by the most effective style leadership in business is the so-called "transformational leadership". T

transformational leaders tend to be honest, they inspire people to be optimistic about the future, they set goals and motivate people to achieve those goals, they are friendly with their team (a more detailed description of transformational leadership can be found at the end of the article).

However, leadership is a very complex and multifaceted concept. Very often it is necessary to select the necessary leadership style in accordance with different situations. That is why it is important to know which leadership style will be most relevant for your business. The more you learn about various types leadership, the easier it will be for you to run your business.

Let's take a look at some common leadership styles that can be followed (styles are presented in alphabetical order):

1. Autocratic leadership

Autocratic leadership is transformational leadership in its extreme form, in which leaders retain power over other people. Team members and other employees do not have the opportunity to put forward proposals, even if these proposals turn out to be very useful for both the team and the company as a whole.

The advantage of autocratic leadership is that it is very effective. Decisions are made quickly and work is done efficiently.

The disadvantage of such a system is that people do not like to be "under the yoke". Therefore, with this leadership style, the likelihood of frequent absenteeism on the part of employees and turnover work force very large. However, this style will be very effective in situations involving routine work and work that does not require special qualifications. In such situations, the advantages of total control are more noticeable against the background of disadvantages.

Autocratic leadership is often resorted to in moments of crisis, when it is necessary to make decisions very quickly, without taking into account disagreements. For example, in the military industry, an autocratic leadership style is very common; commanders-in-chief are responsible for the wards and for accepting difficult decisions, which allows the soldiers to focus solely on the execution of orders and assignments.

2. Bureaucratic leadership

Bureaucratic leaders work on a piece of paper. They impeccably follow the rules and make sure that everyone else follows all the procedures as expected.

This type of leadership is ideal for those whose jobs involve high risks (working with machinery, toxic substances, or working at heights) or with large sums of money. Also, bureaucratic leadership is well suited for organizations with routine activities (for example, industry).

The disadvantage of this kind of leadership is that it is not suitable for organizations that are built on flexibility, creativity or innovation.

Most bureaucratic leaders reach their desired position by adapting to and sticking to rules, not by skill or experience. This can negatively affect the leader's authority, as team members will no longer value his advice and himself as a leader in general.

3. Business leadership

This leadership style occurs when team members agree to obey a certain leader only to complete a specific task. Such "deals" usually occur when an organization pays its team for its efforts and quality work. But the leader also has the right to “punish” team members if their work does not meet the stated standard.

It may seem strange, but business leadership also has its benefits. For example, with this leadership style, all roles and responsibilities are predetermined. In addition, ambitious employees, motivated by any awards, will always be successful and financially prosperous.

The downside to this style is that team members may not like this kind of control. They may feel disadvantaged, which can lead to staff turnover.

Business leadership is sometimes viewed more as a type of management than a style of leadership because it involves a short-term interaction between the leader and the team. It is also not suitable for situations where creativity and specific knowledge are welcome. However, this leadership style has been applied quite successfully in other situations.

4. Democratic/compassionate leadership

The democratic leader allows his team to take an active part in the decision, but the final decision is his. He encourages creativity and his team members are often involved in project work and decision making.

There are many benefits to democratic leadership. The team of such a leader is very satisfied with the working conditions, which increases the productivity of their work, because they have the right to participate in the life of the organization. This leadership style also helps develop some skills. Team members do not feel pressure from outside or from above, so they strive to work hard, not even so much because of financial reward how much of enthusiasm.

Since the whole team is involved in the decision-making process, it is a little delayed, but the result always lives up to expectations. This approach is used in business when teamwork is simply necessary, and when the quality of the work performed is important.

The disadvantage of democratic leadership is that in situations where speed of decision-making or efficiency of work is important, such leadership can only hurt. For example, during crisis situations, the team spends valuable time considering the opinion of each member. Another disadvantage of this style is that not all team members are able to give reasonable and valuable advice due to their lack of experience.

5. Personnel/Relationship Oriented Leadership

Leaders in this area are completely focused on organizing, supporting and developing people in the team. This kind of leadership is very similar to democratic leadership, which encourages teamwork and creative collaboration, and is inversely related to problem-based leadership.

A relationship-oriented leader treats all team members equally. He is friendly and always ready to help, pays attention to each member of the team, who knows that in case of need the leader can be relied upon.

The advantage of such leadership is that everyone aspires to such a leader, everyone wants to be part of his team. His team members are very productive and are not afraid to take risks, because they know that their leader will certainly help them in case of need.

Disadvantage of this kind of leadership: Some leaders can become too obsessed with the development of their team, not paying due attention to project work.

6. Service Leadership

The term "serving leadership" was introduced in the 1970s by Robert Greenleaf. Such leadership presupposes the presence of a leader, who is often not even perceived as such. When someone in your organization manages people through routine assistance, that person can be described as a "service leader."

