The main principle of the formation of vertical dependence can be formulated as follows - the order of development of the goals of the organization is inversely proportional to their hierarchy. If the hierarchical nature presupposes movement from the lowest levels of management to the highest, then the order of developing goals, on the contrary, is from the highest to the lowest. Thus, after the development of the goals for the activities of the top management (the entire organization), their formation begins for the employees of the lower level, then the next, etc.

Almost all well-known specialists of the target control system agree with this. However, there are two, at first glance, opposite points of view regarding the degree of participation of middle-level managers in the development of their own goals. Some researchers are convinced that, in order to motivate and stimulate, management personnel should take the most active part in this process, while others, on the contrary, believe that the degree of such participation should be insignificant. However, there is no contradiction in this: everything ultimately depends on the specific case (the specifics of the organization as a whole, the characteristics of the leaders).

The system of motivation and incentives for the personnel of the enterprise

The target management system has many supporters also because this method makes it possible to significantly increase the objectivity of staff motivation and incentives, eliminating the influence of subjective factors. Of course, objectivity is a relative concept, especially in areas directly related to human activity. However, it is quite possible to speak about the external objectivity of certain assessments if it is determined in advance what exactly acts as criteria. From the standpoint of the management system by goals, this is an assessment of personnel based not on the personal qualities of a specific performer, but on the results of his activities according to predetermined parameters and using quantitative methods that allow you to clearly and accurately calculate the amount of material remuneration.

Moreover, the introduction of quantitative assessment methods and the establishment of direct interdependence with the system of motivation and incentives for personnel in themselves can bring practical benefits to the organization. Among the obvious advantages of such formalization are the following:

• establishment of general and clear rules of the game;
• resolving some of the existing interpersonal conflicts and preventing the emergence of new ones;
• improving the efficiency of resource use;
• streamlining of personnel policy; setting up a system of motivation and incentives for staff to achieve better results;
• motivation and stimulation of staff to self-improvement.

Of course, the use of quantitative methods for assessing performance has certain drawbacks, the main one of which is the lack of "internal" objectivity. It can be initially argued that they will always not fully correspond to all organizational realities, since any method of quantitative assessments is only a model of the surrounding reality. However, the model character has its own advantages. Absolutization, initially making this or that method of motivating and stimulating personnel insufficiently objective, leads to the need to constantly return to its analysis and work on its improvement, taking into account new management experience. As a result, internal ambiguity gives the entire system of formal assessments a dynamic and self-improving status.

The system of relationship between the goals of the organization and the personal goals of personnel

It has been proven more than once that the better the employee understands the goals set for him and the more closely the latter correspond to his inner aspirations, the more likely they will be achieved. The practical implementation of this principle in a specific organization is rather difficult, and this is, as a rule, the main obstacle to the implementation of a management system by goals. The most effective way to solve this problem is the gradual introduction at the enterprise of a system of interconnection between the goals of the enterprise and personnel. This process can be divided into two stages: first - conceptual implementation, which allows to differentiate and correlate the interests of the organization and the employees working in it, then - building a subsystem of motivation and incentives for personnel based on the criterion and quantitative ratio of the goals of the enterprise and personnel.

At first glance, it may seem that the module of the interrelation of goals itself is of a secondary nature in comparison with the other two (the "system of vertical dependence of goals" and "the system for assessing the performance of personnel"), but this is not so. It can be just as useful. Its essence lies in the ability to assess in detail the strengths and weaknesses of the organization, its external contacts and strategic directions of development through the prism of labor resources.

Stages of implementation of a management system by goals

Implementing all three modules at the same time, in my opinion, is impractical. Carrying out this process step by step has many advantages. In particular, it will not only allow you to distribute costs over time, but also in the event of unforeseen situations, to minimize losses.

It seems to me that it makes no sense to recommend any specific order - it all depends on the specifics of a particular organization. But here are some general guidelines. So, in companies with high labor intensity of production, one should start with the introduction of the second module, and with a large number of management levels - from the first.

But the implementation of all three modules does not yet guarantee the transition of the organization to the system of management by goals. This is only the first stage, as a result of which it is necessary to conduct a thorough analysis and determine two things. First, whether the organization still needs to be managed by goals. Secondly, to what extent the needs for its further implementation are provided with resources. It is possible that the effect obtained from the functioning of the primary modules is sufficient to motivate and stimulate staff, and subsequent work will not bring a justified return.

