Control by human resourses carried out through a concerted association human resource systems:

Philosophy of the Czech Republic, which describes the general values ​​and guiding principles that managers have.

HR strategies that determine the direction in which HRM will act.

Politics of the Czech Republic, which provides guidelines for how these principles, values ​​and strategies should be applied and put into practice in specific areas of HRM.

HR processes consisting of the formal procedures and methods used to implement HR strategic plans and HR policies.

CR practice, which includes informal approaches used by managers.

CR programs that enable the systematic implementation of HR strategies, policies and practices.

Becker and Gerhart (1996) divided all these components into three levels: system architecture(guidelines), alternative policy options and processes and practices(Fig. 1.2).

Rice. 1.2 Activities of HRM

HRM Models

According to M. Armstrong, one of the first unambiguous statements about the concept of HRM was made Michigan School(Fombran, 1984). They believed that HR systems and organizational structure should be adjusted to fit the organizational strategy (hence the name "fit model"). They went on to explain that there is a human resource cycle (Figure 1.3) consisting of four main processes, or functions, performed in any organization. This is:

selection - correspondence of available human resources to jobs;

attestation– performance management;

remuneration- "the reward system is a management tool that is used to stimulate organizational performance is often insufficiently and incorrectly"; it is obliged to encourage both short-term and long-term achievements, bearing in mind that "an enterprise must work today in order to succeed in the future";

development- the desire to have highly qualified employees.

Rice. 1.3. Human resource cycle

Other founding fathers of HRM were representatives of the Harvard school - M. Bier et al. (1984), who developed a scheme later called Harvard by P. Boxell (1992).

Harvard School believed that HRM has two characteristic features:

1) most of the responsibility for ensuring a competitive strategy and personnel policy lies with middle managers;

2) employees must develop rules that guide the development of personnel activities and are applied in such a way as to mutually reinforce both levels.

The Harvard circuit as modeled by Bier et al. is shown in Fig. 1.4. P. Boxell (1992) believed that the advantages of this model are that it:

Takes into account the interests of all influence groups;

Recognizes the importance of compromise, expressed or implied, between the interests of owners and workers, and between various groups interests;

Expands the context of HRM to include worker influence, work organization and the related issue of leadership style at the lower level;

Recognizes a wide range of environmental influences on management's choice of strategy, assuming a combination of both market and product related aspects and socio-cultural aspects;

Emphasizes strategic choice - this model is not guided by situational or environmental determinism.

The Harvard Schema has had a significant impact on the theory and practice of HRM, in particular the notion that HRM is the business of managers in general, and not a particular function of the personnel department.

Rice. 1.4 Harvard scheme of human resource management

Goals and objectives of HRM

During the development of cybernetics, behaviorism, philosophy and psychology often used the image of a black box: there are incoming and outgoing data, but what happens in the "black box" is unknown, and this knowledge was dispensed with. The well-known formula "stimulus - reaction" made it possible to get out of this predicament even when exposed to a person.

AT recent times, apparently, due to the accumulation of some knowledge (the theoretical views of 3. Freud can also be attributed to them), they began to use the image of an iceberg. At least what is known at the top is known, and this is 20% of all information. And what is hidden, you can guess. If we recall the theoretical views of 3. Freud, we can define the upper part as conscious, and the lower as unconscious. Now, if we apply the image of the iceberg to understand the processes taking place in the organization, we get the following (Fig. 1.5).

Rice. 1.5 Organization like an iceberg

Those aspects in the functioning of the organization that are located at the top of the iceberg are subject to conscious influence, control, development, etc. As a result, the organization receives a more perfect and modern organizational structure, technology, equipment, products, etc.

The bottom of the iceberg actually concerns people - the employees of the organization. For the further development of the organization, the conscious management of the potential that lies at the bottom of the iceberg, i.e., human resource management, is required.

Target is a system-forming concept for the organization. An organization, as a specific association of people, exists to achieve certain goals.

