CC BY
9METHODICAL SUPPORT FOR THE FORMATION OF PROJECT VALUE MANAGEMENT PROCESSES TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE INTERESTS OF STAKEHOLDERS
Vakolyuk A.
Scientific applicant, Department of Management in Construction Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Ukraine
Abstract
The article is devoted to building a value-based system of project responsibility indicators (VBPASC - Value Based Project Accountability Scorecard) as a management tool developed on the basis of the traditional ASC model to maximize and balance (harmonize) values and interests of the organization, consumers, contractors and other stakeholders. project planning and implementation.
Keywords: value-oriented management; enterprise-stakeholder of construction; administration of operational activities; management tools; business process.
Among the many risks that accompany the implementation of any project / program, an important place is occupied by risks caused by different levels of innovation, turbulence, changes in the environment and the inability of projects and programs to adapt to them in a timely manner. The experience of successful implementation of innovative projects / programs does not guarantee the same success in the transition to projects / programs with different levels of innovation and risks [2, p. 47].
In the literature on project management, researchers emphasize that the success of projects / programs is largely determined by the ability to adapt, but in both foreign and domestic literature there are virtually no studies of the adaptability of project management and programs. Existing project and program management systems do not ensure the adequacy of forecasts and implementation of plans. Delayed planning decisions cause losses and low economic efficiency of project / program management, and the uncertainty of changes in the environment - unacceptable deviations of actual quality of management from planned. The consequence of these problems in practice is the low quality of risk management of projects / programs, which can not only reduce their effectiveness, but also jeopardize the completion of a positive result.
Therefore, today it is extremely important to determine the methodological basis of adaptability of the project and program management system, which will allow: both at the conceptual phase and throughout the project / program to assess the adequacy of adaptive capacity of projects / programs of different levels of innovation for their successful implementation [4, p. 83]. "Building" insufficient adaptive abilities and managing them.
Adaptation of economic behavior of the organization is based on the solution of the contradiction between the existing inertia of the external environment (which allows to maintain the stability of the economic system) and innovative management decisions (adapting to the external environment) in the current information asymmetry. adaptation of the organization to the changed operating conditions [6, p. 117].
Based on the literature review, it can be concluded that the adaptability and adaptive capacity of projects / programs are more influenced by their parameters of structure formation, namely: innovation of projects /
programs, organizational structure, organizational culture, management style, competitive strategy.
The most important processes that ensure harmonization and systemic structure formation are coordination (management, coordination) of all parameters of structure formation.
The selection of patterns of interaction of adaptability parameters and their coordination determines the dominant type of relationships in decision-making processes, as well as the distribution of necessary resources in the project / program.
Let's analyze the parameters of the structure of the project / program in terms of impact on adaptability and adaptability.
The key idea of the project / program adaptability management roadmap is that the project / program management structure is formed under the influence of coordinated interaction of all parameters of structure formation and that the project / program management structure should ensure correspondence between external and internal project / program environment. The greater the compliance, the more adaptable and efficient the project / program management system [1-3].
Based on the first developed roadmap for managing the adaptability of projects / programs, recommendations to project managers have been formed.
For projects of the I level of innovation, in which the smallest local innovations are introduced and the finished product is used, the adaptive model of realization of these projects / programs is violent competitive strategy, functional organizational structure, bureaucratic culture and authoritarian management style.
For projects of the II level of innovation, where small innovations are implemented, in which the known solution is modified and one part of the system is changed, the projects / programs of violent and patient competitive strategies are adaptive and, as a special case, commutative, in case the commutator is at the stage of rebirth. at the patient or violent.
Divisional organizational structure, market culture and authoritarian "friendly" management style are adaptive for intensively developing violets or switches that regenerate into violets [5, p. 186].
And for highly specialized patients or switches, regenerating into patients, adaptive are the matrix organizational structure, clan organizational culture and democratic management style.
For projects / programs of III level of innovation, where medium innovations are implemented, in which one element of the system changes completely and others partially, in which the design of innovation is applied in a new way, and the amount of knowledge required for such innovation is already within one science, adaptive is an explicit competitive strategy, project organizational structure, adhocratic culture and democratic or liberal management styles.
