Psychic regulation of management - 4. MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANIZATION

Это продолжение увлекательной статьи про управление организацией.

...

возможность его непосредственного использования для удовлетворения потребностей здесь, как и во всех иных аналогичных случаях, не играет никакой мотивационной роли. В качестве реальных мотиваторов выступают те блага, которые он получит за выполнение своих обязанностей как частичного работника. Это автоматически ставит вопрос о системе мотивирования и стимулирования, а также о ее справедливости, эффективности и обоснованности. Она должна реально и действенно стимулировать каждого члена организации на выполнение предписываемых ему разделением труда обязанностей. Оттого, насколько она будет эффективной, в какой степени она будет субъективно понята и принята работником как справедливая, зависит обеспечение мотивации исполнения.

Существуют два исходных принципа создания систем мотивирования.

Во-первых, они должны быть ориентированы не только на часть всех потребностей работника (обычно – материальные), а на все присущие ему типы и виды потребностей.

Во-вторых, они должны адекватно выявлять и учитывать реальный вклад каждого исполнителя в итоговый результат и обеспечивать стимулирование, пропорциональное этому вкладу. Если второй принцип предполагает использование организационных средств, то реализация первого базируется на психологических представлениях о строении мотивации личности.

In this regard, the motivation function is considered as the most “psychological” among all other administrative functions. This, in essence, is the immediate, practical psychology of management. The essence of the motivation function and the role of the manager in providing it, therefore, consist in creating a system that satisfies these two specified principles. The most frequent, though quite understandable, mistake of management is the absolutization of material motives and incentives. Of course, within certain limits and, especially, in combination with another incentive - the fear of punishment for not performing work, this system (“carrot and carrot policy”) is quite viable. The question, however, is whether it is the best. Although these incentives are very important (moreover, the main ones), they are not the only ones and do not allow, therefore, to fully realize the motivational potential of the individual.

A kind of breakthrough in the realization of this fundamental position, which led to the inclusion of the problem of motivation in management theory, was due to the famous experiments of E. Mayo at one of the textile factories in Philadelphia. Their general meaning is as follows. At one of the sites, staff turnover reached 250%, while at other similar ones it did not exceed 5–6%. Material incentives (increased wages, improved hygienic working conditions) did not give an effect. After analyzing the situation in detail, Mayo offered to take two 10-minute breaks in work, during which the workers had the opportunity to communicate with each other, i.e. meet their social needs in communication. In addition, the very fact of the study led to the fact that they had the idea of ​​the social significance of their work. As a result, fluidity has almost disappeared, and productivity has increased dramatically. We emphasize that this happened solely because of the “inclusion” of social motives. From this very illustrative, albeit very simple from a modern point of view, research began intensive motivational research in the theory and practice of management.

In order to fully, effectively and competently use the entire motivational potential, the manager must know what basic categories of factors he consists of. In general psychological terms, the motive is understood as a conscious inner urge to activity. All the motivating sources of personality activity are united by the concept of the motivational sphere. It includes the following components: the needs of the individual, his interests, aspirations, desires, beliefs, attitudes, ideals, intentions, as well as social roles, behavioral stereotypes , social norms, rules , life goals and values, and, finally, ideological orientations in general. The most important place among them belongs to the needs, which include a number of basic types. Without dwelling on their characteristics (as they are described in detail in the relevant psychological textbooks), we note only two points. First, the diversity of types of needs determines the extreme complexity of the motives that are formed on their basis. Consequently, there are many ways to influence the motivational sphere through the "connection" of various categories of needs. Secondly, any behavior, any form of labor activity is always based not on any one, but on several motives. To denote this fact in psychology there is the concept of polymotivated behavior and activity. At the same time, various relationships can develop between different motives, both positive (mutually reinforcing) and negative. Consequently, the provision of motivation to work should also take into account the need for consistency in the motivational effects of the contractor.

A special role in the organization of management plays a communicative function. The fact is that the very essence of management activity is connected with the need for constant coordination of the activities of the organization’s units and its individual members in order to achieve common goals. This coordination is carried out in various forms, but first of all - through the diverse contacts of members of the organization, i.e. in the process of their communication. Everything that happens in an organization is directly or indirectly related to communicative processes; therefore, they are one of the basic means of ensuring its integrity and functioning. The system of communicative exchanges, like the circulatory system of the body, permeates all the “cells” of the organization, ensuring its vital activity. In relation to the activities of the leader, she also plays an important but rather specific role. This specificity consists in the fact that, being important in itself, the communicative function is built into the implementation of all other management functions; it acts as a means of their implementation, as well as mutual coordination. Therefore, the communicative function along with the decision-making function is considered as a “connecting process” in organizations.