The most basic goal of the company is survival, making a profit. But besides this, each organization identifies its own set, a set of goals at the level of values, which will, on the one hand, determine the personnel policy, and on the other hand, create a certain image for consumers. These main goals predetermine subgoals, i.e. form a holistic goal tree that affect the definition strategic objectives and specific plans for their implementation.

The need to formulate the organization's goals and recommendations on how best to formulate them to achieve results is a separate topic. Another aspect is important - the employees of the organization who have come to work also have their own goals. And they can differ from organizational goals, and to varying degrees.

An analysis of the graphic relationship between the goals of the organization and its employees reveals an obvious pattern: the closer the goals of employees to the goals of the company, the higher the level of achievement of the organization. In the ideal case, their coincidence gives us the maximum level of achievement, which is impossible for the reason that the person and the organization are not identical. Interests, goals of an individual can go beyond, beyond the boundaries of the organization's capabilities. The organization has its limits, limitations. Therefore, we can only strive to converge the goals of the organization and employees.

Or it can be formulated as follows: it is necessary to try to make sure that, having achieved (achieved) the goals of the organization, employees could achieve their personal goals, satisfy their interests and needs. Such may be personnel management strategy.

When employees know that if they achieve the goals of the organization, their needs / interests will be satisfied, then the interest of employees, their labor motivation will be high. In this case, it is decided central problem in personnel management - creation and increase of labor motivation.

Thus, main goal of HRM actually consists in conscious effective use of the potential that the personnel of the organization have to achieve the main objectives of the organization, as well as to simultaneous satisfaction of the needs of workers.

Let's look at a few definitions.

"Human Resources/Personnel Management - is the activity performed in enterprises that contributes most efficient use employees to achieve organizational and personal goals” (Ivantsevich, Lobanov, 1993).

"Human Resource Management - it is a specific approach to managing people in a company, aimed at achieving competitive advantages through the strategic placement of qualified and loyal personnel, using a holistic set of cultural, structural and personnel techniques” (Story, 1995).

The main tasks of personnel management(UE) are:

1) provide organization by well-trained and interested (motivated) employees; communicate the policy of the HRM department to employees.

Typically, top managers develop a "Company Human Resources Policy", which is determined by the values, strategy, organizational culture, stage of development, size of the organization.

(Company policy, according to Mordovin, may address the following issues: business management, wage and bonuses, travel allowance, holidays and vacations, performance appraisal process, healthcare, education and training, flexible working hours, politics open doors, compensation, reference checks, transfers and outbidding of workers, professional confidentiality, recruitment and hiring, interns in the company, overtime and weekend work, work permits and registration, job postings, accidents, what you need to know about companies).

2) use effectively qualification, practical experience, skill and efficiency of personnel (Ivantsevich, Lobanov, 1993).

Mordovin (1999) highlights the following tasks:

Development and implementation of the personnel policy of the organization in accordance with internal company standards and modern concepts of personnel management;

Creation and maintenance of an information and analytical base for decision-making on personnel management issues;

Ensuring safe working conditions for the company's employees, material and moral incentives for their activities.

So, the overall goal of human resource management is to ensure that the organization can succeed with the help of its employees. Ulrich and Lake (1990) have this to say: "The HRM system can be a source of organizational capability that will enable firms to learn and capitalize on new opportunities."

Therefore, HRM is considered in terms of addressing the following tasks.

1) HRM strategies are designed to facilitate the implementation of programs for improving organizational efficiency through policy development in areas such as knowledge management, capability management and creating a “great place to work”. It is this “big idea” (Purcell et al., 2003) that consists of “a clear vision and a set of integrated values”. More specifically, HR strategies should be seen in conjunction with the development of a policy of continuous improvement and building relationships with clients.

2) The human capital of an organization consists of the people who work in it and on whom the success of its affairs depends.

Human capital can be seen as the main asset of the organization; companies must invest in this asset to ensure their survival and growth.

3) HRM is designed to ensure that, when needed, an organization obtains and retains skilled, dedicated and motivated employees. This includes actions to assessment and satisfaction of the needs of future employees, as well as the expansion and development of people's abilities– their contribution, potential and applicability – through training and continuous empowerment.

