Question 2. Basic elements of the process of organizing the execution of decisions.

Organizing the execution of management decisions is a very complex and diverse activity. The heads of internal affairs bodies and their divisions, as well as the inspector (operational) staff of the management apparatus of sectoral, functional services and headquarters units, are daily engaged in organizational work to implement a wide variety of decisions. It should be noted that such work can take a very long period of time or proceed very quickly. However, regardless of the type and nature of the decision, the length of time required for its implementation, organizational work for each of them involves performing a number of similar actions that form elements (substages, stages) of the process of organizing the execution of decisions. These elements, in essence, constitute a unique mechanism for executing the decision.

The stage of organizing the execution of any management decision includes four common (basic) elements: selection and placement of performers; bringing the decision to the executors; ensuring the activities of performers; control over execution, adjustment and regulation; summing up the execution of the decision.

It should be noted that these elements are inherent in organizing the execution of both one’s own decisions and decisions received from a higher management entity. At the same time, it is obvious that the content of the organizational work to implement the two listed solution options will differ in certain specifics. Thus, along with general elements, the process of organizing the execution of one’s own decisions includes an additional (optional) element - communicating the decision to the executors. And the organization of execution of the decision of a higher management subject begins with its understanding and detailing, which also constitute an optional element. Consequently, the process of organizing any decision actually consists of five elements: four main and one additional.

The initial element of this process is bringing the decision to the executors (when organizing the execution of one’s own decisions) or clarifying and detailing the decision (when organizing the execution of a decision received from a higher management subject), and the final element is summing up the results of the execution of the decision. In the scientific literature, other opinions have been expressed about the number, names and content of elements of the process of organizing the execution of management decisions.

It must be emphasized that each of these elements, as a rule, in turn consists of several more detailed and private operations. So, for example, ensuring the activities of performers is achieved by holding meetings, adopting individual management acts, performing specific material and technical actions, etc.; bringing the decision to the executors is possible through propaganda work, publication of guidelines, written instructions, etc.

It is also important that there are no strict time or substantive boundaries between these elements. In practice, this feature manifests itself in the fact that, while carrying out activities to implement one element, the subject can simultaneously implement another element. Thus, when detailing a management decision received from a superior manager, the manager simultaneously with the same action carries out the selection and placement of performers. In a similar way, a merger of such elements as bringing the decision to the performers and instructions, etc. can occur.

It must be emphasized that when organizing the implementation of various decisions, the degree of effort spent on implementing one or another element can vary significantly. In this case, one element will occupy a significant place in organizational work, and the implementation of another can occur as if along the way, without separating it into a “framework” formally defined by theory and practice.

Let's consider the content and general rules for implementing elements of the process of organizing the execution of management decisions.

Clarification and detail decision is the first element of organizing the execution of a decision received from a superior entity. Their significance lies in the fact that even a completely reasonable and expedient decision may not be implemented or not fully implemented if it is not understood or understood incorrectly. Therefore, the organizer of the execution of the decision of a superior subject must first of all take measures to understand it himself. To do this, he needs to find out the general meaning, the main idea of ​​the decision. It should be borne in mind that the higher the level of the subject who made the decision, the less specific the latter’s formulation, as a rule, is, since the subject of management high level cannot always formulate specific, detailed instructions, and often deliberately avoids them. Therefore, the performer must devote much more effort to identifying the main idea and purpose of such a solution.

Many management decisions are very significant in volume and contain many instructions that require not only their correct interpretation, but also deep assimilation. Therefore, in addition to clarifying the general idea of ​​such solutions, their careful study is required. Among the management decisions made in internal affairs bodies, a significant part consists of regulations (instructions, regulations, rules, etc.). Quite often, the content of normative legal acts adopted by representative authorities is reflected in acts of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation and the ministries of the republics that are part of the Russian Federation. To clarify such decisions, as well as many others, the rules of interpretation of legal norms are used, as well as other types and methods of interpretation: logical, grammatical, by volume, etc.

At this stage, the entity organizing the execution of the decision may have various ambiguities and questions, the reasons for which include: a) a complex form or imperfection of the wording of the management decision; b) inattention of the performer or insufficient level of his qualifications, preventing the correct understanding of the plan of the superior subject. These ambiguities and questions should be attempted to be clarified or resolved, first of all, by repeated, more detailed (and, if necessary, repeated) study of this decision. In cases where the efforts undertaken have not resulted in success, other solutions on similar or related issues should be consulted; to the study of regulations, educational and scientific literature; to consultation with fellow specialists, scientists and other competent persons. It is possible that all this may not lead to the desired result. Then it is necessary to seek clarification and clarification from the entity from which this decision came. Despite the fact that such an appeal is often difficult for organizational and psychological reasons, the interests of the case require neglecting these considerations and achieving clarification of the decision. The semantic barrier that has arisen between the object and the subject of management must in any case be overcome, since the correctness of measures to implement the decision and, ultimately, its effectiveness depend on this.

A qualitative understanding of the solution creates the necessary prerequisites for its detailing. Management decisions must be detailed: a) containing general instructions (for example, an order requiring intensification of the fight against crime); b) complex and complex decisions (for example, a plan for protecting public order and ensuring public safety during a mass event). In such cases, detailing is necessary because the solution to the general task set by the subject of management can only be achieved as a result of the efforts of many performers, each of whom will carry out their own private tasks.

Selection and placement performers, their instruction and training. Already in the process of making a decision and its subsequent detailing, the subject of management to a certain extent predetermines the composition of the performers, foreseeing in advance that it will be carried out by specific bodies, structural units, groups of employees and individuals. In this case, only the industry affiliation of the performers is mainly determined.

However, in practice, employees of the apparatus, services and departments involved in the execution of decisions have different business, moral, and psychological qualities. Therefore, the entity organizing the execution of the decision must select such employees whose personal and professional qualities V to the greatest extent correspond to the nature of the work to be done.

The task of optimal selection and placement of performers is largely creative. However, when solving it, it is necessary to be guided by a number of rules developed by theory and practice that significantly increase the efficiency of its implementation.

The performer should be matched to the task, not the task to the performer. This rule is due to the fact that the content of management is determined by formally established goals and objectives that the body is obliged to achieve and solve, and not by its structure and available personnel. Failure to comply with this rule would lead to the fact that the body would solve only those tasks and carry out only those functions that would correspond to the characteristics of its personnel (level of qualifications of employees, their professional experience, physical capabilities, etc.), which is completely unacceptable.

The degree of complexity of the task assigned to the performer must reach the upper limit of his capabilities. The need to comply with this requirement arises from the following circumstances. On the one hand, significantly exceeding this limit leads to failure to complete the task, and such systematic failures can undermine the performer’s faith in his own strengths, abilities and capabilities. On the other hand, entrusting a qualified, experienced performer with simple tasks that do not require the use of his existing knowledge and experience, as a general rule, is inappropriate, since, firstly, this leads to irrational expenditure of resources and, secondly, as a result of constant When completing simple instructions, the performer may lose interest in them, which may lead to a decrease in the quality of execution.

At the same time, in order to improve the level of qualifications of subordinates, the subject of management in certain cases may entrust specific performers with tasks that obviously exceed their professional capabilities. However, this is possible only if the following conditions are strictly observed: a) if the consequences of non-execution or poor quality execution of such an order are not irreversible (in the form of violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens, other violations of the law, material and physical damage, etc.; b ) if the subject has sufficient time to ensure proper execution of this assignment by issuing a repeated assignment to the one who failed, identifying a new executor, etc. For example, the head of the criminal investigation department instructed an inexperienced employee to prepare a private analysis of certain areas of the fight against crime and the activities of the department. By the appointed time, the material provided by the contractor did not meet the required quality. Then the head of the department, having determined new term, to assist the contractor, involved a more experienced employee in carrying out this assignment, as a result of which the analysis was prepared on time and with adequate quality. At the same time, the first executor acquired relevant experience, which, when executing a similar assignment in the future, will save him from many difficulties.

When determining the performer, it is necessary to take into account his functional responsibilities, knowledge and skills, as well as individual characteristics personality. Compliance with this requirement, taking into account those stated earlier, allows the subject of management to choose from among possible candidates the one most suitable for the execution of a specific decision.

The optimal selection and placement of performers creates the necessary conditions for the successful implementation of the solution. However, this in itself does not completely eliminate the risk of non-execution or poor execution of the decision, which is caused by possible misunderstanding by the executors of any elements of the decision, failure to understand the order of their actions, etc. Instructing performers helps minimize this risk. Its significance lies in the fact that a well-organized and conducted briefing, comprehensive in content, largely guarantees the successful implementation of the decision.

The content and degree of specificity of the briefing depend on the official position of the person conducting it, the composition of those being instructed, the complexity and novelty of the solution, and some other circumstances. It should be borne in mind that performing tasks that are new to performers or rarely encountered in their practice will require more detailed, detailed instructions, while performing familiar, repetitive tasks involves focusing the performers’ main attention on changes in the situation, specifically prevailing conditions, in which they have to act.

The regulations regulating the organization of the work of internal affairs bodies contain a list of issues that are subject to maximum possible coverage when instructing performers: the content of the general management decision and the goal set for the body; general action plan of the body, information about the tasks and actions of its structural units; tasks and activities to be performed by employees of this structural unit; summary and assessing the environment and factors that facilitate and impede task performance; possible changes in the situation and options for action in new conditions; the start and end time of execution of the decision or individual measures on it; ways and means of maintaining communication with the subject of management and between performers; the procedure for maintaining interaction between performers; logistics and other support for the actions of performers; forces and means of support; procedure for monitoring execution, etc.

