CC BY
87. «Регламент составления проектов и технологических схем разработки нефтяных и газонефтяных месторождений» РД 39-01470035-207-86;
8. М.М. Курсина. К.М. Турымов. Эффективность мероприятий по регулированию процесса разработки Западная Прорва Атырау, Вестник, 2019г.
9. Андреева, H.H. Проблемы проектирования, разработки и эксплуатации мелких нефтяных месторождений [Текст] / Н.Н. Андреева // ОАО «ВНИИОЭНГ». - М, 2003. -196 с.
10. Андреев В.Е. Применение комплексных технологий увеличения нефтеотдачи в условиях низкопроницаемых высокотемпературных пластов /В. Е. Андреев, Ю. А. Котенев, А. О. Чижов и др. //Нефтесервис. — 2010.—М> 4.— С. 66-68.
11. Дудинский Г.С. Алгоритм геолого-технологического обоснования применения адресных технологий освоения трудноизвлекаемых запасов нефти / Г.С. Дубинский, В.В. Андреев, А.Ш. Мияс-саров и др. /
12. З.А. Куангалиев, Ж.С.Накпаев и др. / Казахстан - термические методы повышения нефтеотдачи пластов/; АУНГ, сборник материалов Международной научно-практической конференции «СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ТЕНДЕНЦИИ ПОДГОТОВКИ КАДРОВ ДЛЯ НЕФТЕГАЗОВОЙ ОТРАСЛИ» 2223 февраля 2018 г
13. З.А. Куангалиев, Ж.С. Накпаев / Применение различных методов повышения нефтеотдачи в
современных условиях/. АУНГ, сборник материалов Международной научно-практической конференции «СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ТЕНДЕНЦИИ ПОДГОТОВКИ КАДРОВ ДЛЯ НЕФТЕГАЗОВОЙ ОТРАСЛИ» 22-23 февраля 2018г.
14. З.А. Куангалиев, Ж.С. Накпаев /Свойства нефти в пластовых условиях месторождения Узень/ АУНГ, сборник материалов Международной научно-практической конференции «СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ТЕНДЕНЦИИ ПОДГОТОВКИ КАДРОВ ДЛЯ НЕФТЕГАЗОВОЙ ОТРАСЛИ» 2223 февраля 2018 г.
15. Айткалиева Н.Б. и др. Отчет деятельности геологической службы НГДУ «Кульсарынефть» за 2001 г.; Регламент составления проектов и тех. схем разработки нефтяных и газовых месторождений РД 39-0147035-207-86 Москва, ВНИИ, 1986 г.
16. Лысенко В.Д. "Проектирование разработки нефтяных месторождений" Москва, Недра, 1987г.
17. Чернов Б.С. Базлов М.Н., А.И. Жуков "Гидродинамические методы исследования скважин и пластов", Москва, Гостоптехиздат, 1960г.
18. В.И. Щуров "Технология и техника добычи нефти", Москва, Недра, 1988г.
19. Н.Б. Утепов и др. «Единые технические правила ведения работ при строительстве скважин на нефтяных, газовых и газоконденсатных месторождениях Республики Казахстан», Актюбинск, 1995 г.
20. К.В. Иогансен Справочник «Спутник буровика», Москва, Недра, 1985 г.;
ON OPTIMIZATION OF THE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF AN INNOVATION-ORIENTED
ORGANIZATION
Malaksiano M.
PhD, Head of Department of Technical Cybernetics and Information Technology R. V. Merkta, Odessa National Maritime University, Odessa, Ukraine
Abstract
The article proposes a model for managing innovative projects, which allows to provide the advantages of both classical methods and Agile methods of project management. To implement such a management model, the following four concepts were developed: the concept of "project incubator" within which the organization of the management structure of a project-oriented company is implemented; the concept of "maturation of innovation" within the framework of which the management of the prerequisites for the timely initiation and successful implementation of an innovative project is implemented; "sandbox" concepts - the concept of managing access to the resources of a project-oriented organization; and the concept of "opportunity management" within which a differentiated approach to managing the uncertainty of innovative projects is implemented, which implies management of opportunities at the initial stages of maturation of an innovative project and transition to risk management at the stage of initiation and implementation of an R&D project.
Keywords: innovative projects, project management, agile, sandbox.
