The main task that the Management By Objectives system was supposed to solve was increasing the agility of a business organization.

There are many definitions of management by objectives.

Management by Objectives is a systematic and organized approach that allows management to focus on achieving goals and achieve the best results using available resources.

Management by objectives is the work of management to formulate the goals of the organization, convey them to employees, and ensure them necessary resources, as well as the distribution of roles and responsibilities for achieving the goals.

Target management methods assume that the manager is obliged to determine in advance the final results of his actions and develop work programs to achieve them. This approach to management is characterized by the presence of a plan for solving problems, even if these are such unexpected events as machine breakdowns, changes in product designs, interruptions in the supply of necessary materials, etc. The style that dominates in this zone of the management spectrum does not require the constant presence of a manager in his office. workplace. No matter what problem arises, there is always a plan in place to determine the course of action and methods that will best solve a particular problem.

The use of management by objectives (results) systematizes the management process, increases the performance of the enterprise, is an effective tool for establishing and maintaining a quality management system in the enterprise, maintaining quality at all levels of the enterprise.

Management by objectives (results) places high demands on personnel. The better an employee understands the goals set for him and the more accurately the latter correspond to his internal aspirations, the more likely such goals will be achieved.

The functioning of the management system based on goals (results) is based on three basic principles: decomposition of tasks “top-down”, feedback “bottom-up” and “intra-company labor market”. Let's look at them in more detail.

The principle of task decomposition “from top to bottom”. The work of the MBO system is based on the decomposition of the tasks facing the organization according to the existing management hierarchy in the company. The company’s objectives – they are set to the general manager by business owners or the general manager formulates them himself – the general manager breaks down into subtasks, which he then distributes among his subordinates (top managers). In this case, subtasks are identified in such a way that their solution provides a solution to the initial task that was posed to the general manager and, accordingly, to the company as a whole. Exactly the same procedure for decomposing tasks into subtasks is repeated at lower levels of the management hierarchy: top managers form subtasks for their direct subordinates based on their tasks, etc.

The principle of bottom-up feedback. In the process of agreeing on a task between the manager who formulated it and his subordinates, to whom the task is assigned, adjustments may occur to the content of the task, its level of priority or deadlines. Task adjustment is an important and generally positive process. On the one hand, during a joint discussion and exchange of argumentation, an equal understanding of the wording of the tasks is achieved, and the task itself can be transformed into a more accurate and correct one in content. On the other hand, the approval process ensures the necessary balance between the desired results and the resources available in the company. How “objective” is this kind of resource assessment? Is there a danger here that subordinates will underestimate their “real” capabilities? Here you need to keep in mind: the main resource in in this case It may not be money, not production capacity, not the number of working people, but, above all, the subordinate himself. Together with the money, capacity, and employees at his disposal. And together with your ability or inability, desire or unwillingness to achieve the desired result using the available means. This is all the more true the higher the subordinate's position. A manager's main resource is his skill in managing other resources. It follows: the higher the hierarchical level at which the task is agreed upon, the greater the importance of the discussion and voluntary, responsible acceptance of the task based on a realistic self-assessment of the performer’s capabilities.

During the coordination, the manager can and should suggest solutions to the subordinate manager that he could not see. He can and should convince and inspire him. It is important, however, to stay on the edge, beyond which the pressure on the subordinate becomes tantamount to orders issued from above that are “not discussed.” Once this line is crossed, the consent of the performers will turn into a formal ritual. In such situations, the likelihood of obtaining results, especially if it requires non-standard moves and exceptional efforts, will sharply decrease: without internal acceptance of tasks, neither initiative nor a breakthrough beyond what is being done and has been done in the company until now is possible.

The principle of the “intra-company labor market”. Unlike functional responsibilities, tasks (planned tasks) in a results-based management system are unique each time and cannot be provided for in advance in standard contracts concluded when hiring. In a sense, planned tasks are additional labor costs not provided for in the original terms of employment. It is precisely because of this circumstance that the relationship of voluntariness and equality of the parties in the process of agreeing on tasks are so important. In fact, agreement is a kind of “bargaining” between the parties, and the reached agreement is a kind of “microcontract”. The terms of such a local contract include the task itself, the timing of its completion, additional resources provided to the performer, as well as the form and amount of remuneration/bonus depending on the achievement of the final result.

Despite many advantages, the management system by objectives also has a number of disadvantages (Table 1).

Table 1

Advantages and disadvantages of the concept of management by objectives (results)

Advantages	Flaws
Increasing work efficiency due to the fact that each manager has a clear understanding of both his goals and the goals of the organization as a whole	Not applicable to the management of an organization, where it is customary to determine goals only by top management, without involving managers at all levels in this process
Increased motivation to work, since in these conditions everyone feels a personal interest in achieving goals	Difficult to use without personal motivation
Visibility of achieving the final result, because the time frame for its achievement is clearly formulated	Managers' attention is focused on achieving current and short-term goals (results), i.e. to the detriment of strategic long-term goals
Improved relationships between managers and subordinates due to transparency and alignment of goals	A labor-intensive, complex and lengthy process that produces results only when and where the manager himself chooses a model of action (behavior)
Improving the system of monitoring and evaluating the work of each member of the organization (in accordance with the results achieved)	The presence of a weak information management system (its availability) results in unsatisfactory organization of control

The value of the results of management by objectives increases when management methods allow you to program actions taking into account real time and cost constraints. Obviously, value is diminished when work is started before programming has been completed - this inevitably leads to costly adjustments.

table 2

The structure of individual groups of organizational goals

Type of goals	Short term	Medium term	Long-term
Financial	Profit for each month; level of fixed and variable expenses; amount of dividends; liquidity	Increase in profit compared to the previous period; level of profitability; liquidity; amount of dividends; capital size and structure	Profit volume per year; capital and its structure; level of profitability; liquidity; dividend amount
Organizational	Compliance with job descriptions by employees; employee motivation; staff development; filling the structure	Macrostructure, functional diagram; composition of employees: profiles of requirements; motivation; training	Macrostructure and its changes
Marketing.	Sales volume by month (broken down by product groups, customer groups); the number of attracted clients for the period for each category; goals for attracting specific (by name) clients; expanding sales volumes with old clients; sales plans and performance indicators for employees	Increase in sales volume compared to the previous period (broken down by product groups, customer groups); market share; sales plans and performance indicators by employee/department; range; customer structure	Sales volume per year (broken down by product groups, customer groups); market share; range; customer structure

These goals are formulated for departments and employees at different levels, they circulate vertically - from the CEO to top managers (or line directors), then to middle managers (for example, the head of the sales department develops his goals in accordance with the goals of the commercial director), to department heads and project managers and further to ordinary performers.

Every leader in an organization, from the highest to the lowest level, must have clear goals that support the goals of higher-ups.

The development of performance indicators should be carried out in connection with strategic guidelines. On the one hand, by understanding the connection between performance indicators and strategy, employees will be more involved in the organization’s activities. On the other hand, performance indicators should reflect the connection between current activities and the achievement of the organization’s strategic goals.

For strategic planning and measuring the achievement of strategic goals, the Balanced Scorecard methodology (BSC Balanced Scorecard) is increasingly being used. The BSC is a management tool that allows you to formalize strategic planning and goal setting, communicate the company’s strategic goals to staff, and also monitor the achievement of these goals by employees through KPIs.

KPI – (key performance indicators) is translated in the literature differently: “key performance indicators”, “key performance indicators”. “Efficiency” and “effectiveness” are fundamentally different things. The most successful translation is “key performance indicators (KPIs)” (performance).

The management method by objectives in a company can be used along with BSC technology. In this situation, MBO will be the mechanism by which goals will be distributed throughout the company's hierarchy and staff involvement in achieving them will be ensured.

In this situation, KPIs are control points in the process of achieving goals, characteristics of the effectiveness or efficiency of an employee’s work and business processes as a whole.

An employee's monthly work plan (MBO matrix) is a list of indicators established in accordance with the areas of responsibility of this position. A weight coefficient is determined for the indicator, reflecting the importance of the indicator for the employee. The sum of the weighting coefficients is equal to 100%. Planned values ​​of indicators are established based on an analysis of trends in previous periods, taking into account the company's development forecasts and the company's plans for the period being assessed.

With a radical change in the external or internal environment, goals may change. The reasons for the change must be conscious and significant enough. If the goal changes, all participants in the process must be notified of this. Keep in mind that by using this principle, managers can “cover up” their inability to plan properly. If the organization's goals change quarterly or more often, it is necessary to think about the correctness of the planning process and try to improve its quality.

Goals should be described using SMART technology.

S – Specific – specificity

The goal should be formulated as specifically as possible, without using general phrases and abstract concepts.

M – Measurable – measurability

“Everything that is measurable can be achieved.”

A – Achievable – achievability

The goal must be achievable (feasible) and at the same time not automatically achievable. Another aspect of this criterion is the agreement between the manager and the subordinate regarding the possibility of achieving a given goal (the goal must be “accepted” by the subordinate).

R – Relevant

The goal must be consistent with the company's strategy (goals of other levels) and at the same time be in the “zone of influence” of the employee to whom it is assigned (its implementation depends on his efforts).

T – Time-bound – time certainty

The goal statement must indicate the exact time frame for its completion (the task must be “monitored” during its implementation).

At the same time, each leader must be sure that all his personal plans are reflected in the individual plans of his subordinates.

The goals of each subordinate should contribute to the achievement of the goals of his superior. Thus, according to Peter Drucker, “...the goals of the manager for a particular sales region should be measured by the contribution that he and his sales agents make to the work of the entire sales department of the company; The performance goals of the lead project engineer are determined by the contribution that he, his subordinate engineers and draftsmen make to the success of the design department.”

In an organization with a clear hierarchy, it is easier to push tasks from the top down than in an organization with a matrix structure. In the latter case, employees discuss ways to achieve their own goals with their immediate supervisor, who coordinates the tasks of subordinates and makes adjustments if necessary. It is better when goals are not simply “descended from above”, but are developed jointly by the boss and subordinate. Then, already at the discussion stage, it is possible to identify possible difficulties and ways to overcome them, as well as find optimal options for solving problems. In addition, this practice promotes employee loyalty to the company and has a positive effect on his motivation.

It is also necessary to clearly define the timing and criteria for evaluating results. It is understood that everyone performs specific and mutually agreed upon tasks. At the same time, employees exchange information with the manager, who, in turn, ensures that the performers do not duplicate, but complement each other.

Some departments (for example, accounting) may not have financial indicators, but they have internal clients and various market indicators by which work results can be assessed.

Stage 2 – action planning.

When planning, ways to achieve the goals are worked out in detail.

Developing action plans helps to assess the practical possibilities of achieving goals and upcoming costs, identify potential problems, and find the most effective ways to solve problems. If planning exists separately from goals, then it will not be able to contribute to their achievement and will turn into a bureaucratic procedure.

Detailing the plan and goals requires step-by-step actions:

Activities necessary to achieve each of the goals are developed;

Priorities are set, according to which a calendar schedule of activities is built;

It is determined which tasks can be delegated to a lower level, after which those responsible and performers are appointed for each activity;

Specific deadlines for each activity are established;

The resources necessary to carry out each activity are determined (financial, material, etc.);

Deadlines are checked and action plans are adjusted (after discussion with other managers and subordinates).

The third stage is control, measurement and evaluation of results.

Control is the process of ensuring that a firm achieves its objectives. Control can be divided into: preliminary control, current control, final control.

In general, control consists of setting standards, measuring the results achieved, and making adjustments if results are achieved that differ from the established standards.

Final control is carried out on all activities at the end of the planning period, but intermediate control is also important (for example, at operational meetings) in order to track the progress of fulfillment of certain obligations.

Review and evaluation after a specified period of time are carried out in order to determine the extent to which goals have been achieved, identify the causes of problems encountered, and establish the level of reward for effective performance.

Control-oriented employee behavior produces more effective results. However, reward and punishment mechanisms must be in place. At the same time, it is necessary to avoid excessive control, which can irritate employees and staff. Effective controls must be strategic, reflect the firm's overall priorities, and support the organization's operations. The ultimate goal of control is not only the ability to identify a problem, but also to successfully solve the problems assigned to the organization. Control must be timely and flexible. Simplicity and effectiveness of control, and its cost-effectiveness are very relevant. The presence of an information and management system in an organization helps to increase the efficiency of control and planning of the company’s activities. The management information system must contain information about the past, present and future of the organization. This information allows the company's management to make optimal decisions.

The fourth stage is the application of corrective measures.

This stage is needed only if the set goals could not be achieved. The manager, together with the performer, needs to understand the reasons (both objective and subjective) of the current situation and take corrective measures. It is quite possible that the reason for the failure is not related to the actions of a specific employee, but to some other factor - structure, tasks, technology, etc. It is possible to adjust the goals themselves or change the organizational conditions or systems that impede their achievement.

The target management system requires adjustment approximately every 9–12 months. It involves monitoring the labor market and the performance of each employee (conducting surveys, attracting experts and consultants, etc.).

The best way to test the MBO is to compare the existing results with the planned ones and approve the assessment with the employee and manager.

Fundamentals of Management: Textbook for Universities / Ed. Radugina A.A. - M.: Center, 2006. – 432 p.

Economics of an enterprise (firm): Textbook / Ed. prof. O.I. Volkova and Assoc. O.V. Devyatkina. – M.: INFRA – M, 2007. – 601 p.

Meskon M.Kh., Albert M., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management: Trans. from English - M.: “Delo LTD”, 2006 – 702 p.

Chapter 1. Management by results.

History of the concept of performance management………………5
The concept of “labor result”. Key commercial results,

functional and supporting activities of the company…………………………8

The essence of results-based management…………………………………………………….. 12
Success factors for a manager when managing by results………………….14
Ways to increase the competitiveness of a company when managing

results………………………………………………………………………………………. 17

Chapter 2. Management analysis based on the results of the company LLC “ANKLAV”…………. 22

Chapter 3. Recommendations and measures to improve management in the company “ANKLAV” LLC……………………………………………………………… …………………. 27

Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………. 29

List of used literature…………………………………………………….30

Applications………………………………………………………………………………………. 32

Introduction.
In the past, many firms were able to operate successfully by focusing mainly on daily work, on internal problems associated with increasing the efficiency of resource use in current activities. Now, although the task of rational use of potential in current activities is not removed, it is extremely important to implement such management that ensures the company’s adaptation to rapidly changing business conditions.
Acceleration of changes in the environment, the emergence of new demands and changes in the consumer's position, increased competition for resources, internationalization of business, the emergence of new unexpected business opportunities opened up by the achievements of science and technology, the development of information networks that make possible the lightning-fast dissemination and receipt of information, the wide availability of modern technologies, the changing role of human resources, as well as a number of other reasons have led to a sharp increase in the importance of performance management.
The purpose of this work is to study the concept of “results-based management”. To achieve the goal, I was given tasks related to results-based management:
1.Explain the concept of “labor result”. Describe the key results of the firm's commercial, operational and support activities.
2. Reveal the essence of results-based management.
3. Consider the success factors of a manager when managing a company based on results.
4. Conduct an analysis of the company “ANKLAV” LLC and draw appropriate conclusions.
The topic “Management by results” is particularly relevant at present. After all, the company’s position in the market, the dynamics of its development, its potential, the behavior of competitors, the characteristics of the goods produced or services provided, the state of the economy, the cultural environment and many other factors depend on proper management.
There is no management strategy that is uniform for all companies, just as there is no single universal management. Each company is unique in its own way, and therefore the process of developing management for each company is unique. At the same time, there are some fundamental points that allow us to talk about some general principles for developing a strategy of behavior and implementing management based on results.
The transformation of primary business teams into organizations equipped with management systems and tools is a natural process that began in the mid-90s and continues to this day. Some travel this path more slowly, others faster, some use the services of consulting companies - others prefer to act independently. Owners have long realized that being “stuck” for a long time in the primary forms of doing business threatens with the loss of positions in the market, and sometimes even the loss of the business itself. They are actively implementing management tools, and the results-based management system turns out to be one of the most effective.

