Over the past quarter century in the theory of management has designated the interest to the issues of mutual influence of leadership styles of leadership and emotional behavior of managers and subordinates. Among the informed – the need for training, how to control emotions and ambitions (desires), the strategies and methods of investigation, development and implementation of the decisions skills of establishing boundaries in communication. These skills help to establish an adequate management style, which is often referred to as authoritative. When authoritative style of interaction are set flexible boundaries of behavior, friendly relationships, consistent cooperation, high level of independence, energy, responsibility, focus on achieving results. The problem of emotional interaction as the basis for successful interaction in General consonant with another deep topic – emotional intelligence.

In this respect, very indicative are the audit of the Novgorod branch of the Peasants land Bank, which was established in 1885 to facilitate farmers in acquisition, mainly of landed estates. The audits were conducted because of deterioration in the late XIX – early XX centuries and identified a range of shortcomings in the performance of his work. A certain role was played here also by subjective reasons, such as problems with the Assembly personnel office and interactions of managers and employees.

So, revision 30 July – 8 August 1903 was engaged in the consequences of scandal in the Novgorod branch of the Bank where Central office for the position of accountant was transferred by his fellow – Zarkevych, which collided with the group interests of workers of the Novgorod branch. The audit found that the Department has developed a close-knit group of individuals, local natives "of the same origin and views" with M. Z. Zakharov at the head, whose influence on "the whole office is unlimited"[1]. Subordinate to M. Z. Zakharov, in addition to scribes, was the watchman, who, in the opinion of Zarkevych were completely dissolved, did not follow official chain of command. This group had a candidate – the employee Bogdanov, who in the appointment of Zarkevych remained as assistant accountant.

In this situation, the new Manager of the branch K. I. Melnik, who previously worked in Minsk, people are spineless and soft, could not put things in proper order and did not interfere in the relationship of subordinates (though, he was going to leave the service in the Bank).

Thus, the promiscuity was growing up, there were cases of unauthorized control of a Central Bank's prolonged absences of officials from service, which, incidentally, was noticed and the Zarkevych. But his blunders and errors strongly bulging and distended co-workers, and self – silenced. The Zarkevych, as a man quick-tempered and nervous, less than a month (from 30th June to 20th July) was brought against the servants and guards to a nervous breakdown, although for the previous 8 years working in the Bank, he was characterized only positively.

The official result of the audit was the transfer of Zarkevych comes back to the Central office, moreover, the Governor of the Peasant land Bank was instructed to fine the most zealous employee.

Further, employees of the Novgorod branch has continued to receive complaints from the management of the Bank. For example, in 1911 an officer of the Department V. N. Fon-Wessel received a written resolution of the Manager of the Bank explanatory note, compiled by him regarding the outstanding travel funds: "I find this explanation is essentially incorrect, and in shape not meet the modest requirements of the service cycle"[2].

On the other hand, not all employees of the Department were characterized negatively, on the contrary, such cases in the Department were the exception rather than the rule. Even among the lower servants were quite conscientious workers. However, shortcomings in the work of the office were certainly more noticeable than its advantages. Confirmed revision of the Novgorod branch, held in November 1907, after the death of the Manager Acting I. O. Vadikovsky. He was characterized as a drunkard who has lost "all interest not only to business, but generally to people and to life"[3]. Check October 30, 1907, directly linked the poor state of Affairs in the Department with the personality of its Manager. The auditor expressed the opinion that "needs immediate removal"[4].

The audit revealed other shortcomings in the work of the Department. At an auction for the sale of estates directed the inferior officials of the office – assistants clerk and accountant, "which is the perfect inexperience in this case can not be held liable for the correctness of their actions in the production of the auction itself"[5]. Almost all employees of the Department were new, worked in it from six months to two years. Many were young, full of strength and desire to work, but with the specifics of the activities of the office were familiar poorly. The records management Department was very complicated and needing improvement and systemization, reduction of correspondence. Verification of documents was conducted carelessly, the remedy was untimely.

In case of preservation of an independent Novgorod branch of the Bank auditor offered either to send back a good Manager who would be able "to raise the prestige of the Novgorod branch"[6], or leave it under the personal supervision of the Manager of the St. Petersburg branch.

The management of the Bank and the Ministry of Finance advocated the preservation in Novgorod an independent Novgorod branch of the Bank, which continued to operate until 1917 and was closed only after the October revolution.

Thus, the description of the audit of the Novgorod branch of the Peasants land Bank as well as possible illustrates the importance of the problems of employee interaction and the impact of people on the success of the organization. A hundred years of history, financial and credit institutions marked the transition from the liberal to the authoritarian models of behavior to a peer, but at the same time, many described the problems and critical situations does not lose its relevance today.

2. Ibid. Inv. 2. Un. 1146. On the audit of the estimated costs of the Novgorod branch of the Peasants land Bank. 1910-1914. S. 96.

3. Ibid. Inv. 1. Un. 273. On the question of the abolition of the Novgorod branch of the Peasants land Bank. S. 74.

4. Ibid.

5. RGIA. F. 592. Inv. 44. Un. 433. The case of the audit of the Novgorod branch of the Peasants land Bank. S. 28-29.

6. Ibid.