Another name for the economic management style. Leadership styles of a team leader. The negative aspects include

20.11.2019

Every leader has a specific management style.

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

1. Authoritarian style. The decision is made by the leader alone. He acts authoritatively in relation to subordinates, rigidly fixes the roles of participants, exercises detailed control, and concentrates in his hands all the main management functions.

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

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

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

3. Liberal style. Decisions are imposed by subordinates to the leader. He practically withdraws from the active management of the group, behaves like an ordinary member, provides the members of the group with complete freedom. Group members behave in accordance with their desires, their activity is spontaneous. This style is most effective in situations of finding the most productive areas of group activity.

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

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

liberal style: Tone - conventional. No praise, no blame. No cooperation. The position of the leader is imperceptibly away from the group. Things in the group go by themselves. The leader does not give instructions. Sections of work are composed of separate intervals or come from a new leader.

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

Control Style Options	Types of management styles
	Democratic	Liberal
1. Decision making and task definition	Personally by the leader	Taking into account the suggestions of subordinates	Approval and agreement with the opinion of subordinates
2. Method of bringing the solution			request, begging
3. The degree of regulation of the actions of subordinates		Optimal	Low (maximum freedom of subordinates)
4. The nature of communication between the leader and subordinates	Short, business, dry	Longer, not only business, but also personal	May not engage in communication if subordinates do not contact him
5. The nature of the regulation of the behavior and activities of subordinates	Emphasizes claims	Focuses on rewards	Refrains from regulating the behavior and activities of subordinates
6. Opinion of the head about subordinates		Considers all subordinates to be initially good, flexibility in changing assessments	Doesn't give grades to subordinates
7. The attitude of the leader to the initiative of subordinates	incredulous, negative	Encouraging the manifestation of initiative	Reassessment of the possibilities of the initiative of subordinates
8 Moral and psychological climate in the organization	Tense	Optimal	Extremely changeable
9. Performance indicators of the organization	High quantitative, medium quality	Average quantitative, high quality	Unstable indicators
10 Supervisory control over the activities of subordinates	elevated		Missing

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

In its purest form, these leadership styles are extremely rare. As a rule, there is a combination of different styles, but the signs of a single style still prevail;

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

The effectiveness of leadership depends primarily on flexibility in use. positive sides of one style or another and the ability to neutralize it weak sides.

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

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

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

The second style of management is democratic, when the leader tries not to show his own initiative, but supports initiatives "from below". In fact, the head of the organization is endowed not only with power, but also with certain resources that he must direct in the right direction, and most of the initiatives "from below "That's exactly what they point to. This style of management is characterized by the fact that the leader, by his decisions, chooses and consolidates not his own QOC, but "naturally" arising in the organization and supported by public opinion. The official recognition and consolidation of such OOKs proceeds smoothly, without social conflicts, because there is support for what is already there.

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

Despite the fact that all countries of the world use a mixed style of government, each of them is dominated by an authoritarian or democratic principle. So, in the eastern countries, authoritarian government is predominant, and in the western countries - democratic. It depends on the mentality of the nation and its social values. In Eastern culture, social values dominate (a person must work for the good of society), and in Western culture they are individual (society must work for the good of a person). In Eastern countries, people are afraid of power, considering it evil, in Western countries - power is afraid of people, always ready to replace it.

Each of these styles has advantages and disadvantages. The advantage of an authoritarian management style is the ability to maximize the mobilization of society's resources to solve specific social problems or achieve certain goals set by the country's leadership, and ensure their most efficient use. The disadvantages of the authoritarian style are the suppression of democracy, fear of the authorities, and most importantly, the grossest mistakes being made with impunity, for example, the privatization of state property, the war in Chechnya, and GKOs.

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

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

"Style is the person." In influencing subordinates, communicating with partners, clients, the personality traits of any boss are manifested. The concept of leadership style is directly related to the essence of management. How do adherents of radically opposite methods solve various managerial issues? Read our review.

Three Methods of Leadership

Management methods are diverse, but for scientific purposes they are divided into three main groups:

administrative-organizational, or command methods;
economic;
psychological methods.

An experienced manager, taking into account the situation and the characteristics of the team, selects a set of the most effective measures from each group.

The choice of methods and the frequency of their application are influenced not only by objective reasons, but also by the personal preferences of the manager. “Favorite” skills in general leave an imprint on all business communication with colleagues. Team leadership styles are a set of methods and measures implemented by a manager.

Typology of styles

The typology of Kurt Lewin is in demand and relevant today. The psychologist identified three management styles: autocratic, democratic and neutral. Styles differ in management methods, control systems, the presence or absence of delegation of authority.