The service leader is always good example for all. He is always honest and manages with prudence. At some points, service leadership is somewhat reminiscent of democratic leadership, because the whole team is involved in decision making. However, the service leader prefers to stay on the sidelines, out of the spotlight, and let his team make their own decisions about their work.

Supporters of service leadership argue that this is a good way to do business in a world where there is great emphasis on human merit, and where a service leader can achieve power through their merit, ideas, and ethics. This approach helps to create a good corporate culture and lead to an increase in the morale of each team member.

However, some people believe that in a competitive environment, people who practice service leadership may be far behind those who have chosen a different leadership style. Serving leadership takes time to implement adequately, and it is not suitable for situations where you need to make quick decisions or get something done in the shortest possible time.

However, service leadership can be found in areas of life such as politics and in societies where a leader is elected to lead a group, committee, organization, or community.

7. Disinterested leadership

The name comes from the French Laissez-Faire, which means "to give freedom of action." This style involves a leader who allows his team to work at their own discretion. This leadership style can also arise naturally when a manager is not able to supervise the work of his people at the proper level (besides performing his duties).

Disinterested leaders can give their team complete freedom of action, as well as the right to set their own deadlines for the completion of work. However, if necessary, he can help the team with advice, while not interfering in the process of their work.

This kind of leadership can be effective when the leader monitors the work of people and maintains regular communication with members of his team. Also, such leadership is effective if the individual members of your team are experienced, independent and proactive people.

The main advantage of non-participatory leadership is that team members are more satisfied with their work due to their freedom and autonomy, which increases productivity.

The disadvantage of this leadership style can be the disorganization of the team members, their inexperience and lack of motivation to work, which can harm the effectiveness of the work.

8. Problem-Based Leadership

Problem-oriented leaders are focused on getting the job done, which is similar to autocratic leadership. They actively designate the scope of work, distribute responsibilities, structure work, plan, organize and control its implementation. Such leaders also perform other tasks, such as creating and maintaining performance standards.

The advantage of problem-based leadership is that it ensures that work is completed on time, and it is especially needed when your team members are not able to rationally plan their time.

However, with problem-based leadership, very little attention is paid to the team itself, which entails the same problems as in autocratic leadership: a decrease in motivation and staff turnover.

Advice:

In practice, most leaders combine problem-based and person-based leadership.

9. Charismatic leadership

Charismatic leadership is somewhat similar to transformational leadership, because such leaders inspire and energize their team, arouse enthusiasm for work. This ability to arouse desire and enthusiasm is a great advantage.

The difference between charismatic and transformational leadership lies in the role of the leader. Transformational leaders seek to transform their team and organization as a whole. A charismatic leader focuses on himself. He may not want to change anything in the team or organization.

The disadvantage of such a leader is that he believes more in himself than in his team. In addition, with the departure of such a leader, the entire organization may suffer. A charismatic leader is confident that he always does everything right, even if other employees point out his shortcomings. Such overconfidence can harm both the team and the organization as a whole.

In the eyes of everyone around, the success of an organization depends entirely on the presence of a charismatic leader. Therefore, charismatic leadership involves great responsibility and requires continued cooperation from the leader.

10. Transformational Leadership

As discussed earlier in this article, transformational leadership is the best way to run a business.

Transformational leaders expect 100% return from every member of the team, and from themselves in particular, and also motivate their colleagues. With this leadership style, high productivity and the involvement of each team member are very common phenomena.

The downside of transformational leadership is that not only does the team need support, but it's also important for the leader to have someone they can rely on.

Therefore, it is very common to combine business and transformational leadership. Business leaders (or managers) ensure that routine work is done to a high standard, while transformational leaders support the initiative of employees and bring variety to work.

It is also important to resort to other leadership styles when necessary. The choice of style, in this case, will depend on the people with whom you work and the situation as a whole.

• Leadership, Management, Company management

Charisma - (from the Greek charisme - divine grace, gift) - exceptional properties that a leader is endowed with in the eyes of his admirers.

Charisma is the endowment of personality with properties that cause admiration for it and unconditional faith in its capabilities.

A charismatic leader is a person endowed with authority in the eyes of his followers.

The concept of charisma in science is very vague. The bearer of charisma is a kind of leader-savior who knows best what to do. It is very important that he himself believes in his mission. Such people in everyday life look strange. But when a sufficiently powerful social need matures (usually during a period of social cataclysms), such people are no longer perceived with a smile.

Potentially, many can become charismatic - so the offer is constantly present. But a charismatic leader is in demand primarily in a society where some kind of crisis situations constantly occur and there is no system of control of power by citizens. When stabilization comes after radical change, people simply want to live in peace under good governance.

