Authoritarian method of leadership. How to choose a style of personnel management: characteristics of styles and methods. Relationships with subordinates

Management style is a stable system of ways, methods, techniques for influencing a leader on a team, organization joint activities to achieve meaningful goals. Right choice management style largely determines the success of management, and hence the efficiency of the enterprise.
Undoubtedly, the style of management is influenced by the personality of the leader, who, even by his character or temperament, can determine one or another style. Not the last place is occupied in the formation of the management style by moral and business qualities leader. In any case, management style is a rather complex phenomenon that is studied by management psychology and other sciences that study the relationship of people in the field of production, management, and economics.

American psychologists are quite resolute about the potential possibilities of shaping management style. Their position is unequivocal - the management style should be formed. This should be done by the leader himself by restructuring both his personality and by making appropriate decisions to change the structure. working group, daily routine and other factors that affect production.

Characteristics of the main management styles

American scientists in the field of management psychology R. Blake and D. Mouton have developed a table of management styles, with which you can choose the most effective management style, depending on the individual qualities of the manager and the needs of production.

They took as a basis two qualities of a leader, which he manifests in the process of managing an enterprise. This is concern for people and concern for production efficiency. Depending on this, scientists have identified five main management styles. However, there are many intermediate options between them, because those properties that Blake and Munton took as starting points are rarely found in their pure form.

The meaning of their classification is that the manager is constantly faced with a choice: either to increase the volume of production by increasing the efforts of employees, or to choose a policy that meets people, but the interests of the manufacturer will certainly suffer.

Another important factor in the Blake-Mouton system is the collective management factor. It is decisive in the case when the manager is faced with the task of significantly increasing production volumes and at the same time causing less harm to people.

When choosing a management style, the leader should know what he needs more for this time: improving relations with workers or production tasks. Thus, the Blake-Moonton system is quite flexible and allows the leader to constantly change his tactics and management style.

Authoritarian management style

The authoritarian style of management is characterized by excessive centralization of power: the leader concentrates all power in his own hands, takes over all, even partial, management functions and tries to exclude all the necessary self-regulatory mechanisms of this process.

The autocrat autocratically decides most of the issues of the life of the team, does not consult with anyone, does not strive for collegiality in work. In working with subordinates, the manager tends to exaggerate administrative methods of influence. Stimulating the labor activity of subordinates, he uses mainly negative incentives: remark, warning, reproaches, threats, reprimands, punishments, deprivation of benefits, prohibitions that cause subordinates to feel anxiety, anxiety, fear, oppression.

The authoritarian style is characterized by a very high intensity of control over the work of subordinates by the leader. He seeks to personally control everything and everyone. He does not trust anyone, he constantly keeps in sight all aspects of the life of the team. In this way, he achieves the exact and obligatory fulfillment of his requirements, but at the same time increases the dependence of his subordinates on himself.

Democratic management style

A study of the performance of each style proved that the most effective is the democratic style of management, which creates conditions for efficient production and a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team.

Typical for a democratic style of management is the use of positive incentives to work: encouragement, prospects for tomorrow's joy, relying on a person's natural attraction to pleasant things, satisfies his needs more fully. The democrat expresses his demands most often in a soft, consultative form: wishes, advice, recommendations. Democratic style means that the leader is striving to take into account the opinions of other specialists, to check his thoughts, ideas, and decisions collegially. At the same time, compromises are required.

In a democratic style of government, there is a tendency to spread publicity: the decision-making process should be open to all. Constant meetings with targeted information improve relationships between people, coherence in actions, group orientation, develop a sense of shared responsibility among employees, which positively affects labor productivity.

Democrat constantly cares about cohesion labor collective, seeks to maintain the unity of workers, prevents complications in human relations. A good relationship help them cooperate. A democrat works with the team as a whole, does not particularly separate anyone, does not violate official subordination, does not oppose his deputies to their subordinates, and is not stereotyped in assessments and behavior.

He is well oriented in people, knows how to abstract from personal qualities, subjectivity in assessments and adequately understand other people. The democrat takes into account the individual personality traits of subordinates in his work: he studies their needs, interests, causes of social activity and seeks to harmonize them with the interests of the case. When organizing production activities takes into account the psychology of the subordinate's personality, selects assignments and tasks for him, determines the means of influence, the content of the requirements.