This includes "implementing rigorous recruiting and selection procedures, performance-based incentives, and management of development and learning based on company needs" (1997).

4) It also implies ability management- what is the process acquiring and nurturing talents where they exist and are needed, through a variety of interrelationships between HRM policy and practice in the areas of resource selection, learning and development, quality management and successive planning.

The process of human capital management (HMC) is closely related to human resource management. However, the HCA puts a stronger emphasis on using metrics(HR measurements and employee performance) as a means of guiding HR strategy and practice.

5) Knowledge Management is “any process or practice of creating, acquiring, capturing, sharing and using knowledge from any source, aimed at improving learning and improving the quality of the organization” (Scarborough et al., 1999). HRM is designed to support the development of firm-specific knowledge and skills as a result of organizational learning processes.

6) HRM is focused on increased motivation and passion for work through the use of policies and processes that make people feel that they are valued and rewarded for the work they have done and the level of skills and competencies they have achieved.

7) In the field of labor relations, HRM sees its goal in creating climate conducive to maintaining productive and harmonious relationships through partnerships between managers, workers and trade unions.

8) HRM is focused on policy development and implementation designed to balance and adapt the needs of influence groups, provide managers with a diverse workforce that takes into account individual and group differences in employment levels, personal needs and expectations, and provide all workers with equal opportunities.

Research by Gratton et al. (1999) has shown that there is a kind of gulf between these rhetorical statements and life. Managers may go to work with the intention of doing some or all of these activities, but putting that intention into practice—"use theory"—is often difficult.

This is due to the peculiarities of the processes: different company priorities, tight deadlines, limited support from line managers, inadequate infrastructure of supporting processes, lack of resources, resistance to change and lack of trust.

common goal HRM is to bridge this gap by doing everything possible to confirm all expectations with effective actions. To do this, HR staff must remember that it is easy enough to come up with new and innovative practices and policies.

Much harder to get them to work. Therefore, employees need to understand that everything is decided by line managers of the lower level implementing the policy of the CR and act accordingly.

Based on HRM models, the previously listed HRM goals and definitions, Caldwell (2004) identified 12 political objectives:

1. Managing people as an asset that is fundamental to an organization's competitive advantage.

2. Aligning HRM policy with company policy and corporate strategy.

3. Develop close alignment between HR policies, procedures and systems.

4. Creation of a more flexible organization with fewer hierarchical levels, able to respond more quickly to changes.

5. Encourage teamwork and collaboration across internal organizational boundaries.

6. Development within the entire organization of the philosophy of a customer-oriented approach: "The customer comes first."

7. Giving workers the right to manage their own development and learning.

8. Development of reward strategies designed to reinforce a performance-oriented culture.

9. Strengthening the involvement of employees through improved internal communication.

10. Developing a greater commitment among employees to the organization.

11. Strengthening the responsibility of line managers for HR policy.

12. Development of the role of managers as assistants.

Diversity;

A strategy that emphasizes integration;

Orientation to the fulfillment of obligations;

Emphasis on the belief that people should be treated as a company asset (human capital);

Unitary rather than pluralistic, individualistic rather than collective approach to labor relations;

Implementation of HRM is the responsibility of line managers;

Emphasis on company values.

But these characteristics of HRM are by no means universal. There are many models; the practices of different organizations are very different from each other and often only in some aspects are comparable with the conceptual version of HRM.

D. Storey (1989) distinguished hard and soft HRM options.

Hard approach to HRM emphasizes that people are an important resource through which an organization achieves competitive advantage. Therefore, this resource should be acquired, developed and used in such a way that the organization can benefit. Emphasis on quantitative, calculable and business strategy related aspects of management labor resources just as rational as the methods applicable to other economic factors.

soft model HRM has its origins in the Human Relations School; it focuses on communication, motivation and leadership. As described in D. Story (1989), it includes “treating employees as a valuable asset, a source of competitive advantage if they are committed to the company, adaptive and have certain abilities (skills, etc.) or have achieved certain results (performance indicators, etc.).”

