Section "Management of modern enterprises, industries, complexes"

2014 Since 2012, a subsidy has been introduced for small and medium-sized businesses - manufacturers of goods, works, services in order to reimburse part of the costs associated with the implementation of innovative projects, including those aimed at commercializing innovative developments (technologies, products, services) .

In the future, within the framework of the infrastructure for supporting small innovative businesses, on the basis of SibGAU, an innovative platform will be created, which will include a technology park, a transfer center and other structures that are aimed at solving the problems of commercializing developments and technologies. The technopark is planned to be developed on the basis of the innovative infrastructure of SibGAU with the participation of the basic enterprises of FSUE NPO PM, FSUE Krasmash and institutes of the KSC SB RAS in order to intensify production activities through the use of available resources and by attracting new technologies.

This infrastructure to support small innovative businesses in the city of Krasnoyarsk

sk, in cooperation with the regional support infrastructure, will become an excellent platform for the implementation of innovative projects and the formation of small innovative enterprises in the city of Krasnoyarsk.

1. Long-term city target program "Support and development of small and medium-sized businesses in the city of Krasnoyarsk" for 2012-2014, approved by the Decree of the city of Krasnoyarsk dated October 14, 2011 No. 453.

2. Buchwald E, Vilensky A. Problems of formation of innovative entrepreneurship // Questions of Economics. M, 2009. No. 5. S. 36-41.

3. Monitoring the activities of small innovative businesses in Krasnoyarsk // City News. 2011. 9 Apr.

UDC 331.101.3

N. M. Borisova Scientific adviser - A. V. Kukartsev Siberian State Aerospace University named after Academician M. F. Reshetnev, Krasnoyarsk

D. MACGREGOR'S THEORIES OF MOTIVATION AND APPLICATION IN RUSSIAN PRACTICE

Douglas McGregor's theories of motivation are considered: theory X and theory Y, a comparative analysis of these theories is carried out. The experience of introducing theories into Russian business is analyzed.

The problem of motivating people to work has always been relevant. Attempts to find ways to increase the productivity of people through their motivation have been made since ancient times. About 2 thousand years BC. e. The king of Babylon, Hammurabi, legislated for some subjects the level wages. Managers, including top managers, consciously or unconsciously tried to carry out the function of motivating employees. In ancient times, punishments served for this, and rewards for the elect. Ways of motivation have always been associated with the level of development of production, social conditions, needs, culture, traditions, religion.

Theories X and Y characterize two possible variants of a person's attitude to work. In accordance with the first option (theory X), the totality of employee characteristics is as follows: the average individual is dumb, tends to shirk his duties, does not like work, is passive, prefers to be led, does not want to take risks and responsibilities, focuses only on personal security and material gain, i.e., this is an “economic man”. Based on this, most people need to be forced, strictly controlled, in order to ensure the achievement of the goals of the organization. In contrast to the leaders of theory X, who consider it their main duty to manage employees,

Y theory drivers seek to help employees learn self-management skills.

Theory Y suggests that there is another category of workers. For them, the costs of physical and mental labor are as natural and necessary as play or rest, so they do not avoid labor efforts. Such employees not only do not evade responsibility, but also strive for it, do not need control and are able to control themselves, show imagination, ingenuity, and initiative.

The manager, according to D. McGregor, must, based on the relevant assumptions regarding human motivation, adhere to certain style leadership: authoritarian in the first case and democratic in the second. The authoritarian style (variant of motivation according to theory X) is tight control, forced labor, negative sanctions, emphasis on material incentives. Democratic style (a variant of motivation according to theory Y) focuses on the use of the creative abilities of subordinates, flexible control, lack of coercion, self-control, participation in management, moral stimulation.

In Russia, various theories of personnel motivation are used. When managing personnel, one cannot do without world experience, however, it must be borne in mind that direct transfer is impossible. Americans were the founders of management science. Exactly

Actual problems aviation and astronautics. Socio-economic and human sciences

they created the image of a manager as a professional with a special education, invested huge amounts of money in creating the infrastructure for management in the form of hundreds of business schools, etc. Then the Japanese seized the initiative, teaching managers not only the business, but also the art of human relations. Russia, on the other hand, occupies an intermediate position between the two management sciences.

Adapting theories X or Y to Russian "soil" faces many problems.

