prestigious foreign business trip, etc. An autocratic leader is characterized by dogmatism and stereotypical thinking. Everything new is perceived with caution or not at all, since in managerial work he practically uses the same methods. To summarize what has been said, I would like to note that the use of such a management style, although in some cases ensures high productivity, does not create the internal interest of performers in effective work. Excessive disciplinary measures cause fear and anger in a person, and in most cases destroy incentives to work.

1.2.3 Liberal management style

Paying attention to the features of this style, the author B.Z. Zeldovich focuses on its difference from others. Liberal The management style is distinguished by the fact that a manager working in this style sets tasks for his subordinates in the most general form, leaves the solution of many issues to the subordinates, rarely controls the implementation of decisions made, does not really monitor the observance of labor discipline, and almost does not interfere in production activities. subordinates. The liberal style is easily transformed into a bureaucratic one, when the leader completely removes himself from affairs, transferring them into the hands of “promoters” who manage the team on his behalf, using authoritarian methods. At the same time, the leader himself only pretends that power is in his hands, but in reality he becomes more and more dependent on his voluntary assistants.

A liberal leader is usually polite with his subordinates and is always ready to cancel a previously made decision, especially if this threatens his authority. Liberals are distinguished by their lack of initiative and thoughtless execution of the directives of their superiors. From the available arsenal of means of influencing the team, the main place for a liberal leader is occupied by persuasion and requests. When performing managerial functions, such a leader is passive, he is afraid of conflicts and in most cases agrees with the opinions of his subordinates. So, gentleness in dealing with subordinates prevents the manager from acquiring real authority, since individual employees demand concessions from him, which he does, for fear of ruining relationships with them.

Thus, we can conclude that to choose the optimal leadership style, the experience of the manager, his clear understanding of the specific situation, as well as knowledge and consideration of the individual personal characteristics of subordinates are important.

1.3 Social and psychological problems of leadership

The leadership styles considered reflect the strategy for establishing relationships with subordinates and the general line of behavior of the leader. Within the framework of the chosen strategy, the daily activities of a manager are divided into many relatively small acts of communication, managerial influences, interactions with external and higher authorities, etc. And each such aspect of a leader’s activity can give rise to psychological problems. The ability to see them and deal with them accordingly is a mandatory component of the qualifications of any leader.

Based on the opinion of the author V.N. Lavrenko, the management process is traditionally divided into five stages: planning, organization, people management, motivation and control. In accordance with this division, the main functions of leadership can be defined:

Strategic (planning);

Administrative (organization);

Communication-regulatory;

Motivational;

Controlling, etc.

Of course, there are many more functions of management. But since we are trying to understand only the psychological side of leadership, we take only the main ones, which can give rise to major psychological problems.

Strategic function is implemented through strategic planning and the formation of the goals and values ​​of the organization. It is generally accepted that this is the main function of a leader. The successful implementation of a strategic function, as a rule, rests on three problems that have clear psychological implications:

the problem of decision making, the problem of limited time, the problem of innovative activity;

Administrator function is manifested in the fact that the manager’s responsibilities include not only strategic issues, but also pure administration, which denotes directive ways of communication between the manager and his subordinates. A special place is occupied by various types of punishments and rewards. One such method is known as “carrot and stick”. However, the general rule derived from numerous studies is that incentives and rewards are much more effective than punishment. They “train” subordinates much better, psychologically reinforce patterns of required behavior, contribute to the formation of a favorable psychological climate in the team, increase people’s self-esteem, successfully “motivate” them to perform productive work, etc.

Communicative-regulatory function depends on many factors. One of the most significant among them is the establishment of favorable relations between the manager and his subordinates. However, often, even with considerable effort, the manager cannot find the necessary contact with his subordinates. They don't "understand" each other. The nature of this mutual understanding often lies in the field of psychology, more precisely in violations of interpersonal communication. Considering that the manager for the most part is in the position of an observer in relation to the subordinate, it is not difficult to guess how often there is a temptation to explain failure by laziness, stupidity, lack of diligence and other business sins of the subordinates. Psychological errors in the perception and assessment of subordinates are dangerous because they are involuntary and invisible, and are poorly self-diagnosed.

Motivational function is the basis for motivating subordinates, that is, creating interest in the results and quality of work. The theoretical basis for calculating this leadership function is quite simple. Human behavior is known to be based on numerous needs ( their hierarchy is presented in a classical diagram Abraham Maslow). Needs give birth motives of behavior, that is, certain motivations for activity related to the satisfaction of needs. Therefore, the achievement of personal goals by subordinates, satisfaction from solving assigned tasks, self-affirmation, self-regulation, etc. should be not only their personal matter, but also the subject of the closest attention of the manager.

Control function generated by a simple contradiction: it is clear that lack of control is harmful, but not everyone likes to be controlled. This contradiction can be partially avoided if the following requirements are met.

Control must be: constant, objective, prompt, open.

Control should not be: total, unsystematic, formal, and the results not communicated to the performer.

We examined how psychological problems of management affect the moral and psychological climate of the team. Therefore, a rational leader will try to maintain a reasonable balance of power. The power he uses must be necessary and sufficient to achieve his goals, but not make his subordinates feel manipulated or provoke them to show disobedience.