Therefore, this model sees workers as ends rather than means. The soft model of HRM emphasizes the need to earn commitment – ​​the “hearts and minds” of employees – by engaging them in activities or communication, and by developing a high level of commitment to the organization in other ways. In addition, organizational culture plays a key role.

In 1998, Karen Legge defined a rigid HRM model as a process emphasizing “the close integration of human resource policy with business strategy, which regards employees as a resource to be managed as rationally as any other resource used to maximize productivity. income."

In contrast to this view, soft HRM sees employees as “a valuable asset and a source of competitive advantage through their commitment, adaptability, and high levels of skill and performance.”

Perhaps the most outstanding feature of HRM is the importance of linking to strategic integration which stems from the vision and leadership of top managers and requires the full commitment of employees. D. Guest (1987, 1989, 1989, 1991) considers this to be a key policy objective of HRM, having to do with an organization's ability to integrate HRM issues into its strategic plans to link all aspects of HRM and encourage line managers to take these methods into account when making decisions.

Karen Legge (1989) argues that a common feature of typical HRM definitions is the need to integrate human resource strategy into strategic business planning.

The new model of HRM consists of strategies that encourage reciprocity - mutual goals, influence, respect, reward and responsibility. The theory states that a policy of reciprocity will generate commitment, which in turn will lead to increased economic efficiency and higher levels of human development.

The central idea of ​​HRM – full identification of employees with the goals and values ​​of the company– participation of the employee, but on the terms of the company. Power in the HRM system remains in the hands of the employer. Is it possible to really talk about full agreement, when at the end of the day the employer can unilaterally decide to close the enterprise or sell it to someone?

HRM and personnel management

The debate over whether there is any difference between HRM and personnel management has been going on for quite some time. They have ceased only recently, as the terms HRM and HR are now widely used both on their own and as synonyms for personnel management. But understanding the concept of HRM is facilitated by an analysis of the differences that exist, as well as how traditional methods human resource management have become a modern HRM practice.

Some researchers (reviewed earlier) have insisted on the revolutionary nature of HRM. Others denied the existence of any differences between the concepts of personnel management and HRM. D. Torrington (1989) believes that "personnel management has developed, absorbing a number of additional ideas to give a richer combination of experience ... HRM is not a revolution, but another dimension of its multifaceted role."

Many HR managers think of HRM as just abbreviated initials or old wine poured into new bottles. Indeed, it may be just another name for personnel management. But, as a rule, it is usually felt that HRM has at least one virtue - it emphasizes the attitude towards people as the main resource, the management of which is the concern of senior managers and part of the process. strategic planning enterprises. While this idea is nothing new, it has received little attention in many organizations.

Similarities and differences between HRM and personnel management are summarized in Table. 1.4. The differences between personnel management and human resource management can be seen more as a matter of emphasis and difference of approach than a difference in substance.

Table 1.4. Similarities and differences between HRM and personnel management

According to H.T. Graham and R. Bennett personnel Management is an important element broader concept - human resource management, although in practice both terms are often used interchangeably as synonyms. This emphasizes the fact that people used as workers are resources that are no less important than financial or material resources, and which should also be given attention and care.

Employees will not passively submit to and tolerate manipulation or dictatorship by management, they increasingly expect and demand a more skilled approach to hiring and managing them.

Behavioral research shows that a competent management response to this requirement will benefit the company. Technology of personnel management, for example, in the field of certification of an employee, his vocational training and assessing the complexity of its work, can only be successfully applied with the assistance and support of the staff themselves.

Graham and Bennett identify the following relationships and differences between personnel management and human resource management:

a) Personnel management (PM) is a practical, utilitarian and instrumental area, it focuses mainly on the administration and application of policy.