In general terms, communication is defined as any exchange of information between people (or groups), regardless of whether it leads to mutual understanding or not. By virtue of such a general and broad definition, the content of the phenomena and processes included in the concept of "communication" is also very extensive and diverse. Hence the need to structure the concept of communication and to identify in it those aspects that are most important for characterizing the content of the activities of a manager. In control theory, there are three such aspects.

First, communication as a general phenomenon, a process unfolding in the organizational system at all its levels and in all structures, including those not directly connected with the leader.

Secondly - communication as the direct practice of contacts of the head with individual subordinates, their groups, divisions of the organization.

Thirdly, communication as a special, specific management function, i.e. as an object of purposeful regulation by the head, as a component of management activities. In turn, each of these aspects includes two main plans - regulatory and organizational, and subject-psychological.

The first aspect is connected with the objective organizational forms of communication, the requirements for its effective implementation, the structure of the optimal communication process. The second one reveals a very strong influence on the communication of the psychological characteristics of “communicants” and makes it possible to explain a number of its important features, including those that hinder its effective implementation. However, even the concept of communicative function, taken only in its psychological part, is also multivalued and requires diverse disclosures. It includes three psychological aspects proper: the communicative behavior of the leader, communicative phenomena and the communicative processes of his activity.

Characteristics of the content of the communicative function includes the following main areas:

- determination of the essence and identification of the specifics of the communicative function;

- analysis of the main types and types of communications in organizational systems;

- definition of structural components and main stages of the communication process;

- characteristics of the forms of implementation of the communicative function;

- analysis of the characteristic difficulties and errors ("barriers") of the communicative function;

- a description of the general requirements aimed at optimizing the communicative function (principles of optimal communication).

The essence of the communicative function of the head and its main task is to ensure optimal exchange of information within the organization between its individual divisions and individuals (as well as with the external environment). The optimality criterion in this case is the extent to which the existing communication network contributes to the achievement of the overall goals of the organization. Creating effective communications is achieved in several basic ways. Thus, the formulation of a clear, clear and definite goal of the organization, as well as its specification on the sub-goals for each unit, by itself "removes" many questions, makes additional explanations and optimizes communication unnecessary. Adequate and detailed plan, which clearly regulates the main types of work of departments and their standards, is also an effective means of settling business contacts. Further, a properly selected type of organization (its economic structure, lack of redundant units, multiple subordination in it) also contributes to the creation of an optimal communication network. Finally, an effective control system — its fairness, clarity to subordinates, publicity, systematicity — all of this eliminates “unnecessary talk,” clarifications, and conflicts. Thus, it can be seen that the means of implementing the communicative function are all basic managerial functions (goal setting, planning, organization, control). This circumstance clearly indicates the specificity of the communicative function. On the one hand, the communicative function is subject to special regulation by the head. But, on the other hand, it is provided to an even greater degree not directly, but through all other managerial functions in the course of their implementation. There is also an inverse relationship: it is mainly through the communicative function that the manager implements all his other functions. This is the main specific feature of the function in question: the less it is presented as independent and the more it is realized “at the expense of” other functions, the higher its own efficiency. And on the contrary, it comes to the fore, it requires special attention from the manager in cases when the “organization fails” - it works inefficiently. As Mr. Kunz and S. O'Donnell rightly point out in this connection, "areas of the highest concentration of information density ... are associated with those where there is little or no activity at all."

The fact that all other managerial functions of the activity are realized through the communicative function makes the data clear, according to which from 50 to 90% of the total working time of a manager is filled with communications. In addition, 73% of American, 63% of English and 85% of Japanese executives consider communication to be the main obstacle to achieving high organization efficiency.

