Servicios personalizados
Inglés (pdf)
Articulo en XML
Referencias del artículo
Enviar articulo por email
Citado por SciELO 
Similares en
SciELO 
Permalink
Introduction
Today, the activities of various parties, public organizations are personified in specific personalities - leaders. As a social phenomenon, leadership is intrinsic to the nature of every person. Already at the first stages of human development, his existence was inconceivable without the formation and interaction of various models of group behavior.
The specifics of political leadership are determined by national, geopolitical, religious, historical and other factors. These differences, as well as features of the constitutional legal status determine the specifics of political leadership, which is of scientific and practical interest (Leichenko, 2010).
Leadership is considered in political science as one of the mechanisms for regulating the relations of people, social groups, institutions, society as a whole. Its essence is the relationship of domination and submission, influence and succession (Haywood, Divers & Belsky, 2013).
The phenomenon of political leadership includes a complex set of interactions with society, the most important component of which is recognition by the latter of managerial decisions, legitimization of power. Despite the undoubted significance of this phenomenon, especially in Russia, where political leaders determined the development paths and the state of Russian society throughout the country's history, it has not received a significant research base to this day. Even less developed is the problem of interaction, ties and relations between political actors and society, the roots of which also go back to the centuries-old gap between power and society. At the same time, modern societies are a complex structure of social communications, and the participation of political leaders in them determines not only the degree of their professionalism, but also the level of their social responsibility.
In the modern political process, the role of political leaders is growing. In this regard, the study of the activity-related nature of political leadership, associated with mechanisms for the implementation by specific authorities of the most important managerial functions, is of great importance. The functioning of various social structures and society as a whole depends on the effectiveness of the managerial actions of political leaders.
Methodology
To understand political leadership, it is needed to find out its nature. The largest number of diverse studies in this area was carried out by foreign political scientists. The general line of research on political leadership originated from the analysis of personality traits of the leader, the relationship of the leader and his followers and developed in the further development of the classification of various leadership styles. The “Trait Theory” naturally grows out of an analysis of ideal leaders - heroes. An important role in its creation was played by an English scientist of the 19th century. F. Galton, a psychologist and anthropologist who tried to transfer biological laws to human society. The essence of the theory comes down to attempts to identify a set of desirable or mandatory psychological traits of a leader’s personality. A lot of factual material was collected. However, it turned out that a purely empirical generalization of the personality traits of leaders does not produce the expected effect: the more detailed and more detailed the lists of traits became, the more precisely they coincided with the complete set of psychological and social personality traits in general. The studies themselves revealed contradictions. The American political scientist R. Stogdill, summarizing the results of 124 leadership studies, was confronted with a wide range of opinions: there was not a single trait of a leader that all authors would agree with. Even the traits necessary for the leader, such as mind, willpower, integrity, were disputed. Some authors wrote that strong-willed and principled people who are able to withstand mass sentiments turn into social outcasts, and those who follow the group expectations become inferior to the majority’s desire (Khanin, 2011).
American political scientist J. Jennings noted: “There is no doubt that if the situation is ripe for Napoleon, then Napoleon is ripe for the situation. A great leader “feels” a situation ... when he can use it ... turn it into his asset”. (Ashin, 1978)
Domestic studies of the leadership phenomenon and the organizational structure of the group confirm that the type of management of joint activities, the distribution of roles in the group, the definition of the functions of each representative of the collective subject, the nature of coordination and other processes undoubtedly have influence on the actualization and blocking of motives for participation in joint activities (Umansky, 2001; Chernyshev, 2012).
A single spatio-temporal stay and functioning of participants in joint activities contribute to the organization of communication and the formation of all the above features. An adequate level of spatio-temporal conditions for the implementation of joint activities allows for the updating of existing motives for participating in it. Spatio-temporal characteristics of the implementation of joint activities that do not meet the needs of the individual or are in a zone of high saturation can help block the motives for the participation of the individual in joint activities.
Thus, the study of the factors of actualization and blocking of the motives of the person’s participation in joint activities involves taking into account the individual’s subjective assessment of the structural characteristics of the activity (the significance of the own goal of the activity, planned actions, expected results) and the dynamic characteristics of the implementation of joint activities, manifested in the characteristics of the collective subject.
The modern psychology of a small group is a direction of research, including the socio-psychological problems of small groups, interpersonal relationships, organization, leadership, cohesion, compatibility, responsiveness, effectiveness and social perception.
The main indicators of organization at the behavioral level are: psychological attitude to activity, sensorimotor coordination of reactions, unity of opinion about organizers, community of interpersonal relationships. At the theoretical level, organization is seen as a structure of the basic organizational properties of the team: orientation, self-management, leadership, unity of action, stress-resistant and intergroup unity.
