<<
>>

2.2. System principles of management of objects of a state ownership

Such understanding of secondariness of management became a basis of deep administrative crisis in the country, in particular in management of a state ownership. The public sector has appeared the most uncontrollable as the state, remaining the largest proprietor, has not shown the ability effectively to administer an estate.
Practically have not justified itself and economic management as the form of realisation of a state ownership, and institute of representatives of the state in joint-stock companies with the corresponding block of shares. The state being the proprietor has not developed the reasonable strategy of management by the property, did not become \"the strategic proprietor \".
Thereof, there was a controllability easing by the enterprises which have remained in its property. The state bodies could not produce the new effective mechanism of distribution of responsibility for the decisions accepted in managerial process and the order of object of the federal property. By estimations of the State Property Committee of the Russian Federation, at but-minalnoj costs of a portfolio of the state blocks of shares in 10 trln rbl. in 1996 in the budget It is directed hardly more than 100 mlrd rbl. has made 1 % of annual yield at a rate of inflation of 23-25 % in a year. Actual yield has appeared at 12-13 time below expected.
Principal causes of loss of controllability economy public sector carry institutsionalnyj character and are connected by that:
- Systems of orders and purchases of production, works and services for the state needs, the state contracts are not debugged;
There is no the standard base defining requests to management by the state enterprises;
Constituent documents of the unitary enterprises in which branch and regional features should be considered, and also interests of economic safety of the country are not developed;
Is standard-legal aspects of behaviour of representatives of the state are not settled at realisation of such processes, as distribution of profit of the enterprises with a state participation, maintenance of federal warranties for reception of off-budget credits and investments;
Management and order functions by the state property between numerous federal enforcement authorities are shattered;
There is no complete system of preparation operating the state blocks of shares.
With allowance for the transformations conducted in March, 2000 to the executive power organisations (liquidation Minproma, Minoboronproma, other key departments of a transition period) it is possible to assert, that in the field of management of a state ownership the country has passed a way from the rigid on-line constructed vertical system before liquidation just formed (or time and again already reorganised) links.
Creation of system of the state business corresponding to realities of a transition period, - uneasy, but at the same time the urgent problem demanding critical decisions. It is very important to develop thus the rules of law giving a basis for a rational combination of administrative and economic methods of regulation of activity of the state enterprises. It is a question of necessity of acceptance of acts: about the property, about differentiation of patterns of ownership between federal, the regional and municipal levels, new positions about enforcement authorities, the law on an order zakljuche -
nija agreements and agreements between bodies of a federal executive power and enforcement authorities of subjects of federation.
But the is environmental conditions in relation to the subjects of managing who are both state, and operated including representatives of the state in joint-stock companies.
At level of subjects of managing, negative consequences of badly adjusted, disorder, inefficient control system are shown.
First, change of patterns of ownership, prompt aktsionirovanie were not accompanied by application of forms and efficient control methods new subjects of managing.
Secondly, proceeds and even process of organizational and financial deformation of the enterprises amplifies. According to Ministry of Economics of the Russian Federation, in 1996 the share of the unprofitable enterprises in the industry has increased with 35 to 43 %. The Total sum of losses in the industry, building and on transport has made 79,7 trln rbl. and has increased in comparison with 1995 in 3,6 times.
Thirdly, in relations with managing subjects the state gets in \"a vicious circle \". The policy is followed of rendering of the state support to render only to those enterprises which were successfully reformed. But in the conditions of economic recession, crisis neplate-zhej, acting tax system successful reforming predpri-jaty behind a small exception is practically impossible.
Interests of business demand essential increase of a role of the state - of the proprietor in management of joint-stock companies. In particular, at meeting of shareholders the representative (or the collective representative) should carry out voting by the state block of shares gosudarst -
va, instead of the chief of an executive office - the general director. On occasion, when the blocks of shares fixed in a state ownership are transferred in confidential control or the lien, is admissible, that the state block of shares the authorised enterprise structures voted.
Process of privatisation of a state ownership, liberalisation of economic relations, decentralisation of the government demand transition to new forms of the organisation and effective management methods managing subjects. In the developed social and economic situation it is necessary to revise principles and priori-tety in the field of management and the order the state property, strengthenings of the state control and regulation in economy public sector.
Change of the status of the property should be combined with changes in management of the enterprises and in regulating functions of the state bodies.
The problem of increase of productivity in a state sector is among new in an economic science, its various aspects are analyzed in works of foreign economists M.Holtsera, A.Halamchi, etc. the Approach to productivity increase in a state sector is considered as the inter-disciplinary methodological concept based on macro-and microeconomic theories, the organisation theory, concepts gosudarst-vennogo administration and the scientific organisation of work.
On the basis of the interdisciplinary approach four major methodological principles of understanding have been defined at least make-telnosti in a state sector, its estimations and measurement.
At macrolevel transition from zero to a nonnull hypothesis has been carried out. It means a substantiation of necessity of an estimation of the state production not only on consumption of resources that is comprehensible only for \"consuming \" the states. From the point of view of more realistic \"nonzero \" hypotheses costs are not equal to issue, and investments \"which result is some issue are considered exclusively as \".
At microlevel owing to evolution of methodological approaches there was a transition from understanding of production function as assuming, that issue depends on expenses, to its understanding as some kind of the second borders of the enterprise or establishment. This border represents the greatest possible issue at the given volume of expenses and is minimum possible expenses for reception of the given issue at a certain technological level. In other words, production function starts to express a marginal level of efficiency (border) for all possible parities \"inputs - outputs \".
From the point of view of the modern theory of the organisation actual application becomes system the focused indicator of the effective organisation: it should distinguish high efficiency, konstruk-tivnye behavioural installations of staff, ability to adapt to changes in a situation, to be flexible and to supervise an external environment.
In an estimation of efficiency of the state administration two methodological approaches take place. The first is based on soizmerenii expenses and benefits; the second - on an estimation of results (the approach from effect items) irrespective of the fact how they have been received.
Despite significant number of works on the given problematics, debatable there are conceptual bases of economic legal regulation of a state ownership. There is not enough posledova -
telno interrelations of management with a state ownership and economy and company developments as a whole also are purposefully shined.
In the present dissertation managing directors are understood as chiefs of the state unitary, federal state enterprises, official bodies, representatives of the state in controls of other commercial and noncommercial organisations, confidential operating the state property and the companies, anti-recessionary managing directors.
The modern concept of management of the state property should be under construction with allowance for following main principles out of which realisation achievement of the indicated purposes and problems is impossible.
1. With reference to each object of management (group of objects) the state the purpose which it pursues also to which achievement should be realised and fixed the object promotes.
Object


