Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

1.1. The essence of a management decision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.2. Classification of management decisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1.3. Criteria for the quality of management decisions. . . . . . . . . . . eleven

Chapter 2. Mechanism for making management decisions . . . . . . . 13

2.1. Structure of a management decision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.2. Distribution of decision-making powers. . . . . . . . . 16

2.3. Risk in decision making. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2.4 Mathematical tools for decision making. . . . . . . . 19

Chapter 3. Monitoring the implementation of management decisions . . . . . . 25

3.1. Concept, content and types of control. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3.2 System and basic principles of control organization. . . . . . . . 31

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

List of used literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Introduction

The process of developing management decisions connects the main functions of management: planning, organization, motivation and control. The functions of management decision-making became the subject of independent research with the emergence of modern management science, i.e. at the beginning of the 20th century.

Modern organizations are characterized by an unprecedented increase in the number of senior and middle managers; vesting each manager with a professional responsibility to make management decisions in accordance with delegated powers; the presence of specialists who are not managers, who are delegated the authority to make management decisions; collectivity and rationality of development of management decisions.

In this regard, the study of the basic principles of management decision-making is a very urgent task. The purpose of this course work is to consider the features of the process of making management decisions. Objectives of the work: 1) Consider the essence, classification and criteria for the quality of management decisions; 2) Study technologies for developing management decisions; 3) Explore mechanisms for monitoring the implementation of management decisions.

When performing the work, special and educational literature was used by such authors as A.Z. Gasanov, G.Ya. Goldstein B.V. Litvak, R.A. Fatkhutdinov and others.

Chapter 1. The meaning and role of decisions in the management process

1.1. The essence of a management decision

The management process is the activity of management subjects united in a certain system, aimed at achieving the company’s goals by implementing certain functions using management methods.

As a rule, company management processes are very diverse, multidimensional and have a complex structure (consisting of a large number of stages and phases). In a general sense, the management process consists of general management functions that are combined into management cycles (Fig. 1).

Rice. 1 Control cycle

From a functional point of view, a management decision represents both the process of selecting acceptable activities from a given set, and the process of developing activities that were not previously specified.

In addition, the decision-making process includes the collection and processing of necessary information, coordination and approval of activities, legal registration of the decision act, etc.

The components of the theory of managerial decision making are the generation of alternative solutions, their execution, control and analysis of the results of actions.

A significant difference between the theory of management decision making and related sciences is that the subject of study of the theory of decision making is not only quantitative methods, but also methods based on obtaining and analyzing qualitative information. Such methods include methods of expert assessment, multi-criteria and content analysis.

The decision is the central point of the entire management process. We can say that the essence of the management profession is decision making.

In a broad sense, this concept includes the preparation of a decision (planning); in a narrow sense, it is the choice of an alternative.

As part of long-term planning, fundamental decisions are made (what to do?), then in the process of ongoing planning, organization, motivation, coordination, regulation, changes in plans - decisions in the narrow sense (how to do?), although such a boundary is conditional.

1.2. Classification of management decisions

Currently, a typology of management decisions is used, based on a variety of classification criteria.

Their most widespread classification is based on the following grounds:

1) field of activity;

2) validity period;

4) type of decision maker (DM);

5) uniqueness of the management decision;

6) completeness of initial information;

7) the degree of validity of the decision;

8) management rank;

9) scale of the solution;

10) object of influence of the decision;

11) method of formalization;

12) form of reflection;

13) method of transmission.

Depending on the field of activity, the proposed classification includes economic, organizational, technical, communication, etc. management decisions.

Economic decisions are designed to answer the questions:

What to produce?

How many products will be sold?

What level of production costs is optimal?

At what price should finished products be sold?

What economic benefits will production provide to the investor and society as a whole?

Organizational decisions involve resolving problems in organizing production and provide answers to the following questions:

Where should production be located geographically?

What production facilities will be required to organize production?

What are your staffing needs?

At the same time, organizational decisions must contain specific measures to meet the production needs of the enterprise.

Technical management solutions solve the problem of choosing production technology, technical equipment of the company's production units and their improvement.

Communication solutions involve measures to establish, maintain and improve the organization’s connections with subjects of the external environment, as well as the organization of connections between elements of the organizational structure of the enterprise itself.

Based on their duration and impact on development prospects, management decisions are divided into operational, tactical and strategic.

Operational decisions play a corrective role directly in the course of the enterprise’s production activities, solving suddenly emerging problems that cannot be delayed.

Tactical management decisions, as a rule, are focused on the short and medium term and problems of a production and technical nature.

Strategic management decisions are designed to ensure that the organization fulfills its mission and, due to this, its survival in a highly competitive environment.

By purpose, commercial and non-commercial management decisions are distinguished. Commercial decisions involve the implementation of actions aimed at achieving a certain economic effect: increasing turnover, increasing gross income or profit, etc.

Management decisions of a non-commercial nature do not directly pursue economic goals. They are usually aimed at creating a social image of the company, social development of the municipal or regional community within which the organization operates, solving environmental problems, improving working and rest conditions for employees, as well as developing non-profit activities of the organization.

Depending on the type of decision maker and the organization of development, management decisions can be collective or individual (personal). The priority of certain decisions in a particular organization is determined by the leadership style, the degree of centralization of the organizational structure and management, and the available time budget for making and implementing management decisions.

The degree of uniqueness of management decisions allows us to talk about routine (non-creative) and unique (creative) decisions. In the activities of any organization, there are both frequently repeated, standard situations and new non-standard problems.

To overcome recurring problems, it is necessary to develop standard procedures, the complex of which constitutes the content of routine (non-creative) management decisions.

Non-standard problems require in each case the identification of constituent elements, existing limitations, development and analysis of many acceptable options for solving this problem, which gives the management decision a creative character.

The completeness of the initial information implies the division of management decisions into decisions made under conditions of certainty, risk and uncertainty.

The decision is made in conditions of certainty, when the manager knows exactly the result of each of the alternative decision options.

An example would be investing in certificates of deposit or government bonds.

A decision is considered to be made under risk conditions if the probability of all alternative decisions is known. In this case, the sum of the probabilities of all alternatives must be equal to one. A decision is made under conditions of uncertainty when it is impossible to determine the likelihood of potential outcomes.

Introduction

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

A characteristic feature of managing any objects is the achievement of certain goals. This general feature can be used as a basis for defining the management process. The management process is the purposeful influence of the subject of management on the object of management in order to implement management functions.

The management process consists of a sequence of types of management activities that are cyclically repeated over time, which are called management functions. The allocation of functions in the management process can be performed with varying degrees of detail. The most common aggregate management functions are usually considered planning, organizing, motivating and controlling. Decision making permeates all management activities; decisions are made on a wide range of management tasks. Not a single management function, regardless of which body performs it, can be implemented otherwise than through the preparation and execution of management decisions. Essentially, the entire set of activities of any management employee is in one way or another connected with the adoption and implementation of decisions. This primarily determines the importance of decision-making activities and determining its role in management.

Management decisions are one of the most important processes. The success of the business largely depends on its effectiveness. Only a professional manager has the technology to develop, make, and implement management decisions, without which effective management of an organization in a difficult economic environment is practically impossible. Every manager knows that before starting any business, it is necessary to determine the purpose of his actions: strategic (for the long term) and tactical (for a specific action).

Goals must be specific and measurable, i.e. For each goal there must be a criterion that would allow assessing the degree of its achievement. If there is no such criterion, then the implementation of one of the main management functions - control - is impossible. And in this sense, a goal, the degree of achievement of which can be quantitatively measured, is always better than a goal formulated only verbally.

An equally important professional quality of a manager is the ability to foresee. He who does not know how to foresee cannot govern.

The external and internal environment in which the organization operates is subject to continuous changes, the degree of significance of which varies. In order not to find yourself in the situation of a driver who did not notice a sharp turn in the road, monitoring the state of the external and internal environment of the organization must be carried out continuously. It is the results of assessing the quality and control of management decisions that are the basis for organizational leaders to adjust previously made decisions if deviations in the implementation of previously made decisions are significant.

Only by correctly assessing possible losses and gains, and by developing a program of action to prevent possible negative consequences, can a high-quality management decision be made.

Objectives of this course work: consider the theoretical aspects of assessing the quality of management decisions

This work consists of three chapters.

The first chapter examines the essence of management decisions, indicates the characteristic features of decisions, the factors determining their quality and effectiveness, and also provides a classification of management decisions.

The second chapter contains information on methods for assessing the quality of management decisions. A schematic diagram for assessing the quality of management, as well as factors influencing this process. Criteria for determining the quality of management decisions . Objectives of evaluating management decisions.

The third chapter discusses methods for optimizing management decisions

1. Theoretical aspects of the quality of management decisions

1.1 The essence of the quality of management decisions

The experience of successful enterprises shows that achieving high efficiency is impossible without putting things in order in the area of ​​enterprise management. A certain level of management system is required to ensure that decisions made are implemented on time and with proper quality. The quality of the results obtained is a consequence of the quality of the enterprise management system.

Making management decisions and improving their quality is an important problem.

It occupies one of the central places in the sociology of organization. Considering organization to be a management tool, many sociologists and management theory specialists, starting with M. Weber, directly link its activities primarily with the preparation and implementation of management decisions. Management efficiency is largely determined by the quality of such decisions. The interest of sociologists in this problem is due to the fact that the decisions record the entire set of relationships that arise in the process of labor activity and organization management. Goals, interests, connections and norms are refracted through them.

The concept of quality of management decisions.

Quality of management decision- a set of properties that a management decision has that meet, to one degree or another, the needs of successfully resolving the problem. For example, timeliness, targeting, specificity and, in general, efficiency.

The quality of management decisions should be understood as the degree of its compliance with the nature of the tasks being resolved in the functioning and development of production systems, the set of decision parameters that satisfy specific consumers and ensure the reality of its implementation. In other words, to what extent does SD ensure further development of the production system in market conditions?

Urgent calls to improve the quality of governance are heard everywhere. Meanwhile, it is difficult to translate this desire into regulatory requirements and specific indicators for the simple reason that the very term “quality of management” is interpreted both in management science and in practice in a very vague, uncertain manner.

An attempt to translate into management the definition of the concept of “quality” used in relation to material production products, goods, does not lead to success. Indeed, understanding quality as a set of properties of a product that characterize its ability to satisfy the needs associated with the purpose of this product, we get only a vague idea of ​​​​what constitutes the quality of such a unique product as management. After all, management is not a product, but a type of activity that ends with the creation of such a specific product as control actions and management decisions.

On the other hand, the direct product of management is presented in the form of information, and information satisfies the need for it in a completely different way than a material product, and besides, the very need for information produced by management cannot be expressed in such an explicit form, as a need for products, goods, services.

But that's not all. The most important thing is that the information management product in the form of decisions, resolutions, plans, programs, laws, regulations in itself does not satisfy and is not intended to satisfy the ultimate needs of people, society, and the economy. Only by being transferred to the control object, prompting the object to act in the manner necessary for the control subject, does the control process lead to the creation of a consumable product, the quality of which can already be assessed by its ability to satisfy needs. A whole chain of cause-and-effect relationships arises: “the quality of management - the quality of functioning of the control object - the quality of the product created by the control object.”

Consequently, the quality of management can and should be judged only on the basis of an assessment of the quality of the management object’s work, which, in turn, is determined by the quality of the product of its activity. Since the subject of our consideration is the management of the economy, economic objects and processes, then quality of economic management manifests itself in the quality of controlled processes of economic activity and the resulting quality of this activity, ultimately in the extent to which the economy satisfies the needs of people, society, and the country, and ensures a high quality of life.

Such an indirect approach to determining the quality of economic management based on the quality of its functioning and the provided measure of satisfaction of needs, that is, on the effectiveness of management processes, is in principle legitimate and the most objective in comparison with other possible approaches. However, it is also vulnerable, due to which it cannot be recognized as the only acceptable one. Firstly, a judgment about the quality of management must be formed during the development of management decisions (prepared control actions), that is, long before obtaining the final result of managing economic objects and processes. The idea of ​​the results available at that stage is of the nature of expectation, transportation and therefore does not have a high level of reliability. It is also not possible to take into account the side socio-economic consequences of the decisions being prepared, which could lead to a decrease in their final effectiveness.

Secondly, the ultimate needs, towards the satisfaction of which management must be oriented, are not indisputable in themselves and, moreover, are dynamic, changing over time. Due to these circumstances, when assessing management decisions during their development and adoption, one inevitably has to operate with other signs and criteria of management quality, reflecting the properties of the management process itself. These criteria characterize the organization of the management process, decision-making methods, and the level of professionalism of management staff. Of course, expected results are also taken into account, but only to the extent that they are foreseeable, predictable, calculable, and can be confined to certain periods of time. The uncertainty factor prevents the quality of management from being completely identified with its expected effectiveness.

From the above it follows that quality of management is determined by the extent to which it directs economic objects and processes to achieve socio-economic goals in accordance with the needs of the economy and society. At the same time, the quality of management is also characterized by the quality of the processes of management activity itself: the scientific nature of the management methods used, the progressiveness of management tools, and the professionalism of the management apparatus.

1.2 Factors of quality of management decisions and their effectiveness

Factors influencing the quality of management decisions. The quality of a management decision largely determines the final result and depends on a number of factors:

1) the quality of the source information, determined by its reliability, sufficiency, protection from interference and errors, form of presentation (it is known that the accuracy of the calculation results cannot be higher than the accuracy used to calculate the information);

2) the optimal or rational nature of the decision being made;

3) timeliness of decisions made, determined by the speed of their development, adoption, transfer and organization of execution;

4) compliance of decisions made with the current management mechanism and management methods based on it;

5) qualifications of personnel involved in the development, adoption of decisions and organization of their execution;

6) readiness of the managed system to execute decisions made.

Factors that determine the quality and effectiveness of SD can be classified according to various criteria - both internal factors (related to the control and managed systems) and external factors (environmental influence):

laws of the objective world related to the adoption and implementation of SD;

a clear statement of the goal - why SD is being adopted, what real results can be achieved, how to measure, correlate the goal and the results achieved;

volume and value of available information - for the successful adoption of SD, the main thing is not the volume of information, but the value determined by the level of professionalism, experience, and intuition of personnel;

time for development of SD - as a rule, management decisions are always made under conditions of time shortage and emergency circumstances (lack of resources, activity of competitors, market conditions, inconsistent behavior of politicians);

organizational management structures;

forms and methods of implementing management activities;

methods and techniques for developing and implementing SD (for example, if a company is a leader, there is one methodology, if it follows others, it is different);

subjectivity of evaluation of the solution choice option. The more extraordinary the SD is, the more subjective the assessment.

the state of the control and managed systems (psychological climate, authority of the manager, professional and qualified personnel, etc.);

a system of expert assessments of the level of quality and efficiency of SD.

Management decisions must be based on objective laws and patterns of social development. On the other hand, management decisions significantly depend on many subjective factors - the logic of developing solutions, the quality of assessing the situation, structuring tasks and problems, a certain level of management culture, the mechanism for implementing decisions, executive discipline, etc. At the same time, it is necessary to always remember that even carefully thought-out decisions may turn out to be ineffective if they cannot anticipate possible changes in the situation and state of the production system.

The effectiveness of management decisions and its assessment.

In economics, efficiency is understood as the relationship between the results of financial and economic activities, usually characterized by profit, and the costs that caused the receipt of this profit.

Efficiency is determined on the basis of relevant indicators of financial and economic activity. As such, they can be used, for example, balance sheet profit, profit remaining at the disposal of the enterprise, income from securities, dividends, profit growth due to certain circumstances, the average annual cost of fixed and working assets, costs of updating fixed assets, maintenance and provision of management apparatus, etc. The choice of specific methods, procedures and mathematical apparatus for assessing effectiveness is determined by the complexity and nature of the object being assessed. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of simple objects, for example, placing funds in a deposit account, is determined by the ratio of the amount received in the form of interest on the deposit and the amount of the deposit.

When assessing the effectiveness of complex objects, they are conditionally differentiated into simpler components. Based on calculated partial assessments of the effectiveness of individual elements of the object, it is possible to develop a general assessment of effectiveness that takes into account various factors. This raises the problem of determining the contribution of each element to the overall performance assessment. It is resolved by assigning each of the partial assessments of the effectiveness of the corresponding mathematical weight, which can be determined based on the determination of the importance of the corresponding element in the technology of the production process, their ranking according to the results of a survey of specialists, based on the share of this element in the total cost of the object or in the total cost, etc. .P.

Of particular interest is the use of expert methods for assessing effectiveness. They can be used both if there is a certain statistical base for the production and economic activities of the company, and in a newly created enterprise. In the first case, the experts’ task comes down to determining the significance of particular performance assessments; in the second, to developing a consensus opinion about the possible effectiveness of the enterprise’s activities in a new business area.

As performance criteria, indicators such as growth in profit, production volumes and sales of products, changes in the payback period of capital investments, increased turnover of working capital, increased economic profitability, reduced costs of maintaining the management apparatus, etc. can be used. Performance indicators include profitability indicators, indicators of business activity, as well as indicators of capital productivity and capital intensity. The methodology for calculating these indicators is studied in courses in accounting, business analysis and financial management. Therefore, they are not considered in this work.

The practice of financial and economic activity in a market economy shows that enterprises of the same type, which have approximately equal material and financial resources, often have significant differences in the level of profit. Some of them are developing dynamically, others are going bankrupt. In this regard, leading domestic and foreign economists point out that one of the most important reasons for such discrepancies is differences in the efficiency of enterprise management or, in other words, in the effectiveness of management decisions developed and implemented by managers.

In general terms, the effectiveness of enterprise management is understood as the effectiveness of managing the activities of an enterprise, which is a consequence of the ability of managers to develop effective management decisions and achieve their goals. Many economists express the opinion that management efficiency is a function of two variables: the costs of developing management decisions and maintaining the management apparatus, on the one hand, and the results of management activities, reflected in changes in the values ​​of indicators that assess the state of the management object, on the other.

When assessing the quality and effectiveness of management decisions, it is necessary to ensure a synthesis of economic and social aspects of management. In accordance with this, a system of evaluation criteria should be built.