The implementation of management activities is impossible without a control and correction function. In the ordinary consciousness, control is associated with verification, i.e. interpreted narrowly and inadequately. As R. Manteuffel notes, "control based only on verification ... is catastrophic." In fact, control is an extremely complex phenomenon, a kind of attribute of any management system (including organizational), a necessary means and mechanism to ensure the effectiveness of its functioning. It is not limited to any single stage of the management cycle, for example, to the final (“verification”), but is embedded in all management functions, ensuring their implementation, as well as the possibility of transition from one function to another. So, G. Kunz and S. O'Donnell emphasize that "control is the flip side of planning; ... control methods are essentially planning methods; ... it is useless to try to create a control system without first studying plans." In relation to another function - goal setting

P. Drucker notes: "Monitoring and determining the direction are synonymous." Control is an integral component of all actions and management functions. Usually it is most pronounced at the end of their implementation. It allows you to determine whether their goal has been achieved or not, and thereby "gives a sanction" for the transition to subsequent actions, linking all the links of the control chain into a single whole. Hence the high significance of the control function.

In order to be effective and efficient, control must be active. This means that it should not be reduced to stating the detected errors or deviations, but include the means and mechanisms for correcting them. The latter is ensured by the corrective function closely associated with the control. Playing an important independent role and having a number of specific features, the process of correction is still inextricably linked with the overall control function. It acts as a stage, and property, and a requirement for active and effective control. In this regard, these processes are considered in the framework of one - a function that unites them - control and correction functions.

So, control in its broad, true sense is defined as the process of ensuring the achievement of an organization’s goals, as well as a phenomenon that is not local, but global in nature. It is distributed throughout management.

Such a broad definition requires detail. It includes the following main aspects:

- control as a necessary attribute of control systems, as a general principle that allows them to achieve their goals;

- control as a necessary component of the activities of all departments and members of the organization, ensuring its effectiveness and consistency with the overall goals of the organization;

- control as a specific prerogative of certain specialized units of the organization and individuals who are responsible for monitoring its functioning;

- control as an aspect of the activities of the head associated with the creation of these structures and their management;

- control as a direct responsibility of the head, implemented in his individual activities, including in the system of personal, direct interactions with other members of the organization (both with the heads of the subordinate levels and with ordinary performers).

The first three aspects are generally organizational in nature; the last two are directly related to the content of the control function in the activities of the head and are discussed in this chapter.

The disclosure of the content of this function assumes its consideration in the following main plans: a description of the types and types of control, an indication of typical errors in building a control system and requirements for its organization, identifying features of the controlling and corrective behavior of the manager.

The most common, covering all other types of control, are its three main types: leading (preliminary), current and final. The phrase "forward control" is somewhat unusual: how to control something that has not yet happened? Where is the object of control? At the same time, it is considered the most important type of control and is determined by the essence of the active, i.e. most effective management strategy. It is to anticipate and predict future functioning; in that the main efforts should be focused not on correcting, but on preventing errors and unfavorable situations. Because of this, both planning, and the creation of organizational structures, and even goal-setting are considered as aspects of control. "Advancing", or preliminary, control is directed to three areas - human, material and financial resources.

The first involves an effective selection of personnel. The second is the determination of preliminary standards for the quality of resources. The third is the development of the budget.

The preliminary control is organized by the implementation of the system of rules, procedures and "lines" of behavior developed at the planning stage. They act as benchmarks, and in part as criteria for all other types of control. Focussing on the future is the most important feature of effective control: it is better to know with an error of 75% confidence about an error that will, than with a 100% confidence to detect an already committed error. A properly developed control system should detect possible deviations before they occur.

Current control is implemented directly in the process of execution of work and is usually timed to the end of any technological phase of the process of organizational functioning. It most fully embodies the already noted principle of feedback, which allows not only to evaluate the quality of work, but also to make immediate adjustments to them and thereby in a decisive way to contribute to the achievement of goals.

Final inspection is carried out after the completion of certain types of work. His role is twofold. First, on its basis, the question of their quality is finally resolved (with all the ensuing consequences for the performers). Secondly, various evaluation procedures depend on it; addressing issues of "punishment - encouragement", as well as the organization of incentives and motivation. Consequently, it performs an important proper motivating function. Therefore, from a psychological point of view, the manager should pay the most attention to this type of control, to master the methods and rules of final control as a motivating tool.

