Theoretical and methodological basis for defining the organizational development of an enterprise and estimating its efficiency

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Theoretical and methodological basis for defining the organizational development of an enterprise and estimating its efficiency

Ralko O.S. National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Vasiukhno M.O. National Aviation University



Summary

The study, systematization and generalization of modern literary sources of domestic and foreign scholars on the conceptual and categorical apparatus of organizational development of the enterprise, approaches to determining its effectiveness and determining the criteria for its effectiveness allowed us to draw the following conclusions:

1. Taking into account the existing scientific approaches, on the basis of the analysis it is concluded that the development is a change of the object, leading to its transition to a qualitatively new state.

2. The concept of organizational development has been developing since the 1930s. and has two main trends: research and practice of laboratory training; analysis of the organization and feedback systems. Classical concepts and definitions of organizational development were based on the fact that the main task of organizational development professionals is to help organizations solve problems that hinder the efficient use of human resources; create an organizational environment that promotes the development and self-improvement of each employee of the organization and achieve more successful and productive functioning of the organization as a whole. Modern concepts of organizational development emphasize the maximum integration of individual needs and interests of employees, goals and objectives of the organization as a whole, as well as the creation of structures, systems and processes that would provide continuous improvement of the organization. Taking into account existing scientific approaches, the author concludes that organizational development is a process characterized by consistent changes in quantitative and qualitative parameters of the internal environment of the enterprise, namely: structure, techniques, technology, personnel, goals and objectives under the influence of the environment.

3. The sequence of changes in quantitative and qualitative parameters of the enterprise environment over time is natural. Summarizing the existing points of view, we can distinguish the following stages of enterprise development: the initial stage of development, growth, stabilization, decline and gradual closure, these stages constitute the life cycle of the enterprise, each stage of which corresponds to characteristic quantitative and qualitative parameters.

4. In the economic literature, there are three fundamentally different approaches to assessing the economic result of production: resource, cost (or cost), mixed (or resourcecost). To assess the effectiveness of the enterprise in the cost (cost), resource and mixed approaches, it is necessary to compare the result (effect) / costs, result (effect) / resources or use a combination of them. With these approaches, you can establish the effectiveness of the enterprise only at a certain point in time.

5. Organizational development of the enterprise is a process of consistent and natural changes of the enterprise in time. The process is a dynamic phenomenon, and therefore cannot be measured in terms of approaches to economic efficiency, reflecting the state of the object at a particular time, and is static. Therefore, the criterion for the effectiveness of the process of organizational development of the enterprise is the intensity of this process.



Introduction

The concept of organizational development has been developing since the 1930s. And has two main trends: research and practice of laboratory training; analysis of the organization and feedback systems. Classical concepts and definitions of organizational development were based on the fact that the main task of organizational development professionals is to help organizations solve problems that hinder the efficient use of human resources; create an organizational environment that promotes the development and self-improvement of each employee of the organization and achieve more successful and productive functioning of the organization as a whole. Modern concepts of organizational development emphasize the maximu m integration of individual needs and interests of employees, goals and objectives of the organization as a whole, as well as the creation of structures, systems and processes that would provide continuous improvement of the organization. organizational specialists problems



Results. The study of modern theoretical approaches to organizational development is of great scientific and practical importance, as in the scientific literature often use and identify the concepts of "organizational development", "evolution of the organization", "organizational development", "development strategy", resulting in terminological ambiguity understanding of the concept of "organizational development of the enterprise".

In particular, theoretical studies of organizational development are presented in the works of such scientists as: Samochkin V.N., Koryagina S.V., Ivashkovskaya I.V., Goncharuk V.A., Prigogine A.I., Potrashkova L.V., Sorokina L.V., Pogorelov Y.S., Afanasyev N.V. and others [1-6].

In general, the term "development" means the process of natural change, transition from one state to another, more perfect; transition from the old qualitative state to the new, from simple to complex, from lower to higher. From another point of view, development is an irreversible, directed, natural change of matter and consciousness, their universal property; as a result of development there is a new qualitative state of the object - its composition or structure [7].

According to A.V. Vasylenko, development is the property of a new quality that strengthens the viability of the enterprise in a changing environment [8, p. 16]; unleashing hidden opportunities and potential.