The image of a charismatic leader has been of particular interest for many years for scientific research on political, social and religious movements. In recent years, scholars have begun to study the impact of charismatic leadership on organizations. The concept of charisma is difficult to define. In one work, it is called "the fire that energizes subordinates, maintains their commitment and desire to achieve results above and beyond planned." Charismatic leaders have the ability to inspire and motivate people so that they act beyond their normal capabilities, despite all obstacles and personal sacrifices. . Describing a charismatic leader, one commentator notes: “He convinces people—subordinates, employees, customers, even top managers—to work together and do things they couldn't do before. People are ready to follow him to the ends of the world, to walk barefoot on broken glass. He doesn't insist, he just gives orders."

TO charismatic Leader characteristics include:

1) inspirational impact on followers

2) demonstrating superpowers for impressive management

3) trust of followers

4) anticipation of crisis situations

5) the ability to transform (transform) followers

A charismatic leader has a strong emotional impact on people, because it can affect not only their feelings, but also the mind. He can excitedly say that he is in the "front line of fire", and those around him perceive him as a hero who can overcome any obstacles. A charismatic leader often appears in difficult times for a society or organization, because at that moment a strong inspiring personality is needed to relieve stress and reduce people's anxiety. For example, Amar Khaled emerged as a young Muslim religious leader in Egypt at the beginning of the 21st century during another Middle East crisis. His passionate, emotional performances did not leave indifferent people who wished to live as good Muslims. At the organizational level, Lloyd Ward, who was appointed chairman of the US National Olympic Committee at a time when the organization was torn apart by internal strife and was rapidly losing public confidence, is a prime example of this situation. The National Olympic Committee trusted Ward, known for his ability to unite and inspire people. Ward's charisma helped overcome factionalism and revive the US NOC's former glory.

If the charisma of the leader does not contradict ethical standards It improves the productivity of the entire organization. Charismatic leaders raise the level of self-awareness of people, open up new opportunities for them, so that employees begin to sacrifice personal interests for the interests of the team, department or organization.

Charismatic leaders inspire people with their passion for work, appealing to the feelings and minds of subordinates. While it is impossible to "learn" charisma, there are some aspects of charismatic leadership that anyone can use in their practice.

What makes a leader charismatic?

Understanding the characteristics and behavior of a charismatic leader can help a person become a stronger leader. As a number of studies show, charismatic leaders are endowed with special qualities. Their strong influence on subordinates is documented and the behaviors that help them achieve outstanding results are described.

6Charismatic leaders create an atmosphere of change and an idealized vision of a future that is far more attractive than the present. They have the ability to express complex ideas and articulate goals so clearly that literally everyone - from the vice president to the service staff - can understand them. Charismatic leaders inspire followers with their passion, even if success is easy to achieve. This dedication in itself becomes a "reward" for subordinates. Charismatic leaders use original methods to change the status quo. Charismatic leaders earn the trust of followers when they take personal risks. They passionately defend their position. Martin Luther King, who launched the fight for civil rights, almost every day received death threats against himself and his family. By taking risks, leaders become even more emotionally attractive to followers.

Another important characteristic of a charismatic leader is that the source of his influence is personal power as opposed to official power. People respect a charismatic leader and admire him for his experience, knowledge, personal qualities, and not for his title and position. Although charismatic leaders may hold high positions, they are able to transcend formal organizational hierarchies because their influence is based on personal qualities rather than official authority.

Consider 6 concepts of a charismatic leader.

1. J. Conger and R. Canungo developed an attributive model, according to which followers attribute charismatic traits to a leader by observing his behavior during three successive stages in the process:

Assessment of the situation (the accuracy of this assessment is taken into account);

Demonstrating strategic foresight, in particular through the formulation of non-traditional goals;

Demonstrating the ability to lead by example and inspire followers.

2. Based on the concepts of socialized and personalized desire for power, introduced by D. McClelland, there are two corresponding types of charismatic leadership:

1) socialized charisma is characterized by:

- a restrained desire for power and not too zealous use of it;

Inducing internalization (i.e., the emergence of values ​​common to the leader and follower); striving for goals that correspond to the needs of subordinates; their constant support and intellectual stimulation.

2) for personalized charisma are characteristic:

Unrestrained desire for power and increased use of this power;

Identification induction (i.e., the relationship between the leader and followers is built on the basis of the attractiveness of the leader);

Striving for goals that are personally beneficial to the leader, and by deceit, by force imposed on followers;

The support of followers is demonstrated by the leader only if it is beneficial to him. As a result, the followers of a socialized leader become autonomous, free, and responsible, while those of a personalized leader become dependent, subordinate, and submissive. If socialized leaders are generally useful for the organization, as they strive for goals that are congruent to its goals, then personalized ones are useful only in crisis situations.