The authoritarian leadership style is based to a greater extent on organizational and administrative methods, sanctions and rationing. Collegiate - social, psychological and economic. The liberal style does not require a clear methodological system.

Authoritarian leadership style

It is common for an autocrat to concentrate all work processes under his close attention: “Where it is not yourself, there is a grave!” He always relies only on his own strength. Usually, the autocrat believes that subordinates do not like to work, like "little children" they need to be forced. Gives orders and orders, insisting on complete obedience. Violation of its requirements is punishable by sanctions. "Minimum democracy, maximum control." All actions of the personnel are clearly regulated by instructions, regulations and require the constant participation of the authorities.

This style of leadership in the organization is aimed more at improving the efficiency of the work process. It gives such results as: high productivity, profitability, overfulfillment of the plan. On the other hand, the leader chooses a position outside the group, and the socio-psychological climate and collective interests are not always taken into account. The subordinate ceases to be a person, but turns into a "bolt" of the bureaucratic system.

The advantage of a strong control function sometimes translates into a 25-hour workload for a manager! The strengthening of bureaucracy with the growth of the organization deprives management decisions of efficiency.

The authoritarian style of leadership is not for every manager. For an adherent of this style, it is important to "maintain authority", not sinking to permissiveness, arbitrariness. Planning tactics, strategies, results orientation, and not blind observance of prescriptions and instructions will help to avoid traps. The authoritarian style of leadership is characterized by maintaining discipline at a high level, therefore, in a crisis, it is simply necessary in a crisis.

Pros and cons of the autocratic style

Weaknesses

unity of command;
focus on results;
good discipline;
efficiency, quick response;
minimum time and material costs;
efficiency in difficult periods: crisis, formation of the organization and others.

high dependence of working groups on the leader;
great volitional pressure and control from the authorities;
suppression of initiative employees, stagnation, lack of opportunity to apply creative potential;
inefficient motivation, poor social and psychological climate, staff dissatisfaction;
sole control, requiring a significant investment of time and effort;
the probability of error in individual decisions.

Thus, the authoritarian leadership style has many disadvantages, and therefore is effective only with experienced, skillful leadership. Let's apply in certain production, crisis situations connected with debts, the termination of deliveries, possible bankruptcy. But on the condition that subordinates agree to such methods and forgive the "king" of the dictator's manners for the results achieved.

Democratic style

The democratic style of leadership is effective in terms of productivity and is not inferior to the autocratic one. Employees under the leadership of a democrat form a close-knit team, are satisfied with their work and labor relations, are active and enterprising.

The leader-democrat always organizes the discussion of the problem. As the saying goes, "one head thinks well, but two or more thinks better." The collective method of making managerial decisions increases the likelihood of their correctness.

With a collegial style, much time is not lost in the control process, because the manager's attention is drawn to the results of work, and not the entire course of work, as in autocratic management. Powers are actively delegated to employees who monitor the results of work. The staff for a Democrat is main resource and source of information.

Motivation in the team is increased due to interest in the personality of the employee. People feel they belong to common cause. This style of leadership in the organization allows you to implement well-functioning feedback.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the democratic style?

This style is applicable in the conditions of formation, growth of an enterprise with a fairly stable team. It is very useful in situations of crisis in the internal environment of the company, in case of problems in relationships, work processes.

Authoritarian-democratic style

The presence of indisputable advantages of collegial management does not mean "writing off" the authoritarian style. In management practice, a combined leadership style is actively used - "authoritarian-democratic", combining the advantages of the two styles.

A complex approach containing contradictions at the core. What to prioritize: creativity (democratic methods) or discipline (organizational methods)? The selection of the main parameter for a particular situation is carried out by ranking factors or a combination of methods. For example, maintaining democracy in the decision-making process and authoritarianism at the stage of their implementation.

Conclusion

Basic leadership styles should be applied according to the situation. An experienced manager has different approaches. But it is impossible to radically change styles because of the psychological inclination towards certain management methods. An autocrat is not able to turn into a democrat overnight, but he can adjust his own management style to suit the circumstances.

A diverse arsenal of methods and methods of personnel management contributes to successful activities in the field of management. The development of these skills cannot occur by itself, just as managerial talent does not arise spontaneously, it must be developed and trained.

Leadership style- a set of methods used by the leader to influence subordinates, as well as the form (manner, nature) of the execution of these methods in order to effectively implement managerial functions and assigned tasks.