From the point of view of macroeconomic approach, economic development is characterized by changes in market and production conditions over time, during which investment, innovation, technical and technological factors of the economy, as well as factors of economic property and economic mechanism play a significant role [10, p. 5] and is a process of functioning and evolution of the economic system in the long run, which occurs under the influence of economic conflicts, needs and interests.

Thus, development is a change due to the objective necessity of social progress; it is a process that is the result of successive actions that gradually lead the organization to quantitative and qualitative growth. Depending on the dynamics of trends in quantitative and qualitative changes, development can be characterized as stable, gradual (evolutionary); intense and abrupt (revolutionary).

Thus, despite the different definitions, the defining moment of the organization's development is stability as the ability of the system to maintain its working condition in achieving the planned results in the presence of various disruptive effects. Therefore, the difference between development and economic growth is that sustainable development is possible only in the absence of economic growth [11].

Thus, the quantitative increase in the production of economic goods characterizes economic growth, which, provided the acquisition of new quality characterizes development. Economic growth can be defined as a sustainable process of growth of production capacity of the enterprise. The situation, which is characterized by trends opposite to economic growth, corresponds to the economic downturn. Evolutionary development is the result of gradual objective changes that the organization can counteract by activating internal capacity. Revolutionary development is due to rapid change and the involvement of external resources to obtain a new quality.

The theoretical difficulty of clearly defining the concept of "organizational development" can be justified by different views on the goals of organizational development by representatives of different organizational theories.

The term "development" can be characterized by common features that are inherent in it: quantitative and qualitative changes in the object of development. Thus, development can be defined as changes in the object, leading to its transition to a qualitatively new state.

Organizational development can be considered as a complex that includes basic values and principles; a set of concepts and models that form the theoretical basis of organizational development; a large number of methods and tools by which organizational development programs are implemented in practice. Representatives of the flow of organizational development can be divided into two groups - on the one hand, research and practice of laboratory training, which are closely related to the flow of T-groups, and on the other - analysis of the organization and feedback systems.

Another source of concepts and practices of organizational development is a study of the analysis of the organization and feedback systems. Almost simultaneously with the development of laboratory training techniques, a team of researchers at the University of Michigan's Survey Research Center began to apply a model of analysis of Kurt Levin's activities to study the functioning of organizations. Rance Likert and Floyd Mann conducted a global large-scale study of Detroit Edison's activities, systematically providing feedback to all departments in which data was collected. Obtaining information about their own activities by departments and working groups helped to increase the efficiency of groups and improve the system of analysis of organizational activities and feedback [12].

In 1964, the Organizational Development Research Network (OD Network) was established, an international organization that brings together organizational development practitioners from around the world. At about the same time, the Department of Organizational Development was opened at the American Academy of Management.

The late 1960s and 1970s were a period when a behavioral approach prevailed in management theory, and organizational development was seen by many scholars as a solution to all problems related to improving the effectiveness of organizations. Comprehensive programs using different approaches have been introduced in a number of American companies, such as General Motors and Corning Glass, and several British ones. A study by American scientists, to the results of which French referred, found that a positive effect was manifested in 70-80% of cases. French identifies typical goals of studying the program of organizational development: to increase the level of trust and support among members of the organization; increase the number of discussions of organizational issues both within and between groups, instead of ignoring them; create an environment in which the role of leadership is growing, based on knowledge and skills; increase openness to communication directly, vertically and diagonally of the organizational structure; increase the level of personal satisfaction and enthusiasm in the organization; find a synergistic solution to recurring problems (synergistic are creative solutions in which 2 + 2 equals more than four, in which all parties benefit much more from cooperation than from conflict); increase the level of personal and group responsibility in planning and implementing a strategy [13].

The theory of organizational development from behavioral positions had both supporters and critics. Doubts about the effectiveness of the study of organizational development on the basis of small groups were first voiced in the 1970s by R. Kahn. In 1974, he wrote: "This is not a concept, especially in the scientific sense of the word: it is not precisely defined, it cannot be reduced to concrete, constant, observational behavior; it cannot be described and tested in a specific workplace using logically related concepts and theories. Taking into account the above, in my opinion, despite the serious errors and gaps, it can be improved by providing an acceptable definition and creating a full theoretical justification" [14, p. 490].

