The history of the development of management as a science indicates that a large number of theories have been developed that reflect different views and points of view on management problems. Authors dealing with management issues sought to reflect in their works the vision of individual problems in order to create a more complete understanding of management as a science. Therefore, each of the authors, working on the systematization of approaches and schools, focuses on certain properties of the object of study. Many believe that it is impossible to create a universal classification also because the organization is influenced by a large number of internal and external factors.

There are four major approaches that have made it possible to identify four schools of management, each of which is based on its own positions and views:

• scientific management approach - school of scientific management;
• administrative approach - classical (administrative )school in management;
• human relations and behavioral science approach – School of Psychology and Human Relations;
• approach in terms of quantitative methods - school of management science (quantitative ).

These schools of management were developed in the first half of the 20th century. Each school sought to find the most effective tools and methods to achieve the goals of the organization. But the development of science and management practice provided new information about factors that were not taken into account by previous schools. All of the above schools have made a significant contribution to the development of management science. Let us consider successively the concepts of these schools, starting with the school of scientific management.

Supporters of this school sought to prove that it is possible to manage "scientifically", relying on economic, technical and social experiment, as well as on the scientific analysis of the phenomena and facts of the management process and their generalization. This method was first applied to a single enterprise by an American engineer Frederick Winslow Taylor(1856–1915), who is considered the founder of scientific production management. Taylor developed the principles of scientific management (Figure 1.4).

Taylor's goal was to create a system of scientific organization of labor (SOT), based on experimental data and analysis of the processes of physical labor and organization.

Rice. 1.4.

Taylor's research method consists in dividing the process of physical labor and organization into its component parts and then analyzing these parts. In particular, Taylor divided the organization process into the following elements: setting the goal of the enterprise as a whole and for each employee individually; the choice of means of activity and their application on the basis of a predetermined plan; control over the results of activities.

The purpose of the scientific organization of labor at the enterprise is production with the least expenditure of resources (labor, material and monetary) while achieving maximum results. The way to achieve this goal is the rationalization of all elements of production: the living labor of workers, the means of labor (equipment, machines, units, production areas) and objects of labor (raw materials, materials, fuel, energy).

Taylor focused on improving productivity. The main provision of Taylor's concept is the need to establish a scientifically based daily task for the worker and methods for its implementation. He believed that managers do not know the potential of the worker and set production standards "by eye". Taylor, on the basis of experiments conducted to study the methods and movements of workers, measuring the time of performing individual elements and operations, established scientifically based standards. The value of the norm was determined for the best workers achieving the highest labor productivity. Workers who did not want to work hard were subject to dismissal. Thus, Taylor focused on the individual qualities of workers. He believed that workers should be supervised at every phase of production.

The main goal of the developed methods was to achieve an increase in the productivity of workers by any means. To motivate workers to meet and exceed established standards, Taylor improved the wage system. It has assumed a strictly individual, differentiated character, depending on the fulfillment of established norms. Taylor considered self-interest to be the driving force behind the growth of labor productivity and its remuneration.

Much attention in the Taylor system was paid to the normal maintenance of workplaces (tools, fixtures, etc.). The foremen were charged with the duty of timely providing workers with everything necessary for efficient work, training workers, issuing tasks for the day ahead, etc.

Creating his own system, Taylor was not limited only to the issues of rationalizing the work of workers. Taylor paid considerable attention to the best use of the production assets of the enterprise: right choice equipment to perform a specific job, maintenance of equipment, preparation for the operation of the tool and timely provision of jobs for them.

The requirement for rationalization also extended to the layout of the enterprise and workshops. This concerned the rational placement of equipment and jobs, the choice of the most optimal ways of moving materials within the enterprise, i.e. on the shortest routes and with the least expenditure of time and money.

Taylor's system provided not only ways to rationalize each element of production separately, but also determined their most appropriate interaction.

The functions of implementing the interaction of elements of production were assigned to the planning and distribution bureau of the enterprise, which was given a central place in the Taylor system. Much attention was also paid to the organization of accounting and reporting at the enterprise.

According to the Taylor system, a staff of craftsmen was provided to manage the entire enterprise. Part of this headquarters was assigned to the distribution bureau and carried out communications with the workers, set prices, and supervised the general order. Another part of the staff of masters oversaw the exact implementation of the instructions of the distribution bureau: the inspector; serviceman; master setting the pace of work; foreman.

Taylor's concept was based on the division of labor into two components: performing labor and managerial labor. Taylor's important contribution was the recognition that management work is a specialty.

Thus, we can single out the main provisions of Taylor's concept:

• recognition of management as an independent activity, the main function of which is the rationalization of production;
• the division of the production process and labor operations into separate elements and the identification of the range of time spent on their implementation, which allows them to be normalized;
• planning based on work order norms; performance of planning functions by special units that determine the sequence, time, deadlines for the performance of work;
• increasing labor productivity through higher wages;
• selection of workers in accordance with physiological and psychological requirements and their training.

Taylor formulated two main tasks of management.

• 1. Ensuring the greatest prosperity of the entrepreneur, which included not only the receipt of high dividends on invested capital, but also the further development of the business;
• 2. Increasing the well-being of each employee, which provides not only for high wages in accordance with the efforts expended, but also for the development in each employee of the potential that is inherent in him by nature itself.

The philosophical basis of Taylor's system was the concept of the so-called "economic man", which was widely used at that time. This concept was based on the assertion that the only driving stimulus of people is their needs. Taylor believed that with the help of an appropriate payment system, the maximum productivity of the pile could be achieved.

A significant contribution to the development of the Taylor system was made by Harrington Emerson(1853–1931). He studied the principles of labor activity in relation to any production, regardless of the type of its activity.

The analysis carried out allowed him to formulate twelve principles of labor productivity, which boil down to the following.

• 1. The presence of clearly defined goals or ideals as the main prerequisite for effective work.
• 2. The presence of common sense in any work.
• 3. The possibility of obtaining qualified advice, competent advice. Every organization needs to create a department of rationalization, which would develop recommendations for improving management in all departments.
• 4. Compliance with strict discipline based on standard written instructions, complete and accurate accounting, use of the reward system.
• 5. Fair treatment of staff (through "fair" wages). This principle implies staff development, improvement of working and living conditions.
• 6. Availability of timely complete, reliable, permanent and accurate accounting.
• 7. Regulation of production (scheduling) as an integral part of the organization's activities.
• 8. Work planning.
• 9. Rationing of operations on the basis of rational methods of their implementation. Rationing allows you to set time standards and prices, taking into account the identification of unused reserves for increasing labor productivity.
• 10. Normalization of working conditions as a necessary prerequisite for the growth of labor productivity.
• 11. Availability of developed instructions and standards in writing.
• 12. The presence of a rational system of remuneration for increasing its productivity. Emerson noted that the growth of labor productivity of workers is largely determined by their "ideals". Therefore, you should not reduce remuneration only to an increase in wages.

The purpose of the formulated principles of productivity, according to Emerson, is the elimination of losses. In which case to eliminate losses - this is of fundamental importance does not matter.

