Styles of managing the team of the institution. About management styles in management in simple words. Liberal, including bureaucratic

“Every broom sweeps differently” - hidden in this popular saying is the idea of ​​a variety of personality types of leaders and their management styles. By carefully observing the work of several managers in a team, you can notice the difference in the formation of working relationships. The manager's management style directly affects the company's performance. This fact can explain why some companies close, while others live and prosper even in times of crisis.

The personality of the leader, and the results of the company - these things are closely related. Combining several methods of guidance, you can get closer to the ideal result. After all, the style of the leader and the effectiveness of management are inseparable things. If you are a boss, then it is important for you to understand what kind of person you really are. So you will understand your strengths and weak sides and get better results.

Brief description of leadership styles

Management style is a complex of relations between management and subordinates and methods of influencing these two groups on each other. The performance of subordinates, the atmosphere in the team and its ability to achieve the goals and objectives depend on the quality of these relationships. Leadership styles in managing a team can be of five types.

The famous American-German psychologist and writer in the 1930s published and identified three leadership styles that later became classics. A little later, they were added more inconsistent and situational. Having studied the table with a brief description of the manager, you can find yourself and immediately proceed to reading the desired section. And it’s better to read the whole material - in life you will have to deal with different people and better be prepared. What are the management styles of a leader?

a brief description of management styles

Type of leader	Positive traits	Negative qualities
Authoritarian	Takes responsibility, makes quick decisions, clearly sets tasks	Does not tolerate criticism, does not like resistance, does not take into account the opinions of others, puts the interests of the case above people
Democratic	Works in a team, open to new ideas, takes into account the opinion of the team, allows others to take responsibility	A lot of advice, can delay the decision, can give authority to the wrong hands
liberal anarchist	There is no pressure on employees, a good-natured atmosphere in the team allows a creative approach to solving problems	Condones laziness and moral decay in the team, releases the managerial reins, weak control (provocation of theft and dereliction of duty)
Inconsistent	Not found	No clear goal, no clear tasks, no understanding, corrupting atmosphere in the team, poor performance, no money
Situational	High-quality employee management, enters into the situation, always knows how and what to do, there are no favorites and anti-heroes, helps to develop, grows leaders, encourages creative approach to business	Over the years, it becomes liberal and loses its grip, unprincipled workers sit on their necks, do not know how to rest, work "for wear and tear"

Authoritarian

(from Latin auctoritas - power, influence) - domineering, not loving to discuss, to be objected to, and even more so resisted. If the boss belongs to this type of people, then the manager's management style is authoritarian. This type belongs to one of the three classic ones.

Characteristics of a manager

This management style of the leader - authoritarian - is justified in stressful situations: wars, crises, epidemics, and so on, because such a person acts quickly and takes responsibility. In conversations, he is tough and uncompromising. Authoritarian leaders climb to the highest levels of power and successfully maintain their positions. This style of leadership is more common in Russia than the rest. This can be fully justified in large companies, factories, creative teams and the army. Negotiations about purchases or approvals are carried out in a tough mode, in an atmosphere heated to the limit.

An authoritarian leader collects all power in his hands and does not allow anyone to even encroach on part of it. Subordinates are under strict control and constantly undergo various checks. But the authoritarian style is divided into two more models: exploitative and benevolent.

"Exploiter" fully justifies its name, it's directly "Pablo Escobar" in the company. Such a manager squeezes all the juice out of his subordinates, does not consider the interests of people, the opinion of someone does not interest him at all. It can stimulate employees with threats, blackmail, fines and other persecution.

Never allows even the slightest independence in making decisions or performing tasks. Everything must be done exactly as the “exploiter” said. Any authoritarian leader constantly issues orders, decrees and other resolutions. Everything is certified with seals, paintings and dates. In the matter of completing tasks, he is extremely demanding and impatient, although he is able to make concessions if he is not under emotions. If the leader is not in the spirit, then he can say and do anything, and then you can not wait for an apology. At the same time, this behavior should not be confused with manipulative techniques, when all emotions are just a “theatre” - authoritarian leaders love to use this. Subordinates are deprived of the opportunity to take the initiative.

