Management level of management. What is the management level? How many levels of management do most firms have?

Enterprise management? This is the general ordering of the company, defining the sequence of actions, as well as the boundaries within which activities should be carried out. Enterprises are an object of management organization. It includes employees, finances, and information resources.

To organize the management of an enterprise, it is necessary to perform a number of tasks:

• set goals;
• create a community of people;
• create an organizational structure;
• create the necessary conditions.

Let's consider the main functions that are inherent in the organization of enterprise management:

• achievement of the company's goals;
• reducing company costs;
• division of labor, thanks to which employees perform their duties better.

There are such types of division of labor as horizontal and vertical. In the first case, the enterprise creates divisions that perform a number of specialized functions. With vertical division, management levels are formed. The leaders of each of them must identify problems, find ways and solutions, appoint responsible persons, allocate time to complete the task.

The following management levels are distinguished with a clear delineation of functions:

1. Lower, or technical. This includes managers who resolve specific issues related to achieving set goals (producing products, making a profit, etc.), and also work directly with performers.

2. Average, or managerial level. This includes managers who control several structural divisions of the enterprise, as well as managers of targeted projects and programs, service and auxiliary production.

3. Higher or institutional level of management. This is the administration of the enterprise, engaged in solving the most important strategic tasks at the level of the entire enterprise (development, selection of a sales market, financial management, etc.).

Management specialists A. Thompson and A. Strickland developed the following organizations. According to their approach, there are the following levels of strategic management:

1. Corporate strategy. It concerns the general goals of the enterprise and its entire space. Such management levels perform the functions of accepting the most important technical, production, and economic tasks. Usually the board of directors makes decisions. This includes senior managers.

3. Functional strategy. Creates a sequence of actions to achieve the set goal in each area of ​​the enterprise. These levels of management in the organization provide analysis, revision, synthesis of proposals made by local managers, as well as actions to achieve the goals of this unit and support the chosen strategy. These levels include middle managers. Decisions are made by the heads of departments.

4. Operational strategy. Contains specific strategies for individual structural units of the enterprise, management levels, including local managers. Problems specific to this particular unit are solved. Decisions here are made by heads of departments and functional services.

The division of labor can be horizontal or vertical. Horizontal division of labor involves the creation of structural divisions in the company focused on different areas activities.

With vertical separation, the implementation of work is separated from the coordination of the activities of individual performers. In this case, provisions are made different levels of enterprise management.

Levels of enterprise management in the structure of the organization

What can be considered an enterprise management organization? This is the general ordering of the company, which sets the sequence of various actions and the framework within which activities should be conducted. The socio-economic environment of an enterprise is understood as the object of management organization. This includes workers various items labor, financial and information resources.

To organize the management of a company, a number of problems must be solved:

• choose goals;
• to form a community of citizens;
• determine what organizational structure and levels of enterprise management are necessary;
• create the necessary conditions.

The main functions characteristic of the company management organization:

• achievement of the company's chosen goals;
• reducing company costs;
• division of labor, due to which workers exercise their own powers better.

An expression of the division of labor in companies. Nowadays, there is an increasingly obvious trend towards specialization in the field of professional work, during which any employee (or any structural unit) is called upon to perform the actions assigned to him and is not involved in performing other functions.

The following types of division of labor can be noted: horizontal and vertical.

With a vertical division of labor, any manager has an area of ​​activity for which he has to be responsible (sphere of control), or has a certain number of employees reporting to him. In this situation, the distribution of all tasks is carried out not within one level, but “from top to bottom” - from employees occupying the highest positions to employees who find themselves at the bottom of such a hierarchy. At the same time, the higher the position held by the employee, the more general tasks he is engaged in; The lower the specialist’s position in the hierarchy, the more specific goals he receives. This is a natural process, because... The most significant decisions from the operational point of view are usually made at the very top, that is, the company's top managers.

With horizontal division of labor, workers are divided between different functional areas and are assigned to perform tasks that are important from the perspective of this functional area. A typical example is the conveyor production of goods, the case when a certain operation is provided for an individual worker, and he finds himself at the same hierarchical level with other specialists taking part in the production of products.

The internal levels of the enterprise management system should not be considered something stable and unchangeable in the future. Managers, primarily senior managers, should know that the organizational structure is formed in order to solve the problems assigned to the company.

In the future, the company’s position in the market will change, and the conditions for its functioning will also change (competitors will be added, legislation, economic and political situations will change). In addition, there is a possibility of changes in the number of employees of the enterprise.

Of course, all this can lead to the company’s objectives changing. At the same time, the internal levels of production management at the enterprise should also be changed, because the previous structure sometimes turns out to be (and most often is) unsuitable for achieving new goals.

Management in a company is usually carried out according to a pyramidal structure: the lower level includes a larger number of managers, and as you move to a higher level, their number decreases.

5 management principles from the founder of McDonald's

Ray Kroc's business moves made McDonald's a world-class food chain. The founder of a world-famous brand preferred to deal only with strategy, but if the need arose to stand at the cash register or clean toilets, he did not refuse such work.

The editors of the General Director magazine spoke about the management principles that helped Ray create perhaps the most popular company in the world.

Levels of enterprise management

As a rule, there are three levels of management.

1. Technical level (is the lower level of management) – managers directly interact with performing specialists and deal with specific issues;
2. Management level (middle) - managers in this case are responsible for the progress of each production process in structural divisions, which include a number of structural units; managers of headquarters and functional services of the management structure, heads of auxiliary and service production, targeted programs and projects;
3. Institutional level (highest) - the administration of the company, engaged in general strategic management; issues of strategic management - financial resource management, selection of sales markets, company development; only 3-7% of the total number of managers are involved at this level.

The highest level of management is involved in developing long-term plans and formulating tasks for middle management. A significant place here is given to the company’s adaptation to market dynamics and to managing the company’s relations with the external environment. This link may include the president, CEO and other board members.

Middle managers are called upon to coordinate and control the activities of lower-level managers. They identify problems in production, organizational and financial direction. They generate creative ideas and collect the necessary data for decision-making by senior managers. Middle levels of enterprise management include managers of structural divisions, departments and services of the company.

The lower level of management reports to the middle level. Managers at the management level include production foremen, foremen, and group leaders. This professional managers narrow specialization, performing clearly regulated responsibilities in the field of product production, implementation of marketing activities, material supply management, etc. They are responsible for the competent use of received resources and the rational use of equipment and workers. Such levels of enterprise management in structure allow for clear management and take advantage of the narrow, in-depth specialization of managers. At the same time, it complicates the determination of the share of the contribution of an individual lower-level manager to the total result of commercial activity, his area of ​​​​responsibility for the chosen management decisions.

Management specialists have developed a different theory of company management. In their opinion, there are the following levels of strategic management of an enterprise:

1. Corporate strategy. It affects the overall goals of the company and its entire space. These management levels are designed to perform the functions of making key decisions in technical, economic and production areas. Most often, decision making is the function of the board of directors. This category includes senior managers.
2. Business strategy. It is expressed in achieving success in the field of competition in the market of a particular business area. At this level, they are engaged in solving the following problems: increasing competitiveness, responding to external factors, choosing a strategy for the behavior of the main separate divisions. The decision-making body at this level is the board of directors, divisional management, and general directors.
3. Functional strategy. Forms a chain of actions aimed at achieving the chosen goal in each area in which the organization operates; levels of enterprise management are designed to ensure analysis, revision, synthesis of various ideas expressed by local managers, and actions to implement the tasks of this unit and maintain the adopted company strategy. These levels include middle management. Decision making is within the competence of department heads.
4. Operational strategy. Includes special strategies for separate structural units of the company, levels of enterprise management, including local managers. Here they solve problems specific to this particular unit. The choice of solution is within the competence of the heads of departments and functional services.