Human resource management (HRM), on the other hand, has a strategic dimension and considers the overall placement of human resources within a company. As such, HRM will address issues such as:

The aggregate size of the workforce of the organization in the context of the overall corporate plan (how many divisions and branches the company should have, the design of the organization, etc.);

The amount of funds that should be directed to the training of the workforce, taking into account strategic decisions by quality level, product price, production volume, etc.;

The essence of human resource management, p about the opinion of H.T. Graham and R. Bennett is :

Establishing relationships with trade unions for the purpose of effective management control over the organization as a whole;

Accounting for human capital, i.e. systematic evaluation and analysis of the costs and financial benefits of alternative HR policies (eg financial implications of staff development activities, implications of different pay structure options, etc.) and assessment of the human value of the company's employees.

Strategic Approach to HRM includes the integration of all areas of human resource management, including the company's personnel, into the overall corporate planning process and the company's strategy development procedures.

HRM is characterized by activity, a constant desire to open up new directions for a more productive use of the workforce, thereby ensuring the company's competitiveness.

In practice, declaring the adoption of a strategic approach to HRM could include the following steps:

A brief summary of the company's main HRM policies in a mission statement;

Presentation of considerations regarding the consequences for the employees of the company of each of the directions of its strategy and leading new projects;

Design development organizational structure in such a way that it satisfies the needs of workers, and does not force them to adapt to the existing unshakable form of organization;

Inclusion of the head of HRM in the board of directors of the company.

Now more than ever, HR managers are required to contribute to productivity and quality improvement, stimulating creative thinking, leadership, and developing corporate skills.

b) HRM is concerned with the broader aspects of change management, not just the impact of change on company practices. HRM is committed to actively encouraging agility and the adoption of new practices.

c) The HRM aspects provide the main source material for the organizational development exercises.

d) Personnel management (PM) is reactive and diagnostic character. It responds to changes in labor law, labor market conditions, trade union actions, government-recommended codes of practice, and other elements of the business environment.

HRM, for its part, wears prescriptive character and concerns strategies, initiation of new activities and development of fresh ideas.

e) HRM determines the general direction of the company's policy in the field of relationships in the field of wage labor within the enterprise (company). Thus, there is a need to create a special culture within the organization that would favor cooperation and relationships between employees. Human resource management, on the other hand, has been criticized for being more concerned with the observance of company rules and procedures by employees than with the desire to develop their loyalty and devotion to the company.

f) Human resources management (PM) is characterized by a short-term perspective, and HRM has a long-term perspective, strives to integrate all aspects of the organization's human resources into a single whole and set high goals for employees.

g) HRM specific approach , highlights the need:

Direct communications with employees, and not only with their collective representatives;

Development of an organizational culture that would be conducive to the introduction of flexible working methods;

Group work and participation of employees in the development of group decisions;

Improving the long-term capabilities of employees, and not just achieving a level of competitiveness in the performance of their current duties.

A controversial point in comparing HRM and personnel management is the assumption that if the latter is a pluralistic approach, then HRM is based rather on a unitary approach.

Makarova I.K. sees difference between PM and HRM as follows (Table 1.5).

Table 1.5. Differences between PM and HRM

Principles of the concept of HRM

people - a decisive factor in the efficiency and competitiveness of the organization, the main source of added value;

· focus on a strategic approach to human resource management;

· recognition of the economic feasibility of investing in the formation and development of human resources;

· social partnership and democratization of governance;

enrichment of labor and improvement of the quality of working life;

· continuous learning and development of human resources;

professionalization of human resource management.

Thus, in modern conditions economic management, the traditional concepts of management science and practice, revealing the role of a person in an organization, have become too narrow and limited.

Promotion of an employee to the center economic system requires a significant expansion of ideas about the aspects of human activity. Therefore, the introduction new category « human resources» allows you to reflect the real idea that professional knowledge, experience, creative, entrepreneurial abilities of employees provide economic efficiency and competitive advantages organizations in a market environment, in the process of their transformation, both general organizational goals (increase in profits) and personal goals (satisfaction of social needs of employees) are achieved.

So, the main components of the concept of human resource management are

-integration of personnel and organizational strategies,

-formation among employees of commitment to the mission and values ​​of the company,

-investment in the development of human resources.

