This article discusses the management styles in the 12-yearsecondary education and their impact on the form of administrative action. The authors point out the relevance of the study of the pedagogical management of the transition to 12-year education. The article analyzes the following management styles: authoritarian, democratic, liberal, and their varieties, the form of administrative influence in terms of their effectiveness in the 12-year education. The management of educational activities of educational institutions has joint control of the activities of teachers and other staff and students. This process includes the creation of the necessary conditions for the control, the use of necessary means and methods of control and management functions, based on the laws and principles of management. The authors point to circumstances which in the present conditions, in the 12 years of study influence the choice of management style: the situation, the degree of maturity of the employees, their attitude to the head, a willingness to cooperate, the nature of the problem, especially the organization and its divisions that exist in their procedure business management, senior management positions, the prevailing system of values and the type of culture, random factors.
The humanistic orientation of education, its personal orientation focuses on issues of the nature management of educational institutions and teaching staff, creates the conditions for self-realization, selfexpression of the teacher as a subject, an active transmitter of their professional activities.The problems of transition to the 12-year secondary education, the development of human resources of educational institutions, the formation of a new pedagogical thinking enhance the value of teaching management in educational practice; contribute to the understanding of the nature of the impact of management styles on the forms of administrative influence.
One of the topical problems of the Kazakh society is the formation of a competitive person who is ready not only to live inchanging social and economic conditions, but also to influence actively the existing reality, changing it for the better. Information overloads the content of education and leads to lower motivation of training and the deterioration of health of pupils. It is necessary to strengthen the role of school education in achieving the goals of personal development of the student, his socialization, mental and physical health preservation.
Kazakhstan has in recent years made significant steps to upgrade the educational system, designed and implemented the state educational standards, to introduce variable education, work has begun to prepare for the introduction of a 12-year secondary education.
For effective management of the 12-year secondary educational system and the quality of education must be a clear division of functions of school, community, social partners and government authorities.
The management of educational activities of educational institutions has joint control of the activities of teachers and other staff and students. This process includes the creation of the necessary conditions for the control, the use of necessary means and methods of control and management functions, based on the laws and principles of management.
In educational management, as well as in the business management, there are general laws, principles, methods and means of control, but the main purpose of the educational management is not profit, and selfeducation.
Managing educational institutions, the head adheres to a particular style of management.
In modern conditions we distinguish generalized individual characteristics of management styles: authoritarian, democratic, liberal.
Historically, the first and until now, the most common practice is the authoritarian style, which is considered universal. It is based on giving orders to subordinates without any explanation of their connection with the overall goals and objectives of the organization.
Such authoritarian leaders prefer to formalize relationships, keep their subordinates at arm's length that they do not have the right to violate. Regardless of personal qualities (kindness, tact, etc.) they will hold a hard line against employees, imposing their solutions.
Experts identify two kinds of authoritarian style. Exploiting style suggests that the head completely takes over all matters, he or she does not trust subordinates, is not interested in their opinion, takes responsibility for everything, giving the performers a guidance. As the main forms of stimulation such a leader uses punishment, threats, psychological pressure [1].
The employees are indifferent to everything going or negative, they are happy about all his or her mistakes, finding in it a confirmation of his innocence. The result is poor morale and creates the basis for the development of industrial disputes.
By a milder “benevolent” form of the authoritarian style the head refers to subordinates already condescending fatherly, is interested in their opinion, even though, despite its validity, can do in their own way, provides independence performers to a limited extent. Motivating penalty takes place here, but it is minimal.
The use of an authoritarian style can be effective when subordinates are completely at the mercy of the head, such as the military, or the boundless trust him (say, the actors the director or the athletes coach), and the head is sure that they are not able to act independently in the right way .
The authoritarian leadership style is more typical for the charismatic creative personalities. Its use increases personal power and the ability to head its influence on subordinates, provides maximum performance, but does not generate an internal interest of performers, as excessive disciplinary actions cause in the human fear and anger, and destroy the incentive to work.
According to T.I. Shamova, classic and most common authoritarian type of managers considers subordinates only as tools for the execution of orders and the achievement of the organization, in cooperation with the staff use a variety of strategies of behavior by coaxing and encouragement to coercion and blackmail of dismissal [2].
The downside is the suppression of the individual style of the initiatives on the part of workers is punished by the very fact of its existence. Creative employees or become ordinary performers or quit.
Authoritarianism is the basis of the absolute majority of industrial action because of the desire of the subject to the absolute rule. Autocrat's claim on jurisdiction in all matters creates chaos and, ultimately, a negative impact on overall performance. The willfulness of autocrat paralyzes the work of the staff. He loses not only the best employees, but creates a hostile atmosphere around him that threatens to himself. Unhappy and resentful subordinates can misinform. Intimidated employees are not only unreliable, but also are not working at full capacity; they are alien to the interests of the company.
