Cautious management decisions are characterized. Impulsivity: causes of impulsive behavior. Key Differences Between Management Decisions and Decisions in Private Life

Individual decision-making styles

Decisions always reflect the personality of the one who makes them. From this side, the personal profile of a managerial decision is interesting, that is, that set individual features leader, which is carried with him by his decisions to the performers.

In science, the following types of personal decision profiles have been identified.

Balanced type solutions are characteristic of people who approach a problem with an already formulated initial idea that has arisen as a result of preliminary analysis conditions and requirements of the task. The balance is manifested in the fact that putting forward hypotheses and testing them equally attract the attention of a person. Such a decision-making tactic is the most productive.

Impulsive decisions are characteristic of people in whom the process of constructing hypotheses sharply prevails over actions to verify and refine them. Such a person generates ideas relatively easily, but cares little about evaluating them. This leads to the fact that the decision-making process takes place in leaps and bounds, bypassing the stage of justification and verification. AT practical work impulsiveness of decisions can lead to the fact that the leader will strive to implement decisions that are not sufficiently comprehended and justified.

Inert solutions are the result of a very hesitant and cautious search. After the appearance of the initial hypothesis, its refinement is extremely slow. Estimates are supercritical, each step a person checks repeatedly. This leads to the extension of the decision-making process in time.

Risky decisions resemble impulsive ones, but differ from them in some features of individual tactics. If impulsive decisions skip the stage of substantiating a hypothesis, then risky ones still do not bypass it, but a person comes to an assessment only after some incongruity is discovered. As a result, although belatedly, the elements of constructing hypotheses and testing them are balanced.

Decisions of the cautious type are characterized by a special thoroughness in the evaluation of hypotheses, criticality. A person, before coming to any conclusion, performs a variety of preparatory actions. Precautionary decisions are characterized by proactive evaluation. Cautious people are more sensitive to the negative consequences of their actions than to the positive ones. They are more afraid of mistakes than they are happy with successes. Therefore, the tactical line of the cautious is to avoid mistakes. For impulsive, for example, the opposite tactical line is characteristic: they are guided by success and are less sensitive to failures.

Conditions for the effectiveness of management decisions

An effective managerial decision can be made by:

observance of hierarchy in decision-making;

the use of cross-functional groups;

use of direct horizontal links;

centralization of leadership.

Hierarchy in decision-making - delegation of decision-making authority closer to the level at which there is more necessary information and which is directly involved in the implementation of the decision. In this case, the executors of the decision are employees of adjacent levels. Contacts with subordinates who are more than one hierarchical level lower (higher) are not allowed.

The use of targeted cross-functional teams whose members are selected from various departments and levels of the organization.

Use of direct (direct) horizontal connections. In this case (especially at the initial stage of the decision-making process), the collection and processing of information is carried out without recourse to higher management. This approach facilitates decision making in more short time and increased accountability for their implementation.

Centralization of leadership. The decision-making process should be in the hands of one (common) manager. In this case, a decision-making hierarchy is formed, that is, each lower manager solves his problems (makes decisions) with the direct management, and not with the highest-level manager.

As already noted, the best option when the solution is chosen due to the sequential evaluation of each of the proposed ones. In this case, it is determined to what extent each solution option ensures the achievement of the goal. Thus, the solution must meet the requirements arising from the situation being solved and the goals of the organization, namely:

efficiency;

profitability;

timeliness;

validity;

reality.

The solution must be effective, that is, to ensure the achievement of the organization's goal in the most complete way.

The solution must be economical, that is, ensure the achievement of the goal at the lowest cost.

The timeliness of the decision means not only the right moment of its adoption, but also the timeliness of achieving the goals. After all, when the problem is solved, events continue to develop. It can happen that a great idea becomes obsolete and loses its meaning over time, although it was originally good.

The performers must be convinced that the decision is justified. In this regard, one should not confuse the factual validity and its perception by the performers - their understanding of the arguments that prompt the manager to make just such a decision.

The decision must be realistically feasible, that is, unrealistic, abstract decisions cannot be made. Such solutions are frustrating to implementers and fundamentally inefficient. The decision taken must correspond to the forces and means of the team executing it.

