The concept of leader and leadership. Its types and functions

Leadership in psychology

is considered within small groups (team, family) and is defined as influence or power, thanks to which the leader receives support from group members.

The word "leader"

translated from English as “leader”, “leader”. The leader enjoys authority and respect, has the right to set group goals, plan their achievement, and lead group members.

Formal leader

- a person officially selected for a leadership position.
Informal leaders
are chosen by the team unofficially and behind the scenes. A formal leader exercises control from the position of the powers given to him, an informal leader - from the position of his personal authority, abilities and capabilities.

There are a lot of theories and classifications of leadership from psychology, sociology and political science. Let's consider one of the most interesting classifications, which determines the type of leadership depending on the predominant functions of the leader.

Manager and leader

What is the difference between two seemingly very similar concepts? To lead is to have the right to make decisions. This feature is not always aimed at instilling authority among the wards. Leadership qualities can be inherent in a person who does not hold a leadership position. This personality is always respected by others. Such a leader is called informal.

People who simultaneously occupy leadership positions and are authoritative leaders succeed best in political activity. A number of qualities indicate the ability to manage. Among them are the following:

1. Intelligence.
2. Organizational skills.
3. Intuition.
4. The ability to please the public.
5. Willingness to take responsibility.

Who is a leader?

In any team, group of people or society, the role of the leader comes to the fore. This is a person who exercises leadership functions (formally or informally) and enjoys the respect and trust of others. An informal leader does not have authority, but can have a more tangible influence on the actions of a group or team.

The “leader” must be separated from the “manager”. The main differences are as follows:

• the leader in the group plays the role of a regulator of interpersonal relations, while the leader acts as a regulator of official relations;
• leadership arises in the microenvironment, and the “leader” refers to the entire environment of social relations, i.e., the macroenvironment;
• the leader makes decisions according to a more complex scheme, including circumstances that are not relevant to a specific group;
• leadership may depend on the mood of the group (fickle).

Leadership cannot by itself replace management. The best option is to complement each other. When a team leader is a leader, he fulfills his authority and influences group members: sets goals, inspires, motivates. Otherwise, the leader may encounter resistance within the team - competing with the influence of the informal leader of the group.

Political leader through the eyes of Machiavelli

In the work “The Prince” by Niccolò Machiavelli (an Italian philosopher), the requirements for a person who wants to become a successful politician were described in detail. The qualities of a leader in his view look like this:

1. Avoid hatred.
2. Win people over by instilling trust.
3. Create the appearance of virtue in front of the people, regardless of actions.
4. Act quickly and firmly if the situation requires it.
5. Change your management style based on the situation.

Components of Charisma

Charisma is not a clearly defined concept, and the set of its elements may differ, but the main features that are inherent in all charismatic individuals are highlighted.

• Strong communication skills

  A leader's influence is based on conveying his ideas and thoughts to people, which is almost impossible to achieve without developed communication skills. The ability to engage people with very different personalities into a conversation and turn them into like-minded people always distinguishes a leader. A leader not only knows how to competently and beautifully convey his ideas to the audience during verbal contact, but also selects the necessary communication tools and channels in a particular case.

• Deep knowledge in some area

  Charisma is not an inherent personality trait - a person can be attractive in the eyes of one community and unattractive in another. A charismatic leader is a professional in his field of activity, possessing knowledge that is not available to his followers.

• Ability to maintain intrigue (mystery)

  A person's charisma often lies in some mystery. A charismatic leader and manager tends to keep the audience in suspense while maintaining mystery. A charismatic leader is often the target of rumors and gossip, which he does not try to dispel, and sometimes even supports. At the same time, a charismatic leader is close to his followers, he does not build a wall between himself and them, he is attentive to them and their needs. Mystery, along with the openness of the leader, contributes to the formation of a respectful attitude on the part of his followers and subordinates.

Too lazy to read?

Ask a question to the experts and get an answer within 15 minutes!

Ask a Question

What are leaders like?

In relation to subordinates, managers are divided into authoritarian and democratic. Types of political leadership are class, party and national. Modern political science identifies several collective types. These include the following leaders:

1. "Flag Bearer" He is characterized by a special vision and perception of reality. He is also interested in a dream, an ideal that can inspire a large number of people.
2. "Servant." He is guided by the needs and demands of his supporters. And his actions are carried out on behalf of voters.
3. "Dealer". This type is characterized by the ability to present their ideas attractively. He knows how to convince people that his thoughts and proposals are more tempting than others.
4. The “firefighter” acts depending on the situation. He deals with the biggest problems that require immediate action.

Moreover, types of political leadership often have the property of combining these qualities in different proportions. These characteristics are usually not found in their pure form.

Leader-organizer

The organizer knows how to act actively and boldly, guided by the interests of the entire team. He is a purposeful and confident person, has an optimistic outlook on life and believes that all problems can be solved. The leader-organizer is reliable, knows how to convince and motivate. He does not skimp on praise and encouragement. When it is tedious to utter criticism, he will do it sensitively and carefully. He criticizes constructively, so his wards or subordinates have a desire to perform their duties and work even better. If such a leader sets a task, it will be clear and achievable. The organizer knows how to plan the day and activities in general.