Since qualified instruction requires the instructor to have good knowledge of the functional responsibilities of employees, the environment in which they will operate, the individual characteristics of the performers, etc., the instruction should, as a rule, be carried out by their immediate superior, who is better informed about these circumstances than other management subjects . During its implementation, it is also advisable to find out the opinions of the performers on the most difficult moments of the upcoming activity, listen to their proposals on tactics and methods for implementing the decision, and answer the questions they have.

In some cases, briefing should be supplemented with training for performers. The need for it may arise when organizing the execution of complex, multifaceted or previously unknown decisions and tasks for the performers, as well as when attracting new performers. The importance of training is that it provides the level of professional training of performers necessary for the successful completion of the task by instilling in them new knowledge and developing previously absent skills and abilities. In the practice of internal affairs bodies, the most common and effective forms of training for performers are: exercises, training, rehearsals, practical classes, studying scientific and methodological literature, regulations, etc.

WITH communicating management decisions to executors the organization of execution by the control subject of its own decision begins. The significance of this element is due to the fact that its high-quality implementation creates the necessary prerequisites for the subsequent successful implementation of the solution.

In public administration, there are two main ways of doing this work: publishing decisions for public information and bringing them to the executors. Since the first of these methods actually includes the second, there are no hard lines between them. At the same time, in the management of internal affairs bodies, the second method of implementing the element under consideration is more widely used - bringing the decision to the immediate executors. This circumstance is due primarily to the specifics of the activities of internal affairs bodies, as well as the resulting specifics of the decisions they make: most of these decisions are addressed to services, departments and employees; a significant proportion of them are secret; many of them have individual meaning, etc.

Depending on the nature of the decision, the number of executors and other circumstances (the level of the subject of management, its organizational and material and technical capabilities, the location of the executors, the time factor, etc.), decisions can be communicated to the immediate executors in various ways: direct (oral) communication to their decisions at a meeting, during briefing, in an individual conversation, etc.; sending them written decisions; transmitting them via communications, etc. In this case, the following pattern is observed - the higher the level of the subject who made the decision and the greater the number of performers, the more difficult it is to communicate the decision to them, the more attention is required to complete this work.

Bringing decisions to the immediate executors does not exclude, and in some cases presupposes, the need to inform other services, apparatus and employees who are not its direct executors about the decision made. For example, based on the results of an inspection of the activities of one or more territorial bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, a decision is made (an order is issued) instructing these bodies to take measures to eliminate the identified deficiencies. Such a decision, as a rule, is sent not only to the direct executors, but also to other territorial bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. The need for this is explained by the fact that widespread information about certain decisions contributes to positive changes in the functioning of the entire system of bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, creates prerequisites for interaction between bodies, and contributes to better implementation of the decisions of the subject of management.

In some cases, the management subject informs other (usually of the same level) subjects about the decisions made. So, for example, the head of the territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the district level informs the heads of neighboring departments, the bodies of the Federal Security Service, the prosecutor's office, etc. about the decision made to conduct a targeted operation. This creates the necessary prerequisites for the possible coordination of efforts and interaction of these bodies in the course of carrying out this events.

In the process of carrying out law enforcement activities, implementing the state powers granted to them, internal affairs bodies make a significant number of management decisions that are mandatory for execution by objects not subordinate to them. Therefore, in order to successfully implement some management decisions made in internal affairs bodies, it is necessary to inform the public about them, the administration of enterprises, organizations, institutions that are either the direct executors of such decisions or can be involved to a certain extent in their implementation. An example of such decisions could be restricting the movement of vehicles and pedestrians in places of mass events, suspending the activities of an object of the licensing and permitting system, a decision to strengthen the fight against child neglect, etc. Organizing the execution of certain decisions requires information about them from certain categories of citizens (homeowners, owners of motor vehicles, firearms etc.) and officials. Such decisions include: decisions on the procedure for registering motor vehicles, the procedure for their technical inspection; decisions on the procedure for re-registration of firearms, etc. Such decisions are made not only by subordinate services and divisions of internal affairs bodies, but also by citizens and officials who undertake to perform prescribed actions or refrain from prohibited actions.

At the same time, the content of communicating the decision to the executors is not limited to the considered actions of the subject of management. At this stage, he also needs to explain to the performer the validity of his decision and form in him the desired attitude towards this decision. At the same time, the performer must be convinced that the assigned task is the result of an objective need, and not the subjective desire of the boss.

Ensuring the activities of performers. At this stage, the subject of management is faced with the task of ensuring the activities of performers, i.e. create conditions that maximize the implementation of the decision. The significance of this organizational work is due to the fact that only fully supported tasks can be considered feasible.

In order to create conditions for the effective activities of performers, each entity at its own level resolves issues of psychological, legal, logistical, financial and organizational support, etc.

Thus, psychological support for the activities of performers consists of developing in them a responsible attitude to the task, a conviction in the importance and social significance of the task being performed, and an interest in high-quality and timely execution of the decision. An important task of management subjects in internal affairs bodies is to develop psychological stability among subordinates when acting in extreme situations, i.e. the ability to maintain composure when faced with surprises and difficulties, under conditions of mental and physical pressure, etc.

Legal support consists of vesting performers with the appropriate rights and powers necessary to implement a specific management decision. Its significance lies in the fact that the lack of appropriate authority makes the control command either impossible to implement at all, or inevitably leads to violations of the law when attempting to execute it. Therefore, it is unacceptable to entrust the performer with a task that lies outside of him. Solving issues of legal support requires the manager to have good knowledge of the regulations governing the activities of performers, establishing their rights and obligations, since orders can only be given within the limits of the latter. At the same time, in necessary cases, the competence of performers can be temporarily expanded by the subject of management, if the granting of certain rights and powers to performers does not contradict the requirements of current regulations. At the same time, it should be emphasized that granting additional powers to performers is possible only in the sphere of intra-organizational activities of internal affairs bodies (for example, one of the co-executors of equal status is appointed senior to the group, as a result of which his requirements for the period of performance of the task are mandatory for the remaining members of the group).

Logistics and financial support provides for the supply of performers vehicles, weapons, uniforms, food, money and other types of allowance necessary to complete the task. The subject of management must coordinate all these issues in advance with the relevant functional and headquarters units of both his body and higher-level internal affairs bodies.

Organizational support involves the decision by the subject of management of a number of issues, the main of which may be:

Ensuring that the time factor corresponds to the nature and scope of the tasks set in the management decision, which is expressed in the most accurate determination of the deadline for the execution of tasks and work assigned to the performers. The desire of the subject organizing the execution of the decision to achieve the desired result in the shortest possible time must be linked to the actually necessary time. To do this, one should take into account the nature and volume of work assigned to performers, the presence of territorial and organizational barriers to the passage of commands, the specifics and real conditions of the activities of subordinates, their individual characteristics, etc. Compliance with these requirements when determining the deadline for completing a task largely ensures its high-quality completion, while ignoring them leads to the opposite or makes execution unrealistic altogether;

- organization of an information system, which, on the one hand, is capable of providing the subject of management with sufficiently complete and timely information about the progress of the decision, and on the other, keeping performers informed about the results achieved, changes in the decision or operating conditions;

- organization of interaction between performers, coordination of their activities, the need for which arises when several performers are involved in the implementation of the solution, performing private tasks assigned to them. At the same time, the implementation of the decision as a whole can be achieved only if each of the individual tasks is successfully implemented.

To achieve such a result, it is necessary to organize interaction, which in general represents the activity of performers based on laws and regulations, coordinated in terms of goals, place and time, in jointly solving assigned tasks through an optimal combination of their inherent means and methods. In the practice of internal affairs bodies, a distinction is made between external (when the implementation of a management decision requires joint and coordinated efforts with other government bodies and public organizations) and internal interaction (when organizing the execution of a management decision within the system of internal affairs bodies). The main organizational forms of interaction are: a) joint functioning of interacting entities; b) spatially parallel coordinated activity during their independent functioning. In the first case, the co-executors decide general tasks simultaneously and together, in the second - by constantly combining efforts in the process of separate functioning.

The most important type of organizational support for the execution of a decision is the coordination of the activities of performers, during which the subject of management determines the interacting performers, types and forms of interaction, organizes practical training of the interaction of performers, providing them with assistance in their work, and supports interaction between performers.

Monitoring the execution of decisions, adjustment and regulation. It is after the implementation of all the previously discussed elements of organizing the execution of the decision that its implementation actually begins, the performers begin to act within the given parameters. In this regard, the subject of management has a need for constant information about the extent to which the activities of the performers correspond to the program laid down in the decision, what failures and deviations arose during its implementation, etc. This is facilitated by monitoring the execution of the decision, as a result of which the subject receives the necessary information about the degree of actual implementation of the decision, about the progress of its implementation, about deviations that have occurred in the activities of the performers from the given parameters, about the state and changes in the conditions and environment in which the performer operates. The significance of control is that the information obtained during it allows the subject to correct decisions and regulate the control system.

Adjustment consists of making amendments, clarifications, changes to a previously adopted and already implemented decision. The need to adjust (correct) decisions is caused by two main reasons:

a) a management decision is always, to a certain extent, static, while the specific situations in which it is implemented change dynamically;

b) due to this, the subject making the decision always has greater or lesser uncertainty regarding possible changes in the situation and the conditions in which it will be executed.

Unforeseen changes in the situation and conditions (for example, the commission of a dangerous crime, the holding of a large public event, a natural disaster, etc.) may prevent the implementation of the decision to the extent and by the means that were previously provided. In such cases, the management entity is obliged to make the necessary adjustments to the implemented solution: change the sequence or timing of individual activities, methods and forms of their implementation; refuse to carry out certain events or carry out previously unforeseen ones, etc.