Introduction. The introduction of innovative technologies is the main driver of enterprise development in modern conditions of high competition and the mobility of capital and resources. However, effective and sustainable development of enterprises aimed at active search, development and implementation of innovations is impossible without the development of an appropriate internal organizational structure of these enterprises. Currently, the management system of many
companies is not sufficiently adapted to effectively implement innovations. Often, the problems associated with the effective and sustainable development of innovation-oriented companies largely have objective reasons that are associated with the determination of the organizational structure of the company.
Patterns of project managers' behavior when designing product and project management were studied in [1]. The standard P5 provides a scheme of the life
cycle of projects' benefits, which makes it possible to represent the lifecycle processes only at the qualitative level. In order to improve the P5 standard which is already widely applied globally in the practice of project management, in article [2] methods of queueing theory were used for the phenomenological representation of complex systems without considering their physical properties. Papers [3, 4] address methods and models which are aimed to increase the efficiency of the projects concerned with the innovative development for sea transport infrastructure.
Article [5] deals with the problem of determining the enterprise development strategy which involves the choice of the sequence of projects and their parameters in order to provide the achievement of the goal. Various problems associated with the development of models and methods of project management for the innovative development of shipping companies are studied in [69].
The aim of the study. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a management model for a project-oriented company, which is aimed at the implementation of innovative projects, that take advantages of both classical and Agile management methods.
Materials and research methods. One can specify a number of projects for which it is advisable to use Agile methods [10]. On the other hand, there are projects that can be carried out with maximum efficiency only based on classical vertical management methods. But a number of examples can be cited where neither a purely classical approach nor an approach based solely on Agile methods are ideal ways to implement management functions. In such cases it is clear that the successful implementation of the project needs the capabilities that can be provided by both approaches to project management. It can be assumed that the best way out should be that in one project and program management office a combined approach to management is applied, which would combine some of the methods and practices related to the classical approach with those related to the Agile approach. In some cases, this combination of approaches can be effective. But we share the opinion of the authors, who are inclined to the point of view that the combination of classical management methods with Agile methods in one project management office is a controversial solution. In many cases, this combination of management practices can be a source of inefficiency and instability of management. On a number of key aspects, the classical approach and the Agile approach contradict each other. [11]. So, according to the creators of SCRUM, partial use of the SCRUM methodology (SCRUMbut) or any combination of SCRUM with other methods of project management can not only cause a deterioration in the effectiveness of project management, but also have a dramatic negative effect on the results [12].
It is especially important and difficult to implement project management at the initial stages due to the fact that the level of uncertainty at these stages is especially high. In the course of the implementation of an innovative project, the level of uncertainty decreases, and, in this regard, it may be advisable to change the methods of managing this project. Thus, at different
stages of work, significantly different management methods can be effective. Therefore, it is of great practical interest to solve the problem of building such a management model for an innovation-oriented organization, within which it would be possible to realize the advantages of both classical project management methods and Agile methods. To implement such a management structure, we propose the development of the following four concepts:
- the concept of "project incubator" within which the management structure of a project-oriented company is implemented;
- the concept of "maturation of innovation", within which the management of the prerequisites for the timely initiation and successful implementation of an innovative project is implemented;
- the concept of "sandbox" - the concept of control of access to the resources of a project-oriented organization;
- the concept of "opportunity management", within which a differentiated approach to managing the uncertainty of innovative projects is implemented: management of opportunities at the initial stages of maturation of an innovative project and transition to risk management at the stage of initiation and implementation of an R&D project.
To introduce innovative technologies in companies in which, for a number of objective reasons, project management is based on the use of classical management methods, we propose to change the management structure of these companies. In particular, it is proposed to allocate an additional subdivision in the management structure of such companies, one of the main tasks of which is to create the necessary infrastructure for the search, identification and maturation of innovative products, services or technologies to the point where they could be implemented within the framework of appropriate R&D project. In what follows, this unit will be called the "project incubator". In addition, the proposed unit can deal with technology benchmarking, testing new technologies and approvals in teams of specialists to work with new technology standards.
