Traditional management styles are authoritarian democratic neutral. Manager's management styles

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

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

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

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

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

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

Democratic management style

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

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

Liberal anarchist style

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

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

Inconsistent style

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

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

Situation Management

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

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

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

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

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

E.Shchugoreva

Facebook Twitter Google+ LinkedIn

Management in a wide variety of areas of human life is one of the most important functions. The conditions of a market economy have given it particular relevance. To properly manage people, the head of the organization must choose a certain style of behavior. It is something to be shown in relations with subordinates, leading them to the intended goal. In other words, for the normal functioning of the enterprise, the presence of one or another management style of the head is necessary. This is the main characteristic of the effectiveness of the work of a top manager. The role of leadership style cannot be overestimated. After all, the success of the company, the dynamics of its development, the motivation of employees, their attitude to their duties, relationships in the team and much more will depend on it.

Concept definition

What does the word "leader" mean? This is the one who "leads by the hand." Each organization should have a person who is responsible for overseeing all the units operating in the enterprise. This type of responsibility involves monitoring the actions of employees. This is the essence of the work of every leader.

The ultimate primary task of the top manager is to achieve the goals of the company. The manager does this work without the help of his subordinates. And his usual manner of behavior in relation to the team should motivate him to work. This is the management style of the leader. What are the roots of this concept?

The word style is of Greek origin. Initially, this was the name of the rod, designed for writing on a wax board. Somewhat later, the word "style" began to be used in a slightly different meaning. It began to indicate the nature of the handwriting. This can be said about the management style of the leader. It is a kind of handwriting in the actions of a top manager.

Leadership styles in managing a team can be different. But in general, they depend on the leadership and administrative qualities of the person in this position. In the process of carrying out labor activity, the formation of an individual type of leader, his "handwriting" takes place. This allows us to say that it is impossible to find two identical bosses with the same style. Such a phenomenon is individual, as it is determined by the specific characteristics of a particular person, reflecting his peculiarity of working with personnel.

Classification

It is believed that the person who every morning goes to work with pleasure is happy. And this directly depends on his boss, on which leader uses the management style, on his relationship with his subordinates. Management theory paid attention to this issue at the dawn of its creation, that is, almost a hundred years ago. According to the concepts put forward by her, already at that time there were a number of styles of work and management of the head. A little later, others began to join them. In this regard, modern management theory considers the presence of many leadership styles. Let's describe some of them in more detail.

Democratic

This style of leadership is based on the participation of subordinates in decision-making with the division of responsibility between them. The name of this type of work of a top manager comes to us from the Latin language. In it demos means "rule of the people". The democratic leadership style of the leader is considered the best today. Based on the research data, it is 1.5-2 times more effective than all other ways of communication between a boss and his subordinates.

If the leader uses a democratic management style, then in this case he relies on the initiative of the team. At the same time, there is an equal and active participation of all employees in the processes of discussing the goals of the company.

In a democratic leadership style, there is interaction between the leader and subordinates. At the same time, a sense of mutual understanding and trust arises in the team. However, it is worth noting that the desire of a top manager to listen to the opinion of the company's employees on certain issues does not take place because he himself does not understand something. The democratic leadership style of the leader suggests that such a leader is aware that when discussing problems, new ideas arise. They will certainly speed up the process of achieving the goal and improve the quality of work.

If out of all the styles and methods of management, the leader has chosen a democratic one for himself, this means that he will not impose his will on his subordinates. How will he act on this? Such a leader will prefer to use methods of stimulation and persuasion. He will resort to sanctions only when all other methods have been completely exhausted.

The democratic management style of the leader is the most favorable in terms of psychological impact. Such a boss shows a sincere interest in employees and gives them friendly attention, taking into account their needs. Such relationships have a positive effect on the results of the work of the team, on the activity and initiative of specialists. People are satisfied with their own work. Satisfied with their position in the team. The cohesion of employees and favorable psychological conditions have a positive impact on the physical and moral health of people.