2. PRACTICAL RESEARCH OF LEADERSHIP STYLES

In the theoretical part, we examined the styles and socio-psychological problems of leadership. Psychological problems of management include the following functions:

Strategic

Administrative

Communication-regulating

Motivational

Controlling

Each function can generate conflict situations. Thus, in the practical part of the course work we put forward a hypothesis: . In order to confirm it, the following tools were selected.

2.1 Toolkit

Test No. 1 “Leadership styles”

1. I would give my subordinates the necessary instructions even if there was a danger that if they were not fulfilled, they would criticize me.

2. I always have a lot of ideas and plans.

3. I listen to the comments of others.

4. I am generally able to present logically correct arguments in discussions.

5. I encourage employees to solve their problems independently.

6. If I am criticized, I defend myself no matter what.

7. When others present their arguments, I always listen.

8. In order to hold an event, I have to make plans in advance.

9. For the most part, I admit my mistakes.

10. I offer alternatives to others' suggestions.

11. I protect those who have difficulties.

12. I express my thoughts with maximum conviction.

13. My enthusiasm is contagious.

14. I take into account the points of view of others and try to include them in the draft decision.

15. I usually insist on my point of view and hypotheses.

16. I listen with understanding to aggressively expressed counterarguments.

17. I express my thoughts clearly.

18. I always admit that I don’t know everything.

19. I vigorously defend my views.

20. I try to develop other people's thoughts as if they were mine.

21. I always think through what others might answer and look for counterarguments.

22. I help others with advice on how to organize their work.

23. Being passionate about my own projects, I usually don’t worry about other people’s work.

24. I also listen to those who have a point of view that differs from my own.

25. If someone does not agree with my project, then I do not give up, but look for new ways to convince the other.

26. I use all means to force people to agree with me.

27. Talk openly about my hopes, fears, and personal difficulties.

28. I always find ways to make it easier for others to support my projects.

29. I understand other people's feelings.

30. I talk more about my own thoughts than listen to other people's.

31. I always listen to criticism before defending myself.

32. I present my thoughts systematically.

33. I help others get the word out.

34. I carefully follow the contradictions in other people’s reasoning.

35. I change my point of view to show others that I follow their thoughts.

36. As a rule, I don’t interrupt anyone.

37. I don’t pretend to be confident in my point of view if I’m not.

38. I spend a lot of energy trying to convince others of the right thing to do.

39. I speak emotionally to inspire people to work.

40. I strive to ensure that when summing up the results, those who very rarely ask to speak are also active.

1 point - no, that doesn’t happen at all; 2 - no, as a rule, this does not happen; 3 - uncertain assessment; 4 - yes, as a rule, this happens; 5 - yes, this always happens.

PROCESSING RESULTS

Add up the scores you gave in questions 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, I, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 36, 37, 40, and indicate the amount through A (it ranges from 20 to 100).

Add up the points in questions 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 38, 39 and write the sum as B.

If sum A is at least 10 points higher than sum B, then most people consider you a good diplomat, you are able to take into account the opinions of others, and are inclined to a democratic management style. If the sum A > 85, they tend to have a liberal-permissive style.

If sum B is at least 10 points more than sum A, then you are conducting the discussion in an authoritarian, domineering, unceremonious, aggressive manner, and prone to an authoritarian leadership style.

Test No. 2 “Tactics for getting out of conflict” (testing using the method of K. Thomas and R. Killman)

1. A. Sometimes I give others the opportunity to take responsibility for resolving a controversial issue.

B. Rather than discussing what we disagree on, I try to draw attention to what we both agree on.

2. A. I try to find a compromise solution.

B. I try to settle the matter taking into account all the interests: both the other person and my own.

3. A Usually I persistently strive to achieve my goal.

B. Sometimes I sacrifice my own interests for the sake of the interests of another person.

4. A. I try to find a compromise solution.

B. I try not to hurt the other person's feelings.

5. A. When resolving a controversial situation, I always try to find support from another.

6. A. I'm trying to avoid trouble for myself.

B. I try to achieve my goal.

7. A. I try to postpone the resolution of a controversial issue in order to resolve it finally over time.

B. I consider it possible to give in to something in order to achieve something else.

8. A. I usually persistently strive to achieve my goal.

B. I first try to determine what all the interests involved and controversial issues are.

9. A. I think that you should not always worry about any disagreements that have arisen.

B. I make efforts to achieve my goal.

10. A. I am determined to achieve my goal.

B. I'm trying to find a compromise solution.

11. A. The first thing I try to do is to clearly define what all the interests and issues involved are.

B. I try to reassure the other and, mainly, preserve our relationship.

12. A. I often avoid taking positions that might cause controversy.

B. I give the other person the opportunity to remain unconvinced in some way if he also agrees.

13. A. I propose a middle position.

B. I insist that everything be done my way.

14. A. I tell the other person my point of view and ask about his views. B. I am trying to show the other the logic and advantage of my views.