Chapter 1. Results-based management
1.1. History of the concept of results-based management
The theory and practice of management by objectives (Management By Objectives) arose about fifty years ago as a business response to the management problems that almost all countries with developed market economies faced after the Second World War. The main task that the Management By Objectives system was supposed to solve was increasing the agility of a business organization. In the post-war world, the problem of business agility became one of the key ones due to the intensification of social and technological changes, which led to a sharp acceleration of market dynamics. The companies that were active market participants at that time were mostly formed in an era of stable business environment. They were effective and profitable in stable conditions, when a “business machine”, once built and started, could work for decades.
But the era of stability ended - and businesses were forced to part with such a legacy of pre-war times as bureaucratization, slowness, inability to rebuild and quickly respond to market changes. The Management By Objectives (MBO) system brought with it new philosophy, a new look at business, a new management principle. In a highly competitive and rapidly changing environment, firms must not only focus on the internal state of affairs, but also develop a long-term behavioral strategy that would allow them to keep up with changes occurring in their environment.
The Russian translation of the term Management By Objectives 1 as “management by results” accurately conveys the main meaning of this management system: we are talking about managing the movement (of the company as a whole, a division or an individual employee) towards those business results that, at this stage of development, the company has for it is of paramount importance. By analogy, business management in the traditional, “machine” paradigm could be called “deviation management”, since management intervention is required here only when a deviation is detected in the work of a particular department or employee - from established productivity standards, from accepted ways of working, etc. Deviation management provides proper functioning of all links of the functional structure of the organization without providing either an adequate response to the external situation or adequate changes in the functional structure itself.
Over the past half century, the performance management system has proven its effectiveness and has become widespread throughout the world. However, if at the level of theory and ideology MBO and “management by deviations” were sharply opposed, then in real management practice both approaches turned out to be necessary and complementary. Any business is characterized not only by processes of change, but also by reproduction processes “hardwired” into the functional structure of the company. Companies that could do without a “variance management” system, in which unique problems are solved every day, and there are no consistently repeatable functions, are more exotic than a general rule. The meaning of the post-war management revolution was, therefore, not in changing the type of management of organizations, but in the formation of an additional type and additional contour of management. MVO, as an evolutionarily later acquisition, did not replace the deviation management system, but, as it were, “built on top” of it.
Russian business organizations arose at a historical rift, in conditions of deep destabilization of the economy and all public institutions. Our business, a child of risk, chaos and heroic efforts, has lived and continues to live since its birth in conditions of low predictability, rapid changes in market conditions, and constant changes in the rules of the game with the state. Even today, in an era of relative stabilization of the business environment, the pace of its changes significantly exceeds those that took place during the post-war unfreezing of the US economy and Western Europe when the MBO management technology appeared.
For these reasons, Russian businessmen - especially those who managed to overcome the crisis of 98 - were initially characterized by sensitivity to what was happening around them, the desire to predict events, and a quick and accurate reaction to changes. Experience in consulting work with business organizations shows: the majority of business owners and managers perceived and perceive the idea of ​​MBO as close and understandable, and in the management procedures of MBO they see an organic and useful tool that meets the challenges of managing growing companies. At the same time, the idea of ​​business as a cyclically functioning machine in which “every sneeze is regulated” has generally turned out to be less close and attractive to the creators and leaders of Russian companies.
The history of the formation of Russian business organizations, their internal structure, the peculiarities of the surrounding market environment - all this leaves a stamp of originality and determines many differences between our companies and their analogues in countries where the history of business goes back more than one century. Let us give a small comparison of the empirically established parameters of “MBO in Russian” with those prescribed by the “classical” ideas about MBO. 2

1.2. The concept of “labor result”. Key results of the company's commercial, functional and support activities
Since the task of management is to purposefully influence the managed object to ensure the achievement of set goals, the effectiveness of management can be assessed by the degree of achievement of these goals: by the final results of production activities (in terms of profit level), by the quality of planning (improving budgeting indicators), by the efficiency of investments ( return on capital), increasing the rate of capital turnover, etc.
The simplest example is the assessment of management efficiency by the profit level indicator, by the tendency of this indicator to increase or decrease. That is, if we evaluate the compliance of the company’s performance with the actions of management, then the resulting indicator will be a criterion for the economic efficiency of management.
A more complex economic analysis of the effectiveness of a firm's management involves evaluating the firm's performance using comparative indicators that are reflected in the firm's financial statements.
Thus, historically, profitability is considered to be the main criterion for the economic efficiency of management.
Another economic criterion of efficiency, subordinate to the criterion of profitability, is productivity, characterized by indicators of individual and group labor productivity, volume of output, and product quality. This also includes indicators of the use of material resources (indicators of balance of inventories, current direct and overhead costs, etc.), human resources (costs of hiring labor, training and advanced training, labor organization indicators), introduction of innovations (availability of appropriate capacity, production reserves).
At the same time, the presence of several decision options in the management organization raises the question of comparing results with costs. This comparison becomes increasingly necessary as freedom of choice increases on the one hand, and with the intensification of resource use on the other.
The result of labor is the result of the purposeful labor activity of an individual employee.
Management by “labor results” characterizes the division, specialization of labor in the field of management and determines the main stages of the implementation of influences on people’s relationships in the production process.
The main (general) functions of “management based on labor results” are: organization, standardization, planning, coordination, motivation, control and regulation.
The implementation of adopted management decisions requires appropriate organizational support, which is accompanied by regulation of the work of departments, the creation of a regulatory framework for planning, briefing of performers, organization of interaction (coordination of work) of units and levels of production management. The above actions of management personnel should provide for a certain degree of responsibility of department heads and their functional bodies for possible failure to fulfill production programs and assignments. In this regard, there is a need for each participant in the production process to observe strict discipline in the timely completion of work, as well as constant monitoring and regulation of production progress.
One can also highlight another meaning of management based on “labor results,” which relates to the organization of the work of individual management units and the direct executors of management decisions. This type acquires particular significance in cases where, when implementing decisions taken, the actions of these units and individual performers go beyond the scope of regulations, approved instructions, methods and require operational organization of work.
An organizational management structure that promotes rapid innovation plays a more important role in improving a firm's performance than the concentration of production and the firm's financial resources. Equally important are targeted changes in the structure of employment and personnel qualifications, training and efficient use of management personnel, and the availability of specialists in the field of technical development, marketing, and finance.
Based on the above, the management process “based on labor results” can be represented as a set of sequential actions of management personnel to determine goals for management objects and their actual state based on the registration and processing of relevant information, the formation and approval (decision making) of economically sound production programs and operational tasks.
The process of defining results begins with an in-depth analysis of aspirations, based on which the desired results are determined at various levels. Such results are called key; they require annual inspection. The following types of key results are distinguished: a) results of commercial activities;
b) functional activity; c) supporting activities.
The results of commercial activities include the turnover of an enterprise (firm, organization), covering expenses, profitability, use of capital (investments, working capital), variable and fixed costs, etc. These key results are usually correlated depending on various positive or negative components of the balance sheet . The most important place is occupied by identifying the most significant key results and goals of business activities, ranking them in order of importance and achieving consistency on them at all levels of the enterprise. The results of business activities are most clearly manifested when calculating results and drawing up a balance or assessing benchmarks calculated on their basis.
Functional results and goals are the quantity and quality of products produced, efficiency in the use of energy and raw materials, and the degree of utilization of production capacity.
Supporting results, in turn, drive business and functional results. External results of support include the characteristics of the enterprise, the group of products and each individual type of product, relations with external related groups. The results of support within the organization can be established in relation to the motivation of staff, the atmosphere of the organization, the use of working time and means of communication, i.e. the speed of information flow. After identifying the key results, they move on to determining the means by which they will be achieved.
The above examples show that in results-based management the very concept of “result” is very broad and multifaceted. The starting point is that for each employee or group of employees participating in the implementation of the business plan, some key results and goals that are most important for them are established, with the help of which the completion of tasks and the use of working time and other resources can be directed towards the implementation of the main goals set in front of the enterprise.
The process of determining the “results of labor” ends with determining the direction of activity and commercial ideas for its implementation. Results that meet the organization's aspirations are expressed in the form of defined goals (which should be specific, achievable and measurable), strategies, key results and intermediate goals. Results that meet management's aspirations are demonstrated through key results, goals, and time schedules. The aspirations of each individual member of the organization are expressed by plans for advancement through the career ladder and in life in general.

1.3. The essence of results-based management
The last decade of the 20th century was very tragic for Russia. The systemic crisis has affected all spheres of Russian society. One of the main reasons for the crisis is the collapse of the state and industrial management system. The loss of controllability of the economy resulted in a deep decline in production, business activity and living standards of the population.
The activities of any organization, both during a crisis and after it, require management, without which not only its effective functioning and development, but also its very existence is impossible. Moreover, the management of an organization predetermines the attitude of other organizations towards it and, to a certain extent, influences their management decisions in response. This means that management involves the interests of many people, both within the organization and outside it.
In conditions of market relations, views on the nature, role, essence and significance of the work of a manager change. Independence, initiative, enterprise, creative thinking, and willingness to take reasonable risks come first.
Feature of modern management is its focus on efficient management of the economy in conditions of resource scarcity, a gradual reduction in regulation of production by administrative methods, and intensification of production. Modern management should contribute to the development of the market, commodity-money relations in wholesale trade means of production, money convertibility, stabilization of market prices.
Management is an element and at the same time a function of organized systems of various natures (biological, social, technical, etc.), ensuring the preservation of their structure, maintenance of the mode of activity, implementation of the program and goals of the activity.
Under management understand a set of processes that ensure the maintenance of the system in a given state and (or) its transfer to a new, more vital state of the organization through the development and implementation of targeted influences.
The main idea of ​​performance management is the recognition that no organization in itself has any value, but at the same time it represents an orderly form that brings people together to achieve certain results.
The very concept of “results-based management” can be defined as a management and development system through which results are achieved that are defined and agreed upon by all members of the organization.
Results-based management assumes that initially the team is given realistic goals, provided with all the resources to achieve them. Such resources include people, time, finances, material and technical base, technologies, methods, etc. When managing by results, each participant in the process must be able to link their participation in the common cause with other members of the team. Effective thinking assumes that the manager and subordinate determine the result, and then the performer himself chooses the methods of achieving it, i.e. time, technology and other resources.
In conditions of results-based management, an initiative and creative team is a most valuable resource. The leader creates an atmosphere of respect, trust, and success for each participant in the educational process. However, the manager’s task is to provide information, analysis, goal setting, planning, execution, control and correction.
The leader must have a clear grasp of the situation and be a guide to the new. A leader who shows respect for the personality of each member of the team, taking into account inclinations, interests, capabilities, combined with reasonable demands, achieves significantly greater results than one who strictly adheres to authoritarian management methods. One of the best ways to increase interest in work and create a cohesive team is to respect people and delegate responsibility and authority to them.
Responsibility appears when two conditions are met: when the performer is assigned very specific tasks and responsibilities; when the performer knows that he will definitely be held accountable for how the work was done. Explaining to each participant in the process the meaning of his mission and organization in order to achieve certain results does not acquire a forced administrative nature, but conscious creative work. An important issue when managing by results is the distinction between the concepts of “result” and “contribution”.
The result is a realized goal. But the goal itself can be real and ideal. In our case, we assume real goals, i.e. provided with all resources for execution. Thus, results-based management is a targeted, resource-supported interaction between the managing and managed subsystems to achieve the planned result.

Success factors for a manager when managing a company based on results

Success in managing a company based on results depends on both subjective and objective prerequisites in each specific situation. So, a lot depends on the personal qualities and skills of the manager, on his thinking abilities: the ability to see, analyze the situation, find solutions, as well as on his strong-willed qualities and personality strength. Perseverance, courage and responsibility greatly influence the achievement of final results in business.
From the objective side, it is also necessary to keep in mind a number of prerequisites for effective management: awareness of people in the organization, its adaptability, i.e. adaptability to changes, provision of resources and progressiveness of methods used in managing the company.
Professionalism and all its components should be mentioned as the main resources that determine a manager’s success when managing by results:
- organizational and business culture,
- professional and personal qualities (economic thinking, communication skills),
- the manager’s personality and its subjective components (temperament, will),
- the ability of a manager to adapt to the changing operating conditions of the organization, improve the quality of knowledge and skills to manage subordinates.
As objective external resources that can be used in results-based management, we should first of all mention the organization and quality of information, the progressiveness of the organizational structure of the enterprise and the management methods used. The progressiveness of management methods, in turn, comes from the practical use of modern psychotechnologies based on humanistic psychology and personality-oriented pedagogy, as well as the use of management information technologies, modern channels and methods of communication and control, personal computers, local and international information systems.
Thus, a modern manager must have much greater and qualitatively different capabilities and resources to effectively manage complex relationships based on results in conditions of significant uncertainty characteristic of the transition period of the economy.
The methods of social management that were in service with previous managers (administrative influence, incentives, social orientation, etc.) did not have the ability to effectively take into account rapidly changing situations and human factor and therefore are not effective enough when used today, especially for new organizational structures.
The most significant success factors for a manager when managing a company based on results are the following:
- Professional, managerial and communicative competence of the manager.
- Management style and its compliance with the level of the team and the situation
- Enthusiasm, desire to work, belief in your work.
Let's look at each of these factors.
Manager competence consists of three main components:
- Professional competence – knowledge and skills in a specific specialized field (for example, construction or energy)
- Managerial competence – knowledge and skills in the field of planning, administration, coordination, motivation of activities.
etc.................

The meaning and historical context of the emergence of the concept of performance management

The theory and practice of management by objectives (Management By Objectives) arose about fifty years ago as a business response to the management problems that almost all countries with developed market economies faced after the Second World War. The main task that the Management By Objectives system was supposed to solve was increasing the agility of a business organization. In the post-war world, the problem of business agility became one of the key ones due to the intensification of social and technological changes, which led to a sharp acceleration of market dynamics. The companies that were active market participants at that time were mostly formed in an era of stable business environment. They were effective and profitable in stable conditions, when a “business machine”, once built and started, could work for decades. But the era of stability ended - and businesses were forced to part with such a legacy of pre-war times as bureaucratization, slowness, inability to rebuild and quickly respond to market changes. The Management By Objectives (MBO) system brought with it a new philosophy, a new view of business, and a new management principle. What was this novelty?

