The essence of a democratic management style. Democratic management style in the company

Democratic style characterized by granting subordinates independence within the limits of the functions they perform and their qualifications. This is a collegial style that gives greater freedom to subordinates under the control of the leader. Subordinates are seen as partners who can carry out the “daily work” relatively independently. When assessing subordinates with this leadership style, they most often proceed from theory u (Igrek), according to which:

1) reluctance to work is not innate by nature, but a consequence of poor working conditions, which reduce the natural desire to work;

2) employees take into account goals, have self-discipline and self-control;

3) the goals of the enterprise are achieved in the shortest possible way through monetary incentives and providing opportunities for individual development;

4) with favorable experience, employees are not afraid of responsibility.

A democratic leader prefers such mechanisms of influence that appeal to higher-level needs: participation, belonging, self-expression. He prefers to work in a team rather than pull the strings of power.

A Democrat's view of his staff boils down to this:

labor is a natural process. If conditions are favorable, then people will not only accept responsibility, they will strive for it;

if people are involved in organizational decisions, they will use self-control and self-government;

initiation is a function of the reward associated with goal achievement;

The ability to creatively solve problems is common, and the average person's intellectual potential is only partially utilized.

A true democrat tries not to impose his will on his subordinates. He shares power with them and controls the results of their activities.

Enterprises where the democratic style dominates are characterized by high decentralization of powers. Subordinates take an active part in preparing decisions and enjoy freedom in carrying out tasks. The necessary prerequisites for performing the work have been created, a fair assessment of their efforts is carried out, and a respectful attitude towards subordinates and their needs is observed.

The leader puts a lot of effort into creating an atmosphere of openness and trust so that if subordinates need help, they can not hesitate to contact the leader.

In his activities, a democratic leader relies on the entire team. He tries to teach his subordinates to delve into the problems of the unit, give them effective information and show them how to look for and evaluate alternative solutions.

Personally, the manager deals only with the most complex and important issues, leaving subordinates to decide the rest. He is not subject to stereotypes and varies his behavior in accordance with changes in the situation, the structure of the team, etc.

Instructions are issued not in the form of instructions, but in the form of proposals, taking into account the opinions of subordinates. This is not due to a lack of personal opinion or a desire to share responsibility, but to the belief that in a skillfully organized process of discussion, better solutions can always be found.

Such a leader is well versed in the strengths and weaknesses of his subordinates. Focuses on the capabilities of the subordinate, on his natural desire for self-expression through his intellectual and professional potential. Desired results he achieves this by convincing performers of the appropriateness and significance of the duties assigned to him.

The democratic leader constantly and thoroughly informs his subordinates about the state of affairs and prospects for the development of the team. This makes it easier to mobilize subordinates to implement assigned tasks and to instill in them a sense of true masters.

Being well informed about the true state of affairs in the unit he leads and about the moods of his subordinates, he is always tactful in his relationships and is sympathetic to their interests and requests. He perceives conflicts as a natural phenomenon and tries to benefit from them for the future, delving into their root cause and essence. With such a system of communication, the activities of the leader are combined with his work in educating his subordinates, and a sense of trust and respect between them is strengthened.

The democratic style encourages the creative activity of subordinates (largely through delegation of authority) and helps create an atmosphere of mutual trust and cooperation.

People are fully aware of their importance and responsibility in solving the problems facing the team.

Discipline transforms into self-discipline.

The democratic style does not at all complicate unity of command and does not weaken the power of the leader. Rather, on the contrary, his authority and real power increase, since he controls people without harsh pressure, relying on their abilities and taking into account their dignity.

The advantage of a democratic style- making expedient decisions, high motivation of employees and unloading of the manager. In addition, employee development is supported. Flaw- democratic management style can slow down decision making

This phrase is increasingly used in everyday life. Its use applies to methods of leadership, education, communication, activity and even clothing. Let's figure out what the use of these words means.

Democratic style is characterized by collegiality, joint activities united by one goal. The use of this method encourages initiative, allows you to increase the number of options for resolving any issues, since there are no frames or restrictions, and introduces an atmosphere of trust and goodwill.