Since the correction of decisions should be caused only by objective necessity, the task of any management subject is to timely detect and adequately respond to this need. In this case, it is important to take into account the following circumstances: a) adjustment is possible only in relation to one’s own decision; b) too frequent changes in decisions can give rise to a frivolous attitude among performers towards them and reduce the effectiveness of activities for their implementation.

Changes in the conditions and environment in which a management decision is implemented may require a different type of response from the subject - regulation of the management system, the essence of which is to bring the system into line with the newly established situation. In this case, replacement, rearrangement, change in the number of performers occurs, additional support for their activities is provided, the intensity of the performers’ work increases, etc., but the decision itself remains unchanged.

Since adjustment and regulation are aimed at neutralizing the disorganizing influences and obstacles that arise in the implementation of a management decision, they can be carried out simultaneously and interconnectedly.

Based on the information obtained during control, the subject of management carries out not only correction and regulation, but also an assessment of the results of the execution of the decision.

Summing up- the final element of organizing the execution of the decision. Its significance is manifested in two organically interrelated aspects: educational and organizational. The educational aspect of summing up lies in the fact that employees’ knowledge of the quality, results and social significance of their work, an objective assessment of their work provides proper motivation for their activities in the implementation of subsequent decisions, and mobilizes them to achieve better results. In the organizational aspect, at this stage the subject gets the opportunity to really assess the quality of the decision made, identify its shortcomings, as well as shortcomings in the organization of its execution; At the same time, new problems are identified that require further resolution.

The most common forms of summing up the implementation of decisions in internal affairs bodies include: holding meetings; publication of reviews, orders; individual discussion of the results of execution of the decision with the executors, etc.

The results of the implementation of permanent decisions in internal affairs bodies are summed up monthly, quarterly, half a year, 9 months and a year; the results of the implementation of plans - after the expiration of the planning period. The results of implementing one-time decisions are discussed immediately after their implementation.

When summing up the results, the following questions are clarified: whether the decision has been implemented fully or partially; how effective was the process of its implementation (i.e., the degree of optimality of the expenditure of effort, money, time); whether the given goal has been achieved, and if not, then the reasons for its failure; what positive aspects were noted in the activities of the performers; what shortcomings appeared in the organization of execution of the decision and what are the ways to eliminate them in the future.

Summing up the results concludes the organizational work on the implementation of management decisions. Based on the information received, a new decision is made and thus the management cycle resumes.

The choice of the optimal solution is approved by the manager. The decisions are formulated and documented, signed by the manager, after which the tasks are communicated to the immediate executors, i.e. execution is organized.

The implementation phase of the decision includes:

bringing tasks to the executors (the meaning of the decision must be explained to all executors, each person must be assigned specific tasks, rights, responsibilities and functions must be defined)

formation and execution of an organizational plan (provides for a clear definition of the scope of work for each task and the determination of priorities, resources and deadlines for completing tasks by each performer)

organization of control over the execution of the decision (Current control is carried out throughout the entire work on the execution of the decision, the final control is carried out based on the results of execution and allows)

Checking the implementation of management decisions - a process during which the following tasks are set:

promptly detect factors in the internal and external environment that may interfere with the implementation of decisions and achievement of goals

Ensure a comparison of the goals provided for in the decision and the results obtained in the organization’s activities

Provide information to evaluate the organization’s performance over the past period and to adjust its decisions regarding its functioning in the future.

Verification of the implementation of decisions must meet a number of requirements:

the check should be:

systematic

the check must be comprehensive

verification must be effective

verification must be transparent

verification must be economical

Main purpose of the check- identification and prevention of errors and miscalculations.

Verification steps:

1. The parameters of the organization’s functioning are determined

2. Observation and measurement of controlled processes and results is carried out.

3. Comparison of the results obtained with specified standards or indicators

4. Regulation - carrying out adjustments to the organization’s activities based on the results of control

Regulation is usually considered in 3 aspects:

1) Saving the current state

2) Making changes to the functioning of the object being checked

3) Transformation of standards.

35. Classification of management personnel; requirements for the organization's management personnel.

Organizational personnel management- the process of targeted influence by the manager and management bodies, coordinating and uniting the joint work of employees to achieve the goals of the organization.

Main task personnel management - the most effective use of the abilities, motivations, and properties of employees in accordance with the goals of the organization and society.

Subject Personnel management is labor relations in an organization. Object personnel management is the personnel of the organization.

Staff- is an organizational community of people with a common goal, carried out within the framework of one or another form of ownership. In the process of joint activity, relationships of cooperation and mutual responsibility develop between these people.

In control theory, there are various approaches to personnel classifications. The basic classification is by category of workers, which provides for the identification of two main groups of personnel according to participation in the production process:

1) production personnel (main and auxiliary)

2) management personnel (managers and specialists)

heads of the organization and their deputies:

heads of structural divisions and chief specialists;

specialists performing economic functions;

specialists in engineering and technical preparation of production;

employees involved in accounting, control and paperwork.

The staff has certain quality characteristics, which significantly affect the performance of its functions:

capabilities- level of education, amount of knowledge, professional skills, work experience;

motivation- range of professional and personal interests;

properties- personal qualities that influence the fulfillment of a certain social role.

In the process of personnel management, it is important to be able to accurately identify those qualitative characteristics of employees that may be directly related to the functions they perform.

The impact on personnel may be direct or indirect. Direct impact carried out through orders, instructions, assignments, etc. Indirect Impact carried out through immediate needs, interests, incentives. Such influence often turns out to be more effective than issuing orders.

37.Staff training used for:

employee joining a new organization

moving to a new position

when identifying shortcomings in work

when changing technology, equipment

when changing activities.

Factors for choosing a teaching method:

goals and objectives of training

urgency of training

financial capabilities of the enterprise

Availability of instructors, training materials

characteristics of training participants (qualifications, motivation)

qualifications and competence of teachers.

Teaching methods:

Used in the workplace

Briefing- demonstration of work techniques directly at the workplace.

Mentoring– the mentor carries out training without interruption from the main activity.

Rotation- moving an employee from one position to another in order to become familiar with new areas of work

Used outside the workplace.

Lectures

Seminars- discussion, dialogue between student and teacher.

Video training– video viewing and video feedback

Trainings- practical processing of the material being studied

Programmed training- information is given in small blocks, in printed form or on a monitor.

Business games– the behavior of employees of the simulated company is played out.

Practical situations– Research and analysis of the situation.

Basket – method– imitation of a situation requiring urgent analysis of the papers accumulated on the manager’s desk.

Leadership training

Cycles of disciplines that a manager should know:

Humanitarian and socio-economic

general math and science

generally professional

special.

It is necessary to improve the qualifications and develop leaders.

Objectives of the system for selecting, relocating and developing managers:

identifying employees of the organization who have the potential to occupy leadership positions

Preparing identified employees for leadership positions

ensuring planned replacement of vacated positions.

Management decisions. The process of making management decisions, principles and stages. The role of the leader in this process. Factors influencing the process of making management decisions. Monitoring the execution of management decisions.

INTRODUCTION__________________________________________________________2

1.MANAGEMENT DECISIONS.__________________________________________3

2. THE PROCESS OF MAKING MANAGEMENT DECISIONS_________________5

2.1 . Principles and stages of the management decision-making process.________5

2.2 The role of the manager in this process._________________________________12

2.3 Factors influencing the process of making management decisions._____15

3. CONTROL OF THE EXECUTION OF MANAGEMENT DECISIONS_____________21

CONCLUSION______________________________________________________________23

LITERATURE______________________________________________________________24

INTRODUCTION

One of the main functions of management today is decision making. When making decisions, one must rely on as much information as they can obtain. They usually cope better by following rational procedures to achieve solutions to a problem. But there are always indirect influences and uncertainties, so management decisions are not always perfect, and once this decision has been implemented, it must be controlled.

The most important reserve for increasing the efficiency of the HRSP is to improve the quality of decisions made, which is achieved by improving the decision-making process.

Decision making is an integral part of any management function. The need to make decisions permeates everything a manager does, setting goals and achieving them. Therefore, understanding the nature of decision making is extremely important for anyone who wants to succeed in the art of management.

Effective decision making is essential to performing management functions. Improving the process of making informed, objective decisions in situations of exceptional complexity is achieved through the use of scientific approach to this process, models and quantitative methods of decision making.

1.MANAGEMENT DECISIONS

Considering organization to be a management tool, many sociologists and management theory specialists, starting with M. Weber, directly link its activities primarily with the preparation and implementation of management decisions. Management efficiency is largely determined by the quality of such decisions. The interest of sociologists in this problem is due to the fact that the decisions record the entire set of relationships that arise in the process of labor activity and organization management. Goals, interests, connections and norms are refracted through them. Characterizing the full cycle of management activities, consisting of goal setting, planning, organization, coordination, control and adjustment of goals, it is easy to notice that it is ultimately presented in the form of two management elements: preparation and implementation of management decisions. This is why decisions are a central element of management and organization.

In the sociological literature, there are various points of view on what decisions made by a person in an organization are considered managerial. Some experts classify as such, for example, the decision to hire a person, the decision to quit, etc. The point of view seems justified, according to which only those decisions that affect relations in the organization should be classified as managerial.

Management decisions, therefore, are always associated with changes in the organization; they are usually initiated by an official or a relevant body responsible for full responsibility for the consequences of controlled or implemented decisions. The boundaries of competence within which he makes decisions are clearly defined in the requirements of the formal structure. Moreover, the number of persons involved in preparing the decision is significantly greater than the number of persons in power.

The preparation of management decisions in modern organizations is often separated from the function of making them and involves the work of a whole team of specialists. In the “classical” management theory, it is, as a rule, a function of headquarters services.