Далее контроль подразделяется на частичный (выборочный, локальный, "точечный") и полный (общий, глобальный). В первом случае он затрагивает лишь некоторые, как правило, наиболее важные технологические операции и звенья; касается лишь отдельных аспектов организационной деятельности. Во втором случае контролю подвергаются все основные действия исполнителей, все показатели деятельности и (или) все подразделения управляемой системы. Более эффективным является второй тин контроля, поскольку он удовлетворяет основному организационному правилу контроля, согласно которому контроль должен быть всеобъемлющим. Здесь, однако, возникает проблема организации контроля – проблема его экономичности. Дело в том, что чем более контроль приближается к "идеалу всеобъемлемости", тем дороже он становится и наоборот. Затраты на контроль приходится учитывать как важную "статью издержек" и соизмерять ее с итоговой эффективностью деятельности организации. Это ставит вопрос о необходимости рациональной пропорции – компромисса между затратами на контроль и мерой его полноты. Нахождение такого компромисса – важнейшее умение руководителя при реализации им контрольной функции. Одним из действенных средств, использующихся для этого, является особая форма контроля, обозначаемая понятием стратегического контроля. Ее сущность состоит в следующем. Чтобы иметь полное представление о состоянии дел в организации, не требуется контролировать все. Достаточно охватить контролем лишь определенные – стратегические пункты. Сеть таких пунктов результирует, дает сведения о многих иных – более локальных видах работ в организации. Она должна, поэтому, стать основой для разработки системы контрольных мероприятий. Контролируя эти стратегические пункты, руководитель будет одновременно (хотя и косвенно, но эффективно) контролировать и все иные аспекты деятельности организации. Такие пункты есть в каждой – даже самой крупной, сверхсложной системе, включая, например, экономику страны в целом. Здесь ими будут, например, объем грузооборота железнодорожного и иных видов транспорта, объем потребляемой энергии. Падение их показателей – объективный признак неблагополучия экономики.

Further, on the basis of systematicity, there is a selective ("random" and, as a rule, unexpected for the person being checked) and planned control. The latter is provided for in advance developed by the plan of control measures and inspections, which is brought to the attention of subordinates. The behavior of the controlled, their attitude to the control and, of course, the results of the control in these two cases differ significantly. On the basis of volume, control can be either individual, group or corporate. Directional control is differentiated into effective and procedural. In the first case, the measure of achievement of the goals is determined, and in the second, the process of their achievement is controlled. According to the degree of rigor , there are also two types of control - quantitative and qualitative (expert). If the work assumes the presence of quantitatively expressable standards, then they should be used as benchmarks and control takes the form of quantitative evaluation. If the work is such that its effectiveness is difficult or impossible to “change”, a qualitative assessment is carried out by means of the export method.

Characterization of the control function requires, further, the introduction of the concept of a general control process. It contains the presence in any control process of three mandatory components (and at the same time - stages):

- development of a system of standards and criteria ;

- comparison with them of real work results;

- implementation of corrective measures arising from this comparison.

These components form an invariant sequence of control procedures, regardless of their varieties.

The stage of developing performance standards and determining evaluation criteria is a continuation and completion of the planning phase. It establishes two types of evaluation criteria - benchmarks for content (quality, performance) and benchmarks for time. The main requirements of this stage are: consistency of criteria with corporate goals, their realism and familiarization with them of performers. The next stage - the comparison of real results with standards (criteria) is the core of the control as a whole. The apparent simplicity of this stage is deceptive. It is associated with substantial difficulty. The fact is that complete coincidence of results and standards is a rarity and an exception rather than a rule. Deviations almost always exist, but they can be either acceptable or not. Therefore, the problem arises of developing not so much standards as such, as certain limits of their allowable variations ("range of standards", tolerances). In this regard, in the management theory, the “exclusion principle” is formulated : the control system should work when it detects not all, but only unacceptable deviations from standards. Having a range of standards creates the prerequisites for one of the frequent and typical mistakes of a manager. It has its own reasons for psychological factors - for example, a positive attitude towards the performer, and sometimes - his fear. This is an unjustified extension of the acceptable range of standards for performers. Control in such cases loses its meaning. In the same context, it is necessary to note the error of the “double standards” for the “favorites” and “outcasts”. As a consequence of this, either protectionism or hyper demandingness (the “harassment policy”) arises.

The content of the third stage is the implementation of actions that are determined by comparing the results with the standards. They are grouped into five basic types.

1. In the absence of deviations or finding them within the allowable range, there is no need for any additional corrective actions. However, even their very absence for the performer is very important, being an indicator of the effectiveness of his work, a stimulus to it and a factor of implicit encouragement.

2. Actions aimed at eliminating deviations: they are aimed at bringing the activity parameters in line with previously established standards. The following rule is common: the earlier the deviations are noticed, the less laborious these actions will be and the higher their effectiveness. This implies another important requirement for control - it should be timely, and even better - operational.