B. I try to do everything necessary to avoid tension.

16. A. I try not to hurt the feelings of another.

B. I usually try to convince another of the advantages of my position.

17. A. I usually persistently strive to achieve my goal.

B. I try to do everything to avoid unnecessary tension.

18. A. If it makes someone else happy, I will give him the opportunity to insist on his own.

B. I will give the other the opportunity to remain unconvinced if he meets me halfway.

19. A. The first thing I try to do is determine what all the interests and issues involved are.

B. I try to put aside all controversial issues in order to finally resolve them over time.

20. A. I am trying to overcome our differences immediately.

B. I try to find the best combination of benefits and losses for both of us.

21. A. When negotiating, I try to be attentive to the other.

B. I always tend to discuss the problem directly.

22. A. I try to find a position that is halfway between mine and the other person's position.

B. I defend my position.

23. A. As a rule, I am concerned with satisfying the desires of each of us.

B. Sometimes I allow others to take responsibility for resolving a controversial issue.

24. A. If the position of another seems very important to him, I try to meet him halfway.

B. I'm trying to convince someone else to go.

to compromise.

25. A. I am trying to convince someone else that I am right.

B. When negotiating, I try to be attentive to the arguments of the other.

26. A. I usually suggest a middle position.

B. I almost always strive to satisfy the interests of each of us.

27. A. I often try to avoid disputes.

B. If it makes the other person happy, I will give him the opportunity to have his way.

28. A. I usually persistently strive to achieve my goal.

B. When resolving a situation, I usually try to find support from the other person.

29. A. I propose a middle position.

B. I think that you shouldn’t always worry about disagreements that arise.

30. A. I try not to hurt the feelings of another.

B. I always take a position in a dispute so that we can achieve success together.

PROCESSING RESULTS

Award one point for each match:

The “competition” style is characterized by the answers: Z.A; 6.B; 8.A;

9.B; 10.A; 13.B; 14.B; 16.B; 17.A; 22.B; 25.A; 28.A;

Collaboration style: 2.B; 5.A, 8.B; 11.A; 14.A; 19.A; 20.A;

21.B; 23.A; 26.B; 28.B; 30.B;

“Compromise” style: 2.A; 4.A; 7.B; 10.B; 12.B; 13.A; 18.B; 20.B;

22.A; 24.B; 26.A; 29.A;

Evasion style: 1.A; 5 B; 6.A; 7.A; 9.A; 12.A; 15.B; 17.B;

19.B; 23.B; 27.A; 29.B;

Style “adjustment (concession)”: 1.B; Z.B; 4.B; 11.B; 15.A;

16.A; 18.A; 21.A; 24.A; 25.B; 27.B; 30.A.

2.2 Progress of the case study

The first stage of our work was the selection of methods - tools. Test No. 1 reveals the dominant leadership style of each tested student in the group. Test No. 2, based on the Thomas-Killman model, allows you to draw up an approximate reaction of each student in the group to a conflict situation.

Table No. 1

Having carried out test No. 1, we found that a democratic leadership style predominates in the team, which is 42% of the total number of those tested, which can be represented in the following diagram.

Table No. 2

According to Table No. 3, it was revealed that the hypothesis I put forward is confirmed, since for respondents with a democratic leadership style, the way out of the conflict is a compromise. Thus, the hypothesis that “People with a democratic leadership style have a strategy for getting out of conflict - compromise” I found my confirmation.

CONCLUSION

The goal we set has been achieved. The theoretical foundations of the concepts: “leader”, effective leader, typology of individual styles and socio-psychological problems of leadership were considered. To be a leader, you must have subordinates. However, it is precisely that area of ​​a manager’s activity that is associated with his relationships with subordinates that occupies a key position in terms of the success of the manager’s work as a whole. No matter how talented and hardworking the boss is, if his efforts are not supported by his subordinates, the result of the department’s activities as a whole is unlikely to be particularly successful. The work of the team depends on the success of solving the problem of seeing a person in a subordinate. All this urgently requires the manager to tirelessly improve management styles and methods.

So, for example, in extreme situations, where there is almost no time to discuss issues, it is advisable to switch to an authoritarian leadership style; If the situation allows for discussion and reflection on the decisions made, the democratic style is clearly preferable, which allows subordinates to take initiative and a creative approach to business. In addition, the manager is obliged to take into account the personality of his subordinates: for some, discussion is preferable; for others, a commanding tone is much more often suitable and, therefore, an authoritarian management style is better. Thus, we can conclude that in order to choose the optimal leadership style for given conditions, the manager’s experience, his clear understanding of the specific situation, as well as knowledge and consideration of the individual personal characteristics of subordinates are important.

LITERATURE

1. Bykov A.V. The success of a manager: Textbook/ - M.: ASMS, 2002.- 55 p.

2. Zeldovich B.Z. Management in printing: Textbook/ – M.: MGUP, 2004.- 400 p.

3. Kishkel E.N. Managerial psychology: Proc. for medium specialist. textbook institutions/ - M.: Vyssh.shk., 2002.- 270 p.

4. Lavrinenko V.N. Psychology and ethics of business communication: A textbook for university students/– M.: UNITY-DANA, 2007.- 415 p.

5. Stolyarenko L.D. Psychology of business communication and management: Textbook / - Rostov n/D: Phoenix, 2005. - 416 p.