The process of implementing a decision is associated with the implementation of a special plan, which is a set of activities aimed at achieving goals and deadlines for their implementation. The development of such a plan is the prerogative of the relevant services in the management apparatus. At the same time, today those who will implement it, that is, the direct executors, are involved in its development.

One of the important factors influencing the quality of management decisions is the number of tiers in the organization, an increase in which leads to distortion of information when preparing a decision, distortion of orders coming from the subject of management, and increases the sluggishness of the organization. The same factor contributes to the delay in information received by the subject of the decision. This determines the constant desire to reduce the number of management tiers (levels) of the organization.

The problem of the rationality of decisions made has acquired no less importance in the theory of organizations. If the first theorists of the sociology of management considered the preparation of a decision as a completely rational process, then starting from the mid-50s. An approach has become widespread, according to which this process is considered limitedly rational, because it is determined by sociocultural and human factors. Increasingly, the role of the manager’s intuition is being noted when preparing decisions.

The necessary organizational prerequisites for implementing a decision are created already in the process of its preparation and adoption. The decision itself already determines who, what, when, where, how and for what purpose should do it. At the same time, the process of organizing the implementation of decisions made has its own characteristics and requires special implementation methods.

This process includes the following steps:

drawing up an organizational plan;

bringing the decision to the executors;

monitoring the progress of the decision;

making adjustments.

Drawing up an organizational work plan for the implementation of the decision made is the first and most important important stage the process of executing the decision. It must clearly define who, with what forces, what part of the work and in what period of time performs it. Often, for greater clarity, it is advisable to leave a schedule for implementing the solution. The schedule identifies the main stages of the solution implementation process, the timing of their implementation and the responsible executors. To perform each stage of each group of work, the required number of performers of the relevant specialties is selected, taking into account their qualifications and experience.

The finished organizational plan is communicated to the performers. At this stage, explanatory work is always necessary. As a rule, an employee who has a good understanding of the task, the significance of the decision made, as well as the consequences, always performs the work assigned to him with great attention and responsibility. At this stage, it is necessary to ensure effective labor incentives. This can be material incentives, or providing employees with the opportunity to take initiative, develop appropriate work plans, assign performers to areas, etc.

It often happens that in order to implement a decision it is necessary to train employees in new methods and techniques of work. Then, simultaneously with explanatory work, instructional and methodological work should be carried out. An important place is also occupied by the coordination of the activities of performers, the creation of an atmosphere of cooperation and mutual assistance in the team.

With the beginning of the implementation of the adopted management decision, control over the progress of its implementation begins. Moreover, any control is impossible without accurate detailed accounting of the work to implement the solution. In this case, they are used various types accounting: statistical, accounting and operational.

2. THE PROCESS OF MAKING MANAGEMENT DECISIONS

2.1. Principles and stages of the management decision-making process.

Sooner or later, leaders must move from analyzing past events to action. Ideally, if action is motivated by a correct analysis of the problem, the search for causes is narrowed to the point where one can confidently begin to solve the problem. It is important, however, to remember that all actions are motivated by the need to respond to the problem that has arisen. Experienced managers constantly take action to improve the situation, increase work requirements and prevent the occurrence of problems that could threaten the disruption of current plans.

Being in the present time, the manager chooses actions (alternatives) that can often be implemented in the future. The problem is that sometimes you even have to compare the relative consequences of alternatives without having valid data. You cannot know exactly what will happen if you choose another alternative. The manager must consider the alternatives, confidently take a stand and declare that, say, alternative A will better meet the goals than alternatives B or C. This is a complex process of moving towards the truth.

The existing uncertainty in the decision-making process can create a number of situations in which confusion between the concepts of “decisiveness” and “decision making” is not excluded. In many businesses, managers are evaluated and rewarded for how quickly and confidently they make decisions. Uncertainty in this case is seen as a sign of weakness. Managers are expected to make quick and decisive judgments and are highly valued for their willingness to implement decisions despite difficulties. In theory this is correct, but in practice it is not always the best course of action.

In management theory, decisiveness is seen as the ability to make a decision and turn it into reality. And decision making is the ability to analyze the most important information and make the best choice. It is important to properly combine both of these abilities. Paralyzing yourself with endless analysis is just as undesirable as making decisions on a whim, spontaneously.

The decision-making process for managing a company is based on four basic principles, ignoring which (completely or partially) can lead to erroneous decisions and unsatisfactory results. Compliance with these principles makes it possible to make quality decisions at all levels of the organization.

First principle is the principle of organizational compliance. The form of the organization must be adapted to the uninterrupted implementation of communications, which facilitates both the decision-making process and control over their implementation. One cannot ignore the fact that powers and responsibilities are increasingly changing hands. Only by holding managers accountable for the results of their decisions can the best leadership be prepared.

Second principle: Policies, strategies and goals must be so clearly defined that they allow general decisions to be made regarding new activities that go beyond today's needs.

Third principle requires a sufficient amount of reliable data about the changing environment necessary to maintain effective communications between top-level managers and lower levels of the functioning units of the organization. It is extremely important to select the available data in such a way that senior managers have at their disposal only the facts that they really need and are not overloaded with irrelevant factual material.

Fourth principle provides flexibility, without which countless opportunities may remain unexploited. Under ideal conditions (exact criteria, clear goals and complete information), the need for decision-making managers would be small. A computer could answer any question. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world and there is a constant need for qualified managers who determine the optimal directions for the organization's actions. By their nature, the listed principles are universal and must be adhered to in management and entrepreneurial activity.

Let us note, continuing the conversation from this perspective, that managers usually make decisions that are associated with certain obligations and the need to implement them. Once a decision is made, it is difficult to change it. The procedure for analyzing alternatives in decision making differs from the procedure in cause-and-effect analysis.

The decision itself can take a number of forms and represent: a standard decision, in which there is a fixed set of alternatives; binary decision (yes or no); multiple-choice solution (there is a very wide range of alternatives); an innovative solution when action is required but there are no acceptable alternatives.

The most common type of solution is the standard solution. The analytical steps required to make it apply to other types of decisions as well. When making any type of decision, the manager's experience is included from the first step and is used throughout the entire process. If one must be wary of managers' "pet causes" in cause-and-effect analysis, then one may fall prey to "favorite alternatives" when making decisions. In this case, preference for the “favorite option” can distort the entire analysis and lead to a previously known choice.

As a rule, to successfully implement the management decision-making process, a manager needs to go through eight of its main stages.

On first stage The main task is to correctly set the goal of the solution. Any decision-making process must begin with an awareness of the need to make it. It is important, first of all, to ask the question about the choice that has to be made. Such questions contribute to the fulfillment of three tasks: to show the connection between the decision and the need to make a choice; set the direction in the search for alternatives; exclude alternatives that lie outside the stated goal.

In an effort to ensure that the decision goal is set correctly, the manager must answer the following questions:

1. What choice am I trying to make? This question provides a starting point. It will be clarified by the next two questions.

2. Why is this solution necessary?

3. What was it like last decision? This question stems from the concept that all decisions form a chain. Therefore, it is very important to find the place of this solution in it. For example, suppose that the purpose of the decision is to select a training program to implement activities to improve working conditions. Before setting such a goal, it is necessary to answer the question: “Are we sure that improving working conditions will solve the problem of improving the moral climate in the team?” If so, a new question arises: "Are we convinced that a training program is required?" Only after answering these questions can we move forward, based on the fact that the previous decisions were obtained as a result of serious analysis.

Second stage is associated with the establishment of decision criteria. Since decisions are judged primarily by the results obtained, it is reasonable to begin the selection process by considering them. These results are called “decision criteria” and represent the basis for the actual choice made. It is important for managers to be clear about what they want to achieve. The key question in in this case is: "What factors should be considered when making a choice?" This question gives rise to a number of factors that must be taken into account when choosing a solution. In a situation of group decision-making, posing such a question assumes that persons whose activities should be affected by this decision will have the opportunity to express their assumptions and demands.

On third stage The manager divides the criteria according to their importance for the organization. The criteria have different meaning. For example, some criteria represent mandatory constraints, while others simply capture desirable characteristics. In order to make a sufficiently effective decision, the criteria should be divided into strict restrictions and desirable characteristics, which could be dispensed with. It is then important to rank the criteria classified as desirable. In making management decisions, of course, compromises are inevitable. For example, would you choose a lower price over faster delivery? Are you ready to sacrifice speed of repair for better quality of service?

On fourth stage alternatives are being developed. This is not a problem when discussing standard solutions. For example, when comparing different locations of a new food outlet. When considering other types of solutions, especially innovative ones, this step is more difficult.

Fifth stage allocated for comparison of alternatives developed at the previous stage. Skilled decision making requires developing a number of alternatives, comparing them and choosing the best one. Sometimes all solutions look good and none seem to be superior. Therefore, in order to make a choice, the manager needs certain means for comparing alternatives.

Let's look at some of them. So, first of all, it is advisable to start by collecting information about alternatives. In many cases, alternatives are initially described in very general terms, such as “We can outsource all this work” or “We can hire temporary workers.” But in order to be able to compare alternatives, it is necessary to understand the essence of the choice, answering, for example, the following questions: “How much will it cost to do the work outsourced?”, “Can it be done efficiently outsourced?”, “When will the work be done outsourced?” finished?" etc.

Without sufficient data on the alternatives, it is unlikely that their relative merits can be compared. The information collected will help measure the degree to which requirements are met for each criterion. Data collection is a planned process, not a random response to information as it becomes available. Once the manager has clearly identified the alternatives, the first question may be: “How to organize and compare the data?” Here it is necessary to adhere to the following fundamental principle: “Always compare decision options with criteria, never compare one decision option with another. It is important to avoid “decision blindness,” a disease that affects those managers who constantly compare alternatives with each other and eventually lose sight goals and final results of decision making.