In the initial stages of working on innovative products the level of uncertainty is usually very high. At this stage, it is impossible to estimate with sufficient accuracy the potential costs and revenues associated with the implementation of this product or service. That is why effective management of such projects cannot be implemented using standard methods adopted within the project and program management office of this company. The main function of a project incubator is to create such conditions and use such management methods that are most effective to ensure the early maturation of innovations - that is, until the information received about the properties and capabilities of the considered innovative product or service becomes sufficient so that on the basis of this information it would be possible to initiate an appropriate R&D project and lead its further implementation using standard management methods that are accepted in this company.
Another proposed concept is the "sandbox" concept. The so-called "sandboxes" are widely used in the IT field. In IT, a sandbox is a specially allocated virtual environment for launching computer programs, which aimed to significantly limit or emulate the interaction of a guest program with the network, operating system and input-output devices. Sandboxes are commonly used to run untested, potentially unsafe code. Since the implementation of innovative projects is associated with significant uncertainties and risks, we propose, by analogy with the IT sphere, in the theory of project management, to call a "sandbox" such an organization of access to company resources, in which it would be possible to safely implement projects, the level of risk and uncertainty of which is unacceptably high according to the standards that are adopted within the project and program management office of this company.
Since the level of uncertainty is too high for research projects that are in the incubator, the standard approaches to risk assessment and management, which are adopted in the project and program management office of the company, cannot be applied due to the fact that, firstly, - in most cases they will be ineffective, and secondly, - their application will interfere, and even extremely negatively affect the effectiveness of research work. Therefore, we propose to completely abandon those standards and methods of risk management that are used in the project and program management office of the company inside the project incubator, and instead implement methods and practices within the project incubator that best meet the concept of "opportunity management". This approach will allow the research project team to concentrate as much as possible on identifying
new properties and opportunities associated with the innovative product, service or technology being studied within the framework of this research project. An assessment of the risks associated with the innovation under study is supposed to be carried out at the project and program management office level using all company standards after each iteration of the research. And if such an assessment detects the compliance of the studied innovation with the company's standards regarding the efficiency and level of risks, then on the basis of the research carried out, the start of an appropriate R&D project will be initiated, the implementation of which will be carried out using standard approaches to risk management, which are implemented within the project and program management office. Considering that opportunities management is fully implemented within the project incubator and there are no or almost no risk assessment activities, there is a critical need to take measures that could protect the management system of the entire company from possible negative consequences of activities that are carried out in within the project incubator. We propose to implement these measures not by creating appropriate internal mechanisms for managing the research project, but by organizing an external safe environment for the execution of work carried out within the framework of the project incubator. To solve this problem, concept of "sandbox" is proposed. The decision to organize the sandbox should be made at the level of the project and program management office.
Various options for building the project incubator architecture can be considered: diffuse, nodal and matrix architecture (Fig. 1-3).
Fig. 1. Diffuse project incubator architecture
Fig. 1. Nodal project incubator architecture
Fig. 1. Matrix project incubator architecture
The research project team located in the project incubator is maximally motivated to identify and evaluate as many opportunities as possible associated with the implementation of this innovation, despite the associated risks and not having the goal of saving the resources allocated for this. On the contrary, the project, portfolio and program management office takes care of ensuring the sustainable development of the company, that is, of complying the possible results of research with the goals and mission of the company. That is, the research project team acts as emotional intelligence -the driving force that is directed forward to implement innovations, and the project and program management office on the contrary acts as that critical and conservative mind that allows pragmatic assessment and control
of risks in order to ensure sustainability and development for the company. Consequently, with such an organization of the management system, there may be some antagonism between the research project team working inside the project incubator and the project and program management office. But this antagonism is quite constructive.
Conclusions: The work proposes the development of four concepts: the concept of "project incubator", the concept of "maturation of innovation", the "sandbox" concept and the concept of "opportunity management". The proposed model for managing innovative projects makes it possible to realize the advantages of both classical and Agile management methods.
References
1. Bushuyev, S., Bushuev, D., Bushuyeva, N., Kozyr, B. (2018). Information technologies for project management competences development on the basis of global trends. Information technology and learning tools, Vol. 68, No. 6, P. 218-234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v68i6.2684
2. Piterska, V., Kolesnikov, O., Lukianov, D., Kolesnikova, K., Gogunskii, V., Olekh, T., Shakhov, A., Rudenko, S. (2018). Development of the Markovian model for the life cycle of a project's benefits. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, Vol. 5/4 (95), P. 30-39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.145252
3. Lapkina, I., Malaksiano, M. (2018). Estimation of fluctuations in the performance indicators of equipment that operates under conditions of unstable loading. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, Vol. 1, No. 3 (91), P. 22-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.123367
4. Lapkina I., Malaksiano M., Savchenko Y. (2020). Design and optimization of maritime transport infrastructure projects based on simulation modeling. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop IT Project Management (ITPM 2020). Slavsko, Lviv region, Ukraine, February 18-20. 2020. P. 36-45.
