Score assessment of organizational performance (BOERO)

The BOERO method is based on determining the socio-economic trends in the development of an enterprise of any organizational and legal form, its effectiveness in terms of achieving production, economic and social goals. In a simplified form, this is a calculation of the performance of enterprise personnel for a specific period of time. The BOERO method is based on well-known principles - a plan at the lowest cost, achieving the final result, to each according to his work, incentives depending on contribution, comparability of assessments.

The efficiency of an enterprise for a specific period is determined by the numerical value of a complex performance indicator that characterizes the magnitude of the achieved result in relation to the set goals of the activity. The value of the BOERO indicator is based on achieving final results enterprise, resource efficiency, ensuring social development team. Theoretical basis Calculation of work efficiency using the scoring method is discussed in section 3.4.1.

BOERO allows you to evaluate the efficiency of an enterprise and organization, as well as their structural divisions for a quarter, a year, a five-year period. With the help of BOERO, you can summarize the results of the competition and distribute income (net profit) between the structural divisions of enterprises.

Modifications of the BOERO method were made for industrial enterprises, construction and installation organizations, commercial enterprises, housing and communal enterprises, design organizations and educational institutions. The differences are related to the list of economic and social indicators, weighting coefficients and the procedure for their calculation using statistical and operational reporting.

Automated preparation of operational and statistical reporting with the accumulation of data on computer media, it makes it possible to expand the composition of private performance indicators, including the entire list of economic and social indicators discussed above. However, as the number of performance indicators increases, the significance of the weighting coefficients decreases and the law of large numbers comes into force.

Our practical calculations show that the introduction of additional indicators with weighting coefficients of 0.01 or 0.02 in the presence of indicators with a specific weight of 0.05-0.10 does not significantly increase the accuracy of calculations, although it reduces the spread of the final indicator. Therefore, the number of private performance indicators should not exceed 20. With the manual method of calculating the BOERO using the simplest technology, the most labor-intensive is the selection of initial data from existing reporting. In this case, it is advisable to reduce private performance indicators to 10. The selection of the most significant indicators and determination of weight coefficients is carried out using the expert method with the involvement of qualified specialists. Theoretically, there is a “saddle point” at which the number of indicators and the costs of their development are optimal. Depending on the composition of indicators and types of enterprises and organizations, the optimum is in the range from 10 to 20 indicators.

Let's look at examples of calculating the efficiency of an industrial enterprise and educational institution according to the BOERO method based on the results of work for the year. In table 2 shows the calculation of the efficiency of a medium-sized industrial enterprise with a volume of commercial output of 360 million UAH. and a workforce of 4 thousand people. The initial data for the calculation are determined from the enterprise's statistical reporting forms for the year (third and fourth columns from the left). As can be seen from the table, the final value of the comprehensive performance indicator was 103.8 points, which indicates the good performance of the enterprise. Out of 12, 7 main criterion indicators were met: balance sheet profit, volume of commercial output, labor productivity, costs per 1 UAH. products, product quality, capital productivity of OPF, implementation of scientific and technological progress. There were slight deviations for the worse in the following 5 specific indicators: loss of working time, average annual wage, staff turnover, level of labor discipline, etc.

The management of the enterprise should pay special attention to these indicators. When summing up the results of the competition between industrial enterprises administrative district, this enterprise cannot qualify for a prize place due to failure to meet a number of indicators, but will be located in the advanced group with a “good” rating. The specific location will depend on the performance of other businesses.

Calculation of the effectiveness of an educational institution that trains specialists with higher education and conducting advanced training courses, is shown in table. 3. This is a small educational institution with a staff of 100 full-time teachers and staff, in which 1000 students study per year, the volume of work performed per year is 5.4 million UAH. The final value of the work efficiency indicator was 96 points, which indicates satisfactory work.

Of the 12 performance indicators, 6 indicators were met, namely revenue from training and research, output per 1 employee, average number of students, volume of publications per 1 employee, workload fulfillment by 1 employee and number of students per 1 employee. 6 basic values ​​were not met for such indicators as balance sheet profit, costs per 1 UAH. work, quality of training and research, average annual salary per 1 employee, staff turnover and loss of working time per 1 employee. These indicators did not allow the educational institution to reach the level of good performance, and it will be in the middle or lower group of educational institutions in the region or district. The administration of the educational institution should pay special attention to these indicators when developing the annual plan for the next year.