5. Shikun A.F., Filinova I.M. Managerial psychology: Textbook/ - M.: 2002. -332 p.

The role of management as a type of social activity has led to the widespread use of the achievements of many sciences, among which “behavioral sciences” occupy a significant place. These include industrial psychology, sociology of management and others. There are many different recommendations regarding “human relations”, “ethical codes” for managers, interestingly written books on the ethics of official and non-official communication. Basically, this is a proven ideological and psychological toolkit for managerial influence on the consciousness of subordinates. Managers treat it with respect, repeatedly being convinced in practice of the effectiveness of its use in solving economic and social problems of entrepreneurial activity and ensuring business success.

Managerial ethics– this is the goal of constantly making, morally sound decisions. The fundamental principles of management ethics are humanism, collectivism, social justice, patriotism, unity of word and deed.

The decisions and actions of leaders must be imbued with respect for people, concern for their health, spiritual and physical development. Management is intended to act as a reliable system for preserving the inviolability of people’s personal dignity, as a guarantor of their rights and responsibilities.

Management activities are aimed at improving relationships, developing collective forms of organization and stimulating work. Through management, public (state), collective and personal interests must be reasonably combined. A prerequisite for fulfilling the professional duties of a manager is an objective and friendly attitude towards personal views, service expectations and claims, and the professional opinion of subordinates. Of particular importance is a fair material and moral assessment of the personal contribution of each employee and work collective to the common cause of developing the production economy. A leader is constantly faced with a moral choice, as a result of which his moral reputation should not be shaken either in the eyes of people or before his conscience.

In a production team there is a complex system of mechanisms for regulating people's behavior. Mechanisms for regulating behavior work when such qualities of people as conscience, professional honor, duty, moral responsibility for their actions and the deeds of others are best manifested.

A significant place in managerial ethics is occupied by the development of normative provisions of a moral nature. One such provision is moral codes. They specify the approaches taken in managerial ethics when studying the moral qualities of an individual, formulate the basic moral requirements for managerial activities, and present the rules of managerial communication and off-duty behavior of a manager. Knowledge of managerial ethics by a manager is a mandatory requirement for their scientific and professional competence.

Leadership styles in managerial ethics:

By leadership style we will understand the totality of methods used by the leader to influence subordinates, as well as the form (manner, character, etc.) of the execution of these methods.

In actual leadership practice there are several basic leadership styles.
The main ones are defined as authoritarian (or autocratic), democratic and liberal.

In life it is difficult to meet representatives of these styles in their “pure form”.
Human nature is too complex to be fitted to a certain standard.

Authoritarian (directive, dictatorial) management style: it is characterized by strict individual decision-making by the manager, strict constant control over the implementation of decisions with the threat of punishment, and a lack of interest in the employee as an individual. Due to constant control, this management style provides quite acceptable work results (according to non-psychological criteria: profit, productivity, product quality may be good), but there are more disadvantages than advantages: 1) high probability of erroneous decisions; 2) suppression of initiative, creativity of subordinates, slowdown of innovations, stagnation, passivity of employees; 3) people’s dissatisfaction with their work, their position in the team; 4) an unfavorable psychological climate causes increased psychological stress and is harmful to mental and physical health. This management style is appropriate and justified only in critical situations (accidents, military operations, etc.).

Democratic (collective) management style: management decisions are made on the basis of discussion of the problem, taking into account the opinions and initiatives of employees, the implementation of the decisions made is controlled by both the manager and the employees themselves, the manager shows interest and friendly attention to the personality of employees, to taking into account their interests, needs, characteristics.

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

A democrat does not avoid responsibility for his own decisions or the mistakes of his subordinates, he praises or scolds according to merit, and he formulates his instructions clearly and convincingly.

Liberal-anarchist (permissive, neutral) The leadership style is characterized by, on the one hand, everyone can express their positions, but they do not strive to achieve real accounting and coordination of positions, and on the other hand, even the decisions made are not implemented, there is no control over their implementation, everything is left to chance, as a result of which work results are usually low, people are not satisfied with their work, the manager, the psychological climate in the team is unfavorable, there is no cooperation, there is no incentive to work conscientiously, sections of work are made up of the individual interests of subgroup managers, hidden and obvious conflicts are possible, stratification into conflicting subgroups occurs.

A leader using an authoritarian management style relies solely on his own capabilities and personal qualities; believes that his subordinates are professionally incompetent, lazy, avoid responsibility and demand a harsh attitude towards themselves. He strives for sole leadership, while ignoring the initiative of subordinates, does not involve them in decision-making and strictly controls and regulates activities. With this management style, the leader:

focused only on work, on achieving goals and treats subordinates as goals in the process of achieving them;

distanced from subordinates, interested only in their professional qualities and results of work;

intolerant of criticism and objections;

requires submission to one's will;

forgets about respect for the personality of subordinates and their opinions, ignores the norms of business relations and ethical principles of relationships with his employees;

forces them to work, rather than stimulates their business activity and creativity in the performance of official duties;

prefers punishment;

strictly controls subordinates.