Of course, management styles and leadership qualities are closely related concepts. So, with the democratic nature of communication with subordinates, the boss should enjoy high authority among employees. He also needs to have excellent organizational, intellectual, psychological and communication skills. Otherwise, the implementation of this style will become inefficient. The democratic type of leadership has two varieties. Let's consider them in more detail.

deliberative style

When using it, most of the problems that the team faces are solved at the time of their general discussion. A leader who uses a deliberative style in his work often consults with subordinates without showing his own superiority. It does not shift responsibility to employees for the consequences that may occur as a result of the decisions made.

Deliberative leaders make extensive use of two-way communication with their subordinates. They trust employees. Of course, the most important decisions are made only by the manager, but at the same time, specialists are given the right to independently solve specific problems.

Participating style

This is another version of the democratic type of leadership. Its main idea is to involve employees not only in making certain decisions, but also in exercising control over their execution. In this case, the leader fully trusts his subordinates. Moreover, communication between them can be described as open. The boss behaves at the level of one of the team members. At the same time, any employee is given the right to freely express his own opinion on a variety of issues without fear of subsequent negative reactions. In this case, responsibility for failures in work is shared between the leader and subordinates. This style allows you to create an effective system of labor motivation. This makes it possible to successfully achieve the goals that the company faces.

liberal style

This type of leadership is also called free. For it presupposes a tendency to indulgence, tolerance and undemanding. The liberal style of management is characterized by complete freedom of decision for employees. At the same time, the leader takes a minimal part in this process. He withdraws from the functions assigned to him to supervise and control the activities of his subordinates.

We can say that the types of leaders and management styles are closely related. Thus, a liberal attitude in a team is allowed by a person who is insufficiently competent and unsure of his official position. Such a leader is able to take decisive steps only after receiving instructions from a superior. He avoids responsibility in every possible way when receiving unsatisfactory results. Solving important issues in a company where such a leader works often takes place without his participation. To consolidate his authority, the liberal only pays his subordinates undeserved bonuses and provides various kinds of benefits.

Where can such a direction be chosen from all the existing management styles of the leader? Both the organization of work and the level of discipline in the company must be the highest. This is possible, for example, in a partnership of well-known lawyers or in a writers' union, where all employees are engaged in creative activities.

The liberal style of management from the point of view of psychology can be considered in two ways. Everything will depend on what specialists carry out this guide. A similar style will get a positive result where the team consists of responsible, disciplined, highly qualified employees who are able to independently perform creative work. Such leadership can also be successfully implemented if there are knowledgeable assistants in the company.

There are also such collectives in which subordinates command their boss. He is known to them simply as a "good man". But this cannot go on for long. In the event of any conflict situation, disgruntled employees cease to obey. This leads to the emergence of a conniving style, leading to a decrease in labor discipline, to the development of conflicts and other negative phenomena. But in such cases, the head simply removes himself from the affairs of the enterprise. The most important thing for him is to maintain good relations with his subordinates.

Authoritarian style

It refers to the domineering type of leadership. It is based on the desire of the boss to assert his influence. The head of an authoritarian management style provides the employees of the company with only a minimal amount of information. This is due to his distrust of his subordinates. Such a leader seeks to get rid of talented people and strong workers. The best in this case is the one who is able to understand his thoughts. This leadership style creates an atmosphere of intrigue and gossip in the enterprise. At the same time, the independence of workers remains the most minimal. All emerging issues are sought by subordinates to be resolved by management. After all, no one can guess how the authorities will react to a particular situation.

The head of an authoritarian style of management is simply unpredictable. People do not even dare to tell him about the bad news. As a result, such a boss lives in full confidence that everything turned out exactly as he expected. Employees do not ask questions and do not argue, even in cases where they see significant errors in the decision taken by the manager. The result of the activity of such a top manager is the suppression of the initiative of subordinates, which interferes with their work.

In an authoritarian leadership style, all power is concentrated in the hands of one person. Only he is able to single-handedly resolve all issues, determine the activities of subordinates and not give them the opportunity to make independent decisions. Employees in this case perform only what they are ordered to do. That is why all information for them is reduced to a minimum. The head of the authoritarian style of team management strictly controls the activities of his subordinates. Such a boss has enough power in his hands to impose his will on the workers.