Organization of competition using the BOERO method

The calculation of BOERO indicators is carried out by employees of the enterprise's economic planning service and submits them to the working commission, consisting of representatives of the administration, board and trade union committee. After the end of the reporting quarter, on the 17th-20th, using the completed summary calculation, the working commission analyzes the BERO indicators for all divisions of the enterprise and the preliminary places for the group. The winner is the unit that has the maximum number of points, has met all the individual performance indicators and complied with the competition conditions. Working commission has the right to increase or decrease the numerical value of a complex indicator by up to 3 points for important indicators not included in the list of BOERO indicators: irregular work, disruptions in work, exceeding resource consumption limits, etc. The results of the competition are brought to the attention of units and form the basis for the distribution of bonus funds between units and other forms of material and moral incentives for unit personnel.

The BOERO method made it possible to establish the dynamics of the development of enterprises and organizations divided into three main groups: advanced, middle, lagging behind and, based on the results of the reporting period, to promptly influence the economic management of enterprises.

Thus, the BOERO method allows you to quantitatively measure the results of the economic and social development of an enterprise, determine the group and place of the enterprise among other enterprises in the region, eliminates subjectivity and formalism in summing up the results of the competition, gives a real economic effect when influencing lagging enterprises and organizations through rent, tax system and credit policy

Table 2. Calculation of the operating efficiency of an industrial enterprise

Table 3. Calculation of the efficiency of an educational institution for the year

The efficiency of the planning department by quarter of the year had the following values: 93, 95, 101, 102 points. From this we can conclude that work efficiency improved by the end of the year. If the order of the KOT indicators is reversed, then the department reduces efficiency and intervention of the enterprise management is necessary;

By comparing the calculated value of work efficiency with the performance indicators of other structural units for the same period of time. Let's assume that the indicators of the KUT of the planning and production and technical departments are 99.5 and 98.4 points. From this comparison we can conclude that at the end of the year the planning department worked a little better.

The availability of KUT indicators for all structural divisions of the enterprise allows us to objectively summarize the results of the competition and distribute the bonus fund in accordance with the individual contribution to the final production results. The bonus fund is distributed in proportion to the numerical values ​​of the KUT indicators and the basic salary of management employees:

where Ф z is the bonus fund accrued to the z-th structural unit, UAH;

F - the total amount of the bonus fund accrued to the management staff, UAH;

Z z - basic salary fund (amount official salaries) employees of the z-division, UAH;

P z - the calculated value of the KOUT indicator for the z-th division, points;

W is the number of structural units in the management apparatus.

The method of distributing the wage fund for employees of the management apparatus based on the indicators of the labor market makes it possible to more objectively determine the size material incentives compared with traditional method when the subjective opinion of the enterprise management or board members is taken into account. The method used in many enterprises of distributing bonus funds or self-supporting income only in proportion to wages actually legitimizes “equalization.”

The economic efficiency of the KOUT methodology is explained by two groups of factors: firstly, by increasing the efficiency of the management apparatus due to the reduction of lost working time, the growth of executive discipline, the creative activity of workers, and a clear distribution of responsibility for the assigned work; secondly, by increasing the efficiency of production personnel, stimulating their work depending on the final results of production.

An employee of a structural unit is awarded a prize for winning a prize in a competition, achieving and exceeding the standard value of work performance in the amount of 100 points. And this can only be achieved by improving the economic and social indicators assigned to the structural unit, for example, such as growth in profits, volume of marketable products, labor productivity, reduction in lost working time, etc.

The scoring system is widely used in the personnel management system. When applying the scoring method, it is taken into account a large number of factors and indicators influencing the labor efficiency of management staff. The indicators of the final results of their work, as well as its content, are influenced by a combination of factors, the classification of which is given in table. 11.3. Taking these factors into account is mandatory when assessing job performance officials in specific conditions of place and time, as it increases the degree of validity, objectivity and reliability of assessment conclusions.

In the very general view the result of the labor of management staff is characterized by the level, or degree, of achieving the management goal when at the lowest cost. In this case, it is important to correctly determine quantitative or qualitative indicators (criteria) that reflect the ultimate goals of the organization or division.

Indicators include:

• quality of work performed;
• its quantity;
• value assessment of results.