3. Actions aimed at revising the standards and evaluation criteria. They are realized in the event that the obvious unrealistic standards, the impossibility of their mass implementation by the "average worker" is revealed. This situation is not uncommon; it is due to planning and rationing errors. There is a psychological difficulty. It consists in the fact that going to this kind of action means for the manager to admit his mistakes, since he is responsible for the existing system of standards. The ability to do this is one of the important traits of the leader, and his stagnancy in this regard gives rise to numerous conflicts both in his relations with subordinates and between the latter.

4. Actions that form the basis of a specific "corrective behavior". They are not aimed at correcting the error, but at the person who committed it. In this case, the manager should rely on the psychological and, mainly, on the individual characteristics of the performers.

5. Evaluation actions can be of two types: current and final assessment. The range of valuation actions is very wide and is determined by the system’s potential for material and moral incentives, as well as its authority to implement certain sanctions.

The function of control and correction is usually interpreted as completing in the overall management process, as the “last” of the list of classical administrative functions. However, this does not mean that thereby the entire system of managerial functions is exhausted. Equally traditional is the allocation of another large group of managerial functions - personnel. In order to better understand the role and place of personnel functions in the activities of the head, to determine their specificity in relation to all other functions, it is advisable to formulate the following initial positions.

First, the entire system of personnel functions is differentiated in the activities of a manager by a criterion other than the system of administrative functions . Administrative functions are correlated with the actual activity "dimension" - with the main tasks of the organization of management activities. Personnel functions correspond to the second main "dimension" of management activities associated with the impact on its main subject - people, organization staff.

Secondly, the set of core personnel functions is relatively independent of the specific characteristics of organizations and includes an invariant set of ongoing tasks and duties of the head (recruitment, selection, recruitment, placement, vocational guidance and adaptation, training and retraining, assessment and certification of personnel, management professional career, staff stabilization, reduction, dismissal, etc.). Such consistency and relative independence from the type of organizations gives the system of personnel functions stability and certainty; allows to consider it as an independent and peculiar category of management functions.

Thirdly, the implementation of each of the personnel functions is subject to an interesting pattern, which can be described as the "rule of the holistic management cycle". This means that the implementation of each of the personnel functions requires the implementation of all already considered "classic" functions, their complete cycle.

For example, the solution of such an important personnel task as the staffing of an organization begins with goal-setting. A specific goal is always formulated, which is to clarify the need for personnel of a particular professional qualification level. Further work is planned on its implementation, including, inter alia, the forecast of staff dynamics. The solution of this task is associated with the function of organizing the execution, since the set itself is carried out on the basis of the existing structure of the organization or on the basis of ideas about the structure being created. Recruitment is inextricably linked with the creation of motivation, as well as with the provision of the communicative space of the organization. Finally, the final stage of its solution is to control the actual results of acquisition. In a similar “scenario”, including the deployment of the entire system of administrative functions, other tasks of a personnel nature are also being solved.

Fourthly, the solution of the whole range of personnel problems is not identical to the system of personnel functions of a manager. The volume of personnel work is so great that its implementation is assigned to a number of specialized departments and services of the organization, and consideration of their activities goes far beyond the activities of the manager himself. However, all these activities are carried out (or, at least, should be carried out) under the coordinating influence of the head, which constitutes the content of his personnel functions. The specificity of personnel functions, their special role in the work of organizations, as well as their close and organic relationship with each other were the reasons for the fact that by now their system has become an independent area of ​​management theory and practice - personnel management, personnel management.

Along with the system of personnel functions, the system of production and technological functions is also presented in management activities. The activity of any organization is ultimately aimed at the creation of certain products. By their nature, they are extremely diverse and, accordingly, the content of activities for their creation is different. This is actually the creation of any products (production organizations), and education and training (educational organizations), and the provision of services (service organizations), and construction (construction organizations), and the provision of medical care (health organizations), etc. However, in any case, each organization includes as its most important component the operating system. It represents those actions that are aimed directly at production, at the creation of its final product, which has real value for its external environment. The operating system is considered the main component of organizations: this is their "foundation". All other aspects of the organization’s activities, including its managerial functions, serve the tasks of providing the operating subsystem — the tasks of producing goods, services, knowledge, etc. Its coordination is the direct management practice, its daily content. To designate this direction of the manager’s activity, a number of related concepts have emerged: production function, technological functions, operational production management function, operating system support function, etc.