In the eyes of such a leader, a subordinate is a person who is disgusted with work and, if possible, avoids it. This becomes the reason for the constant coercion of the employee, control over him and the implementation of punishments. The moods and emotions of subordinates in this case are not taken into account. The leader has a distance from his team. At the same time, the autocrat specifically appeals to the lowest level of needs of his subordinates, believing that for them it is the most important.

If we consider this leadership style from the point of view of psychology, then it is the most unfavorable. After all, the leader in this case does not perceive the employee as a person. Employees are constantly suppressed creative manifestations, because of which they become passive. People have dissatisfaction with work and their own position in the team. The psychological climate at the enterprise also becomes unfavorable. Intrigues often arise in the team and toadies appear. This increases the stress load on people, which is harmful to their moral and physical health.

The use of an authoritarian style is effective only in certain circumstances. For example, in combat conditions, in emergency situations, in the army and in a team in which the consciousness of its members is at the lowest level. The authoritarian leadership style has its own variations. Let's consider them in more detail.

Aggressive style

A manager who has adopted this type of personnel management believes that by nature people are mostly stupid and lazy. Hence, they try not to work. In this regard, such a leader considers it his duty to force employees to fulfill their duties. He does not allow himself participation and gentleness.

What can mean the fact when a person has chosen exactly aggressive among all management styles? The personality of the leader in this case has special characteristics. Such a person is rude. He limits contact with subordinates by keeping them at a distance. When communicating with employees, such a boss often raises his voice, insults people and actively gesticulates.

Aggressive pliable style

This type of leadership is characterized by its selectivity. Such a boss shows aggression towards his employees and at the same time helpfulness and pliability towards a higher authority.

Selfish style

It seems to the manager who has adopted this type of personnel management for himself that he alone knows and can do everything. That is why such a boss assumes responsibility for the sole decision of the issues of the activities of the team and production. Such a leader does not tolerate the objections of his subordinates and is prone to hasty conclusions that are not always correct.

kind style

At the heart of this type of relationship between the leader and subordinates is authoritarianism. However, the boss still gives his employees the opportunity to participate in making some decisions, while limiting their scope of activity. The results of the work of the team, along with the system of punishments, which occupies a dominant position, are also evaluated by some rewards.

Finally

The individual management style of a leader can be very different. At the same time, all of its types listed above cannot be found in their pure form. Here, only the predominance of certain characteristics can take place.

That is why the definition of the best leadership style is not easy to give. A senior manager needs to know the above classification and be able to apply each of the categories of personnel management, depending on the situation and the presence of a specific task. This, in fact, is the art of a true leader.

Management style - a set of management techniques, using which the leader focuses on his own knowledge, interests, goals.

This style is most in demand during the formation period, that is, at the initial stage of the formation of an organization, its workforce, when employees do not have the skills to see goals and ways to achieve them. The negative qualities of the authoritarian style include the fact that it helps to reduce the creative initiative of subordinates, worsens the socio-psychological climate, and leads to staff turnover.

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

See what "Authoritarian Management Style" is in other dictionaries:

Authoritarian management style- It is a projection on the management of one of the 3 styles of leadership (see also Democratic management style, Permissive management style), identified in the course of research conducted by R. Lippitt and R. White under the leadership of K. ... ...

The way managers treat their subordinates in the process of performing official duties. According to K. Levin, there are three types of leadership styles: democratic (collegiate); directive (authoritarian, one-man); accommodating... ... Glossary of business terms

VET management style- According to the definition generally recognized in the domestic psychology of management, the style of management (leadership) is an individually typological profile of the techniques and methods of influence of the leader on subordinates in the process of implementing managerial ... Encyclopedia of Modern Legal Psychology

MANAGEMENT STYLE- - a stable set of personal and socio-psychological characteristics of the leader, through which certain methods of influencing the group (team) are implemented. In the practice and theory of managerial activity, leadership styles ... ...

MANAGEMENT STYLE, AUTHORITARY- the style of direct orders, orders, which does not allow any objections from subordinates. This style is based on unquestioning obedience to the leader and is effective in tense situations that require quick and decisive action ...