The essence of the second stage lies in the pairwise integration of the first - third and second - third modules (see figure). As a result, two new macrosystems preserving independence will be obtained. The first of them (M1-M2) reflects the strategic aspirations of the organization and represents the technological component of achieving the set goals. Within its framework, the system of vertical dependence of goals is correlated with the resource support of activities at each level of management. The second of these macrosystems (M2-MZ) acts in the organization as a controlled subsystem of motivation and stimulation. Therefore, the assessment of performance and remuneration of personnel are becoming more targeted, which increases the possibilities for regulating production, information and organizational processes. At this stage, all primary modules are actually formatted. They become more rigid, structured, and the indicators and correlations that describe them become clearer and more specific.

Only then, after a thorough analysis and assessment of the feasibility and timing of further work on the implementation of the management system by goals, it comes to the third stage. Its main feature is the need for a two-tiered approach. On the one hand, the three primary modules are integrated, and on the other hand, the macrosystems M1-MZ and M2-MZ are combined into a single whole. It is impossible to separate the two named processes. Despite the high resource costs, they must take place at the same time. At the same time, to motivate and stimulate personnel, action plans are developed, the use of resources, development, distribution of working time, as well as a budget and a reporting system. With the end of the last stage, the system acquires a complete form that allows the enterprise to achieve its goals with sufficient resource provision and a realistic forecast of the market situation.

A phased approach to the implementation of a management system by goals in enterprises and organizations has many advantages. First, it helps to rationalize the costs of restructuring the management system. Secondly, to obtain practical results even before the completion of work on the implementation of the management system by goals. Third, to minimize financial and organizational risks. In Russian conditions, this is especially valuable, since it enables enterprises and organizations to gradually improve the system of staff motivation and incentives.

The most up-to-date MBO method is available here. We also recommend you to look. In chapter "How to order the construction of a BSC and KPI scorecard?" you can familiarize yourself with the procedure for ordering and performing this service. Check out our proposals for cost optimization for this work in the section "The cost of developing a KPI scorecard".
If you fill out this form, we will prepare commercial proposal taking into account the possibilities of such optimization.

br Y board by goals (eng. Management By Objectives, MBO) is the process of agreeing goals within the organization, so that the company's management and its employees share the goals and understand what they mean for the organization.The term "Management by Objectives" was first introduced and popularized Peter Drucker(Peter Ferdinand Drucker) back in 1954 in The Practice of Management.
The main essence of the method"Management by objectives" is a cooperative process of setting goals, choosing a course of action and making decisions.
An important part of the method"Management by objectives" is the measurement and comparison of the actual performance of a company's employees against a set of established standards.

br

The method of "Management by goals" allows you to represent the personnel management system in the form of one of the business processes within the overall supply chain and makes it possible to learn how to manage personnel using standard tools.

br

The method allows "Digitize" many very important processes associated with the management of "human resources" through the definition and setting of objectives c.
Historically, the “MVO” method was first put into practice in Russia by the first chain companies (grocery retail) around the beginning of 2000.
I had a chance to introduce this method in 2004-2005, when I worked at Pyaterochka as the Head of the Logistics Directorate.
We implemented it for a long time (more than six months) and, as they say, "with a creak." At that time, we did not feel any significant or visible results, but mainly felt only additional problems.
But, over the years, I had to re-face with using the "MVO" method, already in the process of its more careful study, from a practical point of view, and then what I was taught once really came in handy for me.
The best thing method "MVO" can be understood on a specific example of its implementation.
Catching up audit of logistics systems in small and medium-sized companies, I very often had to face the problem associated with, to put it mildly, illogical staff motivation.
On the one hand, everyone wants to see their business systemic and as automated as possible, and on the other hand, not everyone wants to eradicate nepotism in their business and get rid of “irreplaceable people”.
And since any systemic business is built on standards, then "Human resource", like all other resources that are used in business, must also be standardized.
I understand that from a moral point of view, a person cannot be likened to a machine or some kind of consumable, but after all, a business should not depend, for example, on the mood of a person or the degree of his devotion to a leader.
What impact on business performance can have "human factor"?
For example, if you pour fuel into the car's tank, then it will flow through certain pipelines, which a person has arranged for this in a certain way, and then it will enter the engine under the right pressure and in the composition of the desired mixture. This will start the engine and drive the vehicle.
But no matter what fuel you fill and no matter how optimally you prepare it, the car will not move if there is no driver in its cab.
And with the driver, everything is much more complicated than with the fuel. The fuel will flow there and how it is not directed, but the driver, by no means always, gets there the way the person who directs him would like.
It would seem that fuel is the same resource as the driver, and they are used for the same purpose - to move the car along a certain route and at a certain speed to a certain point (that without fuel the car will not go, that without a driver).
But for some reason it is generally accepted that the attitude to them, as to separate resources of the same system, should be completely different.
By projecting such a relatively simple system, like a car with a driver, onto a much more complex system, such as, for example, transport logistics in any company, it becomes clear that the role of the human factor, in both systems, is equally very important.