Since any production implies the need for its development and modification, an innovative function belongs to the same group. Finally, since any production is inseparable from the need for marketing products, the marketing function is also considered in this connection.

Due to the fact that production and technological functions are directly aimed at implementing actions but creating a final product, they all relate to the third main “dimension” of management activities. This is the third "dimension" of management activity, complementing the two already considered (administrative and personnel), forms as a result a common "space" of management activity. It gives administrative and personnel functions a directly practical orientation and further complicates the structure of management activities. Very often, a manager (especially - not familiar with the existence of management theory) may not even suspect the existence of any functions other than production-technological ones: it “just works”, i.e. busy with them. The seemingly self-evidentness of this position, by the way, was one of the main obstacles for the separation of management theory as an independent scientific discipline from management practice. However, fulfilling them, he objectively implements all other management functions. Moreover, to the extent that these functions stand out from the "everyday routine" as independent tasks, the success of the fulfillment of the production functions themselves depends. At the same time, it is the latter that retain their primacy, act for the leader as the direct content of his activities.

In the theory of management, this system of functions is given relatively less attention than the "classical" one — administrative, organizational, and personnel functions. The reason for this is that production functions are to a much greater extent determined by the specific content of the activities of the organizations, and not by the general laws of management. However, in the implementation of the system of production and technological functions there are a number of common aspects. They are not related to the content of the activity, but characterize its basic organizational principles, as well as its psychological characteristics. One of the main ones is the following pattern. The measure of representation in the activities of the head of the production functions system is very strong and obviously depends on his hierarchical position in the organization and, in fact, is determined by him. The higher is this position, the less is the head engaged in the direct implementation of production functions. On the contrary, the lower the level of management, the greater (and at the lowest levels, the main one) the role played in management by these functions. In other words, the severity of this function is inversely proportional to the hierarchical position of the leader in the general control continuum. This provision is at the same time a peculiar imperative - a requirement for the organization of management activities at various levels. The higher the level of a manager, the less he should be engaged in operational work and vice versa. Failure to comply with this requirement leads to the fact that the head begins to perform non-characteristic functions at the expense of the main ones. He is "mired in routine", "sprayed in trifles," etc.

In organizational and psychological terms, the essence of production and technological functions is as follows. Any production is characterized by a certain sequence of repetitive and largely standardized production cycles. They are denoted by the concepts of so-called product cycles, production cycles. Each of them requires operational regulation, management of its process. Therefore, in relation to each of them, the full management cycle is also implemented. For example, any production problem related to the manufacture of a product, as the first stage of its solution, requires the formulation of a relevant goal and its communication to the performers. The next stage is just as objective - planning, as well as all the others; the next stage is following - making decisions about the ways and possibilities of achieving the goal; ensuring the motivation of execution, the organization of performance (for example, the provision of raw materials); control over the execution, its correction.

Consequently, whatever the production cycle may be in terms of its “scale”, the basic pattern is always preserved. It consists in the fact that in relation to all the main production tasks, the entire system of management functions already considered by us (goal-setting, planning, decision-making, motivation, organization, control) is being implemented. However, they are not carried out at macrointervals of time and do not correlate with the organization of management as a whole, but are realized in temporary microintervals limited by a specific production task. Production functions are, therefore, complex, integrating other management functions. The latter, however, are represented in production functions not in their full form, but, as it were, in abbreviated form, reduced - only to the extent that it is necessary and sufficient to solve the production problems themselves. All production functions, in particular - operational, there is another important feature that determines their complexity and inconsistency. With all the repetition, standardization of the main production operations, their stereotyping, and often - the "routine", their implementation is carried out in a constantly changing external and internal conditions. As a rule, they are negative and thus complicate regulatory activities. This is a shortage of raw materials, and poor working conditions, and lack of planning, and a shortage of performers, and much more. All this is very well known and is the essence of the difficulties that operational management faces. Directly production activity and each of its individual cycles represents, therefore, a typical example of “repetition without repetition”. As a result, there is an inconsistent combination of constancy and variability of conditions, regulatory requirements and specific tasks. The removal of this contradiction, the alignment of production goals and objectives with constantly and often unpredictably changing conditions determine the content of operational management.