The study of leadership style and the very emergence of this concept are associated with the name of the famous psychologist K. Levin, who in the 30s. XX century Developed a typology of individual leadership styles. The German psychologist Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) conducted a series of experiments, on the basis of which he identified three classic management styles:

Ø democratic (or collegial);

Ø conniving (or liberal-anarchist, or neutral).

Based on giving orders to subordinates in the form of an order without any explanation common ties with the goals and objectives of the organization. It is characterized by strict individual decision-making by the leader (“minimum democracy”), strict constant control over the implementation of decisions with the threat of punishment (“maximum control”), lack of interest in the employee as a person. Employees should only do what they are ordered to do. At the same time, they receive a minimum of information. The interests of employees are not taken into account.

This style is characterized by the centralization of power, the leader requires reports on the work performed, and prefers the official nature of relations. The leader maintains a distance between himself and his subordinates, perceives everything new with caution. Due to constant control, this management style provides quite acceptable results of work according to the following criteria: profit, productivity, product quality can be good.

Style Features:

Ø the prevailing methods of leadership are orders, orders, reprimands, threats, deprivation of benefits. The interests and wishes of employees are not taken into account;

Ø in communication with people, a harsh tone of communication prevails, harshness, tactlessness, even rudeness;

Ø The interests of the cause are placed much higher than the interests of the people.

Style benefits:

Ø provides clarity and efficiency of management

Ø minimizes decision-making time, in small organizations provides a quick response to changing external conditions

Ø creates a visible unity of management actions to achieve the goals.

Style disadvantages:

Ø high probability of erroneous decisions;

Ø suppression of initiative, creativity of subordinates, slowing down innovations, passivity of employees;

Ø bulky control system,

Ø dissatisfaction of people with their work, their position in the team;

Ø unfavorable psychological climate (“toadies”, “scapegoats”, intrigues) causes an increased psychological stress load, is harmful to mental and physical health.

Use cases:

This is required by the production situation (in critical situations - accidents on the production)

The staff voluntarily and willingly agrees to authoritarian methods guides. Subordinates trust the leader, and he is sure that they are not able to independently act in the right way.

This style is effective in military service, in the activities of some public institutions(combat military operations, etc.).

Democratic management style:

Management decisions are adopted on the basis of a discussion of the problem, taking into account the opinions and initiatives of employees (“maximum democracy”), the implementation of the decisions taken is controlled by both the manager and the employees themselves (“maximum control”); the manager shows interest and benevolent attention to the personality of employees, taking into account their interests, needs, characteristics.

The democratic style is the most effective, as it provides a high probability of correct balanced decisions, high production results of labor, initiative, activity of employees, people's satisfaction with their work and team membership.

This management style involves interaction based on trust and mutual understanding. The leader behaves in this case as one of the members of the group; each employee can express their opinions on different issues. Part of the management functions the leader delegates to his subordinates, creates situations in which they can show themselves in the best possible way. The implementation of a democratic style is possible with high intellectual, organizational, psychological and communicative abilities of the leader.

Style Features:

Ø Important production problems are discussed and a solution is developed on this basis. The leader in every possible way stimulates and encourages the initiative on the part of subordinates;

Ø regularly and timely informs the team on issues that are important to them;

Ø Communication is friendly and polite;

Ø With this style, a favorable psychological climate and cohesion develop in the team.

Style benefits:

Ø stimulates the manifestation of initiative, reveals creative potential

Ø allows you to successfully solve innovative, non-standard tasks

Ø includes psychological mechanisms work motivation

Ø increases the satisfaction of performers with their work

Ø creates a favorable mental climate in the team, etc.

Conditions for applying the style:

Having a stable, well-established team

High qualification of employees

The presence of active, proactive, out-of-the-box thinking employees

Under non-extreme production conditions.

Permissive management style:

The permissive style of management is characterized, on the one hand, by the "maximum of democracy", i.e. everyone can express their opinions, but real accounting, agreement of opinions is not sought to be achieved, and on the other hand, a “minimum control” (even the decisions made are not implemented, there is little control over their implementation, a collective method of decision-making is used to avoid responsibility). Softness in managing people prevents the leader from acquiring the desired authority.

Style Features:

Ø communication is conducted in a confidential tone, in a polite manner, the manager is indifferent both to the needs of employees and to criticism addressed to him,

Ø this leadership style is acceptable in creative teams in which employees are distinguished by their creative individuality;

Ø there is almost complete freedom of performers with a very weak managerial impact;

Ø This style of management is characterized by lack of initiative, non-interference of the leader in the process of certain works.

Style disadvantages:

Performance is usually poor;

People are dissatisfied with their jobs

The psychological climate in the team is not always favorable;

There is no cooperation;

There is no incentive to work conscientiously;

Sections of work are made up of individual interests of leaders;

There is a stratification into conflicting subgroups.