The dualism of the Russian mentality, its dynamics, the tendency of formation allow us to model a management system that is adequate to the Russian mentality. It contains the following synthesizing blocks:

1. "Collectivism - individualism" suggests the most wide range used techniques and methods of management. In every separate case it is necessary to take into account their ratio and, depending on this, try to determine the structure management decisions; combination of collective and individual responsibility; collective and individual control; brigade and individual wages, etc.

2. The ratio of industriousness and laziness. The contrast of the Russian soul, like no other, absorbs this contradictory unity. On the one hand, you need a "whip" and a "fist" to work. On the other hand, we have examples of the highest industriousness, which the whole world rightfully admires. In this case, the most effective will be "gingerbread". High and co-

remuneration corresponding to diligence and talent. In essence, such payment has ceased to operate since 1917.

Formation Russian management should take into account the main trend in the development of mentality towards individualism, focusing more and more on the individual, the implementation of individual control, accounting for individual contributions and payment according to it. This means that enterprises greater value should acquire a promotion based not on acquaintance and family ties, but solely on the personal abilities of each individual. When designing a management system, it is necessary to take into account as much as possible business qualities individual, his ability to perceive the new, perseverance.

It is advisable to use workers with a collectivist psychology in areas where specific methods of management are applied that are adequate to them, with an emphasis on collective work, collective responsibility and control, the use of a brigade form of labor organization and its payment, etc.

A modern Russian manager should be flexible in defining the goals and objectives of management and firmness, when a goal is chosen, in a steady striving to achieve it. This type of leader, which combines flexibility, adaptability and great strong-willed qualities, will have to be formed for many years.

Thus, it is impossible to apply to Russian reality in pure form theories of D. McGregor. A feature of Russian management is flexibility, adaptability, maneuverability, dialectic. It is necessary to take into account: 1) the established dualism of mentality; 2) its differences in different regions; 3) vast expanses of the country.

1. Egorshin A.P. Personnel Management. 2nd ed. N. Novgorod: NIMB, 2009.

2. Kozycheva N. B., Kozychev B. S. The problem and tasks of personnel motivation // Management in Russia and abroad. 2009.

3. Sheldrake J. Management Theory: From Taylorism to Japaneseization. SPb. : Peter, 2009. St. Petersburg, 2004.

D. A. Galitskaya Supervisor - A. V. Kukartsev Siberian State Aerospace University named after Academician M. F. Reshetnev, Krasnoyarsk

KAIZEN METHODOLOGY IN RUSSIA

The kaizen system, the features of its implementation in Russian companies and the problems of its application by domestic managers are considered.

IN Japanese The word "kaizen" means "continuous improvement". The philosophy of kaizen assumes that our life as a whole (work,

public and private) should be focused on continual improvement. Based on this strategy, everyone is involved in the improvement process - from me-

This theory is somewhat isolated from other described process theories of motivation, due to the fact that it describes the types and behavior of the leaders of organizations. However, due to the fact that managers are also employees of the team, who are characterized by labor motivation and certain behavior in the labor process, it is also referred to as procedural theories of motivation.

As a behavioral characteristic of the leader, D. McGregor singled out the degree of his control over his subordinates. The extreme poles of this characteristic are autocratic and democratic leadership.

Letocratic leadership means that the leader imposes his decisions on subordinates and centralizes authority. First of all, this concerns the formulation of tasks for subordinates and the rules of their work. McGregor called the preconditions for an autocratic leadership style Theory X. According to her:

A person is lazy by nature, does not like to work and avoids it in every possible way.

A person has no ambition, he avoids responsibility, preferring to be led.

Efficient work is achieved only through coercion and the threat of punishment.

It should be noted that such a category of workers does occur. For example, people who are psychasthenoids by personality type. Without showing any initiative in their work, they will willingly obey the leadership and at the same time complain about their working conditions, low wages, etc.

Democratic leadership means that the leader avoids imposing his will on subordinates, includes them in the decision-making process and the definition of work regulations. McGregor called the prerequisites for a democratic leadership style Theory Y. According to her:

Labor for a person is a natural process.

In favorable conditions, a person strives for responsibility and self-control.

He is capable of creative solutions, but realizes these abilities only partially.

It is these people and this style of leadership that are most appropriate for achieving effective motivation in the market economy.