Charismatic leader

Leaders who captivate and inspire are charismatic. In this case, we can say that the person is gifted. A charismatic leader looks exceptional and infallible in the eyes of others. He seems to be endowed with some kind of supernatural abilities.

People perceive him with reverence and devotion. That is, such a person is a leader who is blindly trusted and followed. However, such faith is not always associated with the right decisions. His words are perceived and remembered because it was this person who expressed them. Charismatic leadership has the ability to unite followers despite danger.

At the same time, it is not easy for such a person to solve current affairs. Moreover, history has many examples of charismatic leaders turning into dictators.

Concept

Charismatic leadership is a special form of exceptional and gifted influence on other people through one's personal attractiveness. This attractiveness rarely has anything in common with good looks. A charismatic leader may be short, have a large nose, or even have a hunchback. But even with all this, he attracts people with something special, something that no one else has, this is the very charisma we are talking about. Thanks to her, he receives universal support and recognition.

Democratic leader

The democratic type of leadership, as most researchers believe, is the most preferable. Personalities of this type are respected and intelligent. They are tactful and objective. These qualities manifest themselves when communicating with group members. But such a leader needs much more time to make a decision than an adherent of the authoritarian style. Such a leader listens to the opinions of colleagues and tries to involve people in the formation of decisions. He may disagree with the opinions of his subordinates and, as a result, act in his own way. But such a leader finds it interesting to listen to the opinions of his wards. The fact is that here he is inclined to the possibility of seeing some new solution that could become a fresh trend.

He has nothing against bringing “fresh air” into the organization. Because permanent attitudes tend to become obsolete. Such a leader is able to form new trends based on the opinions of his followers.

Types of Leaders

A leader is a person who is capable of analyzing a real situation and making quick decisions. Often the fate of the entire team depends on his actions. He knows how to distribute responsibilities and functions, knows who and how to motivate.

But leaders are different in type of character, actions taken, etc. Therefore, they are classified according to different criteria.

Classification according to E. de Bona

British psychologist E. de Bonet uses as a criterion the roles played by leaders in a team. According to his classification, the types of leaders exist as follows:

1. Leading the way. These are the ones who like to accept even complex and risky offers. They agree to be responsible for the employees' performance. Usually such people have innate leadership skills.
2. Idea generators. Focus on their own and team tasks. They study the situation and possible risks in advance. When making decisions, they are guided not only by their knowledge and experience, but also rely on intuition. Their ideas are creative, unusual and unconventional, which often allows them to solve difficult problems.
3. Sellers of ideas. These leaders are enterprising and creative, with a creative type of thinking. But they often find it difficult to take radically new actions. They usually make decisions based on other people's ideas, but adapt them to suit the needs of their team.
4. Synthesizers. Their peculiarity is the ability to highlight the main thing among the secondary and unnecessary. Before doing anything, they re-read a lot of literature and get acquainted with different ideas of other people. They are constantly improving their people management skills.
5. Explainers. Able to explain complex things quickly and easily. They are excellent at conveying important information to team members.
6. Reactors. They react quickly to changes and are able to adapt to market conditions. Actively and constructively criticize the actions of other people when they are sure that they are doing wrong. They give practical, good advice. As a result, they make these people their followers.
7. Communicators. Their advantage is that they love to communicate with people. They can find an approach even to a particularly difficult client or employee. Know the basics of manipulation. They know how to listen and hear. Capable of conducting coaching sessions.
8. Researchers. They are able to quickly and efficiently process information. They monitor market trends and actively implement new management systems. They love to analyze facts and conduct experiments.
9. Pathfinders have the ability to act independently. They can study the actions of competitors for a long time before making a decision. They listen to the advice of others, but implement what they consider to be the best and most effective.
10. Keepers of information. They know how to collect information, know where to find it and how to use it.

Classification by function

Characteristics of leadership styles by predominant functions divides leaders into subtypes. Among them are the following:

1. Organizers of groups or crowds. Before doing anything, they make a detailed plan. They always know the sequence of decisions. They know how to quickly establish contacts with other people. Best suited for organizing events or work purposes in small groups. They gain recognition due to their constant optimism and faith in their team. They are trusted because they almost always offer the best way out of the situation.
2. Creators. They are representatives of the most rational type of leader. Characterized by a high level of activity and energy. They always know what they need and how to achieve it. They know how to overcome barriers. They create a cohesive, friendly team. They are able to formulate a current problem in such a way as to interest others in solving it.
3. Wrestlers. They are distinguished by willpower, strong character and self-confidence. They are not afraid of any obstacles. They know how to make important decisions instantly. Always ready to attack, defend personal and collective interests. The only disadvantage of a leader-fighter is that he is not always able to foresee in advance the consequences of his actions, which are often impulsive.
4. Diplomats. They prefer to have trusting relationships with colleagues. Choose a soft method of influence. They actively use manipulation skills if they need to achieve important goals. Stay up to date with all events. They rarely talk about their plans until they achieve what they want. They are able to conduct successful negotiations in a short period of time even with people of difficult character types.
5. The last type of leader is the comforter. These people are always ready to support, help, and advise something. The atmosphere in the team is important to them, so they actively work in this direction. Comforters are characterized by politeness, understanding, compassion, kindness and empathy.