The "benevolent" management style of the leader creates a more benevolent atmosphere, if you can call it that. Such a leader is already interested in the opinion of his subordinates, but can act in his own way, even if the opinion was expressed correctly. In general, such a boss communicates condescendingly, “paternally” with his subordinates, can sympathize, but dryly and literally for a second, and then immediately reminds that the subordinate is now at work, and no one is interested in his experiences. You should not think that the second model is very different from the first - for all its benevolence, it is still an authoritarian leader: tough, domineering and demanding.

Any of these types love letters, signs, seals, paintings, abbreviations and abbreviations. All this should be big, sweeping, imperial. Such leaders are people with a paranoid personality pattern - power-hungry, distrustful and unprincipled. As a rule, workaholics who do not know how to relax, who love and are able to impose their opinion and will on others.

Relationships with subordinates

If in relations with subordinates the “benevolent” leader builds a distance that no one can cross, then for the “exploiter” this distance becomes intergalactic. The conversation is built in an orderly rude form. Employees are depressed and devoid of motivation, while the risk of developing conflicts in the company is high. Criticism, even constructive, is absent as a concept.

Not everyone has the courage to ask such a leader about something personal, and this is justified - “Pablo Escobar” does not want to know anything about his subordinates, and even more so to think about the difficulties of his employees. The possibility of getting something, even for an enterprise, is almost zero if the autocrat himself did not speak about it. And if he said earlier, then he himself will decide when, to whom and what to receive. It is useless to argue with such a type - he has excellent tempering in tough negotiations, and a subordinate cannot speak to him. If the subordinate continues to insist, he will quickly receive a fine or reprimand, and at the same time he will still have to follow the instructions. It is useless to show emotions in front of such a leader - he will look at a person like a carpet. Zero empathy.

A “benevolent” type can listen to a subordinate, but he will have to immediately get to the point and not pull the rubber, otherwise everything is “your time is up”, and you can only get to him with your question in the next life. It happens that the leader can even give advice. A "benevolent" can provide a vacation, departure on urgent business, or an overpayment - but for this you need to "defend" your plan in front of him, as if to sell him the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bwhy he should do this for you. But even if everything is done brilliantly, there is a big risk that the leader will do it his own way, and it is impossible to know the reasons for the decision.

Problem solving

Everything is simple for the "exploiter" and the "benevolent" - everyone must work without rest and break and lay down their lives for the benefit of the enterprise. Those who disagree with this are declared "enemies of the people" and must leave the company.

Subordinates are required to follow orders implicitly. The faster and better the duties are performed, the more successful the enterprise achieves. And the more new tasks the autocrat will lay on the shoulders of his subordinates. In solving problems, authoritarian leaders have no principles - the end justifies the means. This should be remembered, because the greater the level of influence of the autocrat, the tougher he will act.

Way of communication

It’s not worth playing around with such managers and showing duplicity - they will figure it out in no time. Let not today, but tomorrow, and even then it will not be good. An autocrat knows how to weave intrigues better than anyone, so it’s not worth competing in this direction either. By the way, about competition - this is the strong point of an authoritarian (and paranoid too) person, it is better not to get in his way. Why? Because there are no principles, and to achieve the goal, the autocrat justifies any means. Attempts to suggest will fail - autocrats have zero suggestion. The best approach is cooperation. So it will flow easier, and on the horizon there will be an opportunity career development. Examples of leaders: Donald Trump, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler.

Democratic

The style of work and management of a democratic leader is a mirror image of an authoritarian one. This style of work implies an even distribution of duties and responsibilities among the employees of the company. The leader-democrat gathers a team of subordinates around him, on which he can rely. A team that solves problems and launches even complex projects, and for this you do not need to force or intimidate employees. At the same time, there will still be responsibility, because a democrat is not a liberally conniving person, but a leader focused on a specific result.

Democratic managers also achieve high altitudes in business and politics, as well as authoritarian ones. Only they create a more benevolent atmosphere than autocrats.