2. Methods and criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions

2.1 Methods for assessing the quality of management decisions

Self-assessment. Any management activity, as already noted, includes analysis and quality control on the part of the person performing the work. Without self-control and self-assessment of quality in the search for the best solution, there would be no rejection, variant selection, which are an integral property of the process of preparation and decision-making

By their nature, meaning, and purpose, assessments of the quality of one’s own work are the most thorough, painstaking, detailed and capacious assessments, and given the high professional level of the employee, they are very qualified and profound. Often, few people other than the employee himself are able to ascertain the quality of the work done with the same completeness. At the same time, self-assessment technology is largely individualized, it is difficult to regulate and control, the results of assessments are recorded mainly in the employee’s memory and are not available to the public. Such assessments are subjective, due to why they can be individually oriented. For example, a non-self-critical employee tends to strive for a level of quality sufficient to “pass” the work. This level will be the limit for him and will receive the highest rating, since further improvement in quality is not in his interests. The author of an idea often tends to overestimate its quality. Consequently , it is necessary to take into account the influence of psychological factors on self-esteem of work

Evaluation by work managers. Heads of management bodies, projects, programs, scientific supervisors establish the quality of work, relying primarily on a system of “internal” assessments and judgments, the formation procedures of which are not regulated. Since managers act as creators of the central plan when developing, justifying and making management decisions, their quality assessments are, on the one hand, self-assessments, on the other hand, control assessments in relation to the supervised work of subordinate employees

Quality assessments by managers are often formed explicitly and communicated to employees as an element of management influence carried out in order to direct work in the right direction, find a rational solution, eliminate errors and miscalculations of individual employees. Certification assessment of the quality of work and employees is carried out periodically to check the compliance of employees positions held, when they are nominated for promotion. Evaluation of work by managers is also carried out when summing up the results of work for a certain period. At the same time, many assessments of the quality of management activities developed by managers are carried out by them “for themselves”, to analyze options for management decisions made by the manager himself , and filtering out unsuitable options

Algorithms and procedures for assessing the quality of management work by their immediate supervisors, as well as self-monitoring of employees, are most often purely individual, based mainly on experience and intuition, since managers and leading employees usually have high professional qualifications, possess work skills, deeply understand and perceive the goals activities, their quality assessments, in principle, can be the most representative and reliable. However, these assessments are often characterized by subjectivity

Evaluation by customers. A variety of types of management work related to the preparation of draft laws and other regulations, draft management decisions, programs, forecasts, justifications, analytical materials are carried out by order of organizations external to the performers of the work. Most often, this is work carried out on a contractual basis or at the direction of higher management bodies Since the customer acts as a consumer of the results of the work performed, and often as its buyer, his judgment about the quality is decisive for the performers of the work. Only in certain conflict situations, when the assessments of customers and performers differ decisively, a special commission, its conclusion becomes more important than the customer’s assessment. Typically, customers are psychologically inclined to underestimate the quality of the work they accept. Evaluation of work by customers can be carried out as individual stages are completed or the work is completed as a whole

Peer assessment. Collegial assessments include group, collective assessments formed by a group of people authorized to evaluate the quality of management work or interested in conducting the assessment. Such assessments are carried out through the formation of a collective opinion of specially created groups of experts of permanent commissions, councils, collegiums, as well as by submitting projects for collective discussion. It is advisable to divide collegial assessments into the following groups: a) assessments from higher authorities; b) assessments of permanent councils and commissions; c) assessments formed by specially created expert groups; d) evaluations of production meetings of the teams performing the work; e) assessments based on broad discussion.

Permanent commissions and councils in the form of boards of ministries and departments, academic councils, scientific and technical councils, expert commissions and councils periodically review, discuss, and analyze at their meetings draft management decisions and proposals for improving management, giving them a collegial assessment. At such councils, different opinions and judgments are compared, a generalized opinion is developed, and a high level of representativeness of assessments is achieved. In addition, the most experienced specialists are included in the boards and expert councils, which serves as a prerequisite for the high qualification level of the conclusions they produce. However, the heterogeneity of the composition of the boards, sharp differences in the level of professionalism of their members, extreme inconsistency in the judgments of participants in the assessment process, and varying degrees of interest in the objectivity of assessments often lead to unrepresentativeness of the overall assessment.

Group assessment of the quality of work often takes place on the part of the workers themselves, when consideration of the results of work is submitted to a production meeting of a department, sector, or other unit. Discussion of the results or intermediate results of activities by persons carrying out these activities is very useful, as it promotes creative discussions, exchange of opinions, expression of critical comments from colleagues, as well as the development of collective opinions on ways to eliminate shortcomings and improve the quality of prepared materials, documents, decisions . In addition, production meetings of departments for the purpose of jointly discussing the quality of work performed and ways to improve it help familiarize workers with the content and nature of the activities of their colleagues, which helps to establish close contacts, deepen interaction and consistency, and ultimately leads to an increase in the quality of work of the entire department.

The variety of types and forms of collegial assessment of the quality of management work gives it weight and contributes to the widespread dissemination of this assessment method. Group assessments are becoming widespread in the quality management system of economic activity.

Most collegial assessments of the quality of management work are distinguished by the greatest objectivity of all used forms of assessment. At the same time, their preference is not absolute, because they also have certain limitations that have to be taken into account.

Individual assessment by experts, controllers, inspectors, and auditors. Individuals and specialists in the field of the activity being assessed can and are being involved in assessing the quality of management and management work. Most often, such assessment is the subject of external examination. The results of assessments in this case are very sensitive to the level of professionalism of the expert, his position in relation to the performers of the work, as well as his own point of view on how the problem should be solved. To suppress and mitigate such effects, they resort to the involvement of several independent experts. In this case, individual assessments essentially turn into group, collegial assessments. There are even methods for combining local assessments into a general one, called expert assessment methods.

Let us now consider the types and forms of presentation of assessments of the quality of management activities. Based on the formalization of assessments, assessment methods are divided into non-formalized, formalized and mixed.

Under unformalized, Qualitative means methods of assessment of a heuristic nature, not described using formulas, mathematical dependencies, logical and computational algorithms and not implemented using technical cybernetics, but accessible only to the human brain, developed on the basis of experience and intuition. Respectively formalized methods are considered based on the use of mathematical dependencies, the procedures of which are performed using formal logical algorithms that can be implemented using computer technology. In partially formalized (semi-formalized) methods, formalized and informal procedures are combined, combined, and interspersed.

Based on the form of expression of quality assessments, assessment methods can be divided into two groups: qualitative judgment and quantitative numerical assessment.

Qualitative judgment belongs to the category of verbal (verbal) assessments that are not included in the regulated scale. Such judgments are most often not ordered either by the composition of the assessments used or by their rank. The level of quality of management work, expressed in the form of a qualitative judgment, is determined by the semantic meaning of the expressed assessments. At the same time, such commonly used assessments of work as “satisfactory”, “unsatisfactory”, “good”, “bad”, “excellent”, “high level”, “low level” can be strengthened or weakened by including such assessments in them, as “quite satisfactory”, “very positive”, “not at all satisfactory”. A qualitative assessment should, at a minimum, answer the question of whether the work is in the acceptable quality zone, that is, whether it satisfies the requirements. The content of qualitative assessments is significantly enhanced if it is prescribed in advance which aspects of the quality of work they should reflect (for example, relevance, novelty, efficiency, meeting deadlines, etc.), thereby actually forming a vector of assessments, the components of which correspond to individual characteristics or quality criteria.

Quantitative assessments qualities expressed in numerical form also have a multifaceted, insufficiently standardized structure. Numerical indicators of the quality of management work can be either dimensional, expressed in certain units of measurement, or dimensionless, relative. It should be noted that, along with an unambiguous deterministic estimate represented by a single number, interval, “fork” estimates indicating the lower and upper limits “from and to” and probabilistic estimates in the form of the mathematical expectation of the estimate value and its variance are quite acceptable and often necessary or even the distribution curve of grade values. Quantitative assessments of the quality of work can take different forms.

If relatively homogeneous, comparable works are evaluated, then it is acceptable ordinal an assessment that determines the place of this work among those compared in terms of quality. This place is established by arranging works in ascending or descending order of quality, as well as highlighting works that take first (prize) places. This approach is usually called ranking, and the ordinal estimate itself is called rank or rating.

Shkalnaya(scaled) assessment determines the quality level of work according to the place it occupies in a pre-standardized scale of quality categories (for example, it is possible to divide work by quality into the highest, first, second categories).

Points the assessment is expressed in special relative units - points, each of which is taken for a certain “dose” of quality, and the overall assessment is determined by summing the points received for achieving a certain level of quality for each of the criteria (properties).

Coefficient the assessment is expressed in the form of quality coefficients, which are the degree of approximation or ratio of a certain indicator of the quality of work to the standard or basic level of this indicator. If the basic level is taken equal to one, then the coefficient directly characterizes how much the assessed work does not achieve or how much the assessed work exceeds the standard in quality.

Ordinal, scale, point and coefficient estimates are not yet available. are widely used in establishing the quality of management work, although there is a tendency to expand the scope of their application.; Level and parametric assessments are more suitable for establishing the quality of management activities.

Level assessment- this is a widespread type of coefficient assessment, representing the ratio of a criterion (indicator) of the quality of a given work to a specially established base value of the same criterion. Management is considered to be of high quality if the quality criterion that favors its increase exceeds the base value or shows a tendency to increase, and vice versa.

Parametric estimation represents the absolute value of an economic indicator determined in the process of developing a management decision (growth rates, proportions, efficiency indicators, savings indicators, levels of satisfaction of needs, time frames for solving problems), the analysis of which allows us to judge the quality of the decision. Most often, a management decision is considered high-quality if it favors or directly provides for the achievement of a high level of those indicators that characterize the rise in production, economic growth, resource savings, and living standards.

Methods for comparative analysis of management quality

Among the most common methods of establishing quality is the comparison of the subject being assessed with another, taken as a basis for comparison. As already noted, in relation to management work, management decisions, management influences, due to their unique, non-mass nature, it is difficult to choose a basis for comparison, since there are no standards to be compared to and based on the results of comparison with which it would be possible to clearly establish the level of quality Although , strictly speaking, a single product produced and has no direct analogues, it can be compared with products that are similar in appearance, type, purpose, application. The same, to a certain extent, applies to products of management activities, management works, processes. There are several types of comparison bases that allow, with a certain degree of convention, to identify the quality of management work and its results on the basis of comparative comparative analysis.

Method of statistical comparisons is based on a comparison of the parameters (criteria) of the quality of the work being assessed and its results with indicators of similar content characterizing previous works; for this purpose, based on the accumulated information about previous works, statistically ordered sets (in the form of, for example, dynamic, time series) of real parameter values ​​are constructed quality achieved in previous periods. Steady trends in changes in these parameters are identified; through qualitative analysis, the favorability or unfavorability of these trends, the desired directions and zones of their further change are established. Judgment about the quality of the evaluated work is formed by considering the place occupied by the indicators characterizing it in the statistical field of their previous ones. values ​​The entry of an indicator into the zone of favorable trends indicates the quality of management work according to the given criterion, and vice versa. Quality is determined by the degree of compliance of the assessed parameter with stable favorable trends that occurred in the past, or the degree of change in unfavorable trends for the better due to the adoption of the assessed management decision. The method of statistical comparisons is used in planning when developing judgments about the reliability, intensity, and progressiveness of plans, projects, and programs being developed by comparing them with previous analogues. This method is preferable to use for assessing the quality of management decisions for a fairly short term.

Method for comparing planned and actual results based on a comparison of planned indicators with those practically achieved as a result of the implementation of the planned decisions. In this case, the basis for comparison is formed by an information array of reporting indicators on the actual results of the implementation of management decisions. The level of quality of work is determined by the degree of compliance of the actual results obtained with those that were outlined during the development and adoption of plans, projects, programs, forecasts, and other documents and decisions. Comparison of planned and actual results provides an objective assessment of the quality of management activities. However, the basis for such a comparison can be formulated only after the practical implementation of the solutions, which significantly delays the time frame for potentially assessing the quality of work from the period of its implementation.

Method for analyzing experimental results applicable in cases where the progressiveness and effectiveness of a management decision, before its widespread dissemination and implementation, are tested selectively in experimental conditions on a group of regions, industries, associations, enterprises. The quality of the solutions developed is established by comparing the performance indicators of economic objects in experimental conditions with similar indicators that took place before the transition to the experiment, or with the performance indicators of objects that were not transferred to the experimental conditions. This approach has a common original concept with the method of comparing planned and real results, but differs significantly from it in that real results are compared with past ones, that is, essentially a statistical basis for comparison is used.

Comparison method with the results of economic and mathematical modeling of the management object’s activities is based on a comparison of parameters and indicators included in projects, program plans and other economic decisions with the values ​​of similar indicators obtained through mathematical (simulation) modeling of the processes of functioning and development of the object. Basic indicators when using this method are formed on the basis of model forecasting, that is, using scientifically based forecast Based on the results of several calculations using different models or carried out by different research organizations, it is possible to establish forecast values ​​of indicators achieved when implementing the strategy of the program plan and other business decisions. Comparison of the planned results with indicators determined by modeling (forecasting) makes it possible to judge the quality of projects plans and programs.

Particularly noteworthy is the variant of the specified method, in which the comparison base is formed on the basis of optimization models. In this case, calculations make it possible to determine the optimal indicators of the development of the object, which can be considered as ideal and judge the quality of project plans for the development programs of the object by the degree of approximation of their indicators to the optimal However, this approach, despite all its attractiveness, has the obvious drawback that the optimality criteria (objective functions) used in optimization models are always conditional, and the models themselves do not adequately describe the real development of the modeled object. If, with the help of models, it was possible to confidently establish optimal real indicators, then they should be included in the management decisions made and the object should be directed through management strictly in the model direction.

Method of normative comparisons is based on a comparison of the indicators and parameters of the proposed draft plans, programs of regulations and other management decisions with the standard values ​​of the corresponding indicators, that is, with resource consumption standards, technological standards, efficiency standards, rational consumption standards, taxation standards, bank interest rates. If the normative basis for comparison is progressive and scientifically grounded and reflects the advanced achievements of technical and technological progress, then the quality of management activities can be judged by the extent to which it directs economic and social development into a normative direction. The difficulty of applying a normative method for assessing the quality of management activities is due to the imperfection or absence of a number of standards and the difficulty of updating them. The basis for normative comparisons are also standards including management standards

A unique independently distinguished form of the regulatory framework is a task for performing work or a target setting developed by the customer, which determines the desired level or limit limits for changes in the quality criteria characterizing this work. Assessment of the quality of work is formed as a measure of compliance with the set requirements and conditions. However, most often the task cannot be used as the only basis for comparison since, in relation to management work, it is usually of a general installation nature, does not cover all the parameters of the work and may not have sufficient validity since the customer is inclined to expect a little more from the work than it can actually give.

Method of comparison with the level of world achievements is based on the fact that the indicators that characterize the quality of work, determined in the process of performing the assessed work, are compared with indicators of similar content achieved in world practice. The comparison should be made taking into account the dynamics of the level of the world's highest achievements and the trends in its change during the implementation of the planned management decisions. Thus, this comparison method is combined with the method of predictive comparisons. The possibilities of its use are limited by two circumstances. Firstly, this requires a fairly complete and representative database on the level of world achievements, the formation of which represents an independent problem. Secondly, due to the specifics of the functioning and development of economic objects, formally homogeneous indicators turn out to be incomparable if they relate to different social, economic, and natural conditions, therefore, the highest achievement obtained in one environment is not rightfully considered a target for other conditions.

Method of comparison with similar works is based on comparisons of the results or other qualitative properties of this work with those obtained during the performance of similar or similar in content works that were carried out earlier or are carried out in parallel with the one being evaluated in the competition. Even if there are analogous works performed by other organizations and performers, their comparison is feasible based on a limited number of quality indicators due to the fact that the conditions for carrying out the work and the personnel composition of the performers are not the same.

Method of variant comparisons represents a natural, widespread method of establishing the quality of management work, carried out by forming a comparison base based on the development of several options for project management decisions and comparing them with each other. This approach is convenient in that it does not require searching for a comparison base external to the given work. In addition, with variant analysis, it is possible not only to establish the comparative quality of options, but also to select the best option that is close to the optimal one. However, the need for special formation of many options significantly complicates the work.

All described methods for establishing quality assessments based on comparison are focused on generating assessments based on local indicators. But along with local, single estimates, it is of interest to use generalized estimates, including complex and integral ones.

Comprehensive assessments work qualities are formed by combining other single assessments that are similar in content into one generalized, synthetic one, or by assessing a number of qualitative characteristics of work with one complex indicator.

Integral It is customary to call a single assessment, expressed by one indicator, which is of the most general nature and accumulates all the basic qualitative properties of the work being assessed.

Based on frequency, assessment can be divided into continuously and discretely, periodically, step by step. Periods of quality assessment can be agreed upon in advance in accordance with the stages of work. In addition, selective periodic assessment is possible as a means of unprogrammed control, the dates of which are unknown to the performers of the work. Often, periods of time-regulated assessment of work are associated with planned reporting deadlines for their implementation. Continuous or close to continuous assessment accompanying the work is more typical for self-assessments and, to a certain extent, for assessments by the work manager, while the establishment of quality on the part of the customer, higher authorities, and commissions is obviously periodic in nature.

Objectives of evaluating management decisions.

The goal is the ideal result of activity in the future. The purpose of the decision Let us agree to name those specific results that are expected to be obtained after implementing this decision under certain conditions and a fixed period of time. In this case, the goal always lies outside the system. It reflects the reaction of the environment to the system. The quality of the goal determines the success or failure of the organizational-production system.

Let us list the known requirements for the goal. The goal should be:

· unambiguously formulated and understandable to performers;

· measurable, feedback can be used for this;

· realistic and achievable within the established time frame;

· connected with the reward system, since the goal must motivate the performer’s actions in the direction necessary to achieve it;

· compatible with the goals of individual groups of performers;

· formalizable. Formalizing goals is a very complex process. There are no formal methods for synthesizing goals, but it should be remembered that the formulation of goals is heuristic.

The main goal for commercial organizations is to maximize profits. In this case, additional limiting requirements may be formulated, for example, ensuring safety, preventing damage, etc.

There are three types of organizational goals:

1. official purposes- determine the general purpose of the organization, are declared in the charter or regulations of the organization, and are also declared publicly by the leader. They explain the need for an organization for society, have an external focus and perform an important protective function, creating an appropriate image for the organization;

2. operational goals- determine what the organization actually does in the current period, and may not completely coincide with official goals for a specific period. Such goals have an internal focus and are designed to mobilize the organization's resources; the form of their expression can be a work plan;

3. operational goals- direct the activities of specific employees and allow them to evaluate their work. They are even more specific and measurable than operational ones; such goals are formulated in the form of specific tasks for individual groups and performers.