If a person who is holding a post is inferior to his subordinates in professionalism and personal qualities, then he has to compensate for the mismatch position his repressive commanding style of leadership. Very often there is an opposite situation when the head-professional is surrounded by inexperienced workers, which are simply impossible to share the responsibility. Being authoritative this is the only correct way out in this situation. But the leaders of this type in the new conditions still should look to a democratic style.
A variant of the authoritarian management style is paternalistic style. It involves treatment subordinates, both as children and their work motivation mediates through personal dependence on the head. Service information is distributed from top to bottom, depending on the goodwill of management, control the activities carried out selectively, at the request of the head and intuition.
The positive side of authoritarian leadership is efficiency in managing subordinates. The rigid system of "order-execution" is often effective in emergency situations when there is a need to take responsibility for the decision, and to quickly and accurately make it a reality.
This type of guidance is only acceptable in groups where there are problems with labor discipline. Studies show that the head's absence at his workplace leads automatically to a drop in productivity.
Democratic style is opposite to the authoritarian leadership. The scientific and technological revolution has largely changed the previous situation. The machine begins to perform most types of physical work and chores related to mental, under the control of these same machines. This, according to MacGregor, inevitably leads to a change in people's attitudes to their work [1].
Now expenditure of physical and mental effort in work is as natural as, for example, play or rest, so even a simple person should not have a sense of aversion to work. Last, under appropriate conditions can and should be a source of satisfaction, rather than punishment, which people tried to escape. Her voluntary compliance makes it unnecessary coercion and external control. A person can manage their own activities, directing it to achieve this goal, the achievement of which in itself becomes a reward for their efforts. According to McGregor, a normal person normally is ready to take not only the responsibility, but also looking for it; the desire to avoid the lack of ambition of the latter, concern about personal security is only a consequence of the influence of reality, rather than the specifics of human nature.
Most people, according to McGregor, have a relatively high degree of imagination, ingenuity, creativity, which can be successfully applied in the interest of the organization, the more that the real potential of the human today is used only marginally.
The organization, which is dominated by the democratic management style, is characterized by a high degree of decentralization, the active participation of employees in decision making, the creation of conditions under which the performance of official duties is for them attractive, and the success is the reward.
The democratic leadership style appeals to higher levels of needs. The present democratic leaders trying to do the duties of subordinates more attractive, avoid imposing their will, it involves decision making, provides the freedom to formulate their own goals based on the organization's goals, which increases the motivation to work, and at the same time provides a fairly tight control over them. Thus, the Democratic leadership is characterized by the separation of powers and the participation of workers in management.
A democratic leadership style also identifies two forms: "advisory" and "participatory". As part of the "advisory" head though not completely, but largely trusts subordinates, is interested in their opinions, moods, consults with them, seeking to use the best of what they offer. Among the incentives is dominated by the promotion, and the punishment is used only in exceptional cases. The employees are generally satisfied with such a system of management and usually try to give their boss help and support [3].
"Participatory" form of democratic governance suggests that managers have complete trust in subordinates in all matters (and they will respond in kind), always listen to them, and use all the constructive proposals involve them in setting goals and monitoring, which allows them not to feel like pawns. All that unites the team.
The democratic leadership style is usually applied in the case when the performers are well, sometimes better than leaders, versed in the intricacies of the work and can make it a lot of innovation and creativity.
Studies have shown that under the authoritarian leadership style can be done twice more work than in a democratic, but its quality, originality, novelty, the presence of elements of creativity will be on the same order of magnitude lower. From this we can conclude that an authoritarian style is preferred for easier management activities focused on the quantitative results, and democratic complex, where the quality takes the first place.
But where it comes to the need to stimulate creative performers to solving problems, most preferred is a liberal style of management. Its essence lies in the fact that the leader confronts performer’s problem, creates the necessary organizational conditions for their work, determines its rules, sets the boundary of the solution, and he fades into the background, leaving behind functions as a consultant, arbitrator, expert, assessing the results.
I. Shamova notes that a head with democratic style tends to attract employees to the strategic objectives of the school, encourages initiative. Naturally, with this style of leadership it is necessary to apply an individual approach to employees. For this purpose it is necessary to be a good psychologist, have not only the personal information, but also to be able to "take" it from personal communication [2].
The Chiefs are respectful to employees, without allowing public and private offensive remarks against them. In contrast to the authoritarians they may share some of his powers to his deputies, not perceiving it as an attack on the government. Instead of the "order-execution" is the primary method of management recommendations, requests advice. Head constantly monitors their implementation in the case of deviations from the proper course gently corrects the employee. In this type of leadership the existence of "clandestine opposition" and approximate groups difficult.
But robustness, sufficiently professional and disciplined team, plus the emotional maturity, balance and compromise, tact and interpersonal skills of leader are required for the successful implementation of democratic leadership.
In a conflict situation the head of this style tends to identify all alternative points of view of the parties, it encourages full disclosure of all information relating to the causes and nature of the conflict. Moreover, its resolution is on the path making the most convincing viewpoint regardless of its carrier and the root of the conflict detection. As a result, when this style works a transition is possible to a new level of interaction when there is a completely new result. But all this is possible with a well-established organization.