Liberal management style

The liberal style is often called permissive, anarchist. Its main difference is the insignificant activity of the leader in management. He is little interested in the process of daily work, he does not often visit production units, and weakly exercises control functions.

Such a leader spends most of his working time on meetings, desk work. As a result - poor awareness of the state of affairs in the enterprise. A liberal is an undemanding person. Often such a leader, at his own discretion or indirect initiative of an informal leader, delegates, delegates his powers to him. At the same time, the degree of personal participation of the manager in management does not reach the optimal level.
Often it comes to the point that he is forced to persuade his subordinates to do this or that work, and even he himself undertakes to carry out assignments that have not been completed by subordinates.

Thus, knowledge of the psychology of people and oneself personally helps the leader to choose the right management style, on which the effectiveness of structures subject to him largely depends. Psychology makes it possible to select a management style on a scientific basis, taking into account factors that are already defined and developed in scientific theories and concepts.

The choice of management style is a very important stage in the development of any manager. Style and character have a huge impact on your team. Most importantly, by knowing your style and character, you can accept people who fit your style, thereby reducing the number of managerial mistakes. Despite the importance of management style, novice managers tend to simply copy the behavior of their boss. Such imitation sometimes turns out well. But more often it does not look natural, it does not allow to establish relations with subordinates, and most importantly, such a manager will not be able to reveal his talents.

What a leader should know

I am often asked: what should a new leader know first of all? As a rule, everyone is very interested, especially and. You can also hear questions about. They like to ask these questions on. Much less often, young managers think about what style of personnel management they should choose. In most cases, a novice leader simply copies the behavior of his boss. He simply did not see another. The fact that people can be controlled in different ways is taught very rarely.

Training of operational management is the task of middle managers, training of middle managers falls on top management. You should not hope that a person brought some practices from the university or found them somewhere on the street. Manager training should include several fundamental things.

Understanding the goals and objectives for the current position

An explanation of what tasks the manager solves and what tools he uses will help the manager understand how his new position differs from the previous one. At this stage, the manager needs to explain the difference between an operations manager and a subordinate, between a middle manager and a lower level manager. When moving from one position to another, the employee does not always understand how his duties have changed. Often an employee tries to continue doing what he can and what he can do. For example, the seller was promoted to , but he is still eager to sell in the fields.

Thoughtful team building depending on the temperament of the manager

First of all, you need to pay attention to the formation of the team, the definition of the management style, the definition of the portrait of a candidate for a new team. The main task of a manager is to manage resources, and people are the most difficult resource. A young leader often does not understand how important it is to him. The direct manager always talks more about daily operational goals, and team building is important, but not urgent, so it often falls out of sight. It is rare when a leader helps his subordinate to decide on his management style and draw up a portrait of an ordinary member of his team.

The style of management depends primarily on the temperament of the person. Temperament has a decisive influence on the selection of people. Now imagine that the temperamentally phlegmatic is trying to use an authoritarian management style. First of all, it will be hard for the employee, as a result, the young leader quickly. The consequences of such management for the team can be very deplorable.

There is an opinion that a good leader should be a choleric. In fact, there are many examples of successful managers of various temperaments. But the most important thing is that people with pronounced features of the same temperament are very rare. Rather, you can see a mixture of different temperaments from which the character is formed. Temperament is the innate features of the psyche, character is a set of human behavior, developed on the basis of his temperament and habitat. Character can be changed both consciously and unconsciously under the influence of external environment. Temperament will always be with a person, all you can do is learn to control it.

Leadership styles in management

Leadership styles (management styles, management style, leader styles) are a set of behavior and interaction methods between a leader and a subordinate. We have already talked about management styles in an article about.

In general, it is customary to distinguish three main managerial styles: democratic, liberal and authoritarian. These three styles balance between two important characteristics of the staff: and the initiative of the employees.

Good discipline forms high manageability, it is easy for the manager to implement any of his ideas. The working day of the staff is fully scheduled and everyone knows what to do. We discussed the importance of discipline in the article -. But discipline completely suppresses the initiative of the staff. What does it mean? Employees will not make suggestions for improving and optimizing work, they are passive and, as a rule, are not interested in the overall success.