During the 1980s and 1990s, the emphasis on organizational development as a concept of behavioral science shifted to a number of other areas of organizational theory. Some, such as organizational transformation, have features similar to organizational development. Others, such as team building, change management and culture management, are based on the basic ideas developed by the authors of the theory of organizational development, specialists who practice organizational development.

Gordon Lippitt describes the renewal of the organization as "the process of proposing, creating and maintaining under control such necessary changes that enable the organization to become and remain viable, adapt to new conditions, solve problems, draw conclusions from its experience" [15].

Wendel French and Cecil Bell define organizational development as "long-term work to improve problem-solving and renewal processes in the organization by more effectively co-regulating the organization's cultural tenets - with a special focus on culture within formal working groups - through change agent or catalyst." and the technology of applied science of behavior, which includes the study of actions.

Problem-solving processes are related to how the organization evaluates and decides on opportunities and threats that arise in the external environment. French and Bell ask the question: "Does the organization relate to its external environment, and therefore to its mission, from the standpoint of a decade ago, or is it constantly reviewing its goal and methods of achieving it in the light of present and future?" [13].

The culture associated with the social system of the organization is the prevailing norms of behavior, feelings, attitudes and values of people working in the organization.

Formal working groups are considered the main object of organizational development. Such a group consists of a leader and his subordinates. According to French and Bell, "much of the development of managers focuses on the individual manager or foreman - not on his working group." In contrast, the concept of organizational development focuses on the whole working group.

The change agent, or catalyst, is used to get different people in an organization to pay attention to issues such as attitudes toward different aspects of organization and management; determining what exactly hinders the work; how to do the job more efficiently, etc.

As a rule, crisis triggers are the impetus for change. Changes in strategy, production processes, structure and culture can be made gradually, in the form of small steps or radically, in the form of large leaps. Accordingly, it can be an "evolutionary" and "revolutionary" model of change.

The new organizational strategy becomes global in nature, regardless of the scope of the enterprise. Thus, A. Lahti points to a new type of organizational processes that are a consequence of globalization. Large-scale and hierarchical organizational structure contributed to organizational development in an industrial society, when the advantage of the organization was associated with its location and cost of labor. At the present stage, the advantages of the organization lie in the network of its business relations, and their implementation requires a flexible type of organization [16, p.158].

Particular importance in the study of modern organizations is given to their existence not only in the actual social, but also in virtual reality, where instead of things (existing) is a simulation (image). The following are recognized as universal properties of virtual reality: immateriality of influence / action (what is depicted reproduces the effects that are characteristic of the materialized); conditionality of parameters (artificial and changeable objects); ephemerality (freedom of entry / exit provides the possibility of interruption and resumption of existence). The transition from the real world to the virtual has provoked some scientists to present virtualization as a paradigm of new change, including organizational. Virtualization of organizations is a social process, during which the value understanding of the organization, their goals and functioning is reconsidered. In these conditions, office design, support for the attributes of a certain appearance of workers and the organization in which he works, corporate image and other "non-economic", social and socio-psychological aspects of the organization not only acquire economic meaning and become a commodity, but also a systemic factor development.

Institutionalization of modern organizations includes the use of marketing technologies that streamline organizational dynamics. At the same time, the role of coordinating the processes taking place in the macro and micro environment of the organization is increasing. The adequacy of the organizational form of social expectations of both staff and their external environment becomes a factor in the viability of the organization.

In 1991, American management specialists M. Hammer and J. Champy basically formulated the concept of business reengineering ("revolutionary" model of change). In their opinion, economic reengineering is a fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of the enterprise and its most important processes. The result is a sharp (by an order of magnitude) improvement in the most important quantifiable indicators of costs, quality, service and timing [17].

Organizational development ("evolutionary" model of change) is based on the concept of planning, initiating and implementing processes of change in the social system with the involvement of a large number of participants. From this point of view, organizational development can be defined as a long-term, thorough, comprehensive process of change and development of the organization (enterprise) and the people working in it.

In the context of these features, it can be understood that any organization operating in a market environment implements two trends: operation and development. If functioning is the support of vital activity, preservation of functions that determine the integrity of the organization, qualitative certainty, essential characteristics, then development is the achievement of a new quality that determines the sustainability (sustainability) of the organization, its growth.