Another classification of goals is possible:

· strategic goals;

· goals of a specific business program;

· long-term goals;

· current goals;

· operational goals.

Goals become a management tool when they are defined or formulated, known to the staff, and accepted by employees for execution.

Formalization of goals takes place when forming a criterion for assessing the effectiveness of the system.

2.2 Criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions

Urgent calls to improve the quality of governance are heard everywhere. Meanwhile, it is difficult to translate this desire into regulatory requirements and specific indicators for the simple reason that the very term “quality of management” is interpreted both in management science and in practice in a very vague and uncertain manner. The author offers his vision of the process of preparing management decisions and formulates indicators for assessing their quality.

Quality of management: defining the concept

The meaning of the concept of “quality of management” is intuitively clear and generally reflects the level of perfection of management processes. At the same time, in relation to management work, the category “quality” needs to be analyzed not only to reveal the essence of this category, but also for the purpose of clear structuring and the formation of specific ways to improve the quality of economic management.

An attempt to translate into management the definition of the concept of “quality” used in relation to material production products (goods) does not lead to success. We understand quality as a set of product properties that characterize its ability to satisfy certain needs. But management is not a product, but a type of activity that ends with the creation of such a specific product as control actions and management decisions.

Dictionary of personnel management. Management decisions are a creative, volitional action of a management subject based on knowledge of the objective laws of the functioning of the managed system and analysis of information about its functioning, consisting in choosing a goal, program and methods of action of the team to resolve a problem or change a goal.

On the other hand, the direct product of management is presented in the form of information, and information satisfies the need for it in a completely different way than a material product, and besides, the need for this information itself cannot be expressed in as explicit a form as the need for products, goods, services.

But that's not all. The most important thing is that the information management product in the form of decisions, resolutions, plans, programs, laws, regulations in itself does not satisfy and is not intended to satisfy the ultimate needs of people, society, and the economy. Only by being transferred to the control object, prompting the object to act in the manner necessary for the control subject, does the control process lead to the creation of a consumable product, the quality of which can already be assessed by its ability to satisfy needs. A whole chain of cause-and-effect relationships arises: “the quality of management - the quality of functioning of the control object - the quality of the product created by the control object.”

Consequently, the quality of management can and should be judged only on the basis of an assessment of the quality of the management object’s work, which, in turn, is determined by the quality of the product of its activity.

A decision is the result of a person’s mental activity, leading to a conclusion and (or) necessary actions. Solutions developed and implemented in a technical system are called technical (inanimate objects). Solutions developed and implemented in a biological system are called biological (flora and fauna). Decisions developed and implemented in a social system are generally called managerial and political (subordinate people and structures; non-subordinate people and structures). Solutions are called management solutions (RM) if they are developed and implemented for the social system and are aimed at:

strategic planning;

management of management activities;

human resource management (productivity, activation of knowledge, skills, abilities);

management of production and service activities;

formation of a company management system (methodology, mechanism);

management consulting;

management of internal and external communications.

A management decision can be represented by a set of smaller decisions, including managerial, technical and biological, each of which must contribute to solving problems.

The solution is developed and implemented in the interests of a group of people - the consumer of the solution. They can be: company employees, the population or individual citizens (Fig. 1).

Standard diagram of the process of preparing and implementing solutions

┌ ─────────────────────────── ┐

└────┬────────────┬────────┬─┘

/│\ /│\ /│\

┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────┴───────┐ │ │

│ Consultants │<-------------------->│ Specialists │ │ │

│ Experts │ └─────────────────┘ │ │

└─────────────────┘ │ │ │

┌─────────────────────┴──────┐ │ │

│ Object (performer) of the decision │ │ │

└────────┬───────────────────┘ │ │

┌─────────────────────────────────┴────────┴─┐

└────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Management quality: we measure and evaluate

I propose to improve the process of preparing high-quality management decisions, namely, to abandon consultants and specialists - firstly, for cost-effectiveness, and secondly, for the speed of preparation and implementation of decisions. But in this process, the level of education of the subject of management will be very important; they will need to undergo special training under the program “Assessing the Quality of Management Decisions” and certification according to ISO 9001. What our scheme will look like is presented in Fig. 2. When we talk about product quality, we mean a complex of its consumer properties, each of which is either physically measurable or established through comparison. The vast majority of types of products are replicable, that is, produced in a significant number of copies. In this case, from a fairly extensive set of objects, the best one is taken as the standard of quality. The quality of any object from a given group is established by comparing its properties with the properties inherent in this sample: the closer the properties are to the standard, the higher the quality. The standard does not necessarily have to exist as a physical object; it can be represented by a set of properties, conditions, requirements recorded in standards, regulatory materials, and technical specifications. But such a convenient and reliable approach is practically unacceptable for identifying the quality of management decisions. Indeed, in the process of management work, it is necessary to develop a single management decision for which the standard cannot be predetermined. Only in the course of developing a management document do we strive to get closer to some ideal result.

Proposed scheme for preparing and implementing management decisions

┌───────────────────────────────┐

│ Subject (initiator) of the decision │

└───────────────┬───────────────┘

┌───────────────┴────────────────────────────────┐

│ Criteria for assessing the quality of SD │

└───────────────┬────────────────────────────┬───┘

┌───────────────┴───────────────┐ │

│ Object (performer) of the decision │ │

└───────────────┬───────────────┘ │

┌──────────────┴─────────────────────── ─ ─ ─┴───────┐

│ Consumers for whom SD is being prepared or implemented │

└ ────────────────────────────────────────────────── ┘

Product quality assessment is isolated as an independent process, separated from the production process and usually carried out by technical control bodies after completion of the production process. The situation is different with the quality of planning and management. Here, assessing the quality of the finished product is not the main thing. Although it may take place, it will be late, because in this case it is impossible to carry out rejection by dividing the final product into good and bad. After completion of the work, when a single document is prepared, it must be known to be valid. It follows that isolation and isolation of quality assessment in the form of an independent final control procedure is not typical for management processes.

It is necessary to assess the quality of management work, carried out before its completion and allowing shortcomings to be eliminated in advance and the quality to be brought to the required standard. Such an assessment should accompany the work process by analogy with technological control in material production. Thus, instead of the “work - quality control of the final result of the work” scheme, characteristic of product production, the “work and continuously accompanying quality assessment” scheme is used in planning and management. Such accompanying assessment represents an integral part of the management process, playing the role of feedback in the system for regulating the quality of this activity. Accordingly, this assessment does not require isolation in the form of a special procedure, isolated from the process being assessed, and is not so much aimed at quality control as searching for ways to improve it.

So, I propose to evaluate the quality of management based on criteria and quality indicators. The quality criterion represents the characteristics of the properties of management activities, allowing one to form a judgment about its quality. By indicators of management work we understand any signs and properties of work that characterize its goals, purpose, content, methods and organization of implementation, deadlines, composition of performers, the result obtained, its use, resource costs, efficiency, connection with other works and activities. Not all of these indicators are used as quality criteria, but one of the possibilities for forming work quality criteria is to select from the entire set of its indicators a subset of those that best characterize the quality properties of the work. Thus, it is natural to include performance indicators that characterize its focus, scientific validity and prospects as quality criteria. Before making a management decision, you should use the criteria that are given in Table 1, and set coefficients against each criterion when considering the indicators. After relating all the criteria, the coefficients must be multiplied, and if the result is closer to one, the solution can be considered effective, but if the result is closer to zero, then this solution can be considered ineffective or not effective at all.

Table 1

Criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions

Introduction

1. Theoretical aspects of the quality of management decisions

1.1 The essence of the quality of management decisions

2. Methods and criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions

2.1 Methods for assessing the quality of management decisions

Conclusion

A characteristic feature of managing any objects is the achievement of certain goals. This general feature can be used as a basis for defining the management process. The management process is the purposeful influence of the subject of management on the object of management in order to implement management functions.

The management process consists of a sequence of types of management activities that are cyclically repeated over time, which are called management functions. The allocation of functions in the management process can be performed with varying degrees of detail. The most common aggregate management functions are usually considered planning, organizing, motivating and controlling. Decision making permeates all management activities; decisions are made on a wide range of management tasks. Not a single management function, regardless of which body performs it, can be implemented otherwise than through the preparation and execution of management decisions. Essentially, the entire set of activities of any management employee is in one way or another connected with the adoption and implementation of decisions. This primarily determines the importance of decision-making activities and determining its role in management.

Management decisions are one of the most important processes. The success of the business largely depends on its effectiveness. Only a professional manager has the technology to develop, make, and implement management decisions, without which effective management of an organization in a difficult economic environment is practically impossible. Every manager knows that before starting any business, it is necessary to determine the purpose of his actions: strategic (for the long term) and tactical (for a specific action).

Goals must be specific and measurable, i.e. For each goal there must be a criterion that would allow assessing the degree of its achievement. If there is no such criterion, then the implementation of one of the main management functions - control - is impossible. And in this sense, a goal, the degree of achievement of which can be quantitatively measured, is always better than a goal formulated only verbally.

An equally important professional quality of a manager is the ability to foresee. He who does not know how to foresee cannot govern.

The external and internal environment in which the organization operates is subject to continuous changes, the degree of significance of which varies. In order not to find yourself in the situation of a driver who did not notice a sharp turn in the road, monitoring the state of the external and internal environment of the organization must be carried out continuously. It is the results of assessing the quality and control of management decisions that are the basis for organizational leaders to adjust previously made decisions if deviations in the implementation of previously made decisions are significant.

Only by correctly assessing possible losses and gains, and by developing a program of action to prevent possible negative consequences, can a high-quality management decision be made.

Objectives of this course work: consider the theoretical aspects of assessing the quality of management decisions

This work consists of three chapters.

The first chapter examines the essence of management decisions, indicates the characteristic features of decisions, the factors determining their quality and effectiveness, and also provides a classification of management decisions.

The second chapter contains information on methods for assessing the quality of management decisions. A schematic diagram for assessing the quality of management, as well as factors influencing this process. Criteria for determining the quality of management decisions. Objectives of evaluating management decisions.

The third chapter discusses methods for optimizing management decisions

The concept of quality of management decisions.

The quality of a management decision is a set of properties that a management decision has that meet, to one degree or another, the needs of successfully resolving a problem. For example, timeliness, targeting, specificity and, in general, efficiency.

The quality of management decisions should be understood as the degree of its compliance with the nature of the tasks being resolved in the functioning and development of production systems, the set of decision parameters that satisfy specific consumers and ensure the reality of its implementation. In other words, to what extent does SD ensure further development of the production system in market conditions?

Urgent calls to improve the quality of governance are heard everywhere. Meanwhile, it is difficult to translate this desire into regulatory requirements and specific indicators for the simple reason that the very term “quality of management” is interpreted both in management science and in practice in a very vague, uncertain manner.

An attempt to translate into management the definition of the concept of “quality” used in relation to material production products, goods, does not lead to success. Indeed, understanding quality as a set of properties of a product that characterize its ability to satisfy the needs associated with the purpose of this product, we get only a vague idea of ​​​​what constitutes the quality of such a unique product as management. After all, management is not a product, but a type of activity that ends with the creation of such a specific product as control actions and management decisions.

On the other hand, the direct product of management is presented in the form of information, and information satisfies the need for it in a completely different way than a material product, and besides, the very need for information produced by management cannot be expressed in such an explicit form, as a need for products, goods, services.

But that's not all. The most important thing is that the information management product in the form of decisions, resolutions, plans, programs, laws, regulations in itself does not satisfy and is not intended to satisfy the ultimate needs of people, society, and the economy. Only by being transferred to the control object, prompting the object to act in the manner necessary for the control subject, does the control process lead to the creation of a consumable product, the quality of which can already be assessed by its ability to satisfy needs. A whole chain of cause-and-effect relationships arises: “the quality of management - the quality of functioning of the control object - the quality of the product created by the control object.”

Consequently, the quality of management can and should be judged only on the basis of an assessment of the quality of the management object’s work, which, in turn, is determined by the quality of the product of its activity. Since the subject of our consideration is the management of the economy, economic objects and processes, the quality of economic management is manifested in the quality of managed processes of economic activity and the resulting quality of this activity, ultimately in the extent to which the economy satisfies the needs of people, society, the country, provides a high quality of life.

Such an indirect approach to determining the quality of economic management based on the quality of its functioning and the provided measure of satisfaction of needs, that is, on the effectiveness of management processes, is in principle legitimate and the most objective in comparison with other possible approaches. However, it is also vulnerable, due to which it cannot be recognized as the only acceptable one. Firstly, a judgment about the quality of management must be formed during the development of management decisions (prepared control actions), that is, long before obtaining the final result of managing economic objects and processes. The idea of ​​the results available at that stage is of the nature of expectation, transportation and therefore does not have a high level of reliability. It is also not possible to take into account the side socio-economic consequences of the decisions being prepared, which could lead to a decrease in their final effectiveness.

Secondly, the ultimate needs, towards the satisfaction of which management must be oriented, are not indisputable in themselves and, moreover, are dynamic, changing over time. Due to these circumstances, when assessing management decisions during their development and adoption, one inevitably has to operate with other signs and criteria of management quality, reflecting the properties of the management process itself. These criteria characterize the organization of the management process, decision-making methods, and the level of professionalism of management staff. Of course, expected results are also taken into account, but only to the extent that they are foreseeable, predictable, calculable, and can be confined to certain periods of time. The uncertainty factor prevents the quality of management from being completely identified with its expected effectiveness.

From the above it follows that the quality of management is determined by the extent to which it directs economic objects and processes to achieve socio-economic goals in accordance with the needs of the economy and society. At the same time, the quality of management is also characterized by the quality of the processes of management activity itself: the scientific nature of the management methods used, the progressiveness of management tools, and the professionalism of the management apparatus.

1.2 Factors of quality of management decisions and their effectiveness

Factors influencing the quality of management decisions. The quality of a management decision largely determines the final result and depends on a number of factors:

1) the quality of the source information, determined by its reliability, sufficiency, protection from interference and errors, form of presentation (it is known that the accuracy of the calculation results cannot be higher than the accuracy used to calculate the information);

2) the optimal or rational nature of the decision being made;

3) timeliness of decisions made, determined by the speed of their development, adoption, transfer and organization of execution;

4) compliance of decisions made with the current management mechanism and management methods based on it;

5) qualifications of personnel involved in the development, adoption of decisions and organization of their execution;

6) readiness of the managed system to execute decisions made.

Factors that determine the quality and effectiveness of SD can be classified according to various criteria - both internal factors (related to the control and managed systems) and external factors (environmental influence):

laws of the objective world related to the adoption and implementation of SD;

a clear statement of the goal - why SD is being adopted, what real results can be achieved, how to measure, correlate the goal and the results achieved;

volume and value of available information - for the successful adoption of SD, the main thing is not the volume of information, but the value determined by the level of professionalism, experience, and intuition of personnel;

time for development of SD - as a rule, management decisions are always made under conditions of time shortage and emergency circumstances (lack of resources, activity of competitors, market conditions, inconsistent behavior of politicians);

organizational management structures;

forms and methods of implementing management activities;

methods and techniques for developing and implementing SD (for example, if a company is a leader, there is one methodology, if it follows others, it is different);

subjectivity of evaluation of the solution choice option. The more extraordinary the SD is, the more subjective the assessment.

the state of the control and managed systems (psychological climate, authority of the manager, professional and qualified personnel, etc.);

a system of expert assessments of the level of quality and efficiency of SD.

Management decisions must be based on objective laws and patterns of social development. On the other hand, management decisions significantly depend on many subjective factors - the logic of developing solutions, the quality of assessing the situation, structuring tasks and problems, a certain level of management culture, the mechanism for implementing decisions, executive discipline, etc. At the same time, it is necessary to always remember that even carefully thought-out decisions may turn out to be ineffective if they cannot anticipate possible changes in the situation and state of the production system.

The effectiveness of management decisions and its assessment.

In economics, efficiency is understood as the relationship between the results of financial and economic activities, usually characterized by profit, and the costs that caused the receipt of this profit.

Efficiency is determined on the basis of relevant indicators of financial and economic activity. As such, they can be used, for example, balance sheet profit, profit remaining at the disposal of the enterprise, income from securities, dividends, profit growth due to certain circumstances, the average annual cost of fixed and working assets, costs of updating fixed assets, maintenance and provision of management apparatus, etc. The choice of specific methods, procedures and mathematical apparatus for assessing effectiveness is determined by the complexity and nature of the object being assessed. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of simple objects, for example, placing funds in a deposit account, is determined by the ratio of the amount received in the form of interest on the deposit and the amount of the deposit.

When assessing the effectiveness of complex objects, they are conditionally differentiated into simpler components. Based on calculated partial assessments of the effectiveness of individual elements of the object, it is possible to develop a general assessment of effectiveness that takes into account various factors. This raises the problem of determining the contribution of each element to the overall performance assessment. It is resolved by assigning each of the partial assessments of the effectiveness of the corresponding mathematical weight, which can be determined based on the determination of the importance of the corresponding element in the technology of the production process, their ranking according to the results of a survey of specialists, based on the share of this element in the total cost of the object or in the total cost, etc. .P.

Of particular interest is the use of expert methods for assessing effectiveness. They can be used both if there is a certain statistical base for the production and economic activities of the company, and in a newly created enterprise. In the first case, the experts’ task comes down to determining the significance of particular performance assessments; in the second, to developing a consensus opinion about the possible effectiveness of the enterprise’s activities in a new business area.

As performance criteria, indicators such as growth in profit, production volumes and sales of products, changes in the payback period of capital investments, increased turnover of working capital, increased economic profitability, reduced costs of maintaining the management apparatus, etc. can be used. Performance indicators include profitability indicators, indicators of business activity, as well as indicators of capital productivity and capital intensity. The methodology for calculating these indicators is studied in courses in accounting, business analysis and financial management. Therefore, they are not considered in this work.

The practice of financial and economic activity in a market economy shows that enterprises of the same type, which have approximately equal material and financial resources, often have significant differences in the level of profit. Some of them are developing dynamically, others are going bankrupt. In this regard, leading domestic and foreign economists point out that one of the most important reasons for such discrepancies is differences in the efficiency of enterprise management or, in other words, in the effectiveness of management decisions developed and implemented by managers.

In general terms, the effectiveness of enterprise management is understood as the effectiveness of managing the activities of an enterprise, which is a consequence of the ability of managers to develop effective management decisions and achieve their goals. Many economists express the opinion that management efficiency is a function of two variables: the costs of developing management decisions and maintaining the management apparatus, on the one hand, and the results of management activities, reflected in changes in the values ​​of indicators that assess the state of the management object, on the other.