3. Quetz de Vries considers charismatic leadership from the position of a psychoanalytic paradigm: the leader is perceived by followers as a stable father figure when he demonstrates the performance of one of three roles: hero, soothsayer, savior. Especially susceptible in this regard are helpless, emotionally unstable, poorly controlled followers and followers who are in a critical situation. This situation also affects the leader - he can move from an adequate perception of himself to a sharp exaggeration of his own merits, seeking to increase the dependence of his followers on him at the same time.

4. D. Eberbach combines charisma and the theory of devotion by J. Bowley in his concept:

In a situation of crisis, followers receive a "charismatic trauma", which leads to deindividualization and increased family attachment to the leader - charismatic homogamy (love for one person);

A crisis situation gives power to a charismatic leader and forces him to use a directive style.

5. According to R. Treis and A. Beyer, charismatic leadership is aimed at preserving (sometimes developing) an integral culture of the organization, which manifests itself:

In a certain ideology (implicit values, norms, views);

In the form of cultural forms (symbols of the organization, its slogans, accepted jargon, myths, legends). This ideology and cultural norms allow members of the organization to cope with the uncertainty and inconsistency of situations that develop in the organization. The tendency to consider many processes occurring in an organization, including leadership, as part of its culture is very characteristic of modern organizational psychology.

6. K. Klein and R. House believe that charisma characterizes not a leader and a follower, but the relationship between them is a fire that ignites and inspires the latter. If such relationships arise in a leader with charismatic abilities, with all subordinates, we are talking about homogeneous charisma, if only with a few, not numerous, there is variable charisma.

Negative aspects of charisma

Most researchers note another feature of charisma: it can have both creative and destructive effects. Leaders such as Winston Churchill, John F. Kennedy, Mohandas Gandhi, no doubt, had a very strong charisma. But the same can be said about Adolf Hitler, Charles Manson, Idi Amin. Charisma is not always used for the benefit of the group, organization and society. Sometimes it can serve selfish interests, leading to deceit, exploitation and manipulation of people. Since the basis of charisma is emotions, not logic and reason, it is potentially dangerous.

Researchers associate negative and positive influence charisma with personalized and socialized leaders, respectively. Leaders who care only about their own interests can bring great harm to others. Personalized charismatic leaders are characterized by self-aggrandizement, anti-democratic and exploitative attitude towards people. Socialized charismatic leaders get power rather than seize it themselves, they are democratic and tend to support others. Studies show that personalized charismatic leaders cause significant harm to organizations, with long-term negative consequences. Socialized charismatic leaders, in contrast, improve organizational performance.

Eberhard von Löneisen Article written specifically for the McKinsey Bulletin
Published with the consent of the editors of the McKinsey Bulletin.
The article was published in the sixth issue of the journal.
The full issue can be read on the website www.vestnikmckinsey.ru

In the world's most successful companies, leadership development means a systematic activity to which company leaders devote a lot of time. For Russian business, this is still a novelty, although most Russian companies have reached a stage of development at which weak leadership potential becomes a serious obstacle to further growth and efficiency improvement. Russian businessmen will have to realize the importance of the broad development of leadership in the modern interpretation of this concept, analyze the state of affairs in their organizations from the point of view of the conditions for cultivating talented and enterprising employees, and, it is possible, carry out very significant, one might say, “ideological” reforms.

The theme of leadership is becoming more and more popular all over the world. And this is understandable: more and more companies are realizing that the effectiveness and success of their activities depends on how strong their leadership potential is. The "classic" functional approach, which considers strategy, organization, operations as self-sustaining functions, is adjusted taking into account the importance of leadership as key factor their successful implementation.

For Russian companies, the topic of leadership is of particular importance. From our experience with our Russian clients, we know that the essence of functional changes, such as strategy adjustments or organizational structure, is often fairly obvious or easily definable: structural competitive advantages, as well as the weaknesses of Russian companies are well known.

Large Russian companies so far rarely set themselves such unique tasks as a fundamental change in strategy or the development of new products; The most demanded changes by Russian business include the improvement operating activities and building new businesses - and here you can rely on the rich experience of many companies and countries, developed and developing. At the same time, Russian companies have the same problems: how to achieve their goals, where to look for people who, thanks to their knowledge and leadership qualities, will be able to determine the direction of change and achieve the implementation of the tasks set.

The problem of leadership becomes especially important because Russian companies are increasingly faced with foreign competitors both in Russia and abroad. foreign markets. At the same time, international companies not only have an advantage in the field of functional management - they also have many years of experience in understanding and developing leadership potential. The moment has come when Russian enterprises, wishing to maintain and strengthen their competitiveness, need to start systematically working on the development of leadership.