What are the levels of management of a modern enterprise today?

In international practice, specialists in complex automation of production activities identify five levels of management of a modern company:

At the level of ERP - Enterprise Resource Planning (forecasting company resources), various financial and economic indicators are calculated and analyzed, and solutions to strategic administrative and logistics problems are searched for.

At the level of MES - Manufacturing Execution Systems (production process management systems) problems are solved in the field of product quality management, forecasting and checking the sequence of operations technological process, management of production and labor resources within the technological process being performed, maintenance of production equipment.

The indicated levels of management of a modern enterprise are classified as tasks of automated control system (automated enterprise management system) and technical means, due to which such tasks are performed - office personal computers (PCs) and workstations in the services of the company's leading employees.

The next levels of enterprise management solve problems related to the category of automated process control systems ( automated systems process control).

SCADA - Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (information collection and dispatch control system) is a level of tactical current management, within which tasks of choice are solved optimal solution, diagnostics, adaptation, etc.

Control-level – local control level, implemented on the following TSA: software – operator panels, PLC – programmable logic controllers, USO – communication devices with the object.

HMI–Human-Machine Interface (human-machine communication) – performs visualization (graphical representation of information) of the progress of the technological process.

Input/Output – Inputs/Outputs of the control object, which are various sensors and actuators (D/AM) of individual technological installations and working machines.

• Production management: what is the secret of successful management

How the levels of enterprise management are formed

The formation of enterprise management levels is carried out within the framework of the production-territorial principle, the essence of which is expressed in the fact that the entire management apparatus is divided vertically into separate levels, and horizontally at all levels their own management units are formed.

The levels of enterprise management determine the immediate sequence of subordination of management bodies from lower to upper echelons.

All levels of enterprise management are headed by employees involved in general management in this area. Based on the principle of unity of command, he is subordinate to a higher-level manager and receives orders and tasks from him to carry out.

Top managers form an institutional level, considered the highest level of management, where forecasting takes place over a long period of time, decisions are selected that have important consequences for the enterprise, responses are made to changes that have begun and are expected in the near future, etc.

The highest levels of enterprise management have another characteristic feature - it is here that issues in the field of interaction of the enterprise with its external environment, which includes competitors, the state, public associations, etc., are resolved. At this level, decisions are made by top-level managers (top managers: rectors of universities, presidents and vice-presidents of companies, directors).

Top-level management solves the problem of making decisions that are vital for the organization or its large structural unit. Typically, such decisions are of a strategic nature: compared to solving tactical problems, they are aimed not at choosing ways to achieve set goals, but at defining the company’s goals themselves.

The highest levels of enterprise management are distinguished by the fact that the managers at them have little contact with by different people: They communicate within the company with other top-level managers, as well as with some of their subordinates. However, this situation does not indicate that their work turns out to be simpler and easier than the work of managers at other levels.

They have a huge responsibility. The middle and lower levels of enterprise management differ in that the erroneous decisions of their managers affect certain aspects of the company’s work, i.e. lead to local problems, then mistakes by top-level management can cause the company to go bankrupt. In this regard, one of the most important skills required for senior management is the ability to take risks. Not all people are willing to take risks.

Middle managers form the management level, which is considered the next level at which the work of different employees and structural divisions is coordinated to achieve the goals set for the company. At this level, decisions are made by middle managers (these include directors of separate divisions, heads of departments, deans at universities).

The middle levels of enterprise management include managers who coordinate and control the work of lower-level managers and help top-level managers in making key decisions. Therefore, they are intermediaries between senior and lower management. Let's study their functions in more detail:

1. Middle-level management is often involved in the decisions of top-level managers. They express their ideas related to certain innovations, collect information needed to solve the problem, and evaluate the decision made. Top management has only the most general information about the company's work, they often do not understand the problems that exist in the company or appear as a result of making the wrong decision.
2. Of course, middle-level managers have more information about the company's activities. They are well aware of how the structural unit they manage works. The difference between top and middle level managers is that the former deal with the affairs of the company as a whole, while the latter have more complete information about a certain area of ​​the company's work. And lower-level managers have very private information about the enterprise.
3. Another task set for middle-level managers is mediation - with their help, the highest and lowest levels of enterprise management are connected. Most often, a competent interpretation of the decision made by top managers is entrusted to middle management. They manage to give instructions from above a form that is optimal for the lower level of management. In this situation, middle-level managers are responsible for distributing certain tasks and choosing deadlines for their completion.

The goals set for them represent the details of the decisions of top managers. Middle-level managers are forced to communicate very often, which is primarily due to the fact that they perform the functions of mediation between other parts of the management system.

For this reason, they need to be able to highlight relevant information and separate it from what is not important.

If companies employ a large number of employees, the average levels of enterprise management often include additional levels.

For example, there are often situations where some middle-level managers coordinate the work of lower-level managers, and others coordinate the activities of middle-level management. The latter are often considered top-level managers: their position is higher than that of standard middle-level managers, but they do not belong to the highest level of management, because are subordinate to him.

It should be noted that improvements in technology and other reasons have led to a gradual reduction in the number of middle-level managers. However, they remain necessary. The only thing is that their powers are undergoing the most significant changes.

At the same time, lower-level managers form the technical level of enterprise management:

• at this level, normal work activities are carried out;
• this level can be correlated with the daily activities of each company.
• decisions at this level are made by managers of the lower management level (foremen in workshops, heads of subdepartments, in universities - heads of departments, etc.), and their work is considered at the level of current management.

The main feature of the work of lower-level managers is that they are called upon to:

• deal with problems related to the use of resources in individual situations;
• check the quality level and timing of various production operations.

The main difficulty that arises for a lower-level manager is that he is forced to very quickly move from one activity to another. In this regard, he needs to quickly resolve issues, because... Most often there is no time to think and search for the optimal solution. The lower levels of enterprise management involve the formation of special relationships between managers and their subordinates. Managers of this level are forced to solve assigned tasks and check the work of employees, as well as be mentors and leaders. And it is precisely these managers who, consciously or unconsciously, are entrusted with the task of training young specialists and new employees. Middle and senior managers do this much less often.

All levels of enterprise management include functional structures that perform specific functions in the field of management. The main task of such units is expressed in preparatory work on formation management decisions for a manager at this level.

In the case of using a single-level structure, managers directly manage the activities of performers. When using a two-level structure, the highest levels of enterprise management are formed - the work of performers is added.

• Managing business opportunities: how to protect a company from ruin

Analysis of enterprise management levels

Analysis of the management level determines the operation of the management system, its compliance with the management object, and the ability to select sufficiently informed decisions. The specified characteristics of the management system are considered a key condition for the intensification of production activities and the success of its current and future development.

During the analysis of the management level, the work of the management system in general and the activities of its components are considered, such as the organizational structure of management, levels of enterprise management, the composition of management personnel, their level of qualifications and labor organization, technical equipment activities of managers, etc.