Henry Ford(1863–1947) continued Taylor's ideas in the field of industrial organization. He ensured the creation of mass assembly line production and the development of the automotive industry. In setting up the automobile industry, Ford wrote that his goal was "to produce with a minimum expenditure of material and manpower, and to sell at a minimum profit." However, he made huge profits by increasing sales. The following principles were put in the basis of the production organized by him:

• one should not be afraid of possible failures, since "failures only give a reason to start again and smarter";
• you should not be afraid of competition, and at the same time you should not seek to harm the cause and life of another person who is your competitor;
• Profit should not be prioritized over customer service. "In essence, there is nothing wrong with profit. A well-established enterprise, bringing great benefits, should bring a lot of income";
• "To produce is not to buy cheap and sell dear." Raw materials should be purchased "at fair prices", adding minor additional costs in the production process, but at the same time achieving the production of high-quality products.

Ford took the Taylor system a step further by replacing manual labor with machines. He formulated the basic principles of the organization of production (Fig. 1.5).

Based on these principles, it became possible to create mass production, which allows increasing the productivity of workers without the intervention of a foreman who does not need to adjust the workers himself. On the production line, this is done automatically, the worker is forced to adapt himself to the speed of the conveyor and other mechanisms.

Rice. 1.5.

The assembly line of production contributed to a sharp increase in the intensity and intensity of work of workers, while at the same time the exhausting monotony of their work. The conveyor method of organization put the workers in extremely harsh conditions.

Henry Ford was a pioneer of modern mass production. The combination of continuity and speed provided the necessary production efficiency. The production methods developed by Ford were of great importance not only for the automotive industry, but also for many other industries.

The history of management goes back several millennia. Over these long years, the development of the theory and practice of management has been mainly evolutionary, through the continuous accumulation of experience that reflects the changes that have taken place in society, the economy and the entire system of socio-economic relations.

At the same time, a number of stages and revolutionary changes in approaches to management problems are distinguished on this long journey. The beginning of the history of management is considered to be the origin of writing in ancient Sumer. This revolutionary achievement in the history of mankind led to the formation of a special layer of "priests-businessmen" engaged in trading operations. The first managerial revolution was called religious-commercial. Others followed.

The second refers to 1760 BC. e. and is associated with the activities of King Hammurabi, who issued a code of laws governing the state to regulate diverse social relations between various social groups of the population.

The third occurred during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II (682-605 BC) and was aimed at combining government methods of government with control over activities in the fields of production and construction.

The fourth refers to the XVII-XVIII centuries AD. e. and caused by the birth of capitalism and the beginning of industrial progress in Europe. At this time, interest in management intensified, the idea arose that management itself can make a significant contribution to the development and efficiency of production. The allocation of management problems to an independent field of knowledge was a response to the needs of entrepreneurship in connection with the intensification of competition and the formation of large enterprises. The main revolutionary transformation of this period in the field of management was its separation from ownership and the emergence of professional management.

The fifth administrative revolution, often called the bureaucratic one, dates back to the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century. Theoretical basis transformations in the field of management was the concept of bureaucracy, which made it possible to formulate large hierarchical management structures, to carry out the division of labor, to introduce norms and standards, to establish due duties and responsibilities.

By the end of the XIX - beginning of the XX century. The first works appeared on the scientific generalization of the accumulated experience and the formation of the foundations of the science of management. This was due to the needs of the industry, which increasingly acquired such specific features as mass production and mass marketing, large-scale organization in the form of large corporations and joint-stock companies, and orientation to large-capacity markets.

Industrial enterprises felt the need for a rational organization of production and labor, a clear and interconnected work of all departments and services, managers and performers. This required evidence-based principles, norms and standards.

Theory and practice of production management in the twentieth century. Formed under the influence of success in other fields of knowledge related to management, such as mathematics, engineering, sociology, psychology, etc. Advances in these areas have revealed new factors influencing management. This made it possible to find new approaches to management and abandon old theories that did not stand the test of practice.

School of Scientific Management.

The School of Scientific Management (1885-1920) is most closely associated with the names of F. W. Taylor, F. and L. Gilbert, and G. Gantt. F. W. Taylor, who began his scientific experiments on the control of production processes in 1880 at the Midvale Steel Company in the American city of Philadelphia, is rightfully considered its founder. The main features of Taylor's scientific approach were published in 1903 in the report "Control of the Cycle". And although there are many contradictions in Taylor's theory, his teaching has become the main theoretical and historical source of modern management concepts.

The main goal of scientific management is to ensure production efficiency according to the "input - output" formula. Hence, its essence lies in the fact that the management system as a whole and each manager individually are responsible for the rational allocation and expenditure of resources, as well as for improving the entire production system. Taylor also emphasized that managers are responsible for the main functions: assigning tasks to each employee; selection of an employee capable of performing this work; motivation of the employee to perform their functions with high productivity. If managers perform these functions, then the task of increasing the efficiency and productivity of labor was considered completed.

The scientific approach to management proceeded from the fact that, based on observations, measurements and analysis of labor operations, it is possible to improve manual labor processes and perform them with greater efficiency. The main emphasis is on the principle of separating management functions from the execution of work, i.e. on the division of labor for management from the labor of workers. With this approach, management was considered as an independent field of activity, and the worker focused on what he was able to do most successfully.

F. Taylor in practice, in a number of cases, determined the amount of work that a worker can perform, most rationally giving his labor power for a long time.

The theoretical developments of F. Taylor were substantiated by the German sociologist M. Weber. He owns the idea that if every employee in the control apparatus knows clearly what he must do, how he must do it, and if he does everything exactly according to the instructions, then the entire apparatus will begin to work like a well-wound clockwork.

The theory of Max Weber, in fact, is the ideology of bureaucracy. However, this does not mean that bureaucracy as a form of organization arose only in the period when this theory appeared. Bureaucracy was characteristic of almost all forms of autocratic government in the ancient, Middle Ages and has survived to our time. Bureaucracy, in an unbiased understanding of its essence, is a rather vital and powerful form of organization and has its positive and negative sides. The positive is mainly associated with a clear regulation of the main functions, tasks, duties and powers of not only each unit in the management structure, but also each executor, which, of course, gives the management process as a whole greater consistency and organization. The negative aspects of bureaucracy are related to the fact that it leaves practically no space for creativity and freedom of choice in case the situation changes. But any regulation, instruction, provision is limited, does not reflect the whole variety life situations. The document becomes obsolete, in essence, at the moment when the last period is put in its text. This makes the bureaucratic organization less flexible and therefore less vital. Paradoxically, the bureaucratic organization not only does not increase the responsibility of an individual official, although it outlines all his duties, but, on the contrary, reduces his responsibility in specific situations, allowing him to “hide” behind the letter of the instruction.

An important contribution to scientific management was made by the spouses Frank and Lillian Gilbert, who, using the special watches they invented - microchronometers, in combination with a movie camera, identified and described 17 basic elementary hand movements. This allows you to determine how many, which movements are performed during certain labor operations and how long it takes to complete each movement and the entire operation. The essence of the approach was to reduce labor operations to a smaller number of basic movements and eliminate unnecessary or useless activities.

G. Gantt contributed to the approval of scientific management. He explained the low labor productivity of workers by the fact that the tasks and methods of work are formulated on the basis of old experience without the necessary scientific justification of what needs to be done. The difference between the old and new approaches consisted in the ways of planning and distribution of tasks, as well as ways to reward workers (employees) for their implementation. G. Gantt updated the system of setting tasks for employees and distributing rewards for their implementation. If the Taylor system allowed all workers to be paid equally by the piece rate, then under the G. Gantt system, workers could earn a bonus in addition to the piece rate. If they were able to exceed daily allowance. This emphasized the role of the human factor in production. It became clear that the remuneration of workers must be brought into line with its results, not only with the help of daily pay, but also with above-standard results with the help of bonuses.