Innovativeness of projects / programs. Not all projects / programs are equally adapted. The higher the in-novativeness of the implemented solution, the higher the risk, uncertainty and more difficult adaptatio [7, p. 89].
Organizational structure that characterizes a particular system in terms of its construction, spatio-temporal location of parts, stable relationships between elements. The organizational structure ensures the correspondence between the external and internal environments of the project / program. The greater this compliance, the more adaptive and effective the organizational structure. However, there is no perfect, universal organizational structure, and a certain type of structure corresponds to a specific set of properties of both external and internal environment of the organization, project or program/
Organizational culture, which is a kind of guide for choosing the right type of behavior by team members. Organizational culture performs two main functions [8]: internal integration - carries out the internal integration of team members so that they know how they should interact with each other; and external adaptation - helps the project / program to adapt to the external environment.
Management style as a way (manner) of management, which will be implemented behavioral characteristics of organizational culture and organizational structure. Management style is a habitual manner of behavior of the head in relation to subordinates, to influence them and motivate them to achieve the goals of the project / program.
Competitive strategy through which the project / program expresses its "behavioral motives" to the external environment. Each type of competitive strategy focuses on different conditions, both external and internal environment. Their projects and programs are followed in their own way, but not like others, and at the same time equally well adapted to the requirements of the external environment, including the market.
The method of research of complex assessment of adaptability of projects and programs to risks is carried out according to the following algorithm: To build a VBPASC, the following sequence of steps is required:
1. Determining the actual or potential value added (tangible and intangible investment / contribution to the project) received from each stakeholder (or stakeholder group) for the successful implementation of the project. In this step, a list of indicators is determined, according to the values of which the level of investment (introduction) of value into the project by different groups of stakeholders is assessed.
2. Determining the actual or potential value created for each stakeholder. This step differs in that the
list of indicators is determined jointly with the project stakeholders, as the essence of the indicator should reflect the category of value that is acceptable for a particular project stakeholder (project stakeholder groups); and the values of such actual / projected indicators reflect the extent to which the project meets the requirements and expectations of stakeholders and, accordingly, generates value. The process of forming indicators of the created value of the project requires from the responsible persons on the part of the organization of close interaction with stakeholders and professional knowledge in the subject area of value formation. This emphasis is made to take into account real requirements and expectations - which take into account both the subjective assessments of stakeholders and the expert advice offered by stakeholders on the objective components of the value of project results generated by laws and current trends. The latter provide a proactive and potential willingness to change the preferences and expectations of the stakeholders being evaluated. This is the prevention of measures to maximize the value of project results.
3. Establishment of maximum, minimum, actual (or predicted) values of indicators for the entered and created values at the moment of estimation. The value (+/-) depends on the economic essence of the indica-tor.\ 4. Providing a 10-point assessment of the actual (predicted) value of the value added and the value created, taking into account the capabilities of project stakeholders and the potential of the project as a whole.
SPI (Schedule Performance Index), CPI (Cost Performance Index), SI (Schedule Index), CI (Cost Index) - indicators of value added for the project team (including project manager, portfolio, program, project office, etc.), which reflect the current assessment of the effectiveness of a particular stage of the project or the project as a whole in terms of time and cost parameters. Maximum and minimum values of indicators are determined in accordance with the production programs of the enterprise, internal and external benchmarking of similar projects, as well as in accordance with the instructions of the decision maker.
The need for stakeholder analysis is determined by the fact that in the process of project planning and implementation various stakeholders (or units) sometimes put forward opposite in economic content expectations to project results. Yes, in case the project stakeholders feed positive expectations about the project, in their interests - to promote it successful execution. Interests of negative stakeholders parties to the project impede the implementation of the project. Inability to notice negative project stakeholders can lead to increase the probability of failure. An important part of a manager's responsibilities project is to manage the expectations of project stakeholders, and one of the main responsibilities of the project manager are to maintain a balance between these interests and ensuring that the project team interacts with project stakeholders professionally and from a collaborative perspective. For analysis and selection of stakeholders we offer the following sequence of operations.