The democratic style is characterized by the division of responsibility among the entire team. Democratic leadership style is based on trust, information, responsibility and consciousness.

Authoritarian democratic style

This method combined two complete opposites and forced them to act together. How can this be? After all, the authoritarian style implies autocracy, and the democratic style presupposes the presence of freedom. This is the “trick” of this style. The boss alone can make a decision, and entrust the methods of its implementation to the employees.

And vice versa, the team finds different variants resolution of the situation, and the manager approves one thing. The use of this style lies entirely with the manager and depends on his experience and leadership qualities.

Liberal democratic style

Briefly it can be formulated as “maximum freedom with minimal control.” With this method, the liberal manager cannot demand that employees fulfill assigned tasks due to their personal qualities. He is afraid of ruining relations with the team, so all orders are replaced with advice or requests, boss distances himself from the work process, so as not to take responsibility for its implementation.

The psycho-emotional mood among employees is unfavorable, and the work is done carelessly. But in a team where professionals work and everyone knows their job, you can use this method of leadership.

Democratic conniving style

The combination of two such styles is similar to the liberal democratic one. But there is a significant difference. The main characteristic of the democratic style is freedom in choosing decisions and the way to achieve the goal, and conniving The style is characterized by the absence of any control on the part of management over the process of solving and eliminating problems.

Democratic leadership style

The democratic style of a leader gives employees a chance for self-realization. Seeing that their initiative is appreciated, they try to make every effort to complete the task by minimum costs.

A democratic leader is able to unite employees together, where everyone will feel involved in the work being done. This has a great effect on the psychological atmosphere in the team and helps increase productivity.

Democratic management style

The democratic style of activity implies a focus on results. But this can only be achieved by developing the team. All questions and contradictions that arise in this regard regarding the performance of a given job and the interests of the team are not veiled, but are resolved jointly to the satisfaction of both subordinates and the boss, which is what the leader of a democratic management style strives for. A collegial approach helps to find the most effective solution any problem.

Democratic parenting style

It is considered the most balanced, since concepts such as “good” and “bad” are explained to the child, giving him the right to choose for himself. The democratic pedagogical style of education pushes children to independently understand the world and teaches them to bear responsibility for their choices.

Democratic style pedagogical communication manifests itself, for example, in situations where, in case of mistakes, the child is not punished, but together they analyze the reasons for the appearance of shortcomings and develop ways to correct them. The democratic style of the teacher allows the child to fully develop his abilities, correct his behavior, and make the right choice.

Democratic style of communication

This style of communication increases the effectiveness of the conversation, as it creates Feedback. The interlocutor becomes as open as possible for dialogue, expresses his thoughts clearly and clearly, and does not try to disguise them. This, in turn, has a great effect on establishing relationships and mutual respect and trust between interlocutors. This is the only way to find out how valuable mutual cooperation will be.

Pros and cons of the democratic style

As elsewhere, every action has positive and negative points. This did not escape the democratic style. For every “plus” there is also a “minus”. The democratic style helps to increase the number of methods of influencing the situation, but the speed of decision-making is reduced due to the need to review all methods and select one.

The mobility of a department or organization also increases. The democratic style of decision-making allows one to demonstrate the ability to instantly and adequately respond to any external influences. This is due to the fact that the vertical of power is replaced by a horizontal one. Information about any situations immediately reaches all employees and the search for response methods begins. But the team's controllability decreases. Due to the fact that all employees participate in the discussion, and everyone is sure that their option is the most correct. This is how disputes and conflicts arise.

The manager at all levels of the organization’s management system acts as a leading person, since it is he who determines the focus of the team’s work, personnel selection, psychological climate and other aspects of the enterprise’s activities.

Management- the ability to influence individuals and groups to work towards achieving the organization's goals.

One of the most important characteristics The leader's activity is the leadership style.

Leadership style- the behavior of a leader in relation to subordinates in order to influence them and encourage them to achieve.

The manager is the leader and organizer in the management system. Management of the activities of groups and teams is carried out in the form of management and leadership. These two forms of management have certain similarities.

One of the most common leadership theories is leadership theory of K. Lewin(1938).

