CC BY
34ANALYTICAL TOOLS IN THE SPHERE OF PUBLIC PROCUREMENT
Khalina V.
PhD, Associate Professor Butskyi V.
PhD, Associate Professor Ustilovska A.
Lecturer Dushnyuk D.
Master
Kharkiv National University of Civil Engineering and Architecture
ABSTRACT
In recent years, new legislation has appeared in public procurement, a number of unique technological solutions, and fundamentally new principles of interaction between government, business and the public have been developed. This is due to the need to move to a model that focuses on both the development of competition and overcoming market constraints on the basis of purposeful formation of cooperation relations between all participants in the procurement process.
In general, the transfer of procurement to the electronic plane has become a «window of opportunity» for Ukraine in building an accountable, transparent and efficient country. After two years of operation of this system, its victories, resonant scandals and revealed shortcomings, it is obvious that public procurement still remains an area in which there are a number of problems. However, as the experience of these years shows, the roots of these problems are not in the electronic system itself, because conducting tenders in electronic format cannot kill abuses that occur during procurement, the system only provides information on all purchases for further analysis.
The main problems in the field of public procurement are related to the stages of procurement processes that take place either before the stage of procurement announcement in the system, where there are certain manipulations, or even avoid open bidding. It is the need to reduce corrupt abuses of public funds, as well as the need to ensure the inevitability of punishment for them, determine the relevance of the research topic, because only improving government regulation can significantly improve the work of the entire system.
Keywords: public procurement, analysis, market functioning, crisis conditions.
The main purpose of the analysis of the functioning of the public procurement market is to determine the extent to which the public procurement system and individual procurement operations meet the main objectives.
Thus, there is a need for the formation of an integrated (comprehensive) analysis of the functioning of the public procurement market both in the state as a whole and for individual enterprises. An important feature of this analysis is the possibility of its use when comparing the results over time and with similar indicators of other subjects.
Achieving a generalized theoretical understanding of the place and role of public procurement in the information society has become possible thanks to research: Batenko L., Zagorsky V., Kvacha V. and Afanasieva R., Kulaka N., Naumenko S., Nizhny T., Parafiynyk N., Smyrychynskoho V., Tkachenko N., Umantsiva Yu., Chukut S. and others.
International and national experience of electronic public procurement became the objects of research: Akimova L., Andreeva O., Varenik V., Volokha O., Dubinina M., Galchinsky L. and Gavrilova A., Kaidash T., Krupyaka I. ., Minyailo O., Olefira A., Pismennaya M., Ryzhenko O., Smachilo V., Khalina V., Chabana V., Shatkovsky O.
Problems of the system of state regulation of public procurement, as well as its evolution in terms of information and technological development, covered in scientific works: Bugaya N., Bukhatatogo O., Gor-batyuka J., Kiselyova M., Nedilchenko B., Slanetska S., Schukina O and a number of non- governmental organizations and think tanks that research public procurement: the Ukrainian office of the international anti
- corruption organization Transparency International, the NGO Center for Combating Corruption, etc.
Earlier studies by the authors [1-3] initiated the development of the proposed evaluation methodology, while in [4-5] the labor component of this methodology was considered.
Despite the large number of scientific papers and articles on e-procurement in general and e-procurement reform in general, insufficient attention has been paid to the research of public procurement analysis tools, although they are the anti-corruption and anti-corruption mechanisms that promote transparent and accountable functioning. the entire system of public procurement, especially in the current crisis at the current stage of socio-economic development.
Based on the relevance of the topic and the degree of scientific development of the problem, the purpose of the study is to analyze the functioning of the public procurement market in a crisis.
Recently, the stakeholders of the public procurement market are increasingly asking about the need to develop a methodology for analyzing the functioning of this market, especially from the standpoint of fairness for all its stakeholders (customers, participants, regulators, the public, etc.). The level of justice, as an indicator, has multidimensionality and multidimensionality of its essence. Therefore, in previous studies, the authors have selected indicators that reflect various aspects of the functioning of the public procurement market and will be used in the analysis. At the same time, the diversity of such indicators does not allow to comprehensively characterize the effectiveness of public procurement, and even more so, the level of fairness in this area or to determine the degree of progress for a particular entity, it has achieved in this way.
Analysis of existing methodological approaches shows that most of them involve the use of expert methods at different stages of formation of comprehensive comparative assessments, which is not always convenient and justified in a particular enterprise. In addition, these approaches mainly assess either individual aspects of resource conservation, or consider it as part of other activities of the entity, which complicates the definition of a comprehensive assessment of resource-saving activities in the enterprise as a whole.
According to the authors, the method of comprehensive analysis of the functioning of the public procurement market involves several stages (Fig. 1).