When assessing the quality and effectiveness of management decisions, it is necessary to ensure a synthesis of economic and social aspects of management. In accordance with this, a system of evaluation criteria should be built.

Self-assessment. Any management activity, as already noted, includes analysis and quality control on the part of the person performing the work. Without self-control and self-assessment of quality in the search for the best solution, there would be no rejection, variant selection, which are an integral property of the process of preparation and decision-making

By their nature, meaning, and purpose, assessments of the quality of one’s own work are the most thorough, painstaking, detailed and capacious assessments, and given the high professional level of the employee, they are very qualified and profound. Often, few people other than the employee himself are able to ascertain the quality of the work done with the same completeness. At the same time, self-assessment technology is largely individualized, it is difficult to regulate and control, the results of assessments are recorded mainly in the employee’s memory and are not available to the public. Such assessments are subjective, due to why they can be individually oriented. For example, a non-self-critical employee tends to strive for a level of quality sufficient to “pass” the work. This level will be the limit for him and will receive the highest rating, since further improvement in quality is not in his interests. The author of an idea often tends to overestimate its quality. Consequently , it is necessary to take into account the influence of psychological factors on self-esteem of work

Evaluation by work managers. Heads of management bodies, projects, programs, scientific supervisors establish the quality of work, relying primarily on a system of “internal” assessments and judgments, the formation procedures of which are not regulated. Since managers act as creators of the central plan when developing, justifying and making management decisions, their quality assessments are, on the one hand, self-assessments, on the other hand, control assessments in relation to the supervised work of subordinate employees

Quality assessments by managers are often formed explicitly and communicated to employees as an element of management influence carried out in order to direct work in the right direction, find a rational solution, eliminate errors and miscalculations of individual employees. Certification assessment of the quality of work and employees is carried out periodically to check the compliance of employees positions held, when they are nominated for promotion. Evaluation of work by managers is also carried out when summing up the results of work for a certain period. At the same time, many assessments of the quality of management activities developed by managers are carried out by them “for themselves”, to analyze options for management decisions made by the manager himself , and filtering out unsuitable options

Algorithms and procedures for assessing the quality of management work by their immediate supervisors, as well as self-monitoring of employees, are most often purely individual, based mainly on experience and intuition, since managers and leading employees usually have high professional qualifications, possess work skills, deeply understand and perceive the goals activities, their quality assessments, in principle, can be the most representative and reliable. However, these assessments are often characterized by subjectivity

Evaluation by customers. A variety of types of management work related to the preparation of draft laws and other regulations, draft management decisions, programs, forecasts, justifications, analytical materials are carried out by order of organizations external to the performers of the work. Most often, this is work carried out on a contractual basis or at the direction of higher management bodies Since the customer acts as a consumer of the results of the work performed, and often as its buyer, his judgment about the quality is decisive for the performers of the work. Only in certain conflict situations, when the assessments of customers and performers differ decisively, a special commission, its conclusion becomes more important than the customer’s assessment. Typically, customers are psychologically inclined to underestimate the quality of the work they accept. Evaluation of work by customers can be carried out as individual stages are completed or the work is completed as a whole

Peer assessment. Collegial assessments include group, collective assessments formed by a group of people authorized to evaluate the quality of management work or interested in conducting the assessment. Such assessments are carried out through the formation of a collective opinion of specially created groups of experts of permanent commissions, councils, collegiums, as well as by submitting projects for collective discussion. It is advisable to divide collegial assessments into the following groups: a) assessments from higher authorities; b) assessments of permanent councils and commissions; c) assessments formed by specially created expert groups; d) evaluations of production meetings of the teams performing the work; e) assessments based on broad discussion.

Permanent commissions and councils in the form of boards of ministries and departments, academic councils, scientific and technical councils, expert commissions and councils periodically review, discuss, and analyze at their meetings draft management decisions and proposals for improving management, giving them a collegial assessment. At such councils, different opinions and judgments are compared, a generalized opinion is developed, and a high level of representativeness of assessments is achieved. In addition, the most experienced specialists are included in the boards and expert councils, which serves as a prerequisite for the high qualification level of the conclusions they produce. However, the heterogeneity of the composition of the boards, sharp differences in the level of professionalism of their members, extreme inconsistency in the judgments of participants in the assessment process, and varying degrees of interest in the objectivity of assessments often lead to unrepresentativeness of the overall assessment.

Group assessment of the quality of work often takes place on the part of the workers themselves, when consideration of the results of work is submitted to a production meeting of a department, sector, or other unit. Discussion of the results or intermediate results of activities by persons carrying out these activities is very useful, as it promotes creative discussions, exchange of opinions, expression of critical comments from colleagues, as well as the development of collective opinions on ways to eliminate shortcomings and improve the quality of prepared materials, documents, decisions . In addition, production meetings of departments for the purpose of jointly discussing the quality of work performed and ways to improve it help familiarize workers with the content and nature of the activities of their colleagues, which helps to establish close contacts, deepen interaction and consistency, and ultimately leads to an increase in the quality of work of the entire department.

The variety of types and forms of collegial assessment of the quality of management work gives it weight and contributes to the widespread dissemination of this assessment method. Group assessments are becoming widespread in the quality management system of economic activity.

Most collegial assessments of the quality of management work are distinguished by the greatest objectivity of all used forms of assessment. At the same time, their preference is not absolute, because they also have certain limitations that have to be taken into account.

Individual assessment by experts, controllers, inspectors, and auditors. Individuals and specialists in the field of the activity being assessed can and are being involved in assessing the quality of management and management work. Most often, such assessment is the subject of external examination. The results of assessments in this case are very sensitive to the level of professionalism of the expert, his position in relation to the performers of the work, as well as his own point of view on how the problem should be solved. To suppress and mitigate such effects, they resort to the involvement of several independent experts. In this case, individual assessments essentially turn into group, collegial assessments. There are even methods for combining local assessments into a general one, called expert assessment methods.

Let us now consider the types and forms of presentation of assessments of the quality of management activities. Based on the formalization of assessments, assessment methods are divided into non-formalized, formalized and mixed.

Non-formalized, qualitative means methods of assessment of a heuristic nature, not described using formulas, mathematical dependencies, logical and computational algorithms and not implemented using technical cybernetics, but accessible only to the human brain, developed on the basis of experience and intuition. Accordingly, formalized methods are those based on the use of mathematical dependencies, the procedures of which are performed using formal logical algorithms that can be implemented using computer technology. In partially formalized (semi-formalized) methods, formalized and informal procedures are combined, combined, and interspersed.

Based on the form of expression of quality assessments, assessment methods can be divided into two groups: qualitative judgment and quantitative numerical assessment.

Qualitative judgment refers to the category of verbal (verbal) assessments that are not included in the regulated scale. Such judgments are most often not ordered either by the composition of the assessments used or by their rank. The level of quality of management work, expressed in the form of a qualitative judgment, is determined by the semantic meaning of the expressed assessments. At the same time, such commonly used assessments of work as “satisfactory”, “unsatisfactory”, “good”, “bad”, “excellent”, “high level”, “low level” can be strengthened or weakened by including such assessments in them, as “quite satisfactory”, “very positive”, “not at all satisfactory”. A qualitative assessment should, at a minimum, answer the question of whether the work is in the acceptable quality zone, that is, whether it satisfies the requirements. The content of qualitative assessments is significantly enhanced if it is prescribed in advance which aspects of the quality of work they should reflect (for example, relevance, novelty, efficiency, meeting deadlines, etc.), thereby actually forming a vector of assessments, the components of which correspond to individual characteristics or quality criteria.

Quantitative quality assessments, expressed in numerical form, also have a multifaceted, insufficiently standardized structure. Numerical indicators of the quality of management work can be either dimensional, expressed in certain units of measurement, or dimensionless, relative. It should be noted that, along with an unambiguous deterministic estimate represented by a single number, interval, “fork” estimates indicating the lower and upper limits “from and to” and probabilistic estimates in the form of the mathematical expectation of the estimate value and its variance are quite acceptable and often necessary or even the distribution curve of grade values. Quantitative assessments of the quality of work can take different forms.

If relatively homogeneous, comparable works are assessed, then an ordinal assessment is acceptable, determining the place of this work in the series of those being compared in terms of quality level. This place is established by arranging works in ascending or descending order of quality, as well as highlighting works that take first (prize) places. This approach is usually called ranking, and the ordinal assessment itself is called rank or rating.

A scaled assessment determines the quality level of work according to the place it occupies in a pre-standardized scale of quality categories (for example, it is possible to divide work by quality into the highest, first, second categories).

The scoring is expressed in special relative units - points, each of which is taken for a certain “dose” of quality, and the overall rating is determined by summing the points received for achieving a certain level of quality for each of the criteria (properties).

Coefficient assessment is expressed in the form of quality coefficients, which are the degree of approximation or the ratio of a certain indicator of work quality to the standard or basic level of this indicator. If the basic level is taken equal to one, then the coefficient directly characterizes how much the assessed work does not achieve or how much the assessed work exceeds the standard in quality.

Ordinal, scale, point and coefficient estimates are not yet available. are widely used in establishing the quality of management work, although there is a tendency to expand the scope of their application.; Level and parametric assessments are more suitable for establishing the quality of management activities.

A level assessment is a widespread type of coefficient assessment, representing the ratio of a criterion (indicator) of the quality of a given work to a specially established base value of the same criterion. Management is considered to be of high quality if the quality criterion that favors its increase exceeds the base value or shows a tendency to increase, and vice versa.

A parametric assessment represents the absolute value of an economic indicator determined in the process of developing a management decision (growth rates, proportions, efficiency indicators, savings indicators, levels of satisfaction of needs, time frames for solving problems), the analysis of which allows us to judge the quality of the decision. Most often, a management decision is considered to be of high quality, if it favors or directly provides for the achievement of a high level of those indicators that characterize the rise in production, economic growth, resource savings, and living standards.

Methods for comparative analysis of management quality

Among the most common methods of establishing quality is the comparison of the subject being assessed with another, taken as a basis for comparison. As already noted, in relation to management work, management decisions, management influences, due to their unique, non-mass nature, it is difficult to choose a basis for comparison, since there are no standards to be compared to and based on the results of comparison with which it would be possible to clearly establish the level of quality Although , strictly speaking, a single product produced and has no direct analogues, it can be compared with products that are similar in appearance, type, purpose, application. The same, to a certain extent, applies to products of management activities, management works, processes. There are several types of comparison bases that allow, with a certain degree of convention, to identify the quality of management work and its results on the basis of comparative comparative analysis.

The method of statistical comparisons is based on comparing the parameters (criteria) of the quality of the work being assessed and its results with indicators of similar content characterizing previous works; for this purpose, based on the accumulated information about previous works, statistically ordered sets are constructed (in the form of, for example, dynamic time series) real values ​​of quality parameters achieved in previous periods. Steady trends in changes in these parameters are identified; through qualitative analysis, the favorability or unfavorability of these trends, the desired directions and zones of their further change are established. Judgment about the quality of the evaluated work is formed by considering the place occupied by the indicators characterizing it in the statistical field of their previous values. If an indicator falls into the zone of favorable trends, it indicates the quality of management work according to the given criterion, and vice versa. Quality is determined by the degree of compliance of the assessed parameter with stable favorable trends that occurred in the past, or the degree of change in unfavorable trends for the better due to the adoption of the assessed management decision. Method of statistical comparisons are used in planning when making judgments about the reliability, intensity, and progressiveness of plans, projects, and programs being developed by comparing them with previous analogues. This method is preferable to use for assessing the quality of management decisions for a fairly short term.

The method of comparing planned and actual results is based on comparing planned indicators with those practically achieved as a result of the implementation of planned decisions. In this case, the basis for comparison is formed by an information array of reporting indicators on the actual results of the implementation of management decisions. The level of quality of work is determined by the degree of compliance of the actual results obtained with those that were outlined during the development and adoption of plans, projects, programs, forecasts, and other documents and decisions. Comparison of planned and actual results provides an objective assessment of the quality of management activities. However, the basis for such a comparison can be formulated only after the practical implementation of the solutions, which significantly delays the time frame for potentially assessing the quality of work from the period of its implementation.

The method of analyzing experimental results is applicable in cases where the progressiveness and effectiveness of a management decision, before its widespread dissemination and implementation, are tested selectively in experimental conditions on a group of regions, industries, associations, and enterprises. The quality of the solutions developed is established by comparing the performance indicators of economic objects in experimental conditions with similar indicators that took place before the transition to the experiment, or with the performance indicators of objects that were not transferred to the experimental conditions. This approach has a common original concept with the method of comparing planned and real results, but differs significantly from it in that real results are compared with past ones, that is, essentially a statistical basis for comparison is used.

The method of comparison with the results of economic and mathematical modeling of the activity of a management object is based on a comparison of parameters and indicators included in projects, program plans and other economic decisions with the values ​​of similar indicators obtained through mathematical (simulation) modeling of the processes of functioning and development of the object. Basic indicators when using this method are formed on the basis of model forecasting, that is, using a scientifically based forecast. Based on the results of several calculations using different models or carried out by different research organizations, it is possible to establish forecast values ​​of indicators achieved when implementing the strategy of the program plan and other business decisions. Comparison of planned results with indicators determined by modeling (forecasting), makes it possible to judge the quality of draft plans and programs.

Particularly noteworthy is the variant of the specified method, in which the comparison base is formed on the basis of optimization models. In this case, calculations make it possible to determine the optimal indicators of the development of the object, which can be considered as ideal and judge the quality of project plans for the development programs of the object by the degree of approximation of their indicators to the optimal However, this approach, despite all its attractiveness, has the obvious drawback that the optimality criteria (objective functions) used in optimization models are always conditional, and the models themselves do not adequately describe the real development of the modeled object. If, with the help of models, it was possible to confidently establish optimal real indicators, then they should be included in the management decisions made and the object should be directed through management strictly in the model direction.

The method of normative comparisons is based on comparing the indicators and parameters of the proposed draft plans, programs of regulations and other management decisions with the normative values ​​of the corresponding indicators, that is, with resource consumption standards, technological standards, efficiency standards, rational consumption standards, taxation standards, bank interest rates. If the normative basis for comparison is progressive and scientifically grounded and reflects the advanced achievements of technical and technological progress, then the quality of management activities can be judged by the extent to which it directs economic and social development into a normative direction. The difficulty of applying a normative method for assessing the quality of management activities is due to the imperfection or absence of a number of standards and the difficulty of updating them. The basis for normative comparisons are also standards, including standards of management activities

A unique independently distinguished form of the regulatory framework is a task for performing work or a target setting developed by the customer, which determines the desired level or limit limits for changes in the quality criteria characterizing this work. Assessment of the quality of work is formed as a measure of compliance with the set requirements and conditions. However, most often the task cannot be used as the only basis for comparison since, in relation to management work, it is usually of a general installation nature, does not cover all the parameters of the work and may not have sufficient validity since the customer is inclined to expect a little more from the work than it can actually give.

The method of comparison with the level of world achievements is based on the fact that the indicators that characterize the quality of work, determined in the process of performing the assessed work, are compared with indicators of similar content achieved in world practice. The comparison should be made taking into account the dynamics of the level of the world's highest achievements and the trends in its change during the implementation of the planned management decisions. Thus, this comparison method is combined with the method of predictive comparisons. The possibilities of its use are limited by two circumstances. Firstly, this requires a fairly complete and representative database on the level of world achievements, the formation of which represents an independent problem. Secondly, due to the specifics of the functioning and development of economic objects, formally homogeneous indicators turn out to be incomparable if they relate to different social, economic, and natural conditions, therefore, the highest achievement obtained in one environment is not rightfully considered a target for other conditions.

The method of comparison with similar works is based on comparisons of the results or other qualitative properties of this work with those obtained by performing similar or similar in content works that were carried out earlier or are carried out in parallel with the one being evaluated in the competition. Even if there are analogous works performed by other organizations and performers, their comparison is feasible based on a limited number of quality indicators due to the fact that the conditions for carrying out the work and the personnel composition of the performers are not the same.

The method of variant comparisons is a natural, widespread method of establishing the quality of management work, carried out by forming a comparison base based on the development of several options for project management decisions and comparing them with each other. This approach is convenient in that it does not require searching for a comparison base external to the given work. In addition, with variant analysis, it is possible not only to establish the comparative quality of options, but also to select the best option that is close to the optimal one. However, the need for special formation of many options significantly complicates the work.

All described methods for establishing quality assessments based on comparison are focused on generating assessments based on local indicators. But along with local, single estimates, it is of interest to use generalized estimates, including complex and integral ones.

Complex assessments of the quality of work are formed by combining other single assessments that are similar in content into one generalized, synthetic one, or by assessing a number of qualitative characteristics of work with one complex indicator.

Integral is usually called a single assessment, expressed by one indicator, which is of the most general nature and accumulates all the basic qualitative properties of the work being assessed.

Based on frequency, assessment can be divided into continuous and discrete, periodic, and step-by-step. Periods of quality assessment can be agreed upon in advance in accordance with the stages of work. In addition, selective periodic assessment is possible as a means of unprogrammed control, the dates of which are unknown to the performers of the work. Often, periods of time-regulated assessment of work are associated with planned reporting deadlines for their implementation. Continuous or close to continuous assessment accompanying the work is more typical for self-assessments and, to a certain extent, for assessments by the work manager, while the establishment of quality on the part of the customer, higher authorities, and commissions is obviously periodic in nature.

Objectives of evaluating management decisions.

The goal is the ideal result of activity in the future. Let us agree to call the goal of a decision those specific results that are expected to be obtained after the implementation of this decision under certain conditions and a fixed period of time. In this case, the goal always lies outside the system. It reflects the reaction of the environment to the system. The quality of the goal determines the success or failure of the organizational-production system.

Let us list the known requirements for the goal. The goal should be:

· unambiguously formulated and understandable to performers;

· measurable, feedback can be used for this;

· realistic and achievable within the established time frame;

· connected with the reward system, since the goal must motivate the performer’s actions in the direction necessary to achieve it;

· compatible with the goals of individual groups of performers;

· formalizable. Formalizing goals is a very complex process. There are no formal methods for synthesizing goals, but it should be remembered that the formulation of goals is heuristic.

The main goal for commercial organizations is to maximize profits. In this case, additional limiting requirements may be formulated, for example, ensuring safety, preventing damage, etc.

