<...>The opinion that power and leadership positions are the most effective tools for effective management has become stronger and has become very widespread. However, if anyone thinks that this alone is enough, he is at least near-hands. In order for a complex organization to effectively fulfill its tasks, it is necessary to ensure the implementation of all management functions. However, by analogy with the processes of communication and decision-making, management, leadership is the kind of activity that permeates the entire management system. It is impossible to effectively perform the functions of planning, organizing, motivating and controlling if there is no effective leadership.
Leadership in the organization
Although leadership is an essential component of effective management, effective leaders are not always effective managers at the same time. The effectiveness of a leader can be judged by the extent to which he or she influences others. Sometimes effective leadership can interfere with formal organization. For example, an influential opinion leader can cause the workforce to limit output or produce low quality goods or services. Filey, House and Kerr distinguish between management and leadership:“Management can be defined as the mental and physical
* Meskon M.H., Albert M., Hedouri F. Fundamentals of Management / Per, from English. M.: Delo, 1992. S. 463-484.
294

a process that leads to the fact that subordinates carry out official assignments assigned to them and solve certain tasks. Leadership, on the other hand, is the process by which one person influences the members of a group.
The manager becomes the head of the organization as a result of the intentional action of the formal organization - the delegation of powers. Leaders, on the other hand, are not made by the will of the organization, although the ability to lead people can also be increased by delegating authority. The members of the organization know who their leader is, but the followers do not always know that they are being led. Finally, the actions of leaders are not limited to the framework of any powers and structures. Very often, the manager is a leader without any reference to his or her formal position in the hierarchy. As we will soon learn, in some situations, subordinates may even lead their superiors.
In this book, the main interest for us is the leader organizations(organizational leader) - a person who is both a leader and effectively manages his subordinates. Its purpose is to influence others in such a way that they do the work assigned to the organization. In their definitions of leadership in an organization, many authors have tried to clearly formulate the special component that the leader himself brings. For example, Katz and Kahn see leadership as "an influencing element that emerges beyond the mechanical execution of the organization's routine tasks." In his definition of leadership, Peter Drucker takes this idea further: “Leadership is the ability to raise the human vision to a broader horizon, to bring human performance to a higher standard, and the ability to shape a person beyond the ordinary. limiting its scope.
Below we give our definition of leadership in relation to management: "Leadership is the ability to influence individuals and groups, directing their efforts to achieve the goals of the organization."<...>
It is necessary to get an idea of ​​​​how the process of leadership takes place and what exactly gives a person the impulse to encourage other people to work. Thus, in this chapter, our attention will be focused on the elements that underlie leadership and leadership, influence and power.
Influence and power
Influence - it is “any behavior of one individual that introduces changes in behavior, attitudes, sensations, etc. another individual." The specific means by which one person can
295

can influence something else, they can be very diverse: from a request made in a whisper in your ear to a knife put to your throat. In the conditions of the organization, such a “knife” could be the threat of dismissal.
One person can also influence another with the help of ideas alone. Karl Marx, who never had any official authority in any political organization and never personally used the means of violence, had an unintended influence on the course of events in the twentieth century. Leaders must influence in a way that is easy to predict and that leads not just to the acceptance of a given idea, but to action - the actual work required to achieve the goals of the organization. In order to make his leadership and influence effective, the manager must develop and apply power.
In the general public, the concept of power has evoked negative emotions from the very moment Lord Acton said: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Most people associate power with violence, power, and aggression. This view of power is understandable. Indeed, power is based on brute force, even in highly developed societies that believe that violence has a place only in sports or on television. But power is by no means an obligatory component of power. In fact, we will soon learn that the fist, even with a velvet glove, can in some circumstances reduce rather than increase power. By our definition:
Power - it is an opportunity to influence the behavior of others.
The need for power in governance. In addition to formal authority, the manager needs power, as he depends on people both within his chain of command and outside it. John P. Kotter emphasizes this when he argues that a leader needs to develop power because leaders are always dependent on some people who are not subordinate to them, and secondly, because practically no one in modern organizations will accept and will not obey the continuous flow of his or her orders just because he or she is the boss. In all organizations, the proper use of power is necessary to achieve effective functioning.
In various divisions of the organization, the leader depends on his immediate superiors, subordinates and colleagues. In fact, these groups are part of the leader's environment. Without the assistance of these people, the manager cannot effectively carry out his functions. Many leaders are also directly dependent on people and organizations outside of them. own organization- suppliers, customers, competitors, regulatory agencies and trade unions. Ideally, all these people and forces will willingly cooperate with the leadership.
296

telecom and provide everything necessary to perform the work and achieve the goals of the organization. Unfortunately, the real world makes this job somewhat more difficult.
Even when a leader has clearly defined authority to direct the efforts of subordinates, this is not always possible. As Chester Barnard noted and as we noted when analyzing the concept of authority, subordinates may refuse to comply with the request of the leader, thereby nullifying it. authority.Modern workers are usually much more educated and less willing to put up with traditional authority than their predecessors.Even if this problem does not arise, the leader often depends on people who are not formally subordinate to him.For example, in terms of information and services, the line manager is now increasingly dependent on the staff management staff, over whom he has no control.In some situations, the staff staff has only deliberative powers, and the apparatchiks depend on the line managers to implement their recommendations.
This dependence on factors and people that cannot be directly controlled is the main reason for the difficulties experienced by management personnel. However, not only feelings suffer. If the manager is unable to effectively deal with these many "unmanaged" forces, he or she cannot fulfill his or her own work, and this will necessarily reduce the effectiveness of both the individual labor contribution and the activities of the entire organization. Power and influence, the tools of leadership, are in fact the only means a leader has to deal with such situations. If a leader does not have sufficient power to influence those on whom his performance depends, he or she will not be able to obtain the resources necessary to set and achieve goals through other people. Thus, power, although often misused, is a necessary condition for the success of an organization. As sociologist Robert Biersted argues, “Power stands behind every organization and underpins its structure. Without power, there is no organization and no order.”
balance of power
The concept of dependency also undermines another popular notion of power. Many people think that the possession of power implies the ability to impose one's will, regardless of the feelings, desires and abilities of another person. If this were the case, then the appointed heads of organizations would always have the power to influence at least
297

their own subordinates. However, it is now widely recognized that influence and power depend as much on the person being influenced as on the situation and the ability of the leader. There is no real absolute power, since no one can influence all people in all situations.
In terms of organization, for example, power is only partly determined by hierarchy. How much power a particular person has in a given situation is determined not by the level of his formal powers, but by the degree of dependence on another person. The more dependent on another person, the more power this person. This can be expressed by the following formula: the level of influence of person A in power on person B \u003d the degree of dependence of person B on person A.
The power of subordinates. Typically, a manager has power over subordinates because the latter depend on him for such matters as salary increases, job assignments, promotions, empowerment, satisfaction of social needs, and so on. However, in some situations, subordinates have power over the leader, since the latter depends on them in such matters as the information necessary for decision-making, informal contacts with people in other units whose assistance is necessary for the leader, the influence that subordinates can exert on their colleagues, and the ability of subordinates to perform tasks. A striking example of the power of subordinates over the leader are the exceptionally favorable contracts that famous artists and athletes can receive.
Their superiors, of course, would prefer not to pay anyone more than a million dollars, i.e. an amount far exceeding their own earnings. However, they have little choice, since their organization, and therefore they themselves, are to a large extent dependent on these individuals to achieve their goals, and competition in popular sports is very high.
Summing up the factors that contribute to the emergence of power in subordinates, David Mekanik concludes:
“To the extent that one person is dependent on another, he or she is potentially subject to the power of that other person. Within organizations, one individual makes others dependent on him by controlling access to information, people, and tools, which we define as follows:
Information includes knowledge about the organization, people, norms, procedures, methods, etc.
People are all those who are in the organization, on whom the organization depends.
A toolkit is any aspect of an organization's physical means or resources (equipment, machinery, money, etc.).”
Scientific studies have confirmed that subordinates have
298

power. One study showed that even hospital support staff have power, as attending physicians depend on them. This dependence was created due to the shortened working hours of doctors, the huge amount of necessary administrative work and the little interest in it on the part of doctors. As a result, a tacit collusion arose, in which support staff received more decision-making power regarding patients in exchange for performing some administrative functions for doctors. If the doctor violated this agreement, the staff did not give him information, did not obey orders, and did not cooperate at all. This created difficulties in processing the necessary documentation and obtaining updated medical information necessary for the doctor for everyday medical work.
Another study found that prison guards are also dependent on prisoners to some extent. Although guards have the right to file a report against prisoners for disobedience, frequent reports would give the prison authorities the impression that the guards are incapable of obtaining obedience and maintaining order. Therefore, the guards allow some violations of the prison rules by the prisoners in exchange for more submissive behavior.
The leader must be aware that since subordinates often also have power, his or her unilateral use of their full power may cause subordinates to react in such a way that they want to demonstrate their own power. And this, in turn, can lead to a waste of effort and reduce the level of achievement of goals. Therefore, an effective leader tries to maintain a reasonable balance of power: sufficient to ensure the achievement of goals, but not causing subordinates to feel deprived and, hence, disobedient.<...>In addition to subordinates, his colleagues can have power over the leader. For example, if the head of finance or operations is dependent on the services of the data processing department, the head of this department will have some authority over him. The increased importance of computers in organizations has meant that the power of data processing personnel has increased. The more necessary information, resources, or services one leader gives to another, the greater his or her power over that other leader. Because secretaries to superiors usually know who to contact for specific information, they also often hold a significant amount of power in their hands. John P. Kotter notes that a leader can increase his power by making it possible for others to see that they are dependent on him for the resources they need to do their job. These resources can mean access to important people, information, services, money, necessary meetings, and so on.
299

David McClelland, whose research shows that an effective leader has a greater need for power, also notes that an effective leader will never exercise his power in a commanding, expectant manner. On the contrary, a positive or socialized person exercising power rather cares about the implementation of group goals, helping the group in their definition, providing the group with the means to achieve them, providing support to the members of the group, asserting for each the scope of his competence.
Forms of power and influence
We have already noted that in order to lead, it is necessary to influence, and in order to influence, it is necessary to have a basis of power. Common sense tells us that in order to have power, you must be able to control anything that matters to the performer, something that will create his dependence on you and make him or her act as you wish. We all have this “something”. According to Maslow's definition, the basic needs are as follows: physiological needs, the need for security, social needs, the need for respect and self-expression. Power is based on addressing the active needs of the performer.
All forms of influence induce people to fulfill the desires of another person by satisfying unmet needs or preventing their satisfaction, or they induce the performer expect, that the need will or will not be satisfied depending on the behavior of the performer. As we have said, people make assumptions about what might happen if they behave in a certain way. Seeing just such behavior, a person begins to imagine in his mind the impact of his or her behavior on the state of his or her needs. And the leader also represents the effect of his influence on the behavior of the future performer. As a result, the manager and the performer learn similar or dissimilar behavior for the future. This process of influence of the leader on the subordinate is shown in fig. one.
Power can take many forms. French and Raven, researchers in the field of power and leadership (leadership), have developed a convenient classification of the foundations of power. According to their classification, there are five main forms of power:
1. Power based on coercion. The performer believes that the influencer has the ability to punish in a way that will interfere with the satisfaction of some urgent need, or in general can cause some other trouble.
2. Power based on reward. The performer believes that the influencer has the ability to satisfy a pressing need or give pleasure.
300

Rice. 1. Model of the leader's influence on the subordinate.
3. Expert power. The performer believes that the influencer has special knowledge that will satisfy the need.
4. Reference power(power of example). The characteristics or properties of the influencer are so attractive to the performer that he wants to be the same as the influencer.
5. Legitimate authority. The doer believes that the influencer has the right to give orders and that it is his or her duty to obey them. He or she carries out the orders of the influencer, as tradition teaches that obedience will lead to the satisfaction of the needs of the doer. Therefore, legitimate authority is often called traditional authority. Legitimate authority is effective when a subordinate obeys the instructions of the leader only because he or she is on a higher rung of the organizational hierarchy. All leaders enjoy legitimate authority because they have been delegated authority to manage other people.
These bases of power are the tool by which the manager can force subordinates to perform work aimed at achieving the goals of the organization. They are also means that can be used by the opinion leader to interfere with the achievement of the goals of the organization.
Power based on coercion. Influence through fear
The technique of coercion, as a rule, accompanies power in all cases when a person really needs something and he is sure that the other is able to take it away from him. A prime example of this "something" is
301

your own life or the life of a loved one. But there are many examples that have less extreme properties. Many people are extremely anxious that they may lose security, love or respect. Therefore, even in situations where violence is not present, fear is a common reason why people - consciously or unconsciously - allow themselves to be influenced. In The Brokers of Power, David Kipnis says, “Individuals exercise power through coercion, force, rhetoric, and the ability to give or not give emotional support to others. This gives such individuals the means to physically harm, intimidate, humiliate or withhold love from others.”
Fear in the workplace. The workplace offers a wealth of opportunities to develop power through fear and coercion because so many of our needs are met there. For example, the fear of losing a job seems to be common to everyone. In certain circumstances, fear can be used so easily and effectively that some leaders often resort to it: even the hint of being fired, deprived of any authority, or demotion usually produces immediate results. When subordinates are securely protected from such threats, gross and direct, the leader can use more subtle ways of instilling fear.
Ohio Bell, for example, came up with an ingenious method that demonstrates how far you can go from violence and still effectively instill fear in your subordinates. All Ohio Bell did was show the film to its employees. This film, as it were, simulated a forecast of the future - when Congress was going to nationalize the telephone system, as it gradually went bankrupt and lost its ability to provide the corresponding services. As a result, a huge number of employees would lose their jobs. The announcer ended his text with the call: "A full day's work for a full day's pay!" This call would have helped to save the company, if many years ago (ie at the present moment) the workers had followed it. The company calculated that the increase in productivity after watching this film allowed it to increase its revenue by $29 million over three years.
Weaknesses of the influence of the method through fear. Fear can be and is actually used in today's organizations, but not often, as it can become a very costly means of influence over time. Bankruptcy of W.T. Grant, one of the largest in the history of business, shows that in the end, fear can also work in the opposite direction. Therefore, it should not be resorted to.
U.T. Grant, who until 1975 was one of the world's largest retail chain owners, knew that his company was testing
302

there are difficulties with credit coming from consumers. This problem was solved at the level of store directors. Grant proposed his own solution to the problem: to create a negative incentive program for directors called "Beefsteak and Beans". Directors who could not complete the tasks assigned to them were subjected to humiliating procedures: they threw a pie in their face, forced to chase a peanut with their nose and run backwards throughout the store, cut their neck tie in half, etc. . And all this, of course, in public. Most of the directors responded almost immediately: sales efficiency increased. And yet, despite these visible improvements, Grant's liabilities continued to grow. The new management, which was supplied by the company's creditors, managed to discover the cause of what was happening. Store managers knowing inefficiencies financial planning and control in Grant's company and trying to avoid humiliation, forged their reporting documents.
In the company of U.T. Grant's fear did not achieve its goals for the same reason that coercive power does not work on most leaders - because of the lack of trust and the too high costs associated with its application. Indeed, fear can only prevail when there is a fairly high probability that a person will be caught at the moment of hazing. In order to use such a tool as fear, you must have effective system control. But an effective control system is not easy to create, and the pleasure is expensive, even under the most favorable set of circumstances. When the basis of power is mainly coercion, it is almost impossible to maintain effective control at moderate cost, as the desire of people to deliberately deceive the organization increases.
Even if it is possible to create an effective control system at moderate cost, the best that can be achieved through fear is minimally adequate labor productivity. Since a person is not given the opportunity to satisfy his higher needs at work, he or she may look elsewhere for their satisfaction. Research shows that organizations that exercise power based on coercion are likely to be characterized by lower labor productivity and lower product quality. One study of a manager who exercised coercive power found that sales employees were dissatisfied with their jobs.
Another study, based on a survey of more than 100 heads of economic and state organizations, revealed that this kind of power was rarely exercised. They ran to her
303

only when a few executives came to the conclusion that poor performance was due to a lack of discipline, not a lack of ability.
Organizations where fear is used very often may not be able to survive. long life in conditions of private entrepreneurship and open society. In the words of Fred Lugans, “While coercion may lead to a temporary obedience of a subordinate, it produces undesirable side effects - stiffness, fear, revenge and alienation. This, in turn, can lead to lower productivity, job dissatisfaction and high employee turnover.” Our introduction to readers of fear-inducing techniques does not mean that we endorse them, we simply state the realities that exist in many organizations. Notice that even in the academic world, where power based on coercion is so frowned upon, they periodically sin by using fear as a means of influence. “If you don't get published, you won't survive,” is a threat that many professors take quite seriously.
Power based on reward.Influence Through Positive Reinforcement
The promise of reward is one of the oldest and often the most effective ways to influence other people. power basedon the reward exerts influence through positive reinforcement of the subordinate in order to achieve the desired behavior from him. The performer does not resist this influence, because he or she, in exchange for doing what the leader wants, expects some form of reward. In the context of motivational expectation theory, the performer imagines that there is a high probability of receiving direct or indirect rewards that will satisfy an active need, and that he or she is able to do what the leader desires.
Since everyone is a person and their needs are unique, what seems to be a valuable reward to one may not seem so to another or to the same first, but in a different situation. In order to influence behavior, the reward must be perceived as sufficiently valuable. In other words, the performer should be given such remuneration that it is adequate to the consent to influence. This perceived adequacy is the main advantage of reward based power over the weaknesses of coercive power. John P. Kotter points out that one can also increase power by creating a sense of responsibility in others by periodically giving them personal favors. Kotter argues that "some
304

people have a great ability to do personal favors that take little time or effort from them, but which others value very highly.
Disadvantages of positive reinforcement. In a sense, reward-based power will always work, provided that the manager can correctly define what the performer sees as a reward and actually offer that reward to him. However, in practice, the manager has a lot of restrictions on the ability to issue rewards. Each organization has limited resources, and it can allocate a strictly defined amount of resources to encourage staff. The authority of the manager to offer material incentives is also regulated by the policy of the firm and all sorts of techniques. In some cases, restrictions may be imposed from outside, such as in an employment contract with a trade union, which stipulates what remuneration can be offered for certain types of work. The difficulty of exercising power based on reward is further increased by the fact that it is often not easy to determine what will be considered a reward. Money and a more prestigious position are not always able to impress a person and influence his behavior. Therefore, a good leader must learn to use other ways of influence.
Legal authority. Influence through tradition
If you look back at the historian!, tradition will be the most common instrument of influence. The leader uses tradition to satisfy the performer's need for security and belonging. However, this method will become effective only if the performer has already learned the values ​​that will enable him to believe that the leader is able to meet these needs. Therefore, influence through tradition is possible only when the norms of the culture, external to the organization, support the view that obedience to superiors is a desirable behavior. Hampton, Summer, and Weber believe that "a system based on tradition will collapse unless it also gives its loyal, submissive supporters warmth and security."
During millennia the cultural tradition of the West strengthened the power of the authorities. Almost all of us were forced to obey people in certain positions. For example, few people had the courage to argue with a police officer who gave an order. Although many young workers today seem less inclined to accept authority, others still do what - right or wrong - their superiors tell them just because "he's the boss, isn't he?" Perhaps you had to do something

not very pleasant for you just because your parents ordered it, whose traditional authority you absorbed with mother's milk.
Tradition is especially important for formal organizations. The ability to encourage and punish strengthens the leader's authority to give orders. But it would be extremely inconvenient and time-consuming, not to mention costly, if management had to offer rewards whenever it needed to get workers to comply with an order. Thus, the uninterrupted functioning of organizations directly depends on the willingness of subordinates to traditionally recognize authority - the legitimate authority of the leadership. Tradition also continues to be a common and official form of leadership influence because, in contrast to fear, it offers a positive reward - the satisfaction of a need. When a person recognizes influence based on tradition, he or she gets in return a sense of belonging to a social group. This sense of belonging and awareness of oneself as a person can satisfy a social need and create an actual security that also satisfies the corresponding need.
An interesting, subtle effect of tradition on some people is that it can eliminate or greatly simplify decision making. In a system where traditions are very strong, the questions "what is good and what is bad" are defined with extreme precision.<...>
Tradition is an attractive tool for both the organization and the leader. She has a huge advantage - impersonality. The performer reacts not to the person, but to the position. This circumstance increases stability, since the organization does not depend on the life or abilities of any one person. Giving the highest rewards first to those who obey the system best, rather than to the truly competent members, reinforces the organization's ability to use tradition to win the obedience of its members. Another property is the speed and predictability of influence through tradition.
Disadvantages of the method based on tradition. It is interesting to note that tradition often explains in one word why some of the tried and tested concepts of management theory described in this book are not always widely used in practice. Merit-based rewards are a good example. Although almost everyone shares the opinion that merit to the firm is the best criterion for awarding a higher salary or promotion, it is much more common to use seniority as a criterion. And you can understand why. The length of service is easily calculated, it is an objective category and is calculated equally for everyone. Since seniority as a criterion has been used for a long time, many people are interested in it. It took these people many years to complete
306

demotion of their current position, therefore, they consider the transition to another system for calculating remuneration - on merit - not only unfair, but also posing a serious threat. Because of this, they use the acquired power to maintain the status quo, even if it is not in the interests of the organization or society.
Tradition can act to the detriment of the organization. Imagine that a young manager who proposes to improve some operation is told: “We have always done this, and so far everything has been fine.” This attitude can be a much bigger problem than it usually seems. To match the environment, the organization must make changes in its policy, strategy, organization methodology, etc. Those organizations that insist on tradition as an argument for why they resist change may end up facing extinction.<...>
Speaking about the power of the leader and the effectiveness of the organization, I.K. Shetty notes that if you rely on traditional authority, this will certainly give rise to problems, as it may come into conflict with the values ​​of a modern working person related to his work: involvement in an organization, participation in some of its events. In addition, it can lead to underutilization of the potential of human resources, because people who have information about a problem or a way to improve a case are not necessarily part of the formal authority system in the structure. As a result, this can lead to a decrease in labor productivity and growing dissatisfaction among workers.
In his famous book "In search of effective management" Thomas Peters and Robert Waterman talk about America's most efficient corporations, where influence comes not from tradition, but from those individuals and groups who have information about solving problems or improving the production process. Organizations with organic structures operating in a dynamic environment< ... >, have little connection with tradition. Because they have to operate in a rapidly changing environment - market and technology, they rely less and less on the system of relations within the formal organizational structure and traditional authority.
The power of example. Influence through charisma
Charisma- this is power built not on logic, not on a long tradition, but on the strength of the personal qualities or abilities of a leader. The power of example, or charismatic influence, is determined by the performer's identification with or attraction to the leader, and also depends on the performer's need for belonging and respect. In contrast
307

In this way, the line manager wants to meet his or her own needs. By taking on faith (reasonable) the opinion of specialists, the line manager thus frees up time that would otherwise be required for him to carefully check each recommendation of specialists. The line manager can use this time for other activities and perhaps also get higher needs met by being rewarded for completing more difficult tasks. A complete refusal to take expert advice for granted may mean that the line manager cares more about security than about satisfying higher needs.<...>
The limitation of the reasonable faith method. Reasonable faith is much less stable than blind faith, through which charismatic individuals influence others. She also acts more slowly. If the specialist turns out to be wrong, then the manager will no longer reasonably follow his advice - hence, his or her influence will decrease. In addition, if charismatic leader can plant faith in a single speech, then the formation of reasonable faith will take a long time. Specialists, for example, sometimes try for years to gain authority from line managers so that their opinion is accepted by them unconditionally. However, this does not mean that reasonable faith is weaker than other forms of influence. Since the leader needs the information and recommendations of the subordinate, the latter's power grows. At least temporarily, the subordinate may have more power than the manager in a similar situation.
Summary
1. Leadership, the ability to influence others so that they work towards the achievement of goals, is necessary for effective management. Leadership requires power.
2. Power, the ability to influence people's behavior is necessary for the effectiveness of the organization, because leaders depend on people over whom they do not have direct power or have, but very weak.
3. The main types of power are coercion, reward, competence, example and tradition. The leader can also influence through reasonable faith, involvement in decision-making and persuasion.
4. The effectiveness of some type of power depends on whether the performer believes that the leader can satisfy or not satisfy his active need, and on the situation.
Therefore, each method has pros and cons, and no one is able to lead people in all situations.
5. Power based on coercion, influence through fear are effective only if they are backed up by an excellent system of control, which, as a rule, is costly.
310

6. Power based on reward, influence through actions of a positive nature are more preferable than fear, because they provide positive incentives for better performance. Sometimes it is difficult to determine which reward will have an effect.
7. Traditional, or legitimate power, influence through cultural values ​​is the most common type of power. The effectiveness of tradition seems to be fading away due to changing values.
8. Charisma, influence by example - that's what people associate with dynamic leaders. The performer identifies himself with the leader or feels strong sympathy for him and blindly believes in his abilities.
9. Expert power, influence through intelligent faith, is becoming more and more effective due to the increasing complexity of technology and the size of organizations.
10. Due to changing social values, leaders of organizations consider persuasion and participation to be the most effective means of influencing non-managerials, colleagues, and non-members of the organization. Although these methods are slower and less defined than others, they seem to increase the efficiency of the organization when the performer is motivated by higher level needs, especially if the task is unstructured and requires creativity.