All considered types and categories of managerial functions form the basis of the activity of a manager and thus give a general idea of ​​it. At the same time, another category of functions is objectively represented in the structure of the head’s activity. These are integration, strategic, representative and stabilization functions. The peculiarity of these functions lies in the fact that they do not correspond directly to any of the main aspects (dimensions) of management activities - administrative, personnel, production and technological, but include the components of all these three dimensions simultaneously. According to their content, they are derived from all other groups of functions, are built on their basis and therefore, they are supposed to be co-organized. Such a complex and derivative character requires their understanding as “secondary” but with respect to the three considered groups.

All these features of derived functions are most clearly manifested in the control function, which is denoted by the concept of an integration function (in some cases it is also referred to as coordinating). Its content is as follows. The process of organizational functioning has its own internal logic, the laws of the organization, and its main components must be coordinated with each other. The more fully this is achieved, the higher the efficiency of organizational functioning. However, for this, the activity of the manager must also be internally organized; all its main components - functions should not contradict each other, but on the contrary, should be interconnected and coordinated. Therefore, it is necessary to coordinate the main functions.

The implementation of this function makes the most difficult psychological requirements for a manager: to see the organization as a whole; distinguish and highlight the main and its key "points"; comprehensively take into account the consequences of any, even local, managerial impact. All this, in turn, presupposes the presence of a specific intellectual quality - the systematic thinking of the leader.

The integration function is closely interconnected with another function - strategic. The boundary between them is rather arbitrary, since they include a number of common elements. However, there are differences between them. The essence of the strategic function is determined by its two main features.

The first is that the strategic function from the content side is the implementation of the strategic planning process considered. It synthesizes all major strategic functions, starting with goal setting (defining the mission of the organization) and ending with the organization of a system for monitoring the implementation of strategic plans. By including them, the strategic function ensures their integrity and consistency.

The second feature is that it usually differentiates itself from hierarchically coordinated functions — tactical and operational. As we move along the management continuum - from its foundation to the top - in management activities, the share of tactical and especially operational tasks and functions decreases. At the same time, the share of common tasks and functions of a global - strategic nature is increasing. Therefore, the most characteristic of top managers is that they do not control execution as such, but the management of this performance on the part of other managers of levels subordinate to them.

Representative function is usually treated as an independent and does not belong to any of the main groups of functions. Carrying out this role, the head represents the interests of the organization he heads and (or) groups at various levels of the intraorganizational vertical, as well as in various interactions of the organization with the external environment. For example, the head of the department represents his interests at the level of the directorate (internal organizational representation). The director of the organization, participating in the work of higher authorities, already represents the interests of the entire organization (inter-organizational representation).

The basis of this function is a peculiar mechanism - the mechanism of personification by the head of corporate interests and goals, the positions of members of the organization, features and traditions inherent in it. Representation - “personification” by the head of the organization will be the more effective, the more his position reflects the main characteristics of the organization he heads, all aspects of her life and work.

Completing the consideration of derivative functions, we also note a number of aspects of management activities, which are usually denoted by the concept of "function", although they have quite a broad, and therefore not quite specific content. These are administrative, stabilization, and disciplinary functions. Their breadth, and partly the lack of certainty, are related to their complex nature. Thus, the administrative function (from the Latin. Administratio - I manage) is, in essence, the entire set of organizational and activity functions, and the administration process itself acts as the deployment of their system. Further, the stabilization function is also based on many other areas of work of the leader and the functions of his activities. All of them are integrated with a specific goal - preserving the stability of the intraorganizational functioning and ensuring the organization’s "survival" in a dynamically changing external environment. The importance of this task determines the complexity of the ways and forms of the solution. It involves reliance not only on administrative functions, but also requires measures to stabilize staff (personnel functions), as well as to improve and update technology (production and technological functions). Finally, the disciplinary function - in its broad and adequate understanding - is not limited only to special measures for maintaining the discipline as such. It provides a wide range of tasks and functions to create a high organizational culture, which is the most effective means of providing a positive internal organizational environment.

So, the integration, strategic, representative functions, as well as other functions similar to them in terms of the complexity of the structure - administrative, stabilization and disciplinary - form the final - fourth group in the general system of management functions. Together with the other three groups, they reveal the content and structure of management in general.