A special role in the effectiveness of decisions is played by the methods of bringing the decisions made to the executors. Bringing decisions to the executors usually begins with the division into group and individual tasks and the selection of executors. As a result, each employee receives a specific task, which is directly dependent on his official duties. It is believed that the ability to transfer tasks to performers is the main source of the effectiveness of the decision. In this regard, there are four main reasons for non-compliance with decisions:

the decision was not clearly articulated by the manager;

the decision was clearly and precisely formulated, but the performer did not understand it well;

the decision is clearly formulated and the performer understood it well, but he did not have necessary conditions and means for its implementation;

the decision was correctly formulated, the performer learned it and had all the necessary means to implement it, but he did not have an internal agreement with the solution proposed by the manager. The contractor in this case may have his own, more effective, in his opinion, solution to this problem.

Thus, the effectiveness of a solution depends not only on its optimality, but also on the form of bringing it to the executors (making decisions and personal qualities of managers and executors). The organization of the execution of decisions made by the management as a specific activity of the manager assumes that he keeps decisions in his field of vision, finds a way to influence them, and manages them. The command is "Proceed with the execution of the decision!" - cannot be given before the leader has confidence that all links have correctly understood their tasks and have all the means to fulfill them.

The main meaning of all work on bringing tasks to the executors is to build in the minds of a certain image (technology) of future work on the implementation of a management decision. The initial impression of this work is formed by the performer upon receipt and perception of the task. After that, the idea (task model) is refined, enriched by adapting it to real and objective conditions of internal and external environment. On this basis, the solution implementation technology is developed (an ideal model of the performer's activity to fulfill the manager's task). In order for the model of the performer's activity to be carried out in accordance with the initial idea of ​​the manager, a number of requirements are imposed on it (the model):

completeness of the model;

depth of reflection of the original idea;

stress resistance and strength;

model flexibility;

consistency;

her motivation.

The completeness of the decision model describes its compliance, on the one hand, with the manager's intention, his decision and the tasks set by him, and, on the other hand, with the content, structure and conditions of performing activities. The ideal option would be such a completeness of the model, in which it is deployed so much that even before the start of work, the performer can mentally imagine all the subtleties of the forthcoming work.

The accuracy of the model is necessary because if the problem is set in the abstract - in general view, then it is not fulfilled at all or is fulfilled formally. The control system, in which the accuracy of the formation of operational decision models has not become a law, is disintegrating.

The depth of reflection of the original model characterizes the operational model in terms of the representation in it of the entire dynamics of the forthcoming activity.

Stress resistance and strength of the model implies the ability of the performer to clearly implement the action plan that has developed in his mind in any difficult situations.

The flexibility of the model is a criterion that, as it were, contradicts all of the above. It is obvious that an absolutely rigid and "unyielding" image may be acceptable only in frozen and unchanging structures, which do not and cannot exist in nature and society. The problem is to choose the optimal balance between stability (immobility) and flexibility of the model.

The consistency of the decision model is due to the fact that the performer most often performs his stage of work alone, so his actions must be consistent in tasks, time and place with the actions of other performers.

Motivation of the decision model. It is known that the understanding of the solution and the assimilation of its ideal model does not fully ensure the proper mobilization of all the reserves of performers, and therefore it is necessary to motivate their activities. The impact on the motives that encourage performers to be active, the internal need to complete tasks is the main meaning of mobilization labor collective to implement the decisions made by management.

managerial decision management

“I just have to buy it, it’s impossible to resist!” "I'm so sorry I said that..." Familiar? We hear these words every day and often say them ourselves. Can we automatically regulate or control our actions, words and deeds, i.e. To what extent are we able to contain and resist our emotions and impulses? In this article, you will learn about what impulsivity is and what are the causes and symptoms of impulsive behavior. We will also tell you how you can assess the level of impulsivity.

What is impulsivity? Impulsivity is a feature of behavior and perception of the surrounding world, expressed in the tendency to act and react to an event, situation, or inner experience quickly and thoughtlessly under the influence of emotions or circumstances. In this case, the main feature is error in analytical judgment, in which the consequences of one's actions are not evaluated, which often leads to the fact that in the future an impulsive person repents of his actions.

Reasons for impulsive behavior

Neuroscientists using PET ( positron emission tomography) discovered the pathway along which an impulse or thought passes in the brain, turning into a repetitive compulsion, and explained why some people it is difficult to control the momentum that comes in return for a reward or a long-term goal.

What are the causes of impulsive behavior? Impulsivity or impulsive behavior is closely related to- a substance involved in learning and reward processes.