At the same stage of searching for effective solutions, another illness may occur - analytical “paralysis”. It occurs when collecting information about alternatives becomes an end in itself. Decision making is the process of finding the best option based on the best and available information. Meanwhile, it is hardly possible to achieve a situation where all the facts, data, necessary materials to develop solutions. The process of matching alternatives to criteria is an attempt to help the decision maker focus on key sources of information. Both of these ills of decision making can be "cured" by focusing primarily on criteria rather than alternatives.

The criterion for assessing the consequences of various options is usually determined by the purpose of the decisions. There is a need to measure the extent to which a particular event contributes to the achievement of a goal. Conflict resolution requires a common unit of measurement for consequences. Without it, it is impossible, for example, to compare an alternative that leads to minimizing the cost of transporting goods with an alternative that allows minimizing delivery time. To compare the consequences of these alternatives, they must belong to the same class. How to translate measurements on one scale (shipping costs) into consequences on another scale (delivery time) or measure both on a third scale? In addition, we must know how to relate increases on different scales.

In economics, unfortunately, it is impossible to express all the consequences in terms of their impact on costs and profits, so using money as a universal unit of measurement can be difficult

On sixth stage determines the risk to which the firm may be exposed if a particular alternative is chosen. In business, risk identification can range from complex probability analysis in operations research models to purely intuition, which can be represented by questions like: “What do you think they (customers or competing manufacturers) will do when we announce a price increase? " We are interested in a working tool for managers that can be used quickly and efficiently and that does not require complex mathematical apparatus.

To properly identify the area of ​​risk, you should consider the alternatives one by one and try to predict the difficulties that might be encountered if each option were implemented. Deviations associated with the adoption of one alternative, as a rule, have nothing to do with possible deviations in the case of the implementation of other alternatives.

On seventh stage the person developing the solution makes a risk assessment. Knowing that a risk exists is important, but not sufficient. It is necessary to determine its significance. When assessing risk, factors such as likelihood and severity are taken into account. Using the probability factor, a judgment is formed that an event will actually happen. The severity factor allows you to form a judgment about the degree of influence of the event on the situation if it occurs.

On eighth stage a decision is made. Quantitative risk indicators help you make informed decisions. After all, this data allows you to compare the effectiveness of alternatives. It should be noted that risk indicators are not directly related to each other, and there is no formula yet that would allow them to be compared. So the question to ask is, “Is the additional efficiency that can be gained worth the risk that I am taking?” Typically, managers do not seek to minimize risk, but take acceptable and controllable risks. When making a choice, the manager analyzes and weighs a number of judgments. It is very important to clearly sort these judgments. After all, the decision that needs to be made is based on a certain amount of value judgments. At the same time, in practice there are also ambiguous (double) solutions, which are called binary. A binary decision presents two diametrically opposed alternatives. These are usually competing alternatives that force a yes/no, either/or choice. These solutions are different high degree uncertainty. The brief nature of alternatives forces decision makers to take polar opposite positions, which often paralyzes choice. A binary solution reflects an unnatural state of affairs. This unnaturalness is caused by the restrictions placed on choice. Restrictions such as “yes or no”, “to do or not to do” sharply narrow the possibilities of choice. Therefore, very few decisions should be presented in this form. Most binary situations arise as a result of the fact that a serious and in-depth analysis of the problem is not carried out.

The reasons for the occurrence of binary situations include the following:

1. Redirecting decision-making to senior managers. Subordinates, suppliers, or others who want to influence a decision often present it for consideration in binary form. Such an attempt, whether intentional or unintentional, is intended to force a choice that is in the competitor's interests.

2. Superficial analysis of the problem. Asking questions about whether there are different ways to achieve the same goals is not considered acceptable behavior in many organizations. As a result, the binary solution becomes a way of life.

3. Lack of time to develop optimal solutions. Under the pressure of time pressure, it is often faster to simply choose a course of action than to establish the validity of the very statement of the problem to be solved. The willingness and ability to accept responsibility for saying yes or no is cultivated and rewarded in many firms. It should be cautioned that encouraging decisiveness can lead to its identification with decision-making itself. Under these conditions, a serious analysis of facts begins to be perceived as clumsiness and reinsurance. And then the binary decision becomes a generally accepted and decisive criterion for assessing the manager’s effectiveness.

4. Justification of binary solutions in some cases. There are situations in which a manager, considering a chain of decisions, reaches the most specific level: yes or no. This situation usually develops as a result of a sequence of consciously made decisions and represents the final decision in this chain. An example of a valid binary situation would be a make-or-buy decision, especially when there is only one source of supply.

When making a multi-choice decision, the first two steps correspond to standard process solutions. It is setting the purpose of a decision and establishing the criteria to be used in making it. The criteria should be further divided into constraints and desirable characteristics, and the latter ranked by their relative value. But with all this, it is important to take into account that in this case it is impossible to use criteria to determine the relative value of alternatives based on their mutual comparison, since the difficulties of comparing, say, fifty or more alternatives are practically insurmountable. Therefore, the list of criteria must be converted into an absolute measurement scale, which will allow each alternative to be assessed on its own and a more correct choice to be made.

In cases where none of the known alternatives seems suitable, the method can be used optimization of criteria. Main idea This method is based on the assumption that combining the best features of known alternatives can lead to a more effective solution. This procedure is used to help make decisions in situations where traditional methods of generating alternatives do not or cannot produce acceptable results.

First step in the application of the criterion optimization method, this is the compilation of a complete list of desired final results, that is, criteria. Since there are no alternatives yet and nothing to evaluate, they are called “design criteria.” Criteria for constructing alternatives provide incentives and direction for creative ideas.

On second step Each criterion is taken in turn and “ideal” solutions are constructed to achieve the final desired result.

At this point, no alternative is evaluated. IN at the moment are guided by the following judgment: “What might an alternative that ideally meets this criterion look like?” This process is repeated for each criterion until the optimal criteria (ideas) are identified.

It is at this stage of developing criteria-based decisions that innovative ideas are required. This is best achieved by brainstorming or another form of group creativity. Here it is especially important to follow the basic principles of organizing innovation activities outlined above. The freedom to generate ideas increases the likelihood of coming up with components that will be included in the final innovative solution. Once a list of optimal ideas has been compiled for each of the criteria separately, it is important to evaluate them and try to construct a combined, comprehensive alternative based on them. When starting to combine optimal ideas according to individual criteria into a final alternative, it is necessary first of all to check them for mutual compatibility. At this stage, the competent judgment of the manager plays a key role. Because if ideas according to two criteria contradict each other, then it is necessary to determine which of them to include in the combined version.

Next step is a comparison of each of the optimal ideas for their mutual support. They may turn out to be natural combinations that mutually reinforce and complement each other. Such element combinations should be immediately linked and used as the basis for a future final alternative. The end result of all this work should be a combination of ideas that becomes an effective innovative "synergic alternative". A synergistic alternative is a combination of ideas whose combined effect exceeds the simple sum of the effects of these ideas taken individually.

If the criterion optimization method yielded several alternatives, then the decision maker can turn to the standard decision-making procedure and compare these alternatives. When the applied criterion optimization method gives only one alternative, then the initial design criteria turn into a tool for its evaluation.

Despite the obvious differences between the concepts of “symptoms”, “causes”, “consequences”, in the practice of management activities they are quite often replaced with each other, which does not lead to the solution of problems, but to their aggravation and replication.

Solving an identified problem involves establishing a chain of cause and effect, a hierarchy of causes and effects that leads “back” from effect to cause to the point at which action can be taken to help eliminate the underlying causes. The complexity and importance of analysis when using the causal chain procedure lies in the need to constantly record the location of facts and conceptual judgments in the causal chain. To clearly and clearly define a problem means to already begin to solve it.

The criterion optimization method helps managers successfully construct alternatives for decision making and its subsequent implementation in business practice.

2.2. The role of the manager in the process of making management decisions.

In the decision process, the following main functions of a manager can be distinguished.

First, the manager must manage the decision-making process.

Secondly, the manager puts forward a problem for solution, participates in its specification and selection of evaluation criteria. The ability to correctly define and pose a task in an extremely complex and contradictory situation is an essential responsibility of a leader, the main creative part of his work.

Thirdly, it does difficult work on the decision itself.

Fourthly, the manager organizes the implementation of the decision, leading the work at the stage of implementing the decision.

In the process of preparing and making decisions, two main types of workers are involved: system analysts and managers themselves (experts on certain problems are also involved to resolve certain issues).

System analysts must be fully proficient in modern analysis methods; managers must have a systematic approach to decision making and have a general understanding of the methods and means used in the process of preparing and making decisions. Experience teaches that a leader who does not understand general outline logic of the study, does not believe the recommendations of system analysts.

The development of a solution is carried out jointly by the manager and system analysts. One of most important tasks systems analysts is to assist the manager in identifying the goals of his decision-making activities - what they are or what they should be.

The process of identifying goals can be iterative. The system analyst, based on available directive materials, forecast data, the opinions of individual specialists, etc., compiles a list of all possible goals, which initially do not necessarily have to be accurate and complete, and systematizes them.

Then presents this data to the manager. In this case, it may turn out that the manager is not satisfied with the proposals of the systems analyst. Exchange of views helps clarify old goals and identify new goals. System analysts help to correctly outline approaches to defining goals, to carry out the process of identifying them more efficiently, applying certain logical principles, introducing, where possible, quantitative methods of assessment.