A traditional business organization of the pre-war type is a company with a strong specialization in certain goods or services, with a constant range of customers and suppliers, with an unchanged structure, established technologies and ways of working. Exaggerating somewhat, we can say: in essence, such an organization is a machine that cyclically, from year to year, reproduces the same operations . Accordingly, the main task of business management is to monitor the proper operation of the machine, notice problems in time and eliminate them. The new approach to business brought to the fore the changing, non-repetitive content in the life and work of the company. Business began to be understood as a certain path, as a sequence of non-repetitive, unique tactical and strategic tasks that a company solves throughout its history . Problems of this kind arose constantly now. Priorities, guidelines, ways of working - all this had to be changed depending on changes in the market situation, as well as as new technical and technological capabilities emerged, for the speed of development and use of which there was fierce competition. This understanding of the essence of business radically changed the concept of management: from a “supervisory and adjustment” function, management turned into the art of making forecasts, setting tasks and ensuring their implementation.

The Russian translation of the term Management By Objectives as “management by results” accurately conveys the main meaning of this management system: we are talking about managing the movement (of the company as a whole, a division or an individual employee) towards the business results that the company has for it at this stage of development of paramount importance. By analogy, business management in the traditional, “machine” paradigm could be called “deviation management”, since management intervention is required here only when a deviation is detected in the work of a particular department or employee - from established productivity standards, from accepted ways of working, etc. Deviation management provides proper functioning of all links of the functional structure of the organization without providing either an adequate response to the external situation or adequate changes in the functional structure itself.

Over the past half century, the performance management system has proven its effectiveness and has become widespread throughout the world. However, if at the level of theory and ideology MBO and “management by deviations” were sharply opposed, then in real management practice both approaches turned out to be necessary and complementary. Any business is characterized not only by processes of change, but also by reproduction processes “hardwired” into the functional structure of the company. Companies that could do without a “variance management” system, in which unique problems are solved every day, and there are no consistently repeatable functions, are more exotic than a general rule. The meaning of the post-war management revolution was, therefore, not in changing the type of management of organizations, but in the formation of an additional type and additional contour of management. MVO, as an evolutionarily later acquisition, did not replace the deviation management system, but, as it were, “built on top” of it.

Basic principles of a results-based management system

The functioning of a performance management system is based on three basic principles: top-down task decomposition, bottom-up feedback and intra-company labor market. Let's look at them in more detail.

The principle of task decomposition “from top to bottom”. The work of the MBO system is based on the decomposition of the tasks facing the organization according to the existing management hierarchy in the company. The company's objectives - they are set to the general manager by the business owners or the general manager formulates them himself - the general manager breaks them down into subtasks, which he then distributes among his subordinates (top managers). In this case, subtasks are identified in such a way that their solution provides a solution to the initial task that was posed to the general manager and, accordingly, to the company as a whole. Exactly the same procedure for decomposing tasks into subtasks is repeated at lower levels of the management hierarchy: top managers form subtasks for their direct subordinates based on their tasks, etc.

The principle of bottom-up feedback. In the process of agreeing on a task between the manager who formulated it and his subordinates, to whom the task is assigned, adjustments may occur to the content of the task, its level of priority or deadlines. Task adjustment is an important and generally positive process. On the one hand, during a joint discussion and exchange of argumentation, an equal understanding of the wording of the tasks is achieved, and the task itself can be transformed into a more accurate and correct one in content. On the other hand, the approval process ensures the necessary balance between the desired results and the resources available in the company. How “objective” is this kind of resource assessment? Is there a danger here that subordinates will underestimate their “real” capabilities? Here it is necessary to keep in mind: the main resource in this case may not be money, not production capacity, not the number of working people, but, first of all, the subordinate himself. Together with the money, capacity, and employees at his disposal. And together with your ability or inability, desire or unwillingness to achieve the desired result using the available means. This is all the more true the higher the subordinate's position. A manager's main resource is his skill in managing other resources. It follows: the higher the hierarchical level at which the task is agreed upon, the more important is the discussion and voluntary, responsible acceptance of the task based on a realistic self-assessment of the performer’s capabilities.

During the coordination, the manager can and should suggest solutions to the subordinate manager that he could not see. He can and should convince and inspire him. It is important, however, to stay on the edge, beyond which the pressure on the subordinate becomes tantamount to orders issued from above that are “not discussed.” Once you cross this line, the consent of the performers will turn into a formal ritual. In such situations, the likelihood of obtaining results, especially if it requires non-standard moves and exceptional efforts, will sharply decrease: without internal acceptance of tasks, neither initiative nor a breakthrough beyond what is being done and has been done in the company until now is possible.

The principle of the “intra-company labor market”. Unlike functional responsibilities, tasks (planned tasks) in a results-based management system are unique each time and cannot be provided for in advance in standard contracts concluded when hiring. In a sense, planned tasks are additional labor costs not provided for in the original terms of employment. It is precisely because of this circumstance that the relationship of voluntariness and equality of the parties in the process of agreeing on tasks are so important. In fact, agreement is a kind of “bargaining” between the parties, and the agreement reached is a kind of “microcontract”. The terms of such a local contract include the task itself, the timing of its completion, additional resources provided to the performer, as well as the form and amount of remuneration/bonus depending on the achievement of the final result.

2. MVO in Russian business organizations

About the borders of Russian business

In the first years of the transition to a market economy, the Russian economy was struck by the extensive breakdown of technological connections between industries, which quickly led to the collapse of the industries themselves. The most viable industries under these conditions were those that were either at the very beginning (mining natural resources), or at the end (retail trade) of technological chains. In the first case, stability and independence from the internal Russian situation was ensured by well-established export channels. In the second, the previous technological stages of creating products within the country were gradually replaced by the import of goods from abroad. During this period, two main vectors of economic development were determined. Large and highly profitable production facilities of the fuel and raw materials complex moved along the same path, and a fierce struggle ensued for privatization and participation in the income. For others, an army of “former researchers” who, at their own peril and risk, started their entrepreneurial activity. As a result, today the private sector of the Russian economy is represented by two completely different spheres that live according to different laws. The life and development of “big” business is determined mainly by political factors and the political situation in the country, while small and medium business- live in a market environment and are forced to solve problems characteristic of business organizations around the world. When discussing the topic “MBO in Russian business organizations,” by business sphere and business organizations we will mean, first of all, the circle of economic entities related to small and medium-sized businesses.

The evolution of primary centers of entrepreneurship and the problem of organization management

In 1998, the concept of stage-by-stage development of business organizations was formulated, the basic ideas of which are still used in the practical work of the STEP Consulting Center. It is based on the idea of ​​an evolutionary ladder, along the steps of which most Russian business organizations created “from scratch” have passed and are passing through. The evolutionary concept summarizes the history of the first decade market economy and contains accurate, detailed portraits of those primary centers of entrepreneurship on the basis of which small and medium-sized businesses were formed. These initial forms of doing business were not organizations in the proper sense of the word: they were business collectives, cemented not so much by organizational mechanisms as by personal relationships and connections. “In the field of small business, the first companies not only formed on an “informal” basis, but then continued to live an equally “informal” life for quite a long time. What did the business look like from the inside? People work in a close team, literally shoulder to shoulder. Everyone is worried about the success of the company, everyone is more or less aware of current affairs, and everyone is more or less clear about what needs to be done at one time or another and in one case or another. To somewhat sharpen and exaggerate the situation, we can say: everyone can do everything and everyone actually does everything…. This is a natural, and sometimes the only possible form of organization for a small “business special forces” of a dozen people.” .

Primary business teams were agile, efficient, and precise in their market behavior. Unity and effectiveness of actions were achieved through cohesion, people, their high awareness, and everyone’s responsibility for the business as a whole. As long as the teams remained small and business operations were simple, as long as there were specific conditions for the motivation and involvement of people, there was no need for organizational mechanisms for managing joint activities.

However, the growth of the scale of the business required the inclusion of new employees, and the increase in their number required a change in the basic principles of teamwork. In growing companies, two interrelated processes took place: on the one hand, the specialization of employees in unlimited functions and areas of work, on the other, the alienation of people from the business and the formation of employee-employer relationships. The more numerous a company becomes, the less it can manage with the previous methods of self-regulation of activities. Starting from a certain critical point, businesses can no longer function and develop normally without objectified management mechanisms alienated from people. A necessary condition for maintaining controllability is the identification of management as a special activity (regular management), systematically carried out by managers with a management function assigned to them. The content of management activities consists of planning, setting tasks and their distribution among performers, coordinating the work of individual team members, monitoring the progress and results of tasks, and motivational influences on performers. Already from the second half of the 90s, owners of growing businesses began to feel the need for internal order, the introduction of rules and principles of collaboration, and the creation of organizational management mechanisms. In other words, the need for regular management.

Russian business organizations arose at a historical rift, in conditions of deep destabilization of the economy and all public institutions. Our business, a child of risk, chaos and heroic efforts, has lived and continues to live since its birth in conditions of low predictability, rapid changes in market conditions, and constant changes in the rules of the game with the state. Even today, in an era of relative stabilization of the business environment, the pace of its changes significantly exceeds those that took place during the post-war unfreezing of the economies of the United States and Western Europe, when the MBO management technology appeared. For these reasons, Russian businessmen - especially those who managed to overcome the crisis of 98 - were initially characterized by sensitivity to what was happening around them, the desire to predict events, and a quick and accurate reaction to changes. Experience in consulting work with business organizations shows: the majority of business owners and managers perceived and perceive the idea of ​​MBO as close and understandable, and in the management procedures of MBO they see an organic and useful tool that meets the challenges of managing growing companies. At the same time, the idea of ​​business as a cyclically functioning machine in which “every sneeze is regulated” has generally turned out to be less close and attractive to the creators and leaders of Russian companies.

The procedure for installing control systems

The transformation of primary business teams into organizations equipped with management systems and tools is a natural process that began in the mid-90s and continues to this day. Some travel this path more slowly, others faster, some use the services of consulting companies - others prefer to act independently. Owners have long realized that being “stuck” for a long time in the primary forms of doing business threatens with the loss of positions in the market, and sometimes even the loss of the business itself. They are actively implementing management tools, and the results-based management system turns out to be one of the most effective.

Comparing the development of the MBO system going on in Russia today with similar processes of the 50s, one cannot help but notice: Russian business organizations are characterized by the reverse order of setting up management technologies. In most cases, the MBO system is not built on top of already established functioning and “deviation management” mechanisms, but is developed and implemented either in parallel or even before control over the current functioning is established.

The “reverse” order of building management systems in companies is a consequence of two circumstances. Firstly, there was a greater readiness for MBO on the part of business owners, whose entrepreneurial experience is largely consonant with the principles of this system. As already noted, many Russian businessmen are distrustful of the prospect of functionalization, formalization and “bureaucracy”, and the more dynamic the company operates in, the more such concerns there are. If, simultaneously with the construction of a functional structure, the implementation of MBO occurs, then this makes it possible to balance and compensate for such threats of fragmentation of the company into functional cells as bureaucratization, poor access to significant information about the company, delay in decision-making, and the drift of the meaning of work from business goals to maintaining constant procedures. Supplementing the creation of an organizational structure with an MBO system (or KPI, or BSC) does not allow the team to become confined to internal procedures and focuses it on fulfilling strategic tasks and achieving real business results.

There is another reason why, in organizations without articulated management, the starting point for establishing regular management becomes the MBO: it is the MBO cycle, even if carried out in a truncated form and only for the general manager, that turns out to be the only possible first step from which systematically, without postponing to an indefinite future, the design, coordination and implementation of elements of the functional structure begin, i.e. “deviation control” systems.

Summarizing the experience of consulting projects, an essential part of which was the establishment of regular management in business organizations, it can be argued: measures to improve manageability give the best results in cases where the establishment of MBO and the implementation of a functional structure (deviation management system) are carried out comprehensively, as a single bidirectional process.

In order for “deviation management” to become possible and work at least at the divisional level, it is necessary to structure the company, establish the boundaries, functions and composition of its divisions. This in itself is a large-scale task, the solution of which is within the competence of the general manager and logically becomes one of the points of his plan when setting up the MBO. However, in order for the MBO to work in full force, so that a significant number of managers and specialists are involved in it, so that the company as a whole is mobilized to solve key problems, it is necessary to have a fairly deep structuring of the company “from top to bottom” and delineation of areas of competence for all levels, from top manager to ordinary employee. In companies with a vague structure and undistributed responsibility, a reasonable decomposition of the manager’s tasks into the subtasks of subordinates often becomes impossible, and MBO turns out to be applicable only at the highest hierarchical level. Thus, the most effective way to establish regular management in Russian companies- this is a parallel implementation of the MBO and the functional structure of the company, in which the results obtained in one of the directions become a condition for progress in the other direction.

Strategic management mechanism or management framework of a consulting project?

By its nature and purpose, MBO is the main tool of strategic management, which allows annually or at other intervals to mobilize and “refocus” the entire company on tasks that are adequate to the current situation, current market opportunities, and the current state of the business. Accordingly, the task of establishing results-based management largely coincides with the task of establishing a strategic management system. The only difference is that in addition to MBO, the strategic management system includes such a component as long-term strategic planning.

At the same time, many consulting projects - in cases where they are associated with the reorganization of a company, changes in basic processes and other equally large-scale innovations and involve the participation of consultants not only in the design, but also in the implementation of changes - often include the formulation MBO, regardless of the presence or absence of a request for strategic planning. A completely different problem comes to the fore here, namely the problem of the status of an external consultant in the organization.

The fact is that if the forms of involving consultants in the design of organizational changes are well developed and do not usually raise questions, then with their involvement in implementation work everything is far from being so simple. On what basis can an external consultant participate in implementation and take part of the responsibility for its results? Should he take on some of the functions of full-time managers? If not, how is it possible for him to interfere in the work of the organization? If yes, on what legal grounds? And how can he avoid conflicts with full-time managers, which, due to the divergence of positions and interests, are often simply inevitable?

It is this problem that is solved through MBO - the most powerful of all known ways of including consultants in the real activities of the company, in the everyday work of managers and specialists. This is achieved due to the fact that the goals of the consulting project are duplicated in the general manager’s planned task and then, according to the top-down hierarchy, they are laid out into subtasks of specialists and managers of lower rank. As soon as it is possible to complete the first cycle of planning and coordination of tasks, the consultant automatically acquires both value and a very definite status in the eyes of the manager: the consultant turns into... a resource for solving an important task, for the results of which he, the manager, is personally responsible. This positioning of the consultant in relation to the manager subsequently becomes a solid basis for their productive and conflict-free collaboration. MBO, thus, can be used not only as a permanent mechanism for solving new problems for the company, but also as a tool created for a specific one-time task, to assist in the solution of which consultants are invited. To be fair, it should be noted: even in cases where the task of building a strategic management system was not initially set, owners and general managers almost always recognize the value of MBO as a “one-time” tool and begin to use it in subsequent activities, that is, as a permanent management mechanism .