11. In general, the influence will be the strongest when the performer highly appreciates the need to which the leader appeals, considers the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the need as a certain result of submission or non-subordination, and thinks that there is a high probability that his effort will justify expectations. leader.

Book "Fundamentals of Management" Michael Mescon, Michael Albert and Franklin Hedouri is one of the most popular management textbooks in the world. It sets out in detail and in the most accessible language the basics of management as a science and tells about the basic principles and concepts of management. The book describes both theoretical and practical aspects of managerial activity, taking into account the realities of our time. Particular attention is paid to the situational nature of management, which is becoming increasingly important given the constant changes in the modern business environment.

Due to its carefully thought-out structure and simplicity of presentation, the book "Fundamentals of Management" can be useful to a wide range of readers: students studying management, teachers, practicing managers and just people who are interested in theoretical and practical issues of management.
to full content >>>>>

PART THREE: CONTROL FUNCTIONS

Glossary

Lessons from American Management (introductory article)

Americans, accustomed to sharp turns of fate, to competition, define a similar situation with the word "challenge" (challeng). According to them, each challenge is fraught with both opportunities and threats for an individual, organization, country. To cope with this unprecedented challenge in the life of current generations, we, among other things, need to master new knowledge, learn how to use it in practice. An important part of this knowledge, as world experience shows, is the comprehension of the science and art of management.

With the light hand of the Americans, this English word has become known today to almost every educated person. In a simplified sense, management - this is the ability to achieve goals, using labor, intelligence, motives for the behavior of other people. Management - in Russian "management" - a function, a type of activity for managing people in a wide variety of organizations. Management is also an area of ​​human knowledge that helps to carry out this function. Finally, management as a collective of managers is a certain category of people, a social stratum of those who carry out management work. The importance of management was especially clearly realized in the 1930s. Even then it became obvious that this activity had turned into a profession, the field of knowledge - into an independent discipline, and the social stratum - into a very influential social force. The growing role of this social force forced people to talk about the “revolution of managers”, when it turned out that there were giant corporations with huge economic, industrial, scientific and technical potential, comparable in power to entire states. General Motors, for example, is invariably present in the top dozen largest economic entities in the world (including both states - the USA, Japan, the USSR, etc., and corporations). Major corporations banks are the backbone of the economic and political power of great nations. Governments depend on them, many of them are transnational in nature, extending their production, distribution, service, information networks around the world. This means that the decisions of managers, like the decisions of statesmen, can determine the fate of millions of people, states and entire regions. However, the role of managers is not limited to their presence only in huge multi-level and branched corporate structures management. In mature market economy Small business is no less important. In terms of quantity, this is more than 95% of all firms; in terms of value, this is the closest approximation to the daily needs of consumers and, at the same time, a testing ground for technical progress and other innovations. For the majority of the population, it is also a job. To manage skillfully in a small business means to survive, to resist, to grow. How to do this is also a question of effective management.

A little more and concepts. The question arises - is it possible to consider that the English concept of "management" and the Russian "management" and, accordingly, "manager" and "leader" are one and the same. Yes and no. In a general sense, or, so to speak, from a bird's eye view, perhaps - yes. At the same time, there are also differences in the interpretation and application of these concepts, which are of interest, however, mainly only to specialists. However, two differences appear to be significant. First, when talking about "management", Americans almost always mean the figure of a "manager" - a person, a subject of management, acting in some organization. In a more general sense, they use the term "administration", "administration" (administration), which to a greater extent reflects an impersonal management system. Secondly, when they say “manager”, then, by and large, they mean a professional manager who is aware that he is a representative of a special profession, and not just an engineer or economist involved in management. In addition, a manager is a person who, as a rule, has undergone special training.

This book will help you, dear reader, to take quite serious, for someone, the first steps on this path. The question "How to become a manager?" actually not so naive. Of course, for this you need to take a managerial position, become a leader. But the main thing is to be aware of your professional affiliation with management, to master the amount of knowledge that directly concerns management, to adhere to certain standards, even external attributes of behavior that are usually inherent in managers. A full-fledged manager, for example, in whatever country he is, needs to know English language. And yet, at the same time, one should not forget that the leader who knows his business, knows how to manage well, and achieve his goals, regardless of his appearance and education, is valuable. Wherever it is, this is the main standard of a real "manager".

In the culture of developed capitalist countries, the concept of management very often coexists with the concept of business. Business is an activity aimed at making a profit by creating and selling certain products or services. "Business management" is the management of commercial, economic organizations. Along with this, the term business administration is used almost as a synonym, which can be translated as "business administration". The term "management" is applicable to any type of organization, but when it comes to government bodies at any level, it is more correct to use the term public administration - "public administration".

A businessman and a manager are not the same thing. Businessman - this is the one who "makes money", the owner of capital in circulation, generating income. It may be a business person who does not have anyone reporting to him, or a major owner who does not hold any permanent position in the organization, but is the owner of its shares and may be a member of its board. Manager but he necessarily occupies a permanent position, people are subordinate to him. A slightly more special case of business is entrepreneurship. This type of activity is even more associated with the personality of a person - entrepreneur, who carries on business by starting a new business, implementing some innovation, investing his own funds in a new enterprise, and taking personal risk. The differences between a manager and an entrepreneur will be very large if the manager gravitates towards a bureaucratic leadership style, but to a certain extent they are erased if he adheres to an entrepreneurial management style. So far, very few large firms have managed to resolve this contradiction, and yet the reader will find some examples of success in this matter in the pages of this textbook.

The wide public interest in management is largely associated with the formation and development of business schools or management schools, most common in the US and are part of the "management infrastructure". Infrastructural sectors in production - energy, transport, telecommunications, etc., and in the non-manufacturing sector - education, publishing, public computer networks, consulting, etc. - are very developed precisely in a market economy, where horizontal connections are especially important , and public services that satisfy a certain social need and are paid for by the consumer are quickly formed into independent large, medium or small businesses. Today the USA is the country with the most developed management infrastructure in the world. There are more than 1,300 registered business and management programs in America that have an official certificate from the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business, including 600 business schools operating independently within multidisciplinary universities. They provide regular education in business and management. There are over 10,000 consulting firms operating in the country, in addition to tens of thousands of independent consultants who provide services in various aspects of this activity. More than 70 periodicals, more than a dozen publishers specialize in management and business literature. The United States is a leader in management science, business and management research in terms of both the number of researchers, the amount of money spent, and the breadth of the problems covered.

The system of education in business and management, as in most other specialties, is three-stage in the United States. After graduating from high school, after four years of study at a university or college, one can earn a degree bachelor, which roughly corresponds to our high school diploma. At the same time, after the first two years, you can interrupt education, which will be tantamount to graduating from a “junior college”. This is followed by a two-year education master's programs: "Master of Business Administration" - Master of Business Administration - the famous MBA (MBA); "Master of Management Science" - Master of Management Science - MMS (EMM Es); "Master of International Management" - Master of International Management - MIM (M I M) and the like.

Usually, people aged 25-30 years old who, in addition to a bachelor's degree, have at least two years of practical work, enter master's programs. The master's degree awarded as a result of training, generally speaking, is not a scientific degree. This degree is rather “professional”, indicating that the graduate who received it has not only theoretical, but also practical knowledge and partly skills in the field of business and management based on the analysis of a large number of management situations, participation in management games, internships in large firms, abroad etc. MBA programs are the main ones for business schools, especially leading ones. They are characterized by an exceptional intensity of study and guarantee the high quality of specialists. There is a real hunt for graduates of the top ten most quoted business schools. For example, the starting salary of a master's degree from Harvard Business School, which has been ranked number one for many years, typically exceeds $60,000 per year. Its constant rival is the Stanford School of Business, the leading places are occupied by the Wharton School in Pennsylvania, the Sloan School at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Michigan School of Business and others. And at the same time, those who graduate from less prestigious schools may have problems finding employment. In general, in order to make a career as a professional manager in the United States, especially in a large firm, or as a specialist in business and management of a high rank, a master's degree is considered highly desirable. In recent years, evening training programs have become widespread. master's programs for senior practitioners (Executive MBA). In general, about 72,000 Americans receive professional MBA degrees each year, which is a quarter of all masters, which are prepared by American universities in all specialties.

The third stage of study in business and management are programs leading to a degree PhD - Philosophy Doctor - Ph.D. (P.H.D.). They provide for three to four years of study with the obligatory defense of a dissertation and the award of a Ph.D. This degree, approximately equal to the degree of a candidate of sciences in a strong Soviet university or research institute, is higher than a master's degree, but exists, as it were, in parallel. The master's degree is professional, and the doctoral degree is scientific. Those who receive it do not intend to become practicing managers, but will be engaged in research, teaching in this area, or professional work planner, analyst at firms. High quality Ph.D. in US universities (where, by the way, there are no analogues of the second, higher degree of "doctor of science" awarded in our country and in Europe) is determined primarily by the development of a huge array of scientific literature and numerous special courses on the subject. It is not uncommon for a graduate student starting a Ph.D. at one university, he graduates from another, which is dictated by his scientific interests, the logic of research, the presence of prominent scientists engaged in research on problems of interest to him. For the Ph.D. PhD students enter with a bachelor's degree, and sometimes (not at all) a master's degree, in which case the period of study is reduced. This American system is very extensive, flexible and expensive. MBA tuition is typically around $15,000 a year at a top university, and a Ph.D. costs even more.

Recently, this education system has been criticized quite often. According to some, it forms people who are "in an ivory tower", having high ambitions, but not knowing real life, unable to adapt to change. However, US business schools are by no means going bankrupt. Moreover, income from master's programs is usually a good support for others, non-commercial types activities of American universities. If some master's programs cease to be in demand, they are replaced by others. In order to strengthen the connection between science and practice, many business schools prefer to hire people who have worked in senior positions in firms and government departments and at the same time have a Ph.D. degree, experienced in teaching and research. Professors who have passed this kind of “rotation” are a special category of teachers that is very valuable for business schools.

However, it should be emphasized that the American way of forming managers is not the only one in world practice. In Japan, for example, there are only three business schools, mainly to train those who intend to work abroad. Leaders are trained by the firms themselves on the basis of the concept of "learning by experience", systematically moving them to different positions. This allows you to learn the specifics of various aspects of the business and thoroughly study your company. Only at the age of about 35 employees have a chance to get their first managerial position. Everyone learns in Japanese firms - from workers to the president, and the main responsibility for this rests with the heads of each of the departments, the elders teach the younger ones. Referral of practitioners to study abroad training centers is not a common thing, although, for example, at the Matsushita Denki firm, there is the Matsushita Academy, where capable young people with higher education are trained for another five years. But this is an exception for the elite.

Europeans also have business schools. Their leading European association EFMD (European Fund for Management Development) has about 300 full-fledged management training centers registered. Many of them are highly trained, although master's degrees in business and management are not as common and not as highly rated as in the United States. Somewhat more important in European schools are disciplines close to production, the study of social, as well as country and international aspects of business and management.

And yet it should be recognized that the training and formation of managers in different countries are very close both in essence and in the methods of organizing training, especially in the last decade. Management as a profession, as a field of knowledge, is becoming truly international. Mastering the experience of managing each of the countries, transferring this experience is a very valuable and useful thing that everyone is beginning to understand. After all, this allows not only to understand how to do business abroad, but also to learn how to avoid mistakes in situations that have not occurred in the present and the past, but are quite possible in the future. The story of someone else's success or failure can also be very instructive. And, of course, scientific and empirical generalizations, development general principles effective management, the typification of its various forms and the conditions for their application - all this is the subject of serious work for those who think about management in scientific terms and advance managerial thought.

In all this diversity of theories and phenomena of living practice, American management has been and remains the most powerful "management civilization". Its leading importance in the world today is undeniable, and its influence on the development of theory, practice, and even more so management training is the greatest. There is no need to blindly follow the conclusions of American theorists and the recommendations of their practitioners, but it is certainly necessary to know their ideas.

This American textbook on management offered to our reader serves just this. This is not the first book of its kind translated in the USSR. In 1981, the book by G. Kunz and S. O "Donnell "Management: a system and situational analysis of managerial functions" (Translated from English. M .: Progress, 1981) was published. Previously, our readers met with a fairly complete "Course for Higher management personnel”(Abridged translation from English / Scientific ed. V.I. Tereshchenko / M .: Economics, 1970). The book by D. O "Shaughnessy "Principles of organizing the management of a company" (M .: Progress, 1979) was of a review nature. Among the Soviet works on this issue, the book of Academician D. M. Gvishiani "Organization and Management" (2 additional ed. M.: Nauka, 1972), devoted to the systematization and analysis of American management theory at that time. However, the textbook "Fundamentals of Management" is of a qualitatively different nature. It attracts three characteristic features.

Firstly, this is a sufficient completeness of the description of the most important elements of modern knowledge about management, while, say, the book of G. Kunz and S. O "Donnell, mainly covered the principles of the "classical" or "administrative" school in theory management, and a more compact textbook by D. O "Shaughnessy contained a popular review of the results of the most famous research in this area. The authors of "Fundamentals of Management" went, by their own admission, along a somewhat eclectic path. They did not chase after an imaginary methodological harmony of presentation, but tried to adequately highlight the achievements of various approaches and schools and their real contribution to modern managerial thought. The reader of the book can be sure that he will get the basics of knowledge about management, get acquainted with all the most important achievements of Western managerial thought, and learn the most famous names of authorities in science and management practice. In general, this will prepare you to take the next steps - to delve into the study of specialized literature on certain aspects of management, discuss these problems with Western colleagues, or study management abroad. Such a feature of the book, of course, is a great advantage in our time of familiarization with the achievements of world management thought.

Secondly, this textbook has its advantages in terms of readership. With a solid scientific level, it is written intelligibly, fascinatingly, even lively, which was not in any of the previous books of this kind - domestic or translated. You can not only carefully study it with a pencil in your hands, but also just read it to broaden your horizons, or even for pleasure. The main contingent of our readers are those who have taken up the study of management without serious preliminary training and, perhaps, even higher education. In America, this textbook is used primarily by bachelor students. I, in particular, happened to use it as the main study guide when reading a course in the basics of management in 1989 at the State University of San Francisco for students in this category. But taking into account the specifics of our country, this textbook can be used not only by students. Managers who are training in management or upgrading their skills, already established engineers or economists with specific work experience, will find this book interesting and useful, as it opens up a new area of ​​​​knowledge for them, usually not included in our university courses. This book, due to the same novelty of its problems, can be very useful for those who receive postgraduate education in graduate school or in master's programs that are new to us. It is, of course, used by those who are now establishing management teaching in our country. People will read it different ages and professions involved in self-education. In a word, with the formation of a new system of training and advanced training of managers in our country, this textbook seems to be very timely.

Thirdly, this book is interesting from the point of view of a methodical approach to the organization of the presentation of the material. In my opinion, it is a good example of a high scientific level, sharpness of definitions and formulations, a sense of proportion in the presentation of scientific truths and, at the same time, full information about management practice, vivid examples and specific situations for analysis. The abundance of illustrative and schematic material, generalizations at the end of each chapter, questions for discussion - all this, of course, is the result of many years of evolution in the methodology of management education in America, and for us - an example of a modern approach to effective learning students and leaders.

Speaking about the content of the book, it must be admitted that it gives a good idea of ​​the state of American managerial thought. Reading it, one can, in particular, form a certain position on the traditional, but still topical issue: Is management a science or an art? There is good reason to argue that this is the synthesis of science, art, and experience, as discussed in chapter 1. This is, of course, trivial, but it is important to recognize the fact that management activities are so complex, and the science of management is still so young. that it is necessary to evaluate its possibilities with great care, of course, without detracting from the usefulness of life-tested theories and scientifically based methods. No one knows simple recipes solving managerial problems, which is repeatedly emphasized on the pages of this book. This idea underlies the methodology of the "situational approach" to management - perhaps the largest scientific result in this area over the past two decades.

The assurances, characteristic of the Russian literature of the past years, that we are allegedly capable of “scientifically managing” not only production, but also society, do not stand up to criticism either from a theoretical or practical point of view. From an objective standpoint, the current state of scientific knowledge about management and housekeeping is such that it can serve as a source of not only insights, but also serious misconceptions, and “scientifically based” theories and methods can bring not only benefits, but also significant harm. It must be recognized that the myth of " scientific management"For a long time, it was simply beneficial to the ruling layer of the bureaucracy in the administrative-command system in your country as one of the arguments for the centralization of power in its hands. Today, the attempt of the townsfolk to find those responsible for our past and present mistakes among scientists who allegedly advised leaders the wrong way is simply incorrect from the standpoint of real management practice, that weather is made by those who have power, and not those who advise them something. Although the lag in science and education in the field of management is, of course, people scientists are to blame.

In real management, the figure of a scientist, an expert, is perhaps not as important as the figure of a leader, albeit not so educated, but who owns the mysteries of management as an art due to his personal qualities, talent, experience, skills and sound judgment. The combination of talent and scientific knowledge in this area will give a synergistic effect, multiply the ability to achieve the desired results in practice. To do everything so that real talents in the field of business, management, entrepreneurship rise to the surface of real economic life, no matter what it costs - this is the way of salvation in market conditions. Without this, nothing good will happen in our economy.

At the same time, it is important for the reader to understand that management, management is, of course, independent field of knowledge, requiring thoughtful study. This is a separate discipline, or rather, an interdisciplinary field, which is most correctly called "managerial thought", combining science, experience, "know-how", multiplied by managerial art. Readers of the book will be convinced that management thought is influenced by the achievements of many sciences, and the evolution of management in the 20th century consists precisely in using these achievements to solve the main problem - how to get the desired results based on the coordinated actions of many people who produce products and services and use diverse resources.

And, indeed, the first breakthrough in managerial thought, which took place at the beginning of the century and was associated with "Taylorism", was based on the premise that one can manage "scientifically". This was both an insight and an illusion, but in fact it consisted in transferring the ideas of engineering sciences to management at the grass-roots production level. However, quite soon the management world realized the fundamental limitations of "Taylorism". The next major step in the development of Western management thought, closely related to the previous one, consisted in the dissemination of the “principles of management” formulated by A. Fayol, which can be recognized as the first independent result of the “science of administration” in its now classic version, focused primarily on building “ formal organizational structures and systems. It is no coincidence that Americans call this Frenchman the father of management. It must be said that the search for rational forms of enterprise management in our country was carried out at that time with some consideration of these achievements. So, for example, by decision of the party conference, the “functional” (according to Taylor) was abolished in favor of “linear-functional” organizational structures (according to Fayol). But behind all this there were by no means scientific arguments, the specter of tightly controlled hierarchical management systems, based on the unquestioning subordination of the lower levels to the higher ones, on universalism, standard and impersonality, was already hovering over the country, which became a political and economic reality for many decades.

The third breakthrough in managerial thought, comparable in its significance to the first two and often called "neoclassical" - the birth of the school of "human relations" at the turn of the 30s. In the 1940s and 60s, this direction was continued by the development of the theory of organizations as social systems, but by its nature it was nothing more than the use of the achievements of psychology and sociology - the sciences of human behavior - in management. In Soviet theory and practice, this did not cause anything but a tough rebuff to the “intrigues” of bourgeois ideology in the field of establishing “human relations”, and the attempts of some of our scientists to appeal to reason only led to the defeat of sociology and stopped its application in management. This, along with the underestimation of the psychological aspects of behavior in real organizations, caused us enormous damage, which has by no means been repaired to this day.