To assess labor productivity, a fairly large number of criteria are required that would cover both the volume of work and its results.

Therefore, when choosing evaluation criteria, it is taken into account, firstly, for solving what specific problems the evaluation results are used (increase in wages, career growth, dismissal, etc.); secondly, for each category and position of employees, criteria are established taking into account the fact that they will be differentiated depending on the complexity, responsibility and nature of the employee’s activity.

There are three categories of managerial workers: managers, specialists and junior service staff(MOP). Workers in each of these categories contribute to management process: specialists develop and prepare solutions, MOP formalizes them, and managers make decisions, evaluate quality, and control deadlines.

As a rule, the result of a manager’s work is expressed through the results of production, economic and other activities of the organization or divisions (fulfillment of the profit plan, growth in the number of clients, etc.), as well as through the socio-economic working conditions of the employees subordinate to him (for example, the level of payment labor, staff motivation, etc.).

The result of the work of specialists is determined based on the volume, completeness, quality, timeliness of fulfillment of the tasks assigned to them job responsibilities.

When choosing indicators characterizing the key, main results of the work of managers and specialists, take into account that they:

• have a direct and decisive influence on the results of all activities of the organization;
• occupy a significant part of staff working time;
• there are relatively few of them (4-6);
• constitute at least 80% of all results;
• lead to the achievement of the goals of the organization or department.

In practice, when assessing the performance of managers and specialists, along with direct quantitative indicators, indirect indicators that characterize factors influencing the achievement of results are also used. These factors include: efficiency of work, intensity and intensity of work, complexity of work, quality of work, etc. In contrast to direct indicators of labor productivity, indirect assessments characterize the employee’s activities according to criteria that correspond to “ideal” ideas about how job duties and functions that form the basis of this activity should be performed, and what qualities should be demonstrated in this regard.

To assess performance factors, the scoring method is most often used (usually from 1 to 5). For example, when assessing the complexity and quality of work, the interpretation of scores is shown in Table. 11.4 -11.5.

The performance appraisal procedure should be effective if the following are observed: mandatory conditions:

• establishing clear “standards” of labor productivity for each position (workplace) and criteria for its evaluation;
• developing a procedure for assessing job performance (when, how often and who conducts the assessment, assessment methods);
• providing complete and reliable information to the appraiser about the employee’s performance;
• discussing the assessment results with the employee;
• making a decision based on the assessment results and documenting the assessment.

To assess labor productivity, various methods are used: management by objectives, graphic rating scale method, forced choice, descriptive method, evaluation method decisive situation, method of questionnaires and comparative questionnaires, method of behavioral rating scale, method of behavioral observation scale.

Modern automation tools and computerization of managerial workplaces make it possible to quickly and efficiently calculate coefficients, regularly receive information throughout the month about current changes in indicators at the organizational level and use it to characterize the work of the management apparatus. However point system assessing the quality of work of the management apparatus has a number of very significant shortcomings:

• direct addition in order to obtain a comprehensive assessment of indicators that are very different in nature does not in any way reflect either the economic, social, or production and technical efficiency of management. There is no common basis in these indicators that provides an objective principle for their reduction;
• assessments of the significance of individual indicators are very subjective.

An analysis of the correlations between the significance of evaluation criteria for individual enterprises shows that many of them are poorly justified.

The desire for some leveling of assessments leads to the fact that indicators of completely different significance - characteristics of staff development and the quality of decisions made in the management system - can receive approximately equal points. As a result, there will be a significant distortion of the assessment - some managers may seek to improve the overall assessment at the expense of “easier” indicators.

Consequently, the use of a score based on diverse and incommensurable indicators cannot provide an objective assessment of the level of management systems and often leads to significant distortion.

Undoubtedly, such assessments are of practical and methodological interest, but for a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of management systems it is necessary to additionally involve other methods.

To further improve the methodology for such calculations, you should:

• more clearly determine the direction of manifestation of the effect, which will ensure the uniformity of calculations carried out by different specialists;
• consider algorithms of efficiency indicators for their calculation, i.e. availability of information;
• Eliminate double counting in efficiency calculations various directions its application, which is the most complex and is implemented using economic and mathematical methods, in particular methods of mathematical statistics.

The use of the method of correlation, regression and dispersion analysis makes it possible to identify the “purified” influence of individual changes in the management system on the results of the activity of the managed object.