Type of leader, his characteristics and examples

Authoritarian leader

Adherents of the authoritarian style tend to spend a lot of time instructing. It is common for this type of leadership to tell followers exactly what, how and when to do. The authoritarian type of leadership presupposes the presence of a number of followers over whom they extend their power. At the same time, such leaders do not tend to listen to anyone’s advice or opinions. All decisions in an organization or structure are made by only one person. This person does not encourage others to participate in discussions or express any thoughts or wishes.

Types of leadership assume that such a person introduces a number of attitudes into the structure under his charge that require unconditional submission. It is the complete opposite of the style of behavior discussed above. It is strictly forbidden to ignore the set of rules he proposes. All those who disobey are threatened with certain punishment. It is also undesirable to argue with such a person. He knows perfectly well that the boss is always right, and requires his employees to strictly believe in this attitude.

Typology of leadership styles

The world situation is constantly changing, which requires changing types of leadership and management. Therefore, today there are a large number of them. But the main types of leadership are classified according to style, nature and content of activity.

According to K. Levin (or according to style)

One of the most popular concepts remains the typology of individual leadership styles, developed back in the 30s of the 20th century by the German psychologist Kurt Lewin. Each type of leadership has its own formal and substantive characteristics. Formal ones define management techniques and methods. Content characterizes decisions that are proposed by the leader and accepted by the group.

Directive

Another name is authoritarian leadership style. Based on the principles of delivering clear, precise, short commands, briefly and to the point. He does not waste time on long discussions, but acts quickly and effectively. May voice threats or prohibitions if a team member does something not according to plan.

He has a very unfriendly tone. Rarely gives praise, ignores emotions and requests. Sets clear evaluation criteria. This makes it easier to work with the team, because colleagues know exactly what is required of them and what the punishment will be for non-compliance with the rules.

The authoritarian type of leadership is characterized by detailed planning of the volume of work of the group for a short period of time. Further prospects are considered based on the results of production activities.

A directive leadership style is effective in the following cases: A

• in crisis situations;
• when specific tasks are set from top management;
• when any initiative is punishable (you just need to adhere to the guidelines of senior managers);
• in dealing with incompetent, slow employees.

An authoritarian leadership style is ineffective in cases where extraordinary decisions need to be made. In this case, the rule applies: the more complex the task, the lower the effectiveness of this management style.

It is also ineffective in the long term. Not suitable for a creative team where the originality of ideas and the uniqueness of each employee are valued.

Leadership styles: authoritarian, democratic and liberal

Democratic

One of the best leadership styles. A democratic leadership style involves tactful behavior and objectivity towards employees and colleagues. For such a leader, the human factor is important; he often makes concessions.

The democratic type of leadership has its own characteristics:

1. Constant exchange of information. For this leader, it is important that employees are kept up to date with all developments. But he shares that part of the information that he considers important. Likes to hold meetings where he brainstorms. It is important to him that employees are not afraid and know how to exchange information.
2. Meeting on democratic principles. During the conversation, anyone can speak, and the leader will voice his opinion only at the end. A leader knows how to get a silent employee to talk or calm down an overly active subordinate. He is patient, tolerant and respects the ideas of others, even if they completely contradict his judgment. Knows how to listen. If he begins to criticize someone, he does it carefully and constructively.
3. Involves employees in decision making. With a democratic management style, the manager considers himself part of the team, and not a separate element. He often arranges something like a referendum, where every employee can influence his decision.
4. He really appreciates other people's work. He always rewards his subordinates for excellent work. This manifests itself in material or moral stimulation.

In psychology, this type of management is considered the best, because employees are rarely under stress. They are less susceptible to irritability, depression, and anxiety.

The democratic leadership model is especially effective in teams where employees are highly specialized and are true professionals in their field. It often happens that when a manager does not know what type of management to use, he prefers democratic management.

This leadership style should not be introduced in teams where employees are not interested in the development of the company. They are incompetent, have poor knowledge of the state of affairs at the enterprise, or need constant motivation. Another circumstance when the democratic method of leadership will be ineffective is a crisis situation when there is no time for lengthy discussions.

Permissive or passive

This leadership model is characterized by a lack of praise from subordinates. A purely business relationship is formed between the manager and employees. In some situations, delegation of basic powers between employees of different departments or positions is actively used.

Other concepts on which the passive management style is based:

• there is a leader, but he is not visible (the leader is on his own, the employees are on their own);
• lack of interest in each other's successes;
• employees discuss and make decisions themselves;
• the psychological climate in the team is unfavorable, which negatively affects the performance of creative people;
• The team rarely deals with the issue of motivation.

This leadership style has no positive qualities. With it, the quality and volume of work will be low. There is no team cohesion. Employee initiative is not valued - no one takes it into account.

By nature of activity

According to this criterion, leadership styles are distinguished as universal and situational. Universal, also called standard, assumes that a person acts the same way in different situations. Situational – the manager’s actions directly depend on the specific situation.

Universal

His main goal is brilliant performance of work. Such managers themselves set an example of quality work for their subordinates.

They strive to get the job done, not always wanting to interact with colleagues. Friendships are made only with those with whom communication can bring some benefit.

Such managers want employees to work just as hard, but are very afraid to trust them with difficult tasks. They can finish some work for them. They do not interfere in the work of their subordinates until they themselves ask for it.

They create conditions in which employees can perform at their best. May require outstanding achievements. If a subordinate cannot cope with some task, then he is given another task.