In other words, in order to get the fastest reward, there is a certain deviation in the work of the brain nuclei responsible for analyzing and making the most appropriate situation and deliberate decisions. Scientist Joshua Buckholz of Vanderbilt University suggested in 2009 that impulsive people have a lower number of active dopamine receptors in a region of the midbrain associated with the ability to make logical and deliberate decisions, which can also increase the risk of depression and impulsive behavior. Those. the smaller the number of active dopamine receptors in the midbrain region, where dopamine-synthesizing neurons are located, the more dopamine is released and the greater the degree of impulsivity.

Very often impulsive people regret their behavior. while not stopping it. Often it becomes repetitive and compulsive, as in the case of addiction to psychoactive substances, gambling, compulsive shopping, smoking, alcohol, etc.

Symptoms of Impulsivity

On the other hand, a number of researchers Michalczuk, Bowden-Jones, Verdejo García, Clark, 2011) named four main characteristics of impulsivity:

• Inability to plan and forecast: acting under the influence of impulses, we cannot foresee the expected and logical consequences, any result is a "surprise".
• Low control: another cigarette, a piece of cake, an inappropriate comment... "no brakes" and self-control.
• Lack of perseverance: postponing uninteresting tasks. Only the search for bright and sharp emotions.
• Constant search for new experiences and the need to urgently receive them, which refers to the tendency to act under the influence of intense positive or negative emotions and states that distort the ability to make informed alternative decisions and thereby avoid constant remorse and remorse, very typical of impulsive people.

Impulses happen different types and have different consequences - compare: eat an extra piece of cake and steal something, break it or harm yourself or others.

Please note that the key role in this case is played by emotional condition, while the above processes that take place in the brain occurrence emotions that cloud the perception of reality, and the desire to get them at all costs becomes irresistible.

How is impulsivity diagnosed?

If you are characterized by such an emotional state and you suffer from its consequences, not to mention the fact that it may be associated with other serious disorders such as ADHD or Parkinson's disease, you should contact a specialist for diagnosis, who will determine the severity and type of impulsive behavior and offer effective therapeutic measures (including psychotropic drugs), tools and special tests. In addition, you can also take CogniFit neuropsychological testing, which will be an additional help in making a diagnosis by a specialist.

Translation by Anna Inozemtseva

Sources

Celma Merola, Jaume. Bases teóricas y clinica del comportamiento impulsive. Colección digital Professionalidad. Ed. San Juan de Dios. Barcelona (2015).

Shalev, I., & Sulkowski, M.L. (2009). Relations between distinct aspects of self-regulation to symptoms of impulsivity and compulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 47,84-88.

Why Are You So Impulsive? Self-regulation and symptoms of impulsivity. Timothy A Pychyl Ph.D. Don't delay. Psychology Today, Posted Jun 23, 2009

Real managerial decisions differ from each other. Due to the complexity of the conditions (the number of influencing factors), the goals of decision-making, the requirements and the structure of the decision, it is problematic to create a simple and clear classification of them. Therefore, various classifications of managerial decisions can and do exist.

The most complete classification of SD can also be presented in the following form (Fig. 1.1). Predictive decisions are based on a special study to form a conclusion about the possible development and results of any management process. From a set of forecasts, the most appropriate ones are selected for the development of a detailed development plan ( planning solution). These decisions define the necessary parameters for the strategic or tactical planning of the company's activities. To implement the plan, a set is being developed organizational decisions . They provide for the formation of a new or improvement of the existing structure of the company's management, as well as a set of administrative measures to organize the implementation of the task. To increase the efficiency of the task, they form decisions to enhance the activities of the company's employees through stimulation and mobilization ( activating solutions). When unforeseen interfering influences appear coordinate rubbing decisions are necessary to harmonize the activities of the company. Controlling decisions are aimed at ensuring the timely implementation of plans and planned development milestones.

Rice. 1.1. Typology of management decisions

informing decisions are aimed at familiarizing the initiators and executors of the decision with the information they need, as well as with the intermediate and final results of the task.

The organization of the development and implementation of SD is based on the choice of priority in an individual or collegial approach to this process. Individual approach to the development of SD is very typical for organizations. Group approach to the development of SD is characterized by greater validity, fewer errors and uncertainties, the development of original approaches, and the involvement of developers in its implementation. At collegiate approach to the development of SD significantly increases in comparison with the individual solution preparation time. This approach limits the freedom of managers to choose SD and requires maintaining a balance of interests of the specialists involved in its development. Corporate the nature of the development and implementation of SD requires managers to comply with corporate guidelines, rules, morals and values ​​of the company. This limits the initiative of managers and deviations from the approved strategy (“a step to the left or to the right is unacceptable”).