There are three types of organizational goals:

1. official goals - determine the general purpose of the organization, are declared in the charter or regulations of the organization, and are also stated publicly by the leader. They explain the need for an organization for society, have an external focus and perform an important protective function, creating an appropriate image for the organization;

2. operational goals - determine what the organization actually does in the current period, and may not completely coincide with official goals for a specific period. Such goals have an internal focus and are designed to mobilize the organization's resources; the form of their expression can be a work plan;

3. operational goals - guide the activities of specific employees and allow them to evaluate their work. They are even more specific and measurable than operational ones; such goals are formulated in the form of specific tasks for individual groups and performers.

Another classification of goals is possible:

· strategic goals;

· goals of a specific business program;

· long-term goals;

· current goals;

· operational goals.

Goals become a management tool when they are defined or formulated, known to the staff, and accepted by employees for execution.

Formalization of goals takes place when forming a criterion for assessing the effectiveness of the system.

2.2 Criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions

Urgent calls to improve the quality of governance are heard everywhere. Meanwhile, it is difficult to translate this desire into regulatory requirements and specific indicators for the simple reason that the very term “quality of management” is interpreted both in management science and in practice in a very vague and uncertain manner. The author offers his vision of the process of preparing management decisions and formulates indicators for assessing their quality.

Quality of management: defining the concept

The meaning of the concept of “quality of management” is intuitively clear and generally reflects the level of perfection of management processes. At the same time, in relation to management work, the category “quality” needs to be analyzed not only to reveal the essence of this category, but also for the purpose of clear structuring and the formation of specific ways to improve the quality of economic management.

An attempt to translate into management the definition of the concept of “quality” used in relation to material production products (goods) does not lead to success. We understand quality as a set of product properties that characterize its ability to satisfy certain needs. But management is not a product, but a type of activity that ends with the creation of such a specific product as control actions and management decisions.

Dictionary of personnel management. Management decisions are a creative, volitional action of a management subject based on knowledge of the objective laws of the functioning of the managed system and analysis of information about its functioning, consisting in choosing a goal, program and methods of action of the team to resolve a problem or change a goal.

On the other hand, the direct product of management is presented in the form of information, and information satisfies the need for it in a completely different way than a material product, and besides, the need for this information itself cannot be expressed in as explicit a form as the need for products, goods, services.

But that's not all. The most important thing is that the information management product in the form of decisions, resolutions, plans, programs, laws, regulations in itself does not satisfy and is not intended to satisfy the ultimate needs of people, society, and the economy. Only by being transferred to the control object, prompting the object to act in the manner necessary for the control subject, does the control process lead to the creation of a consumable product, the quality of which can already be assessed by its ability to satisfy needs. A whole chain of cause-and-effect relationships arises: “the quality of management - the quality of functioning of the control object - the quality of the product created by the control object.”

Consequently, the quality of management can and should be judged only on the basis of an assessment of the quality of the management object’s work, which, in turn, is determined by the quality of the product of its activity.

A decision is the result of a person’s mental activity, leading to a conclusion and (or) necessary actions. Solutions developed and implemented in a technical system are called technical (inanimate objects). Solutions developed and implemented in a biological system are called biological (flora and fauna). Decisions developed and implemented in a social system are generally called managerial and political (subordinate people and structures; non-subordinate people and structures). Solutions are called management solutions (RM) if they are developed and implemented for the social system and are aimed at:

strategic planning;

management of management activities;

human resource management (productivity, activation of knowledge, skills, abilities);

management of production and service activities;

formation of a company management system (methodology, mechanism);

management consulting;

management of internal and external communications.

A management decision can be represented by a set of smaller decisions, including managerial, technical and biological, each of which must contribute to solving problems.

The solution is developed and implemented in the interests of a group of people - the consumer of the solution. They can be: company employees, the population or individual citizens (Fig. 1).

Standard diagram of the process of preparing and implementing solutions

┌ ─────────────────────────── ┐

└────┬────────────┬────────┬─┘

/│\ /│\ /│\

┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────┴───────┐ │ │

│ Consultants │<-------------------->│ Specialists │ │ │

│ Experts │ └─────────────────┘ │ │

└─────────────────┘ │ │ │

┌─────────────────────┴──────┐ │ │

│ Object (performer) of the decision │ │ │

└────────┬───────────────────┘ │ │

┌─────────────────────────────────┴────────┴─┐

└────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Management quality: we measure and evaluate

I propose to improve the process of preparing high-quality management decisions, namely, to abandon consultants and specialists - firstly, for cost-effectiveness, and secondly, for the speed of preparation and implementation of decisions. But in this process, the level of education of the subject of management will be very important; they will need to undergo special training under the program “Assessing the Quality of Management Decisions” and certification according to ISO 9001. What our scheme will look like is presented in Fig. 2. When we talk about product quality, we mean a complex of its consumer properties, each of which is either physically measurable or established through comparison. The vast majority of types of products are replicable, that is, produced in a significant number of copies. In this case, from a fairly extensive set of objects, the best one is taken as the standard of quality. The quality of any object from a given group is established by comparing its properties with the properties inherent in this sample: the closer the properties are to the standard, the higher the quality. The standard does not necessarily have to exist as a physical object; it can be represented by a set of properties, conditions, requirements recorded in standards, regulatory materials, and technical specifications. But such a convenient and reliable approach is practically unacceptable for identifying the quality of management decisions. Indeed, in the process of management work, it is necessary to develop a single management decision for which the standard cannot be predetermined. Only in the course of developing a management document do we strive to get closer to some ideal result.

Proposed scheme for preparing and implementing management decisions

┌───────────────────────────────┐

│ Subject (initiator) of the decision │

└───────────────┬───────────────┘

┌───────────────┴────────────────────────────────┐

│ Criteria for assessing the quality of SD │

└───────────────┬────────────────────────────┬───┘

┌───────────────┴───────────────┐ │

│ Object (performer) of the decision │ │

└───────────────┬───────────────┘ │

┌──────────────┴─────────────────────── ─ ─ ─┴───────┐

│ Consumers for whom SD is being prepared or implemented │

└ ────────────────────────────────────────────────── ┘

Product quality assessment is isolated as an independent process, separated from the production process and usually carried out by technical control bodies after completion of the production process. The situation is different with the quality of planning and management. Here, assessing the quality of the finished product is not the main thing. Although it may take place, it will be late, because in this case it is impossible to carry out rejection by dividing the final product into good and bad. After completion of the work, when a single document is prepared, it must be known to be valid. It follows that isolation and isolation of quality assessment in the form of an independent final control procedure is not typical for management processes.

It is necessary to assess the quality of management work, carried out before its completion and allowing shortcomings to be eliminated in advance and the quality to be brought to the required standard. Such an assessment should accompany the work process by analogy with technological control in material production. Thus, instead of the “work - quality control of the final result of the work” scheme, characteristic of product production, the “work and continuously accompanying quality assessment” scheme is used in planning and management. Such accompanying assessment represents an integral part of the management process, playing the role of feedback in the system for regulating the quality of this activity. Accordingly, this assessment does not require isolation in the form of a special procedure, isolated from the process being assessed, and is not so much aimed at quality control as searching for ways to improve it.

So, I propose to evaluate the quality of management based on criteria and quality indicators. The quality criterion represents the characteristics of the properties of management activities, allowing one to form a judgment about its quality. By indicators of management work we understand any signs and properties of work that characterize its goals, purpose, content, methods and organization of implementation, deadlines, composition of performers, the result obtained, its use, resource costs, efficiency, connection with other works and activities. Not all of these indicators are used as quality criteria, but one of the possibilities for forming work quality criteria is to select from the entire set of its indicators a subset of those that best characterize the quality properties of the work. Thus, it is natural to include performance indicators that characterize its focus, scientific validity and prospects as quality criteria. Before making a management decision, you should use the criteria that are given in Table 1, and set coefficients against each criterion when considering the indicators. After relating all the criteria, the coefficients must be multiplied, and if the result is closer to one, the solution can be considered effective, but if the result is closer to zero, then this solution can be considered ineffective or not effective at all.

Table 1

Criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions

It should be noted that assessing the quality of management work is cyclical in nature, it is characterized by a reciprocating nature, the presence of an extensive chain of feedbacks and local cycles. The presented description of this process as essentially unidirectional represents a conscious abstraction, which aims to highlight the leading line of the process and represent it in the simplest diagram.

The best option for a decision made at one of the levels of the control system on any issue is called optimal, and the process of searching for this option is called optimization.

The complexity and interdependence of technical, organizational, socio-economic and other aspects of modern production management lead to the fact that making a management decision inevitably affects dozens and even hundreds of various factors, so intertwined with each other that it is impossible to isolate and analyze them separately using conventional analytical methods.

Many factors that determine or influence the choice of solution are, by their nature, not amenable to quantitative characteristics, while others practically cannot be measured. All this made it necessary to develop special methods that facilitate the selection of management decisions in complex technical, organizational, and economic problems (operations research methods, expert assessments, etc.).

Operations research methods are used to express optimal decisions primarily in the following areas of management: large-scale production planning; organization of production processes at enterprises; logistics; organization of transportation.

Operations research methods are based on the use of mathematical (deterministic), probabilistic models representing the process, system or type of activity being studied. Such models provide a quantitative description of the problem and serve as the basis for making management decisions when searching for the optimal option. How justified are these decisions, are they the best possible, are all the factors that determine the optimal solution taken into account and weighed, what is the criterion to determine that this solution is really the best - these are the range of questions that are of great importance for production managers, and the answer to which can be found using operations research methods. Optimization of solutions consists of a comparative study of numerical estimates of factors that cannot be assessed using conventional methods. The best possible solution for an economic system is optimal, and the best solution regarding individual elements of the system is suboptimal.

Operations research methods are designed to find solutions that would be optimal for the largest possible number of enterprises, organizations or their divisions. Quantitative methods of operations research are based on the achievements of economics, mathematics and statistics (optimal programming, queuing theory, game theory, graph theory, mathematical statistics, etc.).

Optimizing a solution is the process of searching through many factors that influence the result. The optimal solution is the most effective solution among all alternative options selected according to some optimization criterion.

Since the optimization process is expensive, it is advisable to use it when solving strategic and tactical problems. Operational problems must be solved using, as a rule, simple, heuristic methods.

The main optimization methods are:

Forecasting;

Modeling (logical, physical, economic and mathematical).

In practical management, the main methods of analysis are:

Comparison method;

Index method;

Balance method;

Chain substitution method;

Elimination method;

Graphic method;

Functional cost analysis;

Factor analysis;

Economic and mathematical methods.

Forecasting in management refers to the process of developing forecasts itself, i.e. scientifically based judgments about the possible states of an object, the ways and timing of its modifications. Functionally, a forecast in management is presented as a pre-plan development of multivariate models for the development of a management object. The forecast is probabilistic in nature and can undergo changes under the influence of changing conditions of the external and internal environment of the organization.

The most important forecasting tasks:

Development of a forecast of market conditions;

Identification of economic and other trends influencing market conditions and the scale of the beneficial effect;

Selection of forecasting method and time targets;

Economic justification for the development or improvement of manufactured products, etc.

The main forecasting functions include:

Systematicity;

Complexity;

Continuity;

Variation;

Adequacy and optimality.

A model is a representation of a system object or idea in some form other than the integrity itself. It is a simplified image of a specific life (managerial) situation. In other words, the models reflect real events, circumstances, etc. in a certain way.

There are a number of reasons for using a model instead of trying to directly interact with the real world:

The complexity of the real world is such that the number of variables related to a specific problem significantly exceeds the capabilities of any person and can be comprehended by simplifying the real world using modeling);

Experimentation - there are many management situations in which it is desirable to try out and experimentally test alternative solutions to a problem. In addition, there are critical situations when a decision needs to be made, but experimentation cannot be done in real life;

Orientation of management to the future - it is impossible to observe a phenomenon that does not yet exist and, perhaps, will never take place, as well as to conduct direct experiments. Modeling is the only systematic way to date to see future options and determine the potential consequences of alternative solutions, which allows them to be objectively compared.

Modern organizations use three basic types of models:

Physical model (represents what is being studied using an enlarged or reduced description of an object or system (drawing, plan, layout);

Analogue model (represents the object under study as an analogue that behaves like a real object, but does not look like one. An example of an analogue model is an organizational chart.;

Mathematical model (symbolic) - symbols are used to describe the properties or characteristics of an object or event.

Building a model is a process. The main stages of this process are problem statement, construction, validation, application and updating of the model.

Formulation of the problem. The first and most important stage of building a model, which can provide the correct solution to a management problem, is to state the problem. Proper use of mathematics or the computer will not be of any use unless the problem itself is accurately diagnosed. To find an acceptable or optimal solution to a problem, you need to know what it consists of. Unfortunately, sometimes huge amounts of money are spent on searching for thoughtful answers to incorrectly posed questions. Just because a manager is aware of a problem does not necessarily mean that the real problem has been identified. A leader must be able to distinguish symptoms from causes.

Building a model. The developer must determine the main purpose of the model, what output standards or information is expected to be obtained using the model to help management solve the problem facing it. It is also necessary to determine what information is required to build a model that satisfies these goals and produces the necessary information as an output.

Checking the model for reliability. One aspect of verification is to determine the extent to which the model fits the real world. A management scientist must determine whether all the essential components of the real situation are built into the model. Testing of many management models has shown that they are not perfect because they do not cover all relevant variables. Naturally, the better a model reflects the real world, the greater its potential for helping a manager make good decisions. The second aspect of model testing involves determining the extent to which the information it produces actually helps management cope with the problem.

Application of the model. No model of management science can be considered successfully built until it is applied in practice. This seems obvious, but is often one of the most troubling aspects of construction.

Model update. Even if the model is successful, it will almost certainly require updating. Management may find that the form of the output is unclear or that additional data is desired. If the organization's goals change in a way that affects decision making, the model must be modified accordingly. Likewise, a change in the external environment—for example, the emergence of new customers, suppliers, or technologies—may invalidate the underlying assumptions on which the model was built.

Thus, improving the management decision-making process and, accordingly, increasing the quality of decisions made is achieved through the use of a scientific approach, models and methods of decision-making.

The experience of successful enterprises shows that achieving high efficiency is impossible without putting things in order in the area of ​​enterprise management. A certain level of management system is required to ensure that decisions made are implemented on time and with proper quality. The quality of the results obtained is a consequence of the quality of the enterprise management system.

Making management decisions and improving their quality is an important problem.

It occupies one of the central places in the sociology of organization. Considering organization to be a management tool, many sociologists and management theory specialists, starting with M. Weber, directly link its activities primarily with the preparation and implementation of management decisions. Management efficiency is largely determined by the quality of such decisions. The interest of sociologists in this problem is due to the fact that the decisions record the entire set of relationships that arise in the process of labor activity and organization management. Goals, interests, connections and norms are refracted through them.

In this work, I tried to explore the main provisions of the theory of decision making, paying special attention to management decisions, examined the methods of their formation and evaluation, and generalized the methodological norms that ensure the process of making high-quality and effective decisions.

The main part of the work is devoted to the quality of management decisions.

In my opinion, the following ways to improve the quality of management decisions are of interest:

Application of intelligent decision support systems;

Preference for multiple solutions;

Introduction of quality standards in management at enterprises.

1. Abchuk V. ABC of management - St. Petersburg. Union, 1998.

2. Ackoff R., Emery F. On purposeful systems - Soviet radio, 1974

3. Ansoff I. Strategic management - M. Economics, 1989

4. Goncharov V.V. Guide for senior management personnel. - T 1.2 MNIIPU, 1996

5. Kobrinsky I.E., Maiminas E.3., Smirnov A.D - Introduction to economic cybernetics - M: Economics, 1975.

6. Course for senior management personnel. - M.: Economics, 1970

7. Economics course. Under the general editorship of Raizberg B.A. - M: Infra-M 1998

8 Management (modern Russian management). Edited by F.M. Rusinova and M. L Razu-M.: FBK - Press, 1998.

9. Mesarovich M., Mako D., Takohara I. Theory of hierarchical multi-level systems - M.: Mir, 1973.

10. Meskon M.H., Albert I., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management. - M: Case IH992

11. Morris W. Management Science. Bayesian approach - M: Mir, 1971.

12. Municipal management. Edited by T. G. Morozova - M.: UNITI 1997.

13. Peters T., Watman R. In search of effective management (experience of the best companies) - M: Progress, 1986.

14 White collar labor productivity. - M.: Progress, 1989

15. Raizberg B.A., Pekarsky L.S. Quality of planning and management work. - M.: Economics, 1987

16 Management of state property. Textbook. Edited by V.I. Koshkin and V.M. Shupyro. - M. Infra-M, 1997.

17. Fatkhutdinov R.A. Management system. - M.: JSC "Business School"

18. Raizberg B.A., Pekarsky L.S. Quality of planning and management work. - M.: Economics, 1987.

19. Smirnov E.A., Seleznev V.N. Management decisions. - M.: National Business Publishing House, 2008.

20. Peters T., Watman R. In search of effective management (the experience of the best companies). - M.: Progress, 1986.

21. Ekaterinoslavsky Yu.Yu. Management situations: analysis and solutions. - M.: Economics, 1988.

22. Efremov V. S. Seven facets of modern management // Management in Russia and abroad. - 1997. - No. 1.

23. Zaichkin N.I. Economic-mathematical models and methods of decision-making in production management. - M.: State University of Education, 2000.

24. Zaichkin N.I. Economic-mathematical models and methods of decision-making in production management. - M.: State University of Education, 2000.

25. Ivanov A.P. Management. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house Mikhailova V.A., 2002.

26. Kardanskaya N.L. Making a management decision. - M.: UNITY, 1999.

27. Kokoreva T.A. System analysis of management decision-making procedures. - St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University Publishing House, 1994.

28. Controlling as a tool for enterprise management / Under. ed.N.G. Danichkina. - M.: UNITY, 1998.

Parameters of the quality of management decisions and conditions for their provision.

Introduction

Decision making is the main part of the work of managers at any level of any enterprise. Therefore, understanding all the intricacies of the decision-making process in various conditions, knowledge and application of various methods and models of decision-making plays a significant role in increasing the efficiency of management personnel.

In the management process, managers have to make a large number of decisions at the stages of planning, organizing, motivating, controlling and coordinating. Management decisions are always associated with the need to influence the control object in order to bring it to the desired state.

A manager must master the technologies for developing, making and implementing management decisions, without which effective management of an organization in modern conditions is impossible. Since every decision is a projection into the future, it contains an element of uncertainty and risk. An effective decision can only be made with a correct assessment of all losses and gains.