Introduction of MBO as a “school of management”

In many Russian companies with which we had to work, the introduction of MBO served not only as the beginning, but also as the main lever for establishing management as such. The fact is that a really working management system, the real manageability of a company, is not just a procedural scheme or a management principle. No less important is the presence of specific management skills among managers, which are often in demand and significant for solving a variety of management problems and within a variety of management paradigms. Typically, the process of introducing MBO became a real “school of management” and gave department heads the opportunity to master universal, basic managerial skills - such as planning, realistic assessment of the time frame for achieving results, setting tasks for subordinates, organizing the execution of these tasks, correlating tasks and required resources, correlating tasks and necessary powers, control of execution, determination of motivational measures depending on the achievement of results.

The powerful learning effect occurred primarily due to the fact that in the theory and practice of MBO, much attention is paid to the procedural aspects of this method. MBO procedures have been worked out in detail and described in the literature; Considerable time is allocated for developing procedures when organizing joint implementation work of consultants and managers. In contrast to the spontaneous practice of everyday management, when implementing MBO, managers learn “advanced” patterns of managerial actions that meet the standards of business administration: correct formulation of tasks, precise formulations and performance criteria, comprehensive assessment of resources, etc. As a result, the manager’s more consistent passage through all steps of the MBO cycle is accompanied by their thorough, deep mastery.

Difficulties and obstacles in the implementation of MBO

Summarizing the experience of setting up an MBO system in several dozen domestic businesses, we list the most typical difficulties, problems and mistakes that a company may encounter when implementing results-based management.

1. The business owner and general manager lack clear strategic business goals and sufficient will to mobilize themselves and the company's managers to achieve them. In this situation, any implementation attempts are usually doomed to failure. The implementation of MBO is a complex and labor-intensive task, associated with changing the usual ways of working, often causing misunderstanding and resistance among some staff. Problems of this kind are never solved in the absence of a powerful “engine” commensurate with their scale.
2. The company does not have a relatively “failure-free” flow of vital processes of routine functioning. It is natural for any employee and manager to concentrate efforts primarily on unresolved current problems, and only secondarily on solving new problems. The presence of constant “rush jobs” in the current functioning makes setting a large volume of new tasks not only psychologically difficult, but also dangerous for the existence of the company itself. In companies where disorder and dysfunction are so deep, the first step in establishing management should be the introduction not of MBO, but of an elementary distribution of functions and responsibility for the results of various parts of the main business processes.
3. Unwillingness of the company's management to comply with the developed and agreed conditions (for example, with a sharp increase in performance productivity, a pre-agreed remuneration may be reduced retroactively). Cases of gross violation of the “rules of the game” by managers lead to discrediting the MBO as a management tool. Sometimes such violations may be caused not by the arbitrariness of management, but by objective circumstances. In this case, one of the possible areas of prevention is a thorough study of the motivational part of the MBO, its correlation with the financial capabilities and plans of the company, consideration of different scenarios and taking measures to manage the corresponding risks.
4. The unwillingness of general managers to delegate responsibility for solving assigned tasks, as well as the unwillingness of their subordinates to accept this responsibility. The problem is usually solved through significant personnel changes in the company, but to some extent it can also be promoted through “educational” influences on the part of the business owner and consultants.
5. Unpreparedness of the owner and senior managers for personnel changes, as a result of which the leading managers in the results management system are people who are unable to work in the appropriate management style. In this case, the chances of successful implementation of MBO are, as a rule, low.
6. Lack of sufficient information openness and transparency in the company. The awareness of MBO participants about strategic goals, about the current situation in the company and on the market is of fundamental importance for the success of the entire system. The main purpose of MBO is to increase business agility. What will happen if, with insufficient information, the adjustment of goals, the “checking of notes” between the manager and subordinates, takes place strictly according to regulations and exclusively at moments of intermediate control? First, the actions of individual employees assigned different parts of their manager's task as tasks will become inflexible and uncoordinated. Everyone will concentrate on their task without being “tied to the locality”, without focusing on the meaning and place of this task in the overall movement of the company. As a result, the actions of individual people will lose coherence, and the direction of the company's movement towards its goals will begin to blur. Secondly, such a situation makes employees blind and deaf not only to each other, but also to the external environment. Accordingly, the company’s activity in the market will also lose flexibility and become like the flight of an unguided projectile: the company will not be able to respond to changes and events that are significant for the business if they occur in the intervals between “control points.” Information openness is the most important prerequisite for the effective operation of MBO, when the compliance of the work of the entire company and each of its employees with the set business goals can increase by an order of magnitude.
7. Lack of a clear connection between results and rewards - for example, when a manager either reserves the assessment of the quality of a task without formulating unambiguous and understandable criteria for a subordinate. Or when the manager arbitrarily sets the amount of remuneration, indicating fairly wide limits in the planned target.
8. Insufficient remuneration to motivate staff (for example, $10 for an increase in sales volume by 30-50%), or unwillingness to take an individual approach to determining remuneration for a particular performer.
9. Unrealistic tasks, their inconsistency with the capabilities and resources of the company. To prevent errors of this kind in the practice of implementing MBO, much attention is paid to the careful development of strategic goals for the year and their comprehensive verification for compliance with real opportunities and limitations, both internal and external.
10. The inability of managers to move from an authoritarian way of assigning tasks to a subordinate to agreeing with him on tasks, necessary resources and deadlines. A direct consequence of this inability is often a “game of coordination” and formal acceptance of the task by subordinates. One of the ways to solve the problem is the mediation work of a consultant, who can act as a link between the manager and his subordinate in the approval process.
11. The inability of the general and other managers to systematically monitor the implementation of planned targets by their subordinates. The MBO system requires systematic, “iron” control, with strict adherence to previously established deadlines. Control, especially intermediate control, in this case performs not only a “mobilization” function, but also allows the manager to timely correct the actions of subordinates in accordance with the current situation. Oddly enough, in many Russian companies there is no regular monitoring by managers (especially top managers) of the work of subordinates. One possible, although not always successful, way to solve the problem is to delegate the technical aspects of control to the secretariat, assistant top managers or administrative unit.
12. The manager's unwillingness to provide the necessary resources, for example, to achieve good performance of related services, which affect the results of the work of the performer, who is deprived of any leverage over these services.
13. Decomposition errors: incomplete or distorted reflection of the tasks of a superior manager in the tasks of his subordinates.
14. Errors in determining the resources and authority required to complete a task. Errors of this kind are easily corrected during intermediate control, when both the manager and his subordinate begin to more fully and clearly see the real picture of all the conditions on which the achievement of the result depends.
15. Failure of MBO participants to distinguish between tasks of current functioning and project-type tasks, which constitute the specific content of MBO. This is manifested, in particular, in the fact that planned tasks begin to include tasks, most of which are the functional responsibilities of the performer. This error is not critical for implementation, but can introduce distortions into the motivation system, provoke mutual misunderstanding and conflicts, and lead to unjustified time expenditure, including additional paperwork.

The above list of “pitfalls” of the MBO - far from complete, but nevertheless impressive - leads to the following obvious conclusion. Ill-conceived attempts to implement a results-based management system, lack of flexibility and a sufficiently deep understanding of the real situation in the company can lead to insurmountable staff resistance, operational failures, loss of valuable employees and a significant deterioration in organizational culture.

Main parameters of MBO and its implementation processes

The history of the formation of Russian business organizations, their internal structure, the peculiarities of the surrounding market environment - all this leaves a stamp of originality and determines many differences between our companies and their analogues in countries where the history of business goes back more than one century. Let us give a small comparison of the empirically established parameters of “MBO in Russian” with those prescribed by the “classical” ideas about MBO (see table).

Table

MBO parameter		Optimal for Russian companies	Main reasons for differences
Planning horizon for planned tasks	1 year	A combination of annual and semi-annual tasks: those less dependent on the external environment and more voluminous are set for a year, and those that meet general strategic goals and are obvious only for the near future - for 6 months.	1. The high dynamism of Russian markets, due to which the tasks set at the beginning of the year may lose their relevance in the second half of the year 2. Insufficient experience and level of development of planning skills among managers
Number of tasks as planned task	6-8	12-25 per year for senior managers up to 15 per year for specialists and lower-level managers	1. A large number of strategic tasks in the context of growing markets and increasing competition 2. A large number of internal tasks of organizational building itself related to the establishment of regular management
Frequency of control	In accordance with the planned deadlines for completing tasks and obtaining meaningful results	Monthly or at least quarterly. In order for control to be meaningful, any task, already during planning, must be divided into successive stages and the intermediate results of the month/quarter highlighted.	Insufficiently rooted culture of regular management, insufficient development of control and self-control skills The need for a gradual transition to the independence required by the MBO system on the part of performers and readiness for delegation on the part of task leaders. The need to create an attitude towards the inevitability of control among task setters and performers

In the translated literature on MVO, the question of such a parameter of MVO as depth of implementation. What is the optimal scope of coverage of the hierarchical levels of the organization by this system? Should all company employees go through basic results-based management cycles and have planned targets?

Experience working with Russian companies indicates that there are clear restrictions on the “depth” of the MBO’s immersion in the organizational hierarchy. There are two determining factors here. Firstly, the more hierarchical levels of management in a company, the more time it takes to develop and approve plans. In large companies, even if they have been using MBO for more than a year, the limit is indicated when trying to bring the decomposition and coordination of tasks to the third level under the general manager. It is here that the time for setting and coordinating tasks becomes commensurate with the required deadlines for their completion, which deprives the MBO system of the advantages of flexibility and efficiency. Secondly, starting from a certain level of decomposition of tasks, their further fragmentation may turn out to be either impractical or impossible. Why try to decompose a task “into molecules” in advance, if a reasonable method of such decomposition can only be found in the process of its implementation? What is the point of separate remuneration for completing tasks if their scale, content, volume do not go beyond the current assignments, which already fit into the employee’s functional responsibilities?

It should also be taken into account that the very content of the company’s current strategic objectives at one stage or another does not always require large-scale, commensurate with MBO procedures, participation in their solution by all managers and specialists without exception.

Let us note that the above-discussed features of the use of MVO in Russian companies relate rather to technical details and do not affect the essence and basic principles of this management system. As for the precedents and results of implementing MBO in domestic business organizations, they turned out to be very impressive. Many of the companies that tried to implement MBO were able to make a quick breakthrough in their development or overcome serious crises with minimal losses.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1.P. Drakker“Result-oriented management”, translation from English, M., 1994.

2.Santalainen T., Voutilainen E., Porenne P., Nissinen J.H., p/r Leimann J.A.“Management by results”, translation from Finnish, M., “PROGRESS”, 1993

3. Meskon M., Albert M., Khedouri F.“Fundamentals of Management”, translation from English, M., “DELO”, 1998. Chapter 10 “Planning the implementation of strategy”, p. 324-331.

4. E. Emelyanov, S. Povarnitsyna“Business Psychology” M., 1998

5. Y. Pakhomov, E. Emelyanov, S. Emelyanova“SOI (System Organizational Change) technology in the development of commercial structures” // Problems of management theory and practice. 2006. No. 10.

Publisher: Journal “Social Sciences and Modernity” June 6, 2007

Reviews

I would like to note the high professionalism of the consultants of the STEP Consulting Center and hope for further successful cooperation. Read in full →

Head of the Personnel Attraction and Development Department of JSC SUEK A. V. Fomin

Representation limited partnership“Dr. Wilmar Schwabe GmbH & Co.KG” expresses gratitude to Vladimir Khomutov, partner of the STEP Consulting Center, for the training “Finance for non-financial managers”. Read in full →

Maksimova Larisa Anatolyevna, Head of Representative Office

I can safely say that today the STEP Consulting Center is an ideal assistant for restructuring the views and approaches of the existing company management in the right direction. Read in full →

General Director S. S. Nikitenko

The management of Center-Processing LLC turned to the STEP Consulting Center at a time when we needed an external assessment of the managerial and professional potential of our employees. In accordance with our request, consultants from the STEP CC conducted an assessment of the company's top managers and prepared personal resumes. Read in full →

General Director REDKO NIKOLAY VITALIEVICH

Based on the positive experience gained during the above-mentioned marketing research, Petrocommerce Bank recommends the STEP Consulting Center as a company capable of conducting complex multi-level market research and preparing analytical material necessary in conditions of an objective shortage of market information. Read in full →

V. A. Vinogradov, First Vice-President of OJSC Bank Petrocommerce

Based on the positive experience gained during the above-mentioned work, Elecsnet recommends the STEP Consulting Center as a company capable of not only obtaining the immediate result the customer needs, but also solving the task assigned to him, based on the strategic prospects for business development. Read in full →

Yu. I. Lokotsov, General Director of Eleksnet LLC

It should be noted that the consultants of the STEP company use unique forms and methods of work, which not only ensured that they achieved the desired result in an extremely short time, but also led the Corporation’s management to decisions that maximally satisfied all participants. Read in full →

President G. V. Duvanov

The work was done carefully and efficiently, without noticeable interference with the work process. The results of the work significantly expanded the understanding of the management and all personnel of the company about the existing problems and tasks, and became an important aid in the reorganization we are carrying out. Read in full →

President of CJSC "Insurance Joint Stock Company Russia" A. V. Razuvaev

LLC "G.A.I." thanks the STEP Consulting Center and personally Elena Kisel, who fulfilled this request for us. We recommend STEP as a company capable of solving the problems of selecting candidates for top management positions at the highest level. Read in full →

General Director of LLC "G.A.I." Volkova N. A.

In the past, we engaged the STEP Consulting Center to solve business development problems, and now we can recommend them as professionals in the field of business closure. Read in full →

President of Vedis Group of Companies

Based on our experience of cooperation, I would like to wish you to formulate problems more clearly and show greater courage and persistence in proposals for improvement, and be more categorical in achieving your goals. Read in full →

General Director Goryainov M.V.

We hope that your company will continue to work in this direction and turn its attention to the rapidly growing ASKUE market in Russia and abroad. Read in full →

Chief specialist, Golikov V.V.

The STEP Consulting Center is characterized by the generally high intellectual level of its employees, widely known among related organizations, and also, along with the presence of its own methods and procedures, an excellent understanding of business conditions in Russia and the problems of its customers. Read in full →

General Director of CJSC ROXA D. E. Kitchenko

We highly value “Step” for practical knowledge and experience, for the ability to lead different groups of people to the goal, for the creative organization of decision-making, for honesty and integrity. Read in full →

General Director of SATORI Financial and Industrial Corporation LLC A. V. Gusarov

Organizer LLC highly appreciates the practical usefulness of the work carried out by the STEP Consulting Center and recommends this experience for use in the implementation of urban planning projects. Read in full →

General Director G. I. Muravin

Hereby, the management of Energosystems and Technologies CJSC expresses its gratitude to Evgeniy Nikolaevich Emelyanov, the head and owner of the STEP consulting company, for his close and fruitful cooperation. Read in full →

Andrianov B.V., General Director

I thank Evgeniy Nikolaevich Emelyanov and Lyubov Maksovna Gorbunova, Partners of the STEP Consulting Center, for their help in rethinking the conduct of my business. Read in full →

Owner of the Lapotok shoe store chain, S. Yu. Zaglumonin.