61. Likert's leadership theory (1947-1967)

Renis Likert and his colleagues at the University of Michigan are developing a leadership model according to which there are two orientations of the leader: either to work or to the person. Subsequently, he singled out 4 leadership styles: 1) exploitative-authoritarian (task-oriented, tough and authoritarian leader); 2) benevolent authoritarian (relationships are authoritarian, but there is also limited participation of subordinates in decision-making); 3) consultative-democratic (the relationship between the leader and the subordinate is largely trusting and open); 4) based on participation (subordinates take part in decision-making). According to Likert, participatory leadership is most effective, however, as shown further research, - not always.

Being a supporter of the well-known theory of D. McGregor, he attached great importance moral and psychological climate within the organization. He considered it necessary to strictly assess the "state of the human organization" and punish leaders who allowed it to deteriorate.

62. Blake-Mouton Leadership Styles (1971)

Rice. 4. Management styles according to Blake-Mouton

Let's characterize management styles according to Blake-Mouton:

1.1 - the leader makes minimal efforts, sufficient only to save the organization;

1.9 - attentive attitude to people, which creates a pleasant, friendly atmosphere in the organization (the atmosphere of a "country club");

9.1 - the leader ensures a high level of functioning of the organization, while neglecting the interests of people;

5.5 - balance between the need to do work and maintain the morale of people at a satisfactory level;

9.9 - the work is done by dedicated people who understand the goals of the organization, which creates a relationship of trust and respect.

Blake and Mouton, as well as K. Levin, single out the most effective, in their opinion, style - 9.9 - but recognize that when the situation changes (especially in conflict), the main style can be restructured.

63. Fiedler's leadership theory

The situational approach was developed in Fiedler's theory of leadership. His main idea was the assumption that leadership behavior should be different in different situations.

To assess leadership style, Fiedler used an eight-point scale to build a profile of the least preferred employee (colleague) (LPR).

Fiedler's situational leadership model includes three situational variables:

Relations between the leader and the team: good - bad (this variable reflects the level of loyalty, trust, support and respect, i.e. recognition of the leader in the team);

Work structuredness: high - low (clearness of the goal; plurality of means to achieve the goals; validity of decisions);

Power (official power): strong - weak (the level of formal power of the leader, necessary to use adequate incentives (reward - punishment).

Based on the analysis of these three situational variables, in combination with two leadership styles, Fiedler identified eight types of situations that are favorable for a particular leadership style.

Fiedler found that efficiency is achieved if:

In the least favorable situation and in the most favorable situation, leaders who exhibit a work-oriented style (low CNR style) are most effective;

In an intermediate situation of moderate auspiciousness, a relationship-oriented style (high NPR style) is more effective. The tasks are structured, but the position of the leader is rather weak. Accordingly, under these conditions, the leader is forced to show interest in the emotions of subordinates.

Thus, according to Fiedler, although the leadership type does not change, one or another type of leadership is more favorable in a given situation. The practical significance of the model lies in the fact that it allows, depending on the situation, to select a leader. At the same time, the main selection criterion is the compliance of the manager's style with a specific production situation.

64. The Harsey-Blanchard Leadership Theory

According to this concept, the effectiveness of leadership depends on the maturity of the followers. Maturity consists of two aspects professional and psychological. And it is on how much the followers have matured to carry out the orders of the leader and on their willingness to work under him, and his success in the group depends.

P. Hersey and C. Blanchard identified four maturity stages of subordinates.

M1 - people are unable and unwilling to work;

M 2 - people are not able, but willing to work;

M3 - people are able, but unwilling to work;

M4 - people are able and willing to do what the leader offers them.

The degree of maturity is not only a characteristic of subordinates, but also depends on the task being performed. Maturity may be high in one task and low in another.

There are also two characteristics of leader behavior.

1. Task-centric (management) behavior - shows the extent to which the leader uses one-way communication when explaining what and how the subordinate is obliged to do.

2. Anthropocentric (supportive) behavior - to what extent the leader uses two-way communication when providing social and emotional support to subordinates

Based on a comparison of these three factors (degree of maturity of subordinates, task centric and anthropocentric behavior), four leadership type:

5 1 (pointing) is characterized by high task-centricity and low anthropocentricity. Effective when working with people who have a lower level of maturity for this task;

5 2 (persuasive) - with a moderate task and people orientation, effective when working with people with a level of maturity from low to medium;

5 3 (participating) - with high anthropocentricity and low taskcentricity will be most suitable for people with an average and high level of maturity;

5 4 (delegating) - with low anthropocentricity and task-centricity will lead to success when people with a high level of maturity work

65. Vroom-Yetton-Iago decision making model.

Victor Vroom is an American researcher in the field of motivation theory, the developer of the theory of expectations, the author of such works as "Decision Making as a Social Process", "Leadership and Decision Making" and "Work and Motivation".