By adhering to this type of leadership, managers always maintain a high level of professionalism. They demonstrate themselves as highly competent employees and motivate employees to become the same.

A universal, or reference, management style will be effective in the following situations:

• the main employees are highly qualified specialists;
• the situation is crisis, but not critical;
• you need to manage the work of one department;
• subordinates are purposeful, proactive;
• it is necessary to achieve rapid development of the organization;
• It is necessary to improve the professional level of especially promising employees.

It is better not to use it if the company is on the verge of bankruptcy or if there is a sharp decline in the success of its activities. It is better not to use this leadership style if the manager himself cannot cope with his responsibilities.

Versatile leaders are goal-oriented

Situational

In this case, the leader focuses on a specific situation. He learns the peculiarities of the organization of work of different groups of subordinates, and if the team is small (up to 15 people), then their character traits. Gives preference to working with subordinates who are at the same level of development.

Possible situations:

1. Low level of preparedness of workers. It is necessary to introduce strict rules and announce clear guidelines. Subordinates are specifically explained what is required of them and given advice on how to achieve this. Literally every step of employees is monitored, which allows you to quickly identify a possible problem. If a subordinate makes a deliberate mistake, he is punished. If he tried and successfully completed the task, he should be praised and rewarded.
2. The second, or average, level of employee development. It differs in that employees already have an incentive to work and a desire to develop, but they do not have sufficient experience to perform all tasks efficiently. In this case, a mentoring approach is used, when the manager helps employees and gives recommendations. Monitoring the execution of tasks is constant and very strict. In a team, psychological aspects gradually gain value. But even in this case, the leader does not forget to give clear instructions and demands precise execution of all tasks.
3. The third level of collective cohesion implies the presence of a friendly atmosphere in the team, excellent work organization, and professional experience. The manager and employees are one team, united by a common goal. Employees bear greater responsibility for their actions. Initiative is welcomed and encouraged.
4. The fourth level is characterized by a very cohesive team, where employees know how to distribute responsibilities, and the leader only manages the process. In this case, the authority of the boss can be delegated to the employees when the need arises.

According to M. Weber

M. Weber saw in the leader a tough, authoritarian person who likes to give orders. The basis of his typology is the concept of “authority”.

He identifies the following leadership styles: traditional, rational-legal, charismatic.

• Traditional style is based on adherence to traditions and habits. Weber believes that the relationship between leaders and followers is based on the latter's personal devotion to their leader, partly due to tradition, partly due to the arbitrariness of the leader, who is allowed freedom of action based on tradition.
• The rational-legal style is based on the rationality and legality of the procedure for electing a leader. The actions of a leader are always controlled by legislative acts and regulations. Creativity and individuality are not taken into account or applied in this type of management.
• Charismatic leadership is based on faith in the individual, his individuality. When electing a leader, his characteristics, professional skills, and unusual character traits are taken into account. Such a leader is very important in crisis situations. He is able to mobilize many people to achieve common goals. Such leaders were Lenin, Stalin, F. Castro.

Three types of leadership according to M. Weber)

The principle of non-interference

Also interesting is a leader whose actions reflect the principle of non-interference. This style is more progressive than democratic. This leader allows subordinates to make decisions freely. Also, wards have complete freedom in performing tasks that are not limited by the instructions of the supervisor.

But all types of leadership assume that the manager bears final responsibility for decisions made. And the principle of non-interference is no exception. Such a person is not characterized by negligence. He has a clear idea of ​​what his ward actually is. Therefore, such a leader knows perfectly what and in what situation to expect from a subordinate. His task is to correctly distribute responsibilities. After this, you can provide the wards with fairly free conditions, as if only slightly controlling them.

Main types

If we consider the management process as a leader-subordinate relationship, types of leadership are based on two principles.

1. Authoritarian rule.
2. Democratic.

An authoritarian leadership style involves concentrating all power in the hands of one person. The leader personally chooses the goals and methods of achieving them. Communications between led people are minimized and are completely controlled by the leader. Subordinates are suppressed, initiative is not welcomed. The main instrument of government is fear of punishment.

A democratic leadership style involves the active participation of employees in working towards set goals; initiative is welcomed. The responsibility of led people is much higher than under authoritarian rule.

There is another classification developed by M. Weber. This is the leading typology of leadership today.

• Traditional type of government - the concept of leadership is based on the traditions of a particular social or cultural group, its habits, rituals. Power is transferred by right of inheritance. Only someone born into a family of rulers can become a leader.
• The rational type is based on the legal norms established in a particular society. The leader is chosen according to these norms. The rights and obligations of the ruling person are also regulated by generally accepted legislation.
• Charismatic type. Its basis lies in the exclusivity of the leader’s face. The combination of a person’s real qualities and those endowed by the society of led followers is taken into account, while the personal qualities of the leader play a secondary role in management.

According to Weber, the leading type of government is charismatic, since it is not tied to the past and involves development, that is, a transition to a rational type.

Transformational style

Such a leader tends to use his ideas to inspire other people. This personality is characterized by excellent communication skills. That is, such a person speaks quite clearly to his wards. He expresses his thoughts clearly. It’s not difficult with him, because the team of such a person always knows what he wants.