Chernyshev & Sarychev (2009), note that these properties form a hierarchical structure and mediate the relationships and interactions of group members. The quantitative aspect of organization is described by the degree of organization. The criteria for the degree of organization are compatibility, updating and concentration of the functions of the organization. Among the criteria for the organization of the group, various researchers distinguish: the degree of coordination of the actions of the participants, the ability of the group to independently plan the stages of the goal and distribute the upcoming work among its members; the degree of discipline of group members in the performance of assigned functions; the ability of the group to effectively control and correct individual actions and suppress disorganization manifestations; the group’s ability to summarize the work performed by its members in a relatively short time, to ensure the final feasibility of interaction, and others.
Thus, leadership should be understood in several ways.
First of all, leadership is influence, authority, power influence and control over others. At the same time, three main features of this influence are taken into account - its constancy, distribution to the entire group (organization, society), priority (directivity of influence from the leader to the group members).
Leadership should be understood as a set of goal-oriented and value-mobilization opportunities of a leader as a subject of power, directing the political behavior of the participants in the interaction, subject to his will and authority. Such an interpretation of leadership follows from a structurally functional approach, which involves the consideration of society as a complex, hierarchically organized system of social positions and roles. At the same time, leadership is a special position in society, which is characterized by the ability of the occupying entity to direct and organize the collective behavior of its members (Ratmanova, 2009a).
Speaking about the political leader, it should be noted that this is a symbol of community and a model of the group’s political behavior, capable of realizing its interests with the help of the authorities. According to R. Tucker, political leadership is derived from political culture (Ratmanova, 2009a), in this regard, the study of political leadership must be carried out through the prism of the basic characteristics of political culture.
From these provisions it follows that political leadership is defined as an organization that assumes a technocratically rationalistic impact on subordinates, based on a stable system of knowledge, as well as technologically accurate adherence to rules and agreed procedures, recording results, and regulatory control. The organizational component in the structure of political leadership has revealed the need to highlight a special theoretical construct - “organizational leadership”, presented in the system of modern political management.
From the perspective of rational choice theory (Ratmanova, 2009b), political leadership will mean entrepreneurship in the political market, in which “political entrepreneurs” compete in exchanging their software solutions to public tasks for leadership positions.
In general, it should be noted that political leadership is the subject's ability to exert influence on the political activities of individuals and social associations due to the system of socio-political and psychological relations (Ratmanova, 2009b). In addition, political leadership is a socially significant specialized activity carried out in politics by priority actors in accordance with their status-role positions and authority. In this context, political leadership means managerial status, a social position related to the adoption of power decisions.
Political leadership is realized in the activities of specific ruling personalities (entities) located in the structure of state power. It is important to take into account the peculiarities of the style of their managerial activity that is formed and implemented by the leader, which is associated with the practical interaction of the leader with a specific collective power subject - the “management team”.
Leadership style as a stably reproducible distinctive model of a leader performing his functions captures the uniqueness of his behavior, the nature of interaction with his immediate environment and followers, value orientations, decision-making features and a number of other factors.
“Management style”, which is understood as the usual system of methods and reactions to situations that are characteristic of a specific subject (leader) of management; steadily manifested features of the interaction of the subject and the control object, formed under the influence of various conditions of the managerial process, the individual psychological characteristics of the leader’s personality, control groups.
It is noted that in the process of performing his managerial functions, the political leader implements a certain style of managerial activity, seeks to achieve the most effective result in making and implementing the most important decisions. The classical theory of K. Levin distinguishes three main styles - authoritarian, liberal, democratic. Each of them has its own characteristics, advantages and disadvantages and is in demand in specific conditions and situations. In this regard, the author concludes in the dissertation that there is a need to expand ideas about the style of managerial activity of a political leader at the present stage (Ratmanova, 2007).
Results
The author’s understanding of the style of managerial activity is associated with the interpretation of the phenomenon of modern political leadership through a system of relations and interactions “political leader - management team”. In this system, the leadership component is dominant, and the team component that influences the style characteristics of the leader’s behavior and activity brings significant importance to the process of developing and making decisions.
It should be borne in mind that the style of managerial activity of a leader depends on a combination of specific circumstances - the personality characteristics of the leader, the qualifications of his team, the nature of the tasks to be solved, and also on the external conditions within which the decision is made.
The management style is associated with such an important point as the socio-psychological and professional qualities of a particular political leader, which, in fact, reflects the subjective side of the managerial process. In this aspect, the ability of a political leader of a managerial type to show organizational abilities leading to the formation and improvement of interactions with representatives of their professional (managerial) environment in the person of representatives of the “team” should be emphasized. The process of practical implementation by the leader of his organizational knowledge and skills is focused on: the formation of a professional management team; planning their own activities and the activities of all team representatives; rational use of available resources necessary for the implementation of management activities; monitoring the implementation of management decisions.