Systems analysts identify and initially evaluate alternative solutions to a problem. They break down the problem in such a way that all cause-and-effect relationships are visible, determine trends in changes in the behavior of economic objects in the future, select alternatives and criteria, carry out the necessary calculations, etc.

It is extremely important that problems to be solved are identified with the participation of those interested in solving them, i.e. the leaders themselves. When only systems analysts take part in posing problems and choosing ways to solve them, the results of their work often do not find recognition among managers.

Most managers, in the process of working together with systems analysts to define a problem, discover problems and opportunities that they were not previously aware of and that only became apparent during this work.

Involvement of managers in analytical research of problems is an important factor for success. The participation of the manager in the formation of criteria, definition and ranking of goals has a decisive impact on the implementation of results. In 80% of cases, developments carried out with the involvement of a manager find practical application. This is twice the value of the implementation rate of developments without their participation.

This form of cooperation brings benefits of two kinds. On the one hand, problems are posed in a form adequate for management needs, on the other hand, the manager, taking part in the formalization of a specific management situation, has a clear understanding of the boundaries of the conclusions of system analysts and how the results obtained will help him make a more informed decision.

A clear, logically harmonious, possibly mathematical formulation of problems that a systems analyst seeks may, in the eyes of a manager, seem poorly adapted to his field of activity, unattainable from the point of view of his knowledge of the possibility of quantitative methods and, most importantly, unnecessary.

For his part, the systems analyst tends to underestimate the role of intuition and past experience. This is largely due to the fact that the traditions of scientific communication have taught him to focus more on the selection and application of methods for substantiating a decision, rather than on the appropriateness and effectiveness of their use.

The manager must make a decision based on accurate, verified data, on options worked out in detail by system analysts, in the variety of which the optimal option can rarely be detected at first glance. And the manager’s intuition is used only in addition, but not as a replacement for the results prepared by system analysts.

System analysts consider decision-making as an independent process, but for managers, decision-making is only part of the entire management process, where it is necessary to take into account both objective and subjective factors influencing the solution of the problem. Differences in views between systems analysts and managers also manifest themselves in risk assessment when making decisions. (After all, the manager, as a rule, bears personal responsibility for the decision made.)

System analysts cannot guarantee the manager 100% success or finding the only right solution. They can only, on the basis of their knowledge, help him in his progress towards reasonable decisions. A good result from the implementation of a carefully thought-out and scientifically based decision also largely depends on a favorable combination of circumstances, since many decisions, as already noted, are made under conditions of risk and uncertainty.

The manager selects the only solution option from those proposed by system analysts. He must promptly request analysis data from system analysts, even if incomplete. A decision not made on time is a more serious mistake, fraught with more serious consequences, than a decision made, but containing some errors.

There is always some kind of optimum, a certain point to which research must be carried out and after which you can take advantage of their fruits and make a decision. Choosing this moment, catching it not earlier and not later is a matter that requires a different approach, different preparation and different psychological qualities than those that are characteristic of a specialist analyst.

The decision is a direct product of the labor of a manager of any level and rank. The functions of preparing, making and implementing decisions underlie many organizational and procedural schemes and provisions that determine the content of the activities of individual elements of the national economic system.

IN modern conditions Managers have significantly increased independence and the ability to find effective solutions, but also increased responsibility for the final result of decisions made.

2.3. Factors influencing the process of making management decisions.

There are a variety of factors that need to be taken into account when making decisions. Here we describe only some of the most important points that directly determine how decisions are made and how effective they will be. The manager's personal assessments, risk level, time and changing environment, information and behavioral limitations, negative consequences and interdependence of decisions are considered.

Personal assessments of the leader.

Personality assessments contain a subjective ranking of importance, quality, or benefit. In relation to decision making, appraisals act as a compass, pointing a person in the desired direction when faced with a choice between action alternatives. In our discussion of social responsibility and ethics, we have provided several examples of decisions made by leaders that reflect the values ​​of those people regarding right and wrong and integrity. It is important to emphasize that all management decisions, and not just those related to issues of social responsibility and ethics, are built on the foundation of someone’s value system.

Each person has his own value system, which determines his actions and influences his decisions. For example, you may feel it is wrong to withhold information that could help a colleague improve a project they are working on. Even though this employee may be your main competitor for promotion, the value you place on loyalty and openness makes you decide to pass on information to a colleague. On the other hand, you may decide to fire an employee who consistently performs poorly. Although you place great importance on loyalty, your idea of ​​equality dictates that you should fire a bad employee because he does not contribute as much to the organization as others.

Research confirms that value orientations influence the way decisions are made. One of the first studies on the values ​​of American managers showed that in their value system there is a clear bias towards economics, politics and science, as opposed to social, religious and aesthetic aspects. According to a study by George England, a manager who prioritizes profit maximization is likely not to invest in renovating the cafeteria and workers' break rooms. A leader who values ​​compassion for people is more likely to accept a fair increase in wages than to cut wages to free up funds to finance research projects.

Cultural differences are important, although similarities can be expected value orientations managers from different countries. For example, Australian managers prefer a “soft” approach to management and pay significant attention to their subordinates; South Koreans place more importance on strength and do not perceive the problems of others well; Japanese demonstrate respect for their superiors and are highly devoted to the company.

Some organizations use formal statements of corporate values ​​to ensure that the decisions made by managers and the actions of everyone in the organization reflect common system values. The example described below is about the system of rewarded values ​​of the Apple Computer company. Organizations that have promulgated value statements communicate the expectations of such values ​​through various forms of education.

Example: Apple's value system

Empathy for consumers(to users). We offer superior quality products that meet real needs and provide lasting value... We are genuinely interested in solving consumer problems and do not compromise our ethics for profit.

Achieving goals (aggressiveness). We set aggressive goals and force ourselves to achieve them. We recognize that we live in unique times and see our products as tools to change how people work and live. This is an adventure and we are in it together.

Positive social contribution. As a corporate citizen, the firm strives to be an economic, intellectual and social asset in the communities in which we operate. But first of all, we hope to make this world a more comfortable place to live. We create products that empower people, free people from drudgery, and help them achieve more than they could do alone.

Individual achievements. We expect everyone to be passionate and achieve at a level higher than the industry as a whole. Only in this way will we generate the profits we need to achieve our other corporate goals.

The spirit of collectivism. Working in teams is essential to Apple's success because it is beyond the capabilities of any one individual. We welcome interaction between employees and managers at any level, the exchange of ideas and proposals to improve the company's efficiency and quality of life. We support each other and enjoy victories and rewards together.

Quality (perfection). We care about what we produce. We build quality, performance and value into Apple products at a level that earns us the respect and loyalty of our customers.

Rewards. We recognize the contribution of each person and high performance results. We also recognize that rewards must be both moral and monetary, and we strive to create an environment in which everyone can feel a sense of adventure and joy in working for Apple.

Good management. The attitude of managers towards their employees is of paramount importance. Workers must have reason to trust the motives and integrity of their bosses. Management is responsible for creating a productive environment in which Apple's values ​​flourish.

In addition to differences in personal assessments, a typical difficulty in determining optimal alternatives is the environment in which decisions are made.

Decision making environment.

When making management decisions, it is always important to consider risk. The term "risk" is not used here in the sense of danger. Risk rather refers to the level of certainty with which an outcome can be predicted. In evaluating alternatives and making decisions, a manager must predict possible outcomes under different circumstances or states of nature. Essentially, decisions are made in different circumstances with respect to risk. These circumstances are traditionally classified as conditions certainty, risk or uncertainty.

Certainty. The decision is made under conditions of certainty, when the manager knows exactly the outcome of each of the alternative choices. An example of a specific solution would be to invest excess cash in 10% certificates of deposit. The manager knows that, barring the extremely unlikely occurrence of an emergency whereby the federal government cannot meet its obligations, the organization will receive exactly 10% on its investment. Likewise, a manager can, at least in the short term, determine exactly what the costs of producing a particular product will be because rent, materials, and labor costs are known or can be calculated with high accuracy.

Relatively few organizational and personal decisions are made under conditions of certainty. However, they do occur and often elements of larger decisions can be considered as certain. Authors and researchers of economic and mathematical methods call situations with certainty deterministic.

Risk. To decisions made under conditions risk, include those whose results are not certain, but probability each result is known. Probability is defined as the degree of possibility of a given event occurring and varies from 0 to 1. The sum of the probabilities of all alternatives must be equal to one. In conditions of certainty, there is only one alternative.

The most desirable way to determine probability is objectivity. Probability objective, when it can be determined by mathematical methods or by statistical analysis of accumulated experience. An example of objective probability is that a coin lands heads up 50% of the time. Another example is the forecasting of population mortality rates by life insurance companies. Because the entire population serves as the basis of the experiment, insurance actuaries can predict with high accuracy what percentage of people of a certain age will die this year, the next, and so on. years. From this data, they determine how many premiums they must receive in order to pay claims and still make a profit.

Management must consider the level of risk as the most important factor. The probability will be determined objectively if enough information is available to make the prediction statistically reliable. Moreover, the probability is only reliable as an average value and in the long term. The coin can come up heads 10.20 or more times in a series. So, if an insurance company with policies for 50 thousand cars is able to predict losses from accidents with high accuracy, based on statistical averages, the manager will not be able to do this.

In many cases, an organization does not have sufficient information to make an objective assessment of probability, however, management's experience suggests what is most likely to happen with high confidence. In such a situation, the manager can use judgment about the possibility of achieving alternatives with one or another subjective or estimated probability.