The reasons that prompted the development of SD are very diverse, but can be reduced to two groups: unexpected and planned. Unexpected ones include situational and initiative ones, and planned ones - by prescription, program and seasonal ones. situational SD are caused by events that have disrupted or may disrupt the planned course of the company's activities. These decisions are often referred to as “churn”, i.e. to the small, day-to-day decisions of the leader. Initiative SD is the creative contribution of the manager to the activities of the company within the framework of the powers given to him. These decisions should complement the main decisions of senior managers - everyone in the company should “row” in one direction. A step to the left or to the right is not always welcome in the company and, in fact, is not always necessary. UR by prescription is included in the functional duties of the lower head and is determined by the relevant regulations. Software SD are the implementation of the program-target technology of RUR, according to which, at a given time, the manager must accept SD on the further work of his unit, replenishment of resources, etc. Seasonal SD - more stable in time than program SD, associated with calendar dates. For example, closer to spring - this is a decision on scheduling vacations, closer to autumn - decisions to carry out work to insulate the company's premises, etc.

The repeatability of the implementation of SD is important for the correct setting of the standard of manageability in the company. Repeatability is determined by the scale of the company and the degree of division of managerial labor. Same type SD have a common subject area (economics, technology). For example, the chief accountant big company implements SD related to the activities of material and technical accounting groups, accountants, cashiers, payers, etc. heterogeneous SDs have different databases of controlled parameters local to the company. These SDs require more time and effort of the leader, so their number should be significantly less than the same type. So, the director of the company must accept SD in the technical field, economic, social, etc. innovative SD usually relate to the process of restructuring and reforming a company to increase its competitiveness - these are complex solutions and their labor intensity is even higher than that of different types.

The scale of the impact of SD can be limited to one person, a separate team, or it is the entire team of the company. Each SD has a target orientation, which defines SD objects. So, if SD is developed for mandatory execution by all personnel ( general decision), then it must be executed in the form of an order and communicated to each employee. If SD is developed for one person ( private solution), then it can be implemented in the form business conversation with a specific person in the manager's office. It is considered unethical to reprimand an employee with the obligatory familiarization of all employees of the company, but it is advisable to bring gratitude to the employee to the attention of all employees who know him.

The total duration of the UR is determined by its importance. Allocate strategic, tactical and operational SD. Strategic SD are developed for a long period (5-10 years) covering the key elements of the company (personnel, structure, production, etc.). Tactical SD are tools for strategic decisions and are developed for a shorter period (1-3 years) covering some of the key elements of the company. Operational SD are developed when situations arise that interfere with the implementation of tactical SD. Operational SD are short-term.

The predicted results of SD implementation can be predicted either with sufficient accuracy (solutions with certain results) , or with a probabilistic outcome. There are many reasons understandable and incomprehensible to the manager, due to which the results of SD do not coincide with the planned ones. After all, usually the decisions of the leader are carried out by several people according to different directions sometimes in series, sometimes in parallel. The final result depends on the understanding by the performers of the task and their professionalism. Performers can even improve the end result of SD.

The process of development and implementation of SD (RUR) is greatly influenced by the socio-psychological and technological situation in the company. Managers and specialists involved in the RRM process experience a constant explicit or implicit influence of this environment on the course of their mental activity and the choice of the final decision. SD must harmonize with this environment, otherwise the decision will be rejected or implemented inefficiently. In this regard, distinguish balanced, impulsive, inert, risky and cautious solutions. The personal characteristics of the SD developer or the organizer of its implementation also influence this choice. Each of these types of SD has areas for effective implementation.