Liberal style is often referred to as "laissez faire": the chief is conflict-free, provides the employees themselves and themselves determine the goals and methods of their solutions. As the head refuses to control and motivation of staff, does not have the proper authority, the control is based on the requests of a personal nature, persuasion, exhortations.
Liberal chiefs do not apply any serious disciplinary action, and, therefore, are always in good relations with their subordinates. Often, their relationships become crony, informal, distance between boss and employee becomes imperceptible. This head is almost always avoid involvement in conflict situations. Unpleasant facts are seen, but ignored in the hope that they will somehow disappear by themselves.
The resulting power vacuum leads to the appearance of competing factions are fighting for influence in chief for the purpose of purchase privileges. You may see the shadow leader. The collapse of the team and disorganization often are constrained by party leader and shadow employees in the carefree life, not to lose the chief-sufferer, they fulfill the required minimum, the benefit has complete freedom in the choice of means. [4]
Liberal leaders give subordinates freedom to set their goals, monitoring performance and are minimally involved in business. The Group has the right to make their own decisions.
Subordinates rid of the annoying control; they take their own decisions on the basis of discussion and looking under the powers granted to the ways of their implementation. This work allows them to express themselves; it brings satisfaction and creates a favorable moral and psychological climate in the team. It builds trust between people who contribute to the voluntary adoption of the additional powers and responsibilities.
The head gives the information, assesses the activities of his employees, promotion, training, providing assistance and support to maintain a good morale, as well as in cases of dispute, he reserves the right of final decision.
The use of this style is becoming more common due to the growing scale of research and development activities, carried out by highly skilled professionals, do not accept the pressure, micromanagement and others.
At the same time, this style can easily be transformed into a bureaucratic, when the head is removed from all cases, transferring them into the hands of "nominees". Latest on his behalf manage the team, while applying more and more authoritarian methods. He just pretends that power is in his hands, but in fact more and more becomes dependent on his volunteers. [5]
The current situation, the transition to 12-year education model requires the use of the head in practice the whole arsenal of management science in the cube with the conscious use of the strengths of the individual manager. Such individual situational approach means using in each case the adequate management styles authoritarian, liberal or democratic. The richer arsenal governing receptions and more flexible than the head rebuilt to achieve the goal, the more reason to say that he has good skills of effective management.
Managers usually use either the democratic-oriented human relations or autocratic oriented work styles. In modern conditions, in the 12-year-old training business success is not only determined by the personal orientation of the head, but also a number of other factors: the situation, the degree of maturity of the employees, their attitude to the head, a willingness to cooperate, the nature of the problem, and others.
The heads cannot change themselves and their management style, as a rule, so we need to put them in those terms when they could best way show themselves on the basis of the situation and of the task.
In the context of well-defined tasks simple instructions are enough to do the job, so at the same time manager can be an autocrat, not forgetting, however, that the slight dictatorship and tyranny not the same thing. The first humans can perceive with the understanding, and the second against the legitimately indignant and refuse to work.
The management style that focuses on the maintenance of human relationships, the most suitable for the head of a moderately favorable situations where it does not have sufficient authority to ensure the necessary level of cooperation with subordinates. If relations are good, people are generally inclined to do what is required of them, and focus on the organizational side of things can cause a conflict in which the influence of the head on the slave falls. Orientation is on human relations, on the contrary, increases the impact of the head and improves relationships with subordinates.
Leadership style is predetermined by the peculiarities of the organization and its divisions that exist in their order of doing things, the positions of senior management, the prevailing system of values and the type of culture, random factors. Leadership styles are rotated, for example, depending on the external situation, coupled with the changes in the educational system, the introduction of innovations. Alternating use of two sheets received in the western management name "method of two hats."
In each case, between authoritarian, democratic and liberal styles there is a certain balance, and an increase in the proportion of the elements of one of them will lead to a decrease in others.
Thus, the management system of the 12-year management training has a joint venture of teachers, other staff and students. This process includes the creation of the necessary conditions for the control, the use of necessary means and methods of control and management functions, based on the laws and principles of management.
- Управление персоналом. Учебник и практикум// И.А. Максимцев, Н.А. Горелов. – М.: Изд-во: «Юрайт», 2015. – 528 с.
- Менеджмент в управлении школой/ Т.И.Шамова, Н.В.Немова, К.Н.Ахлестин, и др.; под ред. Т.И.Шамовой. – М.: ИЧП «Издательство Магистр», 2005. – 226 с.
- Ключевые идеи менеджмента: Пер. с англ/ С. Крейнер. – М.: ИНФРА-М, 2002. – 346 с.
- Лазарев B.C. Управление образованием на пороге новой эпохи// Педагогика. – 2007. – N – С. 12-18.
- Полуянов В.Б. Организация и управление в сфере образования: Учебное пособие. – Екатеринбург, 2000. – 138 с.
- История менеджмента/ А.И. Кравченко. – М.: КНОРУС, 2010. – 430 с.