Psychic regulation of management

At the heart of the organization and regulation of management activity is the whole system of mental processes. They are known to be divided into classes of cognitive (cognitive), emotional, volitional, and motivational processes. All the main features of these classes of processes are very fully manifested in the organization of this activity and affect both its procedural features and performance characteristics. Of particular importance here is the class of cognitive mental processes and, above all, perception, memory and thinking. In addition, it is important to consider that in the structure of management activities, these processes acquire a distinct specificity, due to the content and conditions of this activity. The specificity of perception processes , i.e. perceptual processes are determined by the fact that perceptual stimuli themselves - the “material” perceptions in the activity of a manager are extremely specific. Information perception is not so much objects - objects of the external world (although, of course, they too), as subjects - personalities in all the diversity and contradictions of their qualities, characteristics, properties, intentions. Thus, the perception in the activity of the head is, first of all, personal, subject (more precisely, interpersonal) perception. The subject of perception is such a complex and specific object, identical in its parameters to the subject of perception, which is the "other person". Therefore, the specificity of perceptual processes in management activity is that here they act in their own special form - as interpersonal perception, as social perception.

The term "social perception" refers to the perception of "social objects" (other people, social groups, large social communities). Social perception covers a wide range of phenomena. First of all, this is individual perception (perception of a person by a person). It depends on whether a person belongs to the same group as the perceiver, or - to another group (the phenomenon of "one's own - another's"). This is, secondly, an individual’s perception of certain groups as a whole, which is also different with respect to one’s own and that of others. Finally, thirdly, this is the so-called intergroup perception of each other by groups, as well as self-perception of the group by itself. All these types of social perception literally permeate the content of management activities, form the basis of its communicative function. In studying the processes of social perception, a large array of concrete results was obtained, and many interesting patterns were discovered. To characterize the activities of the head of the most significant following data.

First, it is a characteristic of the general structure of the process of social perception and its main components. They are: the perceiving subject (individual or group), the perceived object (another subject or group), the process of perception itself (receiving information), decoding information and creating an image of "another", active actions to search for additional information about the object of perception, correction (with necessary) the original image. This process involves the inclusion of quite complex psychological mechanisms - in particular, identification, empathy, reflection, standardization, stereotyping, which will be discussed below.

Secondly, this disclosure of the relationship of the accuracy of social perception with the effectiveness of the leader. The processes of interpersonal perception are a necessary condition for any joint, including managerial, activity. In general, it is shown that there is a rather complicated one — a non-linear relationship between accuracy, the differentiation of social perception and the effectiveness of group activities; between the same parameters of perception and the success of management activities. Too low accuracy and completeness of perception, as well as too high, is accompanied by less success of the activity. Успешность максимальна на некотором – довольно высоком, но, все же, промежуточном значении точности перцепции. Такого рода закономерности характеризуют отношения оптимума (а не максимума – "чем больше, тем лучше").

На процессы социальной перцепции руководителя, а также на характер их связи с эффективностью его деятельности влияет свойство маргинальности его статуса. При этом различают две группы руководителей: ориентированных на требования вышестоящих уровней организации и ориентированных на управляемую группу (подчиненных). Второй тип характеризуется большей точностью перцепции и более сильным ее влиянием на эффективность деятельности. В целом выделяют следующие основные особенности восприятия руководителем подчиненных:

1) перенесение общего впечатления о подчиненном па оценку его отдельных характеристик – как деловых, так и личностных ("эффект генерализации");

2) завышение оценок тех подчиненных, которые поддерживают руководителя;

3) завышение оценок тех подчиненных, которые высказывают сходные с руководителем мнения;

4) занижение оценок тех подчиненных, которые не поддерживают руководителя и высказывают противоречащие его мнению суждения;

5) руководитель блокирует информацию, поступающую ему от лиц, получивших с его стороны негативную оценку.

В связи с этим встает и еще один важный вопрос: об адекватности восприятия самого руководителя возглавляемой им группой. Он особенно важен для эффективного руководства, поскольку именно от того, насколько "принят" руководитель группой (организацией), решающим образом зависит и эффективность совместной деятельности. В зарубежных исследованиях разработан своеобразный норматив того, как должен восприниматься руководитель своими подчиненными, чтобы

продолжение следует...

Продолжение:

Часть 1 4. MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANIZATION
Часть 2 Psychic regulation of management - 4. MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANIZATION
Часть 3 High variety and quality of heterogeneity of long-term memory material
Часть 4 Psychophysiological aspects in the activities of the head - 4.
Часть 5 Executive Training - 4. MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANIZATION