Methodological bases of building the system of key performance indicators for stimulating the project participants in executive bodies

Objective: the scientific understanding of the individual key performance indicators function within the mechanism of stimulating the participants of project activities of executive authorities is supplemented with knowledge of the direction and impact of their actions.Methods: combination of logical and analytical deduction of theories and methodologies of stimulating the project activity participants under the stimulating influence of key performance indicators at executive authority bodies; identification of correlation dependence of the stimulated participants’ behaviour by the data of questionnaire survey of project activity experts. Results: on the basis of theoretical and methodological provisions and evidence of the stimulating effect of key performance indicators in the activity of project participants, it is proved that the effect has a complex mechanism inherent in project activities of executive authorities. It is determined that the key performance indicators serve as a means of identifying problem areas of the system of project participants’ motivation. The quantitative ratios are found of the stimulating influence of non-material and material individual key performance indicators on the project success, as well as the required working hours and the value-oriented importance of observing them. It is proposed to supplement the individual key performance indicators with an indicator that focuses the project activities towards the project success. The results show that unsystematic adoption of any key performance indicators as the main one leads to a significant deterioration of the stimulating impact of the remaining indicators on the project participants. It is revealed that the activities of the project participants are mostly (26,2 %) focused on the qualitative implementation of the project activities, and to the least degree (14,9 %) - on the observance of discipline. The most time-consuming activity (15,2 %) for the project participants is obtaining unique results. The quantitative rule is found that the maximization of the project complexity stimulation leads to the minimization of the incentives for the qualitative implementation of the project activities and the uniqueness of its results.Scientific novelty: for the first time it is determined that the key performance indicators in their economic form reflect three types of costs: conditionally constant and variable part of payment, as well as transaction costs for the purpose-orientation of the project participants.Practical significance: the main provisions and conclusions of the article can be used in research of the stimulating effect of key performance indicators on the activity of project participants and in the development of methods for building systems of key performance indicators to stimulate them in the executive authority bodies.

экономика и управление народным хозяйством, методология, стимулирование, участники проектной деятельности, органы исполнительной власти, ключевые показатели эффективности

1. Ткаченко С. Мотивация в сфере проектного управления как механизм повышения инициативности и результативности деятельности органов исполнительной власти Белгородской области / Правительство Белгородской области. Белгород, 2015. 34 с.

2. Павлова О. А. Материальное и нематериальное стимулирование участников проектов в органах исполнительной власти Белгородской области. Правительство Белгородской области. Белгород, 2014. 20 с. URL: http://pmolimp.ru/files/ content/229/1-prezentaciya-pavlova-o-a-pdf.pdf (дата обращения: 20.08.2018).

3. Методология мотивации трудовой деятельности госслужащих, ориентированной на достижение конечных результатов / Жигун Л. А., Литвинюк А. А., Субочева А. О. и др. М.: КНОРУС, 2018. 160 с.

4. Разработка единых принципов оплаты труда работников госорганов и органов местного самоуправления, организаций с государственным участием, учреждений бюджетной сферы / под общ. ред. О. С. Осиповой. М.: Onebook.ru, 2015. 236 с.

5. Жигун Л. А., Рязанцева М. В. Готовность системы мотивации государственных служащих к эффективному контракту // Научное обозрение. 2017. № 21. С. 83-95.

6. Киселева И. А., Симонович М. Е. Оценка рисков с учетом влияния человеческого фактора // Экономический анализ: теория и практика, 2014. № 2 (353). С. 21-27.

7. Glossary of Terms by The State of Alaska, Alaska Department of Administration & Alaska Department of Administration, Personnel and Labor Relations. 2016. URL: https://definedterm.com/project_employee (дата обращения: 09.05.2018).

8. Moynihan D. P., Pandey S. K. The role of organizations in fostering public service motivation // Public Administration Review. 2007. № 67 (1). Pp. 40-53. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00695.x

9. Peterson T. M. Motivation: how to increase project team performance. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2007 - North America, Atlanta, GA. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. 2007. URL: https://www.pmi.org/learning/ library/motivation-increase-project-team-performance-7234 (дата обращения: 09.05.2018).

10. Schmid B., Adams J. Motivation in project management: the project manager's perspective // Project Management Journal. 2008. № 39 (2). Pp. 60-71. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.20042

11. Иберла К. Факторный анализ: пер. с нем. В. М. Ивановой. М.: Статистика, 1980. 398 с.