Philip Yetton - researcher in the field of behavioral theories and leadership models. Together with Victor Vroom, he developed and tested a decision tree for a year and a half to determine the leadership model.

Arthur Jago - researcher in the field of leadership and managerial decision making.

The model is similar to the previous ones in the sense that it proposes to determine the effective leadership style depending on the situation, it is also assumed that the same leader can use different styles. The main difference of the model is its focus on only one aspect of leadership behavior - involvement of subordinates in decision-making. The leader is encouraged to focus on the problem to be solved and the situation in which the problem arose.

The main idea of the model is that the degree or level of involvement of subordinates in decision-making depends on the characteristics of the situation. There is no single solution for all situations.

After analyzing and evaluating each aspect of the problem, the leader determines which style, in terms of the participation of subordinates in decision-making, is best for him to use.

66. Mitchell and House's Theory of Leadership

One of the situational models of leadership "path - goal" was designed by Terence Mitchell and Robert House. The leader in this model can encourage subordinates to achieve the goals of the organization, influencing the way to achieve these goals. Discussing this approach, Prof. House notes that a leader can influence subordinates by “increasing the personal benefit of achieving the goal of a given work by subordinates. The leader can also make the path to that benefit easier by explaining the means to achieve it, removing obstacles and pitfalls, and increasing opportunities for personal satisfaction along the way. Techniques by which the leader can influence the ways or means of achieving goals: 1. Clarifying what is expected of the subordinate. 2. Providing support, mentoring, and removing barriers. 3. Directing the efforts of subordinates to achieve the goal. 4. Creation in subordinates of such needs, which are in the competence of the head, which he can satisfy. 5. Meeting the needs of subordinates when the goal is achieved. At first, House considered two styles of leadership in his model: the supporting style and the instrumental style. The support style is similar to the person-centered or relationship-oriented style. The instrumental style is similar to the work or task oriented style. Later, Professor House included two more styles: a style that encourages the participation of subordinates in decision-making and a style that focuses on achievement. Much of the research is focused on instrumental and backing style.

67. Tannenbaum-Schmidt leadership theory

In accordance with this model, the leader chooses one of seven possible patterns of behavior, depending on the strength of the impact on the leadership relationship of three factors: the leader himself, his followers and the situation. Figure 6.5 shows the full spectrum of choices between democratic and authoritarian alternatives, respectively associated with interest in relationships or in work. The difference between these two extreme leadership styles is based on the leader's assumptions about the sources of his power and human nature. The democrat believes that power is given to him by the followers he leads, and that people are fundamentally capable of self-management and creative work under the right motivation. The autocrat believes that power comes from his position in the group/organization and that people are intrinsically lazy and difficult to rely on. In the first case, there is an opportunity to participate in management, in the second case, the leader himself determines the goals, means and policies. According to the authors of the model, between these two extremes there are five more intermediate leadership styles. In the development of this model, scientists have encountered difficulties regarding the inclusion of all possible interactions between the leader, followers and the situation in establishing causal relationships in leadership relationships.

Introduction

Currently, the leadership style is very important, since the success and efficiency of the organization depends on the success of the leader and the style of leadership used by him. Therefore, always for many years, some leaders are more successful and enjoy the respect of their subordinates, while others look like "tyrants" in the eyes of their subordinates. This is because different leaders have different leadership styles. Therefore, the theory of D. McGregor, the theory of "X" and "Y" is very relevant. Its basis is that the theory "X" is characterized by - authoritarian style leadership, and for theory "Y" - democratic. This theory is the most widely used.

The purpose of this work is to consider the essence and significance of the theory "X and Y" by D. McGregor.

reveal the essence of leadership styles and leadership theory of D. McGregor;

determine the practical significance of D. McGregor's theory of leadership.