Of particular research interest is the team leader selection strategy based on the criteria for the development of team results. In accordance with the degree of effectiveness of team efforts and the achievement of the result of collective activity, the following are distinguished: the stage of team formation (working group), the stage of “drilling” (pseudo-team), the normalization stage (potential team), the functioning phase (real team), the improvement stage (highly effective team).
In a broad sense, a political management team is a group of people who exercise real leadership and control in the organizational structure and have an impact on external socio-political structures and on the political system as a whole, both at the regional and federal levels. The political management team in the narrow sense refers to a group of like-minded people realizing their specific task, which may or may not coincide with the general goals of the political organization within which it operates (Almond, et al., 2003).
Team management in the field of politics is carried out through the creation and functioning of management teams as one of the forms of collective management, based on the process of delegation by the leader of individual powers to team representatives.
For teamwork, behavior that is focused on fulfilling the task facing the whole team and on personal relationships within the team is fundamentally important.
In the structural and functional definition of a team in the field of political management, special attention should be paid to building a two-dimensional system of connections within the team itself: horizontal (coordination and coordination) and vertical (internal leadership and subordination).
In general, the system of interaction “political leader - management team” is a formalized structural and functional system with status and role differentiation, with a certain resource base, the level of organizational and managerial culture and the space of its direct influence.
An important condition for the functioning and development of the team is to maintain the established norms and rules of team activity, as well as ensuring internal communication in the "leader - team" system.
In this case, the political leader is the bearer of a system of organizational and managerial culture, and political leadership is characterized as organizational leadership. Organizational and managerial culture is a harmonious combination of two main components. Firstly, it is a complex normative-value system that has been objectively formed independently of the leader who has taken up managerial positions, and secondly, it is a dynamic system of qualities acquired by the leader in the process of training and practical activities for the implementation of the most important strategic tasks.
The organizational side of the managerial culture is manifested in: the implementation of the direct leadership role of the leader in relations with the management team, also focused on maintaining the foundations of the managerial culture; the development of the institutional foundations of the leadership phenomenon.
In our opinion, it should be noted that the organizational and managerial culture has a complex internal structure, represented by four main levels, each of which affects the substantive side of the development and functioning of political leadership.
The social level reflects a developed worldview, a sense of social self-identification, humanity, stable moral and moral foundations of a political leader. The professional level is focused on the ability of a political leader to take managerial functions in organizing, planning, coordinating, delegating authority, assessing the situation and implementing goals. The interpersonal level forms the political leader’s readiness for a certain style of interaction, communication and training in the process of professional activity, including the possibility of a collective mechanism for fulfilling functional duties. The personal level emphasizes self-control, self-control, self-education, determined by the makings and abilities, motives, interests, expressed in the qualities of a leader’s personality.
Determining the essential features of a political management team as a complex structural and functional formation, its general system properties and specific organizational properties should be indicated.
Considering the vast complex of systemic properties, we will highlight some of them that characterize a team’s peculiarity: integrity, complexity, expediency of existence, openness and communicativeness, historicity, complexity, stability, limitedness, reproduction, invariance, integrability, constructiveness, compositionality, structuredness, dynamism and static (political and management team is characterized by the dynamism of its activities in relation to the external environment and internal static stable ness in relation to the conditions of development of the organization).
The political and management team has its own special organizational properties. Among them are: selectivity; emergence; conjugation; activation of internal relationships; resource provision; strategic orientation; general organizational communication network; organizational and managerial culture; adaptability; multi-level nature of responsibility and separation of powers; the formal nature of the joint venture; the presence of leadership in the organizational system that performs managerial functions (Kogan, 1993).
Conclusions
Management culture is a phenomenon that deserves independent study, the form of existence of an organization and the manifestation of its behavior in the internal environment and in relation to the subjects of the external environment. Management culture is the subject of study of social psychology, management psychology, organizational behavior, industrial psychology and many other scientific disciplines.
Management culture and leadership in the organization are closely connected with each other. Organization is a kind of creation of its founder, leader, therefore, as in any work, it reflects the characteristics of the author’s personal culture, his views and errors. Saying: managerial culture, we mean the culture of a leader.
Thus, the nature of political leadership plays a decisive role in the political, including constitutional and political, processes of the present, shaping their features and orientation.
Political leadership has certain signs: 1) the presence of its own political program, the ability to implement it; 2) popularity, authority, responsibility - only one who is able to take responsibility, and can act as a leader; 3) constantly with all its practice to prove the right to leadership and justify a credit of trust. Political leaders, expressing the interests of certain classes and parties, have a significant impact on the course of events.