Balanced decisions take into account the balance of interests of interested parties. These decisions may not be the most effective, but they are more readily implemented and bring better results. Managers who are attentive and critical of their actions, put forward hypotheses and their testing are prone to such decisions. Starting to develop a solution, they already have a formulated initial idea, an analyzed situation, an identified problem and a list of the reasons that caused it. These solutions are effective for performers with high qualifications or high self-esteem.

impulsive decisions are based on an unexpected insight of the leader, a combination of circumstances, a strong nervous excitement of both the leader and the performers. Sometimes impulsive decisions are the release of long overdue ideas, conversations, desires. For example, the "Belovezhskaya agreement" adopted in 1991 on the state independence of a number of union republics that were part of the USSR is regarded by many as impulsive. These decisions are characteristic of leaders who easily generate a variety of ideas in unlimited quantities, but are not able to properly test, refine and evaluate them. Such decisions are made "on the spurt", "jerks" and most often turn out to be insufficiently substantiated and reliable. For the effective implementation of impulsive decisions, a high personal and professional authority of the leader among subordinates and his high charisma are required.

inert decisions are a time-delayed process of responding to disturbing influences. They are based on the confidence and monopoly of the leader. These solutions are the result of a careful search. In them, control and refinement activities prevail over the generation of ideas, so it is difficult to detect originality, brilliance and innovation in such decisions. They weakly activate the staff to implement decisions. Inert solutions are effective in the current process management activities, good support from leaders at all levels, and, if possible, to lobby their interests in the external environment.

Risky decisions are based on possible reasonable luck with the minimum resources spent on the principle: "make or break". Such decisions are characteristic of gamblers - players. In some cases, there is not enough data for informed decisions, and the manager has two main options: not to implement the decision or take a risk - “what if it works out”. As practice shows, the absence of a decision can cause more damage than a prompt decision, even a bad one. Therefore, there is always ground for making risky decisions. These solutions are effective in the general positive attitude of the leader and performers, when a possible failure does not significantly worsen the material and social condition of the team. Risky decisions usually use insurance or other methods to reduce possible damage.

Cautious decisions are made in the presence of a bad experience in the past - “having been burned in milk, they blow on the water”, as well as with the exceptional importance of the task assigned. They are characterized by the thoroughness of the manager's assessment of all options, a supercritical approach to business, and a large number of approvals. Such solutions are effective in solving problems related to human life and the state of its environment. For example, decisions related to the activities of personnel at nuclear, thermal and power plants.

The methods of information processing in RUR are important, since it is based on information. Most often, solution developers use algorithmic a method of processing information that involves a relatively strict formalization of the implementation of procedures and operations based on rules, algorithms, formulas, statistical data. For example, the calculation of the economic efficiency of a new production should be carried out according to the developed algorithms in order to be able to compare with the efficiency of other projects.

Heuristic methods of information processing in RUR are based on intuition, generalizations, ideas, experience, associations. This is due to the fact that in economics, management and other social sciences, information is not always logical, definite and does not always adequately reflect real processes and not all parameters can be measured quantitatively. Something is evaluated qualitatively, by using the accepted norms of business turnover. You can process and evaluate such information through conversation, discussion, asking leading questions, activating thinking at the level of consciousness and subconsciousness. Thus, it is possible to obtain new significant information from the client, partner and other carrier of the necessary information for making a quality decision.

Determining the number of criteria for evaluating SD options (alternatives) is a rather difficult task. The criteria can be such parameters as the level of comfort in the workplace, the percentage of labor productivity increase, the level of profitability of products, etc. Simple SDs are usually compared according to one criterion. (single-criteria solutions ) , and complex or responsible - for several ( multicriteria ).

The direction of the impact of SD most often goes to the objects of the internal environment, i.e. for the company's staff (internal solutions). Managers have the appropriate authority to make decisions within the mission of the company. However, any company is a system open to the external environment. Therefore, a manager who has the authority to represent the company in the external environment - working with clients and partners - must be able to develop and implement SD among people equal to himself ( external solutions). This requires new approaches and technologies.

The depth of SD impact is determined by the number of management levels for which this decision is mandatory. So, a manager can implement SD only at the level of a workshop or department - this single-level depth of impact. If, apart from workshops and departments, SD is mandatory for deputy heads, then this multilevel impact.

Almost any solution has limitations on resources and parameters (solutions with restrictions ). These limitations are both objective and subjective. Objective ones include restrictions determined by the laws of the theory of organization and management, the legislation of the Russian Federation, and the budget. Subjective restrictions include parameters that depend on the specifics of resources, the product being produced, the supply-demand ratio, etc. These limitations are in themselves criteria for the reality of the proposed solution. There is a group of decisions that are made in conditions of abundance of resources, in which they no restrictions .

The way of fixing SD can be written and oral. According to the regulations of many firms, managers must writing provide the most responsible SD for economic and legal expertise and further for execution. Oral URs also have legal force, they can be challenged in court if there are at least two people who have heard this decision voiced by the leader. Virtual the method of fixing SD is associated with the gradual introduction of e-mail, electronic signature and printing. An electronic signature and seal free the company's management from the costly transportation of original documents over long distances. According to the legislation of the Russian Federation, documents in in electronic format have legal status.