Symbols to fig. 1: n - competition (the indicator characterizes the level of competition in the public procurement market and is calculated as the ratio of the number of participants in public procurement procedures to the number of procedures; r2 - savings (the indicator characterizes the savings of budget funds and is calculated as the difference between the expected purchase price and the actual value of the transaction; r3 -performance (the indicator characterizes the performance of bidding and is calculated by the formula
Pt=(1-Kv/Ko), where Kv - the number of canceled procurement procedures; Ko - the number of announced procurement procedures); r4 - reliability (characterizes the reliability of suppliers and is calculated as the ratio of executed contracts to their total number for the period); r5 - trust (ratio of the number of participants who participated in public procurement for the current period to the same indicator for the previous period); r6 -labor intensity (labor measure of public procurement efficiency is calculated as the ratio of procedures performed during the analytical period to the number of authorized persons); er+- relative assessment of the i-th indicator, if a larger value is the best; £f - relative estimate of the i-th indicator, if its smaller value is the best;
r - i-th evaluation indicator; r r. - maximum
i 7 max ■ min
and minimum value of the i-th evaluation indicator; r's - integrated indicator of the level of justice; rS - the average level of fairness for the analytical period; yi -
specific weight of the i-th indicator; n - number of evaluation indicators.
1. Formation of a system of indicators
1
M
c
I
2. Determining the direction of indicators
3. Calculation of the relative assessment of the i-th indicator
4. Determination of specific weights of the i-th indicator
5. Determination of the integrated indicator of justice
Figure 1 - Stages of analysis of the functioning of the public procurement market in crisis conditions (equity
level) (developed by the authors)
The task of the first of them is to create a system of baseline indicators that most fully characterize the aspects of the functioning of the public procurement market. The selection of indicators is carried out by constructing and analyzing the appropriate correlation matrix. Its purpose is to exclude from consideration one of the indicators that have a high degree of correlation and interchangeability. This ensures a reduction in the initial array of indicators without losing valuable information on the functioning of the public procurement market, because having one of the indicators, you can give a comprehensive description of the other. Correlation analysis should be performed using software packages STATISTICA, Rapid Miner, MS Excel and others.
Next, the selection of the most significant indicators is based on the definition of the regression relationship between them. The result of the selection of indicators at the end of this stage is their array, which corresponds to the volume of 10-20% of the initial number of indicators.
Selected indicators have different dimensions, which complicates their comparison and consolidation into an integrated indicator. In this regard, the normalization of the values of indicators, taking into account their diversity. At the same time, there are indicators-stabilizers, the growth of which indicates an increase in justice, and indicators-destabilizers, the reduction of which has a negative impact on the level of justice. Normalization of values of indicators of a positive and negative direction, in our opinion, should be carried out by two formulas (fig. 1).
The next stage of the analysis is to determine the specific weights of each of the selected indicators. The following specific weights for the indicators participat-
ing in the assessment were determined by expert evaluation: competition - 0.2; savings - 0.2; efficiency -0.15; reliability - 0.15; trust - 0.15; labor intensity -0.15.
The final stage of the analysis is the calculation of the integrated indicator. The result for each year is compared with the average value for the evaluation period. If the value of the integrated indicator is higher than the average for the period, the level of fairness will be considered satisfactory, if less, then - unsatisfactory.
Thus, the authors proved the inexpediency of using natural meters for the analysis of the subject of procurement, and the scope of its use may be limited to one individual procurement procedure. At the same time, for the first time a labor meter was used to calculate the workload based on the number of procurement procedures conducted per one tender committee (authorized person).
Using the method of analysis of the functioning of the public procurement market in crisis conditions on the basis of fairness, presented in the previous paragraph, its approbation was carried out. In order to form an array of data required for the calculation of the complex analysis, by forming a correlation matrix and subsequent analysis, indicators that had a correlation coefficient greater than 0.95 were excluded from consideration. By pairwise regression analysis, factor indicators were identified and selected, the impact of which is significant for 60% of the selected indicators of public procurement efficiency. In this case, the coefficient of determination ranged from 0.7 to 0.99 with significant F and t-criteria (significance level 0.05). Thus, as a result of selection there were 6 indicators or 16% of the array of initial indicators.
The initial data for the analysis are presented in table. 1.
Table 1
Initial data for analysis
№ Indicators Years
2017 2018 2019
1 r1 - competition 0,625 0,684 0,698
2 r2 - savings 2158 3269 4721
3 r3 - efficiency 0,854 0,897 0,921
4 r4 - reliability 0,813 0,885 0,910
5 rs - trust 0,102 0,203 0,225
6 r6 - labor intensity 1,120 1,202 1,320
To normalize and bring the indicators to proportionality, it is proposed to use formulas depending on the direction of the indicators and their impact on the level of equity (stabilizers, destabilizers). In the table. 1 gray highlights the maximum values of indicators, in
K
the case of calculation of stabilizers s, =
minimum values, in the case of calculation of destabi-
r
lizers s, =
r
The results of the calculation are
presented in table 2.
and
r
Table 2
Normalization of evaluation indicators
№ Indicators Years
2017 2018 2019
1 r: - competition 0,895 0,980 1,000
2 r2 - savings 0,457 0,692 1,000
3 r3 - efficiency 0,927 0,974 1,000
4 r4 - reliability 0,893 0,973 1,000
5 r5 - trust 0,453 0,902 1,000
6 r6 - labor intensity 1,000 1,073 1,179
The final stage of assessing the level of fairness in the enterprise is the calculation of the integrated indicator
n
RS = ^ (1 — si ' ) • yj . The calculations are given in table 3. i
Table 3
Calculation of the integrated indicator_
№ Indicators Years
2017 2018 2019
1 r1 - competition 0,021 0,004 0,000
2 r2 - savings 0,109 0,062 0,000
3 r3 - efficiency 0,011 0,004 0,000
4 r4 - reliability 0,016 0,004 0,000
5 r5 - trust 0,082 0,015 0,000
6 r6 - labor intensity 0,300 0,311 0,327
Rt Integral indicator S 0,538 0,399 0,327
Graphically, the integrated indicator for 20172019 is presented in the figure 2.