The purpose of the analysis is to substantiate the rational structure of management bodies, ensure compliance of management staff with the characteristics and content of management functions, rational measures to centralize management functions, reduce the time for data processing and the time for making a choice of management decision.

An important assessment of the level of enterprise management includes conducting an analysis organizational structure, starting with a description of the company. The parameters of the company and its production structure are designed to determine the structure of management bodies and the number of managers.

Analytical indicators that determine the current state of governing bodies are:

• the ratio of the supply of management personnel in general for the company and for each functional group;
• the share of management employees in the total number of personnel of the company;
• their average number and specific gravity in workshops and in individual areas;
• controllability coefficient. Controllability factor in separate divisions determines, for example, the number of workers per foreman, shift manager, workshop manager, etc.

At the same time, the analysis of enterprise management levels includes such a special section as assessing the level of centralization of management functions. This indicator is calculated generally for the company and separately for existing functional groups.

Analysis of technical equipment and management methods

It determines the breadth of involvement in management work of advanced achievements of scientific and technical thought ( the best equipment), new management techniques, etc.

The analysis begins with an assessment of the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the technology used in management and the possibilities for its improvement.

Using the level of technical equipment, an indicator of the degree of mechanization and automation of management work is determined.

Its characteristic is the level of comprehensive (or partial) mechanization of the data processing process, the level of automation of data processing and preparation of solutions. It is with the help of automation of the work of managers that the basis is formed for exploring alternative development options and choosing rational solutions.

Analysis of the composition and labor organization of management employees

It is carried out by assessing the level of qualifications of management staff, its compliance with the current requirements of production activity and science.

The needs to increase the level of qualifications of management employees for individual functional groups (planners, planners, etc.) are determined, and a set of measures is developed to increase the level of qualifications.

An analysis of the organization of work activities of management personnel is carried out, based on a description of the management process, management functions performed by each employee, documentation and document flow diagrams.

During the analysis, reserves are found for improving the technology of the management process by organizing the list and flow of documents, their unification, and timely processing. They also find reserves to improve the organization of work of managers.

Management efficiency analysis

Based on a comparison of management costs with the final results of the company. The efficiency indicator of the management techniques used in the company is calculated as the ratio of the volume of sales of goods to the amount of management costs. The higher the value of this indicator, the more successful the management techniques used in the company. Successful levels of enterprise management are considered to be those that ensure:

• increase in labor productivity;
• increase in capital productivity of fixed production assets;
• acceleration of turnover of working capital;
• profit growth.

Copying material without permission is permitted if there is a dofollow link to this page

Levels of Management is a manifestation of the division of labor in organizations. Currently, the trend towards specialization is becoming more and more obvious professional activity, in which each employee (or each department) performs the functions assigned to him and is not involved in the performance of other functions.

The division of labor can be vertical and horizontal. With a vertical division of labor, each manager has an area of ​​activity for which he is responsible (sphere of control) or a certain number of workers who are subordinate to him. In this case, the distribution of tasks is carried out not at one level, but “from top to bottom” - from workers occupying senior positions to workers at the bottom of the hierarchy.

Moreover, the higher the position held by the employee, the more general tasks he decides; The lower the employee’s position in the hierarchy, the more specific the goals facing him are. This is completely natural, since the most significant decisions from the point of view of functioning are made at the very top, that is, by the management of the enterprise.

With horizontal division of labor, specialists are distributed among various functional areas and are entrusted with performing tasks that are important from the point of view of this functional area. A striking example The horizontal division of labor is conveyor production, when each worker performs a separate operation and is at the same level of hierarchy as other workers involved in the production of the same product.

The internal structure of an organization should not be perceived as something established, something that will always exist. Managers, especially senior managers, must understand that the structure of the organization is created to solve the problems facing the organization. Over time, the organization’s position in the market changes, and the conditions of its activities also change (the emergence of competitors, the legislative framework, economic conditions, political situation); in addition, the number may also change labor collective. Naturally, this leads to the organization's goals changing. And along with them, the internal structure of the organization must change, since the old structure may be (and usually is) unsuitable for solving new problems.

Management in an organization always has a pyramid structure: at the lower levels there are a large number of managers, as you move up their number decreases. On this basis, it is customary to distinguish between lower, middle and upper managers; this classification is based on the ideas of the American sociologist Talcott Parsons.

According to Parsons, any organization has three levels of management:

1) institutional level - the highest level of management, at which planning is carried out for a long period, decisions are made that have very important consequences for the organization, there is a response to changes that have already begun or are expected in the near future, etc. Another distinctive feature of this level is that it is at this level that decisions are made regarding the interaction of the organization with its external environment - competitors, the state, public associations, etc. At this level, decisions are made by senior managers (the so-called top managers: directors, presidents, vice-presidents of enterprises, university rectors);

2) managerial level - this is the next level at which the coordination of the actions of various employees and departments is carried out to achieve the goals of the organization. At this level, decisions are made by middle managers (heads of independent divisions and departments, directors of branches, and in universities - deans);

3) technical level of management - this is the level at which standard labor operations are performed; this level can be correlated with the daily work that exists in any organization. Decisions at this level are made by lower-level managers (foreman in the workshop, head of a subdepartment, in universities - heads of departments, etc.), and their activities are studied operational management.

The tasks that managers at different levels are called upon to solve differ significantly from each other. These differences are due primarily to the fact that managers at each level must manage different types of work. Any person who aspires to become a leader must have a good understanding of the features of a leader’s activities, depending on the level at which he carries out his functions.

You should not think that managers at some level are more important for the enterprise than managers at another level. The activities of a manager at any level of management are important for the normal functioning of the organization. The highest level of management will be helpless if it does not rely on the lower and middle echelons, the same is true for all other levels.

Senior managers are entrusted with the task of making decisions that are vital for the organization or its large division. As a rule, such decisions are strategic: they, unlike tactical decisions, determine not how to achieve goals, but the goals themselves that the organization should strive for.

As a rule, senior managers do not have a large number of contacts with people: their communications within the organization are limited to communication with other senior managers, as well as communication with a small number of subordinates. However, this does not mean that their work is simpler or easier than the work of managers at other levels. Firstly, they bear a huge responsibility.

If an incorrect decision made by a middle or lower-level manager affects some aspects of the organization’s activities, that is, leads to local violations, then a mistake by a top-level manager can lead to the death of the organization. For this reason, one of the most important abilities required for a senior leader is the ability to take risks. Not every person is capable of this.

Middle managers, as a rule, are involved in coordinating and monitoring the activities of lower-level managers, and also assist senior managers in decision-making. In addition, they play the role of intermediaries between senior managers and lower-level managers. Let's take a closer look at their functions.

Middle managers are often called upon to make decisions made by senior managers. Their participation in this process can consist either in proposing specific innovations, or in collecting information that is significant from the point of view of the problem, or in examining the decision made. Senior managers have only the most general information about the activities of the organization; Often they may not be aware of the problems that either exist in the organization or arise as a result of making the wrong decision.

Naturally, middle managers have more complete information about the life of the enterprise; By at least, they know better about how the division of the organization they manage functions. The difference between senior managers and lower managers is that the former deal with the organization as a whole, while middle managers are better informed about some part of the organization's activities. From this point of view, lower-level managers have too private information about the activities of the organization.