The essence of the theory "X" and "Y" D. McGregor

Management and leadership became subjects of study in the early twentieth century, when management was first studied. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that only in the period between 1930 and 1950. leadership has been studied on a large scale and in a systematic way. These early studies aimed to identify the properties or personality characteristics of effective leaders. According to personality theory of leadership, also known as the theory of great people, the best leaders have a certain set of personal qualities that are common to all. According to this idea, it can be argued that if these qualities could be identified, people could learn to nurture them in themselves and thereby become effective leaders.

In the 40s. scientists began to study the collected facts about the relationship between personal qualities and leadership. Despite a lot of research, scholars have not come to a consensus on the set of qualities that undoubtedly distinguish a great leader. In 1948, Stogdill made a comprehensive review of leadership research, where he noted that the study of personal qualities continues to give conflicting results. He found that leaders were distinguished by intelligence, desire for knowledge, reliability, responsibility, activity, social participation, and socioeconomic status. Stogdill also noted that effective leaders exhibited different personality traits in different situations. Therefore, he came to the conclusion that a person does not become a leader just because he has a certain set of personal qualities.

Other studies have shown that additional factors can play a decisive role in leadership effectiveness. These factors are situational, which include the needs and personal qualities of subordinates, the nature of the task, the requirements and influences of the environment, as well as the information available to the manager.

Modern scientists are trying to determine which styles of behavior and personal qualities are most appropriate for certain situations. The results of their research indicate that, similar to how different situations require different organizational structures, so must be chosen and various ways guides, i.e. depending on the nature of the particular situation. This means that the leader-leader must be able to behave differently in different situations.

The basis for the classification of leadership styles was created by the behavioral approach. It has been a major contribution and a useful tool in understanding the complexities of leadership. According to the behavioral approach to leadership, effectiveness is determined not by the personal qualities of the leader, but by the manner in which he behaves towards his subordinates. The behavioral approach advanced the study of leadership by focusing on the actual behavior of a leader who wants to motivate people to achieve organizational goals. The main drawback of this approach was the tendency to assume that there is one optimal leadership style. It should be noted that when summarizing the results of studies on the use of this approach, the group of authors argues that there is no single "optimal" leadership style.

Leadership style in the context of management is the habitual behavior of a manager towards subordinates in order to influence them and encourage them to achieve the goals of the organization. The degree to which a manager delegates, the types of authority he uses, and his or her concern primarily for human relations or task performance all reflect the leadership style that characterizes that leader.

In management theory, there are various classifications management styles, however, the most common and most commonly used is a classification based on the allocation of two types of people and two management styles that are most appropriate for each of them. This classification was proposed by the psychologist Douglas McGregor, who called it "Theory X and Theory Y". According to McGregor's approach, to a large extent, management actions turn out to be ineffective due to erroneous ideas of managers about the motives of behavior and the nature of a person at work. Instead of analyzing the objective situation at the enterprise, identifying blunders in management, managers often tend to see the source of all troubles in the laziness or stupidity of employees, their inertia of thinking and unwillingness to cooperate. Such an approach was characteristic, as it were, of Taylorism.

According to Theory X, most people do not like to work and try to avoid work in every possible way. If they have a choice - work or rest - they will rest. They need to be constantly monitored and forced to work, urged, otherwise they relax. Also, most people are not particularly ambitious and prefer to do what they are told, i.e. they do not tend to take responsibility, preferring to have it carried by someone else. Therefore, the best way to motivate people is through punishment: if people know that retribution is inevitable, they will follow the rules and make every effort in their work. The main thing that people strive for is security and safety, as well as material well-being, which gives this feeling of security.

If most people are as they are represented in "theory X", then it turns out that the most effective style management - authoritarian. The authoritarian style is characterized by the following features:

Decision-making takes place unilaterally, the instructions of the management are not subject to discussion, it is the task of the contractor to strictly follow the instructions.

Often decisions are made spontaneously, too quickly, without clarification of the circumstances, and as a result, some of them have to be canceled later or simply "forgotten" about them.

An authoritarian leader is ready to control every step of the performer. Freedom in any manifestation is not welcome. The best performer is a disciplined performer. An authoritarian leader may say that it is necessary to take the initiative, but in fact it turns out that any initiative turns against the executor.

The leader's word is the law, all instructions are given in an authoritative, indisputable manner.

If the task is not completed or not completed on time, the performer is punished, no objective or subjective reasons are taken into account.

In general, compared with the twenties in the US, there is a noticeable improvement in relations between workers and enterprises, says McGregor, but it is not yet so great that managers can abandon "Theory X". In practice, it remains the predominant leadership style model.