She identifies three leadership styles:

authoritarian leadership style - characterized by rigidity, exactingness, unity of command, prevalence of power functions, strict control and discipline, focus on results, ignoring socio-psychological factors;
democratic leadership style - based on collegiality, trust, informing subordinates, initiative, creativity, self-discipline, consciousness, responsibility, encouragement, transparency, orientation not only to results, but also to ways to achieve them;
liberal leadership style - characterized by low demands, connivance, lack of discipline and exactingness, passivity of the leader and loss of control over subordinates, giving them complete freedom actions.

K. Lewin's research provided the basis for the search for a management style that can lead to high levels of satisfaction among performers.

Considerable attention was paid to the study of leadership styles in the works of R. Likert, who in 1961 proposed a continuum of leadership styles. Its extreme positions are work-centered leadership and people-centered leadership, with all other types of leadership behaviors in between.

According to Likert theory, there are four leadership styles:

Exploitative-authoritarian: the leader has clear characteristics of an autocrat, does not trust his subordinates, rarely involves them in decision-making, and creates tasks himself. The main incentive is fear and the threat of punishment, rewards are random, interaction is based on mutual distrust. and are in conflict.
Paternalistic-authoritarian: The leader favorably allows subordinates to have limited participation in decision making. Reward is actual and punishment is potential, both of which are used to motivate workers. Informal organization is partly opposed to formal structure.
Advisory: The leader makes strategic decisions and, showing trust, delegates tactical decisions to subordinates. Limited inclusion of workers in the decision-making process is used for motivation. The informal organization differs only partially from the formal structure.
Democratic The leadership style is characterized by complete trust and is based on the widespread involvement of personnel in the management of the organization. The decision-making process is dispersed across all levels, although integrated. The flow of communications goes not only in vertical directions, but also horizontally. Formal and informal organizations interact constructively.

R. Likert called model 1 task-oriented with a rigidly structured management system, and model 4 - relationship-oriented, based on team work organization, collegial management, and general control. According to R. Likert, the last approach is the most effective.

Choosing a management style

Management style- represents the manager’s manner of behavior towards subordinates, allowing him to influence them and force them to do what they want this moment need to.

Management styles develop under the influence of specific conditions and circumstances. In this regard, we can distinguish “one-dimensional” ones, i.e. conditioned by one factor, and “multidimensional”, i.e. leadership styles that take into account two or more circumstances when building the “manager-subordinate” relationship.

"One-Dimensional" Management Styles

Parameters of interaction between a manager and subordinates		Democratic style management	Liberal style management
Decision Making Techniques	Solve all issues single-handedly	When making decisions, consults with the team	Waits for instructions from management or gives initiative to subordinates
Method of communicating decisions to executors	Orders, disposes, commands	Offers, requests, approves proposals from subordinates	Asks, begs
Distribution of Responsibility	Completely in the hands of the leader	In accordance with authority	Completely in the hands of the performers
Attitude to initiative	Suppresses completely	Encourages, uses in the interests of the cause	Places initiative in the hands of subordinates
	Afraid of qualified workers, tries to get rid of them	Selects business, competent workers	Does not engage in personnel selection
Attitude to knowledge	Believes he knows everything himself	Constantly learns and demands the same from subordinates	Increases his knowledge and encourages this trait in his subordinates
Communication style	Strictly formal, uncommunicative, keeps distance	Friendly, loves to communicate, makes positive contacts	Afraid of communication, communicates with subordinates only on their initiative, we allow familiar communication
The nature of relationships with subordinates	In mood, uneven	Smooth, friendly, demanding	Soft, undemanding
Attitude to discipline	Rigid, formal	Supporter of reasonable discipline, carries out a differentiated approach to people	Soft, formal
Attitude towards moral influence on subordinates	Considers punishment to be the main method of stimulation, rewards selected people only on holidays	Constantly uses different stimuli	Uses rewards more often than punishment