This style is justified with a very high competence and responsibility of the staff and poor training of the leader himself. Also in the management of scientific and other creative teams in the presence of strong and disciplined workers.

In general, the leadership style is flexible, individual and situational. He must master all three styles and skillfully apply them depending on the specific situation, the specifics of the tasks being solved, the socio-psychological characteristics of employees and their personal qualities.

Custom Style:

This style is not distinguished by science, but it will always exist.

We can say that the individualized style is a creative mixture of all the above leadership styles. The leader uses authoritarianism at certain moments, takes the blow on himself, and bears all the responsibility. Then, in order to solve some problems, he convenes the management of the company and puts a number of issues before them for consideration, i.e. uses a passive, liberal style. And, finally, the leader assigns some of the duties to the heads of departments, including giving them the right to resolve certain issues and responsibility for making decisions, while he himself controls the progress of their work.

Forte this style of leadership: his creativity, because The manager can vary different styles of leadership depending on the situation that occurs in the company.

Weakness: the leader must constantly show a certain flexibility and speed of reaction, for example, if in situations that require authoritarianism, he will show a passive style, then he will quickly lose his influence and authority in the company.

"Multidimensional" Leadership Styles(take into account simultaneously a number of criteria for assessing the behavior of the leader)

Initially, the idea of a "two-dimensional" management style was formed, which is based on two approaches. One of them focuses on the creation of a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team, the establishment of human relations, and the other - on the creation of proper organizational and specifications in which a person can fully reveal his abilities.

Management grid of R. Blake and J. Mouton.

In the early 1980s, the concept of the "management grid" appeared, created by American psychologists Robert Blake and Jane Mouton.

	1,9			9,9



		5,5



1,1			9,1

Focus on

human
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Task orientation

The vertical axis of this scheme ranks “concern for a person” (the manager’s focus on employees, their needs, expectations, positive and negative qualities) on a scale from 1 to 9. Caring for people can be expressed in creating favorable working conditions, job security, improving the structure salaries, etc.

The horizontal axis ranks “concern for production” (the concentration of the manager's attention on production indicators - productivity, profit, efficiency) also on a scale from 1 to 9. In total, 81 leadership styles are obtained, which are determined by the degree of manifestation of these two factors. Blake and Mouton describe the middle and four extreme positions of the grid as:

1.1. poverty management (little management): involves minimal concern for production and the needs of workers. The leader makes the minimum effort required to maintain his or her workplace In the organisation.

9.1. work management: maximum concern for production efficiency is combined with minimum concern for subordinates. The 9.1 type leader gives priority to maximizing production results, dictating to subordinates what and how they should do, the moral microclimate in the leader's team is of little concern.

1.9. people management: maximum concern for people is combined with minimum concern for production; attention is paid to creating a comfortable and friendly atmosphere in the organization, due to which a fairly even working rhythm can be maintained.

5.5. control in the middle: the leader finds a balance between production efficiency and a good microclimate in the group. This style is quite conservative, it assumes a system of assumptions that ensure the peaceful coexistence of the leader and subordinates, in work, an orientation towards a reliable average result (both in terms of labor achievements and employee satisfaction).

9.9. collective management: work efficiency is determined high level obligations of people and their interaction. The leader seeks the acceptance by employees of the goals of the organization as their own, ensuring this high performance. A high degree of employee satisfaction entails high labor achievements. An atmosphere of universal trust and respect is being created.

Thus, the managerial grid includes two components of the manager's work. The first is attention to solving production problems and tasks, and the second is attention to people.

Blake and Moutton proceeded from the fact that the most effective leadership style - the optimal style - was the behavior of the leader in position 9. 9. In their opinion, such a leader combines a high degree of attention to his subordinates and the same attention to performance. The term "production" means not only the manufacture wealth, but also the implementation of sales, settlements, customer service, etc. The researchers believed that professional training and a conscious attitude to the goals of the organization allows all leaders to approach the style of 9. 9, thereby increasing the efficiency of their work.

Theoretically, the attractiveness of the style in position 9.9 is obvious, but the question arises - what then prevents it from becoming the most common in practice? The German researcher U. Shtopp identified seven main obstacles to its use:

1. low level of education of employees

2. insufficient managerial preparedness of managers

3. low identification of employees with the tasks of the organization

4. unsatisfactory condition information system enterprises

5. low degree of willingness of employees to take responsibility for themselves

6. difference in the value orientations of the manager and employees

7. Emotional incompatibility of the leader and subordinates arising from hierarchical relations in the organization.

Most of the listed obstacles are, in principle, removable, but require long-term and serious work, both on the part of the leader and on the part of subordinates (for example, according to parameters 1,2,4). However, among them there are those that practically do not depend on the efforts of the leader (parameters 6, 7). And this means that additional factors that are commonly called situational affect the effectiveness of leadership. This means that in the models of leadership styles being developed, one more variable should appear - the situation. Consider some situational models of leadership styles.