Another task facing middle managers is mediation between senior and lower management. Usually, the optimal interpretation of a decision made at the highest level rests with them. And this is completely natural, since they can usually give these decisions a form that is optimal from the point of view of the lower level of management. In this case, middle managers distribute specific tasks and set deadlines within which they can be completed. The tasks they face can be defined as a specification of decisions made at the highest level.

Middle managers have to communicate a lot, and this is primarily due to the fact that they act as intermediaries between other levels of management. For this reason, they must be able to highlight relevant information and discard what is not important.

If the organization consists of large number workers, additional levels may be allocated in middle management. In particular, you can often encounter a situation where some middle managers coordinate the activities of lower-level managers, while others coordinate the activities of middle managers. The latter are often called top-level managers: they occupy a higher position than ordinary middle managers, but do not belong to the highest echelon of management, since they are subordinate to it.

It should be noted that technological progress, as well as some other reasons, have led to the fact that the number of middle management is gradually decreasing. However, this does not mean that there is no need for middle managers. The only point is that the functions assigned to these managers are subject to the most dramatic changes.

The main feature of the work of lower-level managers is that they are required to control the production process: solve problems associated with the use of resources in a specific situation, control the quality and timing of production operations. The main difficulty that a lower-level manager has to face is that he has to switch very quickly from one job to another. For this reason, a lower-level manager must be able to make decisions quickly, since there is usually no time to think about a decision.

A lower-level manager has a special relationship with his subordinates. He not only has to make decisions and monitor their activities, but also act as a mentor and leader. Indeed, it is these managers who, consciously or unconsciously, are tasked with training young and/or new employees. Managers at other levels perform such functions much less frequently.

Levels of management and types of managers

Completed by a third year student

Faculty Business and Management

Checked by the teacher

· MANAGEMENT LEVELS.

· Management as a concept

· Horizontal and vertical principle of division of labor

· Levels of management

· MANAGER AND LEADER. COMMON AND DISTINGUISHING FEATURES.

· Management and manager functions

· Leader and leader functions

· Leaders and managers. General and distinctive features.

· TYPES OF LEADERS. QUALITIES REQUIRED BY A MANAGER.

· Main types of leaders

· Qualities required for a modern leader

Conclusions and Conclusions

· LEVELS OF MANAGEMENT

· Management as a concept

Control is the process of planning, organization, motivation and control necessary in order to formulate and achieve the goals of the organization (Meskon M. Kh.).

Peter F. Drucker, considered by many to be the world's leading management and organization theorist, offers a different definition. "Management - it is a special kind of activity that transforms a disorganized crowd into an effective, focused and productive group."

Management (as a process) is the influence of the subject of management on the object in order to achieve certain goals. The subjects of management can be an investor, manager, state, corporate or entrepreneurial governing body. The objects of management can be objects of a lower level of management in relation to the subject (a corporation enterprise, a department of an enterprise, a subject of the Federation, etc.), a manager of a lower management level in relation to the subject, a specialist, a worker, objects and means of labor for the worker and etc.

Management is the implementation of several interrelated functions: planning, organization, employee motivation and control. The interaction of these functions with each other forms single process, or, in other words a continuous chain of interrelated actions .

Governance as such is both a catalyst for social change and an example of significant social change. And finally, it is management, more than anything else, that explains the most significant phenomenon of our century: the explosion of education. The more highly educated people there are, the more dependent they are on the organization. Almost all people with more than a high school education, in all developed countries of the world in the United States, this figure is more than 90%, will spend their entire lives as employees of controlled organizations and will not be able to live and earn a living outside the organizations.”

· Horizontal and vertical principle of division of labor

Large organizations need to perform very large volumes of management work. It requires division of managerial labor into horizontal and vertical.

The horizontal principle of division of labor is the placement of managers at the head of individual divisions and departments.

The vertical division of labor principle is the creation of a hierarchy of management levels to coordinate horizontally divided management work to achieve organizational goals.

Also in this chapter we will look at 3 levels of management, or, in other words, three categories of managers.

· Levels of Management

· Lower level managers(operational managers). The most numerous category. They monitor the implementation of production tasks and the use of resources (raw materials, equipment, personnel). Junior superiors include the foreman, the head of the laboratory, etc. The work of a lower-level manager is very diverse, characterized by frequent transitions from one type of activity to another. The level of responsibility of lower-level managers is not very high; sometimes the work involves a significant proportion of physical labor.

A typical job title at this level is foreman, shift foreman, sergeant, department head, head nurse. Most of the managers in general are lower-level managers. Most people begin their management careers in this capacity.

Research has shown that the job of a line manager is stressful and action-packed. It is characterized by frequent breaks and transitions from one task to another. The tasks themselves are potentially short. One study found that the average time it took a craftsman to complete one task was 48 seconds. The time period for implementing the decisions made by the master is also short. They are almost always implemented in less than 2 weeks. It was found that craftsmen spend about half of their working time communicating. They communicate a lot with their subordinates, not much with other masters, and very little with their superiors.

· Middle managers. They monitor the work of lower-level managers and transmit processed information to senior managers. This level includes: heads of department, dean, etc. Middle managers bear a significantly greater share of responsibility.

In a large organization there may be so many middle managers that it may be necessary to separate the group. And if such a division occurs, then two levels arise, the first of which is called upper level of middle management, second - lower level of middle management.

It is difficult to generalize about the character of a middle manager, as it varies significantly from organization to organization and even within the same organization.

A middle manager often heads a large division or department in an organization. The nature of his work is determined to a greater extent by the content of the work of the unit than of the organization as a whole. For example, the work of a production manager in an industrial firm primarily involves coordinating and directing the work of lower-level managers, analyzing productivity data, and interacting with an engineer to develop new products. The head of the external relations department at the same company spends the bulk of his time preparing papers, reading, talking and talking, as well as at meetings of various committees.

In general, however, middle managers act as a buffer between senior and lower management. They prepare information for decisions made by senior managers and transmit these decisions, usually after transforming them into a technologically convenient form, in the form of specifications and specific tasks, to lower-level line managers.

Middle managers, as a social group, experienced a particularly strong impact of various economic and technological changes in production during the 80s. Personal computers eliminated some of their functions and changed others, allowing senior managers to receive information directly at their desks directly from the source, rather than having to filter it at the middle management level. A wave of corporate mergers and general pressure to improve operational efficiency have also caused a drastic reduction in the number of middle managers in some organizations.

· Senior managers. The smallest category. They are responsible for the development and implementation of the organization's strategy and for making decisions that are especially important for it. Senior managers include: company president, minister, rector, etc. The work of a senior manager is very responsible, since the scope of work is large and the pace of activity is intense. Their work mainly involves mental activity. They must constantly make management decisions.

Usually there is a hierarchy (pyramid) of management with differentiation according to the rank of command power, decision-making competence, authority, and position.

The management hierarchy is a tool for realizing the company’s goals and guaranteeing the preservation of the system. The higher the hierarchical level, the greater the volume and complexity of the functions performed, the responsibility, the share of strategic decisions and access to information. At the same time, qualification requirements and personal freedom in management are increasing. The lower the level, the greater the simplicity of decisions and the proportion of operational activities.

The pyramid shape is used to show that at each subsequent level of control there is less people than the previous one.

· MANAGER AND LEADER. COMMON AND DISTINGUISHING FEATURES

· Management and manager functions

Management- this is a system of management methods in a market or market economy, which involve the company’s orientation towards the demand and needs of the market, a constant desire to increase production efficiency at the lowest cost, in order to obtain optimal results.