The prerequisite for the establishment of various “one-dimensional” management styles was the theories “X” and “Y” of Douglas McGregor. Thus, according to Theory X, people are inherently lazy and avoid work at the first opportunity. They completely lack ambition, so they prefer to be leaders, not take responsibility and seek protection from the powerful. To force people to work, you need to use coercion, total control and the threat of punishment. However, according to McGregor, people are not like this by nature, but due to difficult living and working conditions, which began to change for the better only in the second half of the twentieth century. Under favorable conditions, a person becomes who he really is, and his behavior is reflected by another theory - “Y”. In accordance with it, in such conditions people are ready to take responsibility for the matter, moreover, they even strive for it. If they are involved in the goals of the company, they willingly participate in the process of self-government and self-control, as well as in creativity. And such communion is

a function not of coercion, but of reward associated with achieving set goals. A leader who professes a democratic style relies on such employees.

The characteristics of “one-dimensional” management styles were suggested by the domestic researcher E. Starobinsky.

"Multidimensional" management styles. "Theory X" and "Theory Y"

In 1960, Douglas McGregor published his views on the bipolarity of opinions about how people should be managed. "Theory X" and "Theory Y", presented in the book "The Human Side of Enterprise", have gained widespread acceptance among managers.

Theory X

The person initially does not like to work and will avoid work.
A person must be coerced, controlled, and threatened with punishment to achieve the goals of the organization.
The average person prefers to be led; he avoids responsibility.

Theory Y

Work is as natural as play for a child.
A person can exercise self-government and self-control. A reward is a result associated with achieving a goal.
The average person strives for responsibility.

Thus, two views on management are formed: the authoritarian view, leading to direct regulation and tight control, and a democratic view that supports the delegation of authority and responsibility.

Based on these theories, others have been developed, which represent various combinations above. Also popular in Western business "management grid" theory, developed by R. Blake and J. Mouton. They indicated that work activity unfolds in the force field between production and man. The first line of force determines the manager’s attitude towards production. The second line (vertical) determines the manager’s attitude towards a person (improving working conditions, taking into account desires, needs, etc.).

Let's consider various styles guidelines shown in fig. 10.

Fig. 10. Leadership styles

Type 1.1 - the manager does not care about anything, works so as not to be fired. This style is considered purely theoretical.
Type 9.1 is a style of strict administration, in which the only goal for the manager is production results.
Type 1.9 - liberal or passive leadership style. In this case, the leader focuses on human relations.
Type 5.5 is in the middle of the "management grid". With such a compromise, average labor results are achieved and there cannot be a sharp breakthrough forward. At the same time, this leadership style promotes stability and lack of conflict.
Type 9.9 is considered the most effective. The manager tries to structure the work of his subordinates in such a way that they see in it opportunities for self-realization and confirmation of their own importance. Production goals are determined jointly with employees.

Situational Marketing Concepts

Attempts to define universal style leadership failed because The effectiveness of leadership depends not only on the management style of the leader, but also on many factors. Therefore, they began to look for the answer within the framework of situational theories. The main idea of the situational approach was the assumption that managerial behavior should be different in different situations.

A model describing the dependence of leadership style on the situation was proposed in the 70s. T. Mitchell And R. Howes. It is fundamentally based on motivational theory expectations. Performers will strive to achieve the goals of the organization when there is a connection between their efforts and work results, as well as between work results and reward, i.e. if they get some personal benefit from it. Mitchell and House's model includes four management styles:

If employees have a great need for self-esteem and belonging to a team, then the “style support".

When employees strive for autonomy and independence, it is better to use " instrumental style", similar to that focused on creating organizational and technical conditions for production. This is explained by the fact that subordinates, especially when nothing depends on them, wanting to complete a task as quickly as possible, prefer to be told what and how they need to do, and create the necessary conditions work.

Where subordinates strive for high results and are confident that they can achieve them, a style focused on " participation" of subordinates in decision-making, most corresponds to the situation when they strive to realize themselves in management activities. At the same time, the manager must share information with them and widely use their ideas in the process of preparing and making decisions.

There is also a style focused on " achievement", when the manager sets feasible tasks for the performers, provides the conditions necessary for work and expects them to complete the task independently without any coercion.