When determining the costs of improving management, it is important to ensure the completeness of their accounting. In this regard, for the costs of improving management, as well as for any capital costs, it is necessary to determine the time lag - justification of the time gap between investments and the return on them.

The main goal of analytical processing of indicators is to reveal causation and measure the influence of various factors on one or another indicator.

The task of calculating management efficiency is to identify and study factors, select a method for measuring their influence on a ready-made general indicator, and calculate the influence of each factor on the level of indicators.

In the process of organizing management, various factors are closely intertwined with each other, influence each other, and some of them cannot be measured quantitatively.

Management effectiveness can be viewed from two perspectives:

1. from the standpoint of the result - according to the degree of implementation of the set goals (operational, strategic, economic, social, etc.) (“goal - result - efficiency”);
2. from the point of view of the process - depending on the degree of use of resources (raw materials, fixed assets and production capacity, assessment of each employee) ("resources - results - efficiency").

Perhaps one of the most common approaches to assessing management effectiveness is its definition according to production efficiency criteria and indicators. The validity of this approach is based on the premise that labor in the field of management (as the main component of assessment in management) cannot be assessed by the value of the products and services directly produced there. The results of this labor are realized in the results of the labor of workers directly involved in the production of material assets. Based on this, the results of impact and management effectiveness should be sought in the final results of production. Therefore, traditionally the analyzed management efficiency indicators include financial indicators profitability, profitability, turnover, liquidity, solvency, etc., as well as indicators of the use of production resources - capital-labor ratio and capital productivity, mechanical, power-to-weight ratio, material and capital intensity; worker productivity; quality indicators products and the degree of satisfaction of public needs in products, works or services produced by the enterprise; market indicators characterizing the stability of the enterprise’s position in the market, etc. Particular attention should be paid to the fact of saving time in production (as, indeed, in management), associated with an increase in labor productivity, and consequently, production volume and profit while simultaneously saving material And labor resources. The path to optimizing control is the path to saving time. Saving time has economic and social content, since the “denser” the unit of time, the more value is produced within its framework, the higher the level of production development, more efficient, more optimal control them.

When assessing the effectiveness of the management system, one should also proceed from indicators that reflect the specifics of the industry.

However, with this approach, a number of problems arise related to the difficulty of determining the share of the production and market effect caused by the influence of purely managerial factors. After all, production efficiency is influenced by a number of factors independent of existing system management. Their integrating influence can be both positive and negative. And since it is almost impossible to highlight the results of the influence of the management system, it would be simply wrong to determine production efficiency only on the basis of the results of its production and economic activities.

Another approach to assessing management effectiveness is based on analyzing management costs and determining specific indicators . Here it is proposed to calculate the share of net profit per unit of the wage fund of the management apparatus; per unit cost technical means, used in the management process; the share of costs for maintaining the management apparatus in production costs; the amount of output (information, decisions, documents, instructions, orders, etc.) in the management apparatus per unit of cost for maintaining the management apparatus ( performance in comparison with costs), the share of wages of management employees in the general wage fund for employees of the enterprise. However, focusing only on this criterion leads to the idea that the most effective management system is the absence of any management system. In fact, in this case, the costs of maintaining management staff will be minimal, and output and profit per employee will be maximum.

In addition, both of the first considered approaches are distinguished by the one-sidedness of the research, while the assessment of management effectiveness, as already noted, is advisable to determine on the basis of a set of indicators, using a systematic approach.

The economic efficiency of production management manifests itself mainly in indirect rather than direct effects, which is why it is necessary to develop a whole system of indicators:

1. quantitative assessment of the organizational level;
2. assessment of the effectiveness of production management organization;
3. performance assessment information system;
4. analytical assessment of the results of individual and collective work in control system. Moreover, each of the assessments also consists of a set of production and management indicators.

It is possible to assess the effectiveness of the management system using several groups of indicators, including assessment of:

1. structures (organizational structure of production, organizational structure of management, staff structure);
2. labor (labor organization, labor results, working conditions);
3. technology (management information system, system of organizational regulations, technology for performing management functions, decision-making technology);
4. technology (provision of control of equipment and its quality composition, use of control technology);
5. methods (economic, organizational and legal, socio-psychological, degree of democratic management);
6. impacts (on technical and economic indicators (TEI) of core activities, on scientific and technical development of production and management, on social processes, on environmental processes;
7. efficiency of the control system.

