Managerial ethics is a type of professional ethics associated with the direct activities of key figures in the organization aimed at determining the policy of the company as a whole.

The task of managerial ethics is to maintain effective mechanisms of interaction within the workforce and the relationship between the manager and subordinates.

Leadership styles

There are 4 main management styles used in practice:

1.authoritarian– solves issues individually, focuses on his own goals and interests, practically does not consult with the team, suppresses initiative, is afraid of qualified workers, can fire those he doesn’t like, knows and can do everything, keeps his distance, the main method of stimulation is punishment, encouragement on holidays and the chosen ones.

It is based on McGregory’s theory “X”: a person initially does not like to work, so he needs to be directed, controlled, and he himself understands this.

2.democratic– it is based on McGregory’s theory “Y”: the average person has no aversion to work, work is natural for a person and is considered by the majority as self-realization and the purpose of life. The main priority is the participation of everyone in a common cause, which allows for the rational use of internal resources, achieving solutions to complex problems, and creating an atmosphere of friendship and mutual assistance.

3. liberal-anarchist - the main emphasis is on the non-interference of the leader in the work activities of subordinates; The main task is to prevent serious disruptions in work. Administrative and economic issues are concentrated in the hands of the manager, and the team is engaged in labor activities. Characteristic of creative teams where high professionals work.

4. problem-target – authoritarianism + well-known democracy; management is built on the principle: if there is a goal or problem, it is solved in an authoritarian way; the rest of the time, the team works according to its guidelines. Effective in organizations that work in the field of quick returns.

Code of Ethics for Senior Management

Throughout history, moral codes for management workers have been developed more than once. One of the first was the “Moral Code of Local Government Employees” (USA, 1924), amendments to it were adopted 5 times.

The modern code of ethics for a leader includes the following provisions:

personal financial resources should not conflict with official duties;

your financial income must correspond to the standard income of representatives of your profession;

adherence to the law (legitimacy of all actions);

confidentiality of business information;

complete “transparency” of personal financial investments, including investments of family members.

Principles and standards of moral behavior of senior management:

be an expert in your field;

be decisive (a leader should not make many decisions, few, but the most important ones);

be a diplomat;

inspire trust with your moral qualities: decency, tolerance...

be obligatory: do not bear false obligations;

hire the best to your team;

help your subordinates grow;

be able to create motivation for others;

Don’t be a know-it-all: be able to admit your mistakes;

don't play politics;

do not shoot the messenger with bad news: you may lose good news.

Leadership style is a way, a system of methods for a leader to influence his subordinates. One of the most important factors for the effective operation of an organization, the full realization of the potential capabilities of people and teams. Most researchers identify the following leadership styles:

Democratic style (collegial);

Liberal style (permissive or anarchic).

The directive management style is characterized by high centralization of management and dominance of unity of command. The manager demands that all matters be reported to him and makes decisions alone or cancels them. He does not listen to the opinion of the team; he decides everything for the team himself. The predominant management methods are orders, punishments, remarks, reprimands, and deprivation of various benefits. Control is very strict, detailed, depriving subordinates of initiative. The interests of the business are placed significantly above the interests of people, harshness and rudeness predominate in communication.

An authoritarian leadership style has a negative impact on the moral and psychological climate and leads to a significant decrease in initiative, self-control and responsibility of employees. The democratic management style is characterized by the distribution of powers, initiative and responsibility between the manager and deputies, the manager and subordinates. A leader of a democratic style always finds out the team’s opinion on important production issues and makes collegial decisions. Team members are informed regularly and in a timely manner on issues that are important to them. Communication with subordinates takes place in the form of requests, wishes, recommendations, advice, rewards for high-quality and efficient work, in a friendly and polite manner; orders are applied as necessary. The leader stimulates a favorable psychological climate in the team and defends the interests of subordinates.

The liberal management style is characterized by the lack of active participation of the manager in managing the team. Such a leader “goes with the flow,” waits or requires instructions from above, or falls under the influence of the team. He prefers not to take risks, “keep his head down,” avoids resolving urgent conflicts, and strives to reduce his personal responsibility.

The psychological climate of the team, which reveals itself primarily in the relationships of people to each other and to the common cause, is still not exhausted by this. It inevitably affects people’s attitudes towards the world as a whole, their attitude and worldview. And this, in turn, can manifest itself in the entire system of value orientations of an individual who is a member of a given team. Thus, the ethical aspect and psychological climate are manifested in a certain way in the attitude of each member of the team to himself. Application of the “golden” rule in management: - “Treat a person as you would like to be treated” will help in solving many production and ethical problems.