A new breakthrough in management thought - the development of modern quantitative methods for justifying decisions in the 1950s and 60s - turned out to be a direct consequence of the use of mathematics and computers in management. In our country during this period, the economic and mathematical movement was especially strong, it had a great and generally positive influence on economic and managerial thought, although it was not without serious illusions and significant shortcomings. It was the "quantitative school" in world management thought that stimulated the involvement of the provisions of systems theory, cybernetics - areas of science that synthesize, integrate complex phenomena - to management, which over time contributed to overcoming the conflict between the rationalism of the supporters of the "science of management" and the romanticism of enthusiasts of establishing harmony in human relationships, organizations and society.

At the turn of the 1970s, a turning point for all management thought was the clearly formulated idea that an organization is an open system that adapts to its very diverse external and internal environment, and the main reasons for what happens inside the organization should be sought outside it. . The 1970s and 1980s were spent in an intensive search for relationships between types of environment and various forms of management. Alas, this transition from universalism to a “situational approach”, comparable to the transition from a plane to a three-dimensional space, from silent black-and-white cinema to color with stereophonic sound, in domestic management thought, which, like the whole of society, was in stagnation, to Unfortunately, it went almost unnoticed.

The decade of the 1980s was marked by a new breakthrough - the discovery, unexpected for many Americans, of the importance of "organizational culture" as a powerful management tool, used especially effectively by the Japanese. Today, many American theorists tend to place culture on a par with the organization as a managerial tool in terms of its impact on people, and curricula to transform culture in organizations were a fashionable innovation of the leading business schools in the 1990s. It seems that there is a rational grain in this. After all, in the second half of the 1980s, we also discovered that the main potential and at the same time the main danger for progressive changes lies in a person, or rather, in his mind, in culture, including cultural stereotypes of behavior in organizations.

If we talk about the years of the 90s, here, in my opinion, there are three most interesting trends. The first of them is connected with some return to the past - awareness of the importance of the material, technological base of modern production and the provision of services. This is due not only to the use of computers in management, but also to the general strengthening of the influence of technological progress on achieving the goals of the organization, increasing the role of productivity and quality in order to win the competition. It is no coincidence that this textbook on the basics of management has independent sections on managing operations and achieving high performance through the synthesis of human activities and the use of technological factors of production. It seems that managerial thought is again entering a period of some strengthening of "technocracy" in it on a new, deeper and healthier basis.

However, in parallel with this, there is a second trend, which concerns already social, behavioral aspects, is an increase in attention not only to organizational culture, as mentioned above, but also to various forms of democratization of management, participation of ordinary workers in profits, in the implementation of managerial functions, in property. This idea, which originated in the 1930s and was persistently developed by the theorists of the 1950s, was implemented in the practice of American management, however, rather sluggishly. In this, American management differed from European and Japanese (albeit very peculiar in this sense) management. But today the democratization of management, participation in management is a reality. It is already generally recognized - both in Europe, and in Japan, and in the USA - that the future belongs to democratized, "participatory" forms of government. This phenomenon, apparently, will be generalized and comprehended in the coming years by management specialists. Our practice can give a lot of original and interesting things in this area, as well as in matters of business ethics - another traditional, but again very relevant aspect of managing in a market, economic freedom.

Finally, the third feature of managerial thought in the 1990s was the strengthening of the international character of management. Following the transition of most post-industrial countries to an open economy, a sharp increase in the role of international competition and, at the same time, production cooperation, the development of transnational corporations, etc. The internationalization of management raises a lot of new questions for management theory and practice. The most important of them are what is common and special in management, what patterns, forms, methods of management are universal, and which operate in a range of specific conditions of different countries, how best to perform management functions in foreign economic activity what are the features of the national style in management, in organizational behavior, how important these features are for achieving the desired results, how foreigners can quickly adapt to the national local environment. These are all extremely interesting new questions, many of which are still waiting to be answered. For us, in this area, too, we have to overcome a serious backlog, because international business is a new thing for many, it needs to be learned from the basics. There are already more than 30 thousand enterprises and organizations involved in foreign economic activity, and to train and advise all their personnel in short time impossible. And yet, the search for the shortest paths to success in this area, taking into account the experience of other countries that do not repeat the mistakes of others, is a worthy task for creatively thinking people in our country.

The advantage of this textbook is that, by highlighting the state of managerial thought in scientific and applied aspects, it brings the reader up to about the mid-80s. At the same time, it is very American, closely connected with the development of American managerial thought, based on many values ​​that are characteristic of American society, culture, and management. It contains vivid examples from the practice, first of all, of this country. Therefore, it is necessary to make some allowance for this specificity, to leave room for a certain amount of skepticism, for a free search for thought and taking into account our special conditions. At the same time, it must be clearly understood that this book deals only with the basics of management. Real professional knowledge in management, management requires the development of both special management literature on various sections of this discipline (which is why the text contains numerous references to American sources), and the development of fundamental works in related disciplines - economics, sociology, psychology, mathematics, cybernetics etc. This is necessary first of all, of course, for those who intend to devote themselves to research and teaching in the field of management. For practitioners, apparently, it is much more important to delve into the study of specific situations, and more generally, into the study of the history of economic management using the example well-known organizations, famous projects, activities of prominent leaders, etc. It seems that this empirical layer in managerial thought is still undeveloped virgin land for us. Raising it, we will understand a lot in our management, we will learn to separate the wheat from the chaff, we will learn from the past, we will take a real step forward.

If we try to assess the significance of this textbook for our reader in modern conditions, then it should be emphasized that even some five years ago this book, perhaps, would not have been worth publishing in a large circulation. It could be used in teaching courses on foreign management experience, which were taught and are now being taught in a few of our educational institutions, but for American researchers it would naturally seem somewhat superficial. It would be better to replace it with a series of more specialized, narrowly focused books or works by Soviet authors providing analysis and evaluation certain aspects foreign management. Until recently, this has been the case. However, now the need for such a book is great, since it is at the present time that the formation of a new managerial thinking in most people is necessary. After all, now there is already a very high confidence in the transition of our economy to the market. And this transition means a colossal restructuring of the entire management system.

Organization management is adaptation. This is the cornerstone of modern management methodology. Nothing in management happens unmotivated, everything has its own reason, everything is determined by the extremely complex intricacies of the influence of many variables, the external and internal environment of the organization. That is why it is so difficult to manage well. Modern managerial thought allows us to realize this truth.

Of course, we can talk about our lagging behind in theory and especially in the practice of effective management, however, in my opinion, this would, by and large, be simply incorrect. After all, the management of Soviet organizations for decades was adapted to the requirements of a certain environment - the administrative-command system . And adaptation to this system, not only to the organizational, legal, economic mechanism, but also to its policy, ideology, system of values, took place very actively and in its own way was by no means unsuccessful. Implementation of the plan, often at any cost, instead of meeting the needs of the consumer; growth in the size of enterprises, an increase in the volume of output, regardless of the improvement of its quality and the economical use of resources; stability instead of dynamics; unification instead of diversity; submission instead of initiative and freedom - these and other requirements economic system urged to life certain forms of management, allowing to adapt to specific conditions. According to modern classifications, what was common before are bureaucratic, mechanistic systems for managing organizations.

The administrative-command system was looking for its talents. Among them were outstanding "production commanders", brilliant technocrats, to whom the industry owes a series of outstanding achievements, but at the same time - tough bureaucrats, dogmatists, masters of political intrigue, who turned out to be the creators or accomplices of not just stagnation in society, but also a real national disaster. . A huge mass of people in our economy who were not involved in politics simply worked in ordinary managerial positions. They did their job within the framework of the system where they happened to live, their actions corresponded to the requirements of specific situations, and their views were generally accepted in their environment. In many cases, it was more difficult to achieve results in this environment than in another, more rational in its structure. This required a strain of thought, a kind of search, and enormous personal dedication. Unfortunately, the social selection operating in the administrative-command system often contributed to the promotion of not the most the best people to senior management positions. And yet, from the standpoint of today, it is in no way possible to belittle the potential of our leaders, engineers, workers, and even entrepreneurs. It is important to make the best use and develop this potential. We have no other way. It is necessary to deeply realize the fact that we are all the product of a bureaucratic "administrative civilization" that has shown its historical failure and is in need of revolutionary restructuring.

It should be borne in mind that in its history, mankind has developed only three fundamentally various tools management - that is, the impact on people. The first one is hierarchy, an organization where the main means of influence are relations of power-subordination, pressure on a person from above, with the help of coercion, control over the distribution of material wealth, etc. Second - culture, that is, values, social norms, attitudes, patterns of behavior, rituals that are developed and recognized by society, organization, group, which make a person behave one way and not another. The third is market, that is, a network of equal horizontal relations based on the sale and purchase of products and services, on property relations, on the balance of interests of the seller and the buyer.

It is important to understand that hierarchical organization, culture, the market are complex phenomena. These are not just “management tools”. In living, real economic and social systems, all of them almost always coexist. It is only about what is given priority, what is the main bet. This defines the essence economic organization society.

The root of the administrative-command system of traditional Soviet society was a hierarchy that was, so to speak, "universal". Everything had some kind of line of subordination, a higher authority, and the powers of the highest executive power were virtually unlimited. But in parallel with this, Soviet society also actively used the "hard" culture as a powerful means of influencing its members. Through ideology, party membership, under the influence of means mass media, education, supported traditions and habits, people comprehended numerous "possible" and "impossible", controlled primarily by the partocracy. They either adhered to them or came into conflict with the official system.

The market, as a universal means of influencing economic life, was suppressed in every possible way, used almost exclusively for trade in consumer goods. "Economic methods" of management were applied within a clear framework of hierarchical systems. And yet the market in its natural powerful state existed in the shadow economy, which along the way built its hierarchical relations in hidden antisocial, corrupt structures, formed negative cultures that deformed people's consciousness, their social relations.

The administrative and economic system, which has undergone a long evolution, was well debugged and coordinated in its main elements. Since Stalin's times, it has made it possible to keep society and specific organizations "in check", to achieve goals that were set from above, regardless of costs, to suppress external manifestations of conflicts. This "harmony of evil" the authors of this book, as pragmatists, would apparently recognize as effective (at least pay attention to their assessment of Mao Zedong on p. 46). In addition, this system was aimed at actively satisfying the lowest of the social needs of people - the need for involvement, belonging to a group (see Chapter 13). Despite the brutal suppression of the rights of an individual, for many loyal members of society, the myth of universal participation in building a happy future for the country under wise leadership, about life in the most just society formed the basis of the worldview.

Now, however, the system of government must undergo a radical transformation along with the whole of society. Their necessity is due to the fact that the administrative-command system, the ideology underlying it, came into obvious conflict with the requirements for the development of productive forces and ensuring human rights. Under the conditions of the scientific and technological revolution, new technology and the organization of production bring advanced countries to such a fundamental level of satisfying the economic needs of individuals that this is already the material basis for achieving real economic freedom in the lives of most people. Let this not concern all countries and not all people, let it exist against the backdrop of a large social inequality. However, a qualitative leap has already taken place. A real technical possibility to give people on a massive scale human conditions of existence - material and social, to save them from the fate of the "raw material of exploitation", to make them free to exist.

But in order to make such a leap, as the experience of many countries on different continents - both traditional and new leaders of world development - shows, it is necessary to have an adequate management system and culture that can ensure productivity, efficiency, dynamism, adaptability of production to the various requirements of consumers. , suppliers, inventors, etc. Only the market as a means of managing the economy by its nature has such a potential. Hierarchy, organization rational remedy introduction of stability, regulation in economic and other activities. In addition, different cultures correspond to the market and hierarchy, almost polar opposites in their essence.

The restructuring of the economic structure of Soviet society consists precisely in a cardinal structural change. The market - as a product of the rule of law and economic reality should become the main "management tool" (more precisely, even self-government) at the level social production generally. It is he who will determine the essence of the economic structure of the new society, its external environment. Now, commodity-money relations will tend to acquire a "universal character", and society will quite reasonably restrict this process in some, primarily spiritual areas: education, culture, science, healthcare, etc.

The hierarchy will not die and collapse - that would be a disaster, it will fade into the background in some sectors of the economy that require more control, and most importantly, it will move down to the level of specific organizations, where its useful role will remain for a long time to come. The organizations themselves will adapt to the new external, partly internal environment; in their depths, bureaucratic, mechanistic structures and management systems will increasingly be replaced by organic, flexible, debureaucratized structures and systems.

In parallel, a colossal, figuratively speaking, “tectonic” cultural shift must take place in our economic, managerial thinking, and psychology. It is necessary to turn the consciousness of the leader, the worker, towards the consumer, and not towards the boss; to profit, not to waste; to the entrepreneur, not to the bureaucrat; to the innovator, and not to the thoughtless performer; to pluralism and diversity, not to unification and depersonalization. By and large, we must move from the ideologists of the gassing of management to common sense, from the scientism of abstract schemes and the dogmatism of self-satisfied edifications to knowledge that gives a practical result in improving the behavior of people and the functioning of organizations. If this is not done purposefully, stubbornly, realizing the complexity of the task, nothing will happen, no matter how radically hierarchical relations are replaced by market ones at the legal level, no matter how carefully new “systems” are worked out. Softening, atrophy of culture as a "management tool", inattention to it - this is the path to collapse in the new conditions. Without this "organizational cement" capable of withstanding higher stresses and loads, a new building cannot be built.

This book can make a contribution to the formation of new managerial thinking and the development of new knowledge that we need today. Some of its provisions will be unknown to many, especially if we take into account our poor understanding of the essence of the market and competition, poor education in the field of sociology and psychology. Others, say related to modern methods substantiation of decisions, from the standpoint of our managerial knowledge will be perceived even as somewhat primitive. Still others, for example, the problems of forming organizational management structures, will seem familiar from previous domestic and translated foreign publications. However, after reading the book, we will rethink many of the problems of entrepreneurship and management that are already facing the Soviet business executive. Everyone, apparently, will choose those questions that are more consonant with his current problems, specialty, ability to see and learn new things. However, it seems that this American textbook, written cleverly and skillfully, with great attention and respect for the reader, will not leave anyone indifferent. I would like to wish that familiarization with management thought in its modern American interpretation will become useful and interesting for you, dear reader, make you a more effective leader, encourage you to search for truths and practical approaches that help solve our problems, taking into account the searches and discoveries of others.

The publication of Fundamentals of Management is the result of expanding Soviet-American cooperation. The American-Soviet Trade and Economic Council (co-chairs - W. Forrester and V. Cheklin), its committee for the training of managers, headed by A.F. Dobrynin (USSR) and D. Andreas (USA) rendered great assistance in the implementation of this project. Dean of the School of Business State University San Francisco A. Cunningham and professor of this university S. Thrall stood at the origins of this idea. The Soviet publishers of the book are grateful to them, as well as to everyone who worked on the translation and publication of this textbook.

Professor L. I. Evenko, Rector of the Higher School of International Business at the Academy of National Economy

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Andreichikov, A.V. System Analysis and Synthesis of Strategic Decisions in Innovation: Fundamentals of Strategic Innovation Management and Marketing: Study Guide / A.V. Andreichikov, O.N. Andreichikov. - M.: KD Librokom, 2013. - 248 p.
2. Andreichikov, A.V. System analysis and synthesis of strategic decisions in innovation: Fundamentals of strategic innovation management and marketing / A.V. Andreichikov, O.N. Andreichikov. - M.: KD Librokom, 2018. - 248 p.
3. Andreichikov, A.V. System analysis and synthesis of strategic decisions in innovation: Fundamentals of strategic innovation management and marketing / A.V. Andreichikov, O.N. Andreichikov. - M.: KD Librokom, 2012. - 248 p.
4. Balashov, A., P. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / A. P. Balashov. - M.: Vuzovsky textbook, 2019. - 112 p.
5. Balashov, A.P. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / A.P. Balashov .. - M .: Vuzovsky textbook, Infra-M, 2012. - 288 p.
6. Balashov, A.P. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / A.P. Balashov. - M.: Vuzovsky textbook, 2017. - 192 p.
7. Baronin, S.A. Fundamentals of management, planning and controlling in real estate: Textbook / S.A. Baronin. - M.: NITs Infra-M, 2012. - 160 p.
8. Baronin, S.A. Fundamentals of management, planning and controlling in real estate: Textbook / S.A. Baronin. - M.: Infra-M, 2014. - 494 p.
9. Belykh, I.V. Legal basis municipal management / I.V. White. - M.: MFPA, 2011. - 208 p.
10. Belyaev, V.M. Fundamentals of transport management: Textbook / V.M. Belyaev. - M.: Academy, 2017. - 240 p.
11. Blank, I.A. Fundamentals of investment management. T.2 / I.A. Form. - M.: Omega-L, 2016. - 313 p.
12. Blank, I.A. Fundamentals of investment management (set) in 2 volumes. V.2 / I.A. Form. - M.: Omega-L, 2008. - 560 p.
13. Blank, I.A. Fundamentals of financial management. In 2 volumes / I.A. Form. - M.: Omega-L, 2019. - 128 p.
14. Blank, I.A. Fundamentals of financial management. In 2 volumes / I.A. Form. - M.: Omega-L, 2012. - 1330 p.
15. Blank, I.A. Fundamentals of financial management. In 2 volumes. Fundamentals of financial management / I.A. Form. - M.: Omega-L, Elga, 2012. - 1330 p.
16. Blinov, A.O. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / A.O. Blinov, H.Kh. Kuchmezov, E.I. Shipovalov, A.Kh. Kuchmezov. - M.: ELITE, 2008. - 352 p.
17. Vesnin, V.R. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / V.R. Vesnin. - M.: Prospekt, 2015. - 320 p.
18. Vesnin, V.R. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / V.R. Vesnin. - M.: Prospekt, 2016. - 320 p.
19. Glazunova, O.I. Fundamentals of management / O.I. Glazunov. - M.: KnoRus, 2011. - 320 p.
20. Gribov, V.D. Fundamentals of economics, management and marketing (for spo) / V.D. Mushrooms. - M.: KnoRus, 2014. - 544 p.
21. Egorshin, A.P. Fundamentals of Management: A Textbook for High Schools / A.P. Yegorshin. - N.Novg.: NIMB, 2012. - 320 p.
22. Egorshin A.P. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / A.P. Yegorshin. - M.: Infra-M, 2018. - 288 p.
23. Ermolaeva, L.D. Fundamentals of Management. Fundamentals of Management / L.D. Ermolaeva. - M.: Flinta, 2009. - 88 p.
24. Ermolaeva, L.D. Fundamentals of Management. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / L.D. Ermolaeva. - M.: Flinta, 2009. - 88 p.
25. Zhabina, S.B. Fundamentals of economics, management and marketing in public catering / S.B. Frog. - M.: Academia, 2016. - 398 p.
26. Zhabina, S.B. Fundamentals of economics, management and marketing in public catering. Textbook / S.B. Zhabina, O.M. Burdyugova, A.V. Kolesova. - M.: Academia, 2017. - 398 p.
27. Zhabina, S.B. Fundamentals of economics, management and marketing in public catering: Textbook / S.B. Frog. - M.: Academia, 2017. - 398 p.
28. Zhabina, S.B. Fundamentals of economics, management and marketing in public catering: Textbook / S.B. Frog. - M.: Academia, 2016. - 576 p.
29. Zhabina, S.B. Fundamentals of economics, management and marketing in public catering: Textbook / S.B. Frog. - M.: Academy, 2014. - 384 p.
30. Isachenko, I.I. Fundamentals of self-management: Textbook / I.I. Isachenko. - M.: NITs Infra-M, 2013. - 312 p.
31. Kabanova, L.A. Management Fundamentals: theoretical basis professional activity: Textbook / L.A. Kabanova, N.Yu. Chernov; Scientific ed. S.V. Sokolov. - M.: Academician / Textbook, 2006. - 144 p.
32. Kabushkin, N.I. Fundamentals of management / N.I. Kabushkin. - M.: New knowledge, 2009. - 336 p.
33. Kiryushkin, V.E. Fundamentals of risk management / V.E. Kiryushkin. - M.: Ankil, 2009. - 132 p.
34. Kovalev, V.V. Fundamentals of the theory of financial management / V.V. Kovalev. - M.: Prospekt, 2015. - 544 p.
35. Korolev, V.I. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / V.I. Korolev. - M.: Master, 2017. - 16 p.
36. Korotkov, E.M. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / I.Yu. Soldatova, E.M. Korotkov; Ed. I.Yu. Soldatova, M.A. Chernyshev. - M.: Dashkov i K, Academcenter, 2013. - 272 p.
37. Kossov, V.V. Fundamentals of innovation management / V.V. Kossov. - M.: Master, 2016. - 26 p.
38. Kostrov, A.V. Fundamentals of information management / A.V. Kostrov. - M.: Finance and statistics, 2009. - 528 p.
39. Kravchenko, A.I. Fundamentals of Management: People Management: Textbook for Colleges / A.I. Kravchenko. - M.: Academic project, 2003. - 400 p.
40. Kravchenko, A.I. Fundamentals of management: people management / A.I. Kravchenko, K.A. Kravchenko. - M.: Academic project, 2003. - 400 p.
41. Krui, M. Fundamentals of risk management / M. Krui, D. Galay, R. Mark. - Lyubertsy: Yurayt, 2015. - 390 p.
42. Loktionova Yu.N. Fundamentals of financial management / Yu.N. Loktionova, O.N. Yanina. - M.: Rusayns, 2016. - 288 p.
43. Markevich, A.L. Fundamentals of economics, management and marketing for marine specialties of the fishing fleet / A.L. Markevich. - M.: MORKNIGA, 2012. - 267 p.
44. Maslennikov, V.V. Foresight development of management theory and technology (fundamentals of methodology) / V.V. Maslennikov, A.N. Shmelev. - M.: Rusayns, 2016. - 190 p.
45. Meskon, Fundamentals of Management / Meskon et al. - M.: Dialectika, 2019. - 672 p.
46. ​​Mescon, M. Fundamentals of Management / M. Mescon, M. Albert, F. Hedouri. - M.: Delo, 2004. - 432 p.
47. Meskon, M.Kh. Fundamentals of Management / M.Kh. Mescon, M. Albert, F. Hedouri. - M.: Williams, 2016. - 672 p.
48. Meskon, M.Kh. Fundamentals of Management / M.Kh. Mescon, M. Albert, F. Hedouri; Per. from English. O.I. Bear .. - M .: Williams, 2012. - 672 p.
49. Minaev, E.S. Management for an engineer (in 3 hours) Part 1. Fundamentals of management / E.S. Minaev. - M.: Higher School, 2002. - 359 p.
50. Mirotin, L.B. Fundamentals of management and personnel management. (Logistic concept): Textbook for universities / L.B. Mirotin, A.K. Pokrovsky, V.M. Belyaev. - M.: Hot line -Telecom, 2010. - 240 p.
51. Mirotin, L.B. Fundamentals of management and personnel management. (Logistic concept) / L.B. Mirotin, A.K. Pokrovsky, V.M. Belyaev. - M.: GLT, 2010. - 240 p.
52. Mirotin, L.B. Fundamentals of management and personnel management. (Logistic concept): Textbook for universities / L.B. Mirotin. - M.: Hot line -Telecom, 2010. - 240 p.
53. Myasoedov, S.P. Fundamentals of cross-cultural management. How to do business with representatives of other countries and cultures: Textbook / S.P. Myasoedov. - M.: ID Delo RANEPA, 2012. - 256 p.
54. Nazimko, V.K. Fundamentals of Management: Educational and Methodological Guide / V.K. Nazimko, E.V. Kudinov. - Rn / D: Phoenix, 2018. - 144 p.
55. Nazimko, V.K. Fundamentals of management: teaching aid / V.K. Nazimko. - R&D: Phoenix, 2015. - 255 p.
56. Naumov, V.V. State and language. Formulas of power and anarchy: Ideological and sociolinguistic foundations of language management / V.V. Naumov. - M.: Lenand, 2019. - 182 p.
57. Nachinskaya, S.V. Fundamentals of economics and management in the field physical education and sports / S.V. Nachinskaya. - M.: Academia, 2017. - 160 p.
58. Nachinskaya, S.V. Fundamentals of economics and management in the field of physical culture and sports: Textbook / S.V. Nachinskaya. - M.: Academy, 2008. - 256 p.
59. Petelin, V.G. Fundamentals of Management exhibition activities: Textbook / V.G. Petelin. - M.: Unity, 2005. - 447 p.
60. Plakhova, L.V. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / L.V. Plakhova, T.M. Anurina, S.A. Legostaev. - M.: KnoRus, 2017. - 204 p.
61. Popov, V.N. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / V.N. Popov, V.S. Kasyanov. - M.: KnoRus, 2013. - 320 p.
62. Popov, S.G. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / S.G. Popov. - M.: Os-89, 2013. - 176 p.
63. Pustynnikova E.V. Fundamentals of management: textbook / E.V. Pustynnikov. - M.: KnoRus, 2018. - 112 p.
64. Reznik, S.D. Fundamentals of dissertation management: Textbook / S.D. Reznik. - M.: Infra-M, 2017. - 144 p.
65. Repina, E.A. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / E.A. Repin, M.A. Chernyshev, T.Yu. Anopchenko. - M.: Infra-M, 2014. - 159 p.
66. Repina, E.A. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / E.A. Repin, M.A. Chernyshev, T.Yu. Anopchenko. - M.: NITs Infra-M, Academcenter, 2013. - 240 p.
67. Semenova, V.V. Fundamentals of management. Textbook / V.V. Semenova, L.S. Botasheva, D.S. Petrosyan. - M.: Rusayns, 2014. - 351 p.
68. Soldatova, I.Yu. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook / I.Yu. Soldatova, M.A. Chernyshev. - M.: Dashkov i K, 2015. - 272 p.
69. Sukhov, V.D. Fundamentals of management and marketing in land and property relations: Textbook / V.D. Sukhov. - M.: Academy, 2019. - 160 p.
70. Sukhov, V.D. Fundamentals of Management: Workshop: Textbook / V.D. Sukhov. - M.: Academy, 2017. - 256 p.
71. Sukhov, V.D. Fundamentals of Management: Workshop / V.D. Sukhov. - M.: Academia, 2016. - 704 p.
72. Taktarov, G.A. Fundamentals of Information Management: Textbook / G.A. Taktarov. - M.: Finance and statistics, 2009. - 528 p.
73. Hanger, J., D. Fundamentals strategic management: Textbook / J.D. Hunger, T.L. Whelen. - M.: Unity, 2012. - 319 p.
74. Hartanovich, K.V. Fundamentals of management / K.V. Hartanovich. - M.: Academic prospectus, 2006. - 272 p.
75. Khizhnyak, A.N. Fundamentals of effective management: Textbook / A.N. Khizhnyak, I.E. Svetlov. - M.: Infra-M, 2008. - 224 p.
76. Khizhnyak, A.N. Fundamentals of effective management: Textbook / A.N. Khizhnyak, I.E. Svetlov. - M.: Infra-M, 2019. - 160 p.