For a decisive reorientation of management in connection with a change in specific historical and socio-economic conditions in the United States in the second half of the 20th century, a new approach is needed, which he called "Theory Y". According to this theory, most people like to work and achieve their goals, physical and mental efforts at work are as natural to a person as recreation or entertainment. Work can bring people pleasure, they can work well not only under duress. It is enough just to direct them a little - and they themselves will be able to organize their work and work perfectly on their own. If employees are encouraged, they work with a vengeance.

Under favorable conditions, people perceive the need to take responsibility for granted, strive to perform well and prove themselves. People also want to show their intelligence, they have a desire for creativity and especially appreciate when they are given the opportunity to show their abilities. When achieving the goals of the organization in which he is interested, the individual shows self-control; contribution to the common cause is a function of the reward associated with it. Under appropriate conditions, the employee not only accepts responsibility, but also strives for it. Creative abilities that are not fully utilized in organizations are inherent in most people. The adoption of a negative concept ("theory X") means the removal of subordinates from participation in decision-making, the suppression of initiative by detailed, petty control.

The positive concept ("theory Y"), which assumes that the manager exercises overall control and involves employees in management, is more in line with the democratic style of leadership.

Leader who adheres democratic style management are distinguished by the following features of behavior:

Decision-making proceeds in two stages: first, the leader consults with subordinates and involves them in the management process. After collecting the necessary information and conducting various approvals with the most competent employees, he alone makes decisions.

Decisions are made fairly quickly, but not hastily.

Managers who adhere to a democratic management style use selective control over the activities of employees.

They do not control every step, they give subordinates the opportunity to take the initiative and realize their creative potential.

Both reward and punishment are used.

The motto of such a leader is: "Trust, but verify", subordinates often consider them strict, but fair.

A fundamental feature of McGregor's concept, which is not always paid attention to, is that "theory X" and "theory Y" are not of a research nature, i.e. do not answer the question of how it actually happens. First of all, they have a recommendatory value, because they talk about how it should be done. The essence of the concept is to establish a relationship between the management style and the behavior of employees.

An authoritarian leader is not necessarily a person who consciously considers his subordinates to be lazy, inert creatures, capable of only obeying shouts and threats. In fact, many managers quite realistically perceive people as they really are, with their complex inner world, but due to objective circumstances or other reasons, they behave with subordinates as described in the model of an authoritarian leader. Moreover, this may not always depend on social conditions. Even in a democratic system, many leaders practice autocratic methods of management.

Sometimes behind external swagger they really hide a cynical look at people. Much more often, the authoritarian style is imposed by objective conditions, despite the fact that, subjectively, they are quite likely not inclined towards it. Therefore, it is believed that in other situations, it is not the person who chooses his leadership style, but the style chooses the person. And the choice is independent of the will and consciousness of the leader himself. The reasons for choosing an authoritarian model may be disorganization in production, the collapse of labor discipline, incompetence of the leader or subordinates.

Born 1906 Received Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1934 d. Lecturer at Harvard University Transferred to Massachusetts University in 1937 technological Institute(MIT) was Principal of Antioch College. Returned to MIT in 1954. Died in 1964.

Theory X: the person is lazy and tends to avoid work strict guidance and control are the main methods of management; workers are not very ambitious, afraid of responsibility and want to be led in the behavior of workers is dominated by the desire for safety. to achieve the goals, it is necessary to force employees to work under the threat of sanctions, while not forgetting about remuneration

People are lazy They don't like work To make people work they need to be controlled, directed and held under penalty They avoid responsibility They have no ambition People are lazy They work as little as possible To make people work they need to be controlled, directed and held under penalty They avoid responsibility They have no ambition Resist change Negative motivation based on fear of punishment should prevail in the activities of the leader.

Theory Y 1 unwillingness to work is not an innate quality of the worker, but a consequence of poor working conditions that suppress the innate love for work; 3 the best means achievement of the goals of the organization - remuneration and personal development 2 with a favorable, successful past experience, employees tend to take responsibility 4 with good conditions employees form in themselves such qualities as self-discipline and self-control; 5 the labor potential of workers is higher than is commonly believed In modern production, their creative capabilities are only partially used

People love work They manage themselves according to goals They take responsibility They are ambitious and creative People love work They manage themselves according to goals They are motivated They take responsibility They are ambitious and creative If not want to work, it means that the appropriate conditions have not been created for them. It is necessary to provide workers with more freedom to exercise independence and creativity.

