Many russian companies in the current conditions facing the serious problem - the lack of an effective management system. The old Soviet enterprises under central planning did not need to develop responses to changing business environment and, accordingly, to create open systems management, new business as companies often have no traditions of organized management. As a result, under the pressure of internal and external changes, companies lose control and bear the financial loss.
On the one hand, controllability means that degree of control that a control subsystem performs in relation to controlled. On the other hand, degree of autonomy, the control subsystem keeps in relation to the management. Thus, the concept of «controllability» shows one of the major contradictions of social organization. In one case it may be the submission of controllability as a total control when the manager is convinced that the control is defined by its degree of control over all processes in the organization. In another case manager may assume that controllability is the degree of achievement of this goal and if it is necessary to provide greater autonomy to subordinates and rely on their initiative, it is not considered a reduction in controllability.
Generally, allocated few-controlled and well-controlled organizations. Few controlled organization characteristic of separate existence of administrative staff and the rest of organization. Administrative staff live their life, it is self-sufficient and often very active. But all its activity has on the organization of the minimal performance impact and reduces to intrigue, struggle for positions. At the same time minimal impact indirectly the presence of the levers of power. So for example when deciding on the direction of financial resources for specific projects, the rest of the organization may oppose this decision and forced to adapt to the decisions taken. That is an organization alive and functioning on the basis of the established order, referred to as intra-organization mechanism, which is a search mechanism of a compromise resolution of multidirectional individual and group self-interest of organization members. The case itself (business, production process) is only supported because everyone is aware that it affects their survival.
In turn normal degree of controllability of the organization is characterized: the presence in it of the internal situation, when any management decisions inherent in the relevant (adequate maintenance problems), the reaction of the organization, which runs from sufficient for the effective implementation of solutions speed. In such organizations, administrative staff and all the rest of the organization is a whole. Cannot assert that they are monolithic they may be inherent contradictions, larger or smaller but the unity of purpose and action remains. Accepted staff solutions are controlled. The organization responds to them in the expected form and with the necessary speed. If it does not happen then the solutions are adjusted or changed. The attention of administrative staff and subordinates are focused on business and production process. To realize their selfish interests except through the implementation of the organization´s interests is not possible: the organization eventually rejects the one who is not considered a common interest. Ineffective management and incompetence in an organization become apparent almost immediately.
However the development of socio-economic systems can be a state where the factors of internal and external environment are in a negative direction, leading to failure or malfunction of life-support subsystems, thus comes the stage of general disorder of the system, a systemic crisis. The return «rebellious» socio-economic system in former administering condition requires the determination of the causes of loss of control, reconstruction activities, the normal functioning of life support subsystems, eliminating the harmful effects of factors internal and external environment.
Controllability as the degree of response to management decisions depends primarily on the personality of the manager conducting the managerial impact, rather from a management style characteristic of peculiar to a particular manager. In the context of this article under the management style should be understood form of subordinate perceptions of managerial decisions emanating from the manager. Management style can be characterized as hard or soft. In terms of controllability of the organization preferable to act tough management style. Since in this case the subordinates under the influence of possible discontent manager there is a natural desire to respond to the impact assessment in accordance with retractable manager requirements. Soft style allows subordinates to interpret ambiguous effect because they are aware of impunity own response in the free form. Management style stands testament to manager´s strength or weakness in providing practical impact on subordinates.
Personal qualities of the manager, acting on the degree of controllability is not limited to management style. Another requirement of a manager, describes his ability to make effective decisions and to organize the implementation of decisions. This requirement involves the ability of manager to formulate out-organizational and intra-organizational goals. But the goal can be formulated effectively when the manager is well aware object of management, the organization, and is able to simulate the future functioning. In this case it faced with the need for strategic thinking and a clear vision of an integrated scheme of administrative activity.
Qualitative characteristics that determine the effectiveness of the management process is largely dependent on the personality of the manager, because qualitative management means achieving and maintaining an organization of business success, to success as an organization lead at the head of manager. Manager ensures the effectiveness of the impact on his organization through way, forms and methods for ensuring business success, which form the individual control model.
In the field of professional management the notion of success in business organizations and business success are inseparable manager. If competent, clever and perfectly qualified manager never placed oneself at the head of an organization or he never lead his organization to the level of business success (or keep on this level), so there are no reasons assert that such a specialist reached business success. There are sufficiently a lot of examples where a thriving company with leadership changes lost won first position, and vice versa - seemingly dying company with leadership changes were revived and achieved success. So business success of an organization is largely determined by effectiveness of individual management model who heads the organization, whose implementation is carried out through methods, forms and methods for ensuring business success.
The work was submitted to the International Scientific Conference «Fundamental research», Croatia, 25 July ‒ 1 August, 2011, came to the editorial office 15.06.2011.