At the same time, in the composition structural indicators stand out: indicator specific gravity employees of the management apparatus in the total number of employees (the optimal value is considered to be 18-25%); the ratio of the number of managers, specialists and technical performers, the coefficient of centralization of the management apparatus as the ratio of the number of employees of the management apparatus and structural units for a specific management function, as well as the coefficient of structural tension as the ratio of the number production units to the share of management staff in the total number of employees.

In the composition organizational indicators in particular, an indicator of working conditions is calculated, characterizing the optimal temperature, humidity, noise conditions and the degree of illumination at the workplaces of management staff; as well as the rationality of the structural layout of the premises. Of course, it is advisable to calculate these indicators if appropriate standards are available.

As assessing the effectiveness of the information system it is possible to use the following indicators: the level of organization of information, the level of equipment of the information system, the rhythm of receipt and efficiency of preparation of information, the optimality of information flow. A significant difficulty in calculating these indicators lies in the complexity of the mechanism for collecting initial data.

Another direction in assessing management effectiveness is related to determining efficiency management decisions . The management apparatus is created and functions in order to develop, make and implement decisions that serve as a means of influencing the managed object, and the problem of improving the management system, according to this approach, is to rationalize it so that the best decisions can be made. The assessment of the effectiveness of individual management processes, or management decisions as direct results of these processes, is proposed in the scientific and economic literature to be determined, firstly, through a quantitative and qualitative assessment of the goals achieved as a result of the implementation of decisions.

The second aspect of assessing management decisions is based on calculating a system of indicators that characterize the process of making and implementing decisions. This system includes three groups of indicators:

1. indicators of timeliness and quality of decision-making (the ratio of the number of actually resolved issues to the total number of issues requiring resolution this moment; degree of application scientifically sound methods and decision-making procedures, quality of information used; modern technical means for its analysis and processing);
2. characterizing the implementation of decisions (the ratio of decisions actually executed by managed systems to the total number of decisions);
3. indicators of the quality of implementation of the solution itself (the efficiency of implementation, taking into account the coefficients of the importance of decisions, established by experts based on the significance of problems and tasks; reliability; cost-effectiveness of implementation) (the ratio of high-quality solutions to their total number).

The efficiency of making management decisions can be calculated using certain formulas, for example, the following:

Let us now consider the directions in assessing the effectiveness of management work at all levels as the main component of management effectiveness. Here the effectiveness of collective and individual work is usually distinguished. The collective effectiveness of managerial work in the organization and the enterprise as a whole can be assessed

3.2 Proposals for improving the procedure for assessing personnel performance

Currently, the statement has already become quite general that the assessment of labor results is a necessary, but obviously insufficient condition for making personnel decisions.

Equally important is the assessment of the business and personal characteristics of employees, identified specifically in the course of their activities. It characterizes the employee’s activity in aspects that correspond to ideal ideas about how one’s own duties should be performed and what qualities must be expressed in order to achieve the greatest productivity. The number of such qualities includes, first of all, professional and production skills, as well as purely psychological abilities.

Companies are trying, on the one hand, to find conditions for labor productivity, a common criterion for assessing personnel, and on the other, to note special qualities for individual companies of employees.

Based on the analysis of the methods of personnel assessment used in the company and the methods existing in Russian Federation and abroad, the author has developed a proprietary personnel assessment operation that can be implemented in a closed joint stock company. The essence of the proposed methodology is the introduction of a method for complex personnel assessment with the introduction of a system of complementary techniques.

The first step is to create a performance appraisal plan, review aspects of job description assessments, and select appropriate methods for performing performance appraisals. The subjects of assessment are the characteristics of one of the subsequent companies - individual behavior, performance efficiency, degree of goal achievement, degree of competence.

1) knowledge of the work (does the employee have a clear understanding of the content of the work and its goals);

2) the need for control over his actions by the manager (how diligent the employee is in performing production tasks whether he adheres to work discipline, including lunch time, breaks, etc.);

3) work style (does he constantly make thoughtful decisions, has a predisposition to introspection, and the ability to bring things to the end);

4) entrepreneurship (does he have a desire to take on additional responsibilities, how does he perceive new ideas, is he ready to take risks);

5) location to working together(does it show preparedness and ability to act together with employees and subordinates, can it maintain a favorable psychological mood in the team).