br

So what can you do? How to learn how to manage a human resource in such a way as to ensure the smooth operation of the system and each of its links in the process of achieving certain goals?

br

After all, a person is not a machine, but a business must work smoothly, regardless of the "human factor", otherwise it will never be able to become successful.
It was just for the solution of the above problem that was invented the method of "Management by Objectives" by Mr. Peter F. Drucker.
What are basic principles of this method?

The first and most important principle of the MBO method is correct goal setting.

As you know, the main goal of any commercial company is to make a profit for its founders, preferably on a stable and long-term basis, from which the founders will consistently pay salaries to the staff of their company, invest in maintaining its current activities and be sure to leave something on its development.
And, as you know, the simplest profit formula is as follows:

Profit = Revenue - Cost

It is also obvious that in order for the profit to be greater, it is necessary that the revenue be greater and the costs less.
Thus, if in the same company all divisions and all employees of this company are really motivated to achieve a single final result, in this case, to make a profit (subject to certain conditions), then, about this company, we can say that, on goal setting, she was able to correctly implement the "MBO" method.
But this is theoretically, but in practice, sometimes it is completely different.
For example, recently I was doing at one small manufacturing enterprise, and faced the problem that different divisions of this company worked for completely different purposes.
For example, the sales department was motivated to increase revenue, but absolutely not in any way was motivated to reduce costs. And as a result, it turned out that in the pursuit of revenue, the amount of which was directly reflected in the amount of their bonus, sales managers practically did not notice, those costs contributed by this increase.
And this directly concerned: transportation costs, maintenance costs excess stocks, costs for warehouse processing etc.
As a result, sales managers were always with a premium, and in general the company suffered losses, because costs, respectively, grew faster than the revenue thus obtained.
In the warehouse, in general, everyone was “on salary,” and they didn’t really care what goals their company was facing there. In the transport service, the specialist in charge of delivery practically performed only the function of a dispatcher (only current work), organizing delivery according to the requests received from the sales department, and was in no way motivated to reduce delivery costs.

But in general, it turned out that everyone is fine, and only one employee is at a loss - the head of this business.
This is how it happens if the goals are not set correctly.

The second principle of the "MBO" method is the correct setting of tasks

It would seem that it is difficult to assign a task to a subordinate employee?
I called him into the office, “frowned for greater importance,” and announced in a stern voice what to do.
But, no, it turns out that if you want the task to be actually completed, you only need to set it in a certain way.
The MBO method provides 2 main ways of setting goals:
but) one-time tasks
b) functional tasks
One-time tasks include tasks that are set once and, accordingly, the implementation of each of them, the head is obliged to control separately.
And functional tasks include tasks, the implementation of which is "tied" to the functions that the employee is obliged to perform periodically, in accordance with his job responsibilities.
And if the period for completing tasks coincides with the period for which the employee receives his salary, then the employee's salary will be charged, depending on the degree of completion of the corresponding functional tasks.
And now about how, you need to set tasks according to the "MBO" method.

br

As you know, the Russian language, in the opinion of one Soviet classic, is so “powerful and free” that what is said in it can sometimes be interpreted in completely different ways.

br

For example, a simple task: take a pencil from one table and transfer it to another table.
This task is essentially a description of a process that can be performed in a variety of ways, and at the same time achieve a wide variety of results, spending completely different amounts of resources on it.
For example:
a) you can take a pencil and put it on the table next to it,
b) you can take a pencil and put it on the table located nearby, but so that it falls and it will be impossible for them to write further,
c) and you can also take a pencil from the table and carry it to a distance of 30 km, then return and put it on another table, spending 2 days on this.
All three of the above processes do not contradict the task, but the result from their implementation, obviously, is completely different.