According to Panina O.M., organizational development is a set of theoretical concepts and practical techniques aimed at helping organizations gain more flexibility and adapt to change, and managers - to acquire the necessary skills [18].

Thus, the classic concepts and definitions of organizational development were based on the fact that the main task of organizational development professionals is to help organizations solve problems that hinder the efficient use of human resources, create an organizational environment conducive to development and self-improvement of each employee. Modern concepts of organizational development emphasize the maximum integration of individual needs and interests of employees, goals and objectives of the organization as a whole, as well as the creation of structures, systems and processes that would provide continuous improvement of the organization.

World-renowned corporations such as Proctor & Gamble, General Motors, Heinz Foods, IBM, Polaroid, The Royal Dutch Shell Group and many others are among the organizations that have long and successfully implemented organizational development programs.

Summarizing the existing theoretical approaches to organizational development, it should be noted that:

1. Organizational development is seen as a process of evolutionary or revolutionary changes that accompany the functioning of organizations.

2. As changes taking place in the social environment of organizations in terms of increasing the human resources of the organization as a whole and individual members of its workforce.

Among the basic principles of organizational development include the following provisions:

* Organizational development considers the organization as an open living system. This means that organizations do not exist in a vacuum, but constantly interact with their environment, respond to changes that occur in it, and adapt to them. As in nature, in human society survives not the strongest, but the most adapted. Today we can say with confidence that it is the ability to adapt and is the first and most necessary condition for the effectiveness of the organization.

• Holistic approach to the organization - another important attitude of modern organizational development. Today, organizational development practices not only help the organization get rid of difficulties, they try to teach it to maintain an effective state and constantly update.

• As organizational development seeks to help the organization become a self-renewing and learning system, involving employees in the organizational development process is a necessary element of organizational development. Cooperation and mutual support among the members of the organization is one of the most important components of the successful functioning of the organization as a whole. By enabling people to participate in change, enabling them to make decisions that directly affect their work, we not only reduce resistance to change, but also create conditions for maximizing the potential of each employee of the organization, which increases the overall efficiency of its activities.

• People and their relationships at all levels of the organization - its main resource and key to success. Organizational development works with individuals and groups, paying special attention to the processes that take place between them. No technological, product or structural innovation will be successful if the factor of interpersonal and intergroup interaction is not taken into account during its implementation.

Basic attitudes of organizational development can be transformed into the implementation of the following principles as:

- Flexibility as adaptability;

- Target orientation;

- Evolution;

- Revolutionary changes;

- Systematization.

Organizational development is based on several important ideas about the behavior of people in organizations. "Today, organizational development practices must think globally and have high cross-cultural competence. Without experience in different cultures and the ability to adapt culturally, they will not be able to meet the realities of the modern world" says Gerald Glover, RODP3. Thus, adaptation in different cultures becomes one of the most important tasks of modern organizational development [19].

Another problem area for organizational development today is the use of information technology and telecommunications. Virtual teams are now becoming a fairly common way to organize work, but they also face no less than traditional organizations problems.

Organizations are emerging, evolving, succeeding, aging, and eventually ceasing to operate. A small number of them exist indefinitely, none live without change. New organizations are formed daily. At the same time, hundreds of organizations are liquidated forever every day. Those who know how to adapt - prosper, inflexible - disappear. Some organizations grow faster and perform better than others. The leader must know what stage of development the organization is at, and assess the extent to which the accepted leadership style corresponds to this stage. That is why the concept of the life cycle of the organization as expected changes with a certain sequence of states over time is widespread. Applying the concept of life cycle, we can see that there are clear stages through which organizations go, and that the transitions from one stage to another are predictable, not accidental.

Enterprise life cycle is a set of predictable changes with a certain sequence of states over time [20].

Numerous studies show that organizations develop confidently throughout their lifecycle when they have a sound strategy and resource efficiency; are rebuilt when they no longer meet the chosen goals; die when they become unable to perform their tasks.

Some of the most common models of organizational development were developed in the United States in the period 1967-1983: the models of A. Down, I. Adizes, A. Greiner, B. Livehud, and others.

