скачать PDF
Authors : 1. Leonid A. Zhigun,
Doctor of Economics, Professor; Professor
Russian University for Economics named after G. V. Plekhanov; Financial University at the Government of the Russian Federation
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 nonmaterial 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.
Keywords :
Economics and national economy management; Methodology; Stimulation; Project participants; Executive authority bodies; Key performance indicators
Bibliography :
1. Tkachenko S. Motivation in the sphere of project management as a mechanism of increasing initiative and efficiency of the activity of executive bodies of Belgorod oblast. Government of Belgorod oblast, Belgorod, 2015, 34 p. (in Russ.).
2. Pavlova O. A. Material and non-material stimulation of project participants in executive bodies of Belgorod oblast, Pravitel'stvo Belgorodskoi oblasti, Belgorod, 2014, 20 p., available at: http://pmolimp.ru/files/content/229/1-prezentaciya-pavlova-o-a-pdf.pdf (access date: 20.08.2018) (in Russ.).
3. Zhigun L. A., Litvinyuk A. A., Subocheva A. O., Polevaya M. V., Kamneva E. V., Pryazhnikov N. S., Polevoi S. A., Ryazantseva M. V., Smirnova M. E., Shirvanov R. A. Methodology of stimulation of labor activity of state servants, aimed at final results, Moscow, KNORUS, 2018, 160 p. (in Russ.).
4. Elaboration of common principles of labor remuneration for the personnel of state power and local self-government bodies, organizations with state participation, budget organizations, ed. O. S. Osipova, Moscow, Onebook.ru, 2015, 236 p. (in Russ.).
5. Zhigun L. A., Ryazantseva M. V. Preparedness of the system of state servants’ motivation for effective contract, Nauchnoe obozrenie, 2017, No. 21, pp. 83–95 (in Russ.).
6. Kiseleva I. A., Simonovich M. E. Estimating risks with the account of human factor, Ekonomicheskii analiz: teoriya i praktika, 2014, No. 2 (353), pp. 21–27 (in Russ.).
7. Glossary of Terms by The State of Alaska, Alaska Department of Administration & Alaska Department of Administration, Personnel and Labor Relations, 2016, available at: https://definedterm.com/project_employee (access date: 09.05.2018).
8. Moynihan D. P., Pandey S. K. The role of organizations in fostering public service motivation, Public Administration Review, 2007, No. 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, available at: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/motivation-increase-project-team-performance-7234 (access date: 09.05.2018).
10. Schmid B., Adams J. Motivation in project management: the project manager's perspective, Project Management Journal, 2008, No. 39 (2), pp. 60–71. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.20042
11. Iberla K. Factor analysis, Moscow, Statistika, 1980, 398 p. (in Russ.).
12. Dwivedula R., Bredillet Ch. N. Profiling work motivation of project workers, International Journal of Project Management, Research article, 2010, Vol. 28, No. 2, February, pp. 158–165, available at: https://www.academia.edu/3294976/Profiling_work_motivation_of_project_workers (access date: 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-IRNOP10, University of Quebec, Montreal, 2011, available at: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/49522/ (access date: 03.09.2018).
14. Hall T., Jagielska D., Baddoo N. Motivating developer performance to improve project outcomes in a high maturity organization, Software Quality Journal, 2007, No. 15 (4), pp. 365–381, available at: http://uhra.herts.ac.uk/handle/2299/11471 (access date: 03.09.2018).
15. 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, available at: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/managersmultiple-projects-motivation-perform-1911 (access date: 09.05.2018).
16. Dahlan A. N. The critical success factors for the effective performance of Malaysian government linked companies, DBA thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW, 2010.
17. Parmenter D. Key Performance Indicators: Developing, Implementing, and using winning KPIs, John Wiley &Sons, Inc., 2007.
18. Parmenter D. Finding the right things to measure in the public sector, 2011, available at: http://kpi.davidparmenter.com/finding-measure-public-sector/ (access date: 28.07.2018).
19. Ross L. Public sector performance: a global perspective. The Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, London SW1P 4NP, United Kingdom, 2011, 28 p.
20. Barmayehvar Behnod. Being an Effective Project Manager: An exploration within project-oriented organizations, 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.
21. 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, No. 28, pp. 650–662.
22. Pinto J. K., Slevin D. P. Critical success factors in effective project implementation. Project management handbook, 1988.
23. Turner J. R., Müller R. The project manager’s leadership style as a success factor on projects: A literature review, Project Management Journal, 2005, No. 36, p. 49.
24. 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, No. 2, pp. 198–216.
25. Pinto J. K., Slevin D. P. Project success: definitions and measurement techniques, Project Management Journal, 1988, No. 19, pp. 67–73.
26. Vroom V. H. Work and motivation, New York, Wiley, 1964, 331 p.
27. Porter L. W., Richard D. Irwin. Managerial attitudes and performance, Homewood, IL., 1968, 209 p.
28. Locke E. A., Latham G. H. Goal setting: A motivational technique that works!, Englewood cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall, 1984.
29. Locke E. A., Latham G. P. A theory of goal setting and task performance, Engelwood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall, 1990.
30. Mowen J., Middlemist R., Luther D. 1981. Joint effect of assigned goal level and incentive structure on task performance: A laboratory study, Journal of applied psychology, 1981, No. 75, pp. 68–76.
31. Zhigun L. A. Ontological limits of the variable part of salary of state and municipal servants under results-based remuneration of their work, Upravlenie ekonomicheskimi sistemami: elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal, 2015, No. 4 (76), p. 16 (in Russ.).
32. 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, Vol. 11 (1), 1990, pp. 13–33. DOI: 10.1300/j075v11n01_03
33. Van Dyke M. Incentives, Motivation and Workplace Performance: Research and Best Practices, The Incentive Research Foundation Resource Center, January 20, 2010, available at: http://theirf.org/research/content/6000065/incentives-motivation-andworkplace-performance-research-and-best-practices/ (access date: 02.02.2015).
Citation :
Zhigun L. A. Methodological bases of building the system of key performance indicators for stimulating the project participants in executive bodies, Actual Problems of Economics and Law, 2018, vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 775–788 (in Russ.). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21202/1993-047X.12.2018.4.775-788
Type of article : The scientific article
Date of receipt of the article :
14.09.2018
Date of adoption of the print :
20.11.2018
Date of online accommodation :
25.12.2018