An authoritarian management style is ethically justified in extreme situations, in conditions that dictate the need for special clarity and efficiency of management. The results of management activities within the framework of an authoritarian style are high, but not for a long time. Employees experience a constant feeling of fear and are in a state of mental tension. Their activities and behavior are regulated by a huge number of instructions and rules. These factors negatively affect relationships within the team and relationships with the leader. In turn, the latter becomes irritated and takes appropriate sanctions against his subordinates.

A leader of a democratic style has opposing views on his subordinates and the system of managerial influence. It assumes that subordinates are able to reveal their creative potential and demonstrate their best qualities in the process of activity; they can take responsibility and if they accept the goals of the activity, they can actively participate in self-government and exercise self-control. Thus, with a democratic leader, employees have independence commensurate with their qualifications and job responsibilities, and the leader:

focused on the needs and interests of subordinates, provides assistance in solving their problems;

emphasizes respect for the personality of its employees in formal and informal relationships;

management influences are carried out to a greater extent in the form of requests, advice and instructions rather than orders;

carries out detailed current control least of all, and cares more about the final result;

stimulates the activity and independence of employees using a variety of economic and socio-psychological means and methods,

delegates authority, thereby fostering a sense of belonging to a common cause, collective and individual responsibility;

High performance results in a democratic management style are based, firstly, on the managerial competence of the manager, his understanding of psychological factors in relations with subordinates and compliance with ethical principles of communication. Secondly, on the realized personal capabilities of each employee, the ability to act outside the box and be responsible for their work and actions. Thirdly, on the atmosphere of trust, openness, respect, mutual assistance that has developed in the team, on the ability to satisfy the needs of employees for recognition and moral communication.

The main characteristic of the liberal (permissive) management style is a high degree of delegation of management functions and powers to subordinates. Using this style, the leader:

strive to avoid responsibility, especially in difficult situations;

does not show initiative, waiting for instructions and orders from above;

inconsistent in actions, under the pressure of the situation cancels or changes his decisions;

cannot give clear instructions, and if employees fail to fulfill their duties, he does the work for them;

sometimes in his relations with subordinates he shows familiarity and liberalism;

inconsistent in his actions and in his communications with his employees.

This style of management activity does not have clear goals, specific and consistent methods of organization, or high performance results. And the entire system of work and relationships between the manager and subordinates does not meet the needs of the latter and the goals of the activity.

In their pure form, the described types of managerial activities are rarely encountered in practice. More often there is a mixture of these styles, with one of the three playing a leading role. This is due to the fact that there are no management solutions suitable for all occasions and, depending on the situation, managers have to vary management styles; different managers have a unique “set of personal qualities” and their own manner of behavior; The teams that have to be managed differ in their level of development and the maturity of their employees (experience, level of education, desire to conscientiously fulfill their duties and take responsibility).

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

MARI STATE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

Department of Philosophy

TEST

in the discipline "Business Ethics"

Leader Ethics

Completed by: Karpova T.N.

FC student 11th

Credit No. 1090423419

Checked by: Associate Professor of the Department of Philosophy Karandaeva T.A.

Yoshkar-Ola

INTRODUCTION 4

1. Rules of etiquette in the activities of a leader 5

2. The role of the leader in the formation of the team 6

3. Types of relationships in a team 8

Conclusion 13

INTRODUCTION

The various ethical problems facing people are quite complex, and sometimes even insoluble, since the ethical assessment of right or wrong behavior is always a purely subjective thing. Moreover, each individual (rather than an organization) has his own ethics, which adds further complexity to the ethical views of an individual who may believe that employees should act one way at work and another way outside of it.

Personal ethics are usually influenced by family upbringing, social environment, moral qualities, value systems and choices made at the most important moments in life. Unlike personal ethics, a leader’s ethics prescribes standards of conduct at work. Ethics determines the manager’s sphere of competence and obliges him to deal with such issues as the attitude of the organization towards employees and employees towards the organization.

Within an organization, the ethical standards of an individual are greatly influenced by senior managers. Their behavior sets an example for others to follow and creates a cultural context that is much more powerful than the ethics training, institutional norms, or formal behavioral and ethical codes that many organizations have adopted.

To satisfy a sense of social responsibility, management may do a lot or almost nothing, depending on its understanding of managerial ethics.

Any enterprise or organization faces the task of increasing the efficiency of its activities. The successful solution of this problem largely depends on the level of personnel management. In this regard, there is a need to improve management and bring it into line with the conditions and goals of activity.

The manager must understand that the better his relationship with his subordinates, the more efficient the production will be, and the main characteristic of the relationship between the manager and the subordinate is their direct communication. Therefore, ethics of business communication in management is fundamental. This is what I will try to reveal in this work.

1. Rules of etiquette in the activities of a leader

Undoubtedly, the rules of etiquette also play a huge role in the formation of authority. The rules of etiquette, clothed in specific forms of behavior, indicate the unity of its two sides: moral, ethical and aesthetic. The first side is an expression of a moral norm: precautionary care, respect, protection, etc. The second side - aesthetic - testifies to the beauty and grace of forms of behavior.