It was useful for us to meet the partners of the STEP Consulting Center: companies working in the field of IT, as well as creative promotion of the company’s services and products through corporate videos. One of these acquaintances resulted in long-term and very effective work. Read in full →

Founders of the Liga Company

Our joint work was distinguished by great productivity and at the same time organic changes. We thank the management and staff of Step for their sincere involvement in the affairs of our company. Read in full →

E. R. Satyev, General Director

The Topservice Group of Companies would like to express gratitude to the Consulting Center "STEP" for the work provided in preparing the "Agreement of Co-Owners of the Topservice Group of Companies." Read in full →

President of the Group of Companies "Topservice" Savelyev A.V.

The management of M.video believes that the work entrusted to the consultants was performed at a high professional level, and expresses gratitude to the STEP Consulting Center. Read in full →

Maksimov A. Yu., Manager of Trading Company M.VIDEO

The management of the Sportmaster company believes that the Step Consulting Center completed all the assigned tasks in full within the agreed time frame. I would especially like to note the very attentive attitude during work on the part of the specialists of the “Step” Consulting Center to the features and traditions that exist in our company. Read in full →

Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Sportmaster Company D. Yu. Deukhen

We did a lot of work and helped resolve a seemingly insoluble contradiction between two equal partners, which resulted in an agreement between the owners, which resolved all issues and allowed us to calmly develop the company without wasting time and nerves on sorting out the relationship Read more →

Manager of the group of companies "Our Toy" LLC I. A. Klepikov

The results of the assessment were extremely useful and practical, and we now use them in the ongoing management of the company, in organizing training and in making personnel decisions. Read in full →

Executive Director, M. V. Sklyarov

The OSTIN company recommends the STEP Consulting Center as a reliable partner in the development and implementation of an assessment center that performs work in a timely manner and at the highest quality level, skillfully combining its own methods and the Customer’s developments. Read in full →

HR Director of Austin LLC Safanyuk A.M.

The SPORTMASTER company recommends involving the STEP Consulting Center when planning an assortment strategy and when working with a product portfolio. Read in full →

Director of the Commercial Department of the SPORTMASTER Company D. Yu. Ageev

Top managers of the SEPHORA project are ready to recommend the STEP Consulting Center as a team of professionally working managers with the necessary knowledge in the field of marketing and market research. Read in full →

Nadezhdin K.Yu., General Director S. V. Kupriyanova, General Director

I recommend the STEP Consulting Center as a team of professionals capable of efficiently solving the problems of carrying out structural changes in business, providing consulting support not only in the design and planning of changes, but also in the implementation of specific solutions, and responding quickly and flexibly to changes in tasks during the project and the Customer's priorities. Read in full →

A. L. Ushkova, General Director

Based on the positive experience gained during the above-mentioned work, MSS-Start recommends the STEP Consulting Center as a company that can help the Customer turn the organization in the right direction and achieve the planned result. Read in full →

E. N. Elizarova, General Director of MSS-Start CJSC

I recommend the company Step as honest and decent partners who always comply with the terms of agreements and take a firm position in relation to the discussed agreements, in my case - always defending my side as a shareholder of the company. I also consider the Step company to be one of the most professional Russian consultants in the field of retail trade. Read in full →

Grigory Kozhemyakin, Shareholder of the companies "Starik Hottabych" and "Stroydepo"

Consulting Center "STEP" held a strategic session for our Company. This was no ordinary event. We didn't just formulate our strategy, we found it. We overcame stereotypes, saw misconceptions and eventually found the exact answer on how to significantly increase the efficiency and size of our company in a short period of time. Read in full →

Konstantin Vinokurov, General Director

The company Stroydepo CJSC, represented by General Director Dmitry Vasilyevich Timanov, is pleased with the result of cooperation and recommends the Step Consulting Center to colleagues in the market. Read in full →

D. V. Timanov, General Director

We express our sincere gratitude and appreciation to the specialists of the STEP CC for their responsible and professional approach to work, openness in cooperation, and for the ability to build work in multitasking mode, thereby giving us the opportunity to get great pleasure from both the process and the result. Read in full →

V. A. Frolov, General Director of O`STIN

We started working with CC STEP at the end of 2009. By this time, the limit of the company's growth as a purely retail chain had been reached. As a result of an analysis of the state of affairs in the company, it was decided that it was necessary to establish an active sales system. Read in full →

General Director Brumirsky D.G.

The STEP consulting center helped us not only to find such an experienced employee, but also to place him with L"Etoile Group. Helped us find motivation for changing jobs and finding employment with us. After all, headhunting is not only a search, but also a successful enticement. Read in full →

CJSC Smart Logistics Group plans to continue cooperation with STEP consultants until the full implementation of their proposed plan for optimizing the business of our operating company. Read in full →

Anna Dubovskaya, Financial Director of Smart Logistics Group CJSC

The positive experience gained allows Smart Logistic Group CJSC to recommend the STEP Consulting Center as a team of professionals who are able to see the essence of the problem in a short time and offer bold but realistic ways to solve it. Read in full →

Press service of JSC Smart Logistic Group

As a result of the work of the STEP Consulting Center, we have radically changed our approach to managing various businesses included in the Group of Companies. Read in full →

Co-President of the Elfor Group of Companies L. G. Korzhavina

Step trained our Customer Service team, who is forcing the pace in telco service innovation, with the advantage of being able to focus on a particular market or segment of market with new infrastructure, new supporting systems and carefully selected staff. Read in full →

Elena Elizarova, Customer Support Manager

The management of the Business Center JV ARTEL recommends the lively in form, professional and high-quality in content work of the STEP Consulting Firm to managers commercial organizations working for Russian market. Read in full →

Mike Edgeworth, General Manager

Payment for the work of our salespeople was made directly dependent on the quality of work with clients, thus, monthly STEP reports became part of the technological cycle of our Company. Read in full →

Director of the Retail Network Management Department D. V. Nikulin

My second project with the Step company was the “Team Building” seminar for employees of the TeleRoss Customer Service Center. The task was complicated by the fact that they all work in different cities, but nevertheless we need a sense of team. And the representatives of “Step” succeeded! Read in full →

Elena Karulina, Customer Service Manager at TeleRoss

I would especially like to note the favorable atmosphere that reigned during the training. The friendliness in the relationship between trainers and participants, as well as the accessibility in the presentation of the material, made the learning process easy and dynamic. Read in full →

Marina Novikova, HR Director

I recommend the consulting firm "STEP" for work on assessing the effectiveness of the organization, developing and implementing a development program to achieve a better position for the organization. Read in full →

Fred Ledbetter, Vice President, GTS Cellular

Progress in organizing the work of the Department’s management is obvious, for which we are extremely grateful to the Consulting Center. Undoubtedly, we will continue to turn to STEP for help in selecting top management if such a need arises. Read in full →

General Manager, Ivanova Yu. I.

The President of Heliopark Group recommends the STEP Consulting Center as a partner and assistant to any company that needs to make a breakthrough in its development. Read in full →

President of Heliopark Group A. I. Gusakov

I would also like to note that during our cooperation with our company, the STEP Consulting Center has not only established itself as a highly professional team of experienced specialists who find effective ways to solve problems, but also as people who know how to maintain warm, friendly relations. Read in full →

General Manager I. V. Ilchuk

We are eternally grateful to the STEP Consulting Center for their help and participation, wise advice and invaluable experience! Together we managed to do a lot; a whole stage of life was left behind. We begin the next stage, this time on our own, but of course we don’t say goodbye, we just say “goodbye!” Read in full →

Krylov A.S., General Manager Retail.ru project manager Natalya Marova

The report presented by the consulting center "Step" is based on the results reflecting the main features of the state of affairs in the Concern. Diagnostics of key problems and analysis of trends in the Concern's organizational development enabled the Concern's management to outline the main strategic stages in reforming and improving the Concern's management structures. Read in full →

A. I. Evgrafov, Chairman of the Board of JSC Concern Evening Moscow

The management of the Rank Xerox Company (CIS) thanks the STEP Consulting Firm for the high quality of the results of their work in assessing the potential of the Company’s employees. Read in full →

I. Simonov, General Director of Rank Xerox - CIS.

Assessing the joint work, I would like to note the high degree of interest of STEP consultants in the high-quality implementation of the assigned task. Consultants are distinguished by a flexible approach to work and taking into account the specifics of a particular business. They promptly took into account our wishes and were open to discussing problems.

General Director M. M. Vasilenko

We wish you and your company further leadership in the fields of management and corporate consulting, as well as systematic implementation of interesting projects to form a new generation of consultants. Read in full →

Lobanova T.N.

On behalf of our Company’s consultants, I thank you for training Senior Consultant Yulia Zotova in the field of organizational consulting. The quality of teaching was evident in Zotova's work in the latest project. Read in full →

On behalf of our Company’s consultants, I thank you for training Senior Consultant Yulia Zotova in the field of organizational consulting. Read in full →

President of the Consulting Company "LASPI-PLUS", Associate Professor of the Faculty of Psychology of Moscow State University Erofeev A.K.

The Gagarinsky District Administration evaluates the practical usefulness of the work carried out by the STEP Consulting Center and recommends using the experience of this work in the implementation of urban planning projects. Read in full →

Deputy Head of the Administration S. I. Khmelevsky

The Lefortovo district administration highly appreciates the practical benefits of the work carried out by your specialists. The materials transferred to the district administration helped us during meetings with residents. Read in full →

Head of the Board E. B. Shurygin

Now we actually know that CC STEP deserves the most best recommendations and praise. Read in full →

Director of Training and Development Evgeniy M. Smirnov

Related topics scientific works on economics and business, the author of the scientific work is Elena Igorevna Dobrolyubova

• Management by results in the public administration system in Russia: approaches and results of reform over the past 10 years

  2014 / Gusarova Maya Viktorovna, Ovchinnikova Maria Alexandrovna

• Problems of using information technology as part of the implementation of results-based management

  2019 / Dobrolyubova Elena Igorevna

• Introduction of results-based management as part of the implementation of administrative reform in the Russian Federation: towards the creation of a new model of public administration

  2014 / Dobrolyubova Elena Igorevna, Yuzhakov Vladimir Nikolaevich, Alexandrov Oleg Vladimirovich

• Problems and tools of medium-term financial planning at the regional and municipal levels

  2008 / Sidorova N. I.

• Results-based management at the regional level: control or effectiveness?

  2012 / Kalgin Alexander Sergeevich

• State programs of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Korea: comparative analysis

  2018 / Zaitsev V.E.

• Socio-economic orientation of the reform of the budget system of the Russian Federation at the subfederal level

  2009 / Kalinina Galina Viktorovna, Belova Nadezhda Petrovna, Yunusov Alexander Albertovich

• Modernization of the functionality of the executive branch and its results

  2009 / Klimenko A. V.

• Stages of formation and development of state budget planning of the Russian Federation

  2015 / Balikhina N.V., Kosov M.E.

• Technologies for using results-oriented budgeting tools in the budget process (using the example of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia)

  2012 / Tishutina O. I., Mikhailov A. V.

Over the past few decades OECD countries have made significant efforts to introduce performance management principles in public administration context so as to promote increasing government efficiency and effectiveness in response to growing public demands and existing fiscal constraints. Recent public administration reforms in Russia also have an important focus on performance management issues; however, the approach that developed itself in the Russian Federation is more controversial and presents a compromise of positions and visions of core government agencies in charge of the reform. In late 2006, an independent group of experts attempted to combine the existing requirements and plans and develop a joint Road Map for Implementing Performance Management Mechanisms in the Russian Public Sector in 2007 2010. The Road Map was presented to the key stakeholders at the federal and also regional level in December 2006 and has since then become an informal point of reference for developing performance management agenda. The article presents continuation of this effort and attempts to evaluate the interim results achieved in implementing performance management principles in Russia. The review of achievements also allows to highlight the development priorities for the next two and a half years of public administration reform. The results of this analysis are summarized in an updated Road Map for Implementing Performance Management Mechanisms in the Russian Public Sector. Overall, the author argues that for the last year and a half significant progress has been achieved in implementing performance management principles in the Russian public administration: there has been some progress made in 16 out of 27 areas outlined in the 2006 Road Map. Notable achievements have been made in terms of implementing medium term budgeting, introducing some performance information in budget expenditure planning documents, implementing requirements to financial management quality at the federal level. Development and approval of instruments allowing for cross-regional comparisons and evaluation of regional and local administrations efficiency and effectiveness provided a basis for further regional development planning and supporting performance management practices in the multi-level governance context. Some departmental and regional performance management systems developed and implemented on a pilot basis also provide important lessons learned for the further reform efforts. Overall, the recent review of performance management progress at the regional level revealed significant attention to the matter and significant achievements in introducing core performance management instruments on the ground. Last but not least, expanding the use of programs in the public sector is also an important trend strengthening accountability for the use of public resources and achievement of performance outcomes. While commending to the progress made, the article also highlights the unfinished reform agenda which should receive more attention in the years to come. Firstly, as the practice of implementation has confirmed and given the complexity of the Russian governance system, there is a need to develop and approve a special document laying out the conceptual framework for implementing performance management in Russia. This concept could, inter alia, streamline the existing system of forecasting, planning and performance management documents existing at various government levels. Secondly, gradually more autonomy should be provided to program managers at the medium level to achieve the program outcomes. Such autonomy calls for inter alia, introduction of management accounting, adoption of performance planning and evaluation systems at the individual level, etc. Finally, it is crucial to invest in transparent monitoring and evaluation systems that could guarantee the overall coherence and credibility of performance management efforts. The article concludes that the key effect from implementing performance management in the public sector comes from the change in internal incentives. Such change cannot be implemented overnight and requires several years if not decades. However, such change is crucial for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the public sector and hence supporting sustainable socio-economic development in Russia in the longer term.

Text of scientific work on the topic “Implementation of principles and procedures of results-based management in the Russian Federation: interim results and directions for development”

Dobrolyubova E.I.

IMPLEMENTATION OF PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES OF RESULTS-BASED MANAGEMENT IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: INTERMEDIATE RESULTS AND DIRECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT1

The concept of results-based management

A necessary condition for ensuring balanced and sustainable development Russian Federation is to improve quality government controlled. One of the key tools for achieving this goal is the introduction of new management mechanisms into the activities of government bodies of the Russian Federation - performance-based management mechanisms that provide incentives for continuous improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of the activities of government bodies and the public sector as a whole. These management mechanisms were borrowed from the practice of organizing work in the private sector (see: in the list of references given at the end of the article) and were first formulated within the framework of the theory of “new public management”, developed in Anglo-Saxon countries in the 1970s.

Despite the fact that reforms aimed at introducing the principles of results-based management in the public administration system in developed countries have been implemented for more than thirty years, there is no common understanding of the term “results-based management” or “result-oriented management” in the scientific and practical literature. Accordingly, foreign government bodies responsible for organizing the implementation of new management technologies often introduce their own definitions of the concept of “results-based management.”

For example, the UK Treasury understands performance management as “the management of the performance and effectiveness of an organization or individual.” Agency for Development and Optimization of Local Activities -

The UK government's results-based management framework identifies four stages: planning (prioritizing and planning for optimization), execution (helping to achieve better results), evaluation (assessing the results/impact of activities), review (making adjustments in accordance with results ).