Management is also an area human knowledge, helping to carry out the control function. Finally, management as a collective term for managers is a certain category of people, a social stratum of those who carry out management work. The importance of management was especially clearly recognized in the 1930s. Even then it became obvious that this activity had turned into a profession, a field of knowledge into an independent discipline, and a social stratum into a very influential social force. The growing role of this social force led to talk of a “revolution of managers,” when it turned out that there were giant corporations with enormous economic, production, scientific and technical potential, comparable in power to entire states. The largest corporations and banks form the core of the economic and political strength of great nations. Governments depend on them, many of them are transnational in nature, extending their production, distribution, service, information networks Worldwide. This means that managers’ decisions, like decisions statesmen, can determine the fate of millions of people, states and entire regions. However, the role of managers is not limited to their presence only in huge multi-level and branched corporate management structures. In a mature market economy, small business is no less important. In terms of quantity, this is more than 95% of all companies; in terms of value, this is the closest proximity to the everyday needs of consumers and at the same time a testing ground for technical progress and other innovations. For the majority of the population, this is also work. Managing a small business skillfully means surviving, standing, and growing. How to do this is also a question effective management.

In the modern sense, a manager- this is a leader or manager who holds a permanent position and is vested with the authority to make decisions on specific types of activities of a company operating in market conditions. It is assumed that the decisions made by the manager are reasonable and are developed on the basis of use the latest methods management.

The term “manager” is quite widespread and is used in relation to:

To the organizer of specific types of work within individual divisions or program-target groups;

To the head of the enterprise as a whole or its divisions (divisions, divisions, departments);

To the manager in relation to subordinates;

To an administrator at any level of management who organizes work in accordance with modern methods.

There is a management process applicable to any organization, which consists in implementing the functions that every manager must perform. Currently, in management literature there is a tendency to view management as the implementation of functions. We can only say that there is no consensus on what these managerial functions are.

MANAGEMENT is the process of planning, organizing, motivating and controlling necessary to formulate and achieve the goals of an organization.

Thus, planning, organizing, motivating and controlling are the four main functions of a manager.

Let's look at each of them in a little more detail.

PLANNING. The planning function involves deciding what the organization's goals should be and what members of the organization should do to achieve those goals. In essence the planning function answers the following three basic questions :

Where are we currently?

Where do we want to go?

How are we going to do this?

Through planning Management strives to establish guidelines for effort and decision-making that will ensure unity of purpose for all members of the organization. In other words, planning is one of the ways in which management ensures that the efforts of all members of the organization are directed toward achieving its common goals. Planning in an organization does not represent a separate one-time event for two significant reasons. First, although some organizations cease to exist after achieving the purpose for which they were originally created, many strive to survive as long as possible. Therefore, they redefine or change their goals if full achievement of the original goals is almost complete. The second reason why planning must be carried out continuously is the constant uncertainty of the future. Due to changes in environment or errors in judgment, events may not unfold as management anticipated when plans were made. Therefore, plans need to be revised to ensure they are consistent with reality.

ORGANIZATION . To organize means to create a certain structure. There are many elements that need to be structured so that an organization can carry out its plans and thereby achieve its goal. One of these elements is work, specific tasks of the organization. Since people do the work, others important aspect The function of the organization is to determine who exactly should perform each specific task from large quantity such tasks existing within the organization, including management work. A manager selects people for a specific job by delegating to individuals tasks and the authority or rights to use the organization's resources. These delegates accept responsibility for the successful performance of their responsibilities. By doing this, they agree to consider themselves subordinate to the leader.

MOTIVATION. A leader must always remember that even the best laid plans and the most perfect organizational structure are of no use if someone does not carry out the actual work of the organization. And the task of the motivation function is to ensure that members of the organization perform work in accordance with the responsibilities delegated to them and in accordance with the plan. Managers have always performed the function of motivating their employees, whether they realized it themselves or not. It used to be that motivation was a simple matter of offering appropriate monetary rewards in exchange for effort. This was the basis for the approach to motivating the school of scientific management.

Research in the behavioral sciences has demonstrated the inconsistency of purely economic approach. Leaders learned that motivation, i.e. creating an internal motivation to take action , is the result of a complex set of needs that are constantly changing .

We now understand that in order to motivate his employees effectively, a manager must determine what those needs actually are and provide a way for employees to satisfy those needs through good performance.

CONTROL. Unforeseen circumstances can cause an organization to deviate from the course management originally intended. And if management fails to identify and correct these deviations from original plans before the organization is seriously damaged, the achievement of its goals, perhaps even its very survival, will be jeopardized.

Control is the process of ensuring that an organization actually achieves its goals. Exist three aspects of management control : Setting standards- This precise definition goals that must be achieved within a specified period of time. It is based on plans developed during the planning process. The second aspect is measuring what has actually been achieved for a certain period, and comparison of what has been achieved with the expected results. If both of these phases are performed correctly, then the organization's management not only knows that there is a problem in the organization, but also knows the source of that problem. This knowledge is necessary for the successful implementation of the third phase, namely, the stage in which actions are taken, if necessary, to correction of serious deviations from the original plan. One of possible actions- revising goals to make them more realistic and appropriate to the situation.

· Leader. Leader functions.

There are organizations in which everything seems to be done correctly, but something is still missing. They have no soul, nothing that allows them to breathe life into the administrative system. They exist without faith, without love, and without hope. They are doomed to such a gray existence, unless there is a person or a team of like-minded people who will discover the essence and meaning in this frozen system, and then hope will return. Such a person is called a leader, and the role within which he acts is called leadership.

Overall, in various sources, a leader is defined as a person who thinks big, envisions potential opportunities, creates a shared vision for the future, develops people's abilities, delegates authority, values ​​differences in people, develops a team approach to work, a sense of partnership, welcomes change, demonstrates knowledge of technology , encourages constructive challenge, ensures customer satisfaction, achieves success in competition with competitors, demonstrates personal achievements, a high level of competence, demonstrates a willingness to lead collaboratively, acts in accordance with stated values, but can change those values ​​if the situation requires it.

Place of leadership in the organization

Let's determine the scope of application leadership qualities In the organisation. Three concepts of leadership can serve as our starting point: in the quality system (QS), in psychology and in management.

W. Edwards Deming defines leadership “as a method of work designed to help workers do their jobs.” the best way" It is known from theory that leadership is an integral component of the work of teams and groups. M. Mescon and co-authors also attribute leadership to the internal factors of the organization, or more precisely, to the “people” subsystem.

Japanese management experts believe that the most significant leadership is that of the top management. After all, no matter how local leadership is developed, if the head of the company prefers a sofa and a newspaper to healthy risk and action, no matter how hard his subordinates try, they are unlikely to be able to move forward.

Leadership and Power

Power is not always leadership. But the opposite is apparently always true: leadership generates power and largely ensures it. The advantageous difference between leadership and simple administrative power is that it is power that does not require the use of force, although it has it. Force becomes unnecessary when ideology comes to the aid of leadership. It is the leader who is called upon to formulate an idea or system of ideas that those who need faith are willing to believe in, and that those who are looking for explanations are willing to accept. To avoid resistance, a manager must be strong. The great Indian thinker S. Vivekananda said: “Weakness gives rise to the very idea of ​​resistance.” A leader cannot be weak by definition.

When is a leader needed?