But what is "leadership"? And how to develop it? Now there is no shortage of literature on this issue, as well as leadership experts, but in our article we would like to briefly consider the very concept of "leadership" and focus on practical issues of leadership development in Russian companies, taking into account the peculiarities inherent in them and the entire Russian society. In this article, we have tried to use the international experience of leadership development, as well as the knowledge and impressions received by McKinsey while working with Russian clients over the past 10 years.

LEADERSHIP PARADIGM

“Leadership is the art of getting others to do what you want, so that they think they want to do it themselves,” said Dwight Eisenhower, a famous military leader and US president, referring to the leader’s ability to influence his followers. “Management is the art of getting what is needed, and leadership is the art of determining what needs to be achieved,” said Peter Drucker, the classic of management, implying the difference between managing within a given system and the ability to change the system itself. The same idea was emphasized by entrepreneur Ross Perot. He believed that “people cannot be controlled. Inventories can be managed, but people need to be led.”

Our experience of working with the leaders of the most successful corporations allows us to talk about several qualities and characteristics as key to understanding leadership.

It is important to understand the difference between leadership and management, administration. In general, management is leadership within a given area of ​​responsibility and within established procedures, and not the creation of a new one. Leaders, on the contrary, form the context and tasks themselves, create something new. The founders and leaders of many successful high-growth companies had a vision that helped them successfully bring new products and services to market (as in the case of Microsoft, Apple, Compaq and Dell), transform industries through innovation or radical transformation (as in the case of Home Depot, Aldi or Outback Steak House). People who simply manage and implement the plans developed by others could not create such innovative products and services. But do not think that leaders can realize their potential only in new industries. And in traditional industries, the most successful business leaders who formulate new goals and create new products and services have a messianic vision. This was especially clearly demonstrated by the ex-head of General Electric Jack Welch, famous not only for the amazing financial results that the company achieved under his leadership, but also for the fact that he turned it into a world-renowned forge of leaders.

Some experts note that the main requirements that apply to a manager and a leader partly contradict each other. In his classic 1977 Harvard Business Review article, "Managers and Leaders: How Are They Different?" Harvard University professor Abraham Zaleznik pointed out that business leaders have more in common with artists, scientists, and other creative professionals than with managers. The differences between managers and leaders, he wrote, are at the level of their subconscious conceptual representations of chaos and order. Managers prefer order, they seek stability and control, they prefer to solve a problem faster - often without fully learning the lesson it teaches. Leaders, on the other hand, are willing to tolerate chaos and lack of order and may delay resolving an issue until it is properly sorted out. Managers' goals are driven more by necessity than by their desires; they are excellent at smoothing out conflicts between employees and even entire departments - it is important for them that both parties are satisfied and the organization continues to successfully perform its daily functions. Leaders, on the other hand, have an active, very personal attitude towards goals. They work for the long term, inspiring subordinates with their personal energy and stimulating creativity in their work. Their relationships with subordinates and colleagues are often very emotional, and their workspace- chaotic.

Zaleznik believes that companies need both managers and leaders to survive, and even more so, to succeed. However, in the large American corporations of the 1970s, an atmosphere prevailed that predetermined the formation of people who relied on and supported formal procedures. The ethics of the "Order of Managers" encourages collective responsibility and the desire to avoid risk - and it often interferes with the development of leaders. How can an entrepreneurial spirit develop in a highly formalized environment and in the absence of a personal approach? In large bureaucratic organizations, mentoring is also not welcome, and it is also very important for the development of leadership qualities.

Time has shown how right Zaleznik was. Today's companies increasingly require flexibility and the ability to innovate, so they must encourage and nurture leaders. Only companies that develop both leadership and managerial qualities at the same time easily adapt to a changing environment. This, in turn, requires a new, less formal and hierarchical approach to organizational structure.

LEADERSHIP AT ALL LEVELS OF THE ORGANIZATION

The problem of developing leadership in a corporation - or rather, in any organization - is not limited to the development of selected individuals. Outstanding leaders who can lead an entire organization are rare, and the experience of many companies shows that, in the end, success is determined by the breadth and depth of leadership in the organization and its leadership potential as a whole.

As noted in the article "Not Only at the Top" written for the McKinsey Bulletin by experts from the Wharton Business School, leadership skills can occur at any level of the organization. Although a significant part of the specialized literature is devoted to the analysis of the mechanisms for the nomination of outstanding individuals, in Lately Increasing attention is being paid to the development of leadership qualities in middle and lower managers, as companies understand that success really depends on leadership potential in the broadest sense. After all, to form own point vision, suggest improvement, involve others in the work and achieve the implementation of the planned can and should not only top managers, but also ordinary employees.

Here are a few examples where a broad leadership potential determines the success of a particular undertaking or the functioning of the company as a whole.