Management decisions can be classified:
1. by functional content:
- planning solutions
- organizational,
- controllers,
- predictive.
2. by the nature of the tasks to be solved:
- economic,
- organizational,
- technological,
- technical,
- environmental.
3. by levels of system hierarchy:
- at the system level,
- at the level of subsystems,
- at the level of individual elements of the system.
4. Depending on the organization of solution development:
- individual,
- collective.
5. by the nature of the goals:
- current (operational),
- tactical,
- strategic.
6. Depending on the approaches to making managerial decisions:
- intuitive (decisions are based on the leader's inner conviction of the viability of the decision being made),
- decisions based on judgments (when highest value have previous experience and similar situations that have developed before),
- rational decisions (usually associated with complex situations within the enterprise, when careful analysis is required, tactical and strategic decisions are being developed),
- expert (associated with the widespread use expert assessments, development of scenarios, situational models).
Since decisions are made by people, their character largely bears the imprint of the personality of the manager involved in their appearance.

In this regard, it is customary to distinguish between the following types of solutions:
1. Balanced decisions are made by managers who are attentive and critical of their actions, put forward hypotheses and their testing. Usually, before starting to make a decision, they have formulated the initial idea.
2. Impulsive decisions, the authors of which easily generate a wide variety of ideas in unlimited quantities, but are not able to properly verify, clarify, and evaluate them. Decisions therefore turn out to be insufficiently substantiated and reliable;
3. Inert solutions are the result of a careful search. In them, on the contrary, control and clarifying actions prevail over the generation of ideas, so it is difficult to detect originality, brilliance, and innovation in such decisions.
4. Risky decisions differ from impulsive ones in that their authors do not need to carefully substantiate their hypotheses and, if they are confident in themselves, may not be afraid of any dangers.
5. Cautious decisions are characterized by the thoroughness of the manager's assessment of all options, a supercritical approach to business. They are even less than inert ones, they are distinguished by novelty and originality.
Classification of management decisions according to the following criteria:
1. Source of occurrence:
- proactive (creative contribution of the leader)
- as prescribed (functional duties)
2. Way of bringing decisions:
- oral
- written
- virtual
3. Subject of decision making:
- individual
- group
4. According to the repeatability of performance:
- routine (traditional)
- innovative (creative)
5. By the time of action:
- strategic
- tactical
- operational
6. According to the predicted results:
- with a definite result
- with a probabilistic or uncertain outcome
7. By the nature of development and implementation:
- balanced
- impulsive
- inert
- risky
- careful decisions
8. According to the methods of information processing:
- algorithmic (mathematical and statistical methods)
- heuristic (logic, intuition)
9. Content decisions:
- economic
- technical
- social
- organizational
10. By type of problem:
- well structured
- poorly structured
- unstructured.

Personal Decision Making Profile- the dominant personality traits of the leader in the development and adoption of managerial decisions. The personal profile of the leader can be diverse: heuristic-organizational, characterized as "cold calculation", characterized by insufficient depth and flexibility, unstable-active (passive), motivational-passive and called "imitation violent activity,

The heuristic-organizational personal profile of decision-making is characterized by an analysis of the situation in the shortest possible time, quick decision-making, persistent implementation of it, reveals the patterns underlying the intellectual task, in the event of intellectual difficulties, it allows you to flexibly rebuild tactics, continue to search for new solutions, which requires developed volitional qualities, emotional stability and mental flexibility. True, such a profile is quite rare, more often it is combined with insufficiently developed organizational skills. Although such a personal decision-making profile is characterized by an instant understanding of the principle of solving an intellectual problem in a situation of managing people, the development and delivery of a reasonable system of interrelated orders, it suffers from the inability to sufficiently clearly control the actions of subordinates, to complete the execution of the decision, which can weaken the effectiveness of deep and the flexible mind of the leader.

When they talk about "cold calculation", a leader with such a profile does not seek to understand the functional significance (principle) of the decision, but goes to his decision in a strictly logical way, consistently, step by step approaching the goal. This profile reveals insufficiently developed heuristic qualities of the manager's mind, which are compensated by firm management. The personal profile of decision-making, characterized by insufficient depth and flexibility of the leader's mind, but well-developed volitional qualities, is more productive if the situation does not require solving intellectual problems of increased difficulty. In this case, the manager needs assistants capable of generating managerial ideas.