Characteristics of a manager

People with expressed but at the same time not putting their ego in the first place gravitate towards the democratic style. A democratic leader is a peaceful warrior: he does not start the war first, but if he is attacked, he will have to answer to the fullest extent of the law. This management style of the leader creates a friendly atmosphere in the team and helps to take care of the staff in solving problems with a certain degree of creativity. Such a leader can, without any special claims, consider the issue of time off, assistance or the purchase of new equipment for the company. If you provide an evidence base for your ideas or requests, then the manager can be persuaded to make a positive decision on your issue.

Relationships with subordinates

Comradely, business relations are developing, which can flow into friendships, although this is rare. Whatever the manager's management styles, do not forget that this is the leader, and there is no need to overstep the bounds. The leader-democrat uses a humane approach to subordinates, enters into their position to a certain limit, easily arranges motivational competitions or gifts for overfulfillment of plans.

People with this style of management feel best in middle-level positions, for example, the head of a department or the head of a city district. Even in companies with an authoritarian management style, in departments with a democratic leader, “their own atmosphere” develops - at the same time, the authority of the head of the department is higher than that of the head of the organization.

Of the minuses, the following can be noted: a democrat can play "friend", and then more and more disputes and conflict situations will arise, instead of work. The shift in focus from achieving goals to increased attention to employees does not bring the team closer to achieving goals. In this case, the Democrat leader loses authority and the level of influence on the team, but he still has a bonus in the form of a fine or an order up his sleeve, although such bosses rarely use it.

Problem solving

Problem solving boils down to the fact that at first a plan of action is developed by collective efforts. After that, performers are selected based on skills and abilities. Without any resistance, such a leader invites an external expert to the team and listens to his opinion. By the way, none of the subordinates is forbidden to express their opinion, because the leader is concerned about achieving the result, and realizes that he risks missing something important.

When planning deadlines, it puts a margin of time into the plan, because it takes into account the likelihood of errors by the staff, and it still takes time to correct them. If difficulties arise in the course of the work or there is an opportunity to do everything differently, then the manager quite easily rebuilds according to the situation, although he does not really welcome this.

Way of communication

The leader-democrat chooses the generally accepted style of communication. You can go to his office and “steal” some time. He listens to the opinion of the staff, especially if the words are backed up by facts and figures - this is worth using. You should not put pressure on such a leader - although he is soft, he bends like bamboo, and if you press hard, he will seriously answer. Whatever the leader, styles and methods of management will be very different. The best way communication - cooperation. You need to act within the framework of the task, without breaking the deadlines. If you can improve or redo the work - you need to immediately contact the boss, keep him up to date. Examples of personalities: Vladimir Putin, Evgeny Chichvarkin, Lavrenty Beria.

liberal anarchist

This style of governance is similar to democratic, but there are differences. It is characteristic that the leader, having set the task clearly and clearly, setting the deadlines and speed of implementation, fades into the background. Thus, he allows subordinates to act independently, while almost not limiting the means and methods of performing tasks.

Liberal style is suitable for management At the same time, it is not necessary that it will be a song and dance group, the editorial office of a magazine, a design bureau, and other similar groups will do.

Characteristics of a manager

The liberal style can be divided into two areas: anarchist and expert. In the first case, the leader is a weak person, non-conflict, conformist. He postpones the decision important issues until the last moment, or tries to completely relieve himself of responsibility, shifting it onto the shoulders of deputies or subordinates. Such a leader can sit in the office for days and not go out to the workers - let them work for themselves.

The second type is more suitable for the role of an expert or an invited manager for temporary tasks - he gives instructions on how and what to do, how and in what time frame. Otherwise, he does not get into work, does not pull his subordinates, only if the situation is out of control. Authority rests on the level of his expertise, knowledge and skills in the current work.

Relationships with subordinates

A liberal expert develops friendly, informal and strong relationships. Leaders grow up in such collectives, who then either take power from the liberal, or go to new collectives - as practice shows, these are authoritarian leaders.

The leader-liberal almost does not interfere in the work of subordinates, providing the maximum possible freedom of action. Provides subordinates with information, tools, trains and instructs, reserves the right of the final decision.