The New Zealand Public Services Commission defines performance management as a four-step cycle: choosing a direction (what we want to achieve in the next 3-5 years and why); planning (how best to achieve what you want and whether there are the necessary resources); implementation and provision of services (implementation, monitoring, making adjustments); assessment (assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of actions taken, assessment of unforeseen side effects). The Australian National Audit Commission suggests that performance-based management should be viewed as the ability to do what is needed, in the right way. At the same time, within the framework of the management process, three main stages are distinguished: planning of results, which are recorded in an agreement on standards of efficiency and effectiveness; execution (implementation of programs); assessment based on comparison of what has been achieved with what was planned.

The most well-known international definition of the concept of “results-based management” is that of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): “Performance-based management is the management cycle within which target values ​​in the field of efficiency and effectiveness are determined; managers have the capabilities to achieve them; results are measured and reported, and this information is then used in decisions about funding, structure, program operation, rewards and sanctions” (see ). Based on this definition, we can highlight the following main differences between performance management mechanisms and other management mechanisms:

Use of information on target and actual values ​​of indicators characterizing the efficiency and effectiveness of activities at the planning stage (making decisions on financing, structure and functioning of programs) and at the evaluation stage (making decisions on rewards and sanctions);

Identification of programs as objects of management - complexes of interrelated activities aimed at solving common problems (performing related functions), and not the abstract concept of “organizational activities”;

The presence of middle managers (“program managers”) of a sufficient degree of freedom in decision-making, which ensures the ability to achieve target values ​​of indicators in the field of efficiency and effectiveness;

The presence of a formalized relationship between the results of an organization’s activities and incentives and sanctions in relation to its management and (to a certain extent) employees of this organization.

Taking into account the analysis of the concepts used in international practice, we can formulate the following working definition of results-based management: results-based management is a management principle based on ensuring the relationship of goals, results and resources at all stages of management (planning, implementation and control), facilitating the most effective achievement of the goals of executive authorities (local governments, government organizations).

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

It is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of “results-based management” and “results-based budgeting”. Results-based budgeting (program-target budgeting) is an integral part of results-based management and is aimed at ensuring that results are taken into account in the process of planning, execution and control over budget execution. Thus, “result-based budgeting” is a narrower concept associated with taking into account results in the process of planning and executing the budget, a structural element that allows you to link one of the resources (financial) with the results of the organization’s activities.

The general logic of the results-based management system in the Russian Federation is presented in Figure 1. Social problems, global challenges, results achieved over the past years, as well as the powers of government bodies form the system of goals and objectives of the Government of the Russian Federation, as well as the system of goals and objects of budget planning2 and constituent entities of the Russian Federation (within the powers of the relevant structures). The implementation of this system of goals and objectives, supported by available resources, allows us to achieve immediate results. It is important that resources, being a means of achieving immediate results, simultaneously act as a limitation in determining the goals and objectives of budget planning subjects and constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The degree to which such results are achieved may entail adjustments to some goals and objectives of government bodies and constituent entities of the Russian Federation. In the medium term, immediate results provide final, socially significant results. Assessment of results, during which actual changes in the management object and the dynamics of the values ​​of indicators of final socially significant results are recorded, allows, in turn, to adjust the goals of the Government of the Russian Federation.

Picture 1

Logic of results-based management in the Russian Federation

Abbreviations used: OGV - public authorities; SBP - subjects of budget planning

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

In practice, the considered stages of results-based management are largely synchronized: the availability of information about the dynamics of immediate and final socially significant results of the activities of executive authorities allows timely adjustments public policy in this area, orients the activities of all participants to achieve maximum results in conditions of limited resources.

Issues of results-based management in public administration reforms in Russia

The results of a survey conducted by specialists from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 2005 show that most of its member countries use, to one degree or another, indicators to assess the immediate and final results of the public sector, while the emphasis is on the final socially significant effects of the implementation of government programs. Evaluation of performance results (based on predetermined indicators of efficiency and effectiveness) is also, to one degree or another, taken into account when making decisions on the financing of certain programs or budget items in future financial periods (see).

The experience of implementing performance management systems in the public sector of the vast majority of developed countries could not but be taken into account when developing public administration reforms in the Russian Federation. The possibility of structured activity planning, monitoring and evaluation of immediate and final results at all levels of management - these advantages of results-based management technology have determined the advisability of including results-based management as an important component of public administration reform in Russia.

The ideas for the development and implementation of performance management elements in the public administration system in the Russian Federation were first taken into account when developing the Presidential program “Reforming the civil service of the Russian Federation (2003-2005)3” in terms of conducting individual experiments and implementing “pilot” projects to develop new methods of planning the activities of government bodies and civil servants, as well as program-targeted financing. Conducting these experiments at the federal level (in particular, in the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia), as well as in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation - participants in the implementation of the Program (the Republic of Chuvashia, the Krasnoyarsk Territory, the Samara and Saratov regions, the Taimyr (Dolgano-Nenets) Autonomous District) in 2003-2004 gg. made it possible to test the possibility of using certain new technologies for planning and evaluating activities (including performance-based remuneration) in certain government bodies. At the same time, the lack of a unified methodological and regulatory framework for further dissemination of the results of experiments, the lack of generalized results of the experiments, the lack of financial resources for the implementation of program activities in other federal executive authorities and constituent entities of the Russian Federation

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

led to the fact that the results of the implementation of these activities remained at the level of individual initiatives. Thus, despite the fact that in the vast majority of constituent entities of the Russian Federation similar programs for reforming the civil service were developed and approved, the activities financed within the framework of these programs were mainly limited to advanced training, training and retraining of civil servants (in some cases also municipal employees) , but not to reforming public administration systems in the relevant constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

In a broader sense, the issues of introducing results-based management (in terms of introducing results-based budgeting) were included in the Concept of reforming the budget process in the Russian Federation in 2004-2006, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 259 of May 22, 2004. Within The Concept and the attached Action Plan provided for the following:

Introducing changes to the budget classification of the Russian Federation, aimed at: a) reorienting budgets to achieve final results by increasing the independence and responsibility of participants in the budget process and administrators of budget funds; b) bringing the structure of the functional classification of expenses into line with the main functions performed by government bodies; c) harmonization of budget classification with international financial reporting standards (IFRS) and international standards of government finance statistics;

Allocation of the budget for existing and the budget for assumed obligations;

Determination of the procedure for maintaining the register of expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation;

Determining the procedure for drawing up a long-term financial plan and a draft federal budget;

Approval of accounting and financial reporting standards for general government units;

Annual submission by budget planning entities of reports on the results and main directions of their activities;

Improving the methodology for the development and implementation of federal (regional, municipal) target programs;

The use of departmental target programs in the budget process (including determining the procedure for the development, approval and implementation of departmental target programs);

Distribution of part of the budget of accepted obligations on a competitive basis based on the results of an assessment of existing and proposed budget programs;

Expanding the powers of administrators of budget programs in the process of budget execution; And

Introduction of amendments to the Budget Code regarding regulation of the budget process, adoption of relevant acts of the Government of the Russian Federation. Thus, in comparison with the Civil Service Reform Program, the implementation of which largely envisaged an experimental approach to innovations in the field of management, the Concept of reform

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

The development of the budget process was focused on the full-scale implementation of new budgeting principles. At the same time, an assessment of the degree of implementation of the measures of this Concept related to the implementation of the principles and procedures of results-based management shows that in a number of key areas (in particular, in the field of taking into account achieved and planned results when distributing the budget of accepted obligations) there is insufficient progress in the implementation of measures of this Concept is a limiting factor for the implementation of a results-based management system as a whole (Table 1).

A certain attempt to systematize the work on introducing the principles and procedures of results-based management was made within the framework of the Concept “Administrative Reform in the Russian Federation in 2006-2008”, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1789-r dated October 25, 2005, where results-based management was highlighted as a separate area of ​​administrative reform, the implementation of which was supposed to ensure the solution of the following tasks:

Creation and implementation of a comprehensive system of departmental and interdepartmental planning for goals and performance results, project management for goals and performance results, competitive distribution of resources between departments and monitoring the achievement of the results of their activities;

Development of key measurable indicators of the efficiency and effectiveness of the activities of executive authorities in the main areas of their activities in accordance with the strategic goals of the state;

Introduction of technologies and goal-setting procedures that ensure the linking of goals to specific performers, the development of indicators that make it possible to adequately assess the degree of achievement of set goals and the actions of performers taken to achieve these goals;

Development and implementation of management accounting that allows you to distribute resources according to assigned tasks, as well as ensure control over the achievement of results and determine the personal responsibility of managers and officials for solving these tasks;

Development and implementation of an internal audit system that allows assessing the effectiveness of the activities of structural units and officials responsible for solving assigned tasks, as well as assessing the effectiveness of budget expenditures;

Introduction of a system for regular assessment of risks that impede the achievement of intended goals;

Introduction of management mechanisms for organizations subordinate to executive authorities;

Creation of a standard regulatory, legal and methodological framework for the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (in order to introduce results-oriented management procedures and project management in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation) with its subsequent experimental testing. The above list of tasks shows that within the administrative

reforms provided for a broader approach to the implementation of results-based management principles compared to more early directions reforms, focused either on individual experiments and pilot projects (civil service reform), or exclusively on budgeting issues,

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

result-oriented. At the same time, as part of the administrative reform, the very scheme for introducing results-based management in the Russian Federation did not receive full conceptual elaboration. In fact, the Concept of Administrative Reform included only measures to introduce individual mechanisms and tools for results-based management, while the development of a management scheme using new management technologies remained “outside the scope” of this Concept, as well as other conceptual documents defining the directions for reforming public administration in the Russian Federation. Federation. This feature was a significant limiting factor for the subsequent implementation of this area of ​​administrative reform.

Table 1 highlights the main tasks and activities associated with the implementation of performance management elements within the framework of various public administration reforms in the Russian Federation. For each of the activities, an expert assessment of the degree of implementation of the corresponding activity was given and problems that required solutions for its successful implementation were identified. In general, it can be stated that to date, measures to introduce the principles and procedures of results-based management, provided for by various public administration reforms, have been partially completed; Full implementation of performance management mechanisms and tools requires additional systemic efforts in the medium term.

Table 1

management surveys on results in public administration reform activities4

Reforms/challenges/activities related to the implementation of results-based management Degree of implementation (as of December 2006)5 Degree of implementation (as of June 2008) Challenges

Administrative reform (Concept of administrative reform in the Russian Federation in 2006-2010): tasks, activities

1. Creation and implementation of a comprehensive system - departmental and interdepartmental planning for goals and performance results - project management for goals and performance results - competitive distribution of resources between departments and monitoring the achievement of the results of their activities Partially (in terms of planning the goals and performance results of the IIV) Partially (in terms of planning the goals and results of activities of the executive authorities, their structural divisions and subordinate organizations (in the “pilot” mode); competitive distribution of resources (in the experimental mode at the regional level) Project management mechanisms are not used enough; interaction mechanisms for interdepartmental / interlevel goals are not sufficiently developed and tasks; mechanisms for monitoring the achievement of results require improvement; a formalized system of competitive distribution of resources between departments has been developed in a number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and can be adapted to the conditions of other constituent entities of the Russian Federation and for the federal level

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

Continuation of Table 1

Creation of a unified state information system for planning and monitoring the effectiveness of government agencies in order to achieve key indicators of socio-economic development, including through the development, integration and accessibility of state statistical data bases and the introduction of modern information systems in executive authorities to support project management and the formation of departmental management reporting Partially. Work is underway in the area of ​​generating departmental management reporting. Partially. Rosstat collects data on 65% of the indicators of budget planning entities6 included in the Consolidated Report of the Government of the Russian Federation, active work is being carried out to organize the collection and publication of indicators characterizing the effectiveness of the activities of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities Indicators of achieving goals and objectives in DROND Federal executive authorities do not fully coincide with the indicators included in the Consolidated Report of the Russian Government. The widespread use of departmental reporting continues, which leads to a shift in emphasis in the assessment

Improving the methodology and procedure for developing medium-term programs of the Government of the Russian Federation The methodology is not approved The methodology is not approved The goals, objectives and activities of the medium-term programs of the Government of the Russian Federation are not assessed in resource (including monetary) terms

Implementation of a unified vertically integrated automated system for monitoring the performance of state authorities and local governments in achieving the most important indicators socio-economic development of the Russian Federation and the execution of their powers (State Automated System “Management”) Not applicable7 Partially. The concept of the automated system GAS "Management" is being developed. Difficulties in distributing responsibility for achieving indicators of socio-economic development between management levels

2. Development of key measurable indicators of the efficiency and effectiveness of the activities of executive authorities in the main directions of their activities in accordance with the strategic goals of the state Basically yes (within the framework of the Consolidated Report of the Government, the Report on the goals and results of budget policy, DRONDs of budget planning subjects) Yes (in within the framework of the Consolidated Report of the Government of the Russian Federation, DRONDs of budget planning subjects, lists of performance indicators of the activities of the executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal districts) A large number of performance indicators complicates the analysis and complicates the process of making management decisions; the performance indicators of the activities of the executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal districts are not directly related to state development goals

Formation of a system of performance indicators for the activities of executive authorities and budget programs, including indicators of the current and final results and resources used Yes, partially (within the framework of the development of DRONDs and federal programs) Yes, partially (within the framework of the development of DRONDs and justifications for budgetary allocations) The need to refine the development methodology and implementation of budget target programs (DSP, VSP, inter-level budget programs, FAIP, correlation with national projects)

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

Continuation of Table 1

3. Introduction of technologies and goal-setting procedures that ensure the linking of goals to specific performers, the development of indicators that allow adequate assessment of the degree of achievement of set goals and the actions of performers taken to achieve these goals, partly within the framework of pilot projects, partly within the framework of pilot Projects and in individual federal executive authorities Responsibility system managers and civil servants of the Executive Office for achieving goals and results not defined not implemented (except for individual pilot projects) system of planning and ongoing assessment of the performance of civil servants

Formation of an incentive system for civil servants based on performance indicators, job regulations, as well as fixed-term service contracts with leading employees No, but work is underway (development of performance indicators for the Federal Tax Service of Russia, the Federal Customs Service of Russia, etc.) Partially (in the Federal Tax Service of Russia, the Federal Customs Service Russia, etc.) The relationship between indicators and activity planning and current assessment is insufficient; a large volume of “current” activities of civil servants to carry out assignments remains a gap in the level of remuneration between public authorities and the private sector (for comparable positions)

4. Development and implementation of management accounting, which makes it possible to distribute resources according to assigned tasks, as well as ensure control over the achievement of results and determine the personal responsibility of managers and officials for solving these problems No No There is no practice of management accounting; in fact, only financial resources are considered as managed resources

Development and implementation of a methodology for calculating resource support for set goals and objectives No Partially (as part of the preparation of justifications for budgetary allocations) Only financial resources are considered as resource support

5. Development and implementation of an internal audit system that allows assessing the effectiveness of the activities of structural units and officials responsible for solving assigned tasks, as well as assessing the effectiveness of budget expenditures Rather not (internal performance audit units have been created only in a few federal executive authorities) Partially (in some federal executive authorities and some constituent entities of the Russian Federation) Lack of a unified methodology for conducting performance audits (including taking into account the assessment of the effectiveness of budget expenditures)

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

Continuation of Table 1

Creation of mechanisms for competitive distribution of resources in departments, i.e. mechanisms for distributing funds from the corresponding budget to ensure the activities of executive authorities, providing for procedures for choosing between two or more options for spending a specific amount of budget funds to carry out government functions and provide public services No No It is necessary to clarify the task and the possibilities for its implementation (for example, by introducing a requirement for consideration of alternative methods of achieving the desired results when developing programs)

6. Introduction of a system for regular assessment of risks that impede the achievement of intended goals Most likely not (risks are assessed within the framework of DRONDs) Partially (risk assessment is carried out as part of the preparation of DRONDs and BPs) Lack of a unified approved concept and methodology for risk assessment

7. Introduction of management mechanisms for organizations subordinate to executive authorities partially (within the framework of pilot projects at the federal and regional levels) partially (within the framework of pilot projects at the federal and regional levels) Lack of a unified approved concept and methodology for the effective management of subordinate organizations

8. Creation of a standard legal and methodological framework for the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (in order to introduce results-oriented management procedures and project management in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation) with its subsequent experimental testing No (the regulatory and methodological framework is developed at the level of each individual subject Russian Federation) No (the legal and methodological framework is being developed at the level of each individual subject of the Russian Federation). At the same time, a significant number of events are being carried out to exchange experience in implementing results-based management at the regional level. Additional resources spent by subjects on developing their own regulatory and methodological framework. Lack of unified approaches (by type of subjects of the Russian Federation). Lack of generalized results of practice at the level of subjects of the Russian Federation.