Uncertainty. Decisions are made under conditions of uncertainty, when it is impossible to estimate the likelihood of potential outcomes. This should be the case when the factors to be taken into account are so new and complex that it is not possible to obtain sufficient relevant information about them. As a result, the likelihood of a particular outcome cannot be predicted with sufficient confidence. Uncertainty is characteristic of some decisions that must be made in rapidly changing circumstances. The sociocultural, political and knowledge-intensive environment has the highest potential for uncertainty. However, in practice, very few management decisions have to be made under conditions of complete uncertainty.

When faced with uncertainty, a manager has two main options. First, try to obtain additional relevant information and analyze the problem again. This often reduces the novelty and complexity of the problem. The manager combines this additional information and analysis with accumulated experience, judgment, or intuition to give a range of outcomes a subjective or perceived probability. Below, when considering the method of expert assessments, an interesting new approach to obtaining additional information in partially uncertain situations is described.

The second possibility is to act strictly on past experience, judgment, or intuition and make a guess about the likelihood of events. This is necessary when there is not enough time to collect additional information or the costs are too high. Time and information constraints are of utmost importance when making management decisions.

Time and changing environment. The passage of time usually causes the situation to change. If they are significant, the situation may change so much that the criteria for making a decision become invalid. Therefore, decisions should be made and implemented while the information and assumptions on which the decisions are based remain relevant and accurate. This is often difficult because the time between making a decision and taking action is long. Likewise, the likelihood of a decision being ahead of its time should be taken into account.

Information restrictions.

At the beginning of the chapter, we made a distinction between data and information by pointing out that information is data sifted for specific people, problems, goals, and situations. Information is necessary for rational problem solving. Sometimes, however, the information needed to make a good decision is not available or is too expensive.

Behavioral restrictions.

Many of the factors that impede interpersonal and intraorganizational communications influence decision making. For example, managers often have different perceptions of the existence and severity of a problem. They may also perceive constraints and alternatives differently. This leads to disagreement and conflict in the decision-making process.

Managers may become so overwhelmed with information and work at hand that they fail to perceive opportunities. Each person's track record can reveal how they perceive and respond to problems. According to one study, managers define the same problem differently depending on the departments they lead. A manager may feel that a superior will be annoyed if he is told of an actual or potential problem. As stated above, the behavior of the latter largely depends on the way the leader exchanges information with subordinates. Similarly, there may be a view that “problems are bad” because “looking good” is more important. People may learn this attitude from their colleagues.

A leader may reject a particular course due to personal preferences or loyalty to someone. He may decide not to stop a questionable investment or project because he has supported it for a long time. As a result, it will be difficult for him to objectively assess the current state of development of the investment or project. Similarly, a manager may decide to support or not support a certain project because the manager of that project has not previously supported the project put forward by the manager. In short, it has been established that numerous psychological factors and personal characteristics affect the decision-making process.

Negative consequences.

Management decision making is in many ways the art of finding effective compromise. Gains in one almost always come at the expense of the other. The decision in favor of higher quality products entails increased costs; some consumers will be satisfied, others will switch to a less expensive alternative. Installing an automatic production line may reduce overall costs, but it may also result in the loss of loyal workers. Simplification of technology may allow a firm to use unskilled workers. At the same time, simplified work can be so tedious that workers become frustrated, which can be expected to increase absenteeism and turnover and possibly reduce productivity.

Such negative consequences must be taken into account when making decisions. The problem in the decision-making process is balancing the negatives with the positives in order to obtain the greatest overall gain. Often the manager must make a subjective judgment about what negative side effects are acceptable to achieve the desired end result. At the same time, some negative consequences can in no way be acceptable to the leaders of the organization. Example: violation of law or ethical standards. In such cases, when choosing criteria for decision making, negative consequences should be treated as limitations.

Interdependence of decisions.

In an organization, all decisions are interconnected in some way. A single major decision can almost certainly require hundreds of smaller decisions. If, for example, an organization decides to move its headquarters to another state, it must also make decisions about how to compensate workers for the move, who will decide whether or not to buy new furniture, who to hire for the new positions and vacancies that will result from the relocation. whether tax laws in another state change accounting procedures, etc.

Major decisions have implications for the organization as a whole, not just the segment directly affected by a decision. The ability to see how control system solutions fit and interact becomes increasingly important as you advance in your career. Managers who are at the lower levels of the hierarchy, but show the ability to discern the interdependence of decisions, i.e. see “the whole picture” and often become candidates for promotion.

3. CONTROL OF THE EXECUTION OF MANAGEMENT DECISIONS.

Each manager has to monitor the implementation of many management decisions at various levels of management. Therefore, the choice of forms of control is important. A higher-level manager must be able to select a number of main general criteria with the help of which he. Without spending a lot of time and effort, he will be able to assess with a sufficient degree of accuracy the degree of implementation of a management decision. If the manager tries to control the progress of work, delving into all the details, all the little things, he will be overwhelmed with information, among which it is difficult to find the main one.

Since all power and responsibility for the functions of control over relationships are assigned to one person (the manager), and he is physically unable to exercise it in full, the manager is forced to delegate part of his powers to subordinates. This is what forms vertical (linear) hierarchical structures. The specialization of management functions and the forms of their coordination give rise to a rigid pattern of the functional structure of a modern organization. In the management hierarchy created in this way, each employee has his own manager and everyone, except ordinary performers, has subordinates. This implies the specificity of the dual formal position of any leader, which leaves a significant imprint on the image of his behavior.

Well-organized control represents feedback, without which the management process is unthinkable. Therefore, special organizational and analytical units are now beginning to be created in the management apparatus, one of the functions of which is to monitor the implementation of decisions, orders, resolutions, instructions.

In the process of implementing a decision, sudden changes in the situation may occur, caused by external reasons, errors that have emerged, and miscalculations both in the decision itself and in the organization of its implementation. In these cases, there is a need to either change the decision made (in terms of timing, performers, content of some tasks), or to make a new decision. Therefore, in the process of making and implementing decisions, it is necessary to provide for the procedure for making the necessary changes. This especially applies to decisions that are made under conditions of uncertainty, which is very typical for the activities of emergency authorities and departments. The need to adjust the progress of a decision is not always associated with a worsening situation. As the solution is implemented, new opportunities may open up that will allow you to achieve better results.

The implementation of a decision, regardless of the results, should always end with a summary. When summing up, you should analyze all stages of work to implement the solution, all successes, mistakes, failures. Summing up provides information about achieving the goal, compliance established deadlines, achievement of planned and side results, the activities of performers, etc. Mandatory summing up of the implementation of the decision has great educational significance. Teams and direct performers must know what results they achieved, how they worked, what the social, economic, and political assessment of their work is. From a management point of view, summing up the implementation of a solution is studying achievements and mistakes, acquiring or improving experience in solving similar situations and problems, and gaining experience in using new methods.

The role of organizing the execution of decisions in management activities is difficult to overestimate. It is naive to believe that if you just make a good decision (even the best one), it will be implemented without much difficulty, and the changes planned by it will take place in a “natural” way.

Execution of a management decision is a process of permanently solving typical, repetitive tasks and new ones that can be regulated by accepted standards.

In organizing the execution of decisions, it is necessary to recognize as the main task the mobilization of the efforts of executors, ensuring creative work, the motivation of strict responsibility for achieving what was planned.

This stage of management activity consists of the following stages:

1) selection, placement of performers, provision of conditions for their activities;

2) assessment of the progress of execution of the decision;

3) accounting and evaluation of the results of its implementation. This stage differs significantly from the previous one in the nature of management operations and management methods.

At the first stage, when the general tasks, means and methods of executing the solution are comprehended, specific tasks are formulated.

Then the performers are selected, their placement is determined, and instructions are given. This is a very important moment, since the manager does not always have only qualified specialists at his disposal. The actions of the subject of management at this stage actually determine the quality of the upcoming work, which depends on the professional training, experience, discipline and other personal properties of the performers. Consequently, the manager, even in the absence of sufficient time, should pay serious attention to personnel - their rational placement and orientation to the new volume and nature of functions, the ability to proactively and timely complete tasks, and anticipate the development of processes in the area regulated by the decision made. The manager must be convinced that the meaning of the decision is clear to the performers, and they know the main tasks, their individual tasks and methods of implementation.

In the process of selecting and placing performers, it is advisable to primarily use methods of persuasion that stimulate responsibility, consciousness and discipline. Here main criterion- achieving employee interest in the successful implementation of the solution. It can be stimulated using administrative, economic, socio-psychological and other methods. Their choice should be based on the manager’s conviction in the correct understanding by the performers of the general social goal and the specific result of its implementation.

At the stage of assessing the progress of decision execution, monitoring, control and regulation of the management system are important.

Monitoring - systematic tracking, study of the state of a controlled object, comparison of the results of constant observations to obtain reasonable ideas about its actual position and development trends. Such observation makes it possible to identify the compliance of certain processes with the initial plans, assumptions, desired results and make timely corrections to management technologies, prevent failure of the decision, and ensure its greater efficiency.

Control and regulation of the management system are due to the fact that during this period new problems, unforeseen circumstances, and negative trends in the work of individual departments that were not previously taken into account may appear. Insufficiency of forces and means, unsuitability of the applied forms and methods of influence may also be revealed.

The manager’s prompt intervention in such cases can be expressed in two main forms: correction of the decision, i.e. clarifications, changes, additions - in general, introducing amendments to the decision, and regulating the management system by changing the structure of the apparatus, the order of work of performers, their placement, scope of authority, etc.

The stage of organizing the execution of the decision is completed by taking into account and evaluating the results achieved.

The specificity of the stage of accounting and evaluating the results of the execution of decisions also determines the features of the choice of management methods used in this case. Administrative methods must be combined with cognitive ones, rely on them, and be enriched through them by obtaining new information about the state of the object of influence for the successful completion of the management cycle. Moreover, all work at this stage should be based not on methods of strong-willed administrative command, but on cognitive-programming methods.