One of the most modern is the model of leadership styles proposed by American scientists V. Vrooman And F. Yetton. They, depending on the situation, the characteristics of the team and the characteristics of the problem itself, divided managers into 5 groups according to leadership styles:

The manager himself makes decisions based on available information.
The manager informs his subordinates about the essence of the problem, listens to their opinions and makes decisions.
The manager presents the problem to his subordinates, summarizes the opinions expressed by them and, taking them into account, makes his own decision.
The manager and his subordinates discuss the problem, and as a result, they develop a common opinion.
The leader constantly works together with the group, which either develops a collective decision or accepts the best one, regardless of who its author is.

The democratic style is characterized by granting subordinates independence within the limits of the functions they perform and their qualifications. This is a collegial style that gives greater freedom to subordinates under the control of the leader.

A democratic leader prefers such mechanisms of influence that appeal to the needs of more high level: participation, belonging, self-expression. He prefers to work in a team rather than pull the strings of power.

A Democrat's view of his staff boils down to this:

labor is a natural process. If conditions are favorable, then people will not only accept responsibility, they will strive for it;
if people are involved in organizational decisions, they will use self-control and self-government;
initiation is a function of the reward associated with goal achievement;
The ability to creatively solve problems is common, and the average person's intellectual potential is only partially utilized.

A true democrat avoids imposing his will on his subordinates. He shares power with them and controls the results of their activities.

The leader puts a lot of effort into creating an atmosphere of openness and trust so that if subordinates need help, they can not hesitate to contact the leader.

Personally, the manager deals only with the most complex and important issues, leaving his subordinates to decide everything else. He is not subject to stereotypes and varies his behavior in accordance with changes in the situation, the structure of the team, etc.

Such a leader is well versed in the strengths and weaknesses of his subordinates. Focuses on the capabilities of the subordinate, on his natural desire for self-expression through his intellectual and professional potential. He achieves the desired results by convincing performers of the appropriateness and significance of the duties assigned to him.

The democratic style encourages the creative activity of subordinates (largely through delegation of authority) and helps create an atmosphere of mutual trust and cooperation.

People are fully aware of their importance and responsibility in solving the problems facing the team.

Discipline transforms into self-discipline.

BASIC POINTS

The approach to management is a set of principles currently recognized by society for treating and managing employees.

Stages of development of approach to leadership:

1. Early technocratism (until the end of the 10th century) was based on the fact that the worker is an appendage of the machine.

2. Classical technocratism (the first half of the 20th century) recognized man as equal in importance to a machine.

3. Humanistic technocratism - treated a person as an independent value, but did not recognize the individual value of everyone.

4. The humanistic approach (late 20th century) focuses on the uniqueness and uniqueness of each individual.

Leadership style - totality specific ways, through which interaction between managers and subordinates takes place.

Historically, the first and until now, apparently, the most widespread in practice is the authoritarian style, which is considered universal. Its essence consists in issuing orders to subordinates in the form of orders without any explanation of their connection with the general goals and objectives of the activity. The leader who uses it gives preference to the official nature of the relationship and maintains a distance between himself and his subordinates, which they have no right to violate.

Experts distinguish two types of authoritarian style. “Exploitation” presupposes that the manager completely concentrates the solution of all issues in his hands, does not trust his subordinates, is not interested in their opinions, takes responsibility for everything, giving only instructions to the performers. He uses punishment, threats, and pressure as the main form of stimulation.

To visualize this style of leadership, you can turn to the words of Colonel Skalozub from Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”: “I will give you a sergeant-major to Voltaire, Prince Gregory. He’ll line you up in three ranks, and if you make a sound, he’ll instantly calm you down!”

It is clear that employees have a negative attitude towards such a leader. As a result, an unfavorable moral and psychological climate is formed in the team and the ground is created for conflicts.

With a softer, “benevolent” version of the authoritarian style, the leader treats his subordinates condescendingly, in a fatherly manner, is sometimes interested in their opinions (but, despite their validity, he can act in his own way), and provides limited independence. Punishments are also used here, but not so widely.

The use of an authoritarian style, although it ensures high productivity, does not create the internal interest of performers in effective work. Redundant disciplinary measures cause fear and anger in a person, destroy incentives to work.