In addition to the rules of cultural behavior, there is also professional etiquette. There have always been and will remain relationships in life that provide the highest efficiency in performing professional functions. Participants in any interaction always try to maintain the most optimal forms of this interaction and rules of behavior. For example, in an organization, a newcomer will be required to strictly adhere to proven and proven rules of business communication, since they facilitate the performance of professional functions and contribute to the achievement of their goals. In this or that team, group of workers, employees, business people, certain traditions develop, which over time acquire the force of moral principles and constitute the etiquette of this group, community.

In the practice of business relations there are always some standard situations that cannot be avoided. For these situations, forms and rules of behavior are developed. This set of rules constitutes the etiquette of business communication, which is important for a manager. Etiquette of business relations is defined, in particular, as a set of rules of behavior that represents the external side of business communication.

Manager etiquette is the result of a long selection of rules and forms of the most appropriate behavior that contributed to success in business relationships. Mastering these rules was not always easy, so leaders from the “plow” often spoke about them not very flatteringly: “Why do I need all this?” You can follow this principle. However, in order for a team to establish strong business relationships, if you want to establish strong ones, so that the authority of the manager is high enough, then knowledge of business etiquette is simply a must.

What rules of behavior should a leader know?

First of all, it should be remembered that business etiquette includes strict adherence to the rules of a culture of behavior, which presupposes, first of all, deep respect for the human person. The social role played by this or that person should not be self-sufficient, nor should it have a hypnotic influence on the subordinate. The cultural leader will treat with equal respect both the minister and the ordinary technical worker of the ministry, the president of the company, the firm and the office cleaner, i.e. Show everyone sincere respect. This sincere respect must become an integral part of the leader's nature. A culture of behavior in business communication is unthinkable without observing the rules of verbal (verbal, speech) etiquette associated with forms and manners of speech, vocabulary, i.e. with all the style of speech accepted in communication of this circle of business people. In a business conversation, you must be able to answer any question. It is always necessary to remember a sense of proportion.

In the speech etiquette of business people, compliments are of great importance - pleasant words expressing approval, a positive assessment of business activities, emphasizing taste in clothing, appearance, balance in the actions of a partner, i.e. assessing the intelligence of a business partner. During business communication there is always a real opportunity for compliments. They inspire your business partner, give him confidence, and approve. Will this interfere with the manager? It is especially important to remember the compliment if you are new to the business, and also one who suffered failure at first. It is no coincidence that open criticism of their employees is prohibited in Japanese companies: this is unprofitable for the company, since labor activity and initiative are reduced. Compliance with the most important rules of conduct with strangers is a sign of respectability, good manners, and self-confidence, which are important for a leader.

2. The role of the leader in the formation of the team

So, the effectiveness of the team’s work, its ability to solve assigned tasks largely depends on the moral and psychological climate, as well as on the prevailing “mood” of employees in the group, which, other things being equal, is determined, firstly, by the qualitative composition of the personnel and, secondly, -secondly, the peculiarities of informal relations between the manager and the subordinate.

Let's look at these problems in more detail. Scientific research and generalization of practical experience indicate that the most productive are work groups consisting of people of different ages, gender and temperament. Young workers are more accepting of new things, more energetic, but sometimes arrogant and not inclined to compromise. Older people, on the contrary, are quite conservative, but have life experience, are not prone to adventures, are able to make more informed decisions, and, as a rule, avoid conflict situations. Further, purely female and purely male teams have specific disadvantages: in women’s teams, petty squabbles occur more often, more work time is lost due to systematic discussion of everyday problems, etc., while in some men’s teams, foul language flourishes during working hours and "bad habits". In other words, the joint work of people of different sexes, as it were, tightens workers, increases self-discipline, and demands on themselves. It is equally important to have individuals with different temperaments in the group, since each of them, as we have already found out, has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Informal relationships between the manager and subordinates deserve the most serious attention. Along with the ability to choose the optimal leadership style in a given situation, it is necessary, first of all, to know the typical mistakes inherent in people of his status and to correctly build interpersonal relationships with staff. Typical errors include cases when:

The manager does not give specific tasks, but constantly annoys his subordinates with a large number of questions of a general nature;

“fixated” on one topic when communicating with staff, for example, labor discipline;

Formulates new ideas for completing tasks daily;

Constantly preaches his ideas;

Does not trust his employees, abuses petty control;

He is interested in papermaking;

Inaccessible geographically and in time;

Does not have ready-made solutions to production problems offered to personnel.

The success of informal relationships with subordinates, without which it is impossible to form a sense of respect for your leader, depends on compliance with a number of principles and rules of business communication.

Respect for the dignity of others is fundamental.

The moral and psychological basis of this principle is the axiom of social psychology, according to which no person feels comfortable enough without positive self-esteem. Consequently, the manager is obliged to see in each subordinate not a position, but an individual, show goodwill and tolerance, respect his personal life, but at the same time avoid advice in this area. It is advisable to always remember that “the strong never humiliate” and, therefore, it is unacceptable to raise your voice at your employee, attach labels like “lazy”, “idle”, “stupid”, etc.

If a subordinate makes a mistake or commits an offense, he, as a rule, understands his guilt and adequately perceives the punishment, but if his boss hurts his pride, he will not forgive it. Therefore, when analyzing a situation, it is necessary to separate the person and the action: criticize specific actions, and not the personality of the offender.