The end result should not be rewarding or punishing employees (which is also necessary), but eliminating shortcomings that make it difficult to implement the solution.

Another thing is important: the use of cognitive methods provides a wide opportunity to reach social assessments of the effectiveness of a decision, while administrative methods are limited to the departmental framework of the system. Accounting and assessment “from above” must be combined with accounting and assessment “from below”. In fact, this is what happens: in reality, the work of any organization is assessed by the population, and formally by management. Focus on formal assessment distorts the actual state of affairs. The elimination of this negative phenomenon is associated primarily with the democratization of the management process.

Involved in the process of making, implementing and evaluating management decisions wide circle people: political leaders and officials, specialists and experts, staff and line personnel, internal and external participants.

In government bodies, especially at the regional, republican, and federal levels, several thousand management decisions of both current operational and long-term, regulatory and strategic importance are made annually. Officials spend a lot of time developing and implementing management decisions. They have to constantly justify various options, find optimal alternatives for resource provision, “join”, coordinate various decisions, actively analyze the progress of some decisions and take into account its results when preparing others, sum up the implementation of decisions and remove them from control, deal with many other issues in this voluminous and responsible area of ​​management activities. Naturally, we need a scientifically based technology for preparing and implementing management decisions. Moreover, such a technology seems to be general, standard, protected from “local” creativity and “amateur activity” of certain leaders.

Its role in management activities can hardly be overestimated. It is naive to believe that if you just make a good decision (even the best one), it will be implemented without much difficulty, and the changes planned by it will take place in a “natural” way.

Execution of management decisions is process permanent solutions to typical, repetitive tasks and new ones that can be regulated by accepted standards.

In organizing the execution of decisions it is necessary in quality main task admit mobilization of efforts performers, security creative work, motivation strict responsibility for achieving the target.

This stage of management activity consists of the following stages: I) selection, placement of performers, provision of conditions for their activities; 2) assessment of the progress of execution of the decision; 3) accounting and evaluation of the results of its implementation. This stage differs significantly from the previous one in the nature of management operations and management methods.

1. At the first stage, when the general tasks, means and methods of executing the solution are comprehended, specific tasks are formulated.

Then the selection takes place and the arrangement of performers is determined, and they are briefed. This is a very important moment, since the manager does not always have only qualified specialists at his disposal. The actions of the subject of management at this stage actually determine quality upcoming work, depending on the professional training, experience, discipline and other personal characteristics of the performers. Consequently, the manager, even in the absence of sufficient time, should pay serious attention to personnel - their rational placement and orientation to the new volume and nature of functions, the ability to proactively and timely complete tasks, and anticipate the development of processes in the area regulated by the decision made. The manager must be convinced that the meaning of the decision is clear to the performers and they know the main tasks, their individual tasks and methods of implementation.

In the process of selecting and placing performers, it is advisable to predominantly use methods of persuasion that stimulate responsibility, consciousness and discipline. The main criterion here is to achieve employee interest in the successful implementation of the solution. It can be stimulated using administrative, economic, socio-psychological and other methods. Their choice should be based on the manager’s conviction in the correct understanding by the performers of the general social goal and the specific result of its implementation.

At this stage, the basic legal, organizational and logistical conditions for the successful implementation of the decision are also created. It is advisable to make the necessary changes to the “set” of functions, clarify the powers of performers and give them, if necessary, additional rights, make appropriate clarifications to job descriptions, provide indicators of their performance, grounds and types of incentives and responsibilities, and the scope of the possible limit of actions “at discretion.”

Work in this direction should also have “output” instructions, recommendations, memos reflecting the order of actions of performers: determination of forms, methods, means of interaction; establishing channels for receiving and transmitting information, reporting forms and recording work results; provision of equipment, communications, transport, etc. Neglecting such elements of organizing the execution of decisions, of course, leads to a decrease in their effectiveness and reduces the possibility of achieving set goals.

2. At the stage of assessing the progress of execution of the decision, it is important
have monitoring, control and regulation of the management system.

Monitoring(English-Latin toshYug - warning) - systematic monitoring, study of the state of the controlled object, comparison of the results of constant observations to obtain reasonable ideas about its actual position and development trends. Such observation makes it possible to identify the compliance of certain processes with the original plans, assumptions, and desired results and make timely corrections to management technologies, prevent the failure of the implementation of the decision, and ensure its greater efficiency.

Control and regulation of the control system due to the fact that during this period new problems, unforeseen circumstances, and negative trends in the work of individual departments that were not previously taken into account may appear. Insufficiency of forces and means, unsuitability of the used forms and methods of influence may also be revealed.

Operational intervention by the manager in such cases can be expressed in two main forms: correcting the solution(it is incorrect to say: correction (from the Latin cogrigere - to correct), i.e. clarifications, changes, additions - in general, introducing amendments to the decision; and also control system regulation by changing the structure of the apparatus, the order of work of performers, their placement, scope of authority, etc.

3. The stage of organizing the execution of the decision is completed taking into account
and evaluation of achieved results.

Management practice has developed in such a way that preference is also given to administrative methods according to the scheme: “command - execution - control - report - evaluation”. In fact, the decision is executed “downstairs” and evaluated “above”. Constant pressure “from above” to achieve the desired result leads to an excessive increase in the role of control methods. Its mechanism begins to be dominated by the requirements of strict adherence to the command without the possibility of adjusting it during execution. This is where the desire of performers arises to get a result that matches the team at any cost, and if this does not work out, to embellish successes or hide shortcomings. In such conditions, the performer is not concerned with questions of the correctness and usefulness of the decision, since the right to evaluate them belongs to the superior subject of management. The latter cannot evaluate the decision objectively, since it receives distorted information.

The reason for such a vicious practice is, apparently, a lack of understanding of the theoretical and practical significance this, third, stage of organizing the execution of decisions. Its essence is that, on the one hand, it completes this process, on the other, it acts as the beginning of a new management cycle. The work at this stage organically combines the assessment of the results of implementing the solution and the identification of problems and contradictions. The conclusion follows from this: the quality of the work at this stage is how effective the subsequent decisions will be.

So, tasks The final stage of organizing the execution of a management decision can be summarized as follows:

Compare decision standards and, in general, the planned result with tactical parameters based on statistical and thematic information;

Identify obvious deviations from the normative act: the emergence of tasks (tasks) not provided for by the norms of the act, contrary to them, incorrect interpretation of norms, interference in the competence of other bodies, organizations, restrictions on the rights of citizens, etc.;

Establish the reasons for the deviations: they may be economic factors, political instability, weak organizational work of a government body, the use of outdated social and administrative technologies, insufficient competence of executive managers, low legal culture of citizens (the object of management), poor quality of the management decision itself (regulatory act). ) etc.;

Characterize the unintended negative side effects of the implementation of a management decision;

Formulate recommendations and measures to eliminate the identified deviations and improve management activities through organizational restructuring or clarification of the management structure, clear local regulation, changing the mode of use of material and financial resources, improving arbitration
but judicial practice, qualifications of civil servants, etc.;

Make proposals for changes, additions to the management decision, or the cancellation of certain of its provisions (points) to the Center for Planning and Development, the appropriate authority.

The specificity of the stage of accounting and evaluating the results of the execution of decisions also determines the features of the choice of management methods used in this case. Administrative methods should be combined here with cognitive ones, rely on them, and be enriched through them by obtaining new information about the state of the object of influence for the successful completion of the management cycle. Moreover, all work at this stage should be based not on methods of strong-willed administrative command, but on cognitive-programming methods.

The final result should not be rewarding or punishing employees (which is also necessary), but eliminating shortcomings that make it difficult to implement the solution.

Another circumstance is also important. The use of cognitive methods provides a wide opportunity to reach social assessments of the effectiveness of a decision, while administrative methods are limited to the departmental framework of the system. Accounting and assessment “from above” must, as is known, be combined with accounting and assessment “from below”. In fact, this is what happens: in reality, the work of any organization is assessed by the population, and formally by the management. Orientation towards formal assessment distorts the actual state of affairs. The elimination of this negative phenomenon is associated primarily with the democratization of the management process.

In order to draw conclusions on the topic as a whole, I would like to note the following. A wide range of people are involved in the process of making, implementing and evaluating management decisions: political leaders and officials, specialists and experts, staff and line personnel, internal and external participants.

In government bodies, especially at the regional, republican, and federal levels, several thousand management decisions are made annually, both current operational and long-term, normative and strategic. Officials devote an exceptionally large amount of time to developing and implementing management decisions. They have to constantly justify various options, find optimal alternatives for resource provision, “dovetail”, coordinate various decisions with each other, actively analyze the progress of some decisions and take into account its results when preparing others, sum up the implementation of decisions and remove them from control, deal with many others issues in this voluminous and responsible area of ​​management activity. Naturally, we need a scientifically based technology for preparing and implementing management decisions. Moreover, such a technology seems to be general, standard, guaranteed from the “local” creativity and “amateur activity” of certain leaders.

Decision theory is one of the classic topics in administrative management science. It is widely represented in the works of both domestic and foreign authors. It is obvious that it arose as a result of economic and political needs, but today it can no longer be attributed only to economic or political science. Decision making theory actively uses methods of mathematics, statistics, sociology, psychology, at the same time time is closely related to management practice. That's why she became recognized academic discipline, an integral part of the educational program for civil servants.

Questions for reflection and self-control

1. Give reasons for your concept of a management decision.

2. Are there any grounds (and what, if you have comprehended them) to consider administrative and management decisions as a specific type of decisions?

3. What does optimization of management decisions mean?

4. Describe the successive stages of the process of developing, making and implementing decisions.