A manager must be strong, just like a leader, but does a leader always have to be a leader? Most modern authors give an affirmative answer to this. In any organization, all processes begin to flow more actively when a leader appears at the helm. W. Edwards Deming wrote that leadership is the trigger for the quality system, and without it it is more fiction than reality. “Leadership is required for all components of the system,” Deming noted in the preface to G.R. Niva "Dr. Deming's Space". And, above all, the leading role of top management is important, without which constructive changes are practically impossible. One of the main provisions of the theory of innovation management is the statement that leadership is a key element of the innovation process and the development of culture in an organization. Leadership is the key that unlocks the path to business success. Juran emphasizes that top management leadership is one of the eight lessons that successful companies learn. T. Conti expresses similar views.

Edgeman says a new, quality-focused organization depends on leadership that creates the internal conditions for success. Undoubtedly, the ultimate success of a corporation will depend on the ability of all its employees to work creatively together toward a common goal. But here again we cannot do without leadership, which nourishes and supports required skills and the required attitude. According to Melissa Horner, leadership today is nothing more than determining the height to which you need to jump.

The fact that a manager who manages the behavior of other people must have leadership qualities is not in doubt among any of the modern researchers and the most successful management practitioners. All advanced business models can be recognized by the central role of leadership in them. These are the models of such luminaries as W. Edwards Deming, Joseph Juran, Peter Drucker, Tito Conti, etc. Leadership in this case refers, as a rule, to top management and, to a lesser extent, to local management.

But this vision of the issue is beginning to change. At the Quality Management Conference in Budapest, Professor Kondo noted:

“The importance of leadership cannot be ignored by senior and middle managers.” And Peter Senge, in a recent interview, noted that companies need three types of leaders: a leader - the head of a company or organization, leader-managers who carry out the company’s policy on the ground, and leader-activists, among ordinary employees of the organization who constantly keep the “fire going.” in the fire” and don’t let it fade away while the managers are not around. This way, you can inspire the entire company from top to bottom and get just the right feedback to continuously improve the process day after day.

So leadership is integral element modern system management, and moreover, leadership is the “trigger mechanism” of this system, this is what makes all the technical elements, concepts, principles come to life.

Leadership is not only an integral component, but also an irreplaceable one. After all, its absence will entail significant financial losses and loss of competitiveness. There is an opinion that leadership can be replaced by a clear system of control, punishment and rewards. What will come of this? There is no leadership - stricter control (you have to control, at least more often), more time is spent on setting the task, the climate in the team is worse - there is a loss of resources: time and human. Funds are needed to hire an extra controller or organize a control service; Personnel turnover caused by a poor climate in the team also affects the financial condition of the organization. All together affects the company’s efficiency, naturally, not for the better. From this we can conclude that leadership is the key to “good organization and global competitiveness.”

· Leaders and managers. General and distinctive features.

Leaders introduce change. Where changes can be avoided, management is sufficient. However, in modern era With rapid and accelerating changes, such static areas in business are becoming fewer and fewer.

The main difference between managers and leaders lies in their underlying beliefs about chaos and order. Leaders easily accept a lack of structure. Managers, on the contrary, strive for stability and control.

So, there are the following opinions:

· If you look at the functions of management in their classic cycle: planning - organization - motivation - control, then the roles of the manager in the framework of designing and coordinating the business process and the role of the leader in solving problems of personnel management are clearly visible. It turns out that effective leader This is not only a person capable of launching and coordinating a business process, but also a leader capable of leading staff to achieve goals. It turns out that an effective leader is “two in one”, he is both a leader and a manager.

· Leadership begins with two feelings: with a sense of internal responsibility for yourself, for your team and for the task taken upon yourself (responsibility accepted, not assigned), and with faith in yourself, in your people and in the feasibility of the task. List external signs I would discover that “being a leader works” as follows: when in other people’s mouths and conversations you hear your own previously expressed thoughts and arguments; when you observe the everyday behavior of your employees (especially when they think that no one sees them) exactly as you were striving for, and the reason for it is their inner conviction (this is right, this is how it should be), and not fear of punishment, for example.

· A manager becomes a leader at the moment when they begin to follow him with new energy, seeing a bright future, believing their “leader”. This means that the manager not only manages the process, he inspires the participants in the work process.

· A person (not necessarily a manager) becomes a leader at the moment when he begins not only to receive something from the world, but also to give to it. When his interests go beyond his own well-being. When he learns to see deeper and wider than others, he begins to understand how to make this world (country, community, his company) more perfect, and feels responsible for this. And this responsibility does not weigh heavily on his shoulders, but inspires and energizes him!

· A manager becomes a leader when he shifts the focus (even if temporarily) from operational problems to the future, when he focuses not on assessment (not so much on assessment), but on development and begins to think in terms of potential and opportunity. When he discovers his ability to inspire his team members.

· A manager becomes a leader when he can involve others in his work without doing job descriptions, but “at the behest of the heart,” when others are ready to follow him, when they completely believe him.

· Managers are focused on the present, prefer stability and think “how”. Leaders are interested in the future, make long-term plans and think “why”.

Harvard University professor Abraham Zaleznik believes that companies need both managers and leaders to survive, and even more so to succeed. Below is the abstract of his famous article “Managers and Leaders: Is There a Difference”

The concepts of “leadership” and “management” are not always identical, but most people misunderstand the essence of their differences. There is nothing mystical or mysterious about leadership. This is not the privilege of a select few. Leadership is not necessarily more important than management, and one does not replace the other.

However, when it comes to training specialists for top management positions, company heads openly ignore the warnings of psychologists that a person is not capable of being both a manager and a leader. They are trying to develop leaders and managers rolled into one. And they can be understood. But is this possible? After all, managers and leaders are completely human beings. different types. And to truly be able to develop such luminaries, companies must understand the basic difference between leadership and management.

If an organization wants to survive, much less succeed, modern conditions, it needs both managers and leaders. However, large corporations today seem to be bewitched solely by the “secrets of effective management.” This hobby leads to an increasing spread of managerial-type personalities - those who value and strive to maintain formal, stable patterns of production processes. The rules of behavior among managers dictate that collective leadership be preferred, and risk is recommended to be avoided.

This same one-sided bias towards management prevents the emergence of real leaders in organizations: how can the entrepreneurial spirit develop in such a conservative, impersonal environment? In order to create the most favorable conditions for a “leadership” type of personality, it is necessary, first of all, to provide potential leaders with the opportunity for close communication with mentors. However, in large organizations with a complex hierarchical structure, such relationships are not encouraged.

Companies need to find a way to train smart managers while developing talented leaders. Without a strong organizational structure, even the leaders with the most brilliant ideas will be left behind. They will work in vain, only deceiving the expectations of their colleagues and not achieving any noticeable results. But another prerequisite is also important: the entrepreneurial culture that is formed when a true leader is at the helm of the organization. If it is not there, then even companies with the most impeccable management structure are at risk of stagnation and loss of competitiveness.

· TYPES OF LEADERS. QUALITIES REQUIRED BY A MANAGER

· Main types of managers

In textbooks on successful leadership, as a rule, there are 5 types of leaders. It must be said that such a grouping is too academic, and in real life Leaders usually combine qualities from several types, but almost always their behavior is built around one, which is taken as a basis (naturally, on a subconscious level). Let's take a closer look at the 5 main types of leaders, highlighting their obvious pros and cons.