A modern organization is distinguished by a significant scale of management activities. The process of making management decisions is accompanied by modern communication and intellectual technologies, which require a high level of professionalism from the manager.

The purpose of the work is to identify various factors that can significantly influence the more effective management decisions of managers in order to achieve stable activity.

1. Conditions for the quality of management decisions.

The choice of management decision is ambiguous and largely depends on the influence of various factors on this process. The range of influence factors is quite wide. Let's consider some of the most important factors that influence the process of making management decisions and their effectiveness.

Personal assessments of the leader. Subjectivity of personal assessments is inevitable when ranking or prioritizing in the decision-making process. The basis for the formation of all management decisions is the value system of the decision maker (decision maker). The value system determines his actions and influences the choice of decision. Each person has his own value system, which determines his actions and influences his decisions. For example, in the process of making a management decision, a manager may choose an alternative that ensures compliance with social and ethical standards, but requires a lot of time.

A decision-making environment that may be characterized by conditions of certainty. In conditions of certainty, relatively few organizational and management decisions are made. However, they do occur. Situations with a high level of certainty are called deterministic.

Decisions made under risk conditions are those whose outcomes are uncertain, but the probability of each outcome can be calculated. Probability is defined as the degree of possibility of a given event occurring and varies from 0 to 1. The sum of the probabilities of all alternatives must be equal to one. The most desirable way to determine probability is objectivity. Probability is objective when it can be determined using mathematical methods or through statistical analysis of accumulated experience.

The conditions of uncertainty in which management decisions are made are characterized by the fact that it is not possible to accurately assess the likelihood of potential results. As a rule, such a situation arises under the influence and need to take into account a large number of various complex and unexplored factors about which it is impossible to obtain sufficient relevant information. As a result, it is impossible to predict with sufficient confidence the likelihood of a particular outcome. Dynamic areas of activity, such as knowledge-intensive, socio-economic, socio-political, are characterized by the uncertainty of some decisions that have to be made in a rapidly changing environment. In conditions of uncertainty, a manager, as a rule, uses one of two approaches. He can use experience and additional relevant information to analyze a problem and assign subjective or perceived probability to a range of results. Another approach is used in conditions of lack of time to search for information or lack of funds to acquire it. It consists of making assumptions about the likelihood of events based on past experience, logic and intuition.

Cultural differences as a decision-making factor reflect the cultural (national) characteristics of the management system. For example, a country may use a soft or tougher approach to the development and implementation of management decisions, or apply approaches that lean towards individualism (USA) or, conversely, towards national collectivism (Japan).

Information restrictions. To make a decision, it is necessary to have sufficient, optimal or complete information. Collecting and processing information involves labor, time and money, regardless of how and where this information is collected. Therefore, it is necessary from the very beginning to initially evaluate the costs of obtaining information and the benefits of the decision made.

According to Norbert Wiener's definition, information is data that reduces uncertainty in knowledge about the control object, the environment. All available information on the nature of the reflection of the properties of an object can be classified into the following three types:

Subconscious information - is formed on the basis of the experience of previous generations, one’s own experience and knowledge gained in the learning process, etc. With the help of imagination, this information is transformed into a more or less formalized qualitative or quantitative result of the forecast. This approach is used in expert forecasting. As a result, a qualitative (worse-better; more-less, etc.) or quantitative forecast or plan can be obtained;

Subject information - is formed by describing the process or state of an object. A subject description of a forecasting object allows one to obtain the forecast result using formal methods of mathematical logic and propositional logic. The forecasting result can only be qualitative;

Formal statistical data is obtained at the stage of object analysis in the process of developing a management decision. They allow you to develop and test statistical hypotheses about the adequacy of forecast models that are used to obtain forecasts. The result of forecasting and planning based on these data are quantitative estimates.

When making decisions, all of the above types of information are used. The degree of awareness about an object is determined both by the absolute amount of information of each type and by the ratio of these types of information. The high importance of information resources is manifested at all stages of making and implementing management decisions.

Temporary restrictions. It is known that over time the situation can change, sometimes dramatically, and then the selected decision-making criteria become irrelevant. Therefore, decisions should be made and executed while the information and assumptions on which the decisions are based are not outdated and reflect the actual state of affairs, which is quite difficult to implement in practice, since the time between making a decision and taking action is long. Given the time factor, managers are sometimes forced to rely on logical considerations or even intuition, when under normal circumstances they would prefer rational analysis.

Equally dangerous can be the possibility of a decision being ahead of its time. Many companies have invested millions of dollars in new projects, hoping to get ahead of competitors in the market, only to find that those who were late and decided to wait were the winners.

Behavioral restrictions. Due to the characteristics of personality psychology and character, managers assess the significance of the problem, limitations and alternative options differently. Such a difference in assessments often gives rise to conflicts and disagreements during the development and adoption of management decisions, and can also have a decisive influence on the choice of solution. A manager’s feeling of sympathy or antipathy for an employee can radically influence a decision, for example, to fire an employee.

Interrelation of decisions. A gain from a management decision in one area may entail a significant loss in another. For example, a manager’s decision to automate production, in particular the introduction of automatic lines, usually involves the release of jobs and, consequently, the dismissal of workers. At the same time, the manager must choose those solutions that provide greater benefits. The ability to see how decisions fit and interact within a management system becomes increasingly important as one moves to higher levels of government.

Complexity factor. The complexity of execution (implementation) of the decision made depends on the extent to which various areas of the company’s activities are covered when implementing the decision. The more complex the solution, the wider the range of areas covered (material and technical, personnel, organizational and economic, marketing, financial, etc.). The more areas of work and the more people (personnel) involved in the implementation, the more difficult and expensive the implementation of solutions.

Prospects for the solution. Since any solution option, along with positive ones, does not exclude negative consequences, it is necessary that the positive ones prevail and contribute to the development of the company, its reaching a higher level.

Factor of financial investments and analysis of financial investments. When choosing solutions related to radical innovations, as a rule, significant financial investments and funds are required. They can be their own and (or) borrowed. It is important to monitor and analyze the ratio of own and credit funds so as not to become heavily dependent on external sources of financing.

Economic feasibility of decision making. This factor is associated with the assessment of costs and economic effect, economic benefits and involves an analysis of the ratio of benefits and costs.

The degree of risk associated with the consequences of implementing the decision. This factor requires the use of various risk assessment techniques (financial, economic, etc.); Accordingly, the manager must have the skills to perform such an analysis.

1.1. Basic conditions for ensuring high quality and efficiency of management decisions.

The main conditions for ensuring high quality and efficiency of management decisions include:

· application of scientific management approaches to the development of management solutions;

· studying the influence of economic laws on the effectiveness of management decisions;

· providing the decision maker with high-quality information characterizing the parameters of “output”, “input”, “external environment” and “process” of the solution development system;

· application of methods of functional cost analysis, forecasting, modeling and economic justification for each
solutions;

· structuring the problem and building a tree of goals;

· ensuring comparability (comparability) of solution options;

· ensuring multiple solutions;

· legal validity of the decision;

· automation of the process of collecting and processing information, the process of developing and implementing solutions;

· development and operation of a system of responsibility and motivation for high-quality and effective solutions;

· presence of a mechanism for implementing the solution.

It is quite difficult to fulfill the listed conditions for improving the quality and efficiency of management decisions, and it is expensive. We can talk about fulfilling the full set of the listed conditions only for rational management decisions on expensive objects (projects). At the same time, competition objectively forces each investor to improve the quality and efficiency of management decisions. Therefore, there is currently a tendency to increase the number of conditions taken into account for improving the quality and efficiency of decisions based on automation of the management system.

As noted earlier, one of the conditions for increasing the quality and efficiency of management decisions is to ensure multivariate solutions, that is, at least three organizational and technical options for performing the same function to achieve the goal should be worked out.

For example, two metal sheets can be connected using the following technological methods: welding, soldering, gluing, rivets, bolting, etc. The specialist’s task is to select a connection that would perform the required functions efficiently and at the same time with minimal costs for developing the problem, manufacturing and operating designs. However, it is almost impossible to implement different technical solutions with absolutely the same level of quality. Therefore, when comparing the effectiveness of options for solving a problem, it is imperative to bring them into a comparable form in terms of quality level.

Alternative management decisions should be presented in a comparable form based on the following factors:

Time factor (time to complete projects or investments
investments);

Object quality factor;

Factor of scale (volume) of production of an object;

Factor of development of an object in production;

Method of obtaining information for making management decisions
solutions;

Conditions of use (operation) of the object;

Inflation factor;

Factor of risk and uncertainty.

The comparability of alternative options for the listed eight factors is ensured, as a rule, when justifying technical, organizational or economic measures aimed at improving particular indicators of the target subsystem of the management system (indicators of product quality and resource intensity, organizational and technical level of production, level of social development of the team, environmental problems ), as well as the development of supporting, managed or control subsystems, improving connections with the external environment of the system.

In each specific case, alternative management decisions may not differ in all factors. The task of a specialist, manager or decision maker is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of specific situations in order to ensure comparability on the maximum number of factors. The fewer factors taken into account, the less accurate the investment efficiency forecast.

Basic rules for ensuring the comparability of alternative management decisions:

The number of alternatives must be at least
three;

As a basic solution, the decision should be made
the most recent solution. The remaining alternative options are reduced to the base one using correction factors;

The formation of alternative options should be carried out on the basis of conditions for ensuring high quality and efficiency of management decisions;

To reduce time, improve solution quality and reduce costs, it is recommended to use coding methods more widely
and modern technical means of information support
decision making process.

2. Factors of quality of management decisions.

Factors influencing the quality of management decisions. The quality of a management decision largely determines the final result and depends on a number of factors:

The quality of the source information, determined by its reliability, sufficiency, protection from interference and errors, form of presentation (it is known that the accuracy of the calculation results cannot be higher than the accuracy used to calculate the information);

The optimal or rational nature of the decision being made;

Timeliness of decisions made, determined by the speed of their development, adoption, transfer and organization of execution;

Compliance of decisions made with the current management mechanism and management methods based on it;

Qualifications of personnel involved in developing, making decisions and organizing their execution;

Readiness of the managed system to execute decisions made.

Requirements for management decisions. In order to be effective, i.e. to achieve certain goals, the solution must satisfy a number of requirements:

Unity of goals - consistency of the solution to previously set goals. To do this, the problem must be structured and a tree of goals must be constructed;

Validity and competence - the reasoning and validity of the decision, as well as the compliance of the rights and responsibilities of the decision-making bodies. If possible, arguments should be formal in nature (contain statistical, economic and other data).

To achieve scientific validity and eligibility, it is necessary to ensure:

Application of scientific management approaches to the development of solutions;

Studying the influence of economic laws on the effectiveness of a decision;

Application of methods of functional cost analysis, forecasting, modeling and economic justification for each decision;

Clarity of wording - focus on a specific performer;

Brief wording of the decision made - fulfilling this requirement increases the specificity and effectiveness of decisions and contributes to a better understanding of the task by the performer;

Flexibility - the existence of an algorithm for achieving a goal when external or internal conditions change, descriptions of the states of the control object, the external environment, under which the implementation of the decision must be suspended and the development of a new solution must begin;

Timeliness and efficiency of decision making, increasing the value of the decision made;

Objectivity - Managers should not ignore actual conditions or actual state of affairs when developing decision options.

To do this, it is necessary: ​​to obtain high-quality information characterizing the solution development system; ensure comparability (comparability) of solution options; provide multiple solutions; achieve legal validity of the decision; the possibility of verification and control, the lack of real control measures, especially when this is known at the stage of decision development, can make all other work on preparing and making decisions meaningless; automation of the process of collecting and processing information, the process of developing and implementing solutions - the use of computer technology, which significantly reduces the time for developing a solution and increases its validity; responsibility and motivation when making high-quality and effective decisions; the presence of an implementation mechanism - the content of the decision should include sections covering organization, stimulation, control in the implementation of decisions.

Thus, to be of high quality, a control solution must be resistant in efficiency to possible errors in determining the initial data (robust) and flexible - provide for changes in goals and algorithms for achieving goals. Otherwise, minor deviations in the initial data, which can arise at any time and for various reasons, will make an effective management decision ineffective.

3. Goals and criteria for evaluating management decisions.

The goal is the ideal result of activity in the future. Let us agree to call the goal of a decision those specific results that are expected to be obtained after the implementation of this decision under certain conditions and a fixed period of time. In this case, the goal always lies outside the system. It reflects the reaction of the environment to the system. The quality of the goal determines the success or failure of the organizational-production system.

Let us list the known requirements for the goal. The goal should be:

Unambiguously formulated and understandable to performers;

Measurable, feedback can be used for this;

Realistic and achievable within the established time frame;

It is connected with the reward system, since the goal must motivate the performer’s actions in the direction necessary to achieve it;

Compatible with the goals of individual groups of performers;

Formalizing goals is a very complex process. There are no formal methods for synthesizing goals, but it should be remembered that the formulation of goals is heuristic.

The main goal for commercial organizations is to maximize profits. In this case, additional limiting requirements may be formulated, for example, ensuring safety, preventing damage, etc.

There are three types of organizational goals:

1. official goals - determine the general purpose of the organization, are declared in the charter or regulations of the organization, and are also stated publicly by the leader. They explain the need for an organization for society, have an external focus and perform an important protective function, creating an appropriate image for the organization;

2. operational goals - determine what the organization actually does in the current period, and may not completely coincide with official goals for a specific period. Such goals have an internal focus and are designed to mobilize the organization's resources; the form of their expression can be a work plan;

3. operational goals - guide the activities of specific employees and allow them to evaluate their work. They are even more specific and measurable than operational ones; such goals are formulated in the form of specific tasks for individual groups and performers.

Another classification of goals is possible:

strategic goals; goals of a specific business program; long-term goals; current goals; operational goals.

Goals become a management tool when they are defined or formulated, known to the staff, and accepted by employees for execution.

Formalization of goals takes place when forming a criterion for assessing the effectiveness of the system. The complexity of systems has given rise to various definitions of the criterion. The criterion is defined as a quantitative reflection of the degree to which the system achieves its goals. However, in management it is more convenient to consider this term as follows: a criterion is a rule for selecting a preferred solution from a number of alternative ones. In accordance with the predicted efficiency, the following solution options can be distinguished:

Ineffective, not allowing to solve the problem;

Rational, allowing to solve the problem;

Optimal solution options are options that allow you to solve the problem in the best way in the sense defined by the criterion or to build the best system in the sense defined by the criterion.

When comparing options for management decisions in the absence of a given criterion for a multi-parameter system, other principles are used.

The Pareto principle, according to which the quality of a solution (operation or system) is improved until all parameters of the effect are improved.

The von Neumann-Morgenstern principle, according to which a good solution is a solution that has external and internal stability of efficiency parameters. The internal stability of a set of efficiency parameters is achieved by their incomparability; external stability is achieved when an option that is not included in the set of good solutions corresponds to a more preferable one, which is included in the option recognized as good.

It can be argued that the set of good solutions is a collection of incomparable solutions, each of which cannot be improved. It is only possible for one or another unformalized reasons to give preference to one of the options.

The quality of a management decision is a set of solution parameters that satisfy a specific customer and ensure the reality of its implementation.

The components of the “black box” systematic approach to decision making are presented in the figure

Let's consider the contents of the components shown in the “black box” figure.

The “input” of the system is characterized by the parameters of the problem that need to be solved for specific markets (consumer requirements, segmentation results, quality of the object, sales volumes, delivery times, prices, etc.).

The “output” of the system is a solution, expressed quantitatively or qualitatively, having a certain degree of adequacy and probability of implementation, the degree of risk of achieving the planned result.

The components of the “external environment” of the system include factors of the macro- and microenvironment of the company, the infrastructure of the region, influencing the quality of the management decision. These factors include international integration, the political situation in the country, the economy, technical condition, socio-demographic, natural-climatic, cultural and other factors of the country, regional infrastructure factors (market infrastructure, environmental monitoring, social infrastructure, industry, transport, communications etc.), factors characterizing the specific connections of the company (decision maker) with other companies, organizations, intermediaries, competitors, etc.

Feedback characterizes various information coming from consumers to the person who made the decision (to the “process”), or to the person from whom information was received to solve the problem (“input”). The receipt of feedback information may be associated with a low-quality solution, additional consumer demands for clarification or improvement of the solution, the emergence of innovations and other factors.

The decision-making process includes the following operations: preparation for work; identifying the problem and formulating goals; search for information; its processing; identification of resource provision opportunities; ranking of goals; formulation of tasks; preparation of necessary documents; implementation of tasks.

Thus, the application of a systematic approach to the process of making management decisions allows us to determine the structure of the problem, the system for solving it, the interconnections of the system components and the order of their improvement.

In order to save time and money on developing a management decision, the following order of improvement (formation, development) of the components of the “black box” is recommended (see Fig. 1).

First, we need to clearly formulate what we should get, what parameters the solution should have.

4. Parameters of the quality of management decisions.

The quality parameters of a management decision include:

· entropy indicator, i.e. quantitative uncertainty of the problem. If the problem is formulated only qualitatively, without quantitative indicators, then the entropy indicator approaches zero.
If all indicators of a problem are expressed quantitatively, the indicator
entropy approaches unity;

· degree of investment risk;

· probability of implementation of the decision in terms of quality, costs and timing;

· the degree of adequacy (or degree of forecast accuracy, approximation coefficient) of a theoretical model to the actual data on the basis of which it was developed.

After preliminary regulation of the parameters of the quality of a management decision and its effectiveness (a limit is set, the minimum acceptable efficiency for which it is worth taking up the solution to the problem), environmental factors influencing the quality and effectiveness of the decision are analyzed. Then the “input” parameters of the system are analyzed and measures are taken to improve them and improve the quality of incoming information.

After clarifying the “output” requirements, clarifying the “external environment” factors affecting the quality and efficiency of the solution, and working out the “input” of the system, it is necessary to model the decision-making technology, analyze the process parameters, take measures to improve them and begin directly developing the solution. If the quality of the “input” is assessed as “satisfactory”, then at any level of quality of the “process” in the system, the quality of the “output”, i.e. the quality of the solution will be “satisfactory”.

Conclusion.

In management, when developing strategies, rational decisions are made based on the study of the economic laws of the functioning of market relations, the laws of the organization, and on the application of scientific approaches in the analysis, forecasting and economic justification of strategic decisions.

Alternative solutions should be explored
comparable view based on 8 factors: quality, scale,
mastery of the object in production, method of obtaining
information, conditions of use of the object, inflation, risk and
uncertainty.