This style is applicable when subordinates are completely in the power of the leader, for example in military service, or they trust him infinitely (say, like actors do to a director or athletes to a coach), but he is sure that they are not able to act in the right way on their own.

According to it, the average person has an inherent aversion to work and a desire to avoid it at the first opportunity. Therefore, most people need to be coerced various methods, up to and including punishment, to fulfill their assigned duties and continuously monitor their actions.

However, McGregor believed that such behavior was caused not so much by the properties of human nature, but by the external conditions under which people had to live and work. And until the middle of the 20th century they were very far from ideal even in the most developed countries. At enterprises, heavy, unskilled physical labor often prevailed, and the duration working week far exceeded 40 hours. Therefore, it would be difficult to expect a different attitude of people towards work.

Modern scientific and technological revolution has largely changed the previous situation. Most species physical labor and routine mental operations begin to be performed by machines under the control of the machines themselves. This, according to McGregor, inevitably leads to a change in people's attitudes towards their work.

Work becomes as natural as play or rest, so even to the common man There should be no inherent feeling of aversion to work. The latter, under appropriate conditions, can and should serve as a source of satisfaction, and not at all as a punishment that people would try to avoid. Its voluntary implementation makes coercion and external control unnecessary, because a person can manage his activities independently, directing them to achieve a set goal, which in itself becomes a reward for the efforts made.

As McGregor believed, normal person under normal conditions, he is not only ready to take responsibility, but also seeks it; the desire to avoid the latter, lack of ambition, concern for personal safety are only a consequence of the influence surrounding reality, and not the specifics of human nature.

Organizations in which a democratic leadership style dominates are characterized by a high degree of decentralization of authority, active participation of employees in decision-making, and the creation of conditions in which the performance of official duties is attractive to them, and success is a reward.

A true democratic leader tries to make the responsibilities of subordinates more attractive, avoids imposing his will on them, involves them in decision making, and provides freedom to formulate their own goals based on the goals of the organization.

Like the authoritarian style, the democratic leadership style has two forms: “consultative” and “participative”. Within the framework of “consultative”, the manager is interested in the opinions of subordinates, consults with them, and strives to use the best that they offer. Among incentive measures, encouragement predominates, and punishment is used only in exceptional cases. Employees are generally satisfied with this management system and usually provide all possible assistance to their boss.

"Participative" form democratic leadership assumes that managers fully trust their subordinates in all matters (and then they respond in kind), always listen to them and use all constructive suggestions, involve employees in setting goals and monitoring their implementation. All this brings the team together.

Typically, a democratic leadership style is used when the performers have a good, sometimes better understanding of the manager, the intricacies of the work and can bring a lot of novelty and creativity to it.

Studies have shown that under conditions of authoritarian leadership it is possible to accomplish approximately twice as much work as under democratic conditions, but its quality and the presence of elements of creativity will be the same order of magnitude lower. From this we can conclude that the authoritarian style is preferable when more simple types activities focused on quantitative results, and democratic - for complex ones, where quality comes first.

Subsequent developments led to the substantiation of two new styles, in many ways close to authoritarian and democratic (each author calls them differently, but in essence the differences between the meaning put into their formulations are small).

The style in which the manager is focused on solving the task assigned to him at any cost, plans, draws up work schedules, develops approaches to their implementation, provides everything necessary, etc.) received the name in the West instrumental, or. task-oriented.

A style when a leader creates a favorable moral and psychological climate, organizes working together, focuses on mutual assistance, involves performers in decision making, encourages professional growth, etc., - focused on human relations, or on subordinates(remember Blake and Mouton's "management grid"!).

This close to democratic leadership style helps to increase productivity, gives scope to people’s creativity, and increases their satisfaction with work and their position. Its use reduces absenteeism, injuries, turnover, creates a higher morale, improves relationships in the team and the attitude of subordinates to the leader.

The potential benefits of a task-oriented leadership style are much the same as an authoritarian leadership style. They consist in the speed of decision-making and action, strict control over the work of subordinates. However, they are placed in a dependent position, which creates their passivity and ultimately leads to a decrease in work efficiency.

Typically, managers use either democratic, people-oriented or authoritarian, work-oriented styles.