Charismatic leader

Well, this is the main character of all American stories success. A person, as a rule, without higher education (this is if American dream), who built a business from scratch with his own hands. He knows how to inspire people like no one else (yes, famous commanders, the same Hannibal, who killed almost 40 thousand people while crossing the Alps for the sake of the dream of conquering Rome, knew how to do this). His energy is contagious. It is in companies with such leaders that technical revolutions most often occur.

Such a manager usually ignores the dress code and is always ready to listen to any employee, which, however, does not mean that he will agree with his opinion. As history shows, it is to this type of leader that company employees are most attached, since his ideas serve as a kind of catalyst for them, which later turns into devotion. Every employee can grow together with such a leader. And this is one of the main advantages of this style. Self-confidence and will are the main features of this type. Such a manager cannot stand defeats, as it affects his EGO.

Of course, the fact that this manager strongly encourages risk-taking and new ideas also have a positive effect on talented employees. True, a charismatic leader is not relevant everywhere today. Such a leader, of course, is the most popular in the USA, and his popularity is high in many European (Anglo-Saxon) countries. But in Asia and Australia this type of leadership is completely unacceptable. Due to cultural traditions.

In addition, it is worth noting that this leadership style is very productive at the stage of business formation. When will is one of the most important attributes of success. If the company grows, the manager will have to change, although of course not radically. One of the most famous representatives of this type is Apple co-founder Steve Jobs.

Diplomat

From the name it already becomes clear that such a manager focuses on team activities. Perhaps this best type manager for businesses that employ highly educated specialists (who may be much smarter than the manager, for example scientists). A diplomat is characterized by benevolence, competence, and the ability to listen.

As a rule, the main task of a diplomat is to establish equal relations with employees. They are not subordinates, but partners. All the most significant decisions are made after discussions with employees, and the diplomat tries to ensure that everyone’s opinions are taken into account. As far as this is, of course, possible in a particular company.

Diplomats are most popular in Japan. It is from this country that this type of leadership came. Wise, understanding that without other people it is impossible to achieve success. At the same time, this leader does not consider himself superior to others. He will never say, “I did it,” but he can always say, “We did it.”

If we talk about representatives of this type, then Konosuke Matsushita from Panasonic immediately comes to mind. In addition to Asia, this type of leadership is very popular in Latin America.

Humanist

This type of manager views the company as one big family. First of all, he values ​​his employees as people, and only then pays attention to their professional qualities. In companies of this type, employees often relax together, make friends, and go out into nature. The boss may well solve some of the problems of his subordinates (for example, voluntarily pay for the treatment of their relatives, and he himself will call the doctor to find out how the patient is doing, not because it is necessary for work, but purely for human reasons).

In companies where a humanist is at the helm, there are usually no fines or strict systems for monitoring employees. Undoubtedly, this leadership style is best applicable in small companies, since as the company grows, it will become increasingly difficult for the manager to communicate with each employee as with a friend. This style is most popular in some countries. Latin America, China, and other low-income countries. Humanistic leaders have not taken root in Europe and the United States. Firstly, because they don’t like interference in personal life (even with good intentions), and secondly, incomes are higher here, and the work style is completely different, which makes it extremely difficult to build such relationships.

Democrat

A democrat is characterized by the fact that he is ready to delegate some of his powers to employees. Thus, sharing with them responsibility for the result. It should be noted that a democrat must completely trust his employees and be confident that they will cope with the tasks that he sets for them.

Such a leader communicates quite closely with the team. Moreover, he often spends non-working time with employees (billiards, bowling, fishing, and so on). He doesn't consider himself a chosen one, much less someone who puts himself above his employees. Everyone is equal and can speak out at any time. True, this does not mean that in companies where a democrat is at the helm, there is no control over the work performed. It’s just that control is carried out not only by the manager, but also by those employees to whom certain powers have been delegated. They already report on the work done to the manager. And of course they are responsible for the result. And in front of the team as well.

Thanks to this management style, the company is run by employees. This type is most widespread in Germany and the USA.

Bureaucrat

Today, this type of leader is no longer as common as before, but almost all other types have absorbed some features from the bureaucrat. Clear control, employee rating system, constant reports, rules that must be followed. All these are the favorite tools of the bureaucratic leader.

He is a typical boss whose orders must be followed without hesitation. No amateur performances, everything must be done strictly according to the rules. This behavior by managers is due to the fact that a bureaucrat must always have accurate data. There is no uncertainty, no decisions are made based on intuition. Everything should be clearly placed on the shelves.

There is always a lot of intrigue, gossip around bureaucratic leaders, and battles for positions. This type of leadership continues to be very popular today, perhaps only in China, where communism is thriving.

· Qualities required for a modern leader

The manager must properly organize the work of the enterprise. Why is it necessary to select qualified personnel, know production technology, and establish connections between departments and employees. “The most important quality is a deep knowledge of the object being managed. Of course, if the production is diverse, then the manager cannot, and should not, be a specialist “in all parts.” But the manager needs general technical knowledge in the given industry and a broad outlook, since otherwise it is difficult for him will monitor the progress of the case and judge it."

1. One of the aspects of successful management must be called quick decision making. This is especially important in a market economy, when the external environment changes at tremendous speed and it is necessary to respond to these changes in a timely manner and adapt the organization’s activities to them. “It is very important that a leader has a “quick mind”, a good reaction that allows him to quickly solve an issue, since often the speed of a solution is more important than finding the ideal of several possible solutions after a long search. Of course, there are extremely serious issues that require prolonged study and thorough examination. But current problems of everyday life usually must be resolved promptly."

2. The manager must organize an effective motivation system at the enterprise. Taylor also identified motivation as one of the principles of scientific management. He believed that self-interest is driving force for most people: "It must be clear to the worker that every element of labor has its price and its payment depends on the established output finished products, if greater productivity is achieved, the worker is paid bonuses." Of course, today a much more complex view of the system of motivation and stimulation of labor has been developed. Thus, in addition to material incentives, incentives for responsibility (delegation of authority, career growth), stimulation of competition between subordinates (use of ratings), stimulation of professional development (employees are regularly sent at the company’s expense to study at universities, professional development courses, various trainings, including abroad), various benefits. “Benefits such as the provision of additional leave(usually not during the “peak” season) and time off, flexible work hours, the company’s transport service for private trips of employees, unexpected gifts, even small ones, work beyond all praise. The stimulating effect is achieved when it is completely clear to the staff what kind of merit this privilege is provided for." So, for the rational use of the above incentive methods, the manager needs to study the needs of the employees of his enterprise and identify the most significant of them.

3. The leader must be good psychologist, understand people, take into account the characteristics of your subordinates when communicating with them. In addition, the manager’s communication skills and ability to communicate with people will be useful in external contacts. For example, Kannegiser I.S. gives the following recommendations on this issue: “The manager must observe complete politeness towards his subordinates. Any, even the most severe, remark should not be rude because rudeness irritates a person and dulls his pride, and then he is less zealous about the matter. Exactly "also, a manager cannot afford to ridicule his subordinates. This, on the one hand, causes anger, and on the other hand, gives the right to familiarity, which undermines the authority of the boss." In accordance with this, Kannegieser formulates a rule that should not be neglected by all leaders, not only present, but also future ones: “A cool and polite remark has a much stronger effect than constant shouting and abuse, which some people consider necessary emblems of power. Leaders should not to be "favorites". In case of disagreement or disputes between employees, the decision on the part of the boss must be impartial and carried out with complete consistency and perseverance. Only justice can inspire confidence in subordinates, while partiality towards "favorites" inevitably entails a hostile attitude towards the leader , and to the business he leads.