Just as there are no two identical fingerprints, there are no two identical leaders; each has an individual leadership style, which depends not only on the requirements of the objective situation, but, first of all, on the psychotype of the leader’s personality, the degree of development of his psychological and moral qualities, and the level of professionalism . However, management science has identified generalized characteristics of leadership styles.

Leadership style is the habitual manner in which a leader behaves towards subordinates.

The problem of leadership style is one of the main problems of management theory, which is studied comprehensively on the basis of research in the field of psychology, social psychology, sociology and management itself.

In management, the main thing in the study of leadership styles is its effectiveness in achieving the goals of the organization. In business ethics, this problem is posed somewhat differently: to what extent are the actions of a manager ethical within the framework of a particular management style.

Let us give a brief historical overview of research into management styles. For a more complete study of them, we recommend turning to educational and scientific literature on management.

The German psychologist K. Lewin, who emigrated in the 30s, began to study management styles in his classical experiments. last century in the USA. Lewin studied the influence of three leadership styles (authoritarian, democratic and laissez-faire) on the behavior of a group of schoolchildren. And although the psychologist himself did not study management, his research had a tremendous influence on the development of management problems in American management. Until now, K. Lewin’s approach underlies the analysis of leadership styles. True, now the same styles are designated as directive, collegial and conniving.

Let us highlight the characteristic features of leadership styles (Table 9.1).

Table 9.1. Leadership styles

	Collegial (democratic)	Conniving (liberal)
Using command management methods	Emphasis on socio-psychological management methods	Unsystematic application of management methods
Task-oriented	People-oriented	Self-focus
Centralization of powers	Delegation of authority	Failure to use authority
Sole decision making	Decisions are made collectively	Samotek in the implementation of cases
Suppression of initiative	Encouraging initiative	Indifference to initiative
Tight control	Trust in subordinates combined with control	Lack of control of subordinates
Minimal information, little publicity	Wide publicity, full information	Unsystematic situational information
Preference for punishment	Reward preference	Unsystematic incentives
Intolerance to criticism	Tolerance for criticism	Indifference to criticism
Elimination of unwanted	Caring for subordinates	Lack of care for staff

Collegial (democratic) style is characterized by the leader’s desire to develop decisions together with subordinates, the distribution of powers and responsibilities between the leader and subordinates.

Conniving (liberal) style is characterized by minimal participation of the leader in managing the team.

This model highlights the most general management styles and outside of specific situations it is difficult to determine which one is preferable. In real practice, a combination of all the main styles is used. For example, Lee Iacocca writes that he always adhered to maximum democracy until the moment when it was necessary to make a decision, and then he turned into a ruthless dictator: “Well, I listened to everyone,” I say, “Now we will do this and that.” !"

When discussing management styles, the writer I. Solonevich gives the following humorous example. Let's imagine that Prince Vladimir the Red Sun is sitting in the capital city of Kyiv in the grid and feasting with his grid. Then a messenger galloped up: “Prince, the Polovtsians are approaching.” They began to discuss (collegially and democratically) what to do. Some suggest urgently leaving the feast and marching against the Polovtsians. Others say that we need to send a messenger to Chernigov and ask for help. Still others propose sending ambassadors with gifts to the Polovtsians. There were many more proposals, but there was no time to discuss them: the Polovtsians came and impaled everyone. The writer notes that under normal conditions the democratic approach to management is most attractive, but in extreme conditions it is not suitable1.

Or let’s take this leadership style as conniving. It would seem, what are its advantages? However, it can be optimal in creative teams in which employees are highly motivated to work, independent and creative, and only want their bosses not to interfere with them.

There are no good or bad management styles. Each style has its own pros and cons when applied to specific conditions, situations or objects. The relationship between them is very important for management results. The ethical or unethical nature of certain manifestations of leadership style is determined by the specific situation.

Douglas McGregor (1906-1964), American psychologist, professor of management at the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, creator of the theory of labor motivation, formulated the prerequisites for choosing authoritarian and democratic management styles in the form of theories X and Y, which consider human motivation from two opposite sides.

According to Theory X:

Proposition 1. People initially do not like to work and avoid work whenever possible.

Proposition 2. People have no ambition, and they try to get rid of responsibility, preferring to be led.

Proposition 3. Most of all, people want security.

Proposition 4. To force people to work, it is necessary to use coercion, control and the threat of punishment.

