I worked for nearly twenty years the director of the structural unit of a small state, and perhaps my thoughts, tips, advice in something to help novice managers, or someone who wants to be a leader.
My dear readers may think that this leadership experience of nothing says.Just think, a little, but still state organization.And if large, and even the private company?Then all my advice, "penny" is not worth?
This is deeply misleading those who are engaged in administrative work.Remember the scene from the movie "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" when friend Catherine admire and wonder how she manages a team that has more than a thousand people.To which she replied: "If you learn to manage several people, then their number does not matter."
For the accuracy of the phrase can not answer, but the meaning of it was just such a statement.And it's the absolute truth, the principles of management in any team, large or small, are equal.As for private companies, and then the same rules apply.Yes, specific bu
and in government and private business people are working, that is, the team who need to be able to operate, the organization has worked consistently and successfully.No matter what the business, this success is reflected in the profit and the state structure in terms of.And there, and there is a team that achieves success, because one head, even if he is "a genius" does not do anything.Therefore, on good governance depends largely on successful work as a public organization and a private firm.
I started my job as a leader at a time when our country by building developed socialism moved to building unclear what capitalism.While infancy many new government structures: the pension fund, tax inspection, social services, Registration Chamber, State Treasury, the employment service.
In one of them, after the interview, I was offered a job as director.By the way, to have two bidders have not been interviewed.So I went to the interview without much conviction that I take, but without much sadness.At that time, I had quite a decent job was deputy head of personnel work in one organization, and the only reason I wanted to change my job - there, where I wanted to get, was higher than the salary.
Therefore, in the interview, I was not trying to portray something, and look better than I am.When I asked why I want to get to this place, I told the truth: "Because of the higher wages."The next question is: "Are you sure you can handle this job?" I also said very frankly: "I'm not sure as yet poorly represent it, but I'll try."Apparently, my sincerity bribed members of the commission, and I was appointed to this position.
What does it mean - to be a leader?
I will not talk about all the challenges that I have faced at his new job, except to say about the two main.Firstly, since this structure did not exist in Russia from the time of the October Revolution, everything had to start from scratch, and there was no place to learn.
was issued by the federal law on the activities of the structure, regulations, while working there were any regulations, but it does not cover the entire spectrum of practical work that had to be done.Secondly, in the course of the work I was faced with direct management problems that may have experienced executives would not reveal problems.But I've never head was not.
I was particularly felt that the responsibility for any certain area of work or for the entire activities of the organization as a whole - are two different things.
now adamant to lead a small organization no better, and perhaps in some ways even harder than large.I will try to justify their belief.
In large organizations, companies, no matter what they owned, public or private, there are specialists or even whole departments dealing with all the parties of the organization.There are lawyers, economists, professionals engaged in business activities, personnel officers, and employees involved in direct activity on the profile of the organization.
Head only need to coordinate and direct their activities, without delving into the intricacies of each department.Whereas in a small structure are only specialists on the profile of direct activities of this structure, an accountant, maybe the cashier if there is a car - the driver and the manager.No other experts in staffing is not provided.
And that means what?And that means all related activities, without which there can be no organization: legal, economic, archives, works for fire safety and health, human, economic, should be engaged in the head, in addition to its basic work on the profile of the organization.
The leaders of small organizations can not accommodate even the position of a secretary or receptionist.Naturally, such a co-operation a bit, but it's there, and before you make it, you need to grasp and understand how to do it.At the beginning of his work as a leader, I had only the experience of personnel management and economics, in which there was no work experience.
I had the experience of reporting on the work done, how to do it properly - read!
«and Sweden, and the reaper, and on dude igrets"!
Yes, this should be a leader, he must understand all aspects of the organization, led by.After reading a lot of literature, constantly consulting with experts in different areas, I learned to understand the construction and repair estimates, to make the correct documents to the courts, to the bodies of internal affairs and defend its position in court sessions, which addressed issues of our organization, to conduct alldocumentation and to take practical action on occupational safety and fire safety, understand accounting and economic issues.
But any leader, there is one more, probably, the main unit of activity - an ability to lead people, to create a climate in the team, so that it has a positive effect on the work as a whole and contributed to the success of the organization.
Any manager - psychologist
on business psychology, I also read a lot of literature, though, to be honest, many of the decisions on the relationship with the employees accepted me intuitively.