To remain globally competitive, large steel companies must continuously improve production activities. Our experience shows that the quality of these improvements depends on the initiative of ordinary employees who know their narrow area well and find even small opportunities for improvement, no less than from more major changes carried out by superior employees. Enormous potential for improving operational efficiency exists in many Russian industrial companies, and it is thanks to the leadership qualities of middle and lower-level employees that “rationalization” proposals can be effectively implemented.

Building a sales system in financial company requires leadership qualities from lower-level employees, such as insurance agents. The success of each individual transaction and the overall image of the company in the market depend on their ingenuity, responsible and interested attitude to business.

Many professional organizations- legal or consulting companies- there is no rigid formal structure, and therefore no hierarchy, and therefore they are especially dependent on the leadership qualities and initiative of all employees in the process of continuous learning and development of new creative approaches.

LEADERSHIP: INDIRECT OR BENEFICIAL

For many Russian entrepreneurs of the first wave, the problem of developing leadership qualities seems far-fetched. In their opinion, leadership is a gift given to a person by nature, and either he is, or he is not and never will be. However, they can raise at least three objections. Firstly, Western companies have been successfully developing and educating leaders for decades. Second, no one is born a leader. There are people with such inclinations, but in order to become real leaders, they need to develop their potential, and this cannot be done without special knowledge and skills. And thirdly: if you look at the biography of successful Russian entrepreneurs, it will become clear that many of them went through a certain school of leadership in Komsomol or party work.

Having recognized the very possibility of developing leadership in a company, you need to understand what leadership qualities need to be developed, how to rebuild the personnel development system, the culture of the company as a whole, in order to identify future leaders in time, educate them, promote them and keep them in the company. Some of the most successful international companies are famous not only for their great leaders, but also for the ability to develop people at all levels of the organization and turn them into leaders. Jack Welch, the already mentioned head of General Electric, understood that this was the only way to ensure the effective management of a huge company. As a result, General Electric has developed a distinct leadership culture focused on developing and promoting talented employees.

Of course, at different stages of a career, different leadership qualities are required from people. At the bottom - leadership implies the ability and desire to take responsibility, attitude to the assigned work as one's own. own business willingness to go beyond the scope of the task. As you move "up" the requirements change: with an increase in the level of responsibility, the ability to develop the necessary qualities in other employees becomes an increasingly important feature. At the top rungs of the career ladder, vision for the future of the company and the ability to lead others become decisive qualities.

RUSSIAN CONDITIONS FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

In recent years, Russian companies have paid more and more attention to improving the efficiency of their activities. Many of the most obvious changes have already been made, and judging by the experience of the evolution of companies in other countries, in the near future one of key tasks Russian business will be the development of leadership potential at all levels of the organization. Already now, in many companies, shareholders and top managers attract specialists from outside, so that they not only bring with them the missing knowledge and skills, but also contribute to the creation of an appropriate corporate culture, the restructuring of the company and the development of leadership.

At the same time, when planning measures to develop a broad leadership potential, one cannot but take into account some features of the Russian business environment. The considerations below do not pretend to be scientific, but they are based on many years of observation of the activities of Russian companies and the comparison of some Russian features with "how it is done in the West."

Even a cursory glance at the history of the development of Russian business is enough to understand that the country has a powerful leadership potential - the necessary "raw material" for growing leaders. It is impossible not to be amazed that the spirit of entrepreneurship has not perished in the country during the decades of the planned economy. The time that has passed since the collapse of the USSR has shown that there are business leaders in Russia who can form, develop and reform large companies that can compete in the global market.

Russian businessmen are distinguished not only by an amazing will to win and a willingness to achieve it by any means, but also by a more pronounced belief in their own strength and a desire to act than many of their Western colleagues. Giving up, retreating in the face of difficulties or admitting that “this cannot be done” is not in the nature of Russian businessmen. Unlike many Western business leaders, Russians are often the main shareholders of the companies they lead and therefore are sincerely interested in initiatives to increase the value of the business, in all sorts of changes, improvements and experiments.

