Our report shows that the Russian theory of personnel management as a "middle-level" theory is weakly correlated with general theories, it clearly does not appeal to any of the theoretical and methodological grounds. In this respect, the modern Russian approach avoids the relationship with Marxism, since in this case it is necessary to recognize the contradiction of interests between employees as manageable and managers as managers. It does not correlate with (neo) liberalism, because in this case the employee should be treated as an internal client/investor/entrepreneur. In a politically oriented liberal version, the employee should also be included in the process of setting goals as co-managing in the hope of his share from the commercial success of the enterprise. Also, the Russian theory of personnel management is cautious in its relation to traditionalism in the spirit of Japanese management, since in this case the organization must take a big responsibility for the fate of personnel. There are no elements of the theory of the social contract, because then it is necessary to negotiate with the worker in setting goals. The statement that "the main feature of the personnel is the targeted orientation of the personnel's activities, i.e. Ensuring the achievement of the organization's goals by establishing the individual's adequate goals for it" rather means that these goals are set by the management or, perhaps, the shareholders through the Board of Directors, but not by the employee. On what theoretical and methodological approach is the Russian theory of personnel management based? Judging by the presented passages, it is guided by a rather distorted perception of the classical theory of management. Distorted, as in the version of Taylor and Ford, the material interest of the employee in the transition to the New Labor Organization (MOT) was placed at the center of the corner. Therefore, to a greater extent, we have a transitional stage between the pre-scientific stage of management, when the management used mainly power and coercion to impose its will on the employee, and the appearance of the ITU when it became clear that one coercion would not give the necessary results. In the Russian concept, the following theoretical turn takes place: "it is still necessary to command the workers, but we can not talk about it", while preserving paternalism and power as a historical and cultural background. In this regard, the modern Russian theory of personnel management as a "middle-level" theory is some "step backward" even in comparison with the Soviet period when plant sociology, the sociology of labor, the concept of planning the social development of an enterprise, developed tools for the social development of the worker and collective primarily on the Marxist Basis