To date, the West has essentially taken shape School of Human Resource Management. The construction of management models of this school is based on systems approach. Attempts are being made to synthesize new modern requirements for human resource management and highlight the key strategic guidelines for its further improvement.

The works of its representatives (J. Douglas, S. Klein, D. Hunt and others) recognized the changes taking place in human resources under the influence of the scientific and technological revolution and external to labor activity conditions. To achieve organizational efficiency, the requirement of complexity in management and focus on the maximum use of human resources and the smooth functioning of the management system for these resources should be put in the foreground. At the same time, attention should be paid to situational factors of management, external (pressure from the state and trade unions, market conditions) and internal (management philosophy, attitudes and expectations of employees, technology).

The concept of "human resources" was a theoretical reflection of the situation in which the decisive factor in competitiveness in many technologically saturated industries was the availability of qualified personnel, the level of motivation, organizational forms and other factors that determine the effectiveness of the use of personnel. In this regard, in many organizations, the approach to working with HR, based on "cost minimization", has proved untenable. One of the authoritative representatives of the School of Human Resource Management (E. Shane) pointed to the following functions of "systemic human resource management":

1. Analysis of labor problems, organization of labor and assessment of the potential of employees; implementation of selection, hiring of personnel and the creation of capable teams.

2. Direct management of labor processes: evaluation of assignments, financial incentives, promotion and relocation of personnel, career planning, providing opportunities for advanced training.

3. Improving the organization and management of labor processes, developing alternative options for performing work with appropriate rewards.

4. Forecasting changes in the field of labor, implementing programs for retraining personnel if necessary, implementing qualitative changes in the labor management system.

“In order for management to be effective, it is necessary to link these components into a single integrated system,” Shane noted. Thus, the complexity is considered as the most important condition for the effectiveness of the labor management system.

Other representatives of the School of Human Resource Management (J. Douglas, S. Klein, D. Hunt, etc.) later also pointed out the integrative nature of decisions on human resource management, the relationship both with the organization's strategy and with its various functional components.

The fundamental essence of the modern concept of human resources is the recognition of the economic feasibility of investing in attracting personnel, maintaining their ability to work, training and advanced training, creating conditions for a more complete identification of the capabilities and abilities inherent in the individual. Consideration of employees as a key resource of production and rejection of ideas about labor force, as about free wealth, the development of which does not require Money and organizational efforts on the part of the employer, is the main theoretical premise of the concept. Human resources are able to create income for the employer, the value of which depends on labor productivity, its duration and efficiency.

The “value” of an employee for the firm is determined by the income that his work brings to the firm. This approach to determining the "inventory" cost of personnel is more in line with the requirements of practice than the concept of "human capital" used by the theory. The characteristic of the latter is an excessive, to the detriment of real work, inclination towards accounting methodology.

Situational characteristics in which the theory of "human resources" proves its validity:

the use of economic criteria in determining the approach to each person in production and management;

empowering employees to influence outcomes economic activity through the growth of their individual powers;

increasing the level of responsibility;

awareness of the limited sources of certain categories of personnel (highly qualified specialists, managers, workers); competition for the possession of human resources, which moves them from the category of a “free” resource into an object of long-term investment;

the constant growth of requirements for HR, causing an increase in investment in training, vocational training, systematic professional development and timely retraining.

Until we understand the motivation, value orientations of adults, the features of their professional behavior, in other words, the state of human resources educational organization, any attempts to improve something significantly in the results of children's learning are unproductive. Our schools have changed, and teachers experience the greatest discomfort as a result. They are the least inclined to change their views (such a profession).

Generally speaking, we are accustomed to pointing at the economic situation as the source of all troubles. This is probably true to some extent, but I ask myself the question: if I, as the head of the department, were to double my salary, would I work twice as hard? Everyone will answer this question for himself, but I will answer for myself: "I doubt it!" At the same time, I perfectly understand that the current level of remuneration of our labor is unworthily low. But the meaning of the above thesis is that there is no direct connection between wages and the quality of work, at least in our sphere. This means that the quality of our work, the problem of increasing its efficiency will be mainly solved through the use of other, non-financial resources.