Reform of the budget process (Concept “Reform of the budget process in the Russian Federation 2004-2006”): activities

1. making changes to the budget classification of the Russian Federation, aimed at: a) reorienting budgets to achieve final results, including by increasing the independence and responsibility of participants in the budget process and administrators of budget funds Yes Yes Further improvement of the budget classification is necessary

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

Continuation of Table 1

b) bringing the structure of the functional classification of expenses into line with the main functions performed by government bodies c) harmonizing the budget classification with IFRS and international standards of government finance statistics Yes Yes Further improvement of the budget classification is necessary

2. Allocation of the budget of existing and the budget of accepted obligations Yes (in terms of existing obligations) Yes (in terms of existing obligations) Requires clarification in terms of the budget of accepted obligations

3. Determination of the procedure for maintaining the register of expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation Yes Yes

4. Determination of the procedure for drawing up a long-term financial plan and draft federal budget Yes Yes

5. Approval of accounting and financial reporting standards for general government units Yes Yes

6. Annual submission by budget planning entities of reports on the results and main directions of their activities Yes Yes Preparation of DRONDs is not synchronized with the budget process and is not part of the budget process

7. Improving the methodology for the development and implementation of federal (regional, municipal) target programs Partially yes (in terms of the Federal Target Program) Partially yes, but improvement of the methodology for the development and implementation of cerebral palsy and terrestrial target programs is required Lack of uniform recommendations for improving the RCP and MTP; normative, legal and methodological ones have not been developed basis for interregional/intermunicipal and interlevel target programs

8. The use of departmental target programs in the budget process (including determining the procedure for the development, approval and implementation of departmental target programs) Probably not (there are examples at the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation) Yes, however, at the federal level, most of the TCPs are analytical. It is necessary to improve the TCP tool (including including simplification of procedures related to the approval of the TCP at the federal level)

9. Distribution of part of the budget for accepted obligations on a competitive basis based on the results of an assessment of existing and proposed budget programs No No (in some constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the distribution of funds between BCPs is provided based on the rating of the latter) Lack of a unified methodological approach to the rating system for accepted obligations

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

Continuation of Table 1

10. Expanding the powers of administrators of budget programs in the process of budget execution partially (as part of changes to the budget classification) partially (as part of changes to the budget classification) Conceptual and methodological elaboration of this issue is necessary

11. making changes to the Budget Code in terms of regulating the budget process, adopting the relevant acts of the Government of the Russian Federation partially (amendments to the Budget Code have been developed, but not introduced) Basically yes (a number of legal acts ensuring the implementation of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation are at the approval stage) A coordinated position is required interested OIV

Reform of the civil service (Federal program “Reform of the civil service of the Russian Federation in 2003-2005” (extended until 2007)

1. Testing of new methods for planning the activities of federal government bodies, a system of indicators and criteria for assessing the activities of federal civil servants partially (within the framework of experiments and pilot projects) partially (within the framework of experiments and pilot projects) Lack of generalized results of experiments, incl. in connection with other areas, the lack of an approved methodological framework that ensures the interconnection of the goals and objectives of bodies, structural divisions and civil servants

2. Application of methods of program-targeted financing of individual federal government bodies, aimed at increasing the efficiency of the activities of these bodies and federal government employees Most likely not; the event was partially implemented as part of the reform of the budget process (however at the level of bodies, not civil servants) Probably not; The event was partially implemented as part of the reform of the budget process (however at the level of bodies, not civil servants) Bodies that have completely switched to the program-target principle, there is insufficient motivation of civil servants to achieve their goals/expected results

3. Use of the balance sheet method of accounting for resources and modern forms of assessing the effectiveness of budgetary expenditures made by federal government bodies Rather no No Expenditures on financing apparatuses remain largely static; the lack of management accounting does not allow linking them with program costs

Abbreviations used:

Budget Code of the Russian Federation - Budget Code of the Russian Federation; BCP - Budget Target Programs; DTP - Departmental Targeted Programs; GAS - State Automated System; DROND - Report on results and main activities; Cerebral palsy - Long-term targeted programs; MTP - Municipal Target Programs; NLA - normative legal act; OIV - executive authorities; RCP - regional target programs; SBP is the subject of budget planning; FAIP - Federal Targeted Investment Program; Federal executive authority - Federal executive authorities.

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

“Road map” for introducing performance management mechanisms into the activities of government bodies of the Russian Federation in the medium term

The problem of the lack of a unified Concept for the implementation of results-based management is aggravated by the difference in approaches to the implementation of management innovations within the framework of the public administration reforms under consideration, the lack of unity of terminology, and significant differences in the positions of key government bodies responsible for the implementation of relevant concepts and programs. The consequence of this was the ambiguity of understanding not only of individual terms, but also of ideas about the expected results of related reforms. This state of affairs led to duplication of efforts, adoption of conflicting decisions, dissipation of resources and ultimately reduced the effect of the implementation of measures provided for in various areas of reform. Thus, an objective need arose to formulate a unified methodology and an interrelated action plan for the introduction of mechanisms and procedures for results-based management within the framework of various public administration reforms.

To this end, in 2006, a group of experts from the Center for Strategic Research, the State University Higher School of Economics, the Center for Economic and Financial Consulting and the World Bank developed and presented for wide discussion a draft “Road Map” for introducing performance management mechanisms into the activities of government bodies of the Russian Federation for the medium term. perspective8 (hereinafter referred to as the “Road Map”). The Roadmap is based on an analysis of the degree of implementation of the main measures for introducing the principles and procedures of performance-based management within the framework of various public administration reforms, presented in the previous subsection of this article, as well as an analysis of the main problems in introducing performance-based management mechanisms in the Russian Federation at various stages management cycle (planning, implementation, control). Accordingly, the Road Map activities were also grouped into three blocks:

1. Correlation of goals, results and resources of public authorities in the planning process.

2. Coordination of the resources used, results achieved and goals of public authorities in the process of their implementation (execution of plans).

3. Control, evaluation, encouragement and correction of achieved goals, results and resources used.

International experience with similar reforms suggests that the introduction of performance management mechanisms and tools will require coordinated efforts over at least the next four years (2007-2010). The extension of the implementation period of the Concept “Administrative Reform in the Russian Federation” until 2010 confirmed this assumption.

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

In general, despite its unofficial nature, the Road Map is used by interested executive authorities in their activities (see:). In addition to the main goal of creating a unified methodology for implementing results-based management, the development and implementation of the Road Map activities were intended to orient the expert community towards solving current problems and increasing the impact of coordinating efforts within the framework of implementing various public administration reforms. In addition, the presence of a “Road Map” provides the opportunity to monitor and evaluate (including external evaluation) the process of introducing results-based management mechanisms. To a certain extent, the process of developing and discussing intermediate results of the implementation of the Road Map activities was one of the examples of independent external monitoring of the implementation of public administration reforms in Russia.

Interim results of the implementation of the “Road Map” for the introduction of performance management mechanisms into the activities of government bodies of the Russian Federation in the medium term

Analysis of progress in the implementation of public administration reforms in 2007 - the first half of 2008 allows us to evaluate the intermediate results of the implementation of the “Road Map” for the introduction of performance management mechanisms into the activities of public authorities of the Russian Federation in the medium term (Table 2).

In general, it is necessary to note the positive dynamics in the implementation of results-based management. Thus, for most of the Road Map activities (16 out of 27), some progress has been identified. The main achievements were noted in the following areas:

Introduction of new budget legislation;

Introduction of tools for comparing the development of territories and assessing the effectiveness of the activities of government bodies and local self-government;

Development and implementation of departmental and regional results management systems;

Expanding the use of program-targeted management methods. It should be noted that progress in the development and implementation of results-based management tools and mechanisms is observed not only at the federal, but also at the regional level. In accordance with a survey conducted by the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia in May 2007, if before 2006 the level of regulatory development of tools and mechanisms for management based on the results (issues of preparing documents of a strategic nature, medium-term programs for socio-economic development, Consolidated reports of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, Reports on results and main areas of activity (DROND) of executive authorities, Departmental Target Programs (DTP), issues of auditing performance and competitive distribution of funds taking into account the results achieved) was only 11.4%, then by the end of 2007 the constituent entities of the Russian Federation expected to reach the level 39.4%. Co-

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

responsibly, the level of implementation of performance management mechanisms and tools on average in the Russian Federation (according to 77 constituent entities of the Russian Federation) before 2006 was 7.6%, in 2006 - 13.4%, the expected value at the end of 2007. was 22.4% (the level of implementation in a separate constituent entity of the Russian Federation was calculated as the share of implemented tools and performance management mechanisms in their total number).

An expert assessment of the actual degree of achievement of the planned results carried out in mid-2008 (based on materials from the legal database, as well as based on an analysis of the official websites of government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation) confirmed that the results planned for 2007 were, in general, achieved (Table 3), and in the field of legal regulation and methodological support even slightly exceeded.

table 2

"ROAD MAP"

implementation of performance management mechanisms in the activities of government bodies of the Russian Federation for the medium term: degree of implementation (as of June 2008)

Activities Immediate result Status of the activity as of June 15, 2008 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 sq. 2 sq. 3 sq. 4 sq. 1 floor 2nd floor

1. Correlation of goals, results and resources of public authorities in the planning process

1.1. Generalization of experience in implementing performance management mechanisms in federal government bodies and government bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation in 2004-2006. (including the results of “pilot” projects). Formation and dissemination of a library of “best practices” - Analytical report summarizing the experience and lessons learned from implementing results-based management mechanisms - materials on “best practices” are presented on the website; measures were taken to disseminate experience. Implemented. In 2007, several events were held to analyze and disseminate experience in implementing results-based management

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

Continuation of Table 2

1.2. Development of the results-based management concept and mechanisms for its implementation

with subsequent submission to the Commission on the Performance of Federal and Regional Executive Bodies

1.3. Preparation of a draft federal law

on amendments to Federal Law No. 115-FZ “On state forecasting of socio-economic development of the Russian Federation” / draft Federal Law “On general principles of strategic management, planning, implementation of activities and monitoring the results of activities of state and municipal government bodies in the Russian Federation”

A concept for introducing performance management mechanisms was developed and agreed upon

Draft federal law

1.4. Development of methods for preparing state strategies (policies), reports on the results and main directions of activities of public authorities (OGB) and programs for the socio-economic development of the Russian Federation for the medium term, based on a system of strategic goals of public authorities and indicators of the results of their activities.

A unified methodological framework for preparing documents for strategic planning and results-based management

Not implemented

Implemented

partially

(within the framework of Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated June 28, 2007 No. 825 “On assessing the effectiveness of the activities of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation”, Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated April 28, 2008 No. 607 “On assessing the effectiveness of local governments of urban districts and municipal areas”

completed

partially.

There is no unified methodological basis.

Over the past period, a methodology for assessing the effectiveness of the activities of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation has been developed and approved (in pursuance of Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 825 of June 28, 2007);

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

Continuation of Table 2

activity (including the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation in areas of joint jurisdiction and delegated powers)

Further development of this methodology is expected. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of May 26, 2008 No. 392

1.5. Preparation of a draft federal law on amendments to the Federal Law “On the Government of the Russian Federation” in terms of goals and performance results and preparation of a draft resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Regulations of the Government of the Russian Federation regarding the implementation of instructions

and their correlation with goals, results and resources

1.6. Introduction of the mechanism of budget assignments

Draft federal law, draft Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation

New event

1.7. Introducing amendments to the Budget Code in terms of introducing the principles of results-based management and improving the quality of management of public and municipal finances, implementation of messages

“On the formation, provision and distribution of subsidies from the federal budget to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation” provides for the introduction of performance indicators in connection with federal budget transfers

Not implemented

Implemented on a pilot basis in certain regions of the Russian Federation

Partially implemented. The current version of the Budget Code does not provide for compliance of target expenditure items with the goals of government bodies

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation (including goals and results of budget policy), based on a system of strategic goals of the system of government bodies and indicators of the results of their activities, allocation of program-target classification of budget expenditures, ensuring compliance of target items of expenditure (TSR) with the goals of government bodies, types of expenses (BP) - budget target programs

Draft federal law on amendments to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation

Budget target programs can be assigned a separate type of expenditure (except for analytical TCPs). In order to improve the quality of public finance management, Order No. 123n of the Russian Ministry of Finance dated December 10, 2007 was approved “On organizing monitoring of the quality of financial management carried out by the main managers of federal funds.”

budget."

new forms of justification for budget allocations have been introduced, in which there are elements of dividing planned expenses by goals and objectives, as well as the immediate and final results obtained

1.8. Introducing amendments to the regulations on executive authorities in order to reflect in them the goals of the activities of executive authorities and to provide opportunities to change the staffing level (in terms of employees hired under fixed-term contracts for the implementation of budget target programs) within the established limits of the staffing level

legal

Not implemented

Continuation of Table 2

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

Continuation of Table 2

1.9. A complete inventory of budget target programs, their rating assessment and correlation with the goals and results of the activities of government bodies, approval of a unified methodology for the preparation of BPs (National Projects, Federal Target Programs, (o) Regional Target Programs,

VTsP, etc., including inter-level programs)

1.10. Creation and implementation of an automated integrated system of departmental, interdepartmental and inter-level strategic and budget planning according to goals

and performance results based on a system of reports on the results and main directions of the activities of the State Duma (including the methodology/methodology for calculating the resource support for the goals set)

Draft regulations on changing/terminating the BCP based on the results of the rating assessment

Approved methodology for preparing BCP

Approved methodology/technique for calculating resource support for set goals

Automated integrated system of strategic

and budget planning

1.11. Creation of a standard regulatory and methodological framework in the field of planning goals, results and resources, implementation of results-based management mechanisms and mechanisms for monitoring the achievement of goals, results and use of resources for the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (taking into account the accumulated experience in implementing results-based management elements at the regional level, typology of regions , changes in the planning system at the federal level). Approbation of the methodological base, making adjustments based on the results of implementation

Model normative legal acts, methodological recommendations (taking into account various types of constituent entities of the Russian Federation)

Not implemented on

federal level, but partially implemented

in the subjects

Russian

Federation

(Chelyabinsk,

Saratovskaya

region, etc.)