Types of leadership suggest that such a person tends to delegate his own powers to his wards. He spends a lot of time communicating with his team and gets real pleasure from such pastime. The purpose of such meetings is to raise the collective spirit, unite people, and develop in everyone a sense of the importance of involvement in what is happening.

In addition, the leader draws a lot for himself from such conversations. He understands the thinking of the team, its mood, development trends. This leader is also interested in the emotional side of what is happening. If he observes a lack of enthusiasm in someone, he tries to develop interest.

Basic Concepts

There are 6 concepts of charismatic leadership.

1. The first is that led people attribute certain abilities to the leader in the process of assessing the situation, initiation into strategy, through the formation of extraordinary decisions and demonstrating opportunities to become an example.
2. Consists in the separation of personalized and socialized forms of charismatic government. The first form is characterized by intemperance, a strong desire to seize power and its unauthorized use, and the pursuit of one’s own selfish goals. The second form is characterized by the desire to instill one’s concepts and train followers.
3. It lies in the perception by followers of the leader in the image of a father, when there is a demonstration of heroism, stability and foresight. Typically, followers who find themselves in a difficult situation, highly suggestible, and emotionally unstable become more susceptible. This state of affairs can dramatically change the leader's self-perception and increase his desire to dominate his followers.
4. Considers the behavioral characteristics of followers and the leader at the time of crisis. Followers, being in a critical situation, strive even more for the leader, perceiving him as family. The leader receives even more power.
5. Represents charismatic leadership as a kind of engine of progress in a certain circle of people. Sometimes this form of government helps preserve cultural values ​​or adopt new ones when a stalemate arises and followers cannot stop being ambivalent about it.
6. The final concept is that charisma is a characteristic of the relationship between a leader and his followers.

Flexibility

It should be noted that all these types of leadership and management are not perfect. Therefore, the most successful person is called a “flexible leader.” He is able to combine different types of management, guided by the situation. If it is necessary to introduce an authoritarian or democratic style, a flexible leader chooses the most suitable option. This helps achieve the greatest efficiency. And the need for insight and going beyond standard boundaries leads to the choice of a transformational style.

Guided by the proposed specification, it is easy to determine the personal style or type of your leader in the workplace. Knowing the basic characteristics, you can develop the necessary qualities. In this case, you just need to compare the personal characteristics of behavior and the types of leadership described in the article.

Leader-diplomat

This is a subtle, sensitive, cautious leader. He knows how to manipulate people without them noticing. Such a leader is well versed in all the intricacies and details of the matter and has excellent command of the situation. Usually the Diplomat is aware of all the gossip, gossip and intrigue in his team and skillfully uses this in managing people. Such a leader likes to organize confidential meetings where everyone is allowed to freely express their opinions and attitudes to current problems, however, the Diplomat himself does not always reveal his plans.

Psychological needs and motives of leadership

The behavior of any leader is almost always purposeful and motivated. There are many different personal needs that are in one way or another related to the activities of a leader. Nevertheless, social psychologists from different schools have identified the following basic needs that motivate leader behavior. The need for power .

Currently, there are many different concepts of the need for power. In Western social psychology, the concept of G. Lasswell and A. George appeared earlier than others, who considered the need for power as a means of compensating for damaged or inadequate self-esteem. The need for power, which arose as a compensatory mechanism, manifests itself in a leader in different ways, depending on the conditions. This need may be reinforced by other needs or, on the contrary, come into conflict with them. In order to compensate, the leader tries to find a field of activity where he can demonstrate his competence and dignity. The leader receives a social space in which he can function quite productively and autonomously, sometimes even aggressively and arrogantly, to achieve personal balance, since this space is free from the interference of others. The process of creating a competence area tends to | a shift from one pole of subjective feelings to another, namely, from I lack of self-confidence to high self-esteem and I self-confidence in one’s actions. The importance of such motivation for

8 pages, 3811 words

1) the personality of the leader;

... the emphasis is on the issue of efficiency, i.e. the leader’s ability to ensure that the group achieves specific goals [Shackleton 2003; Thomas 2005; ... categories, i.e. ensures their connection with the needs and attitudes of group members, thereby creating... attempts are being made to create a stable majority, ensuring the strength of presidential power. This is a model of limited government in which...

1. people suffering from low self-esteem hardly require deep
2. argumentation.

“Subsequently, A. George went a little further and proposed a more expanded version of the interpretation of the need for power: he began to consider power as a self-sufficient highest value, which allowed a deeper understanding of the leader’s motivation. Power in this approach is seen not so much as a phenomenon of compensation, but as a tool that allows one to obtain satisfaction of many other personal needs, such as the need for achievement, respect, approval, security, personal freedom, understood as the absence of someone else’s domination over the leader. Another point of view on the need for power was proposed by D. Winter. He considers it from the position of sociality; an indicator of the need for power within the framework of his concept is the occupation of a position that gives formal social power. Here the need for prestige, in a prestigious material world and a prestigious social environment, is satisfied, although confrontation with others who have a high social status often arises. Closely related to the need for power are such leader traits as the desire to dominate in interpersonal relationships, the desire to manipulate people (Machiavellianism), persuasiveness - and each implements its own set of behavior patterns.