These non-financial resources include, first of all, the resources of the organization, and above all human resources, by the way, the only ones inalienable from the leader. The quality of the human resources of an organization, determined by the qualifications of teachers, the level of consistency of their professional values ​​and actions, their vision of the future of their organization and motivation, their attitude to emerging problems and ways to solve them, etc., largely determines the development potential of the organization. This key issue and dedicated book.

This book is based on several extremely important positions for understanding its content.

In today's circumstances, there is no recipe for unequivocally the best management actions, the conditions in which we operate have become too different.

The main problems of the school are the problems of adults. The main potential for improving school organizations lies in the development of human resources.

The development of an organization can be facilitated by the presence of several alternative points of view on the assessment of its state.

It is very important for the author to emphasize that these features, which determine, among other things, the actions of the leader, are neither good nor bad. This is some given, it is not criticized, if only because it cannot be significantly changed in a relatively short time. What's the point of criticizing something if it's impossible to change it.

You can consider these circumstances as temporary, and then the strategy of the school is to survive and wait for better times. We can assume that the current circumstances will not change much in the foreseeable future, and with this view of things, we have to look for new opportunities in what we have.

In this book, in addition to human resources, there are several more key concepts. The first is organizational culture. This concept seems to be relevant for describing the state of an organization in a certain period of time, since it is precisely this concept that makes it possible to assess the state of human resources to the maximum extent.

Secondly, relevance. In today's circumstances, there are no recipes for the unambiguously best managerial actions; the conditions in which we operate have become too different. Therefore, it seems to me that there are no good or bad management decisions and schemes, there are adequate to the state of your organization and inadequate.

In conclusion, I would like to note that, setting forth these views, I do not pretend to be their truth. This is a subjective idea of ​​what is currently the most relevant in management. It is possible that after reading it, you will separate it, and it will become objective.

Where are we?

When we talk about the need to move along the path of developing the education system, educational institution, then in order not to get into an awkward position, you need to answer two questions. Where we are and where we are going. As for the second, it is currently difficult to say anything definite. At present, we, I mean the citizens of our country, have not yet fully decided. In society, there are numerous and influential political groups whose orientations do not agree well with each other; in any case, the problem of finding a compromise has not been resolved. If it is not solved in society as a whole, then it cannot be solved in a single education system. Therefore, with the answer to the second question, we will wait a bit. There is something still unclear here. The future is very uncertain, and its vision is now being built at the level of individuals, relatively small groups and organizations.

Let's try to figure out the first question first.

Before offering something to dear readers, I would like to clarify the foundations on which further reasoning and conclusions are based. I would like to warn that this is the personal point of view of the author, and the reader has the right to agree with it or not. It is quite obvious that over the past 10-12 years we have found ourselves in new conditions of existence. How are they, in fact, new from the point of view of the author? Among the many new circumstances, several of the most important are clearly visible, let's call them strategic.

New strategic factors in education

instability

This is a fairly new factor. Its influence is felt everywhere: in politics, and in the economy, and in ideology. Instability is a new factor for most of us, it is extremely difficult to get used to it, considering it the norm. Instability is a consequence of the fact that in society today there are several powerful different orientations at the same time, which do not agree well with each other, and besides, there is no experience and ability to coordinate anything.

However, to be a realist, it becomes clear (albeit unpleasant) the fact that instability is for a long time. It is clearly enough not only for our children, but also, it seems, for grandchildren. The only thing that can inspire optimism in those who feel uncomfortable in conditions of instability and uncertainty is the hope that the amplitude of the instability pendulum will gradually decrease.

What is the effect of this factor? First, to fatigue. We cease to react to new conditions, to notice them. And we begin to act on the principle "the more everything changes, the more it remains the same." It’s not only you, the leaders, who get tired (from irregular funding, weak legislative framework, continuous changes in the rules of the game), teachers, your subordinates get tired. Because with all your desire, you cannot protect them from this. This instability reaches them at home as well. Many of us have exhausted the resources to adapt to the new.