br

Therefore, before formulating a task in order to obtain the desired result, it is necessary: ​​the one who sets the task and the one who will perform it, agree with each other, they say, "on the shore", about certain rules (criteria, formats) for its implementation ...

br

This format for setting goals has already been invented, has existed for a long time, and they are called -.
Word SMART translated from English means - "smart, clever, cunning, dexterous."
But this is not just a word with a definite meaning - it is also no less "smart" abbreviation, consisting of the following parts:
Specific- specific
The task must be unambiguous and unambiguous, i.e. is formulated in such a way that the employee does not have more than one chance to understand it wrong, wrong in his own way.
Measure- measurable
It is necessary to clearly formulate the criteria by which it will be assessed whether the task has been achieved or not. These criteria can be both quantitative (in percentage, money, pieces, etc.) and qualitative (in this case, it is necessary to very accurately describe what we will consider worthy of fulfilling the goal and what is not).
Achievale- feasible
An overestimated task is demotivating: if an employee considers the goal to be unattainable, then most likely he will not make sufficient efforts to achieve it.
Relevant- relevant
Refers to a large goal / task, is part of it. The employee must remember how the implementation of this task contributes to the achievement of the company's strategic plans.
Time bounded- limited in time
Limited time, i.e. having a certain deadline.
So, everything is clear with a one-time task.
You call a subordinate, set him a task in SMART format, and then you evaluate its execution in the same format.
Of course, both of them will have to work hard on the description of the task according to certain rules, its coordination and implementation, but the likelihood of achieving the desired result will increase significantly.
But the functional task is a little more complicated.
Probably, in order to make life easier for yourself and every time not to deal with the formulation of periodically repeating tasks, some indicators of the effectiveness of their implementation were invented.
For example, when creating a transport service in a certain company, the task is set to it: to ensure uninterrupted delivery of goods, in accordance with the requests of the sales department with minimal costs.
This task is set for the entire period of operation of this transport service, therefore it is called a functional task.
And then, with the head of the transport service and its personnel, certain indicators are agreed upon, according to which, on a monthly basis, before calculating salaries, it will be assessed: how effectively they perform this task (process)
Obviously, any process can be either more efficient or less efficient. How do you measure the effectiveness of a process? Obviously, according to some indicators of its effectiveness.

br

Any process of these indicators can be infinitely many, but not all of them can be important from the point of view of a real assessment of the effectiveness of the process and therefore, in order not to get confused and to simplify the process of assessing a particular action as much as possible, they try to select and use only the main (key) ones. indicators of his assessment.

br

Such indicators are called - KPI(eng.Key Performance Indicators).
Currently, KPI have become very widely used to assess the effectiveness of processes, but not everyone who uses them really understands what can actually be measured by these indicators and how it should be done correctly.

How to learn how to find the most key (main) indicators of the effectiveness of certain processes is one of the most difficult tasks of the MBO method.

For example, in transport logistics, the following standard KPIs are used:
a) the cost of transportation of one ruble of cargo (in other words, this is the profitability of delivery = delivery cost / cost of cargo,%)
b) the cost of transportation of one kg or cubic meter of cargo
c) delivery cost per 1 km run
d) the cost of an hour of using the car
e) the percentage of loading the van by weight and volume
f) the percentage of transport defects in the delivery process
g) and many, many others

But which of these indicators is more key, and which is less, and in what order they should be correctly analyzed, can be determined only on the basis of the real conditions of their application in these specific conditions.

The third principle of the "MBO" method is correctly formulated, taking into account human resources and adapted to real conditions, business processes.

To describe a business, as you know, are used business processes... Example of a standard first-level business process in IDEF0 format distribution business is shown in Figure 1 .:

br

Fig. 1

With help business processes almost any business can be described.

In short, the less any uniqueness in a business process, the more effective its results, including in the personnel management system.

