From the author: The article was published in the magazine “Director”, No. 9/2008. It has long been known that the quality of management in an organization depends not only on the power of the charisma of the top-level manager, not only on literacy systems of motivation and efficiency of personnel service (if any), but also on the quality of work of middle management (heads of departments, heads of departments, senior and leading specialists and mentors). That is why they talk about the development of middle management, about creating a team of middle managers, etc. But before creating and developing a team, you often have to solve a fundamental question - to raise department heads from “our own”, or to hire them into the organization from outside? Each of the options (“yours” or “someone else’s”) has its own advantages that you can rely on, as well as risks that are important to foresee. If an “insider” who works in your organization and has grown from an ordinary person becomes the head of a department or the head of a department specialist, he is already aware of the specifics of the department’s work, and he himself has experienced in practice all the difficulties that arise for his future subordinates, so he knows about them first-hand. He has the same conceptual apparatus as the department employees, that is, he speaks the same language with them. In addition, you can be sure of his loyalty in advance (and, having finally received the desired career growth, such an employee will definitely try not to “fall in the face” in front of management). However, looking from the other side, we will quickly discover that the person , who came from “their own”, is already burdened by existing relationships in the team, and therefore may not have the authority that is important for a leader among people who have been equal with him for a long time. He is much more susceptible to manipulation by his future subordinates (“you drank tea with us/baptized children for so many years, and now you are against us?!”), which often prevents him from controlling them (and, consequently, from punishing them for mistakes ) and generally ensure the manageability of the department. And also, one of the biggest risks is that the “former” specialist often thinks in terms of a performer, not a boss, and it is very difficult for him to adapt. Thus, “insiders” are often already too drawn into their “swamp” to get out of it easily and without outside help. The concept of “one’s own” will be weaker in advance both in a team where there are no clear leaders, and in terms of professional level everyone is approximately the same, and in a team with a large number of fiercely competing leaders. In addition, “one of our own” may not be able to manage a department in which very close, friendly relations have been established between everyone. If you appoint as the head of a department a person who came from outside and was hired specifically for this position, then you will have managerial experience, which means well-developed skills of control, motivation, stimulation, etc. This is also an outside view, which in the first few months (while the person has not yet completely become a part of your system) often gives a big leap in performance due to seeing repeated errors that are not visible from the inside with a “blurred look”, and a clear understanding of how to correct them . And an outsider often has his own ideas, ideas, and techniques, which your organization receives as a bonus. At the same time, an outsider is certainly distanced from the team. Until they begin to trust him, it will take time (and often a lot), and due to the reluctance of employees to share important information or help the “newcomer,” large losses are possible even in the first days and weeks of his work in the position. He has his own language, one way or another different from the language of your organization (even if he worked in the same field), due to which he may not be understood, and synchronization of concepts, again, takes time. It’s also difficult to be completely sure of his motivation. After all, for some reason he left his previous place of work, which means he mayleave you too. And, without being in an established relationship with him for the first time, you can see much less fluctuations in his emotional background, and therefore prevent a drop in motivation. And, of course, there is also a risk of resentment on the part of those “insiders” who laid claim to given position, and it can result in a “revolt on the ship” and reluctance to accept a new manager. And if in general, the “stranger” risks, first of all, remaining “cut off” from the team by an “armchair manager” who does not understand the needs and characteristics of his people, and therefore does not hit the target with its management influences. The concept of an “alien” will fail where there is already a respected leader (albeit informal), whom the majority would like to see as a leader. And also where the focus is primarily on the professionalism and ability of the manager to do with his own hands everything that his employees do, or the area of ​​work of the department is so specific that it will take too long for an outside person to study it. In fast-growing organizations, the levels of hierarchy of which are multiplying before our eyes, the “outsiders” option may not work simply because you do not have enough time and resources to attract so many professionals from outside, and it will be easier to create an internal “personnel reserve”. So, the first step has been taken. You have identified a priority direction of action. Then you need to think about how to choose this or that manager. Indeed, in the process of selecting it or preparatory actions, you at the same time have the opportunity to make sure that the choice you made is correct. Or change your mind. If you are more inclined to the “our own” option, here are the most important points that require analysis: 1. The readiness of the future managers you have chosen for management (the presence of leadership qualities, the ability to take responsibility, plan and control, the willingness to overcome difficulties, etc.). As well as internal readiness, expressed in the positive attitude of these people (or a person) and understanding of their