It is important to remember that only those leaders are respected who are praised in front of everyone and reprimanded privately; never complain about their employees and, if necessary, take their blame upon themselves; admit their mistakes promptly and openly.

Despite personal likes and dislikes, the manager is obliged to make the same demands on all subordinates, treat everyone equally, and not single out anyone; in front of strangers, address your employees by their first and patronymic names, regardless of their age.

A typical mistake of young managers is the desire to become “one of the people” among their subordinates. It’s better to keep your distance, separate personal and business, and avoid familiarity. Otherwise, the order as a form of direction will be ineffective.

A manager has no moral right to hide important information from his employees. At the same time, he is obliged to suppress gossip and denunciations.

Any boss faces complaints from his employees about working conditions, relationships within the team or with other departments. Even if the manager is not able to solve the problem himself, he is obliged to listen carefully to the subordinate. It is unacceptable to ignore the appeals of subordinates, because, as American sociologist Diana Tracy correctly noted, complainants are not traitors. It may very well be that the complainant is doing you a great favor by reporting a situation that others are suffering from but keeping silent. Thus, the basis for the success of any modern collective activity is a relationship of cooperation and mutual assistance.

3. Types of relationships in a team

Without pretending to be a special consideration of the problem of leadership, an interesting classification of types of relationships in a work group, proposed by American researchers Blake and Mouton, draws attention. It is based on a combination of two main parameters - attention to the person, the degree of consideration of people's interests and attention to production, the degree of consideration of the interests of the business. These are five types of relationships within teams, which differ significantly from the point of view of the moral and psychological climate.

1. Non-interference - a low level of concern for the manager about production and people. The leader does a lot himself, does not delegate his functions, and does not strive for serious achievements. The main thing for him is to maintain his position.

2. Warm company, a high level of care for people, a desire to establish friendly relations, a pleasant atmosphere, and a work pace that is convenient for employees. At the same time, the manager is not particularly interested in whether specific and sustainable results will be achieved.

3. Task: the manager’s attention is completely focused on solving production problems. The human factor is either underestimated or simply ignored.

4. Golden mean: the manager in his activities strives to optimally combine the interests of the business and the interests of the staff; he does not demand too much from employees, but also does not indulge.

5. Team: the most preferred type of relationship in a work group. The manager strives to take into account the interests of production and the interests of the team as much as possible, to combine efficiency and humanity at all levels of relations.

However, this model is not universal, since specific situations may differ significantly from each other.

An equally interesting study of the dynamics of interpersonal relationships in the “manager-subordinate” system was proposed by two Americans - Hersey and Blanchard. Within the framework of this approach, it is assumed that the degree of leadership and emotional support provided to an employee is closely related to the level of his professional maturity, i.e. As professionalism grows, the manager manages less and more and supports the employee more and more, instilling in him confidence in his abilities. At the same time, with the achievement of an average level of maturity and above, the manager not only manages less, but also supports him less emotionally, since such a subordinate is already able to control himself, and in this situation, a reduction in guardianship is regarded as trust on the part of the boss.

This approach to the problem allows the use of four types of relationships in the “manager-subordinate” system: command, suggestion, participation and delegation.

According to the proposed scheme, the order is optimal in the case of low professionalism, when the performer is not ready to independently complete the task and does not want to take responsibility. The manager's task is to instruct the employee, to lead a lot and to trust a little.

Suggestion is recommended to be used at maturity levels from an average to high employee: subordinates are not yet capable, but are already ready to take responsibility. This is where both guidance and support are especially important to help you get things done.

Participation is most effective at medium to high maturity levels. The employee is already capable of independently completing the task and in such a situation what is required is not so much guidance as psychological support, joint discussion of the problem and joint decision-making.

A high level of professional maturity involves the transfer of powers to the performer - delegation, which means weak management and a low degree of emotional support.

The problem of choosing the optimal behavior of a leader does not have an “armchair” solution, but we can identify typical situations that arise in the event of inappropriate behavior of a leader. Subordinates develop a feeling of annoyance, and the ground for discontent and resistance is created in cases where:

For the mistakes of one, the other is responsible;

The decision is made without the participation of the employee;

Discussion and proceedings are carried out in the presence of third parties or in the absence of the employee;

The manager is unable to admit his mistake and tries to find the culprit among his subordinates;

Important information is hidden from the performer;

An employee who is professionally qualified to take a higher position is not promoted;

A manager complains about a subordinate to a superior;

Rewards for the work of one employee go to another;

The level of demands is not the same for all employees; there are favorites and rejects in the team, etc.

The manager’s responsibilities include not only strategic issues, but also pure administration, which refers to directive ways of communication between the manager and his subordinates. A special place is occupied by various types of punishments and rewards. One such method is known as “carrot and stick”. Moreover, all psychologists of the second half of the 20th century. We are convinced that the “carrot” is much preferable to the “stick” and is much more effective when managing people. "Manage subordinates based on their positive deviations!" - this is the slogan of today. This does not mean, of course, that punishment as a type of managerial influence is about to die out. This only means that they are not the basis for the activities of a leader who strives to achieve something from his subordinates. For the effectiveness of “negative incentives” in management practice is greatly undermined by numerous “aggravating circumstances”:

They are conflict-generating;

c reduce the self-esteem of employees, disrupt their psychological balance;

Creates a fear of making mistakes;

Do not contribute to sustainable productivity growth;

They teach poorly, since in this case a person learns first of all to avoid punishment, and not to form the “correct” behavior.