The time in which we live is an era of change. Our society is undergoing an exceptionally difficult, largely contradictory, but historically inevitable and irreversible restructuring. In socio-political life, this is the transition from totalitarianism to democracy, in the economy - from the administrative-command system to the market, in the life of an individual - his transformation from a "cog" into an independent subject of economic activity. Such changes in society, in the economy, in our entire way of life are difficult because they require a change in ourselves.
Americans, accustomed to sharp turns of fate, to competition, define a similar situation with the word "challenge" (challeng). According to them, each challenge is fraught with both opportunities and threats for an individual, organization, country. To cope with this unprecedented challenge in the life of current generations, we, among other things, need to master new knowledge, learn how to use it in practice. An important part of this knowledge, as world experience shows, is the comprehension of the science and art of management.
With the light hand of the Americans, this English word has become known today to almost every educated person. In a simplified sense, management is the ability to achieve goals using labor, intelligence, and the motives of other people's behavior. Management - in Russian "management" - a function, a type of activity for managing people in a wide variety of organizations. Management is also an area of ​​human knowledge that helps to carry out this function. Finally, management as a collective of managers is a certain category of people, a social stratum of those who carry out management work. The importance of management was especially clearly realized in the 1930s. Even then it became obvious that this activity had turned into a profession, the field of knowledge - into an independent discipline, and the social stratum - into a very influential social force. The growing role of this social force forced people to talk about the “revolution of managers”, when it turned out that there were giant corporations with huge economic, industrial, scientific and technical potential, comparable in power to entire states. General Motors, for example, is invariably present in the top dozen largest economic entities in the world (including both states - the USA, Japan, the USSR, etc., and corporations). The largest corporations, banks are the core of the economic and political strength of the great nations. Governments depend on them, many of them are transnational in nature, extending their production, distribution, service, information networks around the world. This means that the decisions of managers, like the decisions of statesmen, can determine the fate of millions of people, states and entire regions. However, the role of managers is not limited to their presence only in huge multi-level and branched corporate governance structures. In a mature market economy, small business is no less important. In terms of quantity, this is more than 95% of all firms; in terms of value, this is the closest approximation to the daily needs of consumers and, at the same time, a testing ground for technical progress and other innovations. For the majority of the population, it is also a job. To manage skillfully in a small business means to survive, to resist, to grow. How to do this is also a question of effective management.
A little more and concepts. The question arises - is it possible to consider that the English concept of "management" and the Russian "management" and, accordingly, "manager" and "leader" are one and the same. Yes and no. In a general sense, or, so to speak, from a bird's eye view, perhaps - yes. At the same time, there are also differences in the interpretation and application of these concepts, which are of interest, however, mainly only to specialists. However, two differences appear to be significant. First, when talking about "management", Americans almost always mean the figure of a "manager" - a person, a subject of management, acting in some organization. In a more general sense, they use the term "administration", "administration" (administration), which to a greater extent reflects an impersonal management system. Secondly, when they say “manager”, then, by and large, they mean a professional manager who is aware that he is a representative of a special profession, and not just an engineer or economist involved in management. In addition, a manager is a person who, as a rule, has undergone special training.
This book will help you, dear reader, to take quite serious, for someone, the first steps on this path. The question "How to become a manager?" actually not so naive. Of course, for this you need to take a managerial position, become a leader. But the main thing is to be aware of your professional affiliation with management, to master the amount of knowledge that directly concerns management, to adhere to certain standards, even external attributes of behavior that are usually inherent in managers. A full-fledged manager, for example, in whatever country he is, needs to know English. And yet, at the same time, one should not forget that the leader who knows his business, knows how to manage well, and achieve his goals, regardless of his appearance and education, is valuable. Wherever it is, this is the main standard of a real "manager".
In the culture of developed capitalist countries, the concept of management very often coexists with the concept of business. Business is an activity aimed at making a profit by creating and selling certain products or services. "Business management" is the management of commercial, economic organizations. Along with this, the term business administration is used almost as a synonym, which can be translated as "business administration". The term "management" is applicable to any type of organization, but when it comes to government bodies at any level, it is more correct to use the term public administration - "public administration".
A businessman and a manager are not the same thing. A businessman is the one who "makes money", the owner of capital in circulation, generating income. It may be a business person who does not have anyone reporting to him, or a major owner who does not hold any permanent position in the organization, but is the owner of its shares and may be a member of its board. The manager, on the other hand, necessarily occupies a permanent position, people are subordinate to him. A somewhat more special case of business is entrepreneurship. This type of activity is even more associated with the personality of a person - an entrepreneur who carries out business, starting a new business, implementing some innovation, investing his own funds in a new enterprise and taking personal risk. The differences between a manager and an entrepreneur will be very large if the manager gravitates towards a bureaucratic leadership style, but to a certain extent they are erased if he adheres to an entrepreneurial management style. So far, very few large firms have managed to resolve this contradiction, and yet the reader will find some examples of success in this matter in the pages of this textbook.
The wide public interest in management is largely associated with the formation and development of business schools or management schools, the most common in the United States and which are part of the "management infrastructure". Infrastructural sectors in production - energy, transport, telecommunications, etc., and in the non-manufacturing sector - education, publishing, public computer networks, consulting, etc. - are very developed precisely in a market economy, where horizontal connections are especially important , and public services that satisfy a certain social need and are paid for by the consumer are quickly formed into independent large, medium or small businesses. Today the USA is the country with the most developed management infrastructure in the world. There are more than 1,300 registered business and management programs in America that have an official certificate from the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business, including 600 business schools operating independently within multidisciplinary universities. They provide regular education in business and management. There are over 10,000 consulting firms operating in the country, in addition to tens of thousands of independent consultants who provide services in various aspects of this activity. More than 70 periodicals, more than a dozen publishers specialize in management and business literature. The United States is a leader in management science, business and management research in terms of both the number of researchers, the amount of money spent, and the breadth of the problems covered.
The system of education in business and management, as in most other specialties, is three-stage in the United States. After graduating from high school, after four years at a university or college, you can get a bachelor's degree, which is roughly equivalent to our diploma of higher education. At the same time, after the first two years, you can interrupt education, which will be tantamount to graduating from a “junior college”. This is followed by a two-year education in master's programs: "Master of Business Administration" - Master of Business Administration - the famous MBA (MBA); "Master of Management Science" - Master of Management Science - MMS (EMM Es); "Master of International Management" - Master of International Management - MIM (M I M) and the like.
Usually, people aged 25-30 years old who, in addition to a bachelor's degree, have at least two years of practical work, enter master's programs. The master's degree awarded as a result of training, generally speaking, is not a scientific degree. This degree is rather “professional”, indicating that the graduate who received it has not only theoretical, but also practical knowledge and partly skills in the field of business and management based on the analysis of a large number of management situations, participation in management games, internships in large firms, abroad etc. MBA programs are the main ones for business schools, especially leading ones. They are characterized by an exceptional intensity of study and guarantee the high quality of specialists. There is a real hunt for graduates of the top ten most quoted business schools. For example, the starting salary of a master's degree from Harvard Business School, which has been ranked number one for many years, typically exceeds $60,000 per year. Its constant rival is the Stanford School of Business, the leading places are occupied by the Wharton School in Pennsylvania, the Sloan School at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Michigan School of Business and others. And at the same time, those who graduate from less prestigious schools may have problems finding employment. In general, in order to make a career as a professional manager in the United States, especially in a large firm, or as a specialist in business and management of a high rank, a master's degree is considered highly desirable. Recently, evening programs of study on master's programs for executive practitioners of the highest level (Executive MBA) have been widely distributed. In general, about 72,000 Americans receive professional MBA degrees each year, which is a quarter of all masters, which are prepared by American universities in all specialties.
The third stage of study in business and management are programs leading to the degree of Doctor of Philosophy - Philosophy Doctor - Ph.D. (P.H.D.). They provide for three to four years of study with the obligatory defense of a dissertation and the award of a Ph.D. This degree, approximately equal to the degree of a candidate of sciences in a strong Soviet university or research institute, is higher than a master's degree, but exists, as it were, in parallel. The master's degree is professional, and the doctoral degree is scientific. Those who receive it do not intend to become practical managers, but will be engaged in research, teaching in this area, or professional work as a planner, analyst in firms. High quality Ph.D. in US universities (where, by the way, there are no analogues of the second, higher degree of "doctor of science" awarded in our country and in Europe) is determined primarily by the development of a huge array of scientific literature and numerous special courses on the subject. It is not uncommon for a graduate student starting a Ph.D. at one university, he graduates from another, which is dictated by his scientific interests, the logic of research, the presence of prominent scientists engaged in research on problems of interest to him. For the Ph.D. PhD students enter with a bachelor's degree, and sometimes (not at all) a master's degree, in which case the period of study is reduced. This American system is very extensive, flexible and expensive. MBA tuition is typically around $15,000 a year at a top university, and a Ph.D. costs even more.
Recently, this education system has been criticized quite often. According to some, it forms people who are "in an ivory tower", having high ambitions, but not knowing real life, unable to adapt to change. However, US business schools are by no means going bankrupt. Moreover, income from master's programs is usually a good support for other, non-profit activities of American universities. If some master's programs cease to be in demand, they are replaced by others. In order to strengthen the connection between science and practice, many business schools prefer to hire people who have worked in senior positions in firms and government departments and at the same time have a Ph.D. degree, experienced in teaching and research. Professors who have passed this kind of “rotation” are a special category of teachers that is very valuable for business schools.
However, it should be emphasized that the American way of forming managers is not the only one in world practice. In Japan, for example, there are only three business schools, mainly to train those who intend to work abroad. Leaders are trained by the firms themselves on the basis of the concept of "learning by experience", systematically moving them to different positions. This allows you to learn the specifics of various aspects of the business and thoroughly study your company. Only at the age of about 35 employees have a chance to get their first managerial position. Everyone learns in Japanese firms - from workers to the president, and the main responsibility for this rests with the heads of each of the departments, the elders teach the younger ones. Sending practitioners to study at third-party training centers is not a common thing, although, for example, at Matsushita Denki, there is the Matsushita Academy, where capable young people with higher education are trained for another five years. But this is an exception for the elite.
Europeans also have business schools. Their leading European association EFMD (European Fund for Management Development) has about 300 full-fledged management training centers registered. Many of them are highly trained, although master's degrees in business and management are not as common and not as highly rated as in the United States. Somewhat more important in European schools are disciplines close to production, the study of social, as well as country and international aspects of business and management.
And yet it should be recognized that the training and formation of managers in different countries are very close both in essence and in the methods of organizing training, especially in the last decade. Management as a profession, as a field of knowledge, is becoming truly international. Mastering the experience of managing each of the countries, transferring this experience is a very valuable and useful thing that everyone is beginning to understand. After all, this allows not only to understand how to do business abroad, but also to learn how to avoid mistakes in situations that have not occurred in the present and the past, but are quite possible in the future. The story of someone else's success or failure can also be very instructive. And, of course, scientific and empirical generalizations, the development of general principles of effective management, the typification of its various forms and the conditions for their application - all this is the subject of serious work for those who think about management in scientific terms and advance managerial thought.
In all this diversity of theories and phenomena of living practice, American management has been and remains the most powerful "management civilization". Its leading importance in the world today is undeniable, and its influence on the development of theory, practice, and even more so management training is the greatest. There is no need to blindly follow the conclusions of American theorists and the recommendations of their practitioners, but it is certainly necessary to know their ideas.
This American textbook on management offered to our reader serves just this. This is not the first book of its kind translated in the USSR. In 1981, the book by G. Kunz and S. O "Donnell "Management: a system and situational analysis of managerial functions" (Translated from English. M .: Progress, 1981) was published. Previously, our readers got acquainted with the rather complete "Course for Higher Management personnel "(Abridged translation from English / Scientific ed. V.I. Tereshchenko / M .: Economics, 1970). The book of D. O" Shaughnessy "Principles of organizing company management" (M .: Progress, 1979). Among the Soviet works on this issue, the book of Academician D. M. Gvishiani "Organization and Management" (2nd additional ed. M .: Nauka, 1972), devoted to the systematization and analysis of the American management theory at that time, played the most significant role. However, the textbook "Fundamentals of Management" has a qualitatively different character. It has three characteristic features.
Firstly, this is a sufficient completeness of the description of the most important elements of modern knowledge about management, while, say, the book of G. Kunz and S. O "Donnell, mainly covered the principles of the "classical" or "administrative" school in theory management, and a more compact textbook by D. O "Shaughnessy contained a popular review of the results of the most famous research in this area. The authors of "Fundamentals of Management" went, by their own admission, along a somewhat eclectic path. They did not chase after an imaginary methodological harmony of presentation, but tried to adequately highlight the achievements of various approaches and schools and their real contribution to modern managerial thought. The reader of the book can be sure that he will get the basics of knowledge about management, get acquainted with all the most important achievements of Western managerial thought, and learn the most famous names of authorities in science and management practice. In general, this will prepare you to take the next steps - to delve into the study of specialized literature on certain aspects of management, discuss these problems with Western colleagues, or study management abroad. Such a feature of the book, of course, is a great advantage in our time of familiarization with the achievements of world management thought.
Secondly, this textbook has its advantages in terms of readership. With a solid scientific level, it is written intelligibly, fascinatingly, even lively, which was not in any of the previous books of this kind - domestic or translated. You can not only carefully study it with a pencil in your hands, but also just read it to broaden your horizons, or even for pleasure. The main contingent of our readers are those who have taken up the study of management without serious preliminary training and, perhaps, even higher education. In America, this textbook is used primarily by bachelor students. I, in particular, happened to use it as the main teaching aid when reading a course in the basics of management in 1989 at San Francisco State University for students in this category. But taking into account the specifics of our country, this textbook can be used not only by students. Managers who are training in management or upgrading their skills, already established engineers or economists with specific work experience, will find this book interesting and useful, as it opens up a new area of ​​​​knowledge for them, usually not included in our university courses. This book, due to the same novelty of its problems, can be very useful for those who receive postgraduate education in graduate school or in master's programs that are new to us. It is, of course, used by those who are now establishing management teaching in our country. It will be read by people of different ages and professions engaged in self-education. In a word, with the formation of a new system of training and advanced training of managers in our country, this textbook seems to be very timely.
Thirdly, this book is interesting from the point of view of a methodical approach to the organization of the presentation of the material. In my opinion, it is a good example of a high scientific level, sharpness of definitions and formulations, a sense of proportion in the presentation of scientific truths and, at the same time, full information about management practice, vivid examples and specific situations for analysis. The abundance of illustrative and schematic material, generalizations at the end of each chapter, questions for discussion - all this, of course, is the result of many years of evolution in the methodology of management education in America, and for us it is an example of a modern approach to the effective training of students and managers.
Speaking about the content of the book, it must be admitted that it gives a good idea of ​​the state of American managerial thought. Reading it, one can, in particular, form a certain position on the traditional, but still relevant question: is management a science or an art? There is good reason to argue that this is the synthesis of science, art, and experience, as discussed in chapter 1. This is, of course, trivial, but it is important to recognize the fact that management activities are so complex, and the science of management is still so young. that it is necessary to evaluate its possibilities with great care, of course, without detracting from the usefulness of life-tested theories and scientifically based methods. No one knows simple recipes for solving managerial problems, which is repeatedly emphasized throughout the pages of this book. This idea underlies the methodology of the "situational approach" to management - perhaps the largest scientific result in this area over the past two decades.
The assurances, characteristic of the Russian literature of the past years, that we are allegedly capable of “scientifically managing” not only production, but also society, do not stand up to criticism either from a theoretical or practical point of view. From an objective standpoint, the current state of scientific knowledge about management and housekeeping is such that it can serve as a source of not only insights, but also serious misconceptions, and “scientifically based” theories and methods can bring not only benefits, but also significant harm. It must be admitted that the myth of "scientific management" has long been simply beneficial to the ruling stratum of the bureaucracy in the administrative-command system in your country as one of the arguments for the centralization of power in its hands. Today, the attempt of the townsfolk to find those responsible for our past and present mistakes among scientists who allegedly advised leaders the wrong way is simply incorrect from the standpoint of real management practice, that weather is made by those who have power, and not those who advise them something. Although the lag in science and education in the field of management is, of course, people scientists are to blame.
In real management, the figure of a scientist, an expert, is perhaps not as important as the figure of a leader, albeit not so educated, but who owns the mysteries of management as an art due to his personal qualities, talent, experience, skills and sound judgment. The combination of talent and scientific knowledge in this area will give a synergistic effect, multiply the ability to achieve the desired results in practice. To do everything so that real talents in the field of business, management, entrepreneurship rise to the surface of real economic life, no matter what it costs - this is the way of salvation in market conditions. Without this, nothing good will happen in our economy.
At the same time, it is important for the reader to understand that management is, of course, an independent field of knowledge that requires thoughtful development. This is a separate discipline, or rather, an interdisciplinary field, which is most correctly called "managerial thought", combining science, experience, "know-how", multiplied by managerial art. Readers of the book will be convinced that management thought is influenced by the achievements of many sciences, and the evolution of management in the 20th century consists precisely in using these achievements to solve the main problem - how to get the desired results based on the coordinated actions of many people who produce products and services and use diverse resources.
And, indeed, the first breakthrough in managerial thought, which took place at the beginning of the century and was associated with "Taylorism", was based on the premise that one can manage "scientifically". This was both an insight and an illusion, but in fact it consisted in transferring the ideas of engineering sciences to management at the grass-roots production level. However, quite soon the management world realized the fundamental limitations of "Taylorism". The next major step in the development of Western management thought, closely related to the previous one, consisted in the dissemination of the “principles of management” formulated by A. Fayol, which can be recognized as the first independent result of the “science of administration” in its now classic version, focused primarily on building “ formal" organizational structures and systems. It is no coincidence that Americans call this Frenchman the father of management. It must be said that the search for rational forms of enterprise management in our country was carried out at that time with some consideration of these achievements. So, for example, by decision of the party conference, the “functional” (according to Taylor) was abolished in favor of “linear-functional” organizational structures (according to Fayol). But behind all this there were by no means scientific arguments, the specter of tightly controlled hierarchical management systems, based on the unquestioning subordination of the lower levels to the higher ones, on universalism, standard and impersonality, was already hovering over the country, which became a political and economic reality for many decades.
The third breakthrough in managerial thought, comparable in its significance to the first two and often called "neoclassical" - the birth of the school of "human relations" at the turn of the 30s. In the 1940-60s, this direction was continued by the development of the theory of organizations as social systems, but by its nature it was nothing more than the use of the achievements of psychology and sociology - the sciences of human behavior - in management. In Soviet theory and practice, this did not cause anything but a tough rebuff to the “intrigues” of bourgeois ideology in the field of establishing “human relations”, and the attempts of some of our scientists to appeal to reason only led to the defeat of sociology and stopped its application in management. This, along with the underestimation of the psychological aspects of behavior in real organizations, caused us enormous damage, which has by no means been repaired to this day.
A new breakthrough in management thought - the development of modern quantitative methods for justifying decisions in the 1950s and 60s - turned out to be a direct consequence of the use of mathematics and computers in management. In our country during this period, the economic and mathematical movement was especially strong, it had a great and generally positive influence on economic and managerial thought, although it was not without serious illusions and significant shortcomings. It was the "quantitative school" in world management thought that stimulated the involvement of the provisions of systems theory, cybernetics - areas of science that synthesize, integrate complex phenomena - to management, which over time contributed to overcoming the conflict between the rationalism of the supporters of the "science of management" and the romanticism of enthusiasts of establishing harmony in human relationships, organizations and society.
At the turn of the 1970s, a turning point for all management thought was the clearly formulated idea that an organization is an open system that adapts to its very diverse external and internal environment, and the main reasons for what happens inside the organization should be sought outside it. . The 1970s and 1980s were spent in an intensive search for relationships between types of environment and various forms of management. Alas, this transition from universalism to a “situational approach”, comparable to the transition from a plane to a three-dimensional space, from silent black-and-white cinema to color with stereophonic sound, in domestic management thought, which, like the whole of society, was in stagnation, to Unfortunately, it went almost unnoticed.
The decade of the 1980s was marked by a new breakthrough - the discovery, unexpected for many Americans, of the importance of "organizational culture" as a powerful management tool, used especially effectively by the Japanese. Today, many American theorists tend to place culture on a par with the organization as a managerial tool in terms of its impact on people, and curricula to transform culture in organizations were a fashionable innovation of the leading business schools in the 1990s. It seems that there is a rational grain in this. After all, in the second half of the 1980s, we also discovered that the main potential and at the same time the main danger for progressive changes lies in a person, or rather, in his mind, in culture, including cultural stereotypes of behavior in organizations.
If we talk about the years of the 90s, here, in my opinion, there are three most interesting trends. The first of them is connected with some return to the past - awareness of the importance of the material, technological base of modern production and the provision of services. This is due not only to the use of computers in management, but also to the general strengthening of the influence of technological progress on achieving the goals of the organization, increasing the role of productivity and quality in order to win the competition. It is no coincidence that this textbook on the basics of management has independent sections on managing operations and achieving high performance through the synthesis of human activities and the use of technological factors of production. It seems that managerial thought is again entering a period of some strengthening of "technocracy" in it on a new, deeper and healthier basis.
However, in parallel with this, there is a second trend, which already concerns social, behavioral aspects - this is an increase in attention not only to organizational culture, as mentioned above, but also to various forms of democratization of management, the participation of ordinary workers in profits, in the implementation of managerial functions. , owned. This idea, which originated in the 1930s and was persistently developed by the theorists of the 1950s, was implemented in the practice of American management, however, rather sluggishly. In this, American management differed from European and Japanese (albeit very peculiar in this sense) management. But today the democratization of management, participation in management
- this is reality. It is already generally recognized - both in Europe, and in Japan, and in the USA - that the future belongs to democratized, "participatory" forms of government. This phenomenon, apparently, will be generalized and comprehended in the coming years by management specialists. Our practice can give a lot of original and interesting things in this area, as well as in matters of business ethics - another traditional, but again very relevant aspect of managing in a market, economic freedom.
Finally, the third feature of managerial thought in the 1990s was the strengthening of the international character of management. Following the transition of most post-industrial countries to an open economy, a sharp increase in the role of international competition and, at the same time, production cooperation, the development of transnational corporations, etc. The internationalization of management raises a lot of new questions for management theory and practice. The most important of them are what is common and special in management, what patterns, forms, methods of management are universal, and which operate in a range of specific conditions of different countries, how best to perform management functions in foreign economic activity, what are the features of the national style in management , in organizational behavior, how important these features are for achieving the desired results, how foreigners can quickly adapt to the national local environment. These are all extremely interesting new questions, many of which are still waiting to be answered. For us, in this area, too, we have to overcome a serious backlog, because international business is a new thing for many, it needs to be learned from the basics. There are already more than 30 thousand enterprises and organizations involved in foreign economic activity, and it is impossible to train and consult all their personnel in a short time. And yet, the search for the shortest paths to success in this area, taking into account the experience of other countries that do not repeat the mistakes of others, is a worthy task for creatively thinking people in our country.
The advantage of this textbook is that, by highlighting the state of managerial thought in scientific and applied aspects, it brings the reader up to about the mid-80s. At the same time, it is very American, closely connected with the development of American managerial thought, based on many values ​​that are characteristic of American society, culture, and management. It contains vivid examples from the practice, first of all, of this country. Therefore, it is necessary to make some allowance for this specificity, to leave room for a certain amount of skepticism, for a free search for thought and taking into account our special conditions. At the same time, it must be clearly understood that this book deals only with the basics of management. Real professional knowledge in management, management requires the development of both special management literature on various sections of this discipline (which is why the text contains numerous references to American sources), and the development of fundamental works in related disciplines - economics, sociology, psychology, mathematics, cybernetics etc. This is necessary first of all, of course, for those who intend to devote themselves to research and teaching in the field of management. For practitioners, apparently, it is much more important to delve into the study of specific situations, and more generally, into the study of the history of management on the example of well-known organizations, famous projects, the activities of outstanding leaders, etc. It seems that this empirical layer in managerial thought is still undeveloped virgin land for us. Raising it, we will understand a lot in our management, we will learn to separate the wheat from the chaff, we will learn from the past, we will take a real step forward.
If we try to assess the significance of this textbook for our reader in modern conditions, then it should be emphasized that even some five years ago this book, perhaps, would not have been worth publishing in a large circulation. It could be used in teaching courses on foreign management experience, which were and are being taught in a few of our educational institutions, but for American researchers it would naturally seem somewhat superficial. It would be better to replace it with a series of more specialized, narrowly focused books or works by Soviet authors that analyze and evaluate certain aspects of foreign management. Until recently, this has been the case. However, now the need for such a book is great, since it is at the present time that the formation of a new managerial thinking in most people is necessary. After all, now there is already a very high confidence in the transition of our economy to the market. And this transition means a colossal restructuring of the entire management system.
Management of organizations is an adaptation. This is the cornerstone of modern management methodology. Nothing in management happens unmotivated, everything has its own reason, everything is determined by the extremely complex intricacies of the influence of many variables, the external and internal environment of the organization. That is why it is so difficult to manage well. Modern managerial thought allows us to realize this truth.
Of course, we can talk about our lagging behind in theory and especially in the practice of effective management, however, in my opinion, this would, by and large, be simply incorrect. After all, the management of Soviet organizations for decades was adapted to the requirements of a certain environment - the administrative-command system . And adaptation to this system, not only to the organizational, legal, economic mechanism, but also to its policy, ideology, system of values, took place very actively and in its own way was by no means unsuccessful. Implementation of the plan, often at any cost, instead of meeting the needs of the consumer; growth in the size of enterprises, an increase in the volume of output, regardless of the improvement of its quality and the economical use of resources; stability instead of dynamics; unification instead of diversity; subordination instead of initiative and freedom - these and other requirements of the economic system encouraged certain forms of management to come into being, which made it possible to adapt to specific conditions. According to modern classifications, what was common before are bureaucratic, mechanistic systems for managing organizations.
The administrative-command system was looking for its talents. Among them were outstanding "production commanders", brilliant technocrats, to whom the industry owes a series of outstanding achievements, but at the same time - tough bureaucrats, dogmatists, masters of political intrigue, who turned out to be the creators or accomplices of not just stagnation in society, but also a real national disaster. . A huge mass of people in our economy who were not involved in politics simply worked in ordinary managerial positions. They did their job within the framework of the system where they happened to live, their actions corresponded to the requirements of specific situations, and their views were generally accepted in their environment. In many cases, it was more difficult to achieve results in this environment than in another, more rational in its structure. This required a strain of thought, a kind of search, and enormous personal dedication. Unfortunately, the social selection operating in the administrative-command system often contributed to the promotion of not the best people to top management positions. And yet, from the standpoint of today, it is in no way possible to belittle the potential of our leaders, engineers, workers, and even entrepreneurs. It is important to make the best use and develop this potential. We have no other way. It is necessary to deeply realize the fact that we are all the product of a bureaucratic "administrative civilization" that has shown its historical failure and is in need of revolutionary restructuring.
It should be borne in mind that in its history, mankind has developed only three fundamentally different management tools - that is, influencing people. The first is hierarchy, organization, where the main means of influence are relations of power-subordination, pressure on a person from above, with the help of coercion, control over the distribution of material wealth, etc. The second is culture, that is, values, social norms, attitudes, patterns of behavior, rituals that are developed and recognized by society, organization, group, which make a person behave one way and not another. The third is the market, that is, a network of equal horizontal relations based on the sale and purchase of products and services, on property relations, on the balance of interests of the seller and the buyer.
It is important to understand that hierarchical organization, culture, the market are complex phenomena. These are not just “management tools”. In living, real economic and social systems, all of them almost always coexist. It is only about what is given priority, what is the main bet. This determines the essence, shape of the economic organization of society.
The root of the administrative-command system of traditional Soviet society was a hierarchy that was, so to speak, "universal". Everything had some kind of line of subordination, a higher authority, and the powers of the highest executive power were practically unlimited. But in parallel with this, Soviet society also actively used the "hard" culture as a powerful means of influencing its members. Through ideology, party membership, under the influence of the media, education, supported traditions and habits, people comprehended numerous do's and don'ts, controlled primarily by the partyocracy. They either adhered to them or came into conflict with the official system.
The market, as a universal means of influencing economic life, was suppressed in every possible way, used almost exclusively for trade in consumer goods. "Economic methods" of management were applied within a clear framework of hierarchical systems. And yet the market in its natural powerful state existed in the shadow economy, which along the way built its hierarchical relations in hidden antisocial, corrupt structures, formed negative cultures that deformed people's consciousness, their social relations.
The administrative and economic system, which has undergone a long evolution, was well debugged and coordinated in its main elements. Since Stalin's times, it has made it possible to keep society and specific organizations "in check", to achieve goals that were set from above, regardless of costs, to suppress external manifestations of conflicts. This "harmony of evil" the authors of this book, as pragmatists, would apparently recognize as effective (at least pay attention to their assessment of Mao Zedong on p. 46). In addition, this system was aimed at actively satisfying the lowest of the social needs of people - the need for involvement, belonging to a group (see Chapter 13). Despite the brutal suppression of the rights of an individual, for many loyal members of society, the myth of universal participation in building a happy future for the country under wise leadership, about life in the most just society formed the basis of the worldview.
Now, however, the system of government must undergo a radical transformation along with the whole of society. Their necessity is due to the fact that the administrative-command system, the ideology underlying it, came into obvious conflict with the requirements for the development of productive forces and ensuring human rights. Under the conditions of the scientific and technological revolution, new technology and the organization of production bring advanced countries to such a fundamental level of satisfying the economic needs of individuals that this is already the material basis for achieving real economic freedom in the lives of most people. Let this not apply to all countries and not all people, let it exist against the backdrop of great social inequality. However, a qualitative leap has already taken place. A real technical possibility to give people on a massive scale human conditions of existence - material and social, to save them from the fate of the "raw material of exploitation", to make them free to exist.
But in order to make such a leap, as the experience of many countries on different continents - both traditional and new leaders of world development - shows, it is necessary to have an adequate management system and culture that can ensure productivity, efficiency, dynamism, adaptability of production to the various requirements of consumers. , suppliers, inventors, etc. Only the market as a means of managing the economy by its nature has such a potential. Hierarchy, organization is a rational means of introducing stability, regulation into economic and other activities. In addition, different cultures correspond to the market and hierarchy, almost polar opposites in their essence.
The restructuring of the economic structure of Soviet society consists precisely in a cardinal structural change. The market - as a product of the rule of law and economic reality should become the main "instrument of management" (more precisely, even self-government) at the level of social production as a whole. It is he who will determine the essence of the economic structure of the new society, its external environment. Now, commodity-money relations will tend to acquire a "universal character", and society will quite reasonably restrict this process in some, primarily spiritual areas: education, culture, science, healthcare, etc.
The hierarchy will not die and collapse - that would be a disaster, it will fade into the background in some sectors of the economy that require more control, and most importantly, it will move down to the level of specific organizations, where its useful role will remain for a long time to come. The organizations themselves will adapt to the new external, partly internal environment; in their depths, bureaucratic, mechanistic structures and management systems will increasingly be replaced by organic, flexible, debureaucratized structures and systems.
In parallel, a colossal, figuratively speaking, “tectonic” cultural shift must take place in our economic, managerial thinking, and psychology. It is necessary to turn the consciousness of the leader, the worker, towards the consumer, and not towards the boss; to profit, not to waste; to the entrepreneur, not to the bureaucrat; to the innovator, and not to the thoughtless performer; to pluralism and diversity, not to unification and depersonalization. By and large, we must move from the ideologists of the gassing of management to common sense, from the scientism of abstract schemes and the dogmatism of self-satisfied edifications to knowledge that gives a practical result in improving the behavior of people and the functioning of organizations. If this is not done purposefully, stubbornly, realizing the complexity of the task, nothing will happen, no matter how radically hierarchical relations are replaced by market ones at the legal level, no matter how carefully new “systems” are worked out. Softening, atrophy of culture as a "management tool", inattention to it - this is the path to collapse in the new conditions. Without this "organizational cement" capable of withstanding higher stresses and loads, a new building cannot be built.
This book can make a contribution to the formation of new managerial thinking and the development of new knowledge that we need today. Some of its provisions will be unknown to many, especially if we take into account our poor understanding of the essence of the market and competition, poor education in the field of sociology and psychology. Others, say, connected with modern methods of substantiating decisions, from the standpoint of our managerial knowledge, will be perceived even as somewhat primitive. Still others, for example, the problems of forming organizational management structures, will seem familiar from previous domestic and translated foreign publications. However, after reading the book, we will rethink many of the problems of entrepreneurship and management that are already facing the Soviet business executive. Everyone, apparently, will choose those questions that are more consonant with his current problems, specialty, ability to see and learn new things. However, it seems that this American textbook, written cleverly and skillfully, with great attention and respect for the reader, will not leave anyone indifferent. I would like to wish that familiarization with management thought in its modern American interpretation will become useful and interesting for you, dear reader, make you a more effective leader, encourage you to search for truths and practical approaches that help solve our problems, taking into account the searches and discoveries of others.
The publication of Fundamentals of Management is the result of expanding Soviet-American cooperation. The American-Soviet Trade and Economic Council (co-chairs - W. Forrester and V. Cheklin), its committee for the training of managers, headed by A.F. Dobrynin (USSR) and D. Andreas (USA) rendered great assistance in the implementation of this project. San Francisco State University School of Business Dean A. Cunningham and San Francisco State University Professor S. Thrall were the originators of this idea. The Soviet publishers of the book are grateful to them, as well as to everyone who worked on the translation and publication of this textbook.