The authoritarian style of managing an organization is characterized by excessive centralization of the leader's power, autocratic decision of all issues. This style is characteristic of imperious and strong-willed people, tough in relation to others. This article discuss in detail its advantages and disadvantages.

You will learn:

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

Authoritarian management style - this is, first of all, a strictly designated organization's regulations, in which employees conscientiously perform their duties, resignedly recognizing the authority of the leader.

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

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

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

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

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

A tough manager intensifies the competition between the employees of the sales department. A calm and friendly boss supports the teamwork of the sales team. The editors of the Commercial Director magazine put together a test for you to find out which management style will bring you the most profit and how to strike a balance in your management style.

Methods of authoritarian style of organization management

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

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

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

Economic Methods management is the control over the activities of personnel through a system of bonuses and fines. Thus, you can stimulate the employee, form his interest in work. Advantage this method in that subordinates voluntarily perform the tasks assigned to them. The disadvantage is the additional financial expenses. In addition, the imposition of fines is not legal.

Socio-psychological methods management - motivating employees with the help of psychology techniques and simple "human" communication. Efficiency depends on the abilities, experience and charisma of the leader. It requires a competent approach, without which one can only aggravate the situation, becoming “one’s own” for everyone, which will lead to a loss of authority.

Public or collective methods influence. Theoretically, they can serve as a means authoritarian control, since the boss always has the opportunity to exercise leadership, using colleges and councils as intermediaries for this. However, this formally contradicts the very definition of authoritarianism. However, indirect management deserves to be mentioned as one of the methods available to the manager.

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

"Exploitative" authoritarian style.

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

All orders are carried out by employees blindly, from the position of "our business is small." Mistakes of the leader cause gloating among subordinates.

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

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

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

This type of authoritarian leader style implies a parental attitude towards subordinates. The boss is interested in the point of view of the staff, but he can ignore even a reasonable opinion and do it his own way. The manager provides some freedom of action, but tightly controls the work process and monitors compliance with the company's charters and the requirements of the work algorithm. Are used various methods punishments and rewards.

Women's team management: psychological features

A few words about the authoritarian-democratic style of governance

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

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

However, with an authoritarian-democratic style, if the need arises, the leader will easily leave the opinion of subordinates without attention and make a decision alone. It is also not excluded the use of reprimands, comments and orders as methods of management.

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

Authoritarian management style: modern modifications

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

bureaucratic leadership style

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

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

Autocratic leadership style

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

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

Patriarchal leadership style

An organization with this leadership style exists on the principle of a large family, where the leader becomes its head. He takes care of his subordinates, cares and demands respect, gratitude and diligence from them. Within the framework of this style, employees are stimulated through the formation of their personal dependence and devotion.

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

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

Charismatic leadership style

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

In our country, the charismatic style is common in enterprises created on the initiative of the leader himself. As the company grows, it becomes necessary to tighten and regulate the organization of the work process, as the possibilities of charismatic leadership weaken.

Expert opinion

Russian leaders are negatively affected by stereotypes

Galina Rogozina,

Head of Leadership Development Practice at RosExpert Consulting Company, Moscow

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

Organization management system in modern business conditions

How to know if an authoritarian leadership style is right for you

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

The following factors must be taken into account:

Nature of activity

Sufficient influence on the choice of management style is provided by the type of activity of the company's employees. For example, for a creative team, a liberal management style is perfect, but at times it needs to be shaken up with a democratic or even authoritarian style. The lack of boundaries for creativity is necessary, but everything is good in moderation. If it so happened that for each mistake of employees the company incurs losses (not necessarily in financial plan), then it would be more appropriate to use an authoritarian style. However, not a single team can survive on punishments alone, so do not forget about rewards.

The degree of complexity of the task

As a rule, the most difficult tasks have many solutions. There is a difficulty in choosing the most effective of them. If it is difficult to say which is better, a democratic management style will do. Solving the problem alone is dangerous, it is much more effective to think about the issue together, considering different points of view.