At the present stage, one of the most popular evolutionary theories is the theory of survival of the organization in the conditions of "structural changes", which is based on the following provisions: specialized enterprises are generally more perfect than diversified, but less viable; over time, profitability tends to decrease; with age, the "mortality" of organizations tends to decrease. The authors of this theory believe that in any organization there is a struggle between forces interested in improving the efficiency of its activities and its survival. In the early stages of development after the creation of the organization, efficiency plays a key role, but over time the organization enters a period of "shock", when the greatest strength is the antagonistic interests of different groups inside and outside the company. According to this model, each organization aims to "shock" rather than increase efficiency. However, this trend can be reversed if management manages to resist the forces that push the organization to survive ineffectively through organizational innovation, externalization of employment, mergers and acquisitions [21, pp.24-25].

The list of a large number of conditions for success in the enterprise determines the relevance of developing a system of efficiency indicators and models of automated synthesis of organizational structure of the enterprise with specified properties that stabilize the effective operation of the enterprise and improve organizational structure. The transition between stages of the life cycle depends on the specific conditions of the enterprise.

According to Milner B.Z., the life cycle of the organization is directly and related to the life cycle of the product - a time interval that includes several stages, each of which differs in the special nature of the process of changes in production over time. A distinction should be made between: full product life cycle; product life cycle in the field of production; product life cycle in the field of consumption. The full product life cycle includes the time of creation, the time during which the product is produced and the time of operation of products by consumers. This concept is used for planning marketing and supply and marketing activities, the organization of after-sales service of products, the choice of adequate forms of management and the creation of the necessary structural units.

The concept of life cycle indicates the most characteristic symptoms of the collapse of the organization, manifested in the stage of decline. These include, in particular: declining demand intensifies competition and complicates its forms; the competitive strength of suppliers increases; the role of price and quality in competition increases; the complexity of managing the growth of production capacity increases; the process of creating product innovations becomes more complicated; reduced profitability.

Current trends in the development of organizations: the development of integrated operating systems, the development of organizational structures, the development of quality management systems, the development of incentive systems, the stabilization of employees, the involvement of employees in management.

The goals of enterprise development can be considered through the prism of generally accepted organizational theories.

Proponents of population-environmental theory (often called natural selection) argue that the environment chooses the characteristics of organizations that are most suitable for it, that is, the company develops to match the environment as fully as possible to its characteristics.

Organizational characteristics that correspond to the external environment are achieved through continuous management improvement, their characteristics are: the presence of process-oriented units; departmentalization by result; centralization of strategic functions and functions of general management; decentralization of basic and service management functions; creation of matrix and project groups for the purposes of innovative development; organization of cross-functional teams of specialists focused on the production of key products, a particular group of consumers, a specific market.

One of the most famous followers of the theory of economics of operating (or transactional) costs O. Williamson proposed to compare business operations with the structure of the organization, based on savings in operating costs. According to him, the creation of the organization is a response to the uncertainty of the environment. Hence the desire to build a higher level organization (trust, holding, etc.), which would allow to control the behavior of the partners involved through direct monitoring, audit and other mechanisms.

In this regard, the company embodies a new alliance of different activities. The key figures here are qualified employees (this is the professional core of the company). The second level consists of subcontractors - companies or individual professionals who perform certain functions better and cheaper than others. The third level is a flexible workforce (part-time workers and temporary staff).

The starting point of the theory of dependence on resources - companies do not just play the role of passive observer of external influences, but try to manage the external environment to achieve their own benefits. At the same time, no enterprise is able to create all the resources it needs [21].

The company has a strategic choice. The solution is formed in the presence of a number of alternatives and active influence on the environment.

According to proponents of the theory of dependence on resources, the development of enterprises took place through the creation of integrated corporate structures that conduct joint activities on the basis of asset consolidation or contractual relations. In world practice, such forms of them as corporations, holding companies, financial-industrial groups, consortia, strategic alliances, network organizations are widely used. They are the result of strategic choices in a resource-constrained environment.

Summarizing the existing views on the definition of organizational development, we propose the following interpretation. Organizational development is an evolutionary or revolutionary change in the internal environment of the organization, which occurs as a result of adaptation to changes in the external environment and involves the organization of successive stages.