When developing strategic decisions, the mechanisms of manifestation of the law of demand, the law of supply, the law of dependence between supply and
demand, the law of increasing additional costs, the law
diminishing returns, law of economic relationship
costs in the spheres of production and consumption, the law of effect
scale of production, law of economy of time, law
competition.

The quality of a strategic decision will increase if there are
the following laws of organization are taken into account: composition,

proportionality, smallest, ontogeny, synergy, orderliness, unity of analysis and synthesis, self-preservation.

The application of scientific approaches to the development of a strategic solution is mandatory.

Selection of methods for analysis, forecasting and economic justification of factors for improving quality and
effectiveness of strategic management decisions
determined by the complexity, features and cost of the object.
It should be remembered that the future is being formed today. "Saving"
on the quality of a strategic management decision can lead to losses in the future, hundreds or even thousands of times
exceeding previously achieved savings.

Bibliography.

1. Vertakova Yu.V., Kozyeva I.A... Kuzbozhev E.N. Management decisions: development and choice. Tutorial. - M.. KNORUS. 2005 352 p.

2. Vikhansky O., Naumov A. Management: Textbook. - 3rd ed. - M.: Economist,
2004.- 528 s

3. Gerchikova I. N. Management. - M., 2006. 480 p.

4. Glushchenko V.V., Glushenko I.I. Development of management decisions: textbook, manual. - Zheleznodorozhny, 2004. 400 p.

5. Larichev O. I. Theory and methods of decision making: textbook. - M.: Logos, 2002. 296 p.

6. Titarenko B.P. Project management for managers: a textbook. - M: MGEI, 2006. 32 p.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

• Introduction
• 1. Theoretical aspects of the quality of management decisions
• 1.1 The essence of the quality of management decisions
• 1.2 Factors of quality of management decisions and their effectiveness
• 2. Methods and criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions
• 2.1 Methods for assessing the quality of management decisions
• 2.2 Criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions
• 2.3 Recommendations for optimizing quality management of management decisions in modern economic conditions
• Conclusion
• List of used literature

Introduction

A characteristic feature of managing any objects is the achievement of certain goals. This general feature can be used as a basis for defining the management process. The management process is the purposeful influence of the subject of management on the object of management in order to implement management functions.

The management process consists of a sequence of types of management activities that are cyclically repeated over time, which are called management functions. The allocation of functions in the management process can be performed with varying degrees of detail. The most common aggregate management functions are usually considered planning, organizing, motivating and controlling. Decision making permeates all management activities; decisions are made on a wide range of management tasks. Not a single management function, regardless of which body performs it, can be implemented otherwise than through the preparation and execution of management decisions. Essentially, the entire set of activities of any management employee is in one way or another connected with the adoption and implementation of decisions. This primarily determines the importance of decision-making activities and determining its role in management.

Management decisions are one of the most important processes. The success of the business largely depends on its effectiveness. Only a professional manager has the technology to develop, make, and implement management decisions, without which effective management of an organization in a difficult economic environment is practically impossible. Every manager knows that before starting any business, it is necessary to determine the purpose of his actions: strategic (for the long term) and tactical (for a specific action).

Goals must be specific and measurable, i.e. For each goal there must be a criterion that would allow assessing the degree of its achievement. If there is no such criterion, then the implementation of one of the main management functions - control - is impossible. And in this sense, a goal, the degree of achievement of which can be quantitatively measured, is always better than a goal formulated only verbally.

An equally important professional quality of a manager is the ability to foresee. He who does not know how to foresee cannot govern.

The external and internal environment in which the organization operates is subject to continuous changes, the degree of significance of which varies. In order not to find yourself in the situation of a driver who did not notice a sharp turn in the road, monitoring the state of the external and internal environment of the organization must be carried out continuously. It is the results of assessing the quality and control of management decisions that are the basis for organizational leaders to adjust previously made decisions if deviations in the implementation of previously made decisions are significant.

Only by correctly assessing possible losses and gains, and by developing a program of action to prevent possible negative consequences, can a high-quality management decision be made.

1. Theoretical aspects of the quality of management decisions

1.1 The essence of the quality of management decisions

The experience of successful enterprises shows that achieving high efficiency is impossible without putting things in order in the area of ​​enterprise management. A certain level of management system is required to ensure that decisions made are implemented on time and with proper quality. The quality of the results obtained is a consequence of the quality of the enterprise management system.

Making management decisions and improving their quality is an important problem.

It occupies one of the central places in the sociology of organization. Considering organization to be a management tool, many sociologists and management theory specialists, starting with M. Weber, directly link its activities primarily with the preparation and implementation of management decisions. Management efficiency is largely determined by the quality of such decisions. The interest of sociologists in this problem is due to the fact that the decisions record the entire set of relationships that arise in the process of labor activity and organization management. Goals, interests, connections and norms are refracted through them.

The quality of a management decision is a set of properties that a management decision has that meet, to one degree or another, the needs of successfully resolving a problem. For example, timeliness, targeting, specificity and, in general, efficiency.

The quality of management decisions should be understood as the degree of its compliance with the nature of the tasks being resolved in the functioning and development of production systems, the set of decision parameters that satisfy specific consumers and ensure the reality of its implementation. In other words, to what extent does SD ensure further development of the production system in market conditions?

Urgent calls to improve the quality of governance are heard everywhere. Meanwhile, it is difficult to translate this desire into regulatory requirements and specific indicators for the simple reason that the very term “quality of management” is interpreted both in management science and in practice in a very vague, uncertain manner.

An attempt to translate into management the definition of the concept of “quality” used in relation to material production products, goods, does not lead to success. Indeed, understanding quality as a set of properties of a product that characterize its ability to satisfy the needs associated with the purpose of this product, we get only a vague idea of ​​​​what constitutes the quality of such a unique product as management. After all, management is not a product, but a type of activity that ends with the creation of such a specific product as control actions and management decisions. managerial need economic

On the other hand, the direct product of management is presented in the form of information, and information satisfies the need for it in a completely different way than a material product, and besides, the very need for information produced by management cannot be expressed in such an explicit form, as a need for products, goods, services.

But that's not all. The most important thing is that the information management product in the form of decisions, resolutions, plans, programs, laws, regulations in itself does not satisfy and is not intended to satisfy the ultimate needs of people, society, and the economy. Only by being transferred to the control object, prompting the object to act in the manner necessary for the control subject, does the control process lead to the creation of a consumable product, the quality of which can already be assessed by its ability to satisfy needs. A whole chain of cause-and-effect relationships arises: “the quality of management - the quality of functioning of the control object - the quality of the product created by the control object.”

Consequently, the quality of management can and should be judged only on the basis of an assessment of the quality of the management object’s work, which, in turn, is determined by the quality of the product of its activity. Since the subject of our consideration is the management of the economy, economic objects and processes, the quality of economic management is manifested in the quality of managed processes of economic activity and the resulting quality of this activity, ultimately in the extent to which the economy satisfies the needs of people, society, the country, provides a high quality of life.

Such an indirect approach to determining the quality of economic management based on the quality of its functioning and the provided measure of satisfaction of needs, that is, on the effectiveness of management processes, is in principle legitimate and the most objective in comparison with other possible approaches. However, it is also vulnerable, due to which it cannot be recognized as the only acceptable one. Firstly, a judgment about the quality of management must be formed during the development of management decisions (prepared control actions), that is, long before obtaining the final result of managing economic objects and processes. The idea of ​​the results available at that stage is of the nature of expectation, transportation and therefore does not have a high level of reliability. It is also not possible to take into account the side socio-economic consequences of the decisions being prepared, which could lead to a decrease in their final effectiveness.

Secondly, the ultimate needs, towards the satisfaction of which management must be oriented, are not indisputable in themselves and, moreover, are dynamic, changing over time. Due to these circumstances, when assessing management decisions during their development and adoption, one inevitably has to operate with other signs and criteria of management quality, reflecting the properties of the management process itself. These criteria characterize the organization of the management process, decision-making methods, and the level of professionalism of management staff. Of course, expected results are also taken into account, but only to the extent that they are foreseeable, predictable, calculable, and can be confined to certain periods of time. The uncertainty factor prevents the quality of management from being completely identified with its expected effectiveness.

From the above it follows that the quality of management is determined by the extent to which it directs economic objects and processes to achieve socio-economic goals in accordance with the needs of the economy and society. At the same time, the quality of management is also characterized by the quality of the processes of management activity itself: the scientific nature of the management methods used, the progressiveness of management tools, and the professionalism of the management apparatus.

1.2 Factors of quality of management decisions and their effectiveness

The quality of a management decision largely determines the final result and depends on a number of factors:

the quality of the source information, determined by its reliability, sufficiency, protection from interference and errors, form of presentation (it is known that the accuracy of the calculation results cannot be higher than the accuracy used to calculate the information);

the optimal or rational nature of the decision being made;

timeliness of decisions made, determined by the speed of their development, adoption, transfer and organization of execution;

compliance of decisions made with the current management mechanism and management methods based on it;

qualifications of personnel involved in developing, making decisions and organizing their execution;

readiness of the managed system to execute decisions made.

Factors that determine the quality and effectiveness of SD can be classified according to various criteria - both internal factors (related to the control and managed systems) and external factors (environmental influence):

Laws of the objective world related to the adoption and implementation of SD;

A clear statement of the goal - why SD is being adopted, what real results can be achieved, how to measure, correlate the goal and the results achieved;

The volume and value of available information - for the successful adoption of SD, the main thing is not the volume of information, but the value determined by the level of professionalism, experience, and intuition of personnel;

Time for development of SD - as a rule, management decisions are always made under conditions of time shortage and emergency circumstances (lack of resources, activity of competitors, market conditions, inconsistent behavior of politicians);

Organizational management structures;

Forms and methods of carrying out management activities;

Methods and techniques for developing and implementing SD (for example, if a company is a leader, there is one technique, if it follows others, it is different);

Subjectivity of evaluation of the solution choice option. The more extraordinary the SD is, the more subjective the assessment.

The state of the control and managed systems (psychological climate, authority of the manager, professional and qualified personnel, etc.);

A system of expert assessments of the level of quality and efficiency of SD.

Management decisions must be based on objective laws and patterns of social development. On the other hand, management decisions significantly depend on many subjective factors - the logic of developing solutions, the quality of assessing the situation, structuring tasks and problems, a certain level of management culture, the mechanism for implementing decisions, executive discipline, etc. At the same time, it is necessary to always remember that even carefully thought-out decisions may turn out to be ineffective if they cannot anticipate possible changes in the situation and state of the production system.

The effectiveness of management decisions and its assessment.

In economics, efficiency is understood as the relationship between the results of financial and economic activities, usually characterized by profit, and the costs that caused the receipt of this profit.

Efficiency is determined on the basis of relevant indicators of financial and economic activity. As such, they can be used, for example, balance sheet profit, profit remaining at the disposal of the enterprise, income from securities, dividends, profit growth due to certain circumstances, the average annual cost of fixed and working assets, costs of updating fixed assets, maintenance and provision of management apparatus, etc. The choice of specific methods, procedures and mathematical apparatus for assessing effectiveness is determined by the complexity and nature of the object being assessed. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of simple objects, for example, placing funds in a deposit account, is determined by the ratio of the amount received in the form of interest on the deposit and the amount of the deposit.

When assessing the effectiveness of complex objects, they are conditionally differentiated into simpler components. Based on calculated partial assessments of the effectiveness of individual elements of the object, it is possible to develop a general assessment of effectiveness that takes into account various factors. This raises the problem of determining the contribution of each element to the overall performance assessment. It is resolved by assigning each of the partial assessments of the effectiveness of the corresponding mathematical weight, which can be determined based on the determination of the importance of the corresponding element in the technology of the production process, their ranking according to the results of a survey of specialists, based on the share of this element in the total cost of the object or in the total cost, etc. .P.

Of particular interest is the use of expert methods for assessing effectiveness. They can be used both if there is a certain statistical base for the production and economic activities of the company, and in a newly created enterprise. In the first case, the experts’ task comes down to determining the significance of particular performance assessments; in the second, to developing a consensus opinion about the possible effectiveness of the enterprise’s activities in a new business area.

As performance criteria, indicators such as growth in profit, production volumes and sales of products, changes in the payback period of capital investments, increased turnover of working capital, increased economic profitability, reduced costs of maintaining the management apparatus, etc. can be used. Performance indicators include profitability indicators, indicators of business activity, as well as indicators of capital productivity and capital intensity. The methodology for calculating these indicators is studied in courses in accounting, business analysis and financial management. Therefore, they are not considered in this work.

The practice of financial and economic activity in a market economy shows that enterprises of the same type, which have approximately equal material and financial resources, often have significant differences in the level of profit. Some of them are developing dynamically, others are going bankrupt. In this regard, leading domestic and foreign economists point out that one of the most important reasons for such discrepancies is differences in the efficiency of enterprise management or, in other words, in the effectiveness of management decisions developed and implemented by managers.

In general terms, the effectiveness of enterprise management is understood as the effectiveness of managing the activities of an enterprise, which is a consequence of the ability of managers to develop effective management decisions and achieve their goals. Many economists express the opinion that management efficiency is a function of two variables: the costs of developing management decisions and maintaining the management apparatus, on the one hand, and the results of management activities, reflected in changes in the values ​​of indicators that assess the state of the management object, on the other.

When assessing the quality and effectiveness of management decisions, it is necessary to ensure a synthesis of economic and social aspects of management. In accordance with this, a system of evaluation criteria should be built.

2. Methods and criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions

2.1 Methods for assessing the quality of management decisions

Self-assessment. Any management activity, as already noted, includes analysis and quality control on the part of the person performing the work. Without self-control and self-assessment of quality in the search for the best solution, there would be no rejection, variant selection, which are an integral property of the process of preparation and decision-making

By their nature, meaning, and purpose, assessments of the quality of one’s own work are the most thorough, painstaking, detailed and capacious assessments, and given the high professional level of the employee, they are very qualified and profound. Often, few people other than the employee himself are able to ascertain the quality of the work done with the same completeness. At the same time, self-assessment technology is largely individualized, it is difficult to regulate and control, the results of assessments are recorded mainly in the employee’s memory and are not available to the public. Such assessments are subjective, due to why they can be individually oriented. For example, a non-self-critical employee tends to strive for a level of quality sufficient to “pass” the work. This level will be the limit for him and will receive the highest rating, since further improvement in quality is not in his interests. The author of an idea often tends to overestimate its quality. Consequently , it is necessary to take into account the influence of psychological factors on self-esteem of work

Evaluation by work managers. Heads of management bodies, projects, programs, scientific supervisors establish the quality of work, relying primarily on a system of “internal” assessments and judgments, the formation procedures of which are not regulated. Since managers act as creators of the central plan when developing, justifying and making management decisions, their quality assessments are, on the one hand, self-assessments, on the other hand, control assessments in relation to the supervised work of subordinate employees

Quality assessments by managers are often formed explicitly and communicated to employees as an element of management influence carried out in order to direct work in the right direction, find a rational solution, eliminate errors and miscalculations of individual employees. Certification assessment of the quality of work and employees is carried out periodically to check the compliance of employees positions held, when they are nominated for promotion. Evaluation of work by managers is also carried out when summing up the results of work for a certain period. At the same time, many assessments of the quality of management activities developed by managers are carried out by them “for themselves”, to analyze options for management decisions made by the manager himself , and filtering out unsuitable options

Algorithms and procedures for assessing the quality of management work by their immediate supervisors, as well as self-monitoring of employees, are most often purely individual and rely mainly on experience and intuition. Since managers and leading employees usually have high professional qualifications, possess work skills, deeply understand and perceive the goals of the activity, their quality assessments, in principle, can be the most representative and reliable. However, these assessments are often characterized by subjectivity

Evaluation by customers. A variety of types of management work related to the preparation of draft laws and other regulations, draft management decisions, programs, forecasts, justifications, analytical materials are carried out by order of organizations external to the performers of the work. Most often, this is work carried out on a contractual basis or at the direction of higher management bodies Since the customer acts as a consumer of the results of the work performed, and often as its buyer, his judgment about the quality is decisive for the performers of the work. Only in certain conflict situations, when the assessments of customers and performers differ decisively, a special commission, its conclusion becomes more important than the customer’s assessment. Typically, customers are psychologically inclined to underestimate the quality of the work they accept. Evaluation of work by customers can be carried out as individual stages are completed or the work is completed as a whole

Peer assessment. Collegial assessments include group, collective assessments formed by a group of people authorized to evaluate the quality of management work or interested in conducting the assessment. Such assessments are carried out through the formation of a collective opinion of specially created groups of experts of permanent commissions, councils, collegiums, as well as by submitting projects for collective discussion. It is advisable to divide collegial assessments into the following groups: a) assessments from higher authorities; b) assessments of permanent councils and commissions; c) assessments formed by specially created expert groups; d) evaluations of production meetings of the teams performing the work; e) assessments based on broad discussion.

Permanent commissions and councils in the form of boards of ministries and departments, academic councils, scientific and technical councils, expert commissions and councils periodically review, discuss, and analyze at their meetings draft management decisions and proposals for improving management, giving them a collegial assessment. At such councils, different opinions and judgments are compared, a generalized opinion is developed, and a high level of representativeness of assessments is achieved. In addition, the most experienced specialists are included in the boards and expert councils, which serves as a prerequisite for the high qualification level of the conclusions they produce. However, the heterogeneity of the composition of the boards, sharp differences in the level of professionalism of their members, extreme inconsistency in the judgments of participants in the assessment process, and varying degrees of interest in the objectivity of assessments often lead to unrepresentativeness of the overall assessment.

Group assessment of the quality of work often takes place on the part of the workers themselves, when consideration of the results of work is submitted to a production meeting of a department, sector, or other unit. Discussion of the results or intermediate results of activities by persons carrying out these activities is very useful, as it promotes creative discussions, exchange of opinions, expression of critical comments from colleagues, as well as the development of collective opinions on ways to eliminate shortcomings and improve the quality of prepared materials, documents, decisions . In addition, production meetings of departments for the purpose of jointly discussing the quality of work performed and ways to improve it help familiarize workers with the content and nature of the activities of their colleagues, which helps to establish close contacts, deepen interaction and consistency, and ultimately leads to an increase in the quality of work of the entire department.

The variety of types and forms of collegial assessment of the quality of management work gives it weight and contributes to the widespread dissemination of this assessment method. Group assessments are becoming widespread in the quality management system of economic activity.

Most collegial assessments of the quality of management work are distinguished by the greatest objectivity of all used forms of assessment. At the same time, their preference is not absolute, because they also have certain limitations that have to be taken into account.

