The institutionally reforms which have begun in Russia in the end of the XX-th century, have led to radical updating of all spheres of ability to live of the Russian company, especially - spheres of economic relations. Before the Russian enterprises there was a problem of adaptation to new conditions of managing, to search new, рыночно the focused controlling mechanisms. Today many chiefs come to understanding of that the management problem human resources is one of key as the major resource of each company are, first of all, people, and the enterprise commercial value directly depends on a qualitative condition of labor staff and a set of methods and methods of effect on it.

Besides, the humanization of economic processes directed on the maximum increase of internal individual liberty, mediates specificity in sphere of the labor relations, shown that, according to V.I.Martsinkevich, «necessary and productive in economic sphere there are humanitarian, personal qualities of the person, i.e. knowledge, ability, skills, qualification, experience, abilities, activity, responsibility» [5]. It leads to that in work not economic motivations more and more prevail, work comprises not only an external economic element, but also «an intangible spiritual element» the creativity, so necessary for self-realization of the person.

Self-realization of the person in the conditions of market transformation of company is impossible without distribution of new types of the labor behavior corresponding to new social realities. At company transition to a new social situation the major motivations, inducing the person to certain type of behavior, are social installations (personal dispositions) allocated with V.A.Jadov, which the scientist has correlated on four hierarchical levels: 1 level - the elementary fixed installations (represent stable reaction of the individual to the subject situation shown in certain forms of social behavior; 2 level - the social fixed installations (on the basis of these behavioral stereotypes the stable matrix of social behavior with private circumstances of life experience of the person is formed); 3 level - base social installations (characterize the general orientation of interests of the person concerning concrete spheres of realization of its activity; 4 level - valuable orientations (express the relation of the individual to the most significant purposes and methods of their achievement) [8].

The social processes accompanying transition of Russia to the developed market, have concerned all four levels of social installations as during this period it is possible to say about change of a subject situation, population lines of business that has entailed change of behavioral stereotypes and valuable orientations in company. The motivation inducing the person to certain type of behavior, actually is function of labor motivation; she explains purposefulness of action, organization and stability of the complete activity focused on achievement of a definite purpose.

From an item of economic sociology economic action should be considered as the form of social action. Accordingly "action", according to M.Veber [1], is understood «as action of the person (irrespective of, whether it has external or internal character, whether it is reduced to non-interference or patient acceptance), if and as the active individual or individuals connect with it subjective sense». Such action is called as "social", «which on assumed by a character or characters to sense corresponds with action of other people and is guided by it». The economic person in the acts is guided by exclusively egoistical interest. Analyzing a situation, it makes effective decisions only from the point of view of maximization of own utility and minimization of possible costs. The sociological approach assumes that the person often appears in situations when its freedom is considerably limited. Thereupon the motivation of the individual from an item of economic sociology has more many-sided character, rather than from an item of the economic person.

On-opinion V.Radaev, «economic sociology interests not only observable behavior of the economic agent, but also its subjective item - motives, installations, methods of definition of a situation ...» [6]. The scientist underlines that motives of the economic agent fall outside the limits especially economic targets, and the individual can be, besides an economic interest, under the influence social norms and compulsion (legal, power, economic and ideological). As fairly marks M.Kaz: «... change in the fundamental bases of functioning of economy requires revision of theoretical base, search of conceptual schemes adequate to new conditions and models of labor motivation» [2].

Considering transformations of modern company, N.Lapin considers that «the market economy ... at the first stages adapts to company not so much, how many adapts for itself company ... In such economy and company as a whole the principle of maximization of utility» affirms [3]. This principle is formulated by A.Smit and means that the actor of economic action aspires to a maximum of compensation by minimization of expenses. The increase in material requirements of the population during the Post-Soviet period speaks as well from an item of the theory of T.Veblen («The Theory of an idle class» - motive of monetary rivalry). As a whole, the general social mechanism of realization of principles of market economy includes three basic elements: motivation (consists in aspiration of each individual to maximize the incomes), actually work (labor activity is rationally designed and it is constantly improved), an exchange of the made goods or services (is effective economically and socially). In the market the rational behavior is peculiar to "the Economic person», strong motives of a personal advantage, a thrift and enterprise, readiness to run risks, accompanied thus sensation of a private responsibility for the actions, and such he hopes to receive social recognition. By consideration of economic institutes of O.Uljamson it is reasonable that the motivation in the conditions of the market is more "powerful", than at the regulated control system of economy in which "low-power" motives are inherent. Analyzing motivations of an initial stage of reforms of the Russian economy, A. Temnitsky, has come to a conclusion that «... in 90th years there was an adaptable type of motivation of work. The structure of motivation allowing to the worker only somehow to solve a problem of a survival and to support the household ...» [7] was generated impoverished, through impregnated with orientation to earnings. Later, V.Magun, tracing dynamics of the importance of labor values in liberal reforms, established that by the end of 90th years, in comparison with the beginning of decade, there was a growth of the importance of achievements and responsibility, and also - increase of the general readiness to work [4]. Thus «initiative possibility» and did not become more attractive, and it in spite of the fact that the initiative, readiness for risk, innovations entered into an ideological nucleus of the program of reforms.

Achievement of new Post-Soviet problems requires corresponding motivation of work. On the first place there is not a strengthening of dependence of the worker through fear of loss of work, and partnership strengthening by the corresponding relation to its work. According to E.G.Jasin, Russia has stepped over the first stage of formation of market economy. «At the first stage the minimum is made - the market economy instead of the planned is created. Now it is necessary - to make the following step its effective that in modern conditions means more free, liberal, simultaneously having created the institutes, allowing to make economic freedom productive, close to the Pareto-optimality» [9].

References

1. Weber M. The Selected products / transl. by J.N.Davydova. - М: Progress, 1990. - 808 p.
2. Kaz M. // Economic matters. - 2005. - №12. - p.82.
3. Lapin N.I.// The World of Russia. - 2000. - №3. - p.3.
4. Magun V.S. As labor values // Domestic notes vary. - 2007. - №3 (37).
5. Martsinkevich V.I. The human factor and efficiency of economy. - М, UNIТI, 1998. - 110 p.
6. Radaev V.V. Ekonomicheskaja sociology. - М: The Publishing house of SU HSE, 2005. - 603 p.
7. Temnitsky A.L. Motivation of work of wage and salary earners // Economic subjects of Post-Soviet Russia. Under the editorship of R.M.Nureev. - M.: MONF, 2001.-342 p.
8. Jadov V.A. About dispositional regulation of social behavior of the person // Methodological problems of social psychology. - М: The Science, 1975.-89 p.
9. Yasin E.G. Russian economy. Sources and a panorama of market reforms. - М: SU HSE, 2002. - 437 p.