Thus, the development of enterprises involves the following options: internal growth through the use of own resources; mergers and acquisitions as a means of increasing resources; redistribution of internal resources, focusing them on priority areas; termination or limited activity of non-priority areas of activity, not provided with resources, through the sale of shares and assets or internal liquidation - reorientation; separation, transfer of unsecured activities to other contractors on a contractual basis, through the sale or allocation of assets. In market conditions, the catalyst for change in the organizational system is the development of certain elements of the overall strategy of the enterprise. In turn, most of the strategy is determined by the stage of the "life cycle" of the enterprise. In this relationship, the "life cycle" and individual elements of the strategy of the industrial unit significantly affect the distribution, speed and periodicity of the organizational system and its elements. The process of evolution of the elements of the organizational system takes place constantly, throughout the "life cycle of the enterprise". At the same time, it significantly affects the final results of production systems over the long term. Thus processes of organizational development are conditionally divided into processes of development of separate elements of organizational system and development of organizational system as a whole.

The issues of efficiency and criteria for its measurement are considered differently by different economic schools, trends and individual scientists, which causes to ambiguity in the perception and use of this concept, both in scientific and practical activities.

According to Andriychuk V.G., efficiency is the effectiveness of a certain process, action, which is measured by the ratio between the result and the costs (resources) that caused it [22, p.9].

The essence of efficiency is reflected in the ratio of the end result - the effect on the used production resources.

"Efficiency" as a concept has two meanings. This term can refer to both economic and technical efficiency, which means the use of a minimum amount of resources to achieve a certain amount of output or to achieve maximum output at a fixed cost of certain resources. Since technical efficiency does not take into account the different cost of different resources, or different benefits from the production of different products, the approach built solely from the standpoint of technical efficiency can't find the most acceptable solutions. Economic efficiency is to ensure absolute and / or relative (in relation to the volume of production) savings of production resources (or their preservation) while achieving (maintaining) the volume and range in accordance with the need for them [23, p.18].

In the economic literature, there are three fundamentally different approaches to assessing the economic result of production: resource, cost or cost, resource-cost.

Expenses include depreciation, material and other expenses, labor costs with deductions for social activities.

When determining costs, there is the problem of the totality of monetary expression of a set of resource components: funds, items and living labor. Economic theory and practice do not answer this question. To find it, you need to determine for what purposes, what calculations you need to do it. If it is necessary to determine the economic efficiency of the return of each resource, it is necessary to take the ratio of any type of result to a particular type of resource. As a result, a system of partial economic indicators will be obtained. To calculate the generalized indicator of economic efficiency of return of all resources it is necessary to take as a basis certain principles.

First of all, it is necessary that the results are a consequence of costs, because costs are the cause. The second most important principle is full accounting of results and costs. Violation of these basic principles leads to methodological errors.

At present, most organizations use a cost-effective approach rather than performance criteria. This significantly reduces the level of productivity, efficiency of activities. Entrepreneurs who have better resource management tend to have the advantage. Costs are the result of the use of resources, not their cause. Therefore, for efficiency and effectiveness, it is necessary to manage resources, not costs.

The cost approach, which is dominant at the present stage, reduces the effectiveness and efficiency of activities for the following reasons:

• Asset formation based on current needs rather than strategic goals;

• Making decisions from past experience, not with a focus on the future;

• High level of unnecessary non-target costs not related to performance;

• Lack of investment or their minimization in the development of resources: the introduction of innovations, increasing the competence of staff, the creation of intangible assets;

• Priority attention to material resources due to insufficient attention to other resources, regardless of their role in the activity.

The difference between cost and resource approaches is determined by the following aspects:

• Resource management begins at the stage of asset formation. Criteria for attracting resources are their participation in the effectiveness, profitability of activities;

• The formation of resources is based on the need and sufficiency of resources for the implementation of the strategy, their importance for production business processes, taking into account the alternative cost and efficiency of application.

Thus, the resource approach differs from the common cost approach in that it originates from the production (revenue) role of resources in the activity, and does not record only their actual costs. It focuses on results and the effectiveness of achieving them, not just on resource costs. Thus, at the present stage it is necessary to make the transition from cost management to economic resource management.