Fig. 2.2. System of interrelations of a complex of operating functions
The method of achievement of the purpose should be offered the person involved as the managing director, within the limits of defined (as a rule, competitive) procedures of submission and an estimation of such offers, is considered and confirmed by the authorised state body.
Responsibility for realisation of the confirmed method of achievement of the purpose is assigned to the managing director and should not only stimulate its proper activity, but also to reduce to minimum risks of the state for want of the planned qualitative result of management.
The major principle is use in each case of management of the state property of a control system as indissoluble unity of following elements (as it is shown on fig. 2.2.): creations of conditions and an obligatory order of definition of a method of achievement of the purpose; regulations of usages of acceptance of administrative decisions the state bodies and a choice of managing directors; motivations of managing directors; the control over objects of management and activity of managing directors; the reporting of the state bodies and managing directors; administrative decisions by results of the control and the reporting; responsibility for results of management; constant receipt, processing and the analysis of the information on a state of affairs of managing directors and objects of management.
Control system functioning, order of interaction of the state bodies in a control system should be in details regulated legal certificates.
The management efficiency principle consists in achievement of the purpose of management (certain qualitative result of activity or object) by the maximum economy of resources. The indicated criterion is obligatory at an estimation of activity of the state bodies and operating the state property.
Besides, direct management of a number of objects is the function not peculiar to the state which is extremely interested in
Professional management of its property. Attraction of persons as managing directors should be accompanied by creation of system of their preparation and certification.
As of January, 1st, 2001 in the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic are registered 140 state unitary enterprises and 189 establishments.
Heterogeneity of structure of a state ownership (the gosu-donative enterprises belonging to the state blocks of shares ak-tsionernyh of companies, means of budgets of various levels, natural re-sursy) stipulates distinctions in concrete mechanisms and its forms eko-nomicheskoj realisations.
<< | >>
A source: DIKINOV ANDZOR HASLNBIEVICH. FORMATION OF SYSTEM AND CONTROLLING MECHANISMS PROPERTY COMPLEXES OF THE STATE OWNERSHIP IN REGION. 2002

More on topic 2.2. System principles of management of objects of a state ownership:

  1. Principles, functions and the purposes of management of a state ownership
  2. 3.1. Principles of differentiation of authorities and the rights of management subjects of a state ownership
  3. CHAPTER 1. TEORETIKO-METHODOLOGICAL BASES And MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES IMUSHCHESTVEN - NYMI STATE OWNERSHIP COMPLEXES
  4. 3.2. Structure of objects of a state ownership in region
  5. FEDERAL MODEL of MANAGEMENT of RE-STRUCTURING of OBJECTIVE STRUCTURE of the STATE OWNERSHIP, the ECONOMIC RIGHTS And CRITERIA of the MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY
  6. 2.1. The analysis of methodologicalbases of administrative structurization of objects of a state ownership
  7. THE ANALYSIS OF THE BUDGETARY MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY THE STATE OWNERSHIP OF THE SUBJECT OF ROSIJSKY FEDERATION.
  8. 3.3. Perfection of management of shares of a state ownership in the joint-stock companies.
  9. FEATURES OF MANAGEMENT OF THE STATE OWNERSHIP IN SPHERE OF NATURAL MONOPOLIES.
  10. 2.4. Objective necessity and the basic directions of reform of management of a state ownership.
  11. the methodological approach to formation of tool base of management by a state ownership in region
  12. the CHAPTER III. PERFECTION of MANAGEMENT by the STATE OWNERSHIP.
  13. CHAPTER 3. ORGANIZATIONAL BASES of MANAGEMENT of the STATE OWNERSHIP In REGION
  14. THE CHAPTER IV. FEATURES OF MANAGEMENT OF THE STATE OWNERSHIP IN SPHERE OF NATURAL MONOPOLIES.
  15. CHAPTER 3. OPTIMIZATION of MANAGEMENT by the STATE OWNERSHIP In ECONOMY of the SUBJECT of the RUSSIAN FEDERATION.
  16. 1.2. Institutsionalnye changes, transformation of the contents of system of relations concerning a state ownership during an economic reform
  17. SAVCHENKO ANDREY VIKTOROVICH. THE MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY THE STATE OWNERSHIP IN MARKET ECONOMY, 2005
  18. CHAPTER 2. THE ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT OF THE STATE OWNERSHIP IN THE SUBJECT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF KHABAROVSK TERRITORY).
  19. IT IS SUBJECT - THE OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT OF THE STATE OWNERSHIP IN THE SUBJECT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF KHABAROVSK TERRITORY).