The conditions of instability change the managerial and organizational behavior, the planning techniques used, make it necessary to change the management structures, which under these conditions, as world experience shows, become more complicated.

For those who are younger, who do not experience very serious problems associated with this factor, who take the current instability for granted, the situation is more favorable. But both need new guidelines and new views on managerial activity.

Here I would note that we (I mean Russia) are not the first to find themselves in such conditions, and these conditions are not the worst yet (I understand the blasphemy of this phrase). All the developed countries of the world at one time or another fell into such conditions and somehow got out of them.

These general comments apply not only to the state as a whole, but also to each educational organization separately. Almost every school has groups of teachers with different orientations. One group, for example, believes, and not without reason, that the success of the education system lies in a return to the past organization, when there were universal programs, everyone had to master the natural sciences, humanitarian cycles, etc. The other group believes that the actual volume of subject information does not represent significant value in terms of future success in life. Simply put, we all imagine differently where we are going, how we will live in 10-15 years, and in what life situation will be our graduates.

How to manage in such a situation and what is a priority?

Here I would like to note that world experience unequivocally shows that the more complex and unexpected the future appears (and it will be unexpected for many of us), the more complex management systems become, and each next stage of its development complements the previous one.

Note to the revolutionaries. If the previous system is completely destroyed when a new one is created, this gives grounds for suspicion that the new system is not so unambiguously good.

By destruction we do not mean the replacement of individuals (this does not change the system), but a change in the nature of powers, goals and relationships between elements of the structure of the organization. Successive control systems should become more complex and be designed for the ever greater unfamiliarity of events and the ever less predictability of the future. This remark contradicts the traditionally existing myth that the simpler the control system, the better and more efficient it is.

However, complexity is not an end in itself. It must be appropriate. How to complicate the system, increasing its efficiency? For what? What resources are there for this, if we proceed from the assumption that there are no new financial ones? Here, perhaps, one move is decentralization (not always and everywhere is possible). The complication of the management system does not at all mean, in most cases, an increase in the number of rates and deputies. Here you can rely on such a factor as the desire (striving) for power (McCleland). Additional powers are payment for the additional work performed (we will try to prove this point in the future).

Two scientists, Mary Parker Follett and Elton Mayo, can be called the greatest authorities in the development of the school of human relations in management. It was Mary Parker Follett who first defined management as "getting work done with the help of others".

The leader of the movement for the introduction of new forms and methods of management in industry, later called the "school of human relations", was the American sociologist and psychologist Elton Mayo (1880 - 1949). He believed that the former managerial methods aimed at achieving material efficiency, and not at the approval of cooperation. The school of "human relations" was the realization of a new desire of management to consider each industrial organization as a certain "social system", which was an undoubted achievement of managerial thought. It was about the fact that the purely technological aspect of production efficiency, as well as issues economic income, must be viewed through the prism of the relationship of these aspects of the industrial organization with the proper human, social factor industry. Naturally, each worker has certain physiological and material needs, which are relatively easy to satisfy in a reasonable measure in a developed economy. Here it is more important to take into account the fact that a person also has social needs - communication, self-actualization, recognition - and it is much more difficult to satisfy them.

The famous experiments of Elton Mayo, especially those carried out at the Western Electric plant at Hawthorne, opened up a new direction in control theory. E. Mayo found that well-designed work operations and good wages did not always lead to labor productivity. The forces that arose in the course of interaction between people could and often exceeded the efforts of the leader. Sometimes employees reacted much more strongly to peer pressure than to management desires and material incentives. More recent research by Abraham Maslow and other psychologists has helped to understand the causes of this phenomenon. The motives of people's actions, A. Maslow suggests, are mainly non-economic forces, as the supporters and followers of the school of scientific management believed, and various needs that can only be partially and indirectly satisfied with the help of money.

Based on these findings, researchers psychological school It was believed that if management takes more care of their employees, then the level of employee satisfaction should increase, which will lead to increased productivity. They recommended the use of human relations management techniques, including more effective action by direct superiors, consultation with workers, and giving them more opportunities to communicate at work.