Any factor is assessed on a 5-point scale. In this case, the manager will be required to confirm the assessment: disclose in writing certain actions of the employee, attitude to the performance of duties in a given situation, and, if necessary, provide certain results of the employee’s activities that would confirm the assessment.

The assessment should be based on the following settings:

a) assessment of the employee’s business characteristics, within the framework of which an analysis of past achievements and shortcomings in work is carried out with the aim of increasing work efficiency in the future;

b) assessment of the employee’s potential, which aims to determine whether the employee deserves a raise (promotion) and/or further training;

c) an assessment of the amount of remuneration is carried out to determine the amount of increase due to the employee. According to established practice, the amount of wages is always discussed after the efficiency of the employee’s activities and potential in two aspects has been considered.

For certain categories of personnel, their own set of necessary properties is determined (from 6-8 for employees to 15-20 for managers of different ranks). However, it is characteristic that the assessment of business and personal qualities (labor performance factors) does not actually affect small office employees, that is, workers of those categories that can simply be replaced in the labor market.

We also need a system of characteristics, compiled taking into account different requests for business qualities for approximately 2 dozen categories of personnel (managers of 3 levels, designers serving customers, office workers, and so on).

The activity of management employees is characterized by the presence of skills according to the following characteristics:

Planning and management;

Management in critical situations;

Control;

Training of subordinates;

Monitoring the activities of subordinates;

Assignment of powers;

Motivation of subordinates;

Ensuring a healthy moral and emotional climate and compliance by subordinates with safety rules;

Ability to communicate well with employees;

The ability to cooperate in the use of organizational resources, the ability to represent outside the organization;

Competence and effective use of specialized knowledge;

Persistence in achieving goals;

Loyalty to the goals and policies of the company;

Attitude to the new.

Any factor should be defined in detail. For example, effective communication requires the ability to clearly and convincingly explain one’s own proposals and point of view, the constant exchange of information that other employees need to achieve the overall goals of the company, the supply of complete, reliable and up-to-date information senior managers. The ability to motivate subordinates is specified as follows:

Encouraging subordinates to achieve high standards of work;

Assigning permanent or one-time tasks to subordinates that require the use of the employee’s full potential;

Influencing subordinates with your own example of a conscious attitude to business.

Assessing an employee's business traits makes it possible to discover his strengths and weaknesses in order to help him improve his performance.

For different companies of employees, different departments and levels of the firm's hierarchy, special assessment aspects must be developed. In one case, the main aspect is professionalism and the degree of knowledge of qualifications, in another - the numerical characteristics of the activity, in the third - the knowledge to react quickly in non-standard situations.

Particular importance should be attached to the assessment of behavior in critical situations (purely industrial or in relations with the team), finding themselves in which subjects show own qualities in the most concentrated form. We recommend forming small mobile categories of psychologists who will effectively study the actions of participants in such situations (if necessary, other specialists or managers are included in the groups).

A more optimal way to assess professionally and corporately necessary qualities for personnel is the method of group expert assessment. Department heads act as professionals.

The best assessment method professional competence will qualifying work, which makes it possible to detect the strategy of action of a certain manager in daily and crisis conditions.

It is better to use employee self-assessment methods. He is given the opportunity to evaluate himself and compare the results of self-assessment with the desired degree. He can find it himself own need in increasing qualifications, since the information obtained as a result of self-assessment guarantees an understanding of the need for certain knowledge and skills to work in a specific position. Self-assessment makes it possible to find out the employee’s attitude towards his own responsibilities, the level of possession of certain knowledge and skills, as well as those areas in which it is worth improving first.

Can be used for self-assessment different types questionnaires Employees can fill out the questionnaire twice - at the beginning and at the end of the certification. Secondary assessment allows the worker to once again evaluate himself and check changes in his own behavior over a certain period of time, to detect those shortcomings to which special attention should be directed.

The process of assessing labor results will be effective if the following most important conditions are followed: the introduction of precise “stereotypes” of labor results for any position (workplace) and criteria for its evaluation; creating an assessment procedure...

Analysis of labor efficiency scores

3.1 Regulatory and legislative framework Legislative measures characterize the rights and obligations of workers in the field of labor protection, their work and rest regime, labor protection of women and youth...