Individual assessment by experts, controllers, inspectors, and auditors. Individuals and specialists in the field of the activity being assessed can and are being involved in assessing the quality of management and management work. Most often, such assessment is the subject of external examination. The results of assessments in this case are very sensitive to the level of professionalism of the expert, his position in relation to the performers of the work, as well as his own point of view on how the problem should be solved. To suppress and mitigate such effects, they resort to the involvement of several independent experts. In this case, individual assessments essentially turn into group, collegial assessments. There are even methods for combining local assessments into a general one, called expert assessment methods.

Methods for comparative analysis of management quality

Among the most common methods of establishing quality is the comparison of the subject being assessed with another, taken as a basis for comparison. As already noted, in relation to management work, management decisions, management influences, due to their unique, non-mass nature, it is difficult to choose a basis for comparison, since there are no standards to be compared to and based on the results of comparison with which it would be possible to clearly establish the level of quality Although , strictly speaking, a single product produced and has no direct analogues, it can be compared with products that are similar in appearance, type, purpose, application. The same, to a certain extent, applies to products of management activities, management works, processes. There are several types of comparison bases that allow, with a certain degree of convention, to identify the quality of management work and its results on the basis of comparative comparative analysis.

The method of statistical comparisons is based on comparing the parameters (criteria) of the quality of the work being assessed and its results with indicators of similar content characterizing previous works; for this purpose, based on the accumulated information about previous works, statistically ordered sets are constructed (in the form of, for example, dynamic time series) real values ​​of quality parameters achieved in previous periods. Steady trends in changes in these parameters are identified; through qualitative analysis, the favorability or unfavorability of these trends, the desired directions and zones of their further change are established. Judgment about the quality of the evaluated work is formed by considering the place occupied by the indicators characterizing it in the statistical field of their previous values. If an indicator falls into the zone of favorable trends, it indicates the quality of management work according to the given criterion, and vice versa. Quality is determined by the degree of compliance of the assessed parameter with stable favorable trends that occurred in the past, or the degree of change in unfavorable trends for the better due to the adoption of the assessed management decision. Method of statistical comparisons are used in planning when making judgments about the reliability, intensity, and progressiveness of plans, projects, and programs being developed by comparing them with previous analogues. This method is preferable to use for assessing the quality of management decisions for a fairly short term.

The method of comparing planned and actual results is based on comparing planned indicators with those practically achieved as a result of the implementation of planned decisions. In this case, the basis for comparison is formed by an information array of reporting indicators on the actual results of the implementation of management decisions. The level of quality of work is determined by the degree of compliance of the actual results obtained with those that were outlined during the development and adoption of plans, projects, programs, forecasts, and other documents and decisions. Comparison of planned and actual results provides an objective assessment of the quality of management activities. However, the basis for such a comparison can be formulated only after the practical implementation of the solutions, which significantly delays the time frame for potentially assessing the quality of work from the period of its implementation.

The method of analyzing experimental results is applicable in cases where the progressiveness and effectiveness of a management decision, before its widespread dissemination and implementation, are tested selectively in experimental conditions on a group of regions, industries, associations, and enterprises. The quality of the solutions developed is established by comparing the performance indicators of economic objects in experimental conditions with similar indicators that took place before the transition to the experiment, or with the performance indicators of objects that were not transferred to the experimental conditions. This approach has a common original concept with the method of comparing planned and real results, but differs significantly from it in that real results are compared with past ones, that is, essentially a statistical basis for comparison is used.

The method of comparison with the results of economic and mathematical modeling of the activity of a management object is based on a comparison of parameters and indicators included in projects, program plans and other economic decisions with the values ​​of similar indicators obtained through mathematical (simulation) modeling of the processes of functioning and development of the object. Basic indicators when using this method are formed on the basis of model forecasting, that is, using a scientifically based forecast. Based on the results of several calculations using different models or carried out by different research organizations, it is possible to establish forecast values ​​of indicators achieved when implementing the strategy of the program plan and other business decisions. Comparison of planned results with indicators determined by modeling (forecasting), makes it possible to judge the quality of draft plans and programs.

Particularly noteworthy is the variant of the specified method, in which the comparison base is formed on the basis of optimization models. In this case, calculations make it possible to determine the optimal indicators of the development of the object, which can be considered as ideal and judge the quality of project plans for the development programs of the object by the degree of approximation of their indicators to the optimal However, this approach, despite all its attractiveness, has the obvious drawback that the optimality criteria (objective functions) used in optimization models are always conditional, and the models themselves do not adequately describe the real development of the modeled object. If, with the help of models, it was possible to confidently establish optimal real indicators, then they should be included in the management decisions made and the object should be directed through management strictly in the model direction.

The method of normative comparisons is based on comparing the indicators and parameters of the proposed draft plans, programs of regulations and other management decisions with the normative values ​​of the corresponding indicators, that is, with resource consumption standards, technological standards, efficiency standards, rational consumption standards, taxation standards, bank interest rates. If the normative basis for comparison is progressive and scientifically grounded and reflects the advanced achievements of technical and technological progress, then the quality of management activities can be judged by the extent to which it directs economic and social development into a normative direction. The difficulty of applying a normative method for assessing the quality of management activities is due to the imperfection or absence of a number of standards and the difficulty of updating them. The basis for normative comparisons are also standards, including standards of management activities

A unique independently distinguished form of the regulatory framework is a task for performing work or a target setting developed by the customer, which determines the desired level or limit limits for changes in the quality criteria characterizing this work. Assessment of the quality of work is formed as a measure of compliance with the set requirements and conditions. However, most often the task cannot be used as the only basis for comparison since, in relation to management work, it is usually of a general installation nature, does not cover all the parameters of the work and may not have sufficient validity since the customer is inclined to expect a little more from the work than it can actually give.

The method of comparison with the level of world achievements is based on the fact that the indicators that characterize the quality of work, determined in the process of performing the assessed work, are compared with indicators of similar content achieved in world practice. The comparison should be made taking into account the dynamics of the level of the world's highest achievements and the trends in its change during the implementation of the planned management decisions. Thus, this comparison method is combined with the method of predictive comparisons. The possibilities of its use are limited by two circumstances. Firstly, this requires a fairly complete and representative database on the level of world achievements, the formation of which represents an independent problem. Secondly, due to the specifics of the functioning and development of economic objects, formally homogeneous indicators turn out to be incomparable if they relate to different social, economic, and natural conditions, therefore, the highest achievement obtained in one environment is not rightfully considered a target for other conditions.

The method of comparison with similar works is based on comparisons of the results or other qualitative properties of this work with those obtained by performing similar or similar in content works that were carried out earlier or are carried out in parallel with the one being evaluated in the competition. Even if there are analogous works performed by other organizations and performers, their comparison is feasible based on a limited number of quality indicators due to the fact that the conditions for carrying out the work and the personnel composition of the performers are not the same.

The method of variant comparisons is a natural, widespread method of establishing the quality of management work, carried out by forming a comparison base based on the development of several options for project management decisions and comparing them with each other. This approach is convenient in that it does not require searching for a comparison base external to the given work. In addition, with variant analysis, it is possible not only to establish the comparative quality of options, but also to select the best option that is close to the optimal one. However, the need for special formation of many options significantly complicates the work.

All described methods for establishing quality assessments based on comparison are focused on generating assessments based on local indicators. But along with local, single estimates, it is of interest to use generalized estimates, including complex and integral ones.

Complex assessments of the quality of work are formed by combining other single assessments that are similar in content into one generalized, synthetic one, or by assessing a number of qualitative characteristics of work with one complex indicator.

Integral is usually called a single assessment, expressed by one indicator, which is of the most general nature and accumulates all the basic qualitative properties of the work being assessed.

Based on frequency, assessment can be divided into continuous and discrete, periodic, and step-by-step. Periods of quality assessment can be agreed upon in advance in accordance with the stages of work. In addition, selective periodic assessment is possible as a means of unprogrammed control, the dates of which are unknown to the performers of the work. Often, periods of time-regulated assessment of work are associated with planned reporting deadlines for their implementation. Continuous or close to continuous assessment accompanying the work is more typical for self-assessments and, to a certain extent, for assessments by the work manager, while the establishment of quality on the part of the customer, higher authorities, and commissions is obviously periodic in nature.

2.2 Criteria for assessing the quality of management decisions

Urgent calls to improve the quality of governance are heard everywhere. Meanwhile, it is difficult to translate this desire into regulatory requirements and specific indicators for the simple reason that the very term “quality of management” is interpreted both in management science and in practice in a very vague and uncertain manner. The author offers his vision of the process of preparing management decisions and formulates indicators for assessing their quality.

The meaning of the concept of “quality of management” is intuitively clear and generally reflects the level of perfection of management processes. At the same time, in relation to management work, the category “quality” needs to be analyzed not only to reveal the essence of this category, but also for the purpose of clear structuring and the formation of specific ways to improve the quality of economic management.

An attempt to translate into management the definition of the concept of “quality” used in relation to material production products (goods) does not lead to success. We understand quality as a set of product properties that characterize its ability to satisfy certain needs. But management is not a product, but a type of activity that ends with the creation of such a specific product as control actions and management decisions.

Management decisions are a creative, volitional action of a management subject based on knowledge of the objective laws of the functioning of the managed system and analysis of information about its functioning, consisting in choosing a goal, program and methods of action of the team to resolve a problem or change a goal.

On the other hand, the direct product of management is presented in the form of information, and information satisfies the need for it in a completely different way than a material product, and besides, the need for this information itself cannot be expressed in as explicit a form as the need for products, goods, services.

But that's not all. The most important thing is that the information management product in the form of decisions, resolutions, plans, programs, laws, regulations in itself does not satisfy and is not intended to satisfy the ultimate needs of people, society, and the economy. Only by being transferred to the control object, prompting the object to act in the manner necessary for the control subject, does the control process lead to the creation of a consumable product, the quality of which can already be assessed by its ability to satisfy needs. A whole chain of cause-and-effect relationships arises: “the quality of management - the quality of functioning of the control object - the quality of the product created by the control object.”

Consequently, the quality of management can and should be judged only on the basis of an assessment of the quality of the management object’s work, which, in turn, is determined by the quality of the product of its activity.

Product quality assessment is isolated as an independent process, separated from the production process and usually carried out by technical control bodies after completion of the production process. The situation is different with the quality of planning and management. Here, assessing the quality of the finished product is not the main thing. Although it may take place, it will be late, because in this case it is impossible to carry out rejection by dividing the final product into good and bad. After completion of the work, when a single document is prepared, it must be known to be valid. It follows that isolation and isolation of quality assessment in the form of an independent final control procedure is not typical for management processes.

It is necessary to assess the quality of management work, carried out before its completion and allowing shortcomings to be eliminated in advance and the quality to be brought to the required standard. Such an assessment should accompany the work process by analogy with technological control in material production. Thus, instead of the “work - quality control of the final result of the work” scheme, characteristic of product production, the “work and continuously accompanying quality assessment” scheme is used in planning and management. Such accompanying assessment represents an integral part of the management process, playing the role of feedback in the system for regulating the quality of this activity. Accordingly, this assessment does not require isolation in the form of a special procedure isolated from the process being assessed, and is not so much aimed at quality control as at finding ways to improve it.

It should be noted that assessing the quality of management work is cyclical in nature, it is characterized by a reciprocating nature, the presence of an extensive chain of feedbacks and local cycles. The presented description of this process as essentially unidirectional represents a conscious abstraction, which aims to highlight the leading line of the process and represent it in the simplest diagram.

2.3 Recommendations for optimizing quality management of management decisions in modern economic conditions

The best option for a decision made at one of the levels of the control system on any issue is called optimal, and the process of searching for this option is called optimization.

The complexity and interdependence of technical, organizational, socio-economic and other aspects of modern production management lead to the fact that making a management decision inevitably affects dozens and even hundreds of various factors, so intertwined with each other that it is impossible to isolate and analyze them separately using conventional analytical methods.

Many factors that determine or influence the choice of solution are, by their nature, not amenable to quantitative characteristics, while others practically cannot be measured. All this made it necessary to develop special methods that facilitate the selection of management decisions in complex technical, organizational, and economic problems (operations research methods, expert assessments, etc.).

Operations research methods are used to express optimal decisions primarily in the following areas of management: large-scale production planning; organization of production processes at enterprises; logistics; organization of transportation.

Operations research methods are based on the use of mathematical (deterministic), probabilistic models representing the process, system or type of activity being studied. Such models provide a quantitative description of the problem and serve as the basis for making management decisions when searching for the optimal option. How justified are these decisions, are they the best possible, are all the factors that determine the optimal solution taken into account and weighed, what is the criterion to determine that this solution is really the best - these are the range of questions that are of great importance for production managers, and the answer to which can be found using operations research methods. Optimization of solutions consists of a comparative study of numerical estimates of factors that cannot be assessed using conventional methods. The best possible solution for an economic system is optimal, and the best solution regarding individual elements of the system is suboptimal.

Operations research methods are designed to find solutions that would be optimal for the largest possible number of enterprises, organizations or their divisions. Quantitative methods of operations research are based on the achievements of economics, mathematics and statistics (optimal programming, queuing theory, game theory, graph theory, mathematical statistics, etc.).

Optimizing a solution is the process of searching through many factors that influence the result. The optimal solution is the most effective solution among all alternative options selected according to some optimization criterion.

Since the optimization process is expensive, it is advisable to use it when solving strategic and tactical problems. Operational problems must be solved using, as a rule, simple, heuristic methods.

The main optimization methods are:

analysis;

forecasting;

modeling (logical, physical, economic and mathematical).

In practical management, the main methods of analysis are:

comparison method;

index method;

balance method;

method of chain substitutions;

elimination method;

graphic method;

functional-cost analysis;

factor analysis;

economic and mathematical methods.

Forecasting in management refers to the process of developing forecasts itself, i.e. scientifically based judgments about the possible states of an object, the ways and timing of its modifications. Functionally, a forecast in management is presented as a pre-plan development of multivariate models for the development of a management object. The forecast is probabilistic in nature and can undergo changes under the influence of changing conditions of the external and internal environment of the organization.

The most important forecasting tasks:

developing a market forecast;

identification of economic and other trends influencing market conditions and the scale of the beneficial effect;

selection of forecasting method and time targets;

economic justification for the development or improvement of manufactured products, etc.

The main forecasting functions include:

consistency;

complexity;

continuity;

variation;

adequacy and optimality.

A model is a representation of a system object or idea in some form other than the integrity itself. It is a simplified image of a specific life (managerial) situation. In other words, the models reflect real events, circumstances, etc. in a certain way.

There are a number of reasons for using a model instead of trying to directly interact with the real world:

complexity the real world is such that the number of variables related to a specific problem significantly exceeds the capabilities of any person and can be comprehended by simplifying the real world using modeling);

experimentation - there are many management situations in which it is desirable to try and experimentally test alternative solutions to a problem. In addition, there are critical situations when a decision needs to be made, but experimentation cannot be done in real life;

orientation of management to the future - it is impossible to observe a phenomenon that does not yet exist and, perhaps, will never take place, as well as to conduct direct experiments. Modeling is the only systematic way to date to see future options and determine the potential consequences of alternative solutions, which allows them to be objectively compared.

Modern organizations use three basic types of models:

physical model (represents what is being studied using an enlarged or reduced description of an object or system (drawing, plan, layout);

analogue model (represents the object under study as an analogue that behaves like a real object, but does not look like one. An example of an analogue model is an organizational chart.;

mathematical model (symbolic) - symbols are used to describe the properties or characteristics of an object or event.

Building a model is a process. The main stages of this process are problem statement, construction, validation, application and updating of the model.

Formulation of the problem . The first and most important stage of building a model, which can provide the correct solution to a management problem, is to state the problem. Proper use of mathematics or the computer will not be of any use unless the problem itself is accurately diagnosed. To find an acceptable or optimal solution to a problem, you need to know what it consists of. Unfortunately, sometimes huge amounts of money are spent on searching for thoughtful answers to incorrectly posed questions. Just because a manager is aware of a problem does not necessarily mean that the real problem has been identified. A leader must be able to distinguish symptoms from causes.

Building a model. The developer must determine the main purpose of the model, what output standards or information is expected to be obtained using the model to help management solve the problem facing it. It is also necessary to determine what information is required to build a model that satisfies these goals and produces the necessary information as an output.

Similar documents

The essence of the quality of management decisions. Factors of quality of management decisions and their effectiveness. Methods and evaluation criteria, recommendations for optimizing quality management of management decisions in modern economic conditions.

course work, added 01/14/2011


The essence, main stages and organization of the process of developing management decisions, methods and criteria for assessing their quality. Problems of taking into account the conditions and factors that determine the quality of management decisions at OJSC Balakovsky Brewery, optimization measures.

thesis, added 10/01/2012


The essence and properties of management decisions. Classification of management decisions, criteria for their quality. Characteristics of the enterprise LLC "Ship". Characteristics of the organizational structure of management and personnel. Ways to improve the quality of decisions made.

course work, added 09/22/2010


The evolution of approaches to determining management decisions, features and stages of their adoption, criteria for assessing the quality of management. Characteristics of the organization, assessment of the effectiveness of its activities, analysis and ways to improve the quality of management decisions.

course work, added 09/01/2014


Criteria for making management decisions in conditions of uncertainty in the market environment. Contents and types of risks when implementing management decisions. Classification of risks, methods for assessing their degree. Combating risks in the trade organization "Milk Paradise".

course work, added 06/16/2015


Main categories of management decisions, stages and methods of making them. Modeling as a method for solving management problems, their construction and solution. The state and ways of improving the quality and efficiency of management decisions in the State Unitary Enterprise MTS "Zauralye".

course work, added 06/09/2014


The essence of the concept and characteristics of management decisions, their classification, the main requirements, the process of preparation, adoption and implementation. Methods for optimizing management decisions. Features of the economic environment for firms in Kuban.

course work, added 06/26/2010


Essence, functions, conditions and factors of quality of management decisions. Determining the number of criteria for assessing alternative management decisions. Characteristics of the McDonald's restaurant, features of management decision-making in this organization.

course work, added 09/18/2016


The essence and functions of management decisions, their classification and types, features, conditions for ensuring quality and efficiency. Problems of making management decisions under conditions of uncertainty and risk. Formation of a new management decision.

course work, added 03/25/2012


Uncertainties in the management decision-making environment. Classification of risks, methods of assessing them and methods of combating them. Risk management when making management decisions. Rules and criteria for decision-making in conditions of market uncertainty.