Conclusions: Theory X: The activities of the leader should be dominated by the motivation of subordinates, based on the fear of punishment. Theory Y: it is necessary to provide employees with more freedom to show initiative, creativity and create favorable conditions for this.

Employees must be used, taking into account the specific state of consciousness and motivation of employees. Managers should strive to develop the group, if it is not sufficiently motivated, from the state of "X" to the state of "Y", or from the state of "economic man" to "social man". Theory Z Theory Z

A. Maslow's theory of needs physiological needs (food, drink, sleep, sexual needs, clothing, housing); needs for security and confidence in the future (needs for the physical security of the individual, stability, security, the need for order, laws and boundaries. In the refraction of the enterprise, this means labor protection, insurance, a clear system of norms and rules, protection from arbitrariness, the absence of fear of loss benefits and benefits achieved, etc.)

A theory of needs. Maslow's need in love (since the need for love and the need for sex are often confused, this level is better defined as social needs). This concept includes a sense of belonging to something or someone, a feeling that others accept you, a feeling of reciprocity, affection and support, the need to identify the individual with the goals of the group, the goals of the enterprise;

A. Maslow's theory of needs the need for respect or the need for personality differentiation (the need for recognition, respect, self-respect, the attention of other people, promotion, the need for power, status, title, belief in one's own abilities) the need for self-realization (the need for realization their potential and growth as a person, success in achieving goals, solving tasks, obtaining and understanding information, fulfilling creative tasks, independence in making and implementing decisions, influencing the external environment by implementing their ideas, etc.).

Motivational profile of F. Herzberg Each of us is driven by 2 factors: the need to avoid suffering; the need for psychological growth. The company needs to create: hygienic factors (prevention of dissatisfaction) motivators (give satisfaction, achievement motivation) Methods for identifying surveys, tests, observation, business communication.

Vroom's expectancy theory Motivation = (Z-R) × (P-B) × (HC), where (Z-R) is the cost of labor - the results of the effort will give the desired results; there should be a high but realistic level of requirements. (Р-В) - these are results - reward - the expectation that a certain reward will be received for a certain result; a firm relationship must be established between the result and remuneration only for efficient work. HC is Satisfaction with the Reward Rewards must be valuable and meet needs

The theory of justice and equality (A. Adamson) People perceive remuneration subjectively and compare it with the remuneration of other people for similar work, and if an employee finds his remuneration unfair, then he significantly reduces the productivity and quality of work.

Situation for analysis You are employee A (Aleksey). Your colleague, employee B (Boris) works with you in the same department, performs similar tasks. Your manager R (Roman) noted Alexey's work in the current quarter. You know that an order has been prepared to reward Alexei. You are convinced that you do no less work than Alexey and work no worse than him. At the same time, your work is not marked by anything. What is your reaction? Your actions?

You tell me what you need, maybe I'll give you what you want! Motivation cannot solve all problems, although it is often viewed as a perpetual motion machine for high performance. When solving the problems of employee motivation, the manager must always remember that the productivity of an employee consists of three components: - the ability to work productively, - the ability to work productively, - the readiness to work productively. It makes sense to talk about the third component only after the provision of the first two components!

As a specialist in social psychology PhD Douglas McGregor long time dealt with management issues. After the end of World War II, his name was closely associated with brilliant ideas in this area.

Unfortunately, Douglas MacGregor contributed to management only through one completed work. This work was the only one that the scientist could present to the world before death took him at the age of 57. Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Y and several draft papers that were never completed are the only legacy of this American sociologist.

McGregor's main idea on X

Douglas MacGregor made two assumptions about the human nature of behavior. In the course of research, he noticed how dual the human essence can be.

For example, Douglas McGregor's Theory X suggests a negative view of people.

It characterizes a person as someone who:

possesses ambition (even to a small extent this trait is inherent in all);
does not like to work;
seeks to avoid responsibility;
can work effectively only under the strictest supervision.

McGregor's main idea for Y

In turn, Douglas McGregor's theory Y characterizes a person from a positive point of view.

It shows a person as a person who is capable of:

to self-organization;
take responsibility;
perceive work as a natural thing, comparable to play or rest.

