COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES IN RUSSIA’S ECONOMY
https://doi.org/10.38050/01300105201921
Abstract
The paper deals with the key features of declared goals’ setting by economic agents in Russia. It is aimed at designation an approach to making a comparative assessment of public objectives of federal executive authorities, regional administrations, development institutions and major domestic companies. The authors established a set and values of goal-setting’s quality criteria for multicriteria goal analysis. It was identified that federal government’s objectives are more modernization- and long-term-oriented but less measurable than corporate ones. It is also found out that the federal state programs demonstrate logical inconsistency between goals, key performance indicators and expected outcomes. The results suggest that an approach to goal-setting in Russia is non-system-based and nonfunctional at all levels of management. These findings will be of interest to experts and scholars for improving corporate and government strategic documents’ creation.
About the Authors
A. A. Blokhin
ИНП РАН
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
E. A. Adamyan
МГУ имени М. В. Ломоносова
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
A. E. Kitaev
МГУ имени М. В. Ломоносова
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
I. I. Mironova
МГУ имени М. В. Ломоносова
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Blohin A. A. Jekonomika nenuzhnoj produkcii. Institucional’nye osobennosti krugooborota poter’ // Jekonomicheskaja politika. — 2015. — T. 10. — No 1. — S. 7–40.
2. Blohin A.A. Filosofija rezul’tativnosti v reformah gosudarstvennogo upravlenija v Rossii // Cbornik statej “Strategicheskoe upravlenie: ot idei do rezul’tata”. — M.: Analiticheskij centr pri Pravitel’stve Rossijskoj Federacii, 2011. — 164 s. URL. http://window.edu.ru/resource/636/75636/files/Analysis_Center.pdf
3. Postanovlenie Pravitel’stva «Ob utverzhdenii Porjadka razrabotki, realizacii i ocenki jeffektivnosti gosudarstvennyh programm Rossijskoj Federacii» ot 02.08.2010 No 588.
4. Postanovlenie Pravitel’stva Rossijskoj Federacii «O razrabotke, realizacii i ob ocenke jeffektivnosti otdel’nyh gosudarstvennyh programm Rossijskoj Federacii» ot 12.10.2017 No 1242.
5. Prikaz Minjekonomrazvitija Rossii «Ob utverzhdenii metodicheskih ukazanij po razrabotke i realizacii gosudarstvennyh programm Rossijskoj Federacii» ot 16.09.2016 No 582.
6. Ukaz Prezidenta Rossijskoj Federacii «O nacional’nyh celjah i strategicheskih zadachah razvitija Rossijskoj Federacii na period do 2024 goda» ot 07.05.2018 No 204.
7. Federal’nyj zakon «O strategicheskom planirovanii v Rossijskoj Federacii» ot 28.06.2014 No 172-FZ (prinjat GD FS RF 20.06.2014, dejstvujushhaja redakcija).
8. Anderson Sh. W., Dekker H. C., Sedatole K. L. An Empirical Examination of Goals and Performance-to-Goal Following the Introduction of an Incentive Bonus Plan with Participative Goal Setting // Management Science. — 2010. — Vol. 56. — No. 1. — P. 90–109.
9. Andrews B. H., Carpentier J. J. and Gowen T. L. A New Approach to Performance Measurement and Goal Setting // Interfaces. — 2001. — Vol. 31. — No. 3. — P. 44–54.
10. Baker G. A., Babb E. M. Managerial Goals and Firm Performance: A Laboratory Experiment // North Central Journal of Agricultural Economics. — 1984. — Vol. 6. — No. 1. — P. 88–94.
11. Caroll A. B., Shabana K. M. The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Concepts, Research and Practice // International Journal of Management Reviews. — 2010. — Vol. 12. — No. 1. — P. 85–105.
12. Doran G.T. There’s a S.M.A.R.T. Way to Write Management’s Goals and Objectives // Management Review. — 1981. — Vol. 70. — No. 11. — P. 35–36.
13. Fu F.Q., Richards K.A., Jones E. The Motivation Hub: Effects of Goal Setting and Self-Efficacy on Effort and New Product Sales // The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management. — 2009. — Vol. 29. — No. 3. — P. 277–292.
14. Gurkov I. Strategy process as formulation and realization of corporate goals: The synthesis of surveys in Russian firms // Journal of East European Management Studies. — 2009. — Vol. 14. — No. 1. — P. 48–64.
15. Kaplan R.S., Norton D.P. The Balanced Scorecard-Measures That Drive Performance // Harvard Business Review. — 1992. — Vol. 70. — No. 1. — P. 71–79.
16. Kaplan R. S., Norton D. P. Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System // Harvard Business RevieW. — 1993. — Vol. 74. — No. 1. — P. 75–85.
17. Locke E.A., Latham G.P. Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation. A 35-Year Odyssey // American Psychologist. — 2002. — Vol. 57. — No. 9. — P. 705–717.
18. McWilliams A., Siegel D. S., Wright P. M. Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications // Journal of Management Studies. — 2006. — Vol. 43. — No. 1. — P. 1–18.
19. OECD. Budgeting Practices and Procedures in OECD Countries. — OECD Publishing. – 2014. – URL. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264059696-en
20. Ordóñez L.D., Schweitzer M.E., Galinsky A.D., Bazerman M.H. Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Overprescribing Goal Setting // Academy of Management Perspectives. — 2009. — Vol. 23. — No. 1. — P. 6–16.
21. Porter M. E., Kramer M. R. The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy // Harvard Business Review. — 2002. — Vol. 80. — No. 12. — P. 56–68.
22. Shetty Y. K. New Look at Corporate Goals // California Management Review. — 1979. — Vol. 22. — No. 2. — P. 71–79.
23. Ulrike Mandl, Adriaan Dierx, Fabienne Ilzkovitz. The effectiveness and efficiency of public spending // European Economy. — Economic Papers 301. — February 2008. — URL. http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications
24. Usher Ch. L., Cornia G. C. Goal Setting and Performance Assessment in Municipal Budgeting // Public Administration Review. — 1981. — Vol. 41. — No. 2. — P. 229–235.
25. Zahorsky D. 5 Elements of a SMART Business Goal // The Balance Small Business. 2018 [Electronic Resource]. URL. https://www.thebalance.com/elements-of-a-smart-business-goal-2951530 (дата обращения 08.10.2018).
Review
For citations:
Blokhin A.A., Adamyan E.A., Kitaev A.E., Mironova I.I. COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES IN RUSSIA’S ECONOMY. Moscow University Economics Bulletin. 2019;(2):3-25. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.38050/01300105201921
Views:
389
Email this article 