According to D. Gvishiani, the teaching of F. Taylor, or, as it is called, "Taylorism" is:

• Creation of a scientific foundation that replaced the old, traditional, practically established methods of work, scientific research of each of its elements;
• Selection of workers based on scientific criteria, their training and education;
• Cooperation between the administration and workers for the practical implementation of the developed labor organization system;
• Equal distribution of labor and responsibility between management and workers.

Administrative or functional school of management (classical school).

The works of F. Taylor and his followers are devoted to management issues at its lower level, where there is a direct connection of the labor force with the means and objects of labor. Management issues for more high level received little attention. The rapid development of industry in the first quarter of the twentieth century gave impetus to the evolution of views on management problems and the formation of a new approach. Management theory was further developed in the work of the French industrialist A. Fayol and his followers: D. Mooney, A. S. Reilly, L. Gulik, L. Urvik, R. Davies, G. Kuntz, S. O. Donnel, who created so called the functional or administrative school of government. In American literature, it is also called the classical school.

If the supporters of scientific management focused on the issues of managing the production process, then the adherents of the administrative school tried to define General characteristics and management patterns and create on their basis universal management principles that can increase production efficiency. Their management was considered as a single process consisting of a number of functions, and the management process as the sum of all functions. As the main functions, A. Fayol substantiated planning, organization, leadership, coordination and control, through which the management process is carried out.

Later, L. Gulik and L. Urvik more clearly distinguished and systematized these functions. They formulated the principles of administrative management, which have remained virtually unchanged to date:

• Planning - setting tasks to be performed and indicating ways to solve them to achieve the goals of the enterprise;
• Organization - the creation of a formal structure for the division of management work between departments, the definition of functions and the coordination of their activities to achieve a specific goal;
• Staffing - recruitment and training, creation necessary conditions for labor activity;
• Leadership - a permanent function of decision-making and their execution;
• Coordination - ensuring consistency in the work of all departments of the enterprise, forming a single whole;
• Reporting - providing information to higher authorities and their own administration on the progress of work through reports and audits;
• Budgeting - drafting financial plans and financial control.

A. Fayol considered the most important part of management to be administration, which is based on 14 general principles: division of labor, authority and responsibility, discipline, unity of command, unity of directions (goals), subordination of personal interests to common ones, remuneration of personnel (payment), optimal centralization, hierarchy, order, justice, stability of personnel, initiative, corporate spirit. These principles, along with production and technical ones, also take into account some human factors.

The main merit of A. Fayol, among others, is that he first expressed the idea of ​​the need to separate the issues of organization and management into an independent theory of a universal nature, in fact, laying the foundation for professional management. His research not only improved the system of F. Taylor, but also led to the division of management problems into two areas:

1. Organization and management of directly technological and labor processes (organization of production, organization and regulation of labor);
2. management of production systems (the theory of production management).

A. Fayol's view of organizational planning is interesting. Considering it as a general management function, he noted the difficulties of planning in a constantly changing market environment. The plan should stem not from a possible repetition of the past period, but from the idea of ​​inevitable changes in the future. The concept of “uncertainty” appears, and not in the sense of ignorance, but as a constant variability of conditions, behavior (in particular, the emergence of new connections), a quick and flexible reorientation of production and marketing. And from the 70-80s, full accounting and miscalculation in advance, down to the smallest detail, becomes unrealistic, so the task of the leader is to create adaptive, responsive management mechanisms, and the manager - to implement limited systemic approaches.

School of Human Relations and Behavioral Sciences.

Schools of scientific management and administrative management (functional) management were formed without proper consideration of the impact of human relations on the effectiveness of activities in the field of production and management. The importance of the human factor in management was limited to such aspects as fair wages, economic incentives and the establishment of formal functional relations between management employees. Experience has shown that the division of the management process into a number of functions, which together were focused on achieving the goal of management, the assignment of functions to the relevant departments and individual employees, in itself did not lead to an increase in labor productivity and did not guarantee the achievement of the goals of the enterprise.

The role of a person in an organization, his ability to self-organize, increase labor efficiency by introducing creativity into it or as a result of improving the psychological climate in the organization attracted the attention of sociologists and managers. Serious research on this problem has been going on since the early 1930s. The object of research and organizational practical research, experiments was the behavior of a person in an organization, "human relations". The names of the American sociologists M. P. Follet and E. Mayo are associated with this trend.

It was found that the relations between people in labor collectives often contributed more to the growth of labor efficiency than a clear organization of work and material incentives. The motives for highly efficient work are not so much economic interests, as representatives of previous management schools believed, but the satisfaction of employees with their work, which is based on the socio-psychological climate in the team.

In the works of M. Follet, for the first time, such issues as power and authority, their differentiation and informal perception, responsibility and delegation of responsibility, participation of workers in management were considered. She studied the problem of conflicts in the team, classifying them into dominance, compromise and integration, with the development of appropriate recommendations. Originally, M. Follet defined management as ensuring the performance of work with the help of other persons.

Since the 1950s, it has developed into a school of behavioral sciences, which is still developing today. The names of A. Maslow, who proposed a pyramid of motives for human behavior in an organization, R. Likert, D. McGregor, F. Gretzberg, K. Argyris, are associated with this direction. Supporters of the so-called behavioral (behavioral) direction, including the above-mentioned authors and others, proposed their own approach to determining motives and the corresponding set of incentives. The development of sociology and psychology made it possible to lay a scientific basis for the study of people's behavior in labor collectives.

As K. Arjiris showed, increased pressure and control from managers to increase the productivity of subordinates gives rise to a conflict in the management system and employees and does not help prevent low labor productivity, absenteeism, staff turnover, loss of interest in work. On the contrary, according to R. Likert, constructive relationships between members of the team, experience and skills in regulating relations in the team and a high degree of mutual trust in the team contribute to conflict resolution. Mutual trust, respect, favorable relations in the team create a good moral and psychological climate, which has a significant impact on the motivation of employees for highly efficient work.

The School of Behavioral Sciences has focused mainly on methods for building interpersonal relationships in work groups. Its main goal was to increase the efficiency of organizations by increasing the efficiency of using their human resources. The main postulate was that the application of behavioral science will always increase the productivity of both the individual worker and the organization as a whole. Like the school of scientific management and the school of administrative management, so the behavioral school defended its way as the only and best. However, as the science and practice of management subsequently proved, changing the content of work and the participation of employees in enterprise management have a positive effect only in some production situations and not on all employees.

School of management science or quantitative approach.

The development of mathematics and computer technology laid the foundation for a new direction in control theory, called "control science". It is based on a quantitative approach, which involves the use of scientific methods for analyzing the functioning of production systems and solving management problems using a mathematical apparatus for solving problems, computer technology and information systems. Supporters of this direction, which originated during the Second World War, set themselves the task of studying the operational problems of the organization using quantitative methods. This approach is sometimes referred to as operational or operations research. Operations research, at its core, is the application of scientific research methods to the operational problems of an organization. A significant contribution to the development of this approach was made by K. Churchman, R. Akof, L. Bertalanffy.

The application of this approach, according to its adherents, is possible under four conditions:

• management problems are so complex that managers need help in analyzing a large number of variables;
• a large number of factors of production are more easily amenable to quantitative analysis by means of management science, and economic indicators are used as guidelines in decision-making;
• management science is characterized by the use of mathematical models to get an idea of ​​the real state of affairs and ways to improve the situation;
• the complexity of control problems and mathematical apparatus requires the use of computers for processing and analyzing large amounts of information.