Problem solving

You should not think that a liberal leader will sit in his "shell" and not show his nose. It happens, but it does not characterize all liberal leaders. On the contrary, in the current situation, the popularity of this method of managing people is growing. This is especially noticeable in scientific, creative or other teams where the level of knowledge, competence and experience is high - a highly qualified specialist does not tolerate a slavish attitude to himself, as well as excessive guardianship.

In the "manager and organization" relationship, "liberal" management styles are well known. Soft management, trust, cooperation and cooperation - these are the foundations of the liberal style of company management. There is no bad way to manage people, only the wrong use of the tools in your hands. Determining the manager's management style should be started as early as possible - it will be easier to adapt to the situation or quickly find a new job.

Way of communication

The leader-liberal does not attach much importance to the chosen method of communication, because the impact of this on the result of work is minimal. It is worth communicating with the leader himself, based on the goals of communication and what type of personality the leader has. At the same time, management styles can be different - either an anarchist or an expert. Do not worry too much if you suddenly called the boss "you" - he will correct you, but will not punish you with a fine, like an authoritarian. Examples: Roman Abramovich, Robert Kiyosaki.

Inconsistent

The name speaks for itself - there is no consistency and logic in actions. Such a boss moves from one management style to another, but does it out of inexperience, and this is the difference from the situational style.

Characteristics of a manager

Today, such a manager is an authoritarian leader, and tomorrow - an anarchist with a developed conniving character of work. The results of the work of such a team are extremely low, and there is every chance to spoil the work of the enterprise or even ruin it. If the manager has experience in such a position, but he adheres to an inconsistent style of work, then he can be called a suggestible, weak-willed manager who cannot achieve goals.

Relationships with subordinates

The team of an inconsistent leader is dissatisfied with his manager, does not know what to expect from the boss, and besides, everyone has little idea ultimate goal and their growth opportunities. Relations are developing very tensely, all this causes a growth of a negative atmosphere in the team. There is a high probability of omissions, intrigues and scandals.

Problem solving

It is impossible to achieve goals with such a leader, because he vaguely imagines how the team should work. Problem solving is shifted to deputies and subordinates, and then taken over. Then some tasks are canceled, replaced with new ones, and so on. This style of leadership breeds confusion and anarchy.

Way of communication

The same ambiguous and depends on the state of affairs in the company and the mood of the boss himself. Today he can tell stories about how he spent the weekend, and tomorrow he can play the role of the authoritarian “Pablo Escobar”. A subordinate with developed leadership and manipulative skills is able to unsettle such a leader for a long time. And then from his own chair. Examples: such people rarely achieve serious heights, but there is still a vivid example - Mikhail Gorbachev.

Situational

The management style in which the relationship policy adjusts to the current state is called situational. it best way to manage people and enterprises - in times of crisis it helps to get together, and in times of market growth to strengthen competitive advantages.

Do not confuse the situational approach and the duplicity of the leader. In the first case, the boss chooses a communication style based on the behavior of a particular person or group of people, in order to launch the work as efficiently as possible. In the second case, the boss takes different positions based on his own benefit.

Characteristics of a manager

These are experienced managers with many years of experience who have worked in different areas in several areas. In some people, management skills are inherent in nature - these are the so-called managers from God. But talent is replaced by diligence and constant learning. Knowing how to influence a person now comes with experience. This is one of the most acceptable ways to lead a team. With inept attempts to copy the style, there is a danger that the leader will turn into a opportunist who says what is profitable at the moment.

Relationships with subordinates

They develop confidentially, openly and easily - the team constantly has the feeling that their work is literally on fire in their hands, and the leader always knows what needs to be done, how to punish and cheer up the team. Due to their extensive practical experience, such leaders really seem to see through their subordinates and have the gift of foresight. Such bosses enjoy authority in the team.

The situational leader knows how best to communicate with a given group of subordinates or sole employee. In which case it is possible to remain silent or even to condone something, but it only seems to an inexperienced eye that the leader has given up slack.

Problem solving

Disputes, problems and tasks are resolved quickly and professionally. An experienced leader is able to quickly debug most of the work processes, and if force majeure happens, then people are assigned to correct the situation based on the abilities and experience of employees, and not personal preferences.