Let's consider these provisions from an ethical point of view.

Proposition 1. An authoritarian leader takes a position of superiority towards his subordinates, assuming that they, unlike him, do not want to work. Of course, there will always be employees who do not like to work and cannot work at a highly professional level. The consumer society creates the consumer. However, a person can only realize himself through work, and along with those for whom work is a heavy duty, there are many employees who are focused on professional growth. Moreover, if we accept that this provision is of a general nature, then it is just as applicable to the manager as to the subordinates.

Proposition 2. The thesis that people have no ambition is very doubtful, and the “flight from freedom” and the desire to get rid of responsibility touches on the most important ethical problem of the relationship between freedom and responsibility, which is philosophical in nature.

Proposition 3 states the fact that the need for security is one of the basic human needs.

Proposition 4. fundamentally contradicts the “golden rule of morality,” which, as already said, says: “Treat people the way you want to be treated.”

The ideas of a democratic manager about employees differ from the ideas of an autocratic one. McGregor called them theory "Y":

Proposition 1. Labor is a natural process. If conditions are favorable, people will not only accept responsibility, they will strive for it.

Proposition 2: If people are committed to organizational goals, they will use self-management and self-control.

Proposition 3. Involvement is a function of the reward associated with goal achievement.

Proposition 4: The ability to creatively solve problems is common, but the average person's intellectual potential is only partially used.

According to these assumptions, democratic leaders prefer influence mechanisms that appeal to higher-level needs: affiliation, purpose, autonomy, and self-expression. A true democratic leader avoids imposing the will of his subordinates.

D. McGregor himself was a supporter of theory "Y". He owns the following aphorism: “Create a good climate, provide appropriate nutrition and let people grow on their own. Then they will surprise you.”

Under management It is customary to understand the process of organizing any influence aimed at achieving the goals pursued. Leadership is only a part of management activity, and precisely that part in which various management issues are resolved by influencing subordinates.

And the distinction between the concepts of “management” and “leadership” is associated with the existence in any organization of two types of relationships - formal and informal. Leadership- this is a process of influencing people, generated by a system of informal relations, and leadership implies, first of all, the presence of clearly structured formal (official) relations through which it is implemented. The role of the manager is, as it were, predetermined by the formal structure, his functions, as a rule, are clearly defined, the right to apply sanctions is not disputed, etc. Leadership, on the contrary, is formed spontaneously, spontaneously, at the level of semi-conscious psychological preferences. In this question we will look at the socio-psychological problems of leadership. In a long list of them, one of the leading places is occupied by the problem of developing an optimal leadership style.

For analytical purposes, three main types are usually distinguished:

• · administrative (command);
• · economic (negotiable);
• · socio-psychological.

Management methods of each of the above types have their own scope, their own advantages and disadvantages, which may manifest themselves depending on the specific situation in the work group. The art of management consists in selecting, at a given time and place for a given group of workers, such a set of management influences (of three types) that will ensure maximum efficiency of the group. At the same time, the objective need to choose management methods of one type or another is superimposed on the manager’s subjective predisposition to his “favorite” business communication skills. All this together forms in each case the unique nature of business communication with subordinates, which is called the leadership style.

Typology of Kurt Lewin. The most popular typology is still individual leadership styles, developed back in the thirties by the German psychologist Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) who emigrated to the USA. The longevity of this, which has become a classic, typology is most likely explained by its extreme simplicity and clarity. It identifies three leading leadership styles:

• · authoritarian;
• · democratic;
• · neutral (anarchic).

These styles are distinguished from each other by many parameters: the nature of decision-making, the degree of delegation of authority, the method of control, the choice of sanctions used, etc. But the main difference between them is the preferred management methods. The group of so-called command methods corresponds to the authoritarian style of leadership; contractual and socio-psychological methods are more consistent with the democratic style; neutral (conniving) is characterized by a generally unsystematic choice of management methods.

(directive) Predominant use of team management methods. Task orientation. Centralization of powers. Individuality in decisions. Suppression of initiative. Tight control. Minimal information, little publicity. Preference to punishment. Intolerance to criticism, elimination of objectionable ones. Toughness, assertiveness, and sometimes rudeness in communication.	Democratic style (collegial) Emphasis on socio-psychological and economic management methods. People-oriented. Delegation of powers. Collegiality in decisions. Encouraging initiative. Moderate control. Full information, wide publicity. Preference for incentives. Tolerance of criticism. Kindness, politeness, tact in communication.