After studying the situation and posing a particular management problem, the operations research team develops a situation model (situational model). A model is a form of representation of reality. Typically, a model simplifies reality and represents it in the abstract. The use of quantitative methods and mathematical models has found application in connection with the emergence and widespread use of computers in the field of management and development of information systems.

The effectiveness of the application of models depends primarily on the reliability of the initial data, the limitation in obtaining information, poor application in practice, and excessively high cost.

The contribution of this school to management theory is as follows:

1. Deepening understanding of complex management problems through the development and application of models.
2. Development of quantitative methods in solving management problems by managers in complex economic situations.

These schools laid the scientific foundation for management theory, on the basis of which new approaches were formed, such as the process approach, the systems approach, and the situational approach. The modern ideology and theory of management of production systems has absorbed the most important elements of the main management schools and approaches to the study of management problems.

Process approach.

The concept of the process approach, which considers management as a continuous series of interrelated managerial functions, marked a major turn in the development of managerial thought. It is widely used even today.

For the first time, the process approach was proposed by supporters of the administrative (functional) school of management, who developed management functions. However, they considered these functions as independent of each other. In contrast to this view, the process approach considers management functions as interrelated. Management is not seen as a one-time action, but as a process consisting of a series of continuous, interrelated actions. Each of these activities is a process in itself. They are called managerial functions.

The degree of division of the control process into functions by different authors depends on the accepted approach to the study of control and the essence of the problem being solved. The most commonly indicated functions are: planning, organizing, commanding (commanding), motivating, directing, coordinating, controlling, communicating, researching, evaluating, making decisions, recruiting, representing, and negotiating or closing deals.

The general characteristic of the process approach is based on the combination of the most important types of management activities into a small number of functions that are applicable to all organizations. American management divides the management process into four primary functions: planning, organization, motivation and control. These management functions are interconnected by connecting communication and decision-making processes. The function of management (leadership) is considered as an independent area of ​​activity in management.

Through planning, common goals are set and the efforts of all members of the organization to achieve these goals are coordinated. At the same time, the continuity of the planning process must be ensured for two reasons. Firstly, in order to achieve certain goals, the organization sets new goals for itself and, secondly, because of the constant uncertainty of the future due to environmental changes and possible mistakes made in the initial setting of goals.

The function of the organization is to create a structure for the effective distribution of tasks among employees, which should ensure the implementation of the enterprise's strategy to achieve its goals and the implementation of plans in interaction with the environment.

The function of motivation is to determine the needs of the employee to provide conditions for meeting these needs through Good work. At the same time, the task of the motivation function is to ensure that employees perform work in accordance with the plan and the duties delegated to them.

The control function is considered as a process of providing conditions for achieving the goals of the organization. The bottom line is that during the production process, deviations from a given work plan may occur. Finding and eliminating deviations in the work on the implementation of the plan, before serious damage is done to the organization, is the main task of the control function.

Decision making is the leader's choice of one of the alternative options for possible actions indicating what and how to plan, organize, motivate and control.

Communication is the process of exchanging information between people. Since an organization is a structured type of relationship between people, functioning depends on the quality of communications.

The management process is based on the implementation of interdependent management functions through decision making and communication.

Systems approach.

With all the differences in approaches and the choice of objects of the organization, they have something in common, and this common use is the use of a universal management toolkit. It is known that differences usually come to light as the analysis of phenomena becomes more detailed, and the general is already manifested at a higher level of abstraction. Achieving this level allows a systematic approach to organization and management.

The system methodology in management was recognized and widely used already in the second half of the 20th century. Scientific and technological progress, which gave a powerful impetus to the broad automation of production processes, began to exert its revolutionary influence on management processes as well. Cybernetics turned out to be in demand - a theory that explained many patterns of autoregulation in biology, physics, and technology. The possibilities of applying these regularities in the theory and practice of managing socio-economic organizations have opened up. In Russia, this was first used in the design automated systems management (ACS), and then in the formation of a systematic approach to all processes of organization and management in socio-economic structures. From the works of foreign authors who recognized the systematic approach as one of the universal management tools, the works of R. Johnson, F. Kast, D. Rosenzweil, S. Optner, S. Young, J. Riggs, M. H. Meskon and others

The system approach has entered the modern theory of organization and management as a special methodology of scientific analysis and thinking. The ability to think systematically has become one of the requirements for modern leader. The essence of the systems approach in management is the idea of ​​the organization as a system. The system, according to the definition of many authors, is a set of interrelated elements. A characteristic feature of such a collection is that its properties as a system are not simply reduced to the sum of the properties of its constituent elements.

The quality of the organization of the system is usually expressed in the synergy effect. It manifests itself in the fact that the result of the functioning of the system as a whole is higher (lower) than the sum of the results of the same name of the individual elements that make up the aggregate. In practice, this means that from the same elements we can obtain systems of different or identical properties, but of different efficiency, depending on how these elements are interconnected, i.e. how the system will be organized.

Speaking, for example, about production as a socio-economic system, we consider people and means of production (tools, machine tools, tools, objects of labor, etc.) as elements of this system. On the one hand, it is easy to imagine that all these elements can be interconnected in such a way that at the output of the system we will not receive the expected product at all, or we will receive it in the wrong quantity and quality. On the other hand, with the rational placement of all the same elements in space, the organization of a clear interaction in time, the correct use of the professional classification of people, their individual abilities and the possibility of labor cooperation, we can get the expected result at the output of the system.

A feature of the systems approach is that it does not contain a set of any guiding principles. The systems approach says only that the organization consists of a large number of interconnected subsystems and is open system that interacts with the environment.

situational approach.

The traditional schools of management laid the scientific foundation of management. The application of theoretical knowledge in practice was considered as the art of management, which is comprehended by work experience. The situational approach has made a significant contribution to management theory, revealing the possibility of direct application of theoretical provisions to specific conditions and situations. It is not a set of rules, but rather a way of thinking about the organization's problems and how to solve them.

The situational approach does not reject the achievements of other approaches and schools of management. It retains the core concepts and approaches that apply to all organizations. But recognizing that general process management is the same, the situational approach states that the specific techniques that are used in practice to achieve the goals of the enterprise.

The situational approach has become a logical continuation of the systematic approach to management. The system approach made it possible to determine that the organization is an open system that actively interacts with the external environment.

Production systems as systems open type, have input and output channels that allow you to interact with the external environment. According to the situational approach, the entire organization within the enterprise is a response to environmental factors of various nature. The situation is the central point of this approach. It means a specific set of circumstances that have a significant impact on the work of the enterprise in a given period of time. The number of environmental factors affecting the production system is so great that only the main ones are singled out from this variety. Different authors point to a different number of factors influencing management. But most of them believe that there are no more than a dozen factors of internal and external variables that are essential for successful enterprise management.

The situational approach, incorporating all the advantages of previous schools and approaches, expanded practical use systems theory by identifying the main internal and external variables that affect production systems. According to this approach, all known concepts and techniques should be applicable to specific situations. The situational approach, or, as it is often called, situational thinking, is currently considered the best way to make management effective.

Bibliography.