12. Dwivedula R., Bredillet Ch. N. Profiling work motivation of project workers // International Journal of Project Management. Research article. 2010. Vol. 28. № 2, February. Pp. 158-165. URL: https://www.academia.edu/3294976/Profiling_work_motivation_ of_project_workers (дата обращения: 09.05.2018).

13. Bredillet Ch., Dwivedula R., Müller R. Work motivation as a determinant of organizational and professional commitment in case of temporary organizations: theoretical perspectives // International Research Network for Organizing by Projects-IRNOP

14. University of Quebec, Montreal. 2011. URL: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/49522/ (дата обращения: 03.09.2018).

15. Hall T., Jagielska D., Baddoo N. Motivating developer performance to improve project outcomes in a high maturity organization // Software Quality Journal. 2007. № 15 (4). Pp. 365-381. URL: http://uhra.herts.ac.uk/handle/2299/11471 (дата обращения: 03.09.2018). DOI: 10.1007/s11219-007-9028-1

16. Patanakul P., Pinto J. K., Pinto M. B. Managers of multiple projects and their motivation to perform: the impact of autonomy, support, goal clarity, and opportunities for learning / Project Management Institute Research and Education Conference, Phoenix, AZ. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. 2014. URL: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/managers-multiple- projects-motivation-perform-1911 (дата обращения: 09.05.2018).

17. Dahlan A. N. The critical success factors for the effective performance of Malaysian government linked companies, DBA thesis. Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW, 2010.

18. Parmenter D. Key Performance Indicators: Developing, Implementing, and using winning KPIs, John Wiley &Sons, Inc. 2007.

19. Parmenter D. Finding the right things to measure in the public sector. 2011. URL: http://kpi.davidparmenter.com/finding- measure-public-sector/ (дата обращения: 28.07.2018).

20. Ross L. Public sector performance: a global perspective / The Chartered Institute of Management Accountants. London SW1P 4NP, United Kingdom, 2011. 28 p.

21. Barmayehvar Behnod. Being an Effective Project Manager: An exploration within project-oriented organisations. A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences. School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, 2013. 338 p.

22. Papke-Shields K. E., Beise C., Quan J. Do project managers practice what they preach, and does it matter to project success? // International Journal of Project Management. 2010. № 28. Pp. 650-662. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.11.002

23. Pinto J. K., Slevin D. P. Critical success factors in effective project implementation. Project management handbook. 1988.

24. Turner J. R., Müller R. The project manager’s leadership style as a success factor on projects: A literature review // Project Management Journal. 2005. № 36. P. 49.

25. Turner J. R., Müller R., Dulewicz V. Comparing the leadership styles of functional and project managers // International Journal of Managing Projects in Business. 2009. Vol. 2. № 2. Pp. 198-216. DOI: 10.1108/17538370910949266

26. Pinto J. K., Slevin D. P. Project success: definitions and measurement techniques // Project Management Journal. 1988. № 19. Pp. 67-73.

27. Vroom V. H. Work and motivation. New York: Wiley, 1964. 331 p.

28. Porter L. W., Irwin R. D. Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, IL., 1968. 209 p.

29. Locke E. A., Latham G. H. Goal setting: A motivational technique that works!. Englewood cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1984.

30. Locke E. A., Latham G. P. A theory of goal setting and task performance. Engelwood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1990.

31. Mowen J., Middlemist R., Luther D. Joint effect of assigned goal level and incentive structure on task performance: A laboratory study // Journal of applied psychology. 1981. № 75. Pp. 68-76.

32. Жигун Л. А. Онтологические границы переменной части зарплаты государственных и муниципальных служащих при оплате их труда по результатам деятельности // Управление экономическими системами: электронный научный журнал. 2015. № 4 (76). С. 16.

33. Frisch, Carol J.; Dickinson, Alyce M. Work productivity as a function of the percentage of monetary incentives to base pay // Journal of Organizational Behavior Management. 1990. Vol. 11 (1). Pp. 13-34. DOI: 10.1300/j075v11n01_03

34. Melissa Van Dyke. Incentives, Motivation and Workplace Performance: Research and Best Practices. The Incentive Research Foundation Resource Center. 2010. January 20. URL: http://theirf.org/research/content/6000065/incentives-motivation-and- workplace-performance-research-and-best-practices/ (дата обращения: 02.02.2015).