The differences between the two main leadership styles are clearly visible. Moreover, the characteristic features of the democratic style, of course, should be dearer to the heart of a Russian leader who has not been spoiled by democracy.

Oddly enough, for almost half a century of research into leadership styles, no clear connection has been found between the effectiveness of a group and a particular leadership style: democratic and authoritarian styles give approximately equal performance indicators. As a result, the so-called situational approach: there are no management solutions suitable for all occasions; everything depends on the specific situation, which in turn is determined by many different factors. These include: the conditions of the group’s activities, the nature of the tasks to be solved, the qualifications of the performers, the duration of joint work, etc. A set of factors of this kind creates a unique situation for the group’s activities, which, as it were, sets and requires certain features of the leadership style.

• · the production situation requires it;
• · staff voluntarily and willingly agree to authoritarian management methods.

• · ensures clarity and efficiency of management;
• · creates a visible unity of management actions to achieve set goals;
• · minimizes decision-making time, in small organizations provides a quick response to changing external conditions;
• · does not require special material costs;
• · in “young”, recently created enterprises allows you to more successfully cope with the difficulties of formation.

• · suppression of initiative and creative potential of performers;
• · lack of effective labor incentives;
• · cumbersome control system;
• · in large organizations, bureaucracy of the management apparatus;
• · low satisfaction of performers with their work;
• · a high degree of dependence of the group’s work on the constant strong-willed pressure of the leader.

Economic and socio-psychological management methods inherent in democratic leadership style. This style allows you to:

• · stimulate the manifestation of initiative, reveal the creative potential of performers;
• · more successfully solve innovative, non-standard problems;
• · use material and contractual labor incentives more effectively;
• · also include psychological mechanisms of work motivation to increase the satisfaction of performers with their work;
• · create a favorable psychological climate in the team.

However, the democratic leadership style is not applicable in all conditions. As a rule, it works successfully under the following conditions:

• · in a stable, established team;
• · highly qualified employees;
• · the presence of active, initiative, out-of-the-box thinking and acting employees;
• · not extreme production conditions;
• · the possibility of significant material costs.

These kinds of conditions are not always available, and besides, these are precisely the conditions that make the use of a democratic style only possible. Turning this possibility into reality is also not an easy task.

The concept of typical leadership styles includes a third type - neutral or permissive. Little attention is usually paid to it, since it is extremely rare in practice. This style is characterized precisely by the absence of any system in the application of these methods. Its typical features:

• · avoidance of making strategically important decisions;
• · giving things the opportunity to take their own course, of their own accord;
• · little control of subordinates;
• · use of collective decision-making to evade responsibility;
• · indifference to criticism;
• · indifference to staff.

So, the acceptability of a particular leadership style is ultimately determined by the production situation, which is described by many factors. It should follow from this that a leader must be able to apply any leadership styles, changing them depending on the situation.

A manager is a professional manager whose main goal is to increase production, creative output, personnel activity, focus on reducing the share and number of production and managerial workers, develop and implement a policy for the selection and placement of personnel, resolve issues related to training and advanced training of personnel; This is a person with a wide range of knowledge, but his most valuable quality is the ability to use the services of specialists when necessary.

To implement these functions, a leader must have the necessary qualities. They are usually divided into three groups: professional, personal and business.

Professional skills include those that characterize any competent specialist and the possession of which is a necessary prerequisite for performing duties. These qualities are:

Competence in the relevant profession, formed on the basis of education and work experience;

Breadth of views, based on erudition and deep knowledge of both one’s own and related fields of activity;

The desire to acquire new knowledge, constant self-improvement, critical perception and rethinking of the surrounding reality;

Search for forms and methods of work, help from others, their training;

Ability to plan your work;

The personal qualities of a leader differ little from the qualities of other employees who want to be respected and taken into account, so their possession is also a prerequisite for successful leadership:

High moral standards;

Physical and psychological health;

High level of internal culture;

Responsiveness and favorable attitude towards people;

Optimism, self-confidence;

However, what makes a person a leader is not professional or personal, but business qualities, which include:

The ability to create a team, ensure its activities, set tasks and distribute them among performers, provide them with everything necessary for work, coordinate and control the existence of the team;

Dominance, ambition, desire for power, personal independence, leadership in any circumstances, and sometimes at any cost, inflated level of claims, courage, determination, assertiveness, will, uncompromisingness in defending one’s rights;

Contact, sociability, ability to win people over, convince them of the correctness of your point of view, and lead;

Initiative, efficiency in solving problems, the ability to quickly select the main thing, concentrate on it, but if necessary, easily adapt;

The ability to manage oneself, one’s behavior, working time, relationships with others;

Style is a consistently manifested feature of the leader’s interaction with the team, formed under the influence of objective and subjective management conditions, individual, psychological characteristics of the leader and the tasks being solved.