In general, the manager himself is more like a shadow - he hides his personal and is only engaged in work. He has no favorites, and if he does, then you can guess for a long time who was awarded such a role. It does not show obvious negative, on the contrary, with each problematic employee, such a manager tries to find mutual language. Through experience, this is often successful. It seems that such a person does not think about himself at all: where are all the "Wishlist" and other complexes? To this question, the situational manager will only smile and shrug his shoulders.

It is rare that such a manager is not a workaholic.

Way of communication

Like the liberal expert, the situational manager chooses a simple style of communication. Despite the high rank, such people are simple and open, and often optimistic and endowed with a sense of humor. Often enter the position of an employee and can help beyond the working relationship. With age, managers become too kind and resourceful, sometimes they can lose their grip, which is used by unprincipled workers. But the team usually stands up for the leader, and if they see meanness towards their patron, they immediately take action.

Examples: most of the military, directors and heads of factories and factories of the war and post-war period, such as Konstantin Rokossovsky, Ivan Romazan, Avraamiy Zavenyagin and others.

What style leader are you?

No matter how a manager behaves, it is worth remembering that the individual management style of a leader is made up of the characteristics of a person’s upbringing and character, so labeling is not worth it.

Management as an implementation of the leader's individual style is a complex and multifaceted process, accompanied by a high level of stress, psychological and physical loads. Becoming a leader takes a lot of time, takes a lot of time and effort, and is associated with high risk. Therefore, support from higher-level managers and ongoing training are needed.

What to do if you find yourself on this list? Take your strengths and focus on strengthening and developing them. Weaknesses should be given considerable attention - problems are points of growth. The faster you reconsider your attitude towards your negative traits, the faster and better you will become as a leader.

What to do if you find your manager on the list? Now you know how it is better to build relationships with him, and what moments should be avoided.

Management plays an important function in all spheres of human activity. This is especially important in a market economy. Competent management of subordinates unobtrusively brings them to the achievement of the goal set by the leader. For each type of activity and type employees suitable for different styles of behavior of the employer.

What are management styles

The normal functioning of the enterprise is ensured by the presence of one or another style of management, as well as the use of combined techniques. The applied management scheme is the main characteristic of activity efficiency. The success of the company and the dynamics of its development depend on it. It forms the presence in the work of the motivation of employees, which determines their attitude to their duties, or demotivates them. The leadership scheme also affects the relationships in the team.

What management styles are relevant in management? What is their feature? In what situations is their use effective, and in what situations can they only harm?

Concept definition

Types of styles, their advantages and disadvantages

The duties of the head of the company include supervision of all structural divisions. This type of responsibility implies the need to monitor employees and control their activities determined by job description and provisions employment contract. The implementation of all activities is carried out in the perspective of management, implemented by the leader independently without the help of subordinates. His habitual measure of behavior contributes to the formation of working relationships, motivating employees to work and achieve certain results, and also affects the performance of the company.

In practice, there are three main schemes for the relationship between the employer and subordinates:

• democratic;
• liberal;
• authoritarian.

The personality of the leader and the styles of personnel management applied by him have an impact on the results of the company. This relationship explains the prosperity of one organization, even in a crisis, and the closure of enterprises in favorable periods. The ideal entrepreneurial result can be achieved by combining several methods of leadership.

The style of behavior of the director in relation to his subordinates has a direct impact on the effectiveness of their management. He needs to constantly monitor his strengths and weaknesses in order to correct managerial behavior. It depends on the administrative and personal qualities of the director, and is his original and recognizable handwriting.

Democratic leadership scheme

The democratic style of government implies that in making management decisions subordinates are involved.

They also share responsibility for their consequences with the head of the company. The name "democratic" means "rule of the people" in Latin. With regard to the subject of entrepreneurship, it interprets the equal rights of the director and managers structural divisions. Statistical Research show that this style of leadership is many times more effective in influencing the formation of a positive atmosphere in the team and the effectiveness of entrepreneurial activity.

Democratic governance

When a leader behaves democratically with subordinates, he relies on their initiative. All members of the team in this perspective are equal and have the right to actively participate in the process of discussing problematic issues and in decision-making. The relationship between the leader and subordinates is based on trust. It is worth noting that the desire of the director to listen to the opinion of the company's specialists is not due to the fact that he does not own the issue, but to the fact that he understands that during the discussion of the problem, new ideas may arise, the implementation of which will increase the effectiveness of the work and bring the achievement of the goal closer.