1. Ivanov L. B. "Fundamentals of management: the evolution of managerial thought", tutorial, St. Petersburg, LTA, 1996.
2. Rusinov F. M., Petrosyan D. S. "Fundamentals of the theory of modern management", textbook, M, 1993.
3. Smolkin A. M. “Management. Fundamentals of organization, textbook, INFRA-M Publishing House, M, 1999.

TOPIC 2 DEVELOPMENT OF THE THEORY OF MANAGEMENT

Target. Tell students when management arose, when a person felt the need for management, how it developed and what changes took place in it, how it affected the development of the person himself, his production activities and society as a whole. In its development, management went through a number of periods and used certain research methods.

Topic questions:

1. School of scientific management.

2. Administrative (classical) school.

3. School of human relations.

4. School of Behavioral Sciences.

School of Scientific Management.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, one of the first arose school of scientific management. Frederick Winslow Taylor, Frank and Lillian Gilbert, Henry Gant, Henry Ford are considered its creators. (1885-1920)

They believed that almost any manual labor operation could be improved using observation, measurement, logic, and analysis. First, they analyzed the content of the work and determined its main components (operations, transitions, techniques, individual movements. Then they measured the work operations: they eliminated unnecessary, unproductive movements, introduced standard procedures and equipment into them. As a rule, the gain from improving operations was obvious. that the amount of time allocated to certain tasks should be realistic and take into account the possibility of a little rest.At the same time, production standards were feasible, and those who exceeded them were rewarded more.

This school recognized the importance of selecting people physically and intellectually appropriate for the work performed, attached great importance to training; the separation of managerial functions of thinking and planning from the direct execution of work was advocated (this was sharply stated with the container system, in which the workers themselves planned their work). Through this school, management became widely recognized as a field of scientific research in its own right.

Contribution of the school of scientific management:

use of scientific analysis to determine better ways task completion;

selecting workers best suited to the tasks and providing them with training;

providing employees with the resources required for effective implementation their tasks;

• systematic and correct use of financial incentives to increase productivity;

If the school of scientific management was primarily concerned with improving efficiency at the workplace level, then classical (administrative) school (1920-1950) paid attention to efficiency in the broader sense of the word - in relation to the work of the entire organization. The "classics" who ranked Henri Fayol, Lyndall Urwick, James Mooney (1920-1950) tried to look at the organization from a broad perspective, trying to determine the general characteristics and patterns of organizations.

Henri Fayol ran a large French coal mining company and is called the "father of management". Lindall Urwick is a management consultant in England. James Mooney worked for General Motors. Adherents of this school, like the previous one, did not care much about the social aspects of government. Their work was largely based on personal observations and was not based on scientific methodology. The goal of the classical school was to create universal principles of management that would undoubtedly lead the organization to success. Fayol's main contribution to management theory was that he viewed management as a universal process consisting of interrelated functions. To build the structure of the organization, he developed 14 principles of management. Many of them are still useful today.

The aim of the classical school was to create universal principles of governance.

Fayol's principles of management:

1. Division of labor; (Specialization is the natural order of things. The goal of the division of labor is to do more and better work with the same effort. This is achieved by reducing the number of goals to which attention and effort must be directed.)

2. Authority and responsibility; (Authority is the right to give an order, and responsibility is its opposite. Where authority is given, there responsibility arises.)

3. Discipline; (Discipline involves obedience to and respect for the agreements reached between the firm and its employees. It also involves fairly applied sanctions.)

4. unity of command;(An employee should receive an order from only one immediate supervisor.)

5. Unity of direction; (Each group operating under the same goal should be united by a single plan and have one leader.)

6. Subordination of personal interests to the general; (The interests of one employee or group of employees should not prevail over the interests of a company or a larger organization).

7. Reward persona la; (In order to ensure the loyalty and support of workers, they must receive a fair wage for their service.)

8. Centralization; (Centralization is the natural order of things. The appropriate degree of centralization will vary according to specific conditions. So the question arises as to the right proportion between centralization and decentralization. This is the problem of determining the measure that will provide the best possible results.)

9. Scalar chain- a range of people in leadership positions, ranging from the highest position to the lowest level manager;

10. order;(A place is for everything and everything in its place.)

11. Justice;(Combination of kindness and order.)

12. Workplace stability for staff; (High turnover reduces the effectiveness of the organization. A mediocre leader who sticks to his place is certainly preferable to an outstanding, talented one who leaves quickly and does not hold on to his place.)

13. Initiative;(Means developing a plan and ensuring its successful implementation. This gives the organization strength and energy.)

14. corporate spirit. (Union is strength. And it is the result of staff harmony.)

Contribution of the classical school: development of management principles; description of control functions; a systematic approach to managing the entire organization.

School of Human Relations 1930-1950 (Mary Parker Follet, Elton Mayo) in the 1930s was born in response to the inability (of other schools) to fully recognize the human factor as a basic element of organizational effectiveness.

It has been experimentally found that well-designed work procedures and good wage did not always lead to an increase in labor productivity (as representatives of the school of scientific management believed before). The forces that arise in the course of interaction between people could and often exceeded the efforts of the leader. Sometimes employees reacted more strongly to pressure from colleagues in the group than to the desires of management and financial incentives. The cause of these phenomena, as it turned out, is not mainly economic forces (as the supporters of the school of scientific management believed), but various needs that can only be partially and indirectly satisfied with the help of money.

The researchers of this school believed that if management takes more care of their employees, then their motivation will increase, which will lead to increased productivity. They recommended the use of human relations management techniques, including more effective action by immediate supervisors, consultation with workers, and giving them more opportunities to communicate at work.

School of Behavioral Sciences(1950 to present) (Chris Algiris, Rensis Likert, Douglas McGregor, Frederick Herzberg) moved away from the school of human relations, which focused primarily on methods for establishing interpersonal relationships. The new approach sought to assist the worker to a greater extent in understanding his own capabilities through the application of the concepts of the behavioral sciences to the construction and management of organizations. The main goal is to increase the efficiency of the organization by increasing the efficiency of its human resources. Like earlier schools, this approach advocated a "single best way" to solve managerial problems. His main postulate was that the correct application of the science of behavior will always increase the efficiency of both the individual employee and the organization as a whole. However, it turned out that such methods of this school as changing the content of work and the participation of the employee in the management of the enterprise are effective only for some workers.

Contributions from the School of Human Relations and the School of Behavioral Sciences:

· Applying interpersonal relationship management techniques to improve satisfaction and performance;

Application of the sciences of human behavior to the management and formation of the organization in such a way that each employee can be fully used in accordance with his potential.

A significant contribution to the theory of management, especially in the post-war period, was made by mathematics, statistics, engineering, knowledge in the field of quantitative methods, grouped under the general name: operations research. The latter are essentially the application of scientific research methods to the operational problems of the organization. After the problem is formulated, the operations research team develops models of the situation.

Such a model simplifies complex problems by reducing the number of variables to be considered to a manageable amount. A key characteristic of management science (and the scientific management school of the same name) is the replacement of verbal reasoning and descriptive analysis with models, symbols, and quantitative values. With the advent of the computer, operations researchers began to construct mathematical models of increasing complexity that come closest to reality and are therefore more accurate.

Process approach.

This concept, which marks a major turn in management thought, is widely used today. The process approach was first proposed by adherents of the classical (administrative) school, who tried to describe the functions of a manager. However, these authors tended to view such functions as independent of each other. The process approach, in contrast, considers management functions as interrelated.