Professor L. I. Evenko, Rector of the Higher School of International Business at the Academy of National Economy

We are going on a journey. Most of the territory will be unfamiliar to us or, which greatly complicates matters, will not coincide with what we are convinced we know. Further complicating our journey is the limitation of the time and volume of the book. And yet, despite these difficulties, the final destination of our journey justifies all the trouble. We intend to master the basic concepts of management and organization, this topic is of great practical value and is of extreme importance for almost all members of modern society.
It is believed that the journey will be more successful if you have at least a general idea of ​​\u200b\u200bwhat lies ahead. Our trip is no exception in this sense. In the same way that a traveler studies a map of a country before driving through it, we will begin in Chap. 1 with a general description of organizations, their importance and the nature of governance. In ch. 2 is given short description evolution of management, since it is management that is the main topic of our book.
Before you travel around the country, you will certainly want to make sure that all the parts of your car are in order. And you, of course, understand that no new spark plugs in the car will help the cause if the brakes suddenly fail at the top of the mountain pass. Before starting a trip, you probably want to know about other aspects of the upcoming trip, where, say, you can fill up with gasoline and what is the condition of the roads. Similarly, the manager must understand and consider the critical factors or components of the organization, as well as the forces that affect the organization from outside. The constituent elements of an organization, which are called internal variables, are described in Chap. 3. The forces of the external environment (environment) of the organization, or external variables are described in Ch. 4.
Continuing our analogy, we can say that good driver always remembers that the car can become a source of danger. He not only takes safety measures, but also takes into account the capabilities of the car. Similarly, leaders must consider the organization's impact on society. This is the topic of ch. 5, titled<Социальная ответственность и этика>.

ORGANIZATIONS, MANAGERS AND SUCCESSFUL MANAGEMENT

Introduction

Managing an organization in our dynamic times is a complex job that, as we are about to learn, cannot be done successfully by simple, dry, learned formulas. The leader must combine an understanding of general truths and the significance of the many variations that make situations different from one another. This chapter discusses the basic definitions of organizations, management and managers and provides a somewhat simplified description of them. It also defines the success of an organization and its components: efficiency, economy and productivity. Our goal is to lay the groundwork for understanding the following chapters and to give you a general idea of ​​the task ahead of us. Your goal in reading this chapter (and all others) should be to understand the key concepts, not just memorize the wording.
After reading this chapter, you should understand the terms and concepts mentioned above.

WHAT MAKE ORGANIZATIONS SUCCESSFUL?

Situation 1: Winning a computer game

Realizing that the computer is a sign of the future and the most rapidly growing business in modern world, the two firms decided to compete in this field. Firm A is one of the large American corporations already in the lead.
in electronics. She has hundreds of millions of dollars to invest in this business, spending them on market research, attracting the best technical specialists and marketers, to build the latest, well-equipped factories. Firm B is just two college dropouts. All their experience in electronics actually comes down to the sale of "blue boxes" - devices for illegal free long-distance calls. Before starting the development of their machine, they do not spend a penny on research. The entire initial venture capital is $1,300 from the sale of a Volkswagen bus and a pocket calculator. Their headquarters (and in general their only room) is located in the bedroom of one of the partners, and the assembly line is in the garage. Who will be more successful - firm A or firm B?
The obvious answer is Firm A. Firm A in this situation was Radio Corporation of America (RCA). You probably don't know about its computers, because in 1976, having lost more than $300 million, it closed down its computer production. And firm B is Apple Computer Products, which in 1982, only 6 years after its inception, set a record by entering the list of the 500 most successful firms published by Fortune magazine.

Case 2: Big name in retail

This firm is a pioneer in marketing and retailing and was the first of all companies to introduce the development and procurement of products in accordance with the wishes of its customers. It was probably she who owned the first department store, where she first
realized its idea: to offer the buyer a wide choice of products, a significant part of which was made according to its own specifications. This well-established chain of stores, famous for their "we refund your money, no questions asked" policy, is now, decades later, the nation's largest retailer. What company are we talking about?
If you said "Sears", you would have a good reason. But while many of the characteristics of the above company apply to America's largest retailer, you guessed it wrong. This is the Japanese company Mitsukoshi Department Stores. It was founded in 1650, and as Japan's largest retailer, it predates Sears' practice 250 years before its introduction.

Situation 3: How to get a grade

Sometime in the 1960s, you are an economics student at Yale University, writing a term paper proposing to create an airline that would deliver small parcels and parcels across the country within one day. This company you dream of would compete directly with UPS and the American Postal Service. The plan calls for the exclusion of these two most powerful competitors from business, even on the condition that the company being created would charge 40 times more for its services in delivering a small package over the same distance than its competitors. What grade would you get for your work?
Probably a "three" just for diligence, just like Frederick W. Smith for his "strange" work, which was essentially a fairly detailed plan for the creation of the Federal Express Corporation. Smith could have challenged this estimate, but the management of Federal Express, which brings in $600 million a year and guarantees the delivery of millions of parcels and small parcels a year within 24 hours of dispatch, does not give him time to do so. Smith doesn't even have time to spend the $58 million he personally earned at the company the year he was named CEO of the highest-paid company in the country.

Situation 4: Can it be calculated?