Based on the calculations, we obtain the following average value of the integrated indicator:
Rs = (0,538+0,399+0, 0,327)/3= 0,421
Thus, we can conclude that in 2018 and 2019 the level of fairness in the public procurement market, calculated according to the method proposed by the author
, —t
became unsatisfactory (Rs < Rs ), instead, in 2017,
, — t
the integrated indicator was "above average" (Rs > Rs
), which characterizes it as satisfactory. This confirms the hypothesis of an increase in the impact of the crisis, which affects primarily the budget process.
Figure 2 - Integrated indicator of resource conservation
The application of the proposed method of analysis of the functioning of the public procurement market is characterized by complexity and systematicity, which allows to determine the objective result of the market participants. Among the advantages of the approaches should also be highlighted:
1) the ability, in the case of minor modifications, to compare not only a single object (enterprise) in different time periods, assessing the dynamics of their development, but also the market as a whole through the use of relative indicators;
2) the allocation of individual areas in the calculation of integrated assessment makes it possible to clearly identify problematic issues of public procurement market development and focus efforts on their solution. In addition, in this regard, it is possible to predict the change in specific indicators that form a comprehensive assessment, and their impact on the final result, and, accordingly, the measures that ensure such a change;
3) the proposed methodological approach minimizes the use of expert methods, the use of which is sometimes associated with significant time and money, and allows you to automate the process of assessing the level of fairness in the public procurement market;
4) the use of the proposed approach provides for the possibility of changing the range of indicators that form the basis for determining the level of fairness by adding new or changing existing indicators in the selected final estimates for activities in accordance with changes in public procurement.
Conclusions. Summarizing the advantages, it is worth noting that this methodological tool can be used not only to analyze the functioning of the public procurement market. At the same time, the practical application of the approaches will require detailed preliminary research and calculations related to the set and selection of indicators that form the basis for analysis at
a particular object (objects). It is necessary to use the apparatus of regression and correlation analysis in the case of justification of changes in the range of indicators that form the base. Thus, a promising area for improving methodological approaches is the development of software that would adapt this assessment tool to the needs of a particular object.
References
1. Халша В.Ю., Буцький В.О., Крицька К.С. Публiчнi екозакушвлг органiзацiйно-економiчнi засади впровадження та здшснення/ Економiчний проспр: 36ipHm наукових праць. № 154. Дншро: ПДАБА, 2020. С. 56-60.
2. Khalina V., Butskyi V., Ustilovska A. Ecopro-curement in road construction as a tool for sustainable development / Сучасш проблеми розвитку права та eKOTOMiKu в шновацшному суспшьствг зб. наук. праць за матерiалами Мiжнародноi науково-практично! конференций, 20 березня 2020 р. / за ред. М. Петрово!, С. Гтбка, Велико-Тирново, Болгарiя, Вид-во: ACCESS PRESS, 2020. С. 82-89.
3. Халша В.Ю., Буцький В.О. Впровадження екозакутвель в будiвництвi / Матерiали XII М1жнародно! науково-практично! конференцп «Св-ропейський вектор модершзацп економши: креа-тивнють, прозорють та сталий розвиток». - Харшв: ХНУБА, 2020. С. 279-280.
4. Смачило В. В., Халша В. Ю. Диференцiацiя методiв управлiння кадровим потенцiалом пiдприeмства / В. В. Смачило, В. Ю. Халiна // Сощальна економiка. 2018. Вип. 56. С. 222-232.
5. Kalinichenko L., Smachylo, V., Khalina, V. Realities and Perspectives for Human Resources Development of the Construction Sector. Economics. Ecology. Socium. 2019. № 3. P. 56-66.
Ф1НАНСОВИЙ ПОТЕНЦ1АЛ СИСТЕМИ СОЦ1АЛЬНОГО ЗАХИСТУ НАСЕЛЕННЯ
Чугунов 1.Я.
завгдувач кафедри фтанав, доктор економ1чних наук, професор, заслужений дгяч науки i техшки Украши Кшвський нацюнальний торговельно-економiчний утверситет
Насбова О.В.
докторант кафедри фтанав, кандидат економiчних наук Кшвський нацюнальний торговельно-економiчний утверситет
FINANCIAL POTENTIAL OF THE POPULATION'S SOCIAL PROTECTION SYSTEM
Chugunov I.
Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics, Head of the Department of Finance, Doctor of Economics, Professor, Honored Worker of Science and Technology of Ukraine
Nasibova O.
Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics, Doctoral student at the Department of Finance,
Ph.D. in Economics