role. After all, it is easy to fill the lack of management knowledge. It’s possible to practice management skills. But it is almost impossible to develop managerial potential, expressed in internal qualities, in an adult mature person. And also, do not confuse ambitions (“I want to be the director of all directors”), which often arise out of nowhere or stereotypes instilled by others (“you are already 38 , and you are still an ordinary employee"), with a willingness to be a manager.2. People's attitude towards the selected employee. If you know (or, at least, suspect) that he is not liked in the team, remember that it will be much more difficult for him to become a leader. And on the contrary, if he is everyone’s favorite, his colleagues may not take him seriously as a manager, and he himself will probably be afraid to manage in a planned and firm manner. It is good if a specialist applying for a leadership position is respected as a good professional and his opinion is listened to as a person.3. Relationships in the team, the presence of rivalry and several people willing to take this position. Predict whether, by promoting one of “your own,” you risk losing several good professionals who are offended by you. If there are several candidates, the following options are possible: - Appointment of a middle-level manager. In this case, your task is to convey to the entire team as fully as possible the criteria by which the choice was made in favor of this particular person (in order to reduce the level of resentment and suspicion of cronyism). One of the additional measures is a personal conversation with each of the other applicants in order to demonstrate to them their importance for the organization and future prospects (career, if any, or professional). - Election of the manager (voting). In this case, the risk of grievances and internal “squabbles” is reduced, since the choice is made by the team itself, but the likelihood increases that the most “favorite” candidate from the point of view of emotional attitude will be chosen, but not the best professional and worthy manager. - Internal competition to fill the position. In thatIn this case, the main thing is to explain to everyone in advance the rules and principles of the competition, give time for preparation, and provide coverage of the course of the competition events (to reduce the feeling of injustice and, again, the emergence of gossip about “cross-talk”). Of course, not all candidates may agree to participate. On the other hand, if for some reason a person gives in to such a small complexity, will he be able to lead?.. In addition, one of the options related to the competition, which makes it possible to encourage all desirable candidates to participate, is their mandatory certification, from which you cannot refuse. With the subsequent appointment of the winner. If your choice is more inclined towards the “outsider”, the emphasis shifts significantly, and the main attention should be focused on the following points: 1. Matching of the candidate with the “backbone” of the team based on demographic characteristics. If the team is large and “varied,” this factor loses its role somewhat; in all other cases it may turn out to be decisive. It will be easier for a young manager to find a common language with a young team, and an older one with an older one, and not vice versa. Putting a man in charge of an exclusively female team or a woman in a male team is very dangerous. As well as putting a person with a secondary education in charge of those who have two higher educations. Therefore, first, decide whether there are suitable candidates on the market?..2. Reviews of the selected specialist from previous places of work. And the main thing here is not the level of his professional and managerial knowledge (including not the number of beautiful certificates), or even the love of the past team, but performance in terms of management. Ask if he achieved his goals and if he could motivate the team to make efforts in the right direction. How did you accept the mistakes of your subordinates and your own, and was it possible to correct them quickly? What was the staff turnover in the department, were there any serious conflicts between subordinates or with his own participation.3. The person’s preferred management style (this will be clear both from the feedback received and from interviews with the candidate himself). The fact is that a person could be as effective as possible in other places of work, but, in principle, resolving all issues only through joint discussion and voting, he simply will not take root in your organization, where people are accustomed to stricter management and responsibility for decision-making lies solely with manager And on the contrary, your team, brought up in democratic traditions, will simply survive an authoritarian leader focused solely on punitive motivation (or the leader will survive the entire team, which will also not contribute to efficiency). To study such points, in addition to interviews, it is advisable to give the future middle manager several practically oriented tasks (for example, present a short project for motivating the department). Let's assume that the important step of choosing has also been completed. What now? It’s too early to relax; your mission as a leader is not yet completed. Now it is important to help a newcomer (at least in this position, even if he is an old-timer in the institution) to start working as effectively as possible in a new position. To help “your one,” you can: Jointly discuss his immediate goals and objectives as the head of the department, as well as indicators by which you can jointly evaluate its effectiveness after a designated period. And under no circumstances should you start by inviting him to write his own job description and offer motivation to himself - remember, most likely, he still thinks like a performer! Increase his competencies as a manager. How this will be done - in the form of attending management seminars or mandatory reading of specialized literature - does not matter. Your task is to help a person take this giant step from an ordinary performer to a manager in terms of knowledge, skills, and most importantly, thinking. It’s very good if you manage to organize several.