Analysis of the formation and use of the wage fund at the Kazan-Arena enterprise

Taking into account the disadvantages of establishing wages, a number of measures need to be taken to increase efficiency in the process of forming the wage fund...

Analysis of management decision-making procedures

Analysis of management processes and assessment of the performance of LLC personnel " Industrial equipment TD"

Business assessment of personnel: tasks and methods using the example of OJSC "Drilling Equipment Plant"

Certification is designed to help identify overall human resources potential, determine personnel reserve and optimal use human resources enterprises...

Use by HR departments modern technologies recruitment, selection, personnel assessment

Having studied the work of the personnel service of Bel-Est-Furniture JLLC in the field of selection...

Methods for evaluating staff in a store cellular communications LLC "Perm.Telephone.Ru"

Organization and standardization of labor at a trading enterprise using the example of Aikai LLC, store No. 56 "GROSHEL"

The indicators of the final results of workers’ labor, as well as its content, are influenced by a combination of various factors, the classification of which is given in the table of Appendix 2...

Evaluation of personnel performance. Levels of assessment and basic approaches

The procedure for assessing labor results will be effective if the following mandatory conditions are met: establishing clear “standards” of labor results for each position (workplace) and criteria for its evaluation; developing a procedure...

Evaluation of personnel performance. Levels of assessment and basic approaches

Evaluation of personnel performance. Levels of assessment and basic approaches

At present, the statement has already become quite general that the assessment of labor results is a necessary, but clearly insufficient condition for making personnel decisions. Equally important is the assessment of the business and personal qualities of employees...

Role and place business assessment personnel

Assessing the work of subordinates allows a manager to solve a wide range of problems. On the one hand, this is ensuring the normal functioning of departments and the entire organization, solving production problems, fulfilling plans...

System for assessing the performance of personnel at SEC "Afanasyevsky"

So, let's give general scheme assessments: 1. Determine specific goals for performance assessment 2. Determine what is expected of employees when performing activities (conduct job analysis, discuss) 3. Check and evaluate job performance 4...

Often, economists of companies engaged in investment activities need to provide management with information about the level of efficiency of investment management. In the course of preparing such information, individual investment operations are analyzed, the level and dynamics of the main indicators of investment efficiency are examined. In addition, a fundamental analysis of factors that influence the company’s investment performance indicators is carried out. In this article on specific example Let's look at how you can assess the level of investment management efficiency based on the developed key indicators efficiency ( KPI).

First of all, we note that the assessment must be carried out in accordance with the approved company regulations, which establish the work procedure, the sequence of individual actions and operations, that is, in accordance with the documents regulating the work procedure. This may be a regulation on the procedure for monitoring and generating key performance indicators, instructions for calculation KPI, the procedure for determining scores for indicators.

In the process of assessing the effectiveness of investment management, it is necessary to use several actual and target indicators of the company, which will adequately reflect the degree of efficiency of operational and functional processes in the aggregate and correspond to the chosen investment strategy. Let us present the principles for choosing one or another indicator (taking into account priority):

• the indicator reflects a key aspect in the investment management process;
• plays a significant role in making management decisions;
• it is controllable, that is, responsible persons can significantly influence the value of the indicator within the limits of their job responsibilities;
• has a potential stable cause-and-effect relationship with other indicators;
• easy to calculate.

Let us remember that performance indicators are developed by the company's management. In addition, they are subject to approval by the board of directors and shareholders.

For example, in the Leader company (conditional name) the following indicators have been selected to characterize the effectiveness of investment management:

• thousand roubles.;
• thousand roubles.;
• thousand roubles.;
• units;
• units;

According to company executives, it is these seven indicators that have a significant impact on investment management.

FOR YOUR INFORMATION

Appropriate adjustments may be made to the list of selected investment management performance indicators. In this case, all changes must be formalized in the regulations.

Next, both actual and target values ​​of the proposed indicators are entered. The main sources of factual data are accounting and management reports, as well as a report on financial and economic results for the implementation of the investment project (Table 1).

According to the data in Table. 1 the actual value of investment profit subject to taxation can be obtained from the report on financial and economic results for the implementation of the investment project, and the target value - based on the planned investment costs and the sales budget.