6 pages, 2763 words

MK concepts in the research of foreign sociologists

* G. Le Bon and G. Tarde “mass society as a crowd” 1. Psychology of peoples and masses. St. Petersburg, 1995 2. Tard G. Personality and the crowd: essays on social psychology. St. Petersburg, 1903 3. Tard G. Public opinion and the crowd. M., 1905 * “Mass psychology and analysis of the human self” by Z. Freud and the Phenomenological method of E. Canetti * Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno on the “cultural industry” in the book. "Dialectics of Enlightenment" ...

Need for control over events and people.

This need manifests itself in the activities and behavior of the leader as a basic human need to control external forces and events affecting people's lives.
Sphere of control is the breadth of life space and activity that a leader seeks to exercise his or her influence. Need for achievement.
This is one of the nuclear properties of the psychological structure of the individual, responsible for the choice of goals, values, methods and means of existence. The most characteristic thing for him is the desire to improve results, persistence in achieving his goals, and the ability to achieve his goal. A close connection has been established between the level of achievement motivation and real success in a person’s life. It has been proven that people with high levels of achievement needs seek achievement situations as well as information to judge their success. They are confident in the successful outcome of the case, are ready to take responsibility, are decisive in uncertain situations, enjoy solving interesting problems, do not get lost in situations of competition, competition or struggle, show great persistence when meeting obstacles, and are clearly results-oriented.

This need manifests itself in a concern for perfection, mastery, and success. It is usually clearly visible in entrepreneurial activity and behavior. The risk factor inherent in this field of activity gives this need a special charm. The need for achievement, according to American sociopsychologists D. McClelland and J. Atkinson, is related to competence, professionalism, organization of the physical and social environment, manipulation, overcoming obstacles, establishing high work standards, competition, and victory over someone. For a leader with a strong pragmatic orientation, a high need for achievement can be combined with dishonesty and violation of the law - another side of Machiavellianism: the end justifies the means. The need for achievement is closely related to the leader's level of aspirations. D. Winter and L. Carlson found that this need is brought up largely by parents, who are a high standard for the future leader. The need for affiliation, i.e. in belonging to a group, in receiving approval.

It manifests itself in the leader’s concern for close relationships with others and implies friendly, socially desirable relationships that are realized, as a rule, in conditions of “safety,” i.e. with your own kind. A leader with a dominant need for affiliation prefers group relationships rather than dyadic ones (relationships between two people). Such leaders tend to be defensive and hypersensitive in situations of risk or competition. One important aspect of the need for affiliation is seeking approval from others.

17 pages, 8342 words

Concepts of giftedness and its development

... and understanding. According to the author of this concept, director of the Institute for the Achievement of Human Potential (USA), it is precisely ... and the personal development of gifted children. Development of needs in a gifted child. High selectivity of cognitive abilities of children and adolescents. Characteristics of a successful children's leader (preschooler, primary school student, teenager). Manifestation of individual...

Socionics and other typologies

Manifestations of leadership are quite varied. The attempts made to classify and typologize them were caused by the desire to predict the likely behavior of leaders based on certain characteristics (variables). Depending on the number of classification characteristics and their content, typology systems can be simple or complex. Thus, a quantitative indicator (the number of leaders) allows you to “separate” individual leadership from collective leadership.

A typology of leadership based on taking into account the personal qualities of the leader and the specific situation in which he performs his functions was proposed by the German sociologist M. Weber in his work “Charismatic Dominance.” As a classification criterion, he put forward the concept of “authority,” which he defines as “the likelihood that orders will be obeyed by a certain group of people.” The ability to give orders and expect them to be carried out is based on various power resources. Accordingly, M. Weber identified three types of domination - traditional, rational-legal, charismatic.

Traditional leadership is based on customs and traditions, the force of habit, which have roots in the distant past. The habit of submission is based on the belief in the sanctity of the tradition of transferring power by inheritance: the leader acquires the right to dominance due to his origin. This is the type of authority that was once enjoyed by the leader of a tribe, the head of a clan, or a monarch. Although this type of leadership is fading from the scene, it still persists in a number of countries (for example, in some countries of the Persian Gulf).

Charismatic leadership is based on faith in the chosenness of the individual, in the exceptional qualities of this person. Charismatic power, Fr. This is precisely the charismatic power exercised by the prophets and, in the realm of politics, by the plebiscite-approved military leader, the sovereign, “the great demagogue or head of a political party.” Charismatic leadership is inherent in transitional societies carrying out modernization, therefore charismatic dominance can create conditions either for traditional power (for example, for a return to the institution of monarchy) or for rational-legal power. The peculiarity of charismatic power is that it is devoid of any objective foundations (for example, it is not based on law, tradition), but exists solely due to the personal qualities of the charismatic leader and faith in him.

Rational-legal leadership is personified by bureaucracy. The power of authority is recognized by virtue of "legality", by virtue of belief in the legitimacy of legal status and "competence" based on rationally established laws. Power is based on a single set of legal norms accepted by the entire society. The competence of each holder of power is determined by the constitution and legal norms. Rational-legal leadership is becoming widespread in an increasing number of states, and traditional and charismatic leadership are disappearing from the historical stage.