With a democracy in production, management never imposes its opinion and will on subordinate employees. The main principle of its management are the methods of stimulation and persuasion. Punishment and sanctions are used extremely rarely in situations where other ways of influencing the mind of an employee have already been exhausted. The boss shows a sincere interest in his employees and takes into account their needs, which contributes to their initiative and activity in achieving joint goals.

Read also: Net present value: calculation example

In this perspective of labor relations, a specialist receives satisfaction from his work, since he has the opportunity for self-realization. A favorable psychological environment contributes to the cohesion of employees.

Management in a democratic style is possible only if the management enjoys authority among employees. To do this, the director must be literate, professionally competent and intellectual, as well as possess organizational and psychological and communication skills. In the absence of such qualities, democratic leadership will be ineffective. In practice, there is a distinction between deliberative and participatory style of democratic governance.

deliberative style

With a deliberative management style, most problems are solved in the process of discussing them.

The director, before making any decision, consults with his subordinates, whose competence is the issue. When negotiating, he does not demonstrate his superiority and does not shift full responsibility to the specialist for the consequences that may result from joint decisions. The deliberative type of leadership provides two-way communication with subordinates. Important decisions are made by the director, however, the opinion of specialists is taken into account, who are also given the authority to independently solve problems that are within their competence.

Participating style

A participatory democratic leader seeks to involve employees not only in making certain decisions, but also in monitoring their implementation. Relationships in this perspective require complete trust. The director behaves like one of the members of the team and does not take a predominant position. Any employee has the right to express his own opinion and not be afraid of the consequences of his openness. Responsibility for negative performance is shared between the manager and subordinates. A mixed management style allows you to create effective labor motivation, since every employee in the team is respected.

liberal style

The liberal style of management in the organization is based on the tolerance and indulgence of management towards subordinates.

Employees in such an enterprise have complete freedom in their decisions, in which the director practically does not participate. He withdraws from his obligations of control and supervision over the activities of subordinates. The principle of its functioning is to sign the administrative documentation drawn up by specialists in whose competence it is located.

A liberal attitude in the team is formed in a situation where the leader is not sure of his official position due to professional or organizational incompetence. His independent decisions are possible only after appropriate instructions from higher authorities. With this style of management, unsatisfactory results of work are not uncommon, from which the director seeks to evade responsibility.

Liberal style management

The solution of all important issues at the enterprise with a liberal director is carried out without his participation. To preserve the image of the leader and build his own authority, he has to provide employees with various benefits and pay undeserved bonuses.

Liberal management is relevant in companies where high level discipline and self-responsibility. It can be applied in partnership of creative individuals. In all other situations, such leadership is regarded in two ways. If the team has disciplined, responsible and qualified employees, then the liberality of the director will have a positive effect on the functioning of the enterprise.

Teams in which employees command management can lead to negative results of activities with this perspective of management. Their director is best friend, however, in the event of a conflict situation, employees cease to obey him, which leads to a decrease in discipline, quarrels and non-compliance with the norms of internal documentation governing labor order. All these phenomena lead to a decrease in labor productivity.

The specific features of the authoritarian management style are unity of command and high power distance. Authoritarian style 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.

In accordance with the most common characteristic in management science, the following leadership styles are distinguished: authoritarian (autocratic, directive), democratic (collegiate), liberal (liberal-anarchist, conniving, neutral, permissive).

The authoritarian leadership style is characterized by centralization and concentration of power in the hands of one leader. He single-handedly decides all issues, determines the activities of subordinates, without giving them the opportunity to take the initiative. Subordinates do only what is ordered; while the information they need is kept to a minimum. The activities of subordinates are strictly controlled. An autocratic leader uses either coercive or traditional power.