Management is seen as a process because working to achieve goals with the help of others is not some one-time action, but a series of continuous interrelated actions. These activities, each of which is a process in itself, are essential to the success of the organization. They are called managerial functions. Each managerial function is also a process, because it also consists of a series of interrelated actions. The control process is the total sum of all functions.

Systems approach.

The system approach considers all processes and phenomena in the form of certain integral systems with new qualities and functions that are not inherent in its constituent elements. All systems have a stable internal structure and consist of interconnected elements (subsystems) with specific functions.

Systems are divided into closed, functioning independently of changes in the external environment (for example, clocks) and open, connected with the outside world (all socio-economic objects - enterprises, organizations, teams, etc.).

The systems approach views the organization as an open system.

Conversion inputs outputs

The first major systems approach was Chester I. Barnard (1886-1961), who was closely associated with the behavioral school of management. His basic premise was that an organization is "a system of consciously coordinated action in which the leader is the most important strategic factor."

IN systems approach it is emphasized that managers should consider the organization as a set of interrelated elements, such as people, structure, tasks and technology, which are focused on achieving different goals in a changing external environment.

1. Introduction.

2. School of Scientific Management (F. Taylor., G. Gunnt, F. and L. Gilbert.)

2.1 4 scientific principles Taylor.

3. Administrative or classical school (G. Fayol, G. Emerson)

3.1 File's 14 Management Principles.

3.2 Emerson's 12 principles of management.

4. School of human relations (M. Follet, E. Mayo).

5. School of behavioral relations (A. Maslow).

5.1 Pyramid of needs.

6. Modern management theories (D. McGregor theories "X" and "Y", W. Ouchi theories "A" and "Z".

7. Conclusion.

8. Literature.

Introduction

The entire history of management development has been associated with two approaches to management:

the first of them focused on the management of operations (the technical side production process)

the second is for control labor resources giving priority to psychological factors, motivation and stimulation of human activity. Let's consider the main schools of management theory and the contribution of the most famous representatives of the theory and practice of management to the development of management. Management theory as a science arose at the end of the last century and has undergone significant changes since then.

School of Scientific Management. (F. Taylor, G. Ford. G. Gannt. et al.)

Frederick Winslow Taylor(1856-1915) is considered the founder of modern management. Unlike many management theorists, Taylor was not a research scientist or business school professor, but a practitioner. Widespread fame came to Taylor in 1912. after his speech at the hearings of the special committee of the US House of Representatives on the study of shop management systems. Taylor's system took on a clearer outline in his work "Control of the Cycle." and was further developed in the book Principles of Scientific Management. Subsequently, Taylor himself widely used this notion that

« management is a true science, supporting on well-defined laws, rules and principles».

Prior to Taylor, productivity was driven by the carrot principle. So Taylor came up with the idea of ​​organizing work, which involves the development of numerous rules, laws and formulas, which replace the personal judgments of the individual worker and which can be usefully applied only after the statistical accounting of measurement and so on, their actions have been made. Thus, at the beginning of the century, the role of the manager in deciding what to do to the performer, how to do it, to what extent, grew immeasurably and the regulation of the work of the performer took extreme measures.

F. Taylor dismembered the entire work of the performer into its component parts. In his classic work, first published in 1911. , he systematized all the achievements at that time in the field of organizing the production process. Individual achievements were timed, and the working day was scheduled in seconds. Thus, in practice, F.W. Taylor in a number of cases found that amount of work, performing it accordingly, the worker can most rationally give his labor power for a long time. He proposed a scientific system of knowledge about the laws of rational organization of labor, the constituent elements of which are the mathematical method of calculating the cost, the differential wage system, the method of studying time and movements, the method of rationalizing work methods, instruction cards, etc., which later became part of the so-called scientific management mechanism. .

Taylorism is based on 4 scientific principles

1. Creation of a scientific foundation replacing the old, purely practical methods of work, the scientific study of each individual species. labor activity.

2. Selection of workers and managers based on scientific criteria, their selection and vocational training.

3. Cooperation between the administration and the workers in the practical implementation of the NOT.

4. Uniform and fair distribution of duties (responsibility) between workers and managers.

taylor came to an important conclusion that the main reason for low productivity lies in the imperfect system of incentives for workers. He developed a system of material incentives. He presented the award not only as a monetary reward, but also advised entrepreneurs to make concessions.

One of Taylor's most important students is an American engineer Henry Lawrence Gantt(1861-1919) was no longer interested in individual operations, but in production processes as a whole. According to Gantt, "the main differences between the best systems today and those of the past are in the way tasks are scheduled and rewarded for 'doing' them." Gantt is a pioneer in the field of operational management and scheduling of the activities of enterprises. He developed a whole system of planned schedules (Gantt schedules), which, thanks to his high awareness, allow him to control the planned and draw up calendar plans for the future. Gannt's organizational images include his wage system with elements of time and piecework forms of payment. Such a system of remuneration of workers sharply increased their interest in meeting and overfulfilling a high norm (if the planned norm was not met, workers were paid at an hourly rate). Spouses Frank and Lily Gilbert they analyzed mainly physical work in production processes, i.e., the “study of movements” using measuring methods and instruments.

L. Gilbert laid the foundation for the field of management, which is now called "personnel management". She explored issues such as selection, placement and preparation. Scientific management did not neglect the human factor.

An important contribution of this school was the systematic use of incentives to motivate workers to increase productivity and output. Taylor and his contemporaries actually recognized that the job of management was a specialty, and that the organization as a whole would benefit if each group of workers focused on what they were most successful at.

This school was concerned with performance improvement at a level below the managerial level, the so-called non-managerial level. The ideas laid down by the school of scientific management were developed and applied to the management of organizations as a whole, primarily by representatives of the administrative school of management.

Administrative or classical school.

The development of this school took place in two directions - the rationalization of production and the study of management problems. The main concern of the representatives of this school was efficiency in relation to the work of the entire organization as a whole. The goal of this school was to create universal principles of government. We can highlight the work of G. Emerson. (1853-1931), A. Fayol (1841-1925).

The development of F. Taylor's ideas was continued by the outstanding French engineer Henri Fayol.

Taylor was a "techie" and knew the problems from the inside. Fayol was a leader and, unlike Taylor, stood at a higher level of management. In General and Industrial Administration, Fayol outlined the scope of administration, which can be represented in the form of six areas:

1technical(technological) activities;

2 commercial activities (purchase, sale and exchange);

3 financial activities (search for capital and its effective use);

4 protective activity (protection of personal property);

5 accounting activities (inventory, balance sheets, costs, statistics);

6 administration(affects only personnel, without directly affecting either materials or mechanisms).

Fayol considered administration to be the main function of management, its most important part. Unlike others, he paid a disproportionate amount of attention to the study of this function. He created "administrative science", which was based on 14 principles.

Henri Fayol's principles of management.

1. Division of labor. Specialization is the natural order of things. The purpose of the division of labor is to do more and better work with the same effort. This is achieved by reducing the number of goals to which attention and effort must be directed.

2. Authority and responsibility. Authority is the right to give orders, and responsibility is its opposite. Where authority is given, there responsibility arises.

3. Discipline. Assumes obedience and respect for the agreements reached between the firm and its employees. Establishing these agreements binding firm and workers from which disciplinary formalities arise must remain one of the chief tasks of industry leaders. Discipline also implies fair application of sanctions.

4. Unity of command. An employee should receive an order from only one immediate superior. It ensures unity of point of view, unity of action and unity of command.