Authoritarian management style

The authoritarian style of management implies full attention to the task being performed to the detriment of the interests of the personality of the performer. The attributes of the authoritarian style are: ignoring the opinions of the team, suppressing dissent, strictness and even bias in assessing the activities of subordinates. The consequence of such management is a non-initiative staff, incapable of independent action. In general, in the realities of the modern labor market, an authoritarian management style is possible only with the recruitment of personnel ready to endure such an attitude. As a rule, these are melancholic, although it happens that completely different people are ready to endure a charismatic dictator.

The authoritarian leadership style is great for quick one-time tasks, also in situations where there is a very strong charismatic leader, and also when nothing more than executive discipline is required to achieve results.

Democratic management style

The word democracy is in every news release, in the 21st century, wars begin for the sake of democracy. The word itself has Greek roots and means - the power of the people. The leader of the democrat makes all his decisions jointly with the team and relies on its opinion and support. All decisions are supported by the team, the team makes suggestions for improving work processes and takes the initiative. It is worth noting that in fact, being a democrat is much more difficult than being a dictator. Since he is a democrat, he must still lead the people, that is. It is not so easy to achieve this, the team will initially reject all new leaders. That is why novice leaders often slip into an authoritarian style.

The democratic style is the most flexible, it is suitable for solving various problems. The most important thing is the good managerial competence of the manager who preaches this style. For a democratic style, it is very important that all team members are interested in the final result. The democratic style is applicable in sales, in the management of managers, in teams where non-trivial tasks are solved and creativity is required.

Liberal management style

The liberal style of government is often called free, sometimes even anarchist. The bottom line is that the subordinate is given maximum freedom of action. Sharp corners are smoothed out, management does not conflict with subordinates due to minor misconduct. In such a team, discipline as such does not exist. In general, this type of management is in demand when the subordinate is motivated to complete the task. As a rule, these are creative teams, as well as narrow-profile highly qualified employees, a kind of genius. For the work of such personnel, broad autonomy is needed, since driving them into a common framework reduces their creativity and creativity.

Last update: 01/04/2014

The authoritarian style of management, also known as autocratic, is characterized by individual control over the adoption of absolutely all decisions, which takes place with little or no participation of group members. Authoritarian leaders tend to make choices based on their own ideas and judgments, and rarely take advice from subordinates. The authoritarian style of management, in comparison with, implies absolute, sole control over the group.

Characteristics of an authoritarian style

• the opportunity for group members to contribute to organizational work is limited or non-existent;
• all decisions are made by the leader;
• the leader of the group dictates his conditions and methods of work;
• group members are rarely trusted to solve important tasks, etc.

Benefits of an authoritarian management style

This management style can be useful in some cases - for example, when decisions need to be made quickly without consulting big group of people. Some projects require a strong manager to get things done quickly and efficiently.
Have you ever worked with a group of students or co-workers on a project that was derailed due to poor organization, lack of leadership qualities the manager and his inability to set deadlines for the completion of work? If yes, then chances are your group or team's performance has been hit hard. In such situations, a strong leader who uses an autocratic management style can take responsibility for the work of the group: he will distribute tasks to different members of the group and set precise deadlines for the completion of the project.
In particularly tense situations, such as during military conflicts, group members may actually prefer the autocratic style of leadership to all others. This allows them to focus on specific tasks without having to worry about making complex decisions. It also allows the members of the group to be highly qualified in performing any specific duties that can benefit the group.

Disadvantages of an authoritarian style

Although the autocratic leadership style can sometimes be effective, it is not uncommon for this style to bring problems to the team. People who tend to abuse the autocratic style are often seen as overbearing dictators, and their behavior can often lead to discontent among the rest of the group.
Since authoritarian leaders make decisions without consulting the group, people may not like the fact that they do not have the opportunity to bring new ideas to the group process. The researchers also found that authoritarianism often results in a lack of creative solutions to current problems, which can ultimately have a negative impact on group performance.
Despite the fact that in the very authoritarian style management has already laid some potential "pitfalls" that leaders can learn to use elements of this style wisely. For example, the authoritarian style can be used effectively in situations where the leader is the most experienced and skilled member of the group, or someone who has access to information that other members of the group cannot.

The specific features of the authoritarian management style are unity of command and high power distance. The authoritarian style is characterized by the fact that the leader takes the reins of government into his own hands, demanding complete obedience from his subordinates. This style of management implies that all decisions in the organization are made by the head without taking into account the opinions of employees.