There are two styles of leadership: authoritarian and democratic.
He and the other has its advantages and disadvantages.The authoritarian style is not exactly suited to me, I am by nature a gentle man, accommodating, respecting the opinions of others even if you do not agree with him.But the democratic leadership style did not really suit me, with my character, with a style guide, it is very easy to slip into crony relations with employees.
Apparently, my guide was somehow a symbiosis of the two styles.
cite one example:
Once when we were at a meeting with the team discussing operational issues, I expressed my decision on a problem concerning the activities of the organization.One of the employees said that the need for this issue to take a collective decision, something like voting.
to once and for all clarify the decision-making, I am appealing to all, said something like: "Dear colleagues, remember and try to understand that we do not have collective or joint-stock company, where decisions are made by the members of the board or by majority vote.
responsibility for the activities of the organization have not collective, but personal.In all activities of the organization to higher and other authorities responsible personally head.For all his decisions, right or wrong, I personally say.
In any manufacturing issues discussed collectively, I have listened carefully to all your suggestions and, if they are competent and constructive, be sure to take them into account.But in any case, I'll make a decision, as soon as I am for them.
If you do not agree with my decisions, then you have three options: first - to accept and carry out the second - to appeal my decision to the higher authorities and the third - (if you do not fit the first two, and to carry out and obey you do not want)- to resign. "
More talks on this subject was not.By the way, for all time, no staff gave me a single complaint in any court.Although there were three fire an employee, but resigned in connection with the transition to work, the higher the salary, with two of them were soon asked to return, explaining his departure from the new job a bad climate in the team.
Yes, the women's team (in our small organization, all, except the driver, were women) - a special microcosm (not to be confused with the spiders in the bank), which sometimes do not live by common sense and emotion, where serious passions boil, oftennot production.I am the woman, and was sympathetic to all the features of relations in the women's team: the rapid display of emotion from scratch, touchiness about trifles, petty quarrels due to minor reasons, but only for as long as it does not interfere with work.
collective no toady and pets
Probably, in any group, not excluding women, there are employees who believe that the best way to settle their conflicts with someone else in the team and winning the approval of the leadership, it is becausecalled, peaching.I am so trivial phenomenon is also encountered.
That one, then another employee started to come to my office, and almost in a whisper reported some unpleasant information about another employee, or any of its wrongful act or omission in industrial matters, or unwillingness to perform kakuyu-some work.All of these women intrigue and "undercover" actions do not contribute to the normal and harmonious work of collective, but only foment conflict and cause distrust of the head.
To prevent this in the future, I'm at the next meeting, clearly and unequivocally made it clear that such actions do not approve, saying, "If anyone of you have a claim to the other employee, the proper performance of his duties orsome other actions it wrong, and you are obliged to present all this in a memo in my name, I'll take care of the situation.In personal as your relationships, likes and dislikes, if not a direct physical or verbal abuse at the workplace, I am not going to understand, as long as it does not interfere with work. "
More such situations do not arise, everyone understood the first time that the pets will not and the method of "podlizyvaniya to the head" is not valid.And no I'm not overwhelmed memo.With manufacturing issues versed in working order, and personal relationships build normal.All women, mostly clever, despite his emotion, or perhaps because of it.
success of the organization - is largely due to the head
Perhaps my methods of leadership and some statements seem naive and amateurish, but, first, they are tested by time and experience, and secondly, to provide effective - our small organizationfor their work over the years has been in good standing as at local authorities and at the higher bodies.
We worked not only successful, but also stable.I do not think this is entirely the merit, we had a good, hard-working staff, work responsibly and qualified specialists.But the work of even the most rasprekrasno team needed to guide and coordinate.
psychological climate in the team was good, it's not my opinion, but the opinion of those members who took the job to us (the staff gradually increased), turnover was not.
Conversely, if a vacancy arises, we have to organize a contest almost as many were willing to take this position, although wages in the lower levels of the state structures are not too big.We have good relations with all organizations, institutions and firms with whom we have worked, including the judiciary and law enforcement agencies (the nature of their activities, we had to cooperate with the police and the courts are very close).
As sung in the famous song "and finally I say," if someone thinks that the lead is from the words "hand drive", he is deeply mistaken.Be present, a good leader is successfully operating company or has a high rating of the company responsible, difficult, but very interesting and exciting work.
Can you become the leader?- Check!