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

The specifics of the team

A big plus for the leader if he is personally acquainted with all subordinates. Then it will be easy for him to choose an approach for everyone and reveal his potential. Some work more fruitfully when they are given clear tasks, someone is stronger in improvisation. A prudent boss should keep in mind such features of each employee. Naturally, this is easier to implement in a small team.

When a team consists of newcomers who have little understanding of the matter, management is best done in an authoritarian style. If the majority of the team are professionals, it will be more efficient to work with a democratic management style.

Force majeure situations

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

Business management problems: how mentality affects work

Expert opinion

Different management styles need to be able to apply according to the situation

Galina Agureeva,

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

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

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

The transition to a different leadership style should be smooth. A person needs time to change. You can't be a despot today, and tomorrow you can pat your subordinates on the back and ask their opinions on everything. Moreover, it is also easier for employees when changes occur gradually. For example, when leaders in coaching management become interested in the point of view of employees, instead of giving instructions, this sometimes causes confusion among subordinates - they are not ready for such a relationship. In such situations, if the head of the company understands that he is authoritarian and non-public, for starters, you can put a more flexible and sociable person next to him, for example, an HR director. Otherwise, the function of "ideological inspirer" can be taken over by anyone and the situation will get out of control.

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

How can a leader gain credibility in a team?

12 tips for what an authoritarian style of management should look like

Don't go against your principles.

A leader who has won love and respect should not neglect his principles. Write a list of things that are completely unacceptable for you in communicating with the team. If, for example, you are determined not to be late for work, let the team know. Punishment for such misconduct is another matter. The main thing is not to give in to your principles in any case. It is worth at least once to close your eyes to the lateness of an employee and leave him without sanctions, and your rule will immediately lose its meaning for the entire team. It is better not to overdo it with such principles, five are enough, otherwise you can create an image of a despot for yourself, and this is useless to you.

Set clear time frames.

Spend a fixed amount of time in any meetings, such as 30 minutes. It may be that some issues will require more careful consideration and take longer, but these cases will be an exception. If employees keep in mind that they have only 30 minutes to resolve the issue, they are almost 100% likely to cope within this period. Give an hour for discussion and they will think all this time. Give a task without limiting the time for its solution, it will not be ready the next day.

Do not be afraid of conflicts in the team.

Do not be afraid of the emergence of conflicts in the team. After all, sometimes they can be useful. Even conflict within the team can create healthy competition, which will significantly increase labor efficiency if it is supported.

Reward each for his merit.

If the solution proposed by any employee turned out to be successful, you should not attribute its success to the whole team or to yourself personally. This in the bud can discourage initiative and reduce diligence in work.

Treat every employee equally.

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

Everyone should get what they deserve.

Everyone should receive according to their merits. If subordinates make a mistake, do not comfort them like children. Employees must be aware that they are responsible for their misdeeds, and all the consequences lie on their shoulders. But success should also be treated according to the same principle: the efforts and achievements of employees should be encouraged. Moral or monetary - you decide. If a subordinate has achieved success, do not pretend that this is how it should be. Emotional reinforcement is necessary for every team to be effective.

Don't change yourself.

From a good-natured person, it is unlikely that a strict authoritarian boss will turn out. If he tries to become such, it will look unnatural. Just as if a tough and domineering person who is listened to outside the work team, try to patronize his subordinates like a father who is indulgent to all mistakes. Choose a management tactic in which you feel comfortable. And remember the main thing: the best management style is a balanced mix of all styles.

Be even more interested in your work.

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

Be clear about your instructions.

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

Learn to make decisions.

It is your responsibility to solve problems, you are responsible for them. For this reason, you should convey your desires to employees in verbal and non-verbal ways.

Supervise the work of subordinates.

Always be aware of what is happening. Establish procedures to ensure that you always have access to the information you need to assess each employee's diligence and performance.

Draw the attention of subordinates to all cases of non-compliance with the rules.

Let them know what kind of behavior cannot be considered satisfactory. Insist on strict adherence to the organization's rules.

How to easily increase your authority: the secrets of Benjamin Franklin

Authoritarian style of management on the examples of global companies

Corporation "Chrysler»

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

Lee Iacocca consulted with various experts and came to the conclusion that the main problem of the corporation is the liberal style of management. New leader changed this approach focusing on a combination of democratic and authoritarian principles. This led to the fact that the Chrysler Corporation managed to regain lost ground in a short time and become one of the leaders in the automotive industry.

Henry Ford

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

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

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

Steve Jobs

Steve Jobs was a unique figure among leaders. He was not only the media face of the company, but also its ideologue, as well as a tough leader who rejected the democratic style of management. However, his authoritarianism did not lie in the absence of intermediate bosses with significant powers. Just in this regarding Jobs gave them enough power and freedom. Much more significant is the fact that the leader was the face of Apple, indispensable due to personal charisma and strength of character. Apart from leadership qualities he also possessed considerable commercial competence enabling him to effectively manage the company.