Characteristics of an authoritarian management style

Pronounced with an authoritarian style of management and control - strict, driving ordinary employees into a rigid framework and depriving them of the opportunity to show initiative. As for communication in an organization, it is only a means for employees to carry out common activities.

Friendship relationships are not welcome, since it is not the interests of the individual that are valued above all, but the interests of the company. The leader, in turn, also prefers to maintain a certain distance between himself and his subordinates, which no one has the right to violate.

Methods of authoritarian management style

Unlike other management styles, the authoritarian style focuses more on punishing employees for any faults than on rewards for any achievements. Among the main methods of this management style are: reprimands, orders, comments, deprivation of all kinds of bonuses and benefits.
The main psychological factor affecting the employees of the organization is fear - the fear of shame, punishment, dismissal. Thus, it cannot be said that the authoritarian management style is characterized by a lack of motivation. Motivation exists, but it is a reinforcement of the activities of workers with fear.

Due to the fact that the authoritarian style of management comes in two forms (benevolent and exploitative), management methods depend on what kind of authoritarian style is operating in the organization. It is easy to guess that the benevolent form of the authoritarian style implies a softening of management methods, as well as a significant reduction in the number of punishments.

Disadvantages of an authoritarian management style

Of course, the authoritarian style is by no means the best management style for the normal functioning of the organization. Experts believe that it is possible to use this style in working with subordinates only in certain cases:

1. In emergency situations, which means all sorts of emergency circumstances and disruptions in the company's work, requiring prompt action and quick decision-making, as well as in conditions of limited time.

2. Anarchist moods of the organization, requiring the immediate restriction of employees by introducing strict discipline that does not allow the occurrence of various riots, strikes, etc.

In a company that does not have clearly defined problems, an authoritarian management style can lead to an internal discord in the functioning of the organization, the destruction of self-control, a decrease in efficiency, a deterioration in the socio-psychological climate, a lack of initiative and creativity of subordinates, increased staff turnover, and a decrease in the responsibility of employees for their work.

The management style is very often not accepted by the leader consciously, it comes from his personal ideas about leadership, from his character, temperament, from the knowledge gained about the position of director. Many social factors also influence leadership style. Many times I came across directors, and especially with directors, who, after 3-5 years of management, become real petty tyrants and tyrannized the entire team. Unfortunately, the province simply abounds with such directors. And in the capitals they are not uncommon. In order to correct the style, it is necessary to find out what management styles are singled out in management practice in general, and how they affect common work enterprises.

Why study the director's work style at all - this question can arise only among amateurs who do not strive for development, who believe that their enterprise will never go anywhere in their life. This is a terrible mistake, a colossal delusion! Business can present serious surprises, internal revolutions have not been canceled. BUT external influences competitors, new legislative initiatives of the state are transferred with success only when the team stands behind its director with a mountain and follows him without discussing the details. What kind of leadership style can achieve such an effect? This will be discussed in this article.

So, in management, the following management styles are distinguished: authoritarian, democratic, liberal-anarchist, inconsistent, situational.

The authoritarian style is also called dictatorial, directive. The leader in the team with this style behaves tough, he sets certain limits of work and very strictly controls their implementation. Decisions at such an enterprise are made by the director alone, there are no discussions with top management, each of the leaders works only in his own narrow niche, no one can understand the whole process. Moreover, an authoritarian leader deliberately takes on many functions so that no one else can manage and claim his place. In case of individual entrepreneur none of the relatives or heirs of the business is allowed to manage.

All decisions made are not subject to discussion, strict control over their implementation is established, if something is not fulfilled, then strict administrative measures are taken. The personality of a person, an employee, goes by the wayside. The effectiveness of the method is high only if the director receives for management an enterprise in which there is no order, discipline, no profit and the proper volume of sales. At first, when the company reaches good performance, it is this style that will put things in order. In any other case, an authoritarian style harms the company more than it benefits.

This management style stifles initiative, Creative skills employees, innovations are introduced very slowly and inefficiently. With an authoritarian style, erroneous one-sided decisions are often made that are understandable only to one person. Employees become passive, dissatisfaction with the place of work, the company, their position, position, colleagues, the whole business and the overall system grows. More and more in such a team, toadying, intrigue, gossip begins to flourish, people experience constant stress. As a result, people either leave this place, or begin to get sick often, or simply turn into opportunists and are only engaged in deriving personal gain at work. The director needs to master this leadership style only when all sorts of cataclysms and emergencies happen.