In the form of resources, the cost of tangible labor should include the cost of fixed assets; that part of working capital that provides production, ie material and other costs.

The resource approach is possible in several variants.

The first option. Resource costs can be represented as the sum of the value of fixed assets, intangible assets and tangible current assets (i.e. those current assets that provide material and other costs for production and sales). This part of the resources spent does not include the cost of living labor.

The second option. The sum of the value of fixed assets, intangible assets and current assets. The latter includes two components: the capitalized part, which provides material and other costs, and the capitalized part, which goes to pay.

Changes in the importance of resources for the result, and provoke changes in management. Resources are systemically interdependent and interconnected, which requires integrated organization and management. The ability to manage resources is the basis of effectiveness; it is based on goals, strategies, entrepreneurial skills, organization and management.

Effectiveness is determined by the skillful use of a set of economic resources and is to obtain benefits, i.e. increase opportunities for each subsequent cycle of activities and its diversification. The result is the product of a systematic combination of resources in the course of activities.

The effectiveness of activities directly depends on resources for the following reasons: the need and sufficiency of resources (set of certain resources) for production, product sales, services, management in accordance with strategic objectives; purposeful influence of human resources on others to get the result; benefit from achieving goals; gaining competitive positions in the consumer market and resource markets (opportunities to attract quality resources).

Efficiency is determined by the optimal use of resources, which is expressed in maximizing the result over the cost of resources. Efficiency is ensured by the economic essence of resources in business - they create (determine) results, but to obtain them requires costs.

The efficiency of activity directly depends on the resources for the following reasons: the quantity and quality of resources involved their production interaction; quantity, cost of used resources, which are measured (estimated) by resource costs; quality of resources and their use; investment in the development of strategic resources to increase their productivity; attracting investors to develop business opportunities.

Thus, the goal of resource management is effective performance. The key point in resource management is that the formation and use of resources should be based on their productive role in the activities to avoid overspending, late provision of resources and their financing, inconsistency of resource quality to business processes, accounting for opportunity cost. Any resource is characterized by the following criteria: the need for activity, productivity, quantity, quality, cost and efficiency of use.

Another approach to efficiency assessment is the resourcecost approach, which is used when the economic result is correlated with the cost of production resources and current production losses.

According to G.E. Kudenko, Н.В. Kanarskaya, V.N. Belentsova, S.I. Sevostyanov indicators, which are determined on the basis of resource and cost approaches, of course, can exist, but only as partial indicators that serve the purposes of analysis, rather than a generalized assessment of the level of economic efficiency of production. For a generalized assessment of the level of economic efficiency of production, the only suitable is the resource-cost approach, when the denominator of the efficiency formula includes both production resources and production costs [24, p.23-25].

Thus, to assess the effectiveness of the enterprise within the considered approaches, it is necessary to compare the result (effect) / costs, result (effect) / resources or use a combination. With these approaches, you can establish the effectiveness of the enterprise only at a certain point in time. Thus, the result will be the efficiency of the enterprise at a certain point in time. Considering the concept of "organizational development of the enterprise" it is difficult to determine what its result is. As a result of organizational development, we can consider the transition of the enterprise to a new (next) stage of development. Thus, we can apply these approaches to assess the effectiveness of the enterprise only at the time of transition of the enterprise to a qualitatively new stage of development. However, our goal is to determine the effectiveness of organizational development of the enterprise at any time for any period of time.

In our opinion, the organizational development of the enterprise is a process of consistent and natural changes of the enterprise over time. The process is a dynamic phenomenon, and therefore cannot be measured in terms of approaches to economic efficiency, which reflects the state of the object at a particular time and is static.

In order to obtain correct results in determining the directions of development of the organization, the choice of criteria for planning and evaluating the results of activities is of great importance.

That is why the choice of precise economic criteria to assess the performance of organizations and compare organizations with each other - a very difficult strategic task.

The criterion defines the principle of the approach to measurement, which shows the qualitative substance of production efficiency and characterizes the general trend of change and movement. An indicator is a measure used to quantify the degree and assess the level of performance components. Properly chosen criterion largely prevents the possibility of finding a suitable indicator. At the same time, the quality of the selected indicator is directly dependent on how adequate