The final stage of assessing investment management should be the calculation of a comprehensive performance indicator.

Let's imagine the algorithm for calculating the efficiency coefficient:

1. Construction of a table of indicators and determination of weighti thindicator(). The more important the indicator in a given period, the more weight is assigned to it (the total weight of all indicators is 100%). You can also take into account the difficulty of obtaining the optimal value of the indicator. The importance (significance) of the indicator is established by expert means.

The expert group of the Leader company includes Commercial Director, financial director and three investment service (bureau) specialists. Experts assign a score next to each indicator.

When assessing the importance of indicators, a five-point scale was used:

1 - not at all important;

2 - almost unimportant;

3 - important;

4 - important, but not that much;

5 is very important.

An approximate assessment of the importance and weighting of investment management performance indicators in the Leader company is presented in Table. 2.

Note: When setting points, each expert uses documentation on investment projects. For example, for the indicator “Number of ongoing investment projects”, experts are provided with information on the recommended number of investment projects (three projects have been delivered). Expert 1 (investment service specialist) believes that it is very important to implement exactly three projects. According to expert 2 (financial director), it is important to implement three projects, but not that many. Two projects will be enough, since their implementation is carried out at the company’s own expense.

Note that the weight of each indicator is the ratio of the average score to the sum of the scores of all indicators. Based on the data in table. 2, we find that the following indicators have the greatest weight:

• “Revenue from sales of products through investment” - 16,45 % ;
• “Investment profits subject to taxation” - 15,79 % ;
• “The volume of investments in fixed assets from the local (regional) budget” - 15,13 % .​

Calculation of indicator achievement ratio. We recommend using the following formula for calculating goal achievement (To achieve. i):

To achieve i = X i fact / X i target,

Where X i fact, X i goal - actual and target values, respectively i- indicator of investment management efficiency.

Table 3 presents the calculation of the coefficient of achievement of the investment management efficiency indicator in the Leader company.

We find that the indicator “Volume of investments in fixed capital from local (regional) budget funds” has the lowest achievement coefficient - 0,61 (2150 thousand rubles / 3500 thousand rubles).

3. Determination of efficiency coefficienti -th indicator (To ef.i ). This indicator can be calculated using the following formula:

To ef. i= × K achiev. i.

4. Calculationcomprehensive investment management performance indicator (E control . inv). Let's imagine the calculation formula:

Where i— indicator number ( i = 1, 2, 3, …, n).

Note that upon reaching the target values KPI the assessment of investment management efficiency is equal to 100%. In other words, a comprehensive investment management performance indicator should aim for 100%.

The Leader company has determined the following range of acceptable performance indicator values:

• 85 ≤ E control. inv ≤ 100 – high level of investment management efficiency;
• 70 ≤ E control. inv< 85 — средний уровень (допустимый);
• 60 ≤ E control. inv< 70 — средний уровень (нормальный, но требуется пересмотреть инвестиционную политику для его повышения);
• 50 ≤ E control. inv< 60 — средний уровень (критический);
• E ex. inv< 50 — низкий уровень.

The calculation of a comprehensive indicator of the effectiveness of investment management in the Leader company is given in table. 4.

As we see from the data in table. 4, comprehensive indicator of investment management efficiency (E ex. inv ) of the Leader company is80 % . This value corresponds to the average acceptable level. Note that when assessing the level of investment management efficiency, there remains the possibility of bias, but since this result is assessed according to a number of indicators, the likelihood of error is reduced.

Based on the results of the assessment, the Leader company can identify existing problems in the effective management of investments and take appropriate measures to eliminate them. Of course, the company should now think about revising its investment policy and conducting quarterly monitoring (control) of investment management.

Companies that carry out investment activities must remember that in order to effective management investment requires:

• develop a system of current plans, operational budgets for the main areas of investment activity, types and forms of investment related to the proposed investment strategy, which essentially covers priority tasks to be solved in the near future;
• carry out analytical work, based on the results of which appropriate organizational, technical or financial decisions are made promptly and in a timely manner;
• monitor the implementation of investment projects in accordance with established regulations or regulations for the company’s investment management, based on their proposed system of controlled indicators, which will allow assessing the effectiveness of investment management, promptly correcting inconsistencies, and identifying the company’s strengths and weaknesses in carrying out investment activities.

M. V. Altukhova, independent consultant