Like RCA in situation 1, this company is a giant corporation seeking to capture a large share of the market. The company has an even more conservative public image than RCA. Until recently, the company had a policy requiring all male employees, even maintenance workers, to show up to work in white shirts and ties. In its 75 years of existence in business, this company has never been considered a scientific and technical leader. But while its products are not state-of-the-art, the company typically charges about 25% more than its competitors for similar products. Instead of setting high sales targets, the company sets sales targets so low that nearly every employee ends up receiving a performance bonus. The company also trains its salespeople to try to charge less money from customers. In order to stimulate them in this, the company sometimes resorts to such unusual events as holidays in a specially rented stadium for this purpose, when sellers run out onto the field, while their names are announced on the radio, numbers are displayed on a large information board, reporting the number of products sold by them and the money they received. Does this company have a chance to successfully compete against such an active competitor, as Apple, in the personal computer business?
Answering once a reporter just this question, the former president of Apple, A.S. Markkula said that his company's three biggest competitors are "IBM", "IBM" and "IBM". And the company whose customs we have described above is, of course, the company "IBM". Assessment of Mr. A.S. Markkuly turned out to be ominously correct as the IBM personal computer skyrocketed to the top spot in the industry, while taking a huge bite out of Apple's market size and sales.

Situation 5: Food for Thought

Two firms in the restaurant business. The first is located in an old building in the oldest part of the city, and not on the first floor. The food and service here is excellent, but the owners refuse to advertise their customers in the restaurant. The second company has much lower prices, its cooks do not have such experience, everything is prepared at once, in large portions, stored on food warmers and heated as needed until everything is sold. The second company is conveniently located in the newest part of the city and provides ample opportunities for advertising to its customers. Who from them more likely to succeed?
In fact, both of these firms can certainly be classified as prosperous. Numerous gourmets consider "La Tour d" Arzhan "the best restaurant in the world for all two hundred years of its existence. It occupies the top floor of a building with a magnificent view of Notre Dame de Paris in the French capital. However, most people know better another catering establishment - which sells hamburgers under the letter "M" in the form of two crossed golden arches (The emblem of the McDonald's company. ( Note. lane.)).

Situation 6: Obvious Truths

The Declaration of Independence proclaims that "we hold to the manifest truths." This is exactly the case with management and modernity. It is clear that the world is changing rapidly, and in order to survive, we must also change. It also seems obvious that managers today must always make decisions quickly, because there is a need for this. Similarly, the statement that one person cannot directly supervise a thousand subordinates is also true. These truths do not seem so obvious to the leaders of one institution. Even against the backdrop of a full-blown government bureaucracy, this organization can be compared to a snail racing a hare when it comes to the pace of new policy development, the transition to new practice. Its leader seems to be unaware of modern trends in democracy. He issues verdicts without consulting mere mortals and expects them to obey his orders without question. We say here “he”, not “she”, because the very word “leader” is a masculine noun, as it were, excludes the possibility for a woman to rise to the highest rung of the hierarchical ladder of this organization. Can such an organization even ask in its prayers to let it survive the period of the 80s?
No one can say with certainty what is destined for us in the future. But if you survive and prosper in the year 2000, then you have achieved a lot. There is a high probability that the Roman Catholic Church will survive until that time, at least until the 1990s.

______________________________

Why did the tiny Apple and the giant ABC make hundreds of millions in the computer business, while others like RCA lost their fortunes? How can Federal Express provide a higher level of service than postal service The US Department of Communications, which has much more resources and full government support? How does McDonald's manage to cook billions of hamburgers a year, sell them cheaply and make huge profits while most restaurants are unable to serve several hundred customers a day ? Why, after so many years of existence, Shiro and Mitsukoshi are still the leading retail companies in their countries, while others, such as W. T. Grant went bankrupt? Why can a religious institution such as the Catholic Church thrive in the year 2000 if it operates on principles and practices that would ruin any businessman in a matter of hours?
The field of management has evolved in response to the need to explain why and why organizations succeed or fail. Management scientists, through research and practice in management through trial and error, are relentlessly looking for an answer to the question: “What determines the success of an organization?” The answer to this question leads to an answer to the more pragmatic question: “What can a leader do to make the organization successful?”
In each of the above situations, it would not be difficult to find a ready-made answer that explains the success or failure of a particular case. We would be right to say that RCA tried to compete directly with IBM, while Apple entered the microcomputer business a few years before IBM. But D&C, Data General, Honeywell also faced IBM head-on in competition and did not fall in the struggle. McDonald's rose to the level of a billion-dollar company because it sold its hamburgers cheaper than anyone else, but not cheaper than Watson or White Castle, which were once the leading fast food corporations. service. We have many times to be convinced that simple explanations often seem reasonable at first glance, but then turn out to be either unproven or erroneous.
The absence of simple answers does not mean at all, however, that success cannot be explained at all, that there are no reliable methods and ways to achieve such success. There are numerous techniques, a lot of practice, interesting concepts that have proven to be effective. The absence of simple answers means only that there are no ways and means that are equally suitable at all times and for all people and circumstances; it also means that, having been successful in the past, the method may be completely ineffective in the future. Henry Ford's concept of mass-producing a standard car was one of the greatest ideas in history. But Ford was blinded by his own success, and this almost led the company to collapse: he stubbornly remained loyal to the T car at a time when General Motors had already developed and offered cars of different models and colors to car buyers. Likewise, the lesson that RCA had learned to become a leader in television production and broadcasting turned out to be completely useless when the company entered the computer business.

ORGANIZATIONS

All the success and failure examples of firms and companies cited at the beginning of this chapter have one thing in common. Brownie Corpse 107, Texas Royal Ranch, Mount Sinai Hospital, Los Angeles Sheep, Sony, Harper & Row, Mario Parlor Pizzerias, People's Republic of China, General Motors, Exxon, the US Navy and your college. All of them are organizations. The organization is the basis of the world of managers, it is the cause that determines the existence of management. Therefore, we will begin the study of management, having first learned what an organization is and why it needs to be managed.

What is an organization? A group must meet several mandatory requirements to be considered an organization. These include:
1. Availability at least two people who consider themselves part of this group.
2. Having at least one goals(i.e., the desired end state or result) that is accepted as common by all members of a given group.
3. The presence of group members who intentionally work together to reach a common goal.
Combining these essential characteristics into one, we get an important definition:
ORGANIZATION is a group of people whose activities are consciously coordinated to achieve a common goal or goals.
FORMAL AND INFORMAL ORGANIZATIONS. To be more precise, let's say that the above definition is valid not just for an organization, but for a formal organization. There are also informal organizations, groups that arise spontaneously, but where people interact with each other quite regularly. Informal organizations exist in all formal organizations, except perhaps very small ones. And although they have no leaders, informal organizations are so important that we will devote an entire chapter to them. In accordance with generally accepted practice, when speaking of informal organizations, we will call them that. And using the word organization, we will always keep in mind formal organization.

Resources in italics are of primary importance to the organization
COMPLEX ORGANIZATIONS. In defining our subject, we said that an organization always has at least one common goal shared and recognized as such by all its members. But formal management rarely deals with organizations that have only one purpose. The subject of the book is the management of complex organizations. Complex organizations have a set interrelated goals.
One simple example: McDonald's is an organization of more than 7,000 self-sustaining businesses supported by a large number of organizations working behind the scenes, building stores and shops, advertising, purchasing products, developing new types of products. performing quality control. Each McDonald's establishment has its own sales and profit plans. Each auxiliary unit also has its own purposes, such as, for example, the purchase of beef at favorable prices. These goals are interrelated and interdependent. For example, a restaurant can achieve its goals by achieving its planned profit only if the purchasing department achieves its goals by providing enough buns at the right price, if the marketing department provides a sufficient influx of customers, technologists find a way to cook efficiently, etc. The main reason that allowed McDonald's to become largest enterprise in its business in the world, lies in the fact that the company manages not only to achieve all of the above goals, but also to effectively interconnect them at the lowest cost.

General characteristics of organizations

All complex organizations are not only groups that are purposeful in their activities and have a certain set of interrelated goals, they also have characteristics common to all complex organizations.
These commonalities, summarized below, help to understand why an organization must be managed in order to succeed.
RESOURCES. In general terms, the goals of any organization involve the transformation of resources to achieve results. The main resources used by the organization are people (human resources), capital, materials, technology and information (see Table 1.1.).
The resource transformation process is most easily seen in manufacturing organizations, but service organizations and non-profit organizations also use all these types of resources. In table. 1.1. presents the types of resources used in our organizations, mentioned in the situations at the beginning of the chapter. Apple and IBM use shareholder and bank funds (equity) to buy parts (materials), to build assembly lines (technology), and to pay factory workers (humans) to make computers they can sell with profit (results). Information resources are used continuously to communicate and coordinate each phase of the transformation process. Market research information helps Apple and IBM executives decide what type of product is most likely to appeal to the public. Communicating with workers gives them the information they need to do the job well. The speed and volume of product sales allows management to decide how well the company is operating towards achieving the desired results. The awareness of the importance of information as a resource is the main reason that information processing firms such as Apple and IBM have grown so rapidly. Information is acquired and distributed in the process of communication (connection), as described in detail in Chap. 5.
DEPENDENCE ON THE EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT. One of the most significant characteristics of an organization is its relationship with the external environment. No organization can be an "island in itself". Organizations are completely dependent on the outside world - on external environment- both in relation to their resources, and in relation to consumers, users of their results, which they seek to achieve.
Term external environment includes economic conditions, consumers, trade unions, government acts, legislation, competing organizations, the value system in society, public opinion, technique and technology, and other components described in more detail in Ch. 4. These interrelated factors influence everything that happens within the organization. For example, the introduction of new automated technology can provide an organization with a competitive advantage. But in order to use this new technology, an organization will have to find people with certain skills, as well as certain attitudes, that will make this new job attractive to them. If the economy improves or if there is competition in the market for such professionals, the organization may have to raise salaries to attract these professionals to work. When hiring them, the organization will have to comply with state laws that prohibit discrimination based on age, gender, and race. All these factors are constantly changing.
Of great importance is the fact that, although the organization depends entirely on the external environment, this environment, as a rule, is beyond the influence of managers. The best leaders at IBM can do nothing to keep a small Japanese company from entering the market with a new integrated circuit that makes some of IBM's products obsolete. And McDonald's will have no success trying to stop the federal government from raising the minimum wage, which will increase its labor costs by many millions of dollars a year.
Every year, management has to take into account an increasing number of environmental factors that take on a truly global character. To succeed, firms have to compete in foreign markets and resist the competition of foreign companies at home. This requires an understanding of a whole new field of jurisprudence, an awareness of new cultural values. Of great concern is the fact that only a very few companies, such as Coca-Cola and McDonald's, have penetrated the Japanese market and are successfully operating there. This is especially annoying because a large number of Japanese firms are successfully operating in the American electronics and automobile market.
HORIZONTAL DIVISION OF LABOR. Perhaps the most obvious characteristic of organizations is division of labor. If at least two people are working together towards the same goal, they should share the work among themselves. For example, a two-man organization with the goal of sailing a ship to a place 10 miles distant might divide the work so that one man handles the sails while the other is at the helm. The division of all work into its constituent components is commonly referred to as the HORIZONTAL DIVISION OF LABOR. Dividing a large amount of work into numerous small, specialized tasks, as described in Chap. 9 allows an organization to produce much more output than if the same number of people worked alone. By dividing the work of preparing and serving food among 12 employees, as McDonald's usually does, you can serve hundreds of times more people a day than traditional small restaurants with one chef and several waiters.
In very small organizations, the horizontal division of labor may not be clear enough. The owners, who are also managers of small restaurants, can alternate between preparing food and serving customers. But most complex organizations have this kind of horizontal division, so that their functions and goals can be clearly traced. A classic example of the horizontal division of labor in a manufacturing enterprise, for example, is production, marketing, and finance. They represent the main activities that must be successfully completed in order for the firm to achieve its goals.
SUBDIVISIONS. Complex organizations achieve clear horizontal divisions through education departments, performing specific specific tasks and achieving specific specific goals. Such divisions are often referred to as departments or services, but numerous other names also exist. McDonald's Corporation has dedicated divisions for each major function of the organization - marketing, purchasing, real estate, and so on. These divisions at McDonald's and elsewhere have their own smaller, more specific divisions. McDonald's, for example, being such a large and widely branched company, forms divisions both geographically and by individual activities. The real estate department is divided into sub-departments - selection of new locations of enterprises, management of existing property, and in each of these sub-departments there are groups by geographical areas, such as the East Coast group, the California group, the Western Europe group, etc.

Like the whole organization of which they are a part, divisions are groups of people whose activities are consciously directed and coordinated to achieve a common goal. Thus, at their core, large and complex organizations consist of several interconnected organizations specially created for specific purposes and numerous informal groups that arise spontaneously. On fig. 1.1. shows how a typical marketing department (itself a department) is in turn subdivided into smaller ones horizontal groups who perform specific tasks. Organizations also have a large number of informal, spontaneously emerging groups. For example, the stream of management students is a division of the college of business. After several joint sessions of such a stream, as you probably noticed yourself, several close-knit groupings are created, informal groups that form independently within the stream.

Rice. 1.1. Divisions of the College of Business.
If the department of management, which is itself a subdivision of the organization, does not achieve its goal, then the whole college, i.e. the organization as a whole will not achieve its goal.

VERTICAL DIVISION OF LABOR Since work in an organization is divided into its component parts, someone has to coordinate the work of the group in order for it to be successful. Returning to our boat example, if one of the sailors does not take over the duties of captain, and does not make sure that the movements of the rudder are coordinated with the maneuvers of the sails so that the ship keeps its course, the group sailing on the ship will probably never get to to destination port:
it will most likely end up where the wind and current will take it (i.e., the external environment).
So, in the organization there are two internal organic forms of division of labor. The first is the division of labor into components that make up parts general activities, i.e. horizontal division of labor. The second, called vertical, separates the work of coordinating actions from the actions themselves. The activity of coordinating the work of other people is the essence of management.
THE NEED FOR MANAGEMENT. In order for an organization to achieve its goals, tasks must be coordinated through a vertical division of labor. So management is an essential activity for an organization. However, small organizations often do not have a clearly defined group of managers. For example, in a small store managed by two partners, one of them may make purchasing decisions, thereby performing a managerial function for one week, and the second for another. Both of them coordinate the work schedules of their few subordinates in order to keep the store open during set hours. But both partners also perform non-management functions, serving customers and laying out goods on the shelves. Neither partner considers the other the owner or manager. But, although management functions are not clearly defined, the main function - coordination - is performed.
Even in large organizations, most leaders often do work that does not involve coordinating the work of others. Senior executives at IBM, for example, sometimes call clients themselves or go to shopping room in order to keep in touch with customers, to feel their needs. However, in all but the smallest organizations, management takes so much time that it becomes increasingly difficult to do it casually. As an organization grows, it becomes more difficult for people to know from whom they should directly take instructions. At this level, for an organization to operate successfully, management work must be clearly separated from non-management work, i.e. organizations should appoint leaders and define their duties and responsibilities. In fact, as we will learn in subsequent chapters, the super-large organizations of modern society became possible only when the need to separate management from commercial or technical activities became clearly felt.
WHO ARE MANAGERS AND WHAT DO THEY DO?
As we have just learned, all organizations share some common characteristics, including the need for governance. Not surprisingly, therefore, managerial work also has many common characteristics. A leader is a leader, and although organizations, areas, and responsibilities may differ, the job of the President of the United States has much in common with the work of a foreman on an assembly line at a Honda plant in Ohio.

General factors in the work of managers

Aspects of managerial performance that are common to all managers in all organizations are much less obvious than differences in their work.

ESSENCE OF MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES. As a convincing example, confirming that it is rather difficult to see what is common in the work of all managers, one can point to the essence of managerial work, i.e. what is the work of management in everyday practice. Most people, including practitioners themselves, believe that the routine work of a shop manager is not much different from the work of those whom he supervises. This seems all the more reasonable when you consider that they constantly interact and receive almost the same remuneration for their work. But research shows that managerial work is inherently very different from non-managerial work. Indeed, the job of a shop manager has much more in common with the job of a company president than with the job of the people who are under his control. Commenting on this, Mintzberg, who summarized earlier research and conducted fundamental research on the work of five senior executives, notes in his book “ The nature of managerial work":
“Almost all work in society requires specialization and concentration. Machine operators, having mastered the technique of manufacturing some part on their machine, can then be engaged in this operation for many weeks, engineers and programmers sometimes spend months developing some kind of bridge or computer program, merchants spend most of their lives selling the same product type. The leader, however, has no right to expect such homogeneity in his work. Rather, it will be characterized by the short duration, diversity and fragmentation of the activities carried out. Guest, according to whose research masters perform an average of 583 different management operations per day, notes:
“It is interesting to note that the characteristics of the master’s work, including variety, discontinuity in the actions performed and their fragmentation, are diametrically opposed to the work of many time mechanics, whose work is highly rationalized, repetitive, uninterrupted and carried out in a constant, steady, unchanging rhythm of a moving conveyor ".
ROLES OF THE MANAGER. Concerning the content of the manager's job, Mintzberg finds another common feature managerial work - the role of the leader. Role, by its definition, is "a set of defined behavioral rules appropriate to a particular institution or a particular job." Just as the characters in a play have roles that make them behave in a certain way, managers have certain positions as heads of certain organizational units and this is what determines their behavior at work. "An individual can influence character performance of the role, but not on it content. So actors, managers and others play predetermined roles, although as individuals they can give their own interpretation of these roles.

Source: Henry Mintzberg, The Nature of Managerial Work (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), p. 93-94.

In his works, Mintzberg identifies 10 roles that, in his opinion, leaders take on at different periods and to varying degrees. He classifies them into three broad categories: interpersonal roles, informational roles, and decision-making roles. In table. 1.2. such typing of roles is presented and examples for each role are given. As Mintzberg points out, roles cannot be independent of each other. On the contrary, they interdependent and interact to create a unified whole. Interpersonal roles stem from the authority and status of the leader in the organization and cover the scope of his interactions with people. These interpersonal roles can make the manager a focal point of information, which enables and simultaneously forces him to play informational roles and act as the information processing center. By taking on interpersonal and informational roles, the manager is able to play decision-making roles: allocating resources, resolving conflicts, seeking opportunities for the organization, negotiating on behalf of the organization. All these 10 roles, taken together, determine the scope and content of a manager's job, regardless of the nature of the particular organization.
For example, the section manager of the Siro store interacts with salespeople every day. They come to the manager to receive special instruction about the requests and needs of the client, to solve their work-related problems, and often just to talk. The head receives a large amount of information about how the sections work. For example, in relation to what customers say about products, information, for the most part, cannot be obtained from formal sources, such as sales reports. Information helps the manager to make right decisions to resolve existing or potential problems. And when a manager or lower-level manager sees the store manager, he passes on especially important pieces of information to his boss. They provide the basis for management decisions at a higher level.

MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS: DEFINITION OF MANAGEMENT. Mintzberg's well-received analysis of the content of managerial work is a useful explanation of what a manager does. However, not all authors agree with Mintzberg regarding his definitions and classifications. There is no such description of the work of a manager that would suit everyone in relation to the content, roles and functions of managerial work. Even in such simple matters as , At first glance, it seems the definition of management, there are no ready-made answers in management thought. Rice. 1.2. gives one of the options for interpreting the functions of a leader.
However, there is a widespread point of view that there is an applicable any organizations process management, which consists in the implementation functions, which must be fulfilled any supervisor. Currently, there is a tendency in the management literature to consider management as the implementation of functions. We will discuss this in more detail in Chap. 2, but now we can only say that there is no consensus on the question of what kind of management functions these are, however, most often these disagreements are explained by differences of a semantic nature. Most management experts accept the following definition.

MANAGEMENT is the process of planning, organizing, motivating and controlling that is necessary in order to formulate and achieve the organization's goals.

Peter F. Drucker, considered by many to be the world's leading management and organization theorist, offers a different definition (Example 1.1.).

Rice. 1.2. Leader as a system of information processing. Source Henry Mintzberg, (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), p. 72. Copyright® 1973 and reprinted by permission of the publisher.
We will briefly define the functions of planning, organizing, motivating, and controlling when we describe the approach to management as a process in the next chapter, and then elaborate on them in the second part of the book. It is very important that you understand the essence of these functions and how they interact with each other, forming a single process, i.e. continuous chain of interrelated activities.

Example 1.1.
Drucker on management
Management is a special kind of activity that turns an unorganized crowd into an effective, purposeful and productive group. Management as such is also a stimulating element social change, and an example of significant social change.
Finally, it is management, more than anything else, that explains the most significant social phenomenon of our century: the explosion of education. The more highly educated people there are, the more dependent they are on the organization. Virtually all people with a higher than high school education in all the developed countries of the world - in the United States this figure is more than 90% - will spend their entire lives as employees of managed organizations and will not be able to live and earn their living outside organizations. I can add that their teachers also belong to this number.

Source:. Peter F. Drucker New Discipline, Success! January- February 1987, p. 18.

Management levels

Although all managers play certain roles and perform certain functions, this does not mean that a large number of managers in a large company are engaged in the same job. Organizations that are large enough to provide clear distinctions between the work of managers and non-managers usually have such a large amount of managerial work that it must also be divided. One of the forms of division of managerial labor is horizontal in nature: the placement of specific managers at the head of individual departments. For example, many enterprises have heads of the financial department, production department and marketing department. As in the case of the horizontal division of labor to perform production work, horizontally divided managerial work must be coordinated so that the organization can achieve success in its activities. Some managers have to spend time coordinating the work of other managers, who in turn also coordinate the work of managers, until finally we descend to the level of a manager who coordinates the work of non-managerial personnel - people who physically produce products or provide services. This vertical deployment of the division of labor results in LEVELS OF MANAGEMENT. On fig. 1.3. one of the options for describing the levels of control is given.

Fig.1.3. Management levels.
The vertical division of labor leads to the formation of vertical management levels - on the example of a military organization, as well as in a business organization. The title of the posts does not imply that similar positions are directly comparable across organizations. In a military organization, there are many levels of authority above the brigadier general and below the captain. In business, there are fewer levels of management. The president or chief executive officer - the first person - is responsible only to the Chairman and members of the Board of Directors of the firm and, in accordance with the above example, cannot but be a leader below the head of the labor and wages department.