5. unity of direction. Each group operating within the same goal must be united by a single plan and have one leader. Dual leadership can arise only as a result of unjustified mixing of functions and imperfect delimitation of them between departments.

6. Subordination of personal interests to the general. The interests of one employee or group of employees should not prevail over the interests of a company or a larger organization .

7. Staff remuneration. In order to ensure the loyalty and support of workers, they must receive a fair wage for their service.

8. Centralization. Like the division of labor, it is the natural order of things. However, the appropriate degree of centralization will depend on specific conditions. Therefore, the question arises about the right proportion between centralization and decentralization. It is a problem of determining the measure that will provide the best possible results.

9. Scalar chain--- is a series of people in leadership positions, ranging from the person holding the highest position to the lowest manager. It would be a mistake to abandon a hierarchical system without a definite need for it, but it would be an even greater mistake to maintain this hierarchy when it is detrimental to business interests.

10. Order. A place for everything and everything in its place.

11. Justice. It is a combination of kindness and justice. Loyalty and devotion of the staff should be ensured by the respectful and fair attitude of the administration towards subordinates.

12. Workplace stability for staff. High employee turnover reduces the efficiency of the organization. A mediocre manager who holds on to a position is certainly preferable to an outstanding, talented manager who quickly changes positions.

13. Initiative. It means the voluntary development by an employee or a group of employees of a plan for an event and ensuring its successful implementation. This gives the organization strength and energy.

14. corporate spirit. Union is the strength that results from the harmony of the personnel and management of the firm.

A. Fayol considered the system of 14 positions not only flexible, but also open, i.e. allowing for the possibility of introducing new provisions, taking into account more recent practice. In a number of cases, the provisions - the principles of A. Fayol not only continued and developed Taylor's postulates, but also contradicted them.

Taylor divided the work of the performer into eight constituent parts and the worker received instructions from eight functional specialists, each of whom was fully responsible for the direction he supervised.

Unlike Taylor, Fayol denied the need to empower functional workers with administrative rights and for the first time pointed out the need to create staffs that should not have the right to lead, but to prepare for the future and identify possible ways to improve the organization. Fayol paid special attention to drawing up a plan and forecast. Fayol's merit is also the conclusion that not only engineering and technical workers, but also every member of society needs, to one degree or another, knowledge of the principles of administrative activity.

An important place in Fayol's views is occupied by his attitude to the concept of organizational planning. Considering planning as a prerequisite for successful organization and management, he pointed out the difficulties of planning in a constantly changing market environment. The plan should proceed from the idea not of a repetition of events that have already taken place, but from the idea of ​​possible changes, both natural and random. This principle is currently the basis for planning business and production activities not only at the level of individual corporations, but also at the level of states as a whole.

It should be noted that Fayol was far ahead of his time, realizing that the management of industrial production should be built taking into account the constant changes inherent in market relations.

As a result, Fayol's research led not only to the improvement of the Taylor system, but to the division of management theory into two directions:

¨ organization and management of the production process itself, labor processes, and so on, that is, what can be called a technical direction;

¨ study of general problems of management organization.

G. Emerson in his work "The Twelve Principles of Productivity" (1911) considers and formulates the principles of enterprise management, and substantiates them with examples not only of industrial organizations. He was the first to raise the question of production efficiency in a broad sense. Efficiency is a concept introduced by him for the first time, meaning the most favorable ratio between total costs and economic results. G. Emerson raised and substantiated the question of the need and expediency of applying an integrated, systematic approach to solving complex multifaceted practical problems of organizing production management and any activity in general.

G. Emerson's management principles:

1. Precisely set ideals or goals that every leader and his subordinates at all levels of management strive to achieve.

2. Common sense, that is, a common sense approach to the analysis of each new process, taking into account long-term goals;

3. Competent advice, i.e. the need for special knowledge and competent advice on all issues related to production and management. A truly competent council can only be collegiate;

4. Discipline - subordination of all members of the team to established rules and regulations;

5. Fair treatment of staff.

6. Fast, reliable, complete, accurate and permanent accounting, providing the manager with the necessary information;

7. Dispatching, providing a clear operational management of the activities of the team;

8. Norms and schedules that allow you to accurately measure all the shortcomings in the organization and reduce the losses caused by them;

9. Normalization of conditions, providing such a combination of time, conditions and cost, in which the best results are achieved;

10. Rationing of operations, offering the establishment of the time and sequence of each operation;

11. Written standard instructions, providing a clear fixing of all rules for the performance of work;

12. Reward for performance, aimed at encouraging the work of each employee.

In general, the merit of Taylor, Fayol and others lies in the following principles of scientific management:

1. Using scientific analysis to determine wholesale ways to accomplish a task.

2. Selection of workers most suitable for certain tasks and their training.

3. Providing employees with the resources required to effectively complete tasks.

4. Systematic and correct use of financial incentives to increase productivity.

5. Separation of planning and thinking into a separate process. Approval of management as an independent form of activity of science. Formation of management functions.

School of Human Relations.

The classical school, having gone through certain stages of development, having perfectly studied the technical side of the production process, has largely exhausted its capabilities.

The focus of the behavioral school was on the person, that is, instead of managing work, the management of personnel formation was put at the forefront. For a more successful, competitive development, managers needed to study a person, his psychological characteristics, and adaptive capabilities. A "school of human relations" began to take shape, which studied human behavior in production environment and the dependence of labor productivity on the maral-psychological state of the performer. The researchers of this school proceeded from the fact that if the management takes great care of its employees, then the level of satisfaction among employees increases, which naturally leads to an increase in productivity. The goal of the supporters of this school was to try to manage by influencing the system of socio-psychological factors. The "Human Relations" school was an attempt by management to view every organization as a "social system". This direction was started Elton Mayo, who came to the discovery by investigating the dependence of labor productivity on the level of illumination of the workplace.

Mayo increased the level of illumination in the workplace and noted a significant increase in productivity. Then, for scientific purposes, he reduced the level of illumination, but productivity increased again. After numerous studies, it was concluded that labor productivity is growing not because of the level of illumination, but due to the fact that attention was simply shown to the performers. Mayo found that well-designed work procedures and good wages did not always lead to increased labor productivity, as the representatives of the classical school believed. The forces that arise in the course of interaction between people could and often exceeded the efforts of the leader. Sometimes employees reacted much more strongly to peer pressure than they did to management desires and material incentives. The first serious achievement of the behavioral school was the proof of the fact that the performance of the performer is influenced not only and sometimes as much by material factors as psychological and partly social.

In this regard, an experiment conducted by Mayo in 1923-1924 is shown. in a textile factory. The spinning section had an annual turnover rate of 250% and productivity was lower than other sites. Moreover, no material incentives could correct the situation. As a result of special studies, Mayo came to the conclusion that the reasons for this situation were the organization of labor, which excludes the possibility of communication, and the prestige of the profession. However, as soon as two ten-minute rest breaks were introduced, the situation immediately changed: the turnover of workers dropped sharply, and output increased. And the task of management is to develop, in addition to formal dependencies between members of the organization, fruitful informal ties that strongly influence performance. Thus, the formal organization would be supplemented by an informal structure, which was regarded as a necessary and essential component of the effective operation of the organization. The organization is compared to an iceberg, in the underwater part of which there are various elements of the informal system, and in the upper part of the formal aspects of the organization. This emphasizes the priority of this system over the officially established relationships in the organization, a deeper defining nature of the socio-psychological characteristics in the organization.