Thus, the general rule, derived from numerous studies, is that “positive reinforcements” (encouragements, rewards) are more effective than “negative” ones. They “train” subordinates much better, psychologically reinforce patterns of required behavior, contribute to the formation of a favorable psychological climate in the team, increase people’s self-esteem, successfully “motivate” them to perform productive work, and increase the authority of the leader.

The use of such attractive management measures as incentives and remuneration also requires compliance with certain rules. Here are some of them, formulated by T. Peters and R. Waterman:

The reward should be specific, that is, for the fulfillment of an order, task, action or deed, and not for the achievement of successful indicators by the entire concern;

Reward must be immediate;

Remuneration should be achievable, that is, any achievements, including the smallest ones, deserve encouragement, and not just “outstanding achievements in work”;

Whenever possible, it is best to make rewards irregular and unpredictable;

Small rewards are sometimes more effective than large ones.

Obviously, the more a leader encourages his subordinates, the less he has to resort to punishment. But if he did have to, then it should be borne in mind that:

The reaction to a subordinate’s misconduct must be immediate;

All offenders are punished for undesirable behavior, not just the “instigators”;

A gradual increase in punishment is inappropriate; it is better to make the first punishment such that its second application is no longer required;

When punishing, one should not forget to clearly explain to the subordinate the desired pattern of behavior;

It is said that Japanese managers only punish repeated mistakes; maybe it’s worth stopping the punishing sword?

make a conscious effort to ensure that these relationships develop in the right direction.

However, often, even with considerable effort, the manager cannot find the necessary contact with his subordinates. They don't "understand" each other. The nature of this mutual understanding often lies in the field of psychology, more precisely in violations of interpersonal communication. And the “farther” a manager is from a subordinate, the greater the likelihood of making mistakes, primarily in assessing both the qualities of people and their actions, and this in turn affects the authority of the manager.

The control function of the manager plays an important role in the formation of the team and the authority of the leader. Problems with the implementation of this leadership function are generated by a simple contradiction: it is clear to everyone that lack of control is harmful, but few people like to be controlled. This contradiction can be partially avoided if the following requirements are met.

Control must be: constant, objective, prompt, open.

Control should not be: total, unsystematic, formal, and the results not communicated to the performer.

Try, so to speak, to turn a vice into a virtue: control is not a punitive action, but a manifestation of attention to the employee. After all, if no one controls you, then simply no one is interested in you. And subordinates, as you know, highly value signs of attention from management.

Let us recall some of the conclusions contained in the material presented:

leadership style is a strictly individual characteristic, the direction of leadership is determined mainly

three parameters: the personality of the leader, the maturity of the team and the production situation;

there is no best style, its optimality depends on the combination of the three indicated parameters;

The leadership style develops mostly objectively, but it can be adjusted (and significantly) in the required direction;

As you adjust your own leadership style, remember that you are not the first. Extensive experience in resolving psychological problems related to leadership has been accumulated and generalized. The desire and ability to use it is also a stylistic trait of a leader. And, moreover, appropriate in all possible styles.

So, the success of an enterprise or organization is closely related to the etiquette and culture of behavior of the leader. Good mastery of business etiquette and a culture of behavior requires time, desire and perseverance, constant behavioral training in various operating conditions so that knowledge turns into skills and habits. Then the reaction to any action, any move by the opponent, the development of the situation will correspond to the rules of good manners, business etiquette, and the requirements of the culture of behavior in a given situation. And then, undoubtedly, another thing, the authority of the leader will be quite high.

Conclusion

Modern Russia has chosen a market orientation in economic development. It is still difficult to judge what the path of reforms will be in terms of the relationship between economic, political and social factors, and what price will have to be paid for the mistakes made. However, there is no doubt about the need for economic theorists and business practitioners to abandon the paradigm of thinking of the times of the command economy.

Leadership is a special case of management, a set of interaction processes between a manager and a subordinate, an activity aimed at encouraging employees to achieve a goal by influencing individual and collective consciousness. Any manager has to decide which tasks are top priority and which can wait; what he can do himself and what he can entrust to others; how to direct the activities of employees, what needs to be done to coordinate their actions, ensure an atmosphere of cooperation between them, etc.

A modern leader must also have internal independence and the ability to take risks, not be afraid of bold ideas, constantly accumulate new information, cultivate pluralism of opinions, discussion, initiative, have the ability to create a team of like-minded people, inspire them, respect the law and moral values, be an erudite and competent person etc. This determines his authority.

LIST OF REFERENCES USED

Belolipetsky V.K., Pavlova L.G. Ethics and culture of management.-
Rostov-n/D, 2004.

2. Krasnikova E. A. Ethics and psychology of professional activity. -

3. Protanskaya E. S. Professional ethics. - St. Petersburg, 2003.