I will try to clarify this in the following illustrative example.
One businessman, lying in a hammock on one of the tropical islands, with a laptop on his stomach, runs his business, enjoying the magnificent nature, and the other, “rolling up his sleeves,” unloads trucks with loaders during the day, and does the bookkeeping in the evenings.
And they earn the same. And at the same time, the first businessman feels confident that his business is strong and stable, and the second is always afraid of everything “it might not work out” and lives, as they say, “one day”. What's the secret?
And the secret is that the first businessman has all business processes correctly described, standardized, formalized, people are right and right motivated and therefore nothing happens to him, the system itself copes with business management and at the same time self-learns(!)

And the second businessman has never described anything anywhere, his entire business is in his head.
And all his time he spends only on "plugging up the next holes" and "putting out the next fires", and every day he has everything in a new and everything is unique, because all the time he lives like in that saying:

"... We have no time to cost a water supply system - we carry water!"

So much for the uniqueness.
Now, what is the role of personnel in the systematization and formalization of business processes?
Why does the first businessman practically take no part in the current work himself, but only manage his subordinate personnel, while the second one grabs on to everything, tries to replace as many personnel as possible with himself and still does not have time to do anything?
But because the first businessman has personnel management system, which works smoothly and practically does not require anyone to intervene, and the second has no system at all.
Such a businessman most often surrounds himself with a small group of confidants, and considers all other employees of his company "temporary personnel".
As a result, it turns out that he assigns all key functions to "Irreplaceable people", and all other functions for personnel who work "from paycheck to paycheck" and at the first convenient opportunity starts "Pick up what was not received" or just work "carelessly".

So we see two examples of doing business. Naturally, if you look from the outside, the first option is much better and looks preferable than the second.

br

But how did the first businessman manage to build such an excellent system?

br

Most likely, the first businessman as a person curious and systemic, even at the stage of forming his business, did not waste time and money on inventing the next "bicycle", but immediately made the right decision regarding the use of the method of personnel management that had already been invented and tested in real experience.
He managed to find, study and implement in his company this method, and already having this important resource available, on its basis, he began to create and develop his business, which is why, probably, he managed to achieve such excellent results.

It's not a secret for anyone that among businessmen who started their business in the 90-00s, there is still such an opinion that a successful business can be done if all free proceeds are invested in turnover and thus, by increasing turnover - is it too early late, get rich. It would seem that it could be simpler: I bought a product, sold it, rescued it, “left a little for life”, and put all the remaining money “into circulation” and thus incrementally.
But, at present, if we rely only on this concept, it will no longer be possible to build any systemic business.

br

Because if you don’t invest money in the acquisition of new modern logistics technologies and methods of building a management system for your business, then due to just one injection of money into circulation, you will never be able to build a systemic business.

br

The MBO (Management by Objectives) method is one such method. It is logical and time-tested! Implement it, and thus, you will get a solid foundation for the development of your business!

As already noted, control is based on planning. For control to be effective, it must be closely linked to planning. This linkage is essential to ensure the effectiveness of the management process as a whole. Budgeting is an effective quantitative method for such linking and monitoring. But what about the organization's workforce? A popular management method with the potential to combine planning and control in a complex area of ​​human resources is management by objectives, usually abbreviated as MBO (management by objectives). In addition, MBO is also a way of motivation, which helps to overcome some of the negative effects of control on employee behavior. The following description by Anthony Raja illustrates the main purpose of linking planning and control and increasing productivity: “The focus (in MBO) is on trying to predict and influence the future, rather than reacting and acting in retrospect. MBO is also a “results-based” management philosophy that emphasizes the value of achievement and results. Efforts usually focus on changing and improving the performance of both the individual and the organization. "

Peter Drucker is famous for being the first to publish the concept of MBO as a method of improving the efficiency of an organization. Drucker believed that every leader in an organization, from the highest to the lowest, should have clear goals that support the goals of the higher-level leaders, as illustrated in Fig. 10.2. Drucker envisioned that this process would help each leader gain a clear understanding of what the organization expects of him, the organization’s goals and the goals of his boss. This process was also studied by George Odiorne, another well-known scientist writing about MBO.

Rice. 10.2. The hierarchy of goals in MBO. The goals of each leader should ensure that the goal of his immediate supervisor is achieved. Goals are worked out from top to bottom - along the chain of command.