Identification of all stakeholders. At this stage it is formed a complete list of all interested units, groups
and organizations - as a source information base analysis. Determining the level of importance of each of the stakeholders. Ranking the level of importance of participation of each stakeholder The parties make it possible to focus on the most influential groups. Ranking is based on the assessment of the level of impact on successful implementation of the project and involves the formation of three groups stakeholders on the level of importance of their involvement in the project management. This stage involves determining the actual possibility stakeholders to facilitate or hinder the progress of implementation and success completion of the project.
Evaluation of interest. The main task is identification the nature and level of interest in the successful implementation of the project or its failure. In this case, we propose to assign numerical values from 1 to 3 with the corresponding identifying signs "+" or "-".
Identification of emotional belonging to the project. Practice project management has examples of situations in which emotional the attitude of stakeholders differs from actual interests. Dana the stakeholder analysis component becomes an integral source of information to form a communication plan for the project.
Growth of economic efficiency and value of realized projects as a result of the implementation of measures to increase the maturity of the project management is confirmed by empirical research. The main ones economic and value effects from the growth of project maturity management in diversified organizations is defined as follows: mobilization internal resources of the organization, increasing competitive advantages, ensuring the process of achieving the strategy of the organization, reducing the number unsuccessful projects, reduction of the average level of budget overruns, increase productivity, increase consumer satisfaction, reduction of the average level of delay in the project schedule, increase achieving project goals, etc. Determination of economic effect from optimization of
project management processes at enterprises is offered based on the assessment of changes in performance indicators of projects for established time and cost limits and the integrated indicator effectiveness of project management.
References
1. Anshina V. M., Dagaev A. A. (2006). Innovation Management: Concepts, multi-level strategies and mechanisms for innovation development: Tutorial. Moscow, Russia: Business, 584.
2. Bushuyev S. D. (2012) Master Class, «Innovative projects and programs management based on a system of knowledge P2M».
3. Doug DeCarlo (2007) Extreme Project Management. Moscow, Russia: Company p.m. Office, 588.
4. Filatov Y. V. (2008) Adaptation of economic firm behavior to current conditions in Russia: dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences: 08.00.01 specialty «Economic Theory of Science». Moscow, Russia, 22.
5. Kalyuzhniy V. V. (2007). Reasons for failure of innovation projects: identifying and diagnosing problems. Project management and development of production: Collected Works East Ukrainian National University named after V. Dahl. Lugansk, Ukraine, № 1 (21), 130 -138.
6. Latkin M. O. (2009). Methodological basis for the creation of enterprise risk management projects: Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Science: specialty 05.13.22«Program and Project Management». Kharkov, Ukraine, 35.
7. Meskon M., Albert M., Hedouri F. (1997) Principles of Management. Moscow, Russia: Publishing «Business», 704.
8. Organizational culture [electronic resource]: Human Resources. Reference Dictionary. Mode of access: http://psyfactor.org/personal/personal14-03.htm.
СОЦ1АЛВАЦШ РОЗПОД1ЛУ ДОХОД1В В КОНТЕКСТ ГЛОБАЛЬНОÏ КОНКУРЕНТОСПРОМОЖНОСТ1 ЕКОНОМ1КИ УКРАШИ
Верховод 1.С.,
кандидат економ1чних наук, доцент кафедри економжи та готельно-ресторанного бизнесу Мелгтопольський державний педагоггчний утверситет 1мет Богдана Хмельницького, Украша
Леушина О.А. кандидат економ1чних наук, доцент кафедри економжи та готельно-ресторанного бизнесу Мелгтопольський державний педагоггчний утверситет 1мет Богдана Хмельницького, Украша
THE SOCIALIZATION OF THE DISTRIBUTION IN THE INCOME IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS OF THE ECONOMY OF UKRAINE
Verkhovod I.,
Ph. D. in Economics, Associate Professor of economics and hotel and restaurant business department Bohdan Khmelnitsky Melitopol State Pedagogical University, Ukraine
Leushyna O.
Ph. D. in Economics, Associate Professor of economics and hotel and restaurant business department Bohdan Khmelnitsky Melitopol State Pedagogical University, Ukraine