The manager must pay attention to creating a positive psychological climate in the team, which contributes to more effective work.

In addition, the manager needs to establish a balance between formal and informal relationships in the team, divide the functions performed in the most rational way, determine the range of rights and responsibilities of each member of the organization, introduce the necessary norms and regulate the actions of personnel to the required extent.

At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the informal relationships that have developed between people on the basis of their personal likes and dislikes. The manager must maintain the status of not just a formal boss, but also a skillful professional leader, who is valued and respected in the team. The manager must make maximum use of other informal leaders and emphasize delegation of authority. Strelbitsky S.D. believes that simply shifting responsibility is not enough. It is necessary to create an atmosphere of its acceptance, which, of course, cannot be achieved by order. Such an atmosphere presupposes an awareness of one’s role and the need for one’s participation in the process. Under no circumstances should a manager do the work for others. “Remember,” Strelbitsky warns, “that the latter is an administrator’s mortal sin, which, unfortunately, is extremely common. Each member of the work team must have a clearly defined range of his functions, for which he is responsible. If the manager strives to do everything himself, if he constantly has no time, then his business is inevitably poorly organized.”

4. The manager must stimulate the initiative of employees, take into account new ideas and thoughts on rationalization, and be able to listen to criticism addressed to him. In this regard, the experience of American directors is very useful, who, among their morning work hours, specially allocate an hour dedicated to meetings with their top employees. Most often, such meetings take place in the form of reports on the department, made in the presence of the heads of departments. Thus, the head of General Electric, Jack Welch, in the 80s instructed Vice President Paolo Fresco to create a “Services Council”, within which senior managers could exchange new ideas. And the manager of the Kodak company, George Fisher, installed a system of communication with his subordinates at his enterprise for these purposes. e-mail. At the Russkiy Mir company in the late 90s, they began to regularly hold an “internal council of managers”, working on the principle of a company’s board of directors and aiming to expand and deepen the understanding of management problems and tasks. The main task is not control, but advice and guidance. Discussing issues at internal board meetings develops in leaders important skills for the organization - the ability to create and express their own understanding of complex issues, assimilate other points of view, and at the same time be persistent, persuasive and open. Experience on internal boards improves the management style of company divisions.

5. In order to be respected in the team, a leader must have high moral qualities: honesty, incorruptibility, hard work, fairness towards subordinates. Unfortunately, the level wages in our country does not contribute to the fight against corruption. However, it must be remembered that in many countries around the world the integrity and objectivity of specialists is highly valued. Thus, in Germany they say that in terms of honesty, an auditor is in second place after a priest. And in China, the combination of high moral qualities with professionalism is the basis and tradition of personnel policy. Moreover, the Chinese always put moral qualities first: “Our people can be condescending towards those officials who have high moral qualities, but are inferior in intelligence and talent. However, they do not respect those who have professionalism, but are not morally up to par. And unscrupulous and incompetent officials are simply despised, even hated. Any subordinate wants to be rid of such a boss."

6. In the conditions of fundamental changes, including in engineering and technology, issues of increasing the level of competence of management personnel come to the fore in the field of management. It is not without reason that during the reforms in the former GDR, special attention was paid to the selection and retraining of new managers at all enterprises. Reforms in China were also aimed at improving the skills of managers. Total certification of managers made it possible to free the staff from incompetent employees. The second thing that has been done in China is to provide universal continuous training for management personnel.

In the UK there has also recently been a focus on great attention retraining of managers. There is a type of course that includes T-groups or sensitivity training. Over the course of several days, participants gather in a group and explore the relationships between members of this group. The main idea of ​​the course is to improve the perception of others and come to an understanding of oneself, thereby promoting a more nuanced, sensitive approach to leadership. Many people, however, find the experience unpleasant because it can lead to the discovery of facts that people would rather not talk about.

Partly due to doubts about the effectiveness of the lecture approach to managerial development in last years Role-playing training has become popular. Here, managers are faced with real problems that have arisen in an organization. Theoretically, by focusing on solving these problems, you can improve your problem-solving abilities.

Another approach currently popular is mentoring. Here, the novice leader is assigned to an experienced and successful leader - a mentor who serves as a model for the student. The benefit of mentoring is that it facilitates the development of personal qualities and management skills that cannot be learned from lectures. For mentoring to be successful, it is necessary to establish a good relationship. People who are responsible for the development of managers must be fully aware of what qualities are necessary for management and what qualities a manager should have.

CONCLUSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Having worked with the above material, we can draw the following conclusions.

Leadership is not management, although a leader can be a leader.

In fact, leadership and management in a company are two separate, complementary systems of action. Each has its own function and typical activities. For a company to succeed in today's increasingly complex and rapidly changing business world, it is necessary to master both.

Of course, not everyone is capable of being a great leader and a competent manager at the same time. Some people have real talent for management work, but lack leadership qualities. Others have obvious leadership abilities, but for various reasons are not able to become effective managers. If the manager is smart enough, then his company will value both of them and will try to ensure that these talented people become part of the team.

Of course, there is no ideal leader. It all depends on what the company does. Not every employee can be forced to perform their duties in a democratic way (especially if the work is in a factory and the employees are low-skilled workers). At the same time, a charismatic leader is unlikely to successfully inspire a group of high-quality doctors. They already know what they want and how to achieve it. They don't need such a guiding star.

The most popular types of leaders in most countries are democrats and charismatic leaders. There is nothing surprising about this. At the same time, bureaucrats are equally disliked in most countries. Unfortunately, in Moldova, the most common type of leaders is Bureaucrats. True, the situation with leaders is not clear-cut. For example, in the Nordic countries and the Netherlands, the manager should not stand out from the employees at all. And all kinds of leadership are not encouraged there. So, it is always worth considering the industry, the size of the company, and the country where it operates. There are no universal systems.

In fact, leadership and management in a company are two separate, complementary systems of action. Each has its own function and typical activities. For a company to succeed in today's increasingly complex and rapidly changing business world, it is necessary to master both.

Leadership complements management, not replaces it. However, when developing leadership abilities in their employees, company heads should not forget that a strong leader but a weak manager is no better (or even worse) than the other way around. Indeed, it is not an easy task to combine skillful leadership with competent management and use them as two complementary forces.

LIST OF REFERENCES USED

1. Vikhansky O. S., Naumov A. I. Management: person, strategy, organization, process: Textbook. / M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1995.

2. Meskon M. Kh., Albert M., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management: Trans. from English / M.: "Delo", 1993.

3. Dictionary-reference book for managers / Ed. M. G. Lapusty. / M.: INFRA-M, 1996.

4. Modern business: Textbook. in 2 volumes. T. 1: Transl. from English / D. J. Rechman, M. H. Mescon, K. L. Bovey, J. W. Till. - M.: Republic, 1995.

· Hornby W., Gammy B., Wall S. Economics for managers. – M., UNITY, 1999.

· Ivashkovsky S.N. Economics for managers: micro- and macro-level, Delo, 2002.

5. Alexander Tunik – postgraduate student at the Faculty of Sociology of St. Petersburg State University, sales manager at Marinetek Russia (St. Petersburg) Author of articles on economics and management.