From a psychological point of view, the authoritarian style of management is unfavorable. The leader-autocrat has no interest in the employee as a person. Employees due to the suppression of their initiative and creative manifestations are passive. As a rule, they are mostly dissatisfied with their work and position in the team. With this leadership style, additional reasons appear that influence the emergence of an unfavorable psychological climate: “toadies”, “scapegoats” appear, and intrigues are created. All this is the cause of increased psychological stress, which is harmful to the mental and physical health of people.

The authoritarian style of leadership is expedient and justified: 1) in situations requiring maximum and rapid mobilization of resources (under conditions emergencies, accidents, hostilities, production during the war, etc.); 2) at the first stages of creating a new team; 3) in collectives with a low level of consciousness of the members of this collective; 4) in the army.

The democratic leadership style is characterized by the decentralization of power. The Democratic leader consults with subordinates and consults with specialists involved in decision-making. Subordinates receive sufficient information to have an idea about the prospects for their work. Employee initiative is encouraged. The leader delegates part of his power to subordinates. When exercising control, he introduces elements of collective self-government. The Democratic leader uses predominantly reward-based power and reference power (example power).

From a psychological point of view, the democratic style of management is the most favorable. The democrat leader shows interest and kind attention to employees, takes into account their interests, needs, and characteristics. This has a positive effect on the results of work, initiative, activity of employees, their satisfaction with their work and position in the team. A favorable psychological climate and team cohesion have a positive effect on the mental and physical health of employees. However, with all the positive characteristics of the democratic style of management, its implementation is possible only with a high level of intellectual, organizational, psychological and communicative abilities.

It is advisable to use the democratic leadership style in production teams, regardless of industry affiliation and the type of products (services) produced. This leadership style is most effective in established teams with microgroups and informal leaders.

The liberal style of leadership is characterized by minimal interference of the leader in the activities of the group. The liberal leader does not take an active part in production activities subordinates. He sets tasks for them, indicates the main areas of work, provides the necessary resources and gives employees autonomy in achieving end results. His role is reduced to the functions of a consultant, coordinator, organizer, supplier, controller. The liberal leader tries to use power based on remuneration, expert or reference power.

From a psychological point of view, the liberal style of leadership can be viewed from two sides, depending on which team is headed by a liberal leader. This style gives positive results if the team consists of highly qualified specialists with great creative abilities. independent work, disciplined and responsible. It can also be applied in the form of an individual approach to the employee.

The most successful leader-liberal manages the team in which there are energetic and knowledgeable assistants (deputies) who can take on the functions of the leader. In this case, deputies practically manage and make decisions, they also resolve conflict situations.

With a liberal style of leadership, a strong informal leader can also take over. In this case, the leader-liberal must identify the "platform" of the leader and skillfully influence him in order to prevent anarchy, weakening of discipline and the emergence of an unfavorable socio-psychological climate. The most effective liberal style of management in scientific, creative teams, consisting of recognized authorities, talented, gifted people in specific areas of science, technology, culture and art.

If the collective has not “grown up” to the liberal style of management, but is still headed by a liberal leader, then such a style turns into a liberal-anarchist (permissive). At the same time, “maximum democracy” and “minimum control” lead to the fact that: 1) some employees do not consider it necessary to carry out the decisions made; 2) the lack of control on the part of the management lets the work of subordinates “run its course”; 3) the results of the work are reduced due to the lack of control and its systematic evaluation; 4) people are not satisfied with their work and the leader. As a result, all this negatively affects the state of the psychological climate in the team.

In some collectives, the leader-liberal is commanded by his subordinates, and he is reputed to be “ a good man". However, this continues until conflict situation. In this case, dissatisfied subordinates get out of obedience: the liberal style turns into an indulgent one, which leads to conflicts, disorganization and deterioration of labor discipline.

The above description of leadership styles does not exhaust the whole variety of forms of interaction between managers and subordinates.

In this rapidly changing world, a situational management style is used, which flexibly takes into account the level of psychological development of the team of subordinates.

In addition to the situational management style, the innovative analytical style is popular and effective (especially in successful Japanese firms), which can ensure organizational survival in an acute market competition. It has:
generating a large number of ideas;
the ability to logically analyze the realism and perspective of these ideas;
energy, innovation, sensitivity to new ideas and information;
tolerance for failure;
ability to work with people.