Douglas McGregor, also an MBO supporter, approached the issue from a different angle. He believes that the method of management by goals is necessary because it provides an opportunity to evaluate leaders on the basis of results, not personal qualities. For example, telling a subordinate that he has little initiative is not a useful form of feedback. This is not specific enough for the subordinate in terms of correcting shortcomings in the work. But if a subordinate is told that his performance is 10% below the target set six months ago, then this provides a clear coordinate system, a benchmark for monitoring performance and discussing problems that arise, and what can be done to improve performance. Therefore, McGregor proposes that each manager set specific production goals and the means to achieve them, in conjunction with their immediate supervisor. After a certain period of time, the manager and subordinate would be able to assess the actual performance, comparing them with the established benchmarks.

Raya describes management by goals as a process consisting of four interdependent and interrelated stages (Fig. 10.3.).

1. Development of clear, concise formulations of goals.

2. Development of realistic plans to achieve them.

3. Systematic control, measurement and evaluation of work and results.

4. Corrective actions to achieve planned results.

DEVELOPMENT OF GOALS. The first step — setting goals — echoes the outline of our discussion of the planning process. After top management has developed long-term and short-term goals for the organization and for itself, these goals are formulated for employees at the next level in descending order along the chain of commands. The previously mentioned authors, Drucker and McGregor, strongly believed that subordinate leaders should be actively involved in setting their own goals, basing them on the goals of their superiors. This could be done in department meetings where subordinates discuss the department's goals and prospects for the coming year. Based on the information received, each subordinate could prepare a set of benchmarks for the work unit he or she leads. The department leader would then review the objectives of these units with each subordinate and ensure that they are aligned.

Rice. 10.3. Stages of the Management by Objectives Process - MVO.

However, research shows that maximum involvement in setting goals is not always the case, or even always desirable. General Electric's MBO program found that managers accustomed to little involvement in setting goals did not improve their performance when their involvement in setting goals increased. Other studies show that the number of executives actually participating in goal setting is decreasing from the highest to the lowest levels of management. Carroll and Tosi, based on their experience at Black & Decker, argue: "The traditional concept of organizational structure and reduced leeway at lower levels of the organization impose practical constraints on the nature and degree of participation and influence that can result from a goal setting program." ... Thus, senior leaders in an organization usually have more power to influence what their goals are than those at lower levels.

Regardless of the degree of participation in their development, the goals of each subordinate should contribute to the achievement of the goals of his boss. According to Drucker, the goals

“... the work of each manager should be framed according to the contribution he should make to the success of the larger unit of which he is a part. A salesperson's goals for a specific sales region should be determined by the contribution he and his salespeople make to the entire sales force of the firm; The goals of the project lead engineer are determined by the contribution that he, his subordinate engineers and draftsmen make to the success of the design department. "

If this is done, each manager will understand "what is expected of him and why, how he will be assessed and by what parameters."

When the goal setting process is in progress, a two-way exchange of information is needed to ensure that each person understands their specific goals. In addition to understanding the expected results of work, two-way communication allows subordinates to tell managers what they need to achieve their goals. Table 10.3. lists the main areas where subordinates need the support of their supervisors to complete their assigned tasks. In fig. 10.4. shows a typical MBO goal setting.

Table 10.3. Top Areas Where Leadership Support Is Needed

Goal management is the key to efficiency. BSC, MBO, KPI and others ...

The Management by Objective (MBO) technology was proposed by Peter Drucker in the 1950s. At that time, the West began to clearly understand that Western methods require change and correction. Today, many methods are used in management to assess the effectiveness of both companies and individual employees. These are, for example, the BSC (Balanced Scorecard) balanced scorecard, MBO goal management, BPM (Business Performance Management), management based on key performance indicators - KPI (Key Performance Indicators). In the Soviet Union, in the 60-70s of the XX century, the concept of target program planning (PCP) became widespread, the ideas of this concept in many respects overlap with the ideas of MBO.

Most American companies use MBO ideas in planning and management. This technology is taught in almost all American business schools. And some authors attribute America's economic success to this very approach.

Management by objectives as a management technology

There are many definitions of Goal Management, some of them are:

The first is a systematic and organized approach that allows management to focus on achieving goals and achieve the best results with the resources available.

The second is the work of management in formulating the goals of the organization, communicating them to employees, providing them with the necessary resources, as well as distributing roles and responsibilities for achieving the goals.

The use of MBO systematizes the management process, increases the efficiency of the enterprise, is an effective tool for setting and maintaining a quality management system at the enterprise, maintaining quality at all levels of the enterprise.