There is a traditional division of styles into four types:

Authoritarian (directive, dictatorial, commanding) - as a rule, a “hard”, peremptory (not tolerating objections) tone, sole decision-making and little interest in the subordinate are used. Instructions and instructions are given in the form of orders that are not subject to discussion. Contacts with subordinates are limited. They cannot tolerate criticism. Position in the group is above the team. If meetings are held, they are only formal, and the decision is made long before them. The manager himself works a lot and makes others work. The advantages of such management include, first of all, clarity in the execution of work, strict control and high efficiency. The disadvantage is the suppression of initiative among subordinates, tense relationships in the team, high demands on the leader himself;

Democratic (collective, collegial) - as a rule, collective decisions are made, interest is shown in the informal aspect of relations. Instructions are given in the form of suggestions, a friendly tone is used, praise and blame for workers are made in the form of wishes, and prohibitions are made in the form of discussion. The position of the leader is within the group. Activities are not planned in advance, but according to the situation in the group. Everyone is responsible for the implementation of the decisions made. Efficiency is associated with more complete awareness of all employees and team members;

Liberal (neutral, anarchic, conniving) - characterized by detachment from the affairs of the collective, the tone is convalescent, lack of praise and blame, no cooperation. The position of the leader is not noticeable, on the sidelines. Things go by themselves. The leader does not give instructions, and the work consists of the individual interests or goals of the leaders of groups and departments. Some tend to consider this management style useful in creative and scientific teams;

Mixed (as a combination of the above).

The organization uses a mixed leadership style: a combination of two styles, authoritarian and liberal, can be distinguished. In some situations, the manager alone makes all decisions without asking the opinions or advice of subordinates, giving performers only instructions on what, how, when to do, and uses punishment as the main form of motivation. In this case, employees are generally indifferent to the decisions imposed by the manager, based on the position: “the giraffe is big, he knows better” or negatively, rejoicing at any of his mistakes. As a result, an unfavorable socio-psychological climate is formed in the organization, and the ground is created for the development of industrial conflicts. But management using an authoritarian style can suddenly change to a liberal one, when the leader poses a problem to the performers, creates the necessary organizational conditions for their work, defines the rules, and he himself fades into the background. At the same time, encouragement and punishment take a back seat compared to the results obtained and the opportunity to realize one’s creative abilities. Subordinates are freed from control, make decisions independently and look for ways to implement them. Such work brings satisfaction and creates a favorable climate.

The management style can change depending on the situation; the manager must constantly improve and be able to select the appropriate management style for each situation.

Conclusion

To summarize this work, it can be noted: the general trends are such that the role of socio-psychological methods will only increase over time due to various factors influencing the development of modern society. The next important fact is that many of these methods are too poorly studied - both the methods themselves and the negative consequences of their use, and this should become a priority in the field of control theory.

Be decisive: make decisions that best serve your goals and are ethical;

Be obligatory: do not promise what you cannot deliver;

Take the best into your team: a leader is made by his subordinates, surround yourself with good specialists whose judgment you can rely on;

Don’t rush to fill vacancies: study profiles, conduct interviews, weed out even qualified people who do not have the required personal qualities;

Instill confidence in your employees: give them the opportunity to express themselves in their work, to feel that they are indispensable, the higher their self-esteem, the better they work;

Help people grow: most employees want to improve their skills and should be given the opportunity to do so;

Get support: Business changes every day, and depending on how well innovation is integrated into the established system, employees may resist it or support it. Therefore, before making any changes that could affect the interests of employees, always try to enlist the support of subordinates;

Be with people more often, do not isolate yourself from your subordinates with an office door;

Call employees by name: People like to be remembered and recognized;

Keep employees in the loop: when they know what decisions that directly affect them are being made at the top, what is new in management policies, they will share information with you about what is happening at their level;

An algorithm for resolving the conflict should be developed:

Finding solutions acceptable to both parties;

Paying attention to the problem, not to the personal qualities of the opposite party

Create an atmosphere of trust and full awareness;

Show elements of sympathy towards the other side and try to listen to them to the end;