According to the majority of foreign experts in the field of management, an effective management style is a participatory (participatory) management style, which is characterized by the following features:
regular meetings of the head with subordinates;
openness in relations between the leader and subordinates;
involvement of subordinates in the development and adoption of organizational decisions;
delegation (transfer) by the head of a number of powers and rights to subordinates;
participation of frontline workers in both planning and implementation organizational change;
the creation of special groups with the right to make independent decisions (for example, "quality control groups");
providing the employee with the opportunity to autonomously (separately from other members of the organization) develop problems, new ideas.

The participatory leadership style is most effective in scientific organizations, firms of an innovative type, in science-intensive industries under conditions if:
1) the leader has a high educational and creative level, knows how to appreciate and use the creative proposals of subordinates; self-assured;
2) subordinates have a high level of knowledge and skills, the need for creativity, independence and personal growth, interest in work;
3) the goals and objectives facing the employees of the organization involve a plurality of solutions, require theoretical analysis and high professional performance, strenuous efforts and creativity.

Thus, considering leadership styles in the aggregate, we can conclude that they act as opposites: autocratic-democratic, participatory; innovative analytical - liberal.

Effective, choosing a management style, should keep in mind the following circumstances:
- know yourself;
- understand the situation;
- evaluate the chosen management style adequately to the situation and the level of subordinates;
- take into account the needs of the group;
- take into account the needs of the situation;
- take into account the needs of subordinates.

Every leader sooner or later tends to one or another style of management. In management today, several types of behavior are distinguished at once, each of which is effective in its own way. The methods and styles of management used by the same person can change, depending on what tasks the leader sets for himself and the team. Therefore, it is not possible to name one, the most effective style of management.

To date, the main styles of management are as follows:

1. Liberal personnel management line or the principle of non-interference of the leader in the activities of subordinates. A manager who practices this style of work acts as an intermediary between employees and higher authorities. The liberal behavior of the authorities is practiced in teams where employees know their job well, their day is scheduled by the minute, and there is simply no need for one person to make additional decisions.
2. Authoritarian management style in management. In this case, all working decisions are made "in one person". High demands, constant pressure and control over the course of activities. The authoritarian style is good in cases where extreme situations arise, and it is necessary to urgently make some decisions.
3. Democratic management style. Managers who adhere to this style can involve specialists at all levels in solving managerial problems. As motivators for work, the boss chooses the opportunity for each employee to realize their needs in terms of self-expression, creativity, and belonging to a team.
4. Combination of several management styles in management. In practice, it is very difficult for a leader to develop one single leadership style and stick to it. After all, the team consists of living people, and they are all very different. The propensity for one of the behavioral lines in the management consists of the boss's own capabilities: his level of education, work experience, mental qualities, as well as the traditions of the company and the tasks that are being solved at the moment.

Basic management models

Leadership, power, and management styles is a broad, controversial topic that regularly gives rise to new theories about effective and ineffective management styles. At the beginning of the 20th century, when the science of managing people was just beginning to develop, it was taken up by theorists and practitioners in different parts of the world. As a result, several management models have developed, which, on the basis of a territorial basis, have been called the Western, Japanese and American style. Each method is effective in its own way, and at the same time is fundamentally different from the other.

1. Western style of management. Individual responsibility, decisions are made not only at the top, but also at the middle level of employees, business relationships do not mix with personal ones.
2. American style of management. Strict observance of norms and regulations, practicality, development of personnel.
3. Japanese style of management. Continuous staff development, understanding of the joint contribution to the development of the company, a high level of trust of the authorities in relation to the subordinate.

Coaching as a new style of management

Coaching is a kind of business psychoanalysis. This type of business process management appeared relatively recently in the West, and came to Russia only a few years ago. The essence of coaching is that the coach (aka business coach) does not delve deeply into the problems of the person being consulted and does not give valuable guidance. The task of the coach is to make sure that the specialist himself formulates his problem and finds ways to overcome it. Today, coaching is considered a very promising direction in the science of managing people.

Methods and styles of management are a broad and open topic for research. A competent leader is one who knows how not to limit himself to only one option, to choose one or another method of personnel management, based on the goals and objectives that are currently facing him.