LEADERSHIP STYLE, MANAGEMENT STYLE- the way managers treat their subordinates, the nature of relations with subordinates in the process of performing official duties. It is customary to distinguish between authoritarian (autocratic), democratic, liberal style ... Professional education. Dictionary

MANAGEMENT STYLE- generalized types of behavior of the leader in relations with subordinates in the process of achieving the goals. You can classify S.u.: 1) an authoritarian or autocratic leader imposes his will on his subordinates by coercion, ... ... Big Economic Dictionary

Democratic management style- One of the three leadership styles identified by K. Levin and his students as an opposition to the authoritarian management style (see Authoritarian management style). It is characterized by: the desire to take into account the point of view of group members, their involvement in the development ... ... Encyclopedia of Modern Legal Psychology

leadership style (leadership style)- (from the Greek. stylos letters. The core for writing and the English leader leader, leader) a system of methods of influencing the followers (subordinates) typical of a leader (leader). K. Levin singled out three S. l .: authoritarian (tough methods of management, ... ... Great Psychological Encyclopedia

LEADERSHIP STYLE- (STYLE OF LEADERSHIP) (from the Greek stylos letters, the core for writing and the English leader leader, leader) a system of methods of influencing followers (subordinates) typical for a leader (manager). There are three S. l .: authoritarian (hard methods ... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

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

What a leader should know

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

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

Understanding the goals and objectives for the current position

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

Thoughtful team building depending on the temperament of the manager

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

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

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

Leadership styles in management

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

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

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

Authoritarian management style

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

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

Democratic management style

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

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

Liberal management style

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

Leadership style- a method, a system of methods for influencing a leader on subordinates. One of the most important factors in the effective operation of the organization, the full realization of the potential of people and the team. Most researchers distinguish the following leadership styles:

Democratic style (collegiate);

Liberal style (permissive or anarchist).

Authoritarian management style characterized by a high centralization of leadership, the dominance of one-man management. The leader demands that all cases be reported to him, single-handedly makes decisions or cancels them. He does not listen to the opinion of the team, he decides everything for the team himself. The prevailing methods of management are orders, punishments, remarks, reprimands, deprivation of various benefits. Control is very strict, detailed, depriving subordinates of initiative. The interests of the cause are placed much higher than the interests of people; harshness and rudeness prevail in communication. The authoritarian leadership style has a negative impact on the moral and psychological climate, leads to a significant decrease in initiative, self-control and responsibility of employees.

Subordinates are recipients of orders. According to "theory x and xy:

the average person is lazy and, as far as possible, shirks from work;

workers are unambitious, afraid of responsibility and want to be led;

pressure on subordinates and sanctions against them are necessary to achieve the goals of the enterprise;

strict management of subordinates and private control over them are inevitable.

Theory "X"

1. The average person has an inborn aversion to work and will seek to avoid it if possible.

2. Therefore, the majority of people must be forced to work, controlled and led under the threat of punishment, so that they can make their best contribution to the goal.

3. The worker tends to be led, he avoids responsibility, he has little ambition, he wants to be protected in everything.

Theory "Y"

1. A person does not have an innate dislike for work. Work is natural, as is rest.

2. If a person identifies himself with goals, then he cultivates self-discipline and self-control. External control and the threat of punishment are unsuitable means.

3. Duty to goal setting is a reward function.

4. Under appropriate circumstances, a person not only learns to accept responsibility, but also strives for it.

5. Resourcefulness and creativity are widespread among the working people.

6. Spiritual potential is barely activated in industrial life 1 . Theory "X" and theory "Y" allow us to imagine two opposite types of a person. McGregor believed that every leader bases his leadership style on the adoption of one of these theories. At the same time, "X" is typical for autocrats, and "Y" for democrats.

The MacGregor model itself is not a pure theory of management styles, but it was she who made it possible to more fully and accurately understand the classifications that existed at that time and analyze them.

In this style of management, the motivation of subordinates is often limited because the leader socially separates, delegates, as a rule, less interesting work to subordinates and maintains in them the fear of threatening sanctions. Subordinates become indifferent to the leader, as well as to the enterprise. They get information because of the information barriers set by the head in unofficial ways.

The disadvantages of the authoritarian style lie in the weak motivation for the independence and development of subordinates, as well as the danger of erroneous decisions through excessive demands from managers regarding the quantity and (or) quality of work.