Psychology of management

3. Psychological compatibility in management structures 
In the process of solving common professional tasks employees have to contact each 
other in order to coordinate their actions. On the level of such coordination their work efficiency 
depends. This coordination level, in its turn, is a derivative from the employees’ compatibility 
degree. So, what is the essence of the notion of “psychological compatibility”? 
Psychological compatibility
is the group-members’ ability to common activity based on 
their optimal matching. When forming any production group it is necessary to take into account 
not only each person’s individual-and-psychological qualities, but also possible results of 
common activity which are determined by the process of their placing together. The level of 
psychological compatibility is determined by both similarity of some traits of collective 
members and the difference of others. As a result this leads to complementarity at common task-

---

91 
solving so that the particular production group makes a certain entity. As has been noted, no 
group is a simple sum total of individuals comprising it. The integrity principle (F.D. Gorbov, 
M.N. Novikov) supposes viewing a group as a single inseparably connected organism. 
The beginning in studying the problems of psychological compatibility in domestic and 
foreign psychology in the 60ies was connected with experimental researches made on the groups 
that were comparatively isolated from other social organizations (cosmonauts, polar explorers, 
expeditions-members). But the role of groups’ psychological compatibility is important in all 
without exception spheres of common human activity. The presence of high psychological 
compatibility of employees contributes to their harmonious work, and as a result – to high work 
efficiency. N.N. Obozov distinguishes the following evaluation criteria of harmony achievement: 
- the results of mutual activity; 
- emotional-and-energy consumption by activity participants; 
- satisfaction of activity participants. 
There are several levels of psychological compatibility determined by both employees’ 
personality qualities and the content and difficulty level of the professional tasks being solved. 
Let’s consider such three levels. 
1
st
 level
is the psychophysiological compatibility which is manifested in the similarity of 
people’s natural qualities: type of nerve system (temperament), physical endurance, capacity for 
work, emotional endurance, etc. In a number of professional activities these very qualities are 
needed. If, for instance, a brigade of workers fulfils an urgent building order which demands 
dexterity and endurance from every participant, the lagging of one of them decreases the wages 
of all and causes conflict (in this case the one who lags behind has to go). In mass line 
production on a conveyor belt, in sports games, in digesting information from control panels 
there is needed a certain speed and actions’ coordination of people which makes their mutual 
work efficient. 
2
nd
 level
is psychological level which is manifested in the coincidence of qualities which 
are result of training and education. To this level belongs the coincidence of character traits, 
people’s professional interests, intellectual development level, moral qualities, etc. For example, 
work of cosmonauts, executives at various levels, a group of law-enforcement officers, etc. 
demands not so much of physical endurance as a high level of cognitive processes development: 
memory and attention, thinking, professional experience, acceptance of general moral norms, 
etc. 

---

92 
3
rd
level
is socially-psychological level which is manifested in the coincidence of 
personality traits necessary for social interaction on the basis of common world-view: 
communicativeness, adherence to principles, social attitudes, political views, value orientations. 
The referred qualities are necessary for taking decisions on the upper levels of management in 
social management systems, in social-and-political organizations, and to some extent in common 
work-groups where people show interest to social problems and communicating. 
In case of people matching in all the three levels, it is possible to say of their complete 
psychological compatibility. And at their complete incompatibility there appears 
psychological 
barrier
when people don’t wish to communicate, don’t accept each other, don’t wish to 
cooperate in any sphere. Nevertheless, both at complete coincidence and at complete 
incompatibility the barrier arises comparatively seldom. More often, it is possible to observe 
prevailing compatibility on a number of individuals’ psychological qualities when evaluating its 
level from the point of view of a specific activity’s demands. Thus, the deeper employees’ 
incompatibility, the higher the possibility of conflicts arising is, and as a result – work-groups’ 
breakup. 
Experiments conducted in order to study psychological compatibility testify to the 
necessity of distinguishing four types of employees’ communicative behavior in the groups 
which solve common tasks: 
1) individuals aspiring for leadership, and capable of problem-solving by only subduing 
other group-members; 
2) individualists trying to solve the task alone; 
3) individuals adjusting to the group (conformists) who easily submit to other group-
members’ orders; 
4) collectivists trying to solve tasks by common efforts, that is why they not only accept 
other group-members’ proposals, but also show initiative themselves. 
Nevertheless, such types of communicative behavior depend not only on people’s habits 
and abilities, but also on the character of the tasks solved. In experiments with operators 
digesting visual information and taking common decisions, the optimal groups appeared to be 
those whose members were active enough and exchanged information, acting collectively. The 
easier a task, the fewer demands for information exchange, and the task can be solved on behalf 
of one participant – the leader with submission of others. 

---

93 
Similar research conducted in real production groups have shown that the problem of 
labor efficiency cannot be solved by only manning brigades with workers with the same levels of 
psychophysiological qualities. It appeared that the presence of these abilities is not the 
paramount condition determining work-speed (on the example of the work of female fitters). 
Some group-members possessing necessary professional qualities did not want to work faster. 
The decisive influence on the speed of performing production tasks by separate workers was 
made by socially-psychological directedness. On this characteristic the group members could be 
divided into two subgroups. The first one was comprised of those who orientated on permanent 
work in that collective and good wages. The second subgroup consisted of those who were more 
oriented on the possibility of raising their social status by improving their education level, while 
the wages were on the second place for them. 
Thus, to gain the maximum work-efficiency and decrease conflictability in the collective 
it is necessary to form work-groups not only on the basis of professional abilities, but also with 
the same professional directedness, i.e. to consider compatibility of various levels.