This approach places high demands on staff. The better the employee understands the goals set for him and the more precisely the latter correspond to his inner aspirations, the more likely such goals will be achieved.

Relationship between strategy and target management

One of the main features of management by goals is the existence of a hierarchy of goals within the organization. Even P. Drucker, the first to formulate the most important principles of MBO, said that every leader in an organization from the highest to the lowest level should have clear tasks that support the goals of higher managers.

The development of performance indicators should be linked to strategic benchmarks. On the one hand, understanding the relationship between performance and strategy, employees will be more involved in the organization's activities, On the other hand, performance indicators should reflect the relationship between current activities and the achievement of the organization's strategic guidelines.

For strategic planning and measuring the achievement of strategic goals, the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) methodology is increasingly used Balanced Scorecard- from English. Balanced Scorecard). The BSC is a management tool that allows you to formalize strategic planning and goal setting, communicate the company's strategic goals to personnel, and monitor the achievement of these goals by employees through KPIs.

KPI - (key performance indicators) is translated in the literature in different ways: "key performance indicators", "key performance indicators". "Efficiency" and "efficiency" are fundamentally different things. The most successful translation is “key performance indicators (KPI)” (performance).

This technique in the company can be used on a par with the BSC technology. In this situation, MBO will be the mechanism by which the goals will be distributed along the hierarchy of the company and the involvement of personnel in their achievement will be ensured.

In this situation, KPIs are control points in the process of achieving goals, characteristics of the effectiveness or efficiency of the employee's work and business processes in general.

An employee's monthly work plan (MBO matrix) is a list of indicators established in accordance with the areas of responsibility of this position. For the indicator, a weighting factor is determined that reflects the importance of the indicator for the employee. The sum of the weighting factors is 100%. The target values ​​of the indicators are established based on the analysis of trends in previous periods, taking into account the company's development forecasts and the company's plans for the period being assessed.

Example MBO Matrix for a Sales Manager:

Personnel assessment and material reward.

MVO has many supporters also because this method makes it possible to significantly increase the objectivity (as far as possible) of personnel assessment. Objectivity is a relative concept, especially in areas directly related to human activity. From the point of view of MBO - the assessment is made not on the basis of the personal qualities and potential of the employee, but on the basis of assessing the results of his activities according to predetermined parameters and using quantitative methods. A formalized approach to assessing the performance results allows you to create an algorithm that clearly and accurately determines the amount of material remuneration, depending on the results of labor. Moreover, the introduction of quantitative assessment methods and the establishment of direct interdependence with the remuneration system in themselves can bring practical benefits to the organization.

Implementation effectsMBO:

1. Establishment of transparent and understandable rules for determining the result of work and calculating material remuneration.

2. Distribution of responsibility between employees for achieving the goals of the entire organization, ensuring the involvement of personnel in activities.

3. Satisfaction with the work of the staff increases, relations in the “manager-executive” link improve.

4. Performing discipline and the speed of bringing goals and objectives to the performers grow.

5. Increased initiative and independence of employees in solving operational problems. A system of incentives for personal professional development and improvement is being created.

6. Conditions are created for the professional and career growth of employees. Determination of the most effective employees creates conditions for the formation of a personnel reserve for filling vacant leadership positions.

7. The efficiency of resource use is increased, and ineffective business processes are identified and stopped.

Management by objectives and other management technologies.

For the effective use of technology, it is required to implement and automate several management technologies: budgeting, CRM, quality management system (ISO 9001), etc.

The introduction of these technologies has an independent effect, in addition, the collection of data for calculating targets is greatly simplified. The use of these technologies allows the collection of data for system performance.

In addition, in order to correctly plan the values ​​for the indicators, it is necessary to collect statistical information on the previous periods of activity. In this case, setting targets will be reasonable and visible not only for managers, but also for employees. The existing management accounting system should allow us to track the business indicators of interest to us on a regular basis.

AutomationMBO

A condition for the effective use of MBO is the automation of the management process itself by goals. This will achieve the following results:

• ensuring uniform standards for setting goals and objectives for employees;
• calculation and storage of data on performance indicators (KPI), collection of statistical data for analysis;
• automated collection of data from the management accounting system for calculating KPI;
• automatic calculation of the bonus part of wages;
• ensuring that employees are informed using the distribution of notifications;
• differentiation of access to information on planned and actual data in accordance with the job hierarchy;
• rapid implementation of the target management system.