5. Onyshchenko, S., Bondar, A., Andrievska, V., Sudnyk, N., Lohinov, O. (2019). Constructing and exploring the model to form the road map of enterprise development. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, Vol. 5, No. 3(101), P. 33-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2019.179185
6. Lapkina, I., Malaksiano, M., Glavatskykh, V. (2019). A multi-criteria approach to justifying the choice of a project of bulk carrier vessel acquiring and operating. [Mnogokriterial'nyy podkhod k obosno-vaniyu vybora proyekta priobreteniya i ekspluatatsii
sudna-balkera]. Transport Systems and Technologies, Vol. 2. No. 33. P. 99-110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32703/2617-9040-2019-33-2-10
7. Malaksiano, M. O., Melnyk, O. M. (2020). Vessel selection prospects and suitability assessment for oversized cargo transportation. Scientific Notes of Taurida National V.I. Vernadsky University. Series: Technical Sciences, 31(70)(1 Part 2), 135-140. https://doi.org/10.32838/2663-5941/2020.1-2/25
8. Lapkina, I., Malaksiano, M., Glavatskykh, V. (2019). To the issue of the possibility of operating vessels at slow speeds. Scientific notes of Taurida National V.I. Vernadsky University. Series: Technical Sciences, Vol. 30(69), No. 4(2), P. 134-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32838/2663-5941/2019.4-2/22
9. Melnyk, O., Malaksiano, M. (2020). Effectiveness assessment of non-specialized vessel acquisition and operation projects, considering their suitability for oversized cargo transportation. Transactions on Maritime Science, Vol. 9, No. 1, P. 23-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7225/toms.v09.n01.002
10. Obradovic, V., Todorovic, M., Bushuyev, S. (2018). Sustainability and Agility in Project Management: Contradictory or Complementary? IEEE 13 th International Scientific and Technical Conference on Computer Sciences and Information Technologies (CSIT), P. 1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/STC-CSIT.2018.8526666
11. Krishna, V., Basu, A. (2011), "Scrum+: is it ScrumBut or ScrumAnd", 2011 Annual IEEE India Conference, Hyderabad, P. 1-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/INDCON.2011.6139625
12. Eloranta,V.-P., Koskimies, K., Mikkonen, T. (2016), "Exploring ScrumBut - An empirical study of Scrum anti-patterns", Information and Software Technology, Vol. 74, P. 194-203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.12.003
СТРОИТЕЛЬСТВО ЗДАНИЙ НА СПЛОШНЫХ ПЛИТНЫХ КОМПЕНСАЦИОННЫХ ФУНДАМЕНТАХ НА ПОДРАБОТАННЫХ ТЕРРИТОРИЯХ
Угляница А.В.
Кузбасский государственный технический университет им. Т.Ф. Горбачева (КузГТУ), Российская Федерация, профессор строительного института, доктор технических наук.
Булгакова А. С.
КузГТУ, магистрант строительного института.
CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS ON COMPENSATED SLAB FOUNDATIONS IN AREAS
DAMAGED BY MINING
Uglyanitsa A.
T.F. Gorbachev Kuzbass State Technical University (KuzSTU), Russian Federation, Professor of Construction Institute, Doctor of Technical Sciences.
Bulgakova A.
KuzSTU, Graduate Student of Construction Institute.
Аннотация
Для застройки территорий ликвидированных угольных шахт и разрезов на техногенных и подработанных горными работами грунтах предложено размещать здания и сооружения на сплошном плитном компенсационном фундаменте включающем: сплошную железобетонную фундаментную плиту, песчаную подушку расположенную между ними бетонную компенсационную плиту из низкомарочного бетона. При просадке подработанных грунтов бетонная компенсационная плита, разрушаясь и увеличиваясь в объеме, заполняет кусками бетона линзу провала грунта под зданием, предохраняя железобетонную фундаментную