These conflicting theories were put forward on the basis of the research.

Determining parameters of the theory

There are a number of underlying factors that Douglas McGregor has analyzed. The theory of x and y is based on the activities of the performer at his workplace. As a result of the study, it was revealed that there are certain parameters that determine the actions of the performer. By taking them under his control, the manager will be able to control the actions of his subordinates.

These settings are based on:

tasks assigned to subordinates;
time of receipt of tasks;
beliefs possessed by a subordinate, in a guarantee of receiving appropriate remuneration;
the quality of performance of work tasks;
expected time to complete tasks;
the team (close environment) in which the subordinate works;
funds provided for the execution of tasks;
instructions issued by management;
the beliefs of the subordinate in getting him what he can to complete the task;
the amount of remuneration guaranteed for successfully completed work;
the level of involvement of the subordinate in the problem area associated with the task.

Douglas MacGregor expressed the opinion that the provisions relating to Theory Y are closer to the truth. They more accurately reflect the essence of employees, so it is these provisions that should be taken into account when building a management strategy and practice.

Theory X: its main provisions

The provisions relating to Theory X are as follows:

Based on their nature, employees have a sharp negative attitude to work. They try to avoid it by any means, if the conditions favor it.
To achieve the desired result, subordinates should be forced to work. The employee must be under strict supervision. An alternative to this may be the threat of punishment for poor performance.
Employees practice tactics of avoiding assigned duties. For the further execution of the work, formal instructions are required almost every time the prerequisites for this arise.
The priority for most of the workers is, first of all, a sense of security, and only then all other factors that are related to work. As a rule, under such conditions, great ambition is rarely shown.

Theory Y: its main provisions

This theory by Douglas McGregor includes the following:

The perception of work is accepted by employees in the same natural form as play or recreation.
Subject to the dedication of the personnel of their company and their focus on obtaining good result in the course of work, additional instructions and control from the outside will not be required.
The average person can learn to take responsibility for their activities and even learn to develop a desire for it.
Among the population, the ability to accept right decisions is fairly widespread. This ability is not necessarily inherent in management personnel.

Theory X: clarification of the first proposition

Douglas McGregor points out that the assumptions that are inherent in Theory X are quite widespread in the literature on organizations. In reality, management practice and policy use these provisions extremely rarely.

Given that the average person is born with a sense of dislike for work, McGregor was able to trace even the history of the development of this position and identify the emphasis that guides managers. They are voicing concern about the likely curtailment of production volumes. This leads to the formation of a special system of individual remuneration. Her role fully shows that at the basis of this system is the belief that management efforts are needed to combat the propensity of a person to shy away from work.

Theory X: clarification of the second proposition

The second point follows from the above. Given the innate reluctance of a person to work, there is a need for certain actions on the part of management.

These actions are to:

to force an individual to perform work;
exercise control;
direct his action;
practice a policy of intimidation against the majority of individuals.

All these actions are aimed at forcing individuals to make their own contribution to the achievement of the overall goals of the organization.

In this case, the conclusion suggests itself that the reward system is not a guarantee of the successful completion of tasks by the employee. Only the threat of punishment can become a compelling factor. And all this stems from the belief that people can do work only under the influence of external coercion and control.

Theory X: clarification of the third proposition

The third proposition states that the average individual would prefer to be controlled from the outside. He is afraid of responsibility, is not characterized by the presence of special ambitions, and in his activities seeks, first of all, security.

Despite the fact that America's social and political values suggest that the average person has ideal virtues, most of managers in real life live by the conviction that "the masses are mediocre."

On the basis of the highlighted provisions, McGregor makes attempts to prove that this intellectual scheme is not abstract. It is widely used in the management practice of the modern world.

Explanation of the theory

The provisions that are within the framework of Theory X have been criticized by McGregor. According to the Wu theory, a person spends his mental and physical strength not only on rest or play, but also on work, which indicates the natural nature of this expenditure. Therefore, the average individual will not necessarily show dislike for the performance of the assigned tasks.

There is no need for external control in such conditions. The person will be subjected to self-management and self-control, for which the reward functions are responsible, which the person associates with his own achievements. Moreover, on the part of the individual, the most valuable reward for his work is the feeling of satisfaction of his needs for self-realization and self-affirmation.

It is these aspirations that form the basis for achieving the goals of the organization in the framework of the theory of W.