Bill Gatesand companyMicrosoft

Bill Gates stands out from other leaders with the democratic approach he takes. But this democracy is selective: the creator of the Microsoft company introduces concessions for representatives of the most attractive position for him - programmers. It provides them with considerable freedom, both in terms of work schedule and approach to the implementation of tasks.

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

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

Authoritarian style, or "As I said, so be it"

Gennady Pavlovich P. has been leading the team for many years. As he got into the managers back in Soviet times, he manages. It is clear that for so many years his style has already been formed and is not subject to change. And it would be necessary: Gennady Pavlovich is one of those bosses who firmly believe in the instructions from the joke: “Point 1. The boss is always right. Point 2. If the boss is wrong - see point 1”. Yes, yes, there are still. No wonder that in the team he has a turnover: young people come, brought up in a new society, who are not afraid to offer their ideas and are very surprised when they encounter the principles of the boss. They are surprised and leave - to more loyal leaders. Only the main backbone is delayed in the team - people who have been working for more than a dozen years and have long been accustomed to Gennady Pavlovich's quirks. And everything would be fine, only this backbone is almost entirely pensioners. alien to them - the company has no development, everything goes the old fashioned way. The company is not doing well.

Do you know such Gennadiev Pavlovich? They are also found among the younger generation of entrepreneurs. Usually, very authoritarian, harsh in judgments, recognize only their own opinion. They do not allow the slightest deviation from instructions, regulations, charters and the order established in the company. They tremblingly observe subordination - they do not allow liberties with the common people, this is not a master's business. Here is the paradox: they do not trust their own employees, but at the same time they want their work tasks to be performed flawlessly.

Disadvantages of an authoritarian style

A child can be thrown out with water: one who is used to not listening to opinions risks not hearing valuable ideas that will bring profit to the company. Someone who does not allow informal relationships with subordinates may not notice the love of their life or someone who can become a best friend. Human relationships sometimes go beyond subordination.
Stubbornness is not perseverance. Fanatical following instructions a step to the left - a step to the right is equal to execution - a disastrous position for the company. Read the biographies of great entrepreneurs: they all recognize the need to break the rules, think big, allow creativity.
Not everyone agrees to work with a dictator- In companies where the authoritarian style of management reigns, the percentage of layoffs is higher. And leave, as a rule, the most talented. In such a collective, opportunists or conservatives survive, who do not care.
Employees in such companies do not develop, do not offer ideas, do not learn new things. Maybe they would be happy - but why, because it will still be the way the local god ordered. And since the initiative is punishable - why show it at all?

Advantages of an authoritarian style

Iron discipline. You can't spoil a dictator: either you fulfill all his requirements, or the door to the street is open. As a rule, fines for the slightest violation bloom in such a team. Total subordination makes employees obedient and agreeable to any demand from management.
Clarity and transparency of all business processes. The boss-dictator knows exactly how and what happens in the company at each stage, what tasks are solved and who performs them.
The employees do not get confused, but they will clearly follow the orders of their superiors - they are no strangers. With a democratic or liberal leadership style, this is more difficult to implement: in the event of force majeure, both the bosses and employees can storm like a ship in bad weather. And this is fraught with hastily made and erroneous decisions.

Democratic style, or "Let's think together"

Aleksey K., a young leader, resigned from the company of Gennady Pavlovich and founded own business. He decided to learn from the mistakes of others and realized that he would not allow such a dictatorship that reigned in his former place of work. Alexey recruited young employees who were more like-minded than his subordinates. From the first days, he began to adhere to a democratic leadership style: he discussed the company's development strategy with employees, listened to their ideas and opinions, and trusted them to work on projects independently. For the workers, he was not a strict boss, but his own boyfriend Lekha. Once, this almost ruined the company: the employees relaxed and stopped taking Alexei seriously. Some people started to be late, miss the deadlines for completing tasks, and to the bewilderment of the boss he said: “What are you doing, don’t worry!”. When deals with profitable clients began to fail and the company lost profits, the young businessman realized that it was time to change something.

Democratic management style is a deceptive thing. Young and modern, it seems the only acceptable and in line with the spirit of the times (well, don’t work the old fashioned way!), but it’s worth loosening the reins a little - and it will turn out like in the example above. So that democracy does not turn into anarchy and permissiveness, the leader must have managerial experience.