One of the most modern and widespread typologies of leaders is M. Hermann’s system, which classifies leaders based on image. “Image” translated from English means “image”. This is the visual appeal of a person. Naturally, every person lives by recognition of himself by others, this is especially true for leaders. M. Hermann identifies four images of leaders (similar to M. Weber’s ideal types) based on taking into account four variables: the character of the leader; properties of his supporters; ways of relationship between the leader and his supporters; specific situation in which leadership is exercised.

The first collective image of a leader is leader . He is distinguished by his own view of reality, the presence of an image of the desired future and knowledge of the means to achieve it. Such a leader determines the nature of what is happening, the pace and methods of transformation. To understand this type of leadership, it is important to know the leader’s personal traits and his means of influencing his followers. One of the standard-bearing leaders is M. Gandhi. V. I. Lenin. Martin L. King et al.

The second collective image of a leader is a servant leader. It achieves recognition through the expression of the interests of its adherents. The leader acts on their behalf; he is the agent of the group. In practice, a servant leader is guided by what his constituents expect, believe, and need. Examples of this type of leader include L. I. Brezhnev and K. U. Chernenko, who expressed the interests of the party bureaucracy.

The third image is the leader of the trader. Its essential feature is its ability to escape. US President Harry Truman noted that “the essence of the power of the president is to unite people and try to convince them to do what they should do without any persuasion.” He achieves recognition from his supporters by knowing their needs and desire to satisfy them. Through the power of persuasion, the sales leader involves followers in the implementation of his plans. R. Reagan can be considered an example of this type of leader.

The fourth image is the lead . He is distinguished by his quick reaction to the urgent needs of the time, formulated by his supporters. He is able to act effectively in extreme conditions, quickly make decisions, and respond adequately to the situation. Most leaders in modern societies can be classified as precisely this type. The identification of four collective images of leaders is quite arbitrary, since such types are rare in their pure form. Most often, the leadership of one individual at various stages of his political career combines certain properties of each of the listed ideal types.

A noticeable leveling out of the differences between the leaders of democratic societies in terms of their image and personal merits was predicted at the beginning of the 20th century. G. Le Bon, who, in particular, wrote: “A more serious drawback of democracy is the increasing mediocrity of the people at the head of government. They need only one essential quality: to be always ready to talk immediately about anything, to immediately find plausible or at least loud arguments in response to their opponents.” This circumstance forces us to look for other typology systems that allow us to highlight the specifics of leaders in different countries.

Recently, classifications of leaders by behavioral style . These classifications make it possible to predict the actions of a particular leader. Behavioral concepts of leadership emphasize effectiveness and efficiency. In this case, the components of effectiveness are methods of maintaining or carrying out a political course, ways of responding to emerging problems and needs of the population, and the nature of the leader’s interaction with his supporters and other participants in the political process. The most characteristic features of a political style make it possible to determine the type of leader, his effectiveness for specific conditions, and the predictability of actions. Five political styles can be distinguished according to the degree of dominance of certain qualities: paranoid, demonstrative, compulsive, depressive and schizoid, although in history there are leaders who combine several styles.

Paranoid political style. It corresponds to the type of leader who can be designated by the term “master”. Such a person is characterized by suspicion, distrust of others, hypersensitivity to hidden threats and motives, and a constant thirst for power and control over other people. His behavior and actions are often unpredictable. A paranoid style politician does not accept any point of view other than his own and rejects any information that does not confirm his theories, attitudes and beliefs.

The type of thinking of such a politician is inverse, when reality is viewed through the extremes of “white” - “black”, and people are divided into “enemies” and “friends”. The leader's desire for unlimited power is ensured by him through constant manipulation of subordinates, intrigues and clashes between them in his own interests. This style is often accompanied by a desire to suppress or humiliate another politician at any cost, even contrary to elementary logic.

The danger of such a leader is that his style may coincide with the political behavior of the broad masses in societies without stable democratic traditions and with a weak political culture. Hatred of others, suspicion and embitterment of the leader create an environment of general fear, denunciation, search for “enemies”, which can lead to the establishment of totalitarian regimes. Such a political style is not so effective in appearance, but it can have a significant resource for mobilizing the population, is capable of solving strategically important tasks in a historically limited time frame, and consistently implementing its political course. However, the “master” can lead effectively only by relying on a developed punitive system, political terror. I.V. Stalin and Ivan the Terrible can be considered representatives of the paranoid political style.

Demonstrative political style. It is characteristic of the type of leader who can be called an “artist”, since he always “plays to the public.” He is distinguished by a love of demonstrations, he is overwhelmed by a passionate desire to please, to constantly attract attention to himself. In many ways, his behavior and political actions depend on whether others like him, whether he is loved by the crowd or not. As a result, he is quite “controllable”, predictable, and can lose his vigilance after listening to enough flatterers. However, he may lose his composure when faced with criticism. In this case, the implementation of a thoughtful political course turns out to be impossible due to a change in the motivation of political behavior, in which the desire to gain approval and political recognition from the masses at any cost now prevails. Orientation towards such incentives forces the leader to sacrifice not only socially significant interests, but even his own political convictions.

Least of all, representatives of the demonstrative style are predisposed to persistent and creative work designed for a long time. They are good at turning points (in situations of dissatisfaction, disappointment), when you need to “start up” and lead the crowd. However, their energy is lacking for a long time; they, as a rule, are unable to complete the work they have started. “Artists” are more emotional than pragmatic. A similar leadership style includes A.F. Kerensky, L.D. Trotsky, V.V. Zhirinovsky.