Implemented partially as part of the automation of the process of preparing DRONDs in some departments and constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The introduction of a unified automated system GAS-Management is planned for 2009. There is no unified methodology for calculating resource support for the goals set.

Not implemented

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

Continuation of Table 2

1.13. Carrying out training activities, exchange of experience, discussion of accumulated practice in the field of implementation of performance management mechanisms

The procedure for conducting competitive selection to stimulate the introduction of performance management mechanisms at the local level

Project Implementation Reports

Partially implemented. Unified methodological recommendations have not been developed; the procedure for conducting competitive selection to stimulate the implementation of performance management mechanisms at the local level has been adopted and applied in several constituent entities of the Russian Federation

Seminars - stages of training, implementation

conferences, forums, etc.

2. Coordination of the resources used, results achieved and goals of public authorities in the process of their implementation (execution of plans)

2.1. Introduction of elements of management accounting in government bodies, allowing to obtain reliable information on labor, material, technical and financial costs for the implementation of program activities / projects aimed at achieving goals and results

Approved methodology for implementing management accounting

Automated management accounting systems

Not implemented. A unified methodology for implementing management accounting has not been developed

2.2. Introduction of program (project) management principles to achieve goals and performance results, including development of the matrix management system mechanism in the State Government with the transfer of appropriate powers to program/project managers (administrators)

Experiment to introduce the mechanism of a matrix control system in the OGV

Analytical report on the results of the experiment

Validated methodology for full-scale implementation

Not implemented

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

Continuation of Table 2

2.3. Introduction of mechanisms for individual activity planning and ongoing assessment of the performance of structural units and civil servants

2.4.Development and implementation of the principles of competitive distribution of resources between programs/projects of the UGV (at the expense of the budget of accepted obligations, including additional budget revenues)

2.5. Implementation of a system of regular assessment of risks that impede the achievement of intended goals and results, assessment of the contribution of immediate results to the indicators of the final socially significant results of the activities of the State Guard Group

2.6. Expanding the powers of the main managers of budget funds

in terms of the possibility of independently making changes to the economic classification of expenditures of the relevant state government budgets within the established limits for the functional classification

2.7. Introduction of management mechanisms based on results of organizations and state corporations subordinate to public authorities

Approved methods for individual activity planning and ongoing assessment of civil servants

Draft regulations, methods of competitive allocation of resources based on the assessment of programs/projects of the State Duma

Implemented

partially

(In some

subjects

Russian

Federation

and individual

Implemented

partially

(in a number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, methods for competitive distribution of funds between BCs (OGVs) based on rating assessments have been developed)

Concept, methodology and techniques for risk assessment

Implemented

partially

(in some federal executive authorities, risk assessment methods have been developed)

legal

Not implemented

Concept, methodology and methods of performance management by subordinate organizations

Implemented

partially.

Results-based management mechanisms for subordinate organizations have been introduced in some state bodies

Issues of state and municipal administration. 2008. No. 3

Continuation of Table 2

2.8. Intensifying the use of existing incentive mechanisms for the implementation of results-based management principles, ensuring compatibility of requirements within various incentive mechanisms

Clarifications/changes in the procedure for conducting competitions/experiments

Implemented

partially

(introduction of the possibility of allocating grants based on the results of assessing the effectiveness of the activities of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, introduction of a similar provision in relation to

3. Control, evaluation, encouragement and correction of achieved goals, results and resources used

3.1. Introduction of an internal audit system that allows assessing the level of achievement of goals, the effectiveness of the activities of the state body, structural divisions of the state body and officials, as well as relevant budget expenditures

3.2. Introduction of an external government audit system that allows independent assessment of the level of achievement of goals, the effectiveness of the activities of the state government, structural divisions and officials, as well as relevant budget expenditures

3.3. Introduction of a system of public monitoring and evaluation of the results of the activities of the State Duma (with the possible use of competitive/rating assessments)

3.4. Development and implementation of unified forms of management and budget reporting by objectives and results (including new forms of reporting on the results contained in the reports

on the results and main activities of the UGC)

Methodology for conducting internal audit of performance

Methodology and techniques for conducting external government audit

Public monitoring methods

Reports on the results of public monitoring

Draft legal act

Partially implemented. The internal audit system has been implemented in some state bodies

Not implemented

Not implemented

Not implemented. There is no uniform form; OGV generate reports using their own methods

Dobrolyubova E.I. Implementation of management principles and procedures...

Continuation of Table 2

3.5. Development and implementation of a comprehensive system for monitoring the degree of achievement of goals and actual results based on management and budget reporting data

Implementation of a system for monitoring the degree of achievement of goals and expected results

Partially

implemented

as part of the preparation of the Consolidated Report of the Russian Government. Implementation is expected within the framework of the GAS-Management system

3.6. Formation of a system of material and non-material incentives and encouragement for the UGV, structural divisions of the UGV and civil servants, based on an assessment of the results of their activities

legal

Partially implemented in

within the framework of the experiment on budgetary budgeting (including the distribution of the bonus fund between structural divisions in individual state bodies)

3.7. Development and implementation of mechanisms for adjusting goals (policies), performance results and resources in the system of government bodies based on the results of monitoring the activities of government bodies

■ Methodology Not implemented

according to Provano

conducting analysis of achievement of results and adjustment of goals (policies), expected results and resource provision

Table 3

Degree of development and implementation of performance management tools and mechanisms in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (%)

Indicator Before 2006 2006 2007 (plan) 2007 (actual)

Degree of regulatory elaboration of performance management tools and mechanisms at the level of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation 11.4 28.3 39.4 42.9

Degree of methodological support for management tools and mechanisms based on results 6.7 14.3 23.7 27.7

Share of performance management mechanisms and tools implemented on a pilot basis 4.2 12.2 21.4 21.2

Share of fully implemented management mechanisms based on results 7.6 13.4 22.4 23.3

Degree of automation of mechanisms and management tools based on results 2.3 2.6 4.2 4.2

Introduction

The whole spectrum modern methods control can be placed between two limits: reactive control - target control.

Reactive management is a very common approach to management, the peculiarity of which is that planning is carried out immediately before the start of actions or already in their process. Plans change frequently, either because there has not been time to consider alternatives or because there have been no established goals. Management comes down to reacting to current events. Its effectiveness is assessed by the manager’s vigorous activity and the strength of his pressure on his subordinates, and not by the final results of his efforts.

The effectiveness of applying this management method in conditions of instability in the internal and external environment of the organization and the growing level of competition is significantly reduced.

The method of management by objectives comes to the fore. The method of management by objectives (target management) is most often used when the company’s activities undergo sharp changes and it finds itself in a crisis (or, perhaps, on the contrary, it faces the need to quickly and in the best possible way use the emerging opportunities), and from the entire management team it is required to subordinate your work to the achievement of main goals. In such a situation, the company’s management one way or another comes to a special management regime, defined in world practice as “management by objectives.”

The relevance of this issue increases due to negative consequences global financial crisis, when operating efficiency is significantly reduced.

In Russia, the implementation of management by objectives is still in its infancy: and although some companies have made some attempts to use the principles of management by objectives, the full functioning of management by objectives is still far away.

Based on the foregoing, the purpose of this work is to develop measures for the implementation of a management system by objectives in the enterprise.

To achieve this goal, a number of tasks were formulated:

Determine the essence of the management method by goals (results);

Study the main stages of management by goals (results);

Provide general characteristics KUM LLC;

Develop measures for the implementation of a management system based on goals (results) of KUM LLC.

The object of study of this work is the enterprise KUM LLC, the main activity of which is wholesale and retail trade.

The subject of analysis is the management model.

Theoretical aspects of management by goals (results)

The essence of the management method by goals (results)

The technology of “Management by Objectives” - MBO (Management by objective) was proposed by Peter Drucker in the 50s of the twentieth century. According to his formula, the effective operation of an enterprise requires that each work be subordinated to common goals. In particular, the efforts of managers should be aimed at ensuring the success of the enterprise as a whole.

The essence of the concept of management by objectives, also called management by results, is to focus on the final result. The goal and the result are inseparable in this approach. When managing work to achieve a goal, you should constantly take into account the results achieved.

Goals are a specification of the organization's mission in a form accessible to manage the process of their implementation. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook for Universities / Ed. Radugina A.A. - M.: Center, 2006. - 432 p.

The main task that the Management By Objectives system was supposed to solve was increasing the agility of a business organization.

There are many definitions of management by objectives.

Management by objectives is an organization management system (or a system of management methods) that simultaneously connects both goals and planning objectives, as well as all the activities of the organization. Economics of an enterprise (firm): Textbook / Ed. prof. O.I. Volkova and Assoc. O.V. Devyatkina. - M.: INFRA - M, 2007. - 601 p.

Management by Objectives is a systematic and organized approach that allows management to focus on achieving goals and achieve the best results with available resources. Meskon M.Kh., Albert M., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management: Trans. from English - M.: “Delo LTD”, 2006 - 702 p.

Management by objectives is the work of management to formulate the goals of the organization, communicate them to employees, provide them with the necessary resources, as well as distribute roles and responsibilities for achieving the goals. Drucker P.F. Management challenges in the 21st century: trans. from English: Textbook. M.: Publishing House "Williams", 2007. - 620 p.

Target management methods assume that the manager is obliged to determine in advance the final results of his actions and develop work programs to achieve them. This approach to management is characterized by the presence of a plan for solving problems, even if these are such unexpected events as machine breakdowns, changes in product designs, interruptions in the supply of necessary materials, etc. The style that dominates in this zone of the management spectrum does not require the constant presence of a manager in his office. workplace. No matter what problem arises, there is always a plan in place to determine the course of action and methods that will best solve a particular problem.

The use of management by objectives (results) systematizes the management process, increases the performance of the enterprise, is an effective tool for establishing and maintaining a quality management system in the enterprise, maintaining quality at all levels of the enterprise.

Management by objectives (results) places high demands on personnel. The better an employee understands the goals set for him and the more accurately the latter correspond to his internal aspirations, the more likely such goals will be achieved.

The functioning of the management system based on goals (results) is based on three basic principles: decomposition of tasks “top-down”, feedback “bottom-up” and “intra-company labor market”. Let's look at them in more detail.

The principle of task decomposition “from top to bottom”. The work of the MBO system is based on the decomposition of the tasks facing the organization according to the existing management hierarchy in the company. The company's objectives - they are set to the general manager by the business owners or the general manager formulates them himself - the general manager breaks them down into subtasks, which he then distributes among his subordinates (top managers). In this case, subtasks are identified in such a way that their solution provides a solution to the initial task that was posed to the general manager and, accordingly, to the company as a whole. Exactly the same procedure for decomposing tasks into subtasks is repeated at lower levels of the management hierarchy: top managers form subtasks for their direct subordinates based on their tasks, etc.

The principle of bottom-up feedback. In the process of agreeing on a task between the manager who formulated it and his subordinates, to whom the task is assigned, adjustments may occur to the content of the task, its level of priority or deadlines. Task adjustment is an important and generally positive process. On the one hand, during a joint discussion and exchange of argumentation, an equal understanding of the wording of the tasks is achieved, and the task itself can be transformed into a more accurate and correct one in content. On the other hand, the approval process ensures the necessary balance between the desired results and the resources available in the company. How “objective” is this kind of resource assessment? Is there a danger here that subordinates will underestimate their “real” capabilities? Here it is necessary to keep in mind: the main resource in this case may not be money, not production capacity, not the number of working people, but, first of all, the subordinate himself. Together with the money, capacity, and employees at his disposal. And together with your ability or inability, desire or unwillingness to achieve the desired result using the available means. This is all the more true the higher the subordinate's position. A manager's main resource is his skill in managing other resources. It follows: the higher the hierarchical level at which the task is agreed upon, the more important is the discussion and voluntary, responsible acceptance of the task based on a realistic self-assessment of the performer’s capabilities. Vesnin V.R. Fundamentals of management. M.: Triada-LTD, 2007. - 384 p.

During the coordination, the manager can and should suggest solutions to the subordinate manager that he could not see. He can and should convince and inspire him. It is important, however, to stay on the edge, beyond which the pressure on the subordinate becomes tantamount to orders issued from above that are “not discussed.” Once you cross this line, the consent of the performers will turn into a formal ritual. In such situations, the likelihood of obtaining results, especially if it requires non-standard moves and exceptional efforts, will sharply decrease: without internal acceptance of tasks, neither initiative nor a breakthrough beyond what is being done and has been done in the company until now is possible.

The principle of the “intra-company labor market”. Unlike functional responsibilities, tasks (planned tasks) in a results-based management system are unique each time and cannot be provided for in advance in standard contracts concluded when hiring. In a sense, planned tasks are additional labor costs not provided for in the original terms of employment. It is precisely because of this circumstance that the relationship of voluntariness and equality of the parties in the process of agreeing on tasks are so important. In fact, agreement is a kind of “bargaining” between the parties, and the agreement reached is a kind of “microcontract”. The terms of such a local contract include the task itself, the timing of its completion, additional resources provided to the performer, as well as the form and amount of remuneration/bonus depending on the achievement of the final result.

Despite many advantages, the management system by objectives also has a number of disadvantages (Table 1). Pereverzev M.P., Shaidenko N.A., Basovsky L.E. Management. - M.: INFRA-M, 2009. - 420 p.

Table 1

Advantages and disadvantages of the concept of management by objectives (results)

Advantages	Flaws
Increasing work efficiency due to the fact that each manager has a clear understanding of both his goals and the goals of the organization as a whole	Not applicable to the management of an organization, where it is customary to determine goals only by top management, without involving managers at all levels in this process
Increased motivation to work, since in these conditions everyone feels a personal interest in achieving goals	Difficult to use without personal motivation
Visibility of achieving the final result, because the time frame for its achievement is clearly formulated	Managers' attention is focused on achieving current and short-term goals (results), i.e. to the detriment of strategic long-term goals
Improved relationships between managers and subordinates due to transparency and alignment of goals	A labor-intensive, complex and lengthy process that produces results only when and where the manager himself chooses a model of action (behavior)
Improving the system of monitoring and evaluating the work of each member of the organization (in accordance with the results achieved)	The presence of a weak information management system (its availability) results in unsatisfactory organization of control

The value of the results of management by objectives increases when management methods allow you to program actions taking into account real time and cost constraints. Obviously, value is diminished when work is started before programming has been completed - this inevitably leads to costly adjustments.