Democratic management style

With this style, the leader must be a highly professional manager, psychologist, teacher, production worker. He, of course, makes a decision on his own, but arranges general discussions. Moreover, he himself considers the final version of the decision both before and after the general discussions. The decisions made are clear to all employees, even in the course of their implementation, initiative proposals are made, adjustments are made. Control of implementation is carried out not only by the head, but also by employees. From the director, subordinates see understanding, goodwill, a desire to develop their personalities together with the company. With a democratic style of management, the leader watches the inclinations and talents of employees, tries to train, direct, up to changing the type of activity and position.

This style is quite effective, promotes healthy growth and development of the company's areas of activity. Labor productivity, sales volumes increase, employees become proactive, active, they turn into a real team. There is one danger in this style of management - when control is weakened, it can turn into anarchy. The leader must closely monitor that discipline is not violated, that there is an organizational order in the team. The leader in this management system must be very professional, hard-working, a model in everything for his subordinates.

Liberal anarchist style

This is the most neutral management style, one might even say conniving. It is in him that democracy develops, for which no one observes and builds its framework. In this atmosphere, everyone expresses their opinion, defends their point of view, and does not hear others. And even if to common decision a certain policy is adopted, everyone continues to act at their own discretion. The head of the liberal-democratic style does not have the necessary professional and psychological knowledge and skills, does not hide it, and is not respected.

And besides, such a leader does not care much that they treat him like that, he does his own thing, does not particularly touch anyone, and everyone is comfortable with this. It turns out that tasks are set, fulfilled, there is a result, but all this is in full swing, and often the movement does not quite go where it was planned, and even not at all. The psychological climate in such a team is not conducive to work, it is unfavorable for creativity, for establishing order. In such companies, motivation is very rarely involved, there is no sense of elbow of other team members. There is no benefit from this style in any situation, only harm to work.

Inconsistent style

Leaders who "suffer" from this style tend to jump from one style to another. They then begin to strictly control the work, then let go of control so much that subordinates begin to arrange complete self-government and anarchy. But sometimes in such a collective comes a healthy democracy. Such rolls in one direction or the other give the company instability in the market, ensure the inconsistent implementation of all planned actions, and non-compliance with the company's policies.

The effectiveness of management is low, and most often this is managed by unprepared impulsive people who once studied management, but did not finish their studies. In a team with such management, there are always many conflicts, service or personal problems.

Situation Management

The most effective management style is situational. The manager applies in the company those methods and methods of management that are necessary this employee or a group of employees, but it is best if the whole team is at the same level of development. Therefore, when hiring employees for the first time or re-recruiting, one should try to select specialists in such a way that they are all at approximately the same stage of production development.

If the team is at a low level of development, that is, they do not want to work and do not know how to do it, then it is best to apply the following actions: give clear and tough instructions, tell them in detail what to do, constantly monitor every step. If something goes wrong, then point out mistakes and even punish for deliberate failure to follow instructions. If something works out well, then praise the employees, encourage them.

The second level of development of the team, that is, the middle one, is characteristic of the state when the desire to work has already appeared, but so far there is not enough experience for the qualitative performance of all duties, but there is a desire and diligence, conscientiousness. In this case, the leader should be a mentor, an adviser who gives recommendations so that employees can show initiative, independence and creativity. Control over the execution of tasks should be constant. Mutual respect and goodwill must be present in the team, psychological aspects acquire an important role in the activities of the leader. But with such democratic manifestations, it is necessary to clearly give orders and demand tough and strict implementation.

A good level of team development requires work experience, enough good organization work, cohesion of all team members. In such a team, consultations, advice and hearings are constantly held, initiative is encouraged, comments and clarifications from subordinates are taken into work and awarded. A large share of responsibility is assigned to employees, they are given the opportunity to make advisory independent decisions.

And the last, fourth level of team development is characterized by a great desire to work and a creative approach to working in a team of professionals. In such a team, the powers of the leader at any time can easily be assigned to employees, they are confronted with a problem, goals are clarified, then opinions on solutions are accepted. The leader in such a team is best to give the right to solve problems to top managers, controlling only the key points. You can not interfere in business, you just need to support employees and help them.

E.Shchugoreva

Facebook Twitter Google+ LinkedIn