The automation of MBO makes this management tool convenient and easy to use.

MBO method (management by objectives)

MBO (Management By Objectives) is a planning method that involves the definition of goals by managers and employees (for each department, project and employee) used to monitor the subsequent performance of the organization.

In its most general terms, Management by Purpose, or MBO, is a method of doing business in which a manager and a subordinate jointly develop quantifiable (by results) measurable goals. MBO is used to measure the performance of employees and departments and, ultimately, to determine the amount of bonuses (or any performance-based rewards).

The MBO system and the term itself were proposed in the 1950s by the American theorist and practitioner of management Peter Drucker. According to his formula, the efficient operation of the enterprise requires that each work is subordinated to common goals. In particular, the efforts of managers should be aimed at ensuring the success of the enterprise as a whole.

The concept of MBO has radically changed the logic and mentality of business. In the 1950s, many heads of companies focused mainly on functions and processes, while Drucker argued that management should start with setting goals - global and private, and only then move on to detailing specific and long-term objectives.

Initially, this technology, designed for successful resource planning and implementation of company goals, was perceived as a general strategy and aimed at minimizing financial, organizational and other risks.

Today, this approach is especially popular in personnel management, as it makes it possible to significantly increase the level of objectivity in personnel assessment, while avoiding subjective factors. In addition, based on this method, you can create an effective employee motivation program.

MBO assumes that the management of an organization is based on a system of interrelated and interdependent goals. At the beginning of the period (month, quarter, year), specific tasks are set for the organization, divisions, departments and employees, on the implementation of which bonuses and other payments depend.

Western research shows that the performance of people with specific goals is higher than the performance of those who have no goals or who are asked in the abstract: "Try to do your best!" In the first case, productivity increases, as the employee is focused on results.

The target control system can be represented in the form of three modules with a sufficient degree of autonomy:

• · The system of vertical dependence of goals ("tree of goals");
• · A system of interconnection between the goals of the organization and the personal goals of personnel;
• · A system for assessing the performance of personnel.
• 1) The system of vertical dependence of goals ("tree of goals").

The main task of implementing the idea of ​​vertical dependence of goals is to link the planning process with the levels of the hierarchy in the organization. You need to find out which items of the individual levels of the hierarchy and in what sequence should participate in the various planning processes. Here, as with budgeting, three methods are possible:

• · Planning "top-down", i.e. the management of the enterprise sets the upper goals as a framework plan, and subsequent levels of management concretize them in more detailed plans.
• · Planning "bottom-up", i.e. planning begins at the lower levels of the organization and proceeds in stages, with overall goals and plans being the end result of planning.
• · The method of the opposite flow, which combines both of the previous methods.

Top goals are set temporarily by top management first. On their basis, the lower levels develop sub-goals and sub-plans to test the possibilities of realizing these goals. Why does the reverse flow "bottom-up" begin, during which the plans of the lower levels are gradually coordinated together. This process culminates in the final definition of goals and plans by senior management.

The result of such work is the so-called "goal tree", where a clear dependence of the goals of all levels of the hierarchy in the organization is visible. The "tree" of the goals of the manufacturing enterprise includes the following necessary elements:

• Mission
• Strategic goals
• Tactical targets
• Operational goals
• 2) The system of the relationship between the goals of the organization and the personal goals of personnel. Setting goals for employees is based on the fact that at the beginning of the period (month, quarter) of the organization, divisions, departments, and employees, clear tasks are set on which their bonus depends.
• 3) A system for assessing the performance of personnel. Goals and objectives are set according to the Smart principle.

Smart is a classic international standard for setting goals and objectives for employees by a manager, which includes 5 key features. The goals should be: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound.

There shouldn't be many goals at every level. The optimal number is the number of 3-5 main goals. These goals have different "weight" in terms of the importance of each goal in achieving the overall result of the organization. Each company will have a different weighting of priority goals, but MBO experts recommend the following:

• Financial goals - their weight should not exceed 50%
• Goals related to market share and market relations - their weight should not exceed 30%
• · Goals related to the optimization of internal business processes should weigh up to 30% goals related to the development and training of personnel should weigh up to 30%.