There are, however, a number of Russian features that complicate the development of leadership qualities in a wide range of managers, and they cannot be ignored when developing appropriate programs. Some of these features are explained by the cultural specifics of the country, others are rather structural in nature and are due to the recent past of Russian organizations and enterprises, and others are associated with the youth of Russian business. Among key features the following can be distinguished:

• Dominance of personal relationships over professional ones. Personal relationships play a much more important role in Russia than in a typical Western organization. This situation could be considered quite normal at a stage when companies were just being formed and loyalty was more important than professionalism, but the nature of personal relationships with decision-makers, and not professionalism or leadership qualities, remains the most important factor in moving forward in many companies today. career ladder. In many Russian organizations in fact, an alternative hierarchy has developed, built on personal connections and often contradictory professional requirements organizations.
• Inability to work in a team. For decades, the Soviet management system was based on a strict hierarchy, and therefore many Russian business leaders, despite their individual merits, do not know how to work in a team and establish a team approach in the organization as a whole. At the same time, Western companies are increasingly aware of the importance of creating a team environment in which all managers work together and on an equal footing, make their special contribution to overall success companies. Teamwork and horizontal communication is especially important in organizations such as legal and consulting firms However, in manufacturing companies, some issues can only be solved by the team - especially those that require the expertise of specialists in various fields. For example, the guide oil field involves the management of a reservoir, well stock, surface infrastructure, and one professional even of the highest class cannot always make a qualified decision, therefore, in Western oil companies there are cross-functional teams managing the field. In Russia, this practice takes root slowly.
• Excessive control and unclear distribution of responsibilities. For many Russian companies, the problem of theft and corruption at various levels is still relevant, so the management is introducing total control mechanisms. At the same time, such measures often hinder the decentralization and delegation of authority needed for leadership development. The most successful international companies, in order to stimulate the development of entrepreneurial spirit and leadership qualities, give middle managers more freedom and at the same time give them more responsibility for the work of their departments. In this case, only pre-agreed key parameters are controlled. As a result, many companies have significantly reduced the number of levels in their structures, increased their efficiency, and become more responsive to external changes. Russian companies, on the contrary, often do not have clearly defined areas of responsibility and effective decision-making procedures, since their leaders believe that thanks to such a structure of organizations, they will be able to control the work of all departments and fight theft.
• Lack of experience and culture of personnel development. Many Russian companies do not yet have a broad view of the problem of personnel development, and their managers do not have modern knowledge and skills in this area. For example, Russian companies focus on financial ways stimulating employees (which are really important), but do not always pay enough attention to other, no less effective motivation factors - involvement in a common vision, emotional attachment to work or a team, education, etc.

Russian businessmen did not have the opportunity to accumulate significant experience in the development of corporate culture and the development of corporate leadership - they faced other tasks. Now, in order to master the tools for creating and customizing a system for developing leadership potential, they will have to learn a lot, reconsider their views, and make significant changes. And the sooner Russian business recognizes the main barriers to leadership development, the sooner this process can begin.

ATTRIBUTES OF LEADERSHIP

In The Will to Lead, Marvin Bauer, one of the founders of McKinsey and its director from 1950-1967, urges leaders to abandon hierarchical structures and develop leadership, first of all in themselves.

Hierarchical systems don't fit modern requirements- in the face of growing competition, companies need to become more flexible. According to Bauer, the command system cannot simply be improved, it must be replaced by a new one, leadership must replace absolute power; the company must be managed by a network of leaders who work at all levels of the organization.

The most common definition of a leader is something like this: a person who sets a goal and is able to attract others to achieve it. Anyone who wants to become a leader must have certain qualities and character traits. But if it is difficult to change character traits given by nature, then qualities have more in common with skills, and therefore it is easier to acquire them. Here is what Marvin Bauer has to say about some of the essential qualities of a true leader.

• Honesty. Leadership experts believe that honesty is the most important virtue of a leader. The truth is worth telling if only because it is easier. As ex-DuPont CEO Richard Heckert taught, “If you always tell the truth, you don’t need to memorize all your words.” I noticed that the leaders I trusted the most were honest about the little things, not to mention more serious things. Therefore, for example, they carefully verified even those statements to the press that, it would seem, did not have much significance. Honesty in all things is a good way to build trust within and outside the organization.
• Restraint and ease. A person who is arrogant, arrogant and narcissistic cannot be a leader by definition. But the leader should not be shy either. Real leaders think not about themselves, but about the company and subordinates, behave informally and naturally, and therefore form an informal environment around them. You can show restraint and informality in different ways, for example, do not get yourself chic offices. I know leaders large companies who, like everyone else, stand in line at the canteen and eat at the same table with colleagues.
• Listening skills. It may not seem like a big deal, but I've seen the opposite many times, even though most executives in hierarchical companies don't have this skill. At the meeting, they interrupt subordinates - the second time these people most likely will not want to speak, no matter how important the issue is. Such leaders are so bad at listening that they turn into leaders in the eyes of their subordinates simply by stopping talking and starting to listen. Employees perceive such metamorphoses well, and the bosses themselves are amazed at how much important they learn.
• Susceptibility. The almighty boss sits upstairs and rarely comes down. They don’t argue with him, they don’t ask him “unnecessary” questions and try not to upset him with bad news. So the leader becomes self-confident and self-sufficient, loses receptivity. As a result, the quality of decision making suffers. A receptive leader is better informed and has more productive relationships with colleagues and subordinates. He never says “no” right away, but leaves himself time to think and, whatever his decision, does not forget to inform those concerned about it.
• Ability to enter into the position of another. To convince others, you need to know what they think. Of course, employees will not be frank with the boss all the time, but he can develop the ability to feel what is happening to them. Once a colleague convinced me to move from command to persuasion in communicating with subordinates. I understood that it would be easier for me to convince a person if I knew about his feelings and experiences. I had to take a fresh look at my colleagues, rely on insight, intuition, empathy, to get into their position. In the end, I learned to do it quite tolerably and I think that any leader can do it. You just need to show tact, sensitivity and be careful in expressions. I don't think I said anything new, although such simple things are often forgotten.
• Initiative. This most important quality of any leader is easy to develop in oneself. Just do not waste time: think, soberly assess the situation and start acting. Hierarchical systems are known to stifle initiative, especially at its lower levels. But if the company is run by leaders, they will not miss new opportunities and realize them. Along with managers, ordinary employees can also take the initiative here. And it is on this that the competitiveness of the company depends. The ability to motivate. Today, motivation too often comes down to command-and-control monetary incentives or promises of promotions. But in leadership-based companies, people are much more motivated by the results of their work, the feeling that they contribute to the development of the company, that they are adequately appreciated and respected. In addition, in such companies, the employees themselves are often interested in improving financial results companies, so financial incentives work better.