In an organization, it is usually possible to determine at what level one manager is compared to others. This is done through the job title. However , the job title is not a reliable indicator of a given manager's true level in the system. This observation is especially true when we compare the position of leaders in different organizations. A simple example: a captain in the army is a junior officer, and in the navy it is a senior officer. In some companies, salespeople are called regional or area sales managers, although they do not manage anyone but themselves.
For reasons we will discuss in more detail later, the size of an organization is only one of several factors that determine how many levels of management a company must have in order to achieve optimal results. There are many examples of highly successful organizations with far fewer levels of management than much smaller organizations. The Roman Catholic Church - an organization with millions of members - has only four levels between the Pope and the parish priest. The largest retailers - Shiro and Mitsukoshi - are also known for having very few levels of management, in contrast to another successful organization - the US Army. It has 7 levels and 20 ranks separating the general from the private in a battalion of 1000 people.
Regardless of how many levels of management there are, leaders are traditionally divided into three categories. Sociologist Talcott Parsons considers these three categories in terms of the function performed by the leader in the organization. According to Parsons' definition, persons on technical level mainly engaged in daily operations and activities necessary to ensure effective work without disruption in the production of products or services. Persons who are on managerial level, mainly engaged in management and coordination within the organization, they coordinate the various forms of activity and efforts of various departments of the organization. Leaders on institutional level" they are mainly engaged in the development of long-term (long-term) plans, the formulation of goals, the adaptation of the organization to various kinds of changes, the management of relations between the organization and the external environment, as well as the society in which the organization exists and functions.
A more commonly used way of describing levels of control is to single out low-level managers (managers), or operational managers, middle managers (managers) and senior managers (managers). Rice. 1.4. illustrates the correspondence between these levels and Parsons' concept of levels of control.
LEADERS OF THE LOWER LEVELS. Junior bosses, also called supervisors first (grassroots) link or operational managers - it is the organizational level directly above workers and other workers (non-managers). JUNIOR MANAGERS mainly monitor the performance of production tasks to continuously provide direct information about the correct execution of these tasks. Managers at this level are often responsible for the direct use of resources allocated to them, such as raw materials and equipment. A typical job title at this level is foreman, shift foreman, sergeant, head of department, head nurse, head of the department of management at a business school. Most of the managers in general are low-level managers. Most people start their managerial career in this capacity.
Research shows that the job of a grass-roots manager is stressful and filled with a variety of activities. It is characterized by frequent breaks, transitions from one task to another. The tasks themselves are potentially short: one study found that the average time it took a foreman to complete one task was 48 seconds. A period of time to implement the decisions made by the master is also short. They are almost always realized within less than two weeks. It was revealed that craftsmen spend about half of their working time in communication. They communicate a lot with their subordinates, little with other masters, and very little with their superiors.

Rice. 1.4. Two ways to represent levels of control.
The pyramid shape is used to show that there are fewer people at each successive level of government than at the previous one.

MIDDLE MANAGERS. The work of junior superiors is coordinated and controlled by middle managers. Over the past decades, middle management has grown significantly both in number and in importance. In a large organization, there may be so many middle managers that it becomes necessary to separate this group. And if such a separation occurs, then two levels arise, the first of which is called the upper level of the middle management link, the second - the lowest. Thus, four main levels of management are formed: the highest, the upper middle, the lower middle and the grassroots. Typical middle management positions are department head (in business), dean (in college), regional or national sales manager, and branch manager. Army officers from lieutenant to colonel, priests in the rank of bishops are considered middle managers in their organizations.
It is difficult to generalize about the nature of a middle manager's work, as it varies greatly from organization to organization and even within the same organization. Some organizations give their middle managers more responsibility, making their work somewhat similar to that of senior managers. A study of 190 executives in 8 companies found that middle managers were an integral part of the decision-making process. They identified problems, initiated discussions, recommended actions, and developed innovative creative proposals.
A middle manager often leads a large division or department within an organization. The nature of his work is determined to a greater extent by the content of the work of the unit than by the organization as a whole. For example, the activities of a production manager in an industrial firm mainly include coordinating and directing the work of field managers, analyzing labor productivity data, and interacting with engineers to develop new products. The head of external relations at the same firm spends most of his time preparing papers, reading, talking and talking, and attending various committee meetings.
For the most part, however, middle managers act as a buffer between top and bottom managers. They prepare information for decisions made by senior managers and transfer these decisions, usually after their transformation in a technologically convenient form, in the form of specifications and specific tasks to lower line managers. Although there are variations, the majority of communication among middle managers takes the form of conversations with other middle and lower managers. One study of middle management in a manufacturing enterprise found that they spend about 89% of their time in verbal interaction. Another study indicates that the middle manager spends only 34% of their time alone, it also highlights that most of the time these managers spend on verbal communication.
Middle managers like social group experienced a particularly strong influence of various economic and technological changes in production during the 80s. Personal computers eliminated some of their functions and changed others, allowing senior managers to receive information directly at their desks directly from the source, instead of filtering it at the level of middle managers. The wave of corporate mergers and the general pressure to become more efficient at work has also caused drastic cuts in the number of middle managers in some organizations. Chrysler, for example, reduced the number of middle managers by 40%, and Crown Zellerbach and Firestone by 20%.
SENIOR LEADERS. The highest organizational level - senior management - far fewer others. Even in the largest organizations, there are only a few senior managers. Typical senior executive positions in business are Chairman of the Board, President, Vice President of the Corporation, and Treasurer of the Corporation. In the army they can be compared with generals, among statesmen - with ministers, and at the university - with chancellors (rectors) of colleges.
SENIOR MANAGERS are responsible for making critical decisions for the organization as a whole or for a subset of the organization. If RCA's top management decides to transition the corporation to computers before the company can compete with IBM, there is little that middle and lower management can do to prevent a major failure. Strong senior executives leave the imprint of their personality on the whole image of the company. For example, the atmosphere in which the federal government operates, and indeed the whole country, usually undergoes significant changes under a new president. Consider the contrasts between the Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Reagan administrations. The influence of a senior executive in a company can be brilliantly illustrated by the dramatic changes that Chrysler underwent under the leadership of Lee Iacocca*. Therefore, successful top managers in large organizations are valued very highly, and their work is paid very well.

* Lee Iacocca. Manager's career: Per. from English. Moscow: Progress, 1990

But the hardships of such a post are also great: a person in this position, as a rule, is very lonely. After carefully studying the activities of five senior executives, Mintzberg came to the following conclusion: “Thus, the work of leading a large organization can be called extremely exhausting. The amount of work that a manager has to do or considers necessary to do during the day is enormous, and the pace at which it must be done is very stressful. And after long hours of work, the main leader (as, indeed, other leaders) is not able to leave his environment either physically (because the environment recognizes the authority and status of his position), or in his thoughts, which are aimed at continuous search new information.

Rice. 1.5. How leaders spend their time.
Source: Henry Mintzberg, The Nature of Managerial Work (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), p. 39. Copyright 1973 and reprinted by permission of the publisher.

The main reason for the intense pace and huge amount of work is the fact that the work of a senior manager does not have a clear conclusion. Unlike a sales agent who has to make a certain number of phone calls, or a worker in a factory who has to meet a production quota, there is no point in the plant as a whole, short of a complete shutdown of that plant, when the job can be considered finished. Therefore, the top manager cannot be sure that he (or she) has successfully completed his activity. As long as the organization continues to operate and the external environment continues to change, there is always the risk of failure. The surgeon may finish the operation and consider his task completed, but the senior manager always feels that something else, more, further needs to be done. A working week lasting 60 - 80 hours is not uncommon for him. On fig. 1.5. an example of how this time is spent is given.

Manager versus Entrepreneur

Term entrepreneur was introduced by the French economist Richard Cantillon, who lived at the beginning of the 18th century. And since then, this word has meant a person who takes the risk associated with the organization of a new enterprise or with the development of a new idea, a new product or a new type of service offered to society. It is very important to understand that the words "entrepreneur" and "manager" are not synonymous. The foundations of American industry were laid by a handful of bold entrepreneurs in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Here are their names: John D. Rockefeller (oil), J.P. Morgan (steel and banking), Andrew Mellon (aluminum), Andrew Carnegie (steel), Henry Ford (cars). They are familiar to every American. No less famous are the names of prominent entrepreneurs of recent decades: J. Paul Getty (oil), X. JI. Hunt ( food industry), Aristotle Onassis (courts), Edwin X. Land (Polaroid Corporation), John D. MacArthur (insurance). Example 1.2. talks about the beginning of the activities of one entrepreneur.
Hundreds of thousands of people who every year start new business, also belong to the class of entrepreneurs, although no one is destined to get their names in the history books. These people play a key role in the economy. Small business of an entrepreneurial nature plays a critical role in the US economy. According to Nesbitt, 10.8 million of the 11 million businesses in America are small businesses. It employs 60% of all work force. Moreover, for the period from 1972 to 1979. a 25% increase in the number of super-small self-employed enterprises*.

* Currently, there are more than 20 million enterprises in the United States (without agricultural enterprises), of which 99.6% are classified as small, with less than 500 people. Their share in the gross national product is about 40%, and in the number of employees - more than half. (Approx. scientific ed.)

Entrepreneurship, in terms of the concept, is not limited to business. The innovative forms of command introduced by General Waugrich in the U.S. Air Force Tactical Forces Group transformed it from an inefficient, seriously flawed and error-ridden service into a model of military excellence, and in just six and a half years.

EXAMPLE 1.2.
King of Biscuit Mountain: Entrepreneur

“I wanted to create a product that was unmistakably recognizable in quality, without a shadow of a doubt,” says Amos, a 44-year-old entrepreneur whose public relations talent and love for chocolate biscuits have merged into a $5 million business. of these biscuits a good image, - "image of quality". Amos' Famous Cheap Chocolate Biscuits Corporation achieved rapid recognition, with Amos trading in smart suits, brightly colored shirts, slacks, and wide-brimmed hats. It's all part of a big, clever strategy that evokes the idea of ​​forever young, lean, graceful, and with the thought of which he really forces his consumers to taste tiny, crunchy chocolate lumps.
Many had suggested that he start making chocolate biscuits before, but he did not seriously consider this idea until one of his friends told him that she knew a possible investor. “It was already something positive, something concrete,” says Amos. - It already sounded not just like "You need to open a candy store." It was already like, "We should open a store." It was at this moment that I attached the decision and said: "Let's open it."
Wald and his wife invested $10,000 in the business. If Amos' Famous Chocolate Cheap Biscuits Corporation were sold today, Wald says his stake (just over 10% ) would have been just over $1 million. Singer Marvin Gay also invested $10,000, with another $4,000 coming from Arty Mogulla, former United Artiste Records president. These funds helped Amos pay off his creditors and open the first store with a chocolate biscuit tasting room. Amos is the majority shareholder and owns about 43% of the corporation's capital.
Amos's friends supported his idea. The artist Tony Christian, who lived next door, gave the first store its distinctive look. He laid out the floor, hung the walls and designed the entire interior. “It was a project that captivated everyone who came into contact with it,” says Amos, bursting into laughter that has become something of a trademark of the firm. After the party that marked the opening of the store, there was no Wednesday for advertising. This forced Amos to switch to a fundamentally different marketing strategy. He hired girls and they handed out chocolate biscuits to passers-by in Beverly Hills and Hollywood. The same girls took orders for their manufacture, and Amos personally delivered the completed orders. “My goal at that time was, and still is, to ensure the success of the company,” says Amos. - And everything that I have to do for this, provided that it will be within the law and ethical standards I will definitely do it."
And he did just that. Amos sometimes worked K hours, baking his biscuits, giving interviews, and raising the profile of his products. Sometimes all night long he stood at the stove. To pay for the time he was given to advertise on the local radio, he donated $750 worth of his production there.
Wally Amos and his biscuits became famous. In five years he opened stores in Los Angeles, Santa Monica and 4 stores in Hawaii. He also ran a wholesale biscuit business in Nally, New Jersey and Van Nu, California. One hundred and fifty workers now bake 7,000 pounds of biscuits daily, which are delivered to convenience stores and branded stores throughout the United States.

Source J. Gregory Clemons, The King of Cookie Mountain , Black Enterprise, January 1981, p. 34-37.

ENTREPRENEURS AS MANAGERS. Since all entrepreneurs are actively involved in shaping the goals of an enterprise or organization, they manage this organization at the beginning of its activity, they can all be considered managers. Some are very successful in their managerial activities, not only at the very beginning of the development of the enterprise, but also during the long period of the enterprise. Mao Zedui, the founder of the PRC, ruled the country in such a way that he created a world power out of it. Thomas Watson, founder of IBM, developed and implemented numerous management practices that helped make IBM the undisputed leader in the computer industry. Although Ray Kroc bought the McDonald's name rather than start his own new company, his entrepreneurial move to industrialize hamburger cooking revolutionized the fast food service business. This and many other innovative management techniques, introduced during the days when Kroc was at the head of McDonald's, led the company to the success that we know about today. Frederick Smith also clearly demonstrated managerial talent, implementing the idea that led to the success of Federal Express.
Often, however, characteristics such as personal risk, response to financial opportunity, and willingness to work long and hard without taking rest into account, i.e. everything that is traditionally considered the traits of a good entrepreneur does not necessarily indicate the ability of the same person to effectively manage organization as it gets bigger. Some entrepreneurs may simply not have the ability or inclination to effectively perform managerial functions such as planning, organizing, motivating, and controlling. Author of one study comparing characteristics successful entrepreneur and a successful manager, comes to the following conclusion:
“Successful hierarchs (leaders) in business were able to bring organization into an unstructured situation and see the essence of their organization. Such leaders are able to make decisions. Entrepreneurs, however, did not follow such a line of behavior”, (in addition) a successful business leader showed a positive attitude towards the authorities. And the entrepreneur, by his nature, in short, does not want to recognize and obey authority, shows an inability to work under guidance and, as a result, seeks to avoid such a situation.
Therefore, there is nothing strange in the fact that an outstanding entrepreneur becomes a not particularly effective manager. The organization created by the entrepreneur may even fall apart as a result. In studies conducted by the state line , it is pointed out that, in practice, most new ventures in business fail, and the root cause of their failure is bad leadership, not bad ideas.
If the organization is lucky, a good leader will be at the helm before it collapses. “Siro, for example, did not become a giant retail firm while it was run by its founders, who even gave it a name. Julius Rosenwald, who bought Sears on the verge of collapse, and General Robert B. Wood were the men who turned Sears into a leader in their industry through innovative management and marketing policies. Likewise, Apple experienced a terrific take-off and an impressive increase in sales of its products after Joey Scully took over from the company's chairman and founder, Stephen Jobs.
ENTREPRENEURIAL MANAGEMENT. Organizations operating in a volatile environment simply cannot wait for change and then respond to it. Their leaders must think and act like entrepreneurs. The enterprising manager actively seeks opportunities and deliberately takes risks to achieve change and improvement. Pencho introduced the word enterprise, meaning this kind of attitude to the case and the actions themselves. Entrepreneurship is required at every level if the organization as a whole is to operate as an entrepreneur.
Large business activities that involve significant risk to the organization require decisions that are taken to the highest level of management. But these decisions are usually based on information and on the thoughts expressed by middle managers. If middle managers are unable or unwilling to take risks in connection with the emergence of new ideas, the entrepreneurial ability of the organization is seriously limited. Managers at all levels, even junior managers, must look for opportunities to improve the performance and efficiency of their organization. The craftsman who designs and implements a more efficient way to carry out a particular operation is as much an entrepreneur in spirit as a business executive who decides to invest $10 million in the development of a new product.
Being an entrepreneur is not easy, whether it is your own business or working in the structure of an established company. Both organizations and society strive to resist change, no matter how beneficial it may be. In the chapters that follow, we will explore the techniques that management uses to empower an organization to respond to changing societal needs and to make it easier for individual leaders to make entrepreneurial decisions.
RCA failed in the computer business because it wasn't really entrepreneurial organization. RCA's main approach to business was shaped by television, and television has not changed much since the introduction of color televisions. Because the company didn't give its lead computer engineers the same degree of creative freedom that IBM and other competitors gave them, RCA failed to attract or retain them. As a result, RCA was simply unable to develop and market its products fast enough to keep up with the radical changes in computer technology. In addition, the company was unable to offer the level of service that buyers of large systems, based on IBM's experience, could reasonably expect. Apple, Compac, and many other small companies excelled in this area mainly because they could develop new products without being bound by the structures of large, established organizations. Many believe that IBM's success is due to its succeed to be entrepreneurial, despite its enormous size.
MANAGEMENT FOR SUCCESS
The desire to succeed is common to many. But in order to decide whether success has been achieved or what is needed to achieve success, we must first define what success is. If you ask what organizations can be considered successful, most people will start listing the names of well-known giant enterprises. But if we think about your definition, we see that size and profitability may not always be considered criteria for success. Organizations exist to achieve specific goals. And if achieving huge size is not one of its goals, then a small business can, in its own way, be considered as successful as a large organization. For example, the McDonald brothers sold the rights to use their name and system to Ray Kroc, largely because they were unwilling to make the personal sacrifices that go with business expansion. Having gotten everything they wanted out of life and making a few million in the process, the McDonalds can hardly be considered failures, even considering that the sales of the current McDonald's Corporation have increased thousands of times.
Hence organization is considered successful if it has achieved its goal.

Ingredients of organizational success

SURVIVAL. Some organizations plan to dissolve themselves after they have achieved a number of predetermined goals. An example of such an organization would be any government commission set up for a specific purpose. Such, for example, as the Warren Commission, which investigated the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. But, although it is not often recorded in writing, survival, ability to exist as long as possible is the first priority of most organizations. This can go on indefinitely because organizations have the potential to exist indefinitely. The record is currently held by the Roman Catholic Church, which has been in continuous operation for nearly 2,000 years. History has recorded the existence of some government organizations over the centuries. Some organizations in business also live for long years. So the famous company "French wineries" and now, after almost a century of existence, is as strong as before. However, in order to stay strong and survive, most organizations have to periodically change their goals, choosing them according to the changing needs of the outside world. The English monarchy, for example, survived as an institution because it eventually accepted a significant reduction in its power and influence in response to social pressures for democratization. Almost all organizations that exist for the sake of business periodically develop new types of products or services for their customers. Example 1.3. shows how the organization is trying to become stronger by targeting the most qualified group members who may have previously been underrepresented in the management team.
PERFORMANCE AND EFFICIENCY. To be successful over time, to survive and achieve its goals, an organization must be efficient, so productive. According to popular researcher Peter Drucker, performance comes from “doing the right things.” And efficiency is a consequence of the fact that "these things are created correctly" (doing things right). Both the first and second are equally important.
All the companies we described in the first examples, as companies that have achieved significant success, did the “right thing” by choosing a goal that corresponded to some important need that exists in the world. In the case of Federal Express, it was fast and reliable delivery of parcels. Apple provided an inexpensive, user-friendly computer. In addition, these organizations were doing "their things right." Federal Express management has determined how to deliver parcels efficiently. McDonald's has defined how to prepare hamburgers to ensure low cost and consistent high quality. RCA, on the other hand, did the right thing by deciding to build computers because the demand for them was clearly and dramatically increasing. However, mainly due to the inability to attract highly qualified specialists and find their niche in the market, RCA was not effective enough in competition with IBM.
PERFORMANCE. Effectiveness, in the sense that "the right things are being done", is something intangible that is difficult to define, especially if the organization is internally inefficient. But efficiency can usually be measured and quantified, because it is possible to determine the monetary value of its inputs and outputs. The relative efficiency of an organization is called productivity. Productivity is expressed in quantitative terms.
In a broad sense: consumed resources and manufactured products. (Approx. scientific ed.)

EXAMPLE 1.3.
Where Women Succeed

Women hold almost 35% of the total of 12.6 million leadership positions in agencies, government and various organizations in the United States, according to the Bureau of Statistics of the Department of Labor. This figure has almost doubled since 1972. Such numbers, however, can be misleading, as companies decide who they consider to be leaders and who fit this definition. Other studies are more informative. A survey by Heidrick & Straggles, a firm that studies managers, notes, for example, that in 1986, 83% of women executives in companies listed in the Fortune 500 and Service 500* were vice presidents or vice presidents. higher. In 1980 this figure was only 35%. In 1980, only 11% of female executives received wages in excess of $90,000 a year; in 1986, almost 60% of female executives received this wage or more, and the total amount of payments for them was on average 117 thousand dollars. The merits of women leaders are estimated fairly on the East and West coasts of the United States, and there this assessment is higher than in the whole country. Researchers from Texas (A&M University) found last year that in the West, 65% of male colleagues, bosses and subordinates warmly welcomed the appearance of a female leader. On the East Coast, 57% said the same. But in the South and Midwest, only 48% and 40% of men said so, respectively. Early this year, Heydrick & Struggles noted that women who hold the position of vice president and above earn significantly more in the Midwest and West, than south of the Mason-Dixon line. In the East, for example, women leaders, as reported in the survey, received total amount payments averaging $133,000, almost double the amount received by their sisters in the Southern states.
In order to determine the true success of a woman's career in business, let's leave all geographical tricks and focus on such characteristics of business as randomness and rapid growth. We will use them in relation to firms that employ women leaders. Women advance through the ranks faster in what Professor Eugene Jennings of Michigan has called "knife-edged" businesses - where the old rules don't work, either because there simply hasn't been time for these kinds of rules to set in, or because the game and her rules have changed a lot. Jennings followed the careers of leaders in hundreds of American companies for 30 years, and from the mid-1970s he began to observe women leaders. He notes that in traditional, slow-growing business sectors such as steel, mining, and railroads, the rigidity of long-standing hierarchical structures hinders women's career advancement. In recent years, as many companies realized they could get by with fewer levels of management, General Motors continued to plod along, maintaining the old 18-step hierarchy. Author's conclusion: "The psychological distance seems to be greater for everyone in traditional industries producing traditional goods, and especially for women, who often start by overcoming the company's prejudice that they are women."
Many women have experienced this own experience. A 1986 study by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found that women at every rung of the corporate ladder and at all wage levels in fast-growing industries, including retail and banking, move up disproportionately. more compared to the total number of employees. Women are hardly represented in industries such as tobacco, where, according to the government, and according to common sense, there will be no boom or glorious development of the business. best example The industry where technological change and corporate restructuring have together contributed to a fundamental change in values ​​and attitudes is the telecommunications industry. Marilyn Laurie, 48, is one of the senior vice presidents at A.T. and T. in New York. She believes that women could have risen in the business structure 15 years ago, without any government support. She states: “When a company is poised for the future, like our company, for example, management is much more willing to use talent, any talent.”