A compulsive political style is usually characteristic of a leader, whose collective image can be described as an “ excellent student.” He has an almost obsessive desire to do everything in the best possible way, regardless of the possibilities. His style of behavior is characterized by tension, lack of ease, flexibility, and maneuver. He is constantly preoccupied, petty, too punctual, and has a dogmatic approach to all instructions and rules, which often causes conflicts in power structures. An “excellent” student feels especially uncomfortable in extreme conditions, when it is necessary to quickly make decisions and use non-standard methods. Any deviations from the planned course of activity are painful for him, and the danger of making a mistake can plunge him into panic. As a result, the “excellent student” strictly follows the chosen political course, although it may not correspond to the realities of life, strives not to compromise principles and, on the basis of these principles, unites with other “excellent students.” Constantly changing conditions contribute to his loss of social guidelines, a sense of time, and he can lead society to a dead end, dooming it to stagnation and crisis, even despite his sincere intentions to ensure the prosperity of the state. L. I. Brezhnev can be considered a typical representative of this political style.

The depressive political style is personified by “comrade-in-arms.” A leader of this type is not capable of playing a leading role and therefore tries to unite with those who can really “do politics.” The “companion” often idealizes individuals and political movements, while he himself trails behind events. It does not have a clear political course or sustainable approaches to solving emerging problems. He perceives political reality warily and pessimistically, revealing weakness and political lack of will. Such leaders include the Emperor of Russia Nicholas P.

The schizoidal political style is closely related to the depressive one. He is represented by a “loner” leader. Self-isolation and self-removal from participation in specific events are more distinct. The “loner” does not want to join any particular movement and prefers the position of an outside observer. But political responsibility in this case is practically absent. Naturally, the desire for leadership does not allow one to remain in the position of an outside observer and forces one to either join any movement, party, or create one’s own party. The schizoid style of behavior is historically transitory, less independent and ineffective. A “loner” leader, as he participates in political life and expands his powers of power, transforms his style, adding to it the features of a paranoid and demonstrative style. A similar change in political style was characteristic of the political biography of V.I. Lenin (before the revolution of 1917 - “loner”, and after it the features of “master” and “artist” were added).

However, it should be noted that these political styles identified as “ideal” are quite rare; rather, they act as trends. They are determined by the mentality and culture of society, including stable ideas about the desired model of society and the role of the leader in it, about the preferred ways to solve emerging problems. Policy styles differ markedly due to the different national cultures of different countries. The type of dominant culture also determines the nature of political orientations characteristic of leaders.

American researcher J. Barber distinguished political styles by the leaders' performance of their political roles. The expected political behavior of leaders (presidents, congressional leaders) can be determined either by their subjective understanding of their role or by the expectations of specific groups. For example, he called the style focused on effective and efficient activity active-positive (an example of this could be the activities of F. Roosevelt and R. Reagan). The predominance of personal pride in the implementation of leading functions forms an active-negative style (G. Truman). Dependence on any preferences, attachment to stable standards and values ​​determine a passive-positive style (J. Carter). Minimum performance of one's functions gives rise to a passive-negative style (Doc. Bush).

In addition, styles of political behavior may differ in the technology of development and decision-making by the leader. Thus, there is a distinction between an authoritarian leadership style, focused on individual decision-making, and a democratic one , based on initiating the activity of its supporters and their participation in the management process.

Note that leader classification systems that use macrosocial factors such as “character of the era,” “class representative,” etc. are ineffective and non-functional. They have limited prognostic capabilities. Modern societies are so differentiated that it is impossible for any class to achieve political dominance and for a leader to represent exclusively its interests and needs.

The functions of leaders in a particular society depend on the degree of maturity of its economic, political, cultural spheres, on the level of culture of the population, on the nature (type) of the political regime and, finally, on the individual qualities of the leader himself. A civilly mature society with a high degree of separation of social and political roles and functions significantly reduces the opportunities for non-professional politicians to gain access to leading positions, which often happens in traditional and transitional societies.

Among the generally significant functions of leaders, we highlight the following:

1) integrative : unification and coordination of various interest groups based on basic values ​​and ideals recognized by the whole society;

2) value orientation : developing a political course that reflects progress trends and the needs of population groups ;

3) instrumental: determining ways and methods of solving the problems assigned to society;

4) mobilization : initiating the necessary changes by creating developed incentives for the population;

5) communicative : ensuring sustainable forms of political self-organization based on close contacts with the public, various organizations, groups and layers;

6) the function of a guarantor of justice, law and order (against the arbitrariness of the bureaucracy, lawlessness, violation of individual rights and freedoms).

New articles:

• Seven types of people according to instinct dominance
• Temperament types
• Classifications of human motives and needs
• Types of consumers
• Types of leaders - 5

Old articles:

• Types of leaders - 3
• Types of leaders - 2
• Types of Leaders

">The 5 Worst Types of Leaders

• 9 types of interlocutors
• 10 difficult bosses
• Types of investors by asset type
• 3 types of female bosses
• 5 Types of Tyrant Bosses
• Six types of bosses “A wise boss is a gift from fate,” the Japanese workaholics are convinced. “A good boss is a job you love,” the pedantic Germans echo...

  ">6 types of bosses

Next page >>