The least productive personality profile of a leader is unstable-active, with elements of passivity. It is characterized by the fact that the leader first shows intellectual-volitional activity, but, having encountered difficulty, becomes passive, loses interest in tasks. Such a leader is recommended to form in himself the volitional qualities necessary to overcome the intellectual difficulties of the management process. The motivational-passive personal profile of the leader is also adjacent to this profile of decision-making. A manager with such qualities does not internally accept a managerial task, does not develop decisions designed to become a program for the activities of subordinates. At the same time, usually the senior boss often has to make decisions for the manager subordinate to him.

In fact, the personal profile of the leader, which is designated as “imitation of violent activity,” is harmful to the joint activities of the group and the adoption of managerial decisions. A leader of this type is endowed with increased, but formal activity and little correlated with the content of the problem situation. Often there is a personal profile of decision making, referred to as "general leadership". Such a leader undoubtedly has a strong stimulating effect on his subordinates with his erudition, broad outlook, general managerial knowledge, although he is poorly oriented in solving specific professional problems.

The personal profile of decision-making is organically linked to the nature of the decisions themselves. In management psychology, it is customary to classify management decisions based on various classification features. It seems interesting classification, in which decisions are subdivided (EP Golubkov): by content - political, social, economic, organizational, technical, etc.; by duration and degree of impact on future decisions - operational, tactical, strategic; by type of decision maker - individual and collective (organizational); according to the degree of uniqueness - routine, non-creative and unique (non-standard), creative; according to the degree of uncertainty (completeness of information) - decisions under conditions of certainty, under conditions of risk (probabilistic certainty) and under conditions of uncertainty.

The collective or group form of decision-making is distinguished by a special psychological richness and sharpness. The psychology of making a group decision depends on the effectiveness of the preliminary group discussion that precedes the process of making a managerial decision. Conducted in the first half of the 20th century, the psychological experiments of K. Levin on the problem of making group decisions demonstrated a number of specific patterns in the manifestation of group psychology in the processes of making managerial decisions.

No less significant is the classification of decision-making models proposed by A.V. Shegdoy: by the importance of the problem for the organization; on the time aspect of the decision; according to a preliminary assessment of the effectiveness of the solution; on decision-making conditions and environmental factors; by the nature of decision-making: individual and collective (organizational); according to the specifics of the model of the problem situation: exact or approximate; by the level of formalization of the decision-making process; by the multiplicity of decision-making: a single or multiple procedure; by the type of decisions made: programmed and non-programmed.

Decision making is a central process at all levels of information processing by a person, groups of people, “man-machine” systems. Psychological aspects management problems are usually associated mainly with the analysis of the role and place of decision-making processes in the system of purposeful conscious human activity. Promising direction psychological study of decision-making is the study of mental reflection and mental regulation of activity, namely: sensory-perceptual, speech-cogitative and motor.

It should be remembered that there are two main stages in the decision-making process: informational and procedural. In some cases (V.V. Druzhinin), types of decision-making situations are distinguished: informational, operational, organizational.

Information decisions should answer the question of what is true, and consist in diagnosing the situation.

Operational decisions should answer the question of how to act, and consist in developing a method of management.

Organizational decisions should answer the question of the structure of the organization and the distribution of functions.

In other theoretical constructions, they prefer (T. Tomashevsky) to distinguish four types of decision-making situations:

1. The situation of choice, when a person must make a choice (selection) of signals, classify them into those that require a reaction, and those that do not require it.

2. A complex situation that involves obtaining information from more than one source of information.

3. Situation of preference. “When different possible reactions have different meaning for a person, when for some reason he chooses one of the two.”

4. Probabilistic situations when an employee performs certain operations with insufficient information at his disposal.

The approaches identified in the pre-perestroika period have not lost their relevance. For example, Yu. Kozeletsky singled out the following types of decision-making situations: closed situations (situations are set by a set of hypotheses about the state of the object); open situations (situations that are characterized by uncertainty).

The beginning of decision-making is connected to a greater extent with the motivational side of managerial activity and includes at least: recognition of the problem; formulation of its essence; definition of criteria for a successful solution and achievement positive result. In all likelihood, it makes sense to separate the stages of preparing a management decision and the procedure for making it. In the most general form, the stages of preparing a managerial decision can be described as follows: a) search, selection, classification and generalization of information about the problem situation; b) construction of conceptual models for its solution.