* Respectively, the 500 largest manufacturing and service companies in the United States. (Note. scientific. ed.)

SourceBUT. B. Fisher, "Where Women Are Succeeding" Fortune, August 3, 1987, pp. 79-80.

PRODUCTIVITY is the ratio of output units to input units.
The more efficient an organization, the higher its productivity. A restaurant that makes hamburgers at 60 cents and sells them for $1 each has a higher productivity than a restaurant that makes the same hamburgers at 80 cents and sells them for $1 each. Similarly, a hospital with a cost per bed of $100 is more productive than a hospital that provides the same level and quality of care at a cost of $125. A marketing department that increases sales and profits does not while spending additional funds, thereby increasing its productivity. Similar , as does the assembly team when they increase output per hour and still do so without defects. If, with an increase in the volume of output, it has a lower quality, we are talking about a decrease in productivity. The same is true if the number of defects is high. Thus, a key component of performance is quality.
Performance at all levels of an organization is critical to an organization's ability to survive and succeed in a competitive environment. A potential consumer who has freedom of choice will naturally prefer the product of a more productive organization simply because it has a higher value. More sales results in a more productive organization more money in order to invest in resources, including better factories, better equipment, better technology, that can further increase productivity*. And if the gap becomes large, then less productive organizations will eventually fail. This is exactly what happened to the Watson corporation, which sells inexpensive hamburgers, which could not compete with the extremely high level of productivity of McDonald's and Burger King.

* With regard to the term productivity - “productivity”, it is important to note that it reflects a complex, factorial productivity, which is a consequence of the use of all types of resources, and not just labor productivity, which is typical in similar cases for the methodology adopted in traditional Soviet practice. (Approx. scientific ed.)

Until very recently, American productivity was the highest in the world, both in industry and in institutions. Thanks to high industrial productivity, the United States exported far more than it imported. Government productivity kept inflation low, and Americans received more public service for fewer government tax dollars than any other country. And now countries like Japan have increased their industrial productivity to the point where they have managed to capture a large share of the US auto and electronics market despite high protectionist import taxes. For the first time in their history, Americans began to rebel against tax increases because they felt that due to inefficiency government agencies they get too little from the government and pay too much for it. Decreasing productivity, despite major advances in technology, has become a major problem in both America and Europe.
The seriousness of the consequences of declining productivity is underscored by increased competition that is beginning to become truly global. Every year, advances in the development of technology make our world seem to be smaller in size, and political factors make it more and more difficult to consider it as a shelter, protecting the interests of local businesses from external competition. When General Motors loses a customer to Chrysler, Americans generally don't suffer. When a customer buys a Datsun or Toyota, there are fewer jobs, less tax money. It is no exaggeration to say that the survival of American industry, and therefore of the country, depends on the increased productivity of public and private organizations.
Managers decide what the performance goals of organizations should be. Managers decide which methods of obtaining products will be used in the organization. Managers decide what forms of incentives will be used in the organization in order to motivate workers to increase productivity. Through the developed policy of the organization, through a personal example, leaders set the tone for the organization, determine whether the organization will be quality-oriented and customer-oriented in its work or remain indifferent to them, lethargic. In our book, we will devote a lot of space to performance issues.
PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION. One of the most important points to keep in mind when we talk about success-oriented management is one that is often overlooked by researchers and students alike. Management decisions, no matter how well they are theoretically justified and supported by research, are just ideas, thoughts. And the goal of management is the performance of real work by real people. A successful solution is one that implemented practically - translated into action - efficient and effective There are, as we shall learn, many potential pitfalls between decision making and implementation. One of the measures of success is the assessment of the company by its partners. In example 1.4. estimates of various American companies by leaders of large corporations are given.

Management approach - focus on success

The question, of course, is how to make the organization successful. How can leaders bring together an idea and its implementation to get the job done with the help of other people and in doing so effectively and efficiently? What can a leader actually do to improve performance? As we have said, there are no simple and reliable formulas for success. But we can take a look at what management theorists and practitioners have uncovered, to enable you to develop an approach to how to make an organization successful. The approach we present in the following chapters is based on the creative contributions of many people involved in management. It can be considered that it has three main principles formulated below. Example 1.5. contains some considerations regarding the reasons for the failure of leaders.
GENERALIZATION. The first problem to overcome in managing an organization for success is that complex organizations are indeed complex. It is difficult to imagine what happens within the organization itself and between the organization and its external environment, and even what managers do. Establishing common, common characteristics helps to reduce, reduce the difficulties of the extremely difficult task of managing a large organization, reducing it to a scale that is comprehensible to the mind and perception. Generalization allows us to see the work of the leader as a whole and the interaction of the components of this work.
Because all organizations share many common characteristics, we can develop models and diagrams of the factors that influence an organization's success. Models, although not very precise, are useful in understanding the complex interactions within the organization itself, and between the organization and the outside world. It is also possible to define in general a general management process applicable to all formal organizations. The third part of the book gives an understanding of management as a planning process. organization, motivation and control. Communication and decision making, which are discussed in the second part, are also functions that all managers perform.

EXAMPLE 1.4.
Most Popular Companies in the United States

Fortune magazine, creator of the famous Fortune 500 list of the nation's largest companies, also produces surveys that identify America's most popular companies. More than 8,200 executives, financial analysts and directors of other companies were asked to rate 300 specially selected companies in 33 industries. Eight key characteristics were rated on a scale from 0 (very poor) to 10 (excellent). These characteristics included quality of management, quality of services or products, ability to innovate, return on long-term investment, financial stability, the ability to attract and retain talented people, to help them develop; responsibility to society in the narrow and broad sense of the word and the use of corporate assets.
The ranking proposed by the magazine is interesting from several points of view. First of all, it gives us an idea of ​​what characteristics are considered criteria for organizational success. Secondly, it shows what experienced managers and management analysts think, i.e. people who have devoted their whole lives to this topic, about companies in their field. Third, it illustrates the impact of change. Of the 10 companies that topped the list in 1986, only LBM and Merck remained on the list for five consecutive years. IBM, which had always been number 1 in previous years, moved to 7th place.
Ispinnik: "America's Most Admired Corporations", Fortune, January 19, 1987, p. 19.

EXAMPLE 1.5.
Five Causes of Failure in Executive Careers

In a five-year study of 2,500 leaders, Susan Donnell identified five reasons why some leaders climb the ladder of their careers in an organization only to fall down. They are pushed up by the need to receive higher salaries. Unsuccessful leaders have a strong desire for high salaries and personal comfort. Very often, their goal is not to achieve their units, but what needs to be done to get a higher salary.
They are too concerned about the symbols of their position. The desk, office, car, and home of an unsuccessful leader are usually crammed with trappings and symbols of their status. The fact that the leader's name is written on the door of his office does not in itself mean that he is especially concerned about his status. But if the leader at all costs tries to acquire these symbols, this is a bad sign. They are primarily concerned with their own person. One author wrote about it this way: "A bad leader takes care of himself, a good leader takes care of his people." A successful leader takes care of his subordinates, takes care of their needs, listens to them.
One employee working for a bad manager said, “We just asked him to put a second phone in the hallway. Many mothers work for us, and they call home from time to time to check how the kids are doing. So you might think that he was asked to give the key to his safe.
When there is an opportunity to pay tribute to the work of a subordinate or to appropriate the merit himself, an unsuccessful leader quickly appropriates all the laurels for himself.
They are self-isolating. A bad leader sooner or later isolates himself from others. He is busy with his person and likes to spend time alone, gradually losing all communication with others and subordinates. When a leader is isolated from everyday current information, this is usually a bad sign. They hide thoughts and feelings. Subordinates want and need to know what their leader thinks and feels. One of the surest ways to turn people away from you is to tell them, “I have no thoughts on this. Do what you think, maybe something will come out. Unsuccessful leaders also try to hide their emotions. They try to hide their anger and their fear.
Source: Gerald Graham, "Study Points to Failings of Ambitious Managers", News Sun Sentinel, Weekly Business, January 30, 1984, p. 21.

THE NEED FOR A SITUATIONAL APPROACH. The generalized concept, for all its usefulness and legitimacy, is too imprecise to be applied unconditionally. When exercising managerial functions, differences between organizations must be taken into account. These major differences between organizations commonly referred to as situational variables fall into two main categories: internal and external variables.
Internal variables are a characteristic of the organization. Internal environment, which is mentioned in Chap. 3, includes the organization's goals, resources, size, horizontal and vertical division of labor and people. Internal differences between organizations are akin to differences between buildings. A building is a building, but differences in architecture, material, size make some buildings more suitable for being a warehouse, and others for a house that can become a shelter for many people, able to shelter them from a hurricane. In the same way, differences in the internal variables of an organization are well suited to the tasks of building computers, selling billions of hamburgers, satisfying the spiritual needs of a person.
These variables are controllable to varying degrees. They are the result of management decisions regarding what an organization should do and who in that organization should do the necessary work. The decisions made by management regarding internal variables determine how effective, efficient and productive an organization will be compared to others.
For example, the top management of an organization must determine what the main resources of the organization are. At first glance, it seems that the most important resources for Federal Express are materials such as envelopes and fuel, or vehicles and aircraft. But in fact, knowing where thousands of parcels are now, and where they should be tomorrow, is much more essential to the success of this organization. Federal Express became such a successful organization because Frederick Smith and his team figured out how to use information to coordinate the flow of parcels in such a way that aircraft (equipment) and fuel (materials) could be used most efficiently and ensure that correspondence was delivered within one nights (result - necessary and desired by clients).
The size of an organization is another example of how internal differences affect management. As an organization grows, it becomes increasingly difficult to coordinate its work. Consequently, gigantic organizations with tens of thousands of employees require management that is different from that of small organizations. IBM is successful as an organization not because it's so big, but quite the opposite: it's so big because it can manage without creating chaos, without losing flexibility, and without losing that closeness to customers that is so typical of small companies. . All large companies like IBM that are considered successful emphasize the need for customer service when formulating their goals, and they all use special management techniques to overcome the tendency of large companies to separate themselves from the problems of their customers and their own employees.
External variables described in Chap. 4 are environmental factors outside the organization that have a major impact on its success. External variables include major competitors, sources of equipment and technology, social factors, state regulation and any other changes. Although they are beyond the control of company management, they must strive to ensure that their companies respond to factors and changes in a particular external environment if the organization is to achieve significant success. In order for organizations to respond to these factors correctly, the manager needs to understand that the external environment affects the organization in different ways.
The differences lie both in the depth of the impact of various changes on the organization, and in the speed with which the external environment of the organization, its external environment, is changing.
For example, the organizations cited as an example at the beginning of the book reacted differently to changes in oil prices in 1973. Federal Express was on the verge of bankruptcy because it had to drastically raise the price of its services. Apple and I.B.M. have reacted almost directly to this, as the cost of shipping a computer is a fraction of the cost of manufacturing it. But IBM still lost money, as some companies had less money to buy computers. Demand for the new Apple computer exceeded the company's supply capacity, so the impact of the recession on computer purchases did not affect Apple to any great extent. For some organizations, the external environment is changing at a frightening pace. Science-intensive area high technology, which employs Apple and IBM, is characterized by the release of hundreds of new products annually, unprecedented progress in the development of the industry and a sharp drop in prices, averaging 25% each year. The external environment for Sears and McDonald's is changing less dramatically. Sears does its business in stores basically the way they've done it for years. And the Hamburg race is still a hamburger, whether it's paid for at the electronic checkout or the old-fashioned way of counting change by hand. For these companies, modest changes in the external environment and moderate competition are important components of their success.
THE NEED FOR AN INTEGRATED APPROACH. Simply pointing out which variables have the greatest influence on success is clearly not enough to determine which solution will be the best to achieve the company's goals. The real difficulty lies in the fact that all the many situational variables and all the functions of the management process are interconnected. The components of the situation and management in the organization are so interconnected that they cannot be considered independently of each other. Like a stone thrown into a pond, a change in any important factor causes circles to radiate throughout the pond, i.e. throughout the organization. The first reaction to change causes further changes, and those, in turn, cause new waves to life, and so on. in an endless loop.
Functions of the management process, i.e. what the manager usually does, as described in the third part, are directly related to situational variables. Through the management process, managers create and implement a set of internal variables, i.e. organization. The management process is the means by which the factors of the external environment are taken into account and the success of the organization is assessed. During the planning process, management determines what the organization's goals will be and how they can best be achieved based on an assessment of the needs and constraints in the external environment. The organizational process structures work and forms divisions based on the size of the organization, its goals, technology, and personnel, which is also one of the variables. Motivation is the process by which leaders make people work more productively in pursuit of organizational goals. Control allows management to see how successful its work is in fulfilling its plans, as well as how successfully the needs of the outside world have been met.
THERE ARE NO "CORRECT" ANSWERS. One of the important consequences of the dynamic interaction of internal and external factors is the fact that a leader can never assume that any particular method or method, no matter how well it works, is a priori "correct". McDonald's use of an extremely efficient assembly line procedure in food preparation has resulted in high product quality and high productivity. However, in essence, this method is no better than the old ones. traditional methods restaurant "Da Tour d" Arzhan. This restaurant cannot produce a million burgers a day, but "McDonaldo cannot make a perfect soufflé. If the management of the La Tour d" Arzhan restaurant decides to use machines to make 100 soufflés per hour, using ready-made dry mixes, it will, of course, reduce costs and increase productivity. However, given that the purpose of a restaurant is to cook and serve food High Quality, the performance will be less.
Similar , There is no “right” answer to change. With the rapid pace of scientific and technological progress in today's world, organizations that can quickly adapt to these changes deserve every praise and appreciation. However, although IBM and Apple have achieved their remarkable success through the use of new methods, this does not mean at all that it is best practices for all. The Roman Catholic Church rarely changes its policy, and then only after many years of deliberation. But extreme stability is a positive characteristic for such an organization, whose role in society is to be a support, a support that people can count on in difficult times. Moreover, it would be wrong if an organization whose purpose is to spread fundamental truths constantly changed its point of view. Therefore, the rapid change in orientation required to succeed in a highly volatile society of rapid technological change is essential for knowledge-intensive industries and potentially dangerous for organizations such as the church.
Most management decisions, as stated in Chap. 6, devoted to decision making, have both positive and negative consequences. Good governance is a complex balancing act involving deliberate sacrifices when necessary for the common good. For example, a manager cannot simply select the most capable, most experienced people to work in his organization. A leader cannot always treat people the way they want. Perhaps the single most important reason for the success of McDonald's establishments is the fact that the corporation's management has designed the process of producing burgers and chips so that it can be carried out with consistent quality even by low-skilled workers. For the McDonald's method to be successful, restaurant managers must be sure that each employee will follow the prescribed technology to the last letter. McDonald's specifically hires young, inexperienced people to work in restaurants - they are better suited to its "assembly line" method than people with experience in restaurants. This also has negative consequences, such as high turnover, the risk of missing out on people who have the talent and ability to become good leaders, able to climb this ladder to the very top. But, assessing the situation as a whole, it should be noted that the positive consequences outweigh the negative ones. In addition, the disadvantages are not at all destructive and in many cases can be minimized.
All of these examples are extremely simplified. When making real decisions, many other factors must be taken into account. To understand the essence of major accomplishments, the leader needs to see the whole situation as a whole. Managing success in a complex, dynamic world requires an integrated approach. The leader must see the entire park when he grafts a particular tree. Leaders must always choose methods that best suit their organization's goals, specific characteristics, and, most importantly, people. IBC, McDonald's, Siro, the Catholic Church, and all the other organizations that have flourished successfully for a long time have succeeded because they are run the way they were supposed to be. specific, specific situation.
RATIONALE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS BOOK. The internal interdependence of the elements that influence the success of any organization, and therefore its leaders, forms the basis for the construction of this book. Due to the fact that the manager must capture the phenomenon as a whole - an integrated approach - in order to justify the decision, we offer an overview of all the underlying concepts at the level of the foundations. Then we return to the core functions again, taking a higher level look at the implementation issues. In ch. 2 we look at the evolution of management theory and practice to give you an insight into the essence of the modern situational approach. The main internal and external variables are discussed in the book earlier in the management process, because all these variables must be taken into account in the performance of each of the management functions. Likewise, all managerial functions involve communication and decision making. Therefore, we consider them in the second part, before moving on to a detailed study of control functions.
The most important basic concepts in the first, second and third parts form the basis for the fourth part. "Group Dynamics and Leadership" is a topic whose importance in management can be fully appreciated if you have an understanding of all the basic concepts. Studying the topics of group dynamics and leadership, we enter the area of ​​everyday "realities" of management - we consider the activities that take place within organizations, although they are not planned and supported by the organization itself and, in some cases, may cause its active opposition. We will also deal with some common problems in the practice of management, addressing situations such as conflict or resistance to change and discussing how to overcome them.
Each previous chapter prepares you for ch. 5, which you may at first perceive as a parallel to ch. 3. However, since you already know something about management functions, we can take a closer look at relationships and interactions and how they affect the implementation of management decisions. Ch. 19, for example, is an integrated view of people management, taking into account the need to combine human needs and technical requirements. We end the book with a chapter on performance, because making an organization productive, efficient, and effective is the goal of all management.

EXAMPLE 1.6.
Business School Management and Curriculum

Based on what we have learned about the horizontal and vertical divisions of labor in organizations and about the basic management functions, we can see the relationship between the study of management principles and other regular business school courses. Most courses either prepare a person for a specific position in their organization or for taking responsibility at a higher level of management. Accounting (associating). Core courses help the manager understand and implement the control process, especially in financial terms, and also help with planning. The study of accounting as a major discipline prepares a person to become the head of an organizational unit responsible for work related to financing and control. Marketing. Core courses help managers understand customer needs and the impact of competition on the organization. More complex courses help a person prepare for the position of head of an organizational unit that deals with marketing. Business law The courses provide the manager with an opportunity to evaluate the ways and means by which the government, the main force in the external environment of the organization, influences the organization. Such courses help the manager to communicate with lawyers who have specialized knowledge in the field of jurisprudence and law, necessary for the organization in its functioning.
Organizational behavior, human relations and personnel. The courses provide the manager with a basic understanding of the psychology of work, which is especially important and useful for the manager to fulfill the function of motivation, in order to become a successful leader, and also in order to successfully communicate.
Operations management. Basic courses in management information systems and scheduling methods provide the manager with knowledge useful in the performance of planning and control functions. More advanced courses in this profile prepare people to manage production units in their organizations on manufacturing enterprises or in the operating departments of firms providing services.
Computer science. Some understanding of the use of computers is very important for those who master the profession of leadership in today's environment. Computers are rapidly changing the essence and content of the daily work of the head of the grassroots and middle levels.

* There is no concept in Russian yet that would correspond to the concept of accounting. In fact, it is a synthesis accounting analysis financial activities and accounting, audit work - financial audits. (Approx. scientific ed.)

SUMMARY
1. The three criteria for formal organization include the presence of at least two people deliberately working together towards a common goal.
2. Organizations transform resources in the form of materials, technology, people and information into desired end states or goals.
3. Organizations must interact with the external environment in order to obtain resources and find consumers for their products. Dependence on the external environment, which is constantly changing and beyond the control of management, is the main reason why there are no absolute rules in management.
4. All organizations implement a horizontal division of labor, breaking down all work into its component tasks. Larger organizations make this division by creating departments or divisions, which are further subdivided into smaller units. Management is necessary to coordinate all the tasks of the organization.
5 Management is the process of planning, organizing, motivating and controlling in order to formulate and achieve the organization's goals through other people. All managers perform these functions and play several other roles such as information processor; leader decision maker. The characteristics that make a person an outstanding entrepreneur are different from those of an effective manager.
6, Larger organizations have such a volume of managerial work that they need to clearly define the corps of managers. The vertical division of labor, the creation of management levels are used to differentiate and coordinate management work.
7 Although the actual number of levels may be large, traditionally there are three levels of governance. Grassroots managers, junior bosses oversee the process of production by workers who do not manage, but deal directly with resources. Middle managers act as a buffer between lower and higher managers. Their work varies considerably from organization to organization. Senior managers are responsible for the organization as a whole or for a large segment of the organization.
8. To be successful, i.e. To achieve its goal, the organization must survive through effectiveness and efficiency.
9. Productivity, i.e. the relative effectiveness of the organization, has a quantitative expression. It is defined as the number of units of output divided by the number of inputs. An important element of productivity is quality.
10. For an organization to succeed, the manager must understand its general characteristics.
11. While all organizations share many common characteristics, the differences between them often make the difference between what works best. These situational variables can be internal or external.
12. All these variables and all control functions are interdependent. A change in one of these variables causes changes in all the others to some extent.
13. An effective leader, taking into account these situational variables, understands that there is no single “correct” way to do something. The optimal choice is the choice of what is most appropriate for the current situation.
14. In order to make this right choice, the leader must have a comprehensive view of things.

LITERATURE

1 Chester Barnard, Functions of the Executive(Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1938), p. 71.
2.Henry Mintzberg, The Nature of Managerial Work(New York Harper & Row, 1973), p. 31. Comments taken from Robert H. Guest, "Of Time and the Foreman," personnel, vol. 32 (1955-1956), pp. 478-486.
3. Mintzberg, op. cit., p. 54.
4. Talcott Parsons, Structure and Process in Modem Society(New York: The Free Press, 1960).
5 Guest, op. cit.
6. Ibid.
7. L. V. Biankenship and R. V. Miles, "Organizational Structure and Managerial Decision Making", Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 13 (1968), pp. 106-170.
8. E. E. Lawler III, L. W. Porter, and A. Tannenbaum, "Managers" Attitudes Toward Interpersonal Episodes", Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 52 (1968), pp. 432-349.
9 Rosemary Stewart Managers and their lobs(New York: Macmillan, 1961).
10. Mintzberg, op. cit., p. thirty.
11. John Naisbitt, Megatrends(New York Warner Books, 1984), p. 160.
12. Eleanor D. Schwartz, "Entrepreneurship: A. New Female Frontier", Journal of Contemporary Business, Winter 1976, pp. 47-76.
13. O. Collins and D. Moore, The Enterprising Man(Michigan State University: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, 1964), pp. 239-240.