E. Mayo based his conclusions primarily on the well-known Hawthorne experiments conducted in working groups at the Western Electric plant. These conclusions can be presented as follows:

1. The performance of a worker is determined by group norms rather than by his physical capabilities. All norms that characterize certain standards of behavior or a person's position are supported by group sanctions. Group norms are essentially unwritten rules governing informal organization.

2. Workers act or make decisions much more often as members of a group than as individuals: their behavior is in most cases determined by group norms.

3. The special importance of informal leaders for achieving the goals of the group, establishing and maintaining group norms. The leader of the group is the person whose activity most closely matches group norms, that is, the person whose behavior is perceived as the most consistent with the achievement of group goals.

Based on this, the manager performs two functions: economic and social. The first is aimed at maximizing the purpose of the organization, the second --- at the creation and management of labor associations and groups that work effectively together. The achievement in the analysis of the informal structure was the proof of the need to expand the boundaries of organizational analysis beyond the positions of the structure. Based on these findings, the researchers of the psychological school believed that if the management takes great care of their employees, then the level of employee satisfaction should increase, which will lead to an increase in productivity.

Even before Mayo received practical results, they were theoretically anticipated by Mary Follet. The range of issues that she considered included such categories as "power" and "authority", their differentiation and informal perception, responsibility, delegation of responsibility, etc. She put forward the idea of ​​harmony between labor and capital, which could be achieved with the right motivation and taking into account the interests of all stakeholders. Follet's merit is that she tried to combine 3 schools into a single whole: school. scientific management, administrative and human relations. She believed that for successful management, the manager must abandon formal interactions with workers and be a leader recognized by them, and not appointed by higher bodies. She believed that a manager should manage according to the situation.

Follet defined management as “getting work done with the help of others.

School of Behavioral Sciences.

More recent research done Abraham Maslow and other psychologists, helped to understand the causes of this phenomenon. They showed that the motives of people's actions are not economic forces, but various needs that can only partially be satisfied with the help of money. It was about the fact that the productivity of workers could increase not so much due to an increase in wages, but as a result of a change in the relationship between workers and managers, an increase in the satisfaction of workers with their work and relations in the team.

He made a great contribution to the development of management A. Maslow who developed the theory of needs, which later became widely used in management, known as to the pyramid of needs »

ness in self-re-

the need for self-respect.

belonging to a social group.

the need for security.

basic or main stage.

In accordance with the teachings of Maslow, a person has a complex structure of hierarchically arranged needs. according to this theory, an individual's goals are ranked in order of importance.

Basic Needs(the need for food, security, etc.) and production or meta-needs (the need for justice, well-being, etc.). The basic ones are constant, but the production ones change. The value of meta-needs is the same.

The basic ones are arranged according to the principle of hierarchy in ascending order from “lower” (material) to “higher” (spiritual).

1. physiological and sexual needs.

2. existential needs- in the security of their existence, confidence in the future, stability of conditions, life activity, a certain constancy and regulation of the surrounding society, and in the sphere of work - in guaranteed employment, insurance against accidents.

3. social needs- in affection, belonging to a team, caring for others and paying attention to yourself.

4. prestigious needs- in respect from "significant persons", career growth, status (prestige, vocation and high marks.)

5. spiritual needs--- in self-expression through creativity.

Basic needs are motivational variables that, as a person grows up and as they are realized as a necessary condition for the social existence of an individual, follow each other. Primary (congenital), 3 others - secondary (acquired).

According to the principle of the hierarchy of needs, each new level becomes relevant for the individual only after the satisfaction of previous requests. Maslow's hierarchy of needs allows us to draw an important conclusion about the motivating power of money. Money is not the decisive motivator of productive and quality work. The most powerful factor in motivating work processes is job satisfaction: joy from work, personal growth, freedom in choosing actions, respect from management.

In those cases when a person is not satisfied with his work, if it is a burden to him, he experiences anxiety even when his basic needs are satisfied. That is why it is so important to choose the right profession, find yourself in work, and it is in it that you strive for self-expression. Given that human potentialities grow and expand, the need for self-expression can never be fully satisfied. Therefore, we can say with confidence: the process of motivating human behavior through needs is endless.

Hence the conclusion: the manager must carefully study his subordinates and clearly understand what active needs drive them. Given the dynamic nature of human needs, it is very important for a manager to notice the change in these needs and to change the methods of satisfying the needs accordingly.

This theory has been used as the basis of many modern models labor motivation.

Modern management theories

Views of E. Mayo and others. have been further developed in the works Douglas McGregor. He analyzed the activities of the performer in the workplace and found that the manager can control the following parameters that determine the actions of the performer:

tasks that the subordinate receives

the quality of the task

time of receipt of the task

expected time to complete the task

funds available for the task

the team in which the subordinate works

instructions received by subordinates

convincing the subordinate of the feasibility of the task and the reward for successful work.

the amount of remuneration for the work done

the level of involvement of the subordinate in the range of work-related problems.

all these factors, which depend on the leader to some extent, affect the worker and determine the quality and intensity of his work. McGregor formulated that based on these factors, two different approaches to management can be applied, which he called the "X" theory and the "Y" theory.

Theory U.

1. A person initially does not like to work and will avoid work.

2. Since a person does not like to work, he should be forced, controlled, threatened with punishment in order to make him work to achieve the goals of the organization.

3. The average person prefers to be led: he prefers to avoid responsibility, he has little ambition, he needs security.

Theory "X".

1. Work for a person is as natural as play.

2. External control is not the only means of combining efforts to achieve the goals of the organization. A person can exercise self-respect and self-control by serving the goals to which he is committed: commitment is formed as a result of the rewards associated with achieving the goal.

3. The average person seeks responsibility, his desire to avoid responsibility is usually the result of past disappointment and is caused by bad leadership from above.

Theory "Y" is a democratic management style and involves the delegation of authority, improving relationships in the team, taking into account the appropriate motivation of the performers and their psychological needs, enriching the content of the work.

McGregor's theories cannot be found in their pure form in normal production activities, but they have had a strong influence on the development of management theory as a whole. Theories "X" and "Y" were developed in relation to a single person.

William Ouchi offered his own understanding of the issue under consideration, called the theory "A" and "Z", which was largely facilitated by differences in management in the Japanese and American economies

Modern practice favors theories "Y" and "X". Theories "X" and "Z", theories "A" and "Z" can also be called soft and hard styles of management, which have been quite accurately characterized: a hard leadership style is most effective either in a very favorable or in a very unfavorable situation.

Hard Style: the leader is endowed with more power, has informal support for subordinates, the tasks of the group are extremely clear, and it only awaits instructions.

soft style: a team of like-minded people solving a fundamentally new problem. Here the tasks are not fully defined, the leader may not be supported by everyone, it is advisable to encourage the development of discussions.

Conclusion.

The evolution of the theory and practice of management has found its application in a variety of ways. But all these areas are distinguished by the desire to combine the scientific study of organizational and technical problems of managing individual enterprises with the solution of the fundamental problems of the market economic system: achieving stability in economic development, overcoming socio-economic conflicts.

Literature

1. I.N. Gerchikov "management"

2. R.A. Fatkhutdinov "Management system"

3. P.A. Kokhno "Management" "Finance and Statistics" 1993.

4. Popov A.V. Theory and organizational management. M., 1991

5. Duncan Jack U. Fundamental ideas in management. M., Delo, 1995