In general, the democratic style is really a priority in young modern companies. The leader does not make decisions alone - he consults with the team, arranges brainstorming sessions, tries to ensure that each employee reveals his potential. He himself works on an equal footing or assigns himself the role of a consultant, mentor. If the Democrat boss is wrong, he does not blame the staff for everything, but draws conclusions. At the same time, he remains a leader - he does not remove himself from the main role, he does not emphasize that "we are all equal here, guys." That is, a team is a team, but the hierarchy must be built clearly.

Cons of democratic style

The possibility of anarchy, belittling the role of the leader, the emergence of opposition in the team. In general, everything that is described on the example of Alexei K.
Decisions can take a long time. The more people involved in the discussion, the longer the process can take. The case will be saved by clear deadlines for setting tasks. For example, 3 days are given for discussion and introduction of rationalization proposals - and not a second longer. This disciplines employees and speeds up business processes.

Advantages of democratic style

If no mistakes are made, a democratic style can become the basis for creating.

Strengthens team spirit makes employees real like-minded people united by one goal. Well, if the company has worked out - the mission and values, the main tasks for the coming years, the common Big Idea.
Reduces the number of errors in the work. The more people involved in solving the problem, the greater the chance that there will be best option. Just remember, the discussion should not be delayed.
Minimum staff turnover. Why leave the team if you share its values and tasks, feel involved in one common goal? That's right, no need. Employees rarely leave companies with a democratic management style (unless, of course, they join the team and share common values).

Person-centered style, or "Don't be afraid, I'm with you"

Olga B. worked with both Gennady Pavlovich and Alexei. The woman realized that both authoritarian and democratic styles have their pros and cons, and decided to act differently. Actually, she did not come up with anything new - she used a completely individual approach. Olga realized that each employee needs to work in their own way, and what is suitable for one is categorically unacceptable for another. For example, a quiet person may be shy at general planning meetings and brainstorming sessions, but in a personal conversation, she will begin to gush creative ideas. It is difficult for an owl man to come to the office by 9 am - his head does not understand, things are not being done, but in the evening the most fruitful time comes. Olga organized a free schedule for several comrades, she allowed introverts not to speak at the planning meeting in front of everyone. The employees appreciated the good attitude and began to call the boss “our mommy”. But without a fly in the ointment, there was a group of people who quickly found a good attitude as a weakness and began to openly score on work. Olga was worried, held soul-saving conversations, and only when the team filed a collective request for the dismissal of the offenders, she decided to take a bold step.

Practicing an individual approach is the right thing to do. Typically, bosses of this type (usually women) like to conduct psychological tests, arrange corporate parties and joint gatherings in order to get to know their employees better. However, you should not overprotect workers: you are not a hen, and they are not helpless chickens. Trust, but verify, be not a mom, but a boss - this is the moral of this fable.

Cons of a person-centered approach

As a rule, bosses of this type are soft, sensitive people. A good relationship they are more important than the profit of the company and its development. Therefore, as sad as it is, a soft boss can quickly be “eaten” his more resourceful colleagues or one of the number of subordinates.
Absence . Instead of giving clear instructions and controlling the process of completing tasks, such leaders either do everything themselves or forgive endless delays. Wake up guys, this is business! Here you need to make difficult decisions and take big risks, otherwise there is a risk of burnout and.

Advantages of an individual approach

Good relations in the team. Human relations are almost the main thing for half of the employees. If you are lucky enough to find an understanding boss, many will hold on to this place with their hands and teeth, even despite the low salary and small career prospects.
AT crisis situation employees will stand behind the boss with a mountain and will not let the company fall apart. “One for all and all for one” - this slogan still works.

So how should you?

In each of the three styles, we found our flaws. So what management style to choose, how to behave with subordinates? Much, of course, depends on your personality and type of character. A dictator by nature will never “deliver snot” and take care of the personality of each employee. And a quiet, intelligent woman is simply not able to crack her fist on the table and force her subordinates to work.

What to do? Combine management styles depending on the situation. This is called situational management. For example, if a force majeure event occurs, you need to turn on the dictator mode and give clear instructions that can save the situation. If you see that an employee is not coping with work, use an individual approach, talk to the person personally, find out what worries him. If you need to decide new task- Adhere to a democratic style, get the opinions of all employees and solve the problem together. Moreover - even in interaction with the same person it is possible to apply different management styles - again, depending on the situation. Somewhere to be a tough leader, somewhere - a wise mentor, sometimes to provide the necessary paternal support. Here is a table to help you skillfully navigate between several management styles.

Of course, for this you need to be an experienced leader and a fairly flexible person. All this comes with time. Good luck to you, let everything work out!