DEVELOPMENT OF LEADERSHIP IN RUSSIAN COMPANIES

What needs to be done to develop leadership potential in Russian company? Identifying the problems that prevent this is only the first step in the right direction. Companies must create conditions for the development of leadership potential at all levels of the organization and contribute to this development in every possible way.

One of the most important conditions is the decentralization and delegation of powers, the rejection of traditional Russian methods of increasing the responsibility of employees, such as hierarchical control, in favor of an entrepreneurial attitude to work. Experience shows that the distribution of powers and responsibilities has a strong motivating effect on employees and increases the efficiency of their work. It is no coincidence that most successful large Western corporations are built on the principles of decentralization and entrepreneurial stimulation: they have realized that bureaucratic hierarchy is incompatible with the development of leadership potential.

Second required condition- A bet on the development of key employees, and therefore leadership potential, at all levels of the company. McKinsey research shows that the total shareholder return of companies that are leaders in workforce development is almost 20% higher than the industry average. Such a result, of course, is explained not only by success in the development of people, but the importance of this factor cannot be underestimated. It is therefore very important to build a comprehensive system that would stimulate the development of leadership potential in the organization. In fact, many elements of such a system are quite obvious and "mechanistic", which, however, does not detract from their importance. This includes continuous practical training for all today's and tomorrow's leaders, and involvement of leaders at all levels of the organization in the recruitment, evaluation and career promotion of employees, and not only their functional units. All this not only increases the efficiency of work, but also helps employees to better understand the most highly valued leadership qualities and abilities in the company and try to develop them in themselves.

Thirdly, the development of human potential and the education of future leaders should be a task of paramount importance for the first person of the company. The leaders of the most successful companies devote a significant portion of their time (as well as company resources) to the development of employees at all levels of the organization. “I consider the development of our human potential as my main task, therefore I perceive every conversation, every meeting as an opportunity to talk about people. This is how we manage GE,” said Jack Welch. In the most successful companies, top managers often participate in appointments to even the most ordinary positions, which top managers of less successful companies do not honor with their attention.

Finally, top managers should try to work more on themselves, develop their leadership skills, for example, by applying different management styles depending on the situation. It is important to remember that the management style and behavior of the first person, as a rule, is reproduced in the company - copied by direct subordinates, and then repeated at all levels of the organization. Demonstrating openness and restraint, showing that he appreciates initiative and responsibility, the leader evokes a response from the team. We witnessed a rare "incident": a worker was not afraid to tell the first person of the company, who was inspecting the new control system in the shop, about how they "bypassed" this system. Prior to this, the manager believed that the system was working efficiently, moreover, he gave workers a bonus for excellent work. How high must be the confidence of an ordinary employee in the head of the company in order to come out with such recognition! Such behavior is largely the merit of the leader. Having shown himself to be an open and receptive person, he created an atmosphere of trust in the company so that people were not afraid to talk about failures, he was able to involve employees in solving serious production problems, improving operations, and thereby made them leaders.

Russian businessmen need to decentralize their companies, delegate authority to leaders at all levels of the organization, and focus on building a development system and leadership potential. In this way Russian enterprises will be able to overcome cultural barriers to leadership development and close the gap that separates them from the most competitive companies in the world.

Footnotes

For more on the different styles of leadership, see the article "Many Faces of Leadership" in this issue of the McKinsey Review.