The decision-making procedure is described by somewhat different operations: a) preliminary nomination of a system of reference decisions; b) comparison of conceptual models with a number of other standards; c) correction of models and their coordination with the achieved intermediate results; d) choosing a solution and developing a program of action. Conventionally, this decision-making option can be called an “internal” procedural form. It seems possible to single out an “external” procedural form of decision-making (for example, the decision-making procedure in the State Duma on the Law on Education: making a proposal, approving the agenda, discussing a problem, etc.).

At the same time, each new decision in management arises on the basis of a decision previously accepted for execution, the actions on which have been completed, deviated from the originally chosen option, or have come into conflict with the goals set. In the last versions of situations, the leader begins to re-evaluate and select alternatives. When choosing an alternative, the following is used: the past experience of the manager or employees; organization and conduct of the experiment; analysis and discussion of solutions. Such an algorithm for solving problems and decision-making procedures develops managerial skills and intuition in managers.

The organization of the implementation of the decision involves the coordination of the efforts of many people. It is important to avoid conflicts, motivate people to implement the solution, select and place people in such a way as to maximize the use of their abilities. To do this, firstly, it is necessary to draw up an action plan that turns the decision into reality. Secondly, it is necessary to distribute the rights and responsibilities among the participants in the implementation of the decision. Thirdly, effective forward and backward communication should be built. The basis of such communication should be an information system for detecting errors and achieving success in actions to implement decisions. Fourth, to pay constant attention to the regulation of formal and informal leadership-subordination relations.

After clarifying the task, assessing the situation and choosing a goal, the leader makes a decision. Management decision - a plan, a program for streamlining the actions of subordinates, aimed at achieving the goal.

In the domestic literature, there are various classifications management decisions. Within the framework of the problem under discussion, attention is drawn to the classification of personality profiles of decisions (Yu.N. Kulyutkin), based on the criteria-based assessment of managers. According to this criterion assessment, the following types of personal decision profiles are distinguished:

Balanced Decisions- solutions inherent in people who start a problem with an already formulated initial idea.

impulsive decisions- decisions typical for managers, in which the process of building hypotheses prevails over actions to verify and refine them.

Inert solutions Decisions that characterize leaders as uncertain and cautious.

risky decisions- decisions that are characterized by uncertainty and features of individual decision-making tactics.

Cautious Decisions- decisions typical of managers who carefully evaluate hypotheses and are very critical in their evaluation end result.

It should be noted that the more complex and responsible the decision-making situation is, the brighter the effect of the personality profile (V.I. Bakeev). In relatively simple situations, decision-making is carried out, as it were, according to a single algorithm, so that the random decision profile is leveled. When making decisions in particularly difficult situations that require heightened intuition, a high level of intelligence, determination, outstanding abilities, the role of personal qualities and, accordingly, the personal profile of decisions is quite obvious. It was revealed that in extreme conditions the role of the individual manifests itself most significantly.

The personal profile of a managerial decision is closely related to the emotional side of the manager's activity (O.K. Tikhomirov). In the process of forming a managerial decision, the manager initially has a positive emotional aspect of solving an urgent problem, which contributes to the emergence of confidence, the formation of beliefs in the correctness of the previously put forward assumptions. Therefore, emotion can be considered as a heuristic function that determines the further development of the search for the correct solution.

The personal profile of a managerial decision is closely related to the typology of psychological predisposition to making certain managerial decisions. Typology is a set of psychological characteristics of a leader that characterizes one or another type of managerial decision-making. The most common typology is the following: rational, pragmatic, hesitant, collegial and innovative.

The rational type is distinguished by the predominance of detailed decisions, their coordination and elaboration at all stages of decision-making, up to the choice of a course of action based on the deep intellectual involvement of the members of the management team. The specificity of the pragmatic type lies in the predominance of volitional efforts based on common sense and intuition. Here often the decision is made by discarding details.

The least attractive is the oscillating type. In the process of development, decision-making is delayed or canceled immediately after their adoption, depending on the experience of self-doubt by the leader. The collegiate type is characterized management decisions based on taking into account the opinions of employees. This takes into account those consequences that may positively or negatively affect their interests. And finally innovative type generates new solutions or bases them on the belief in new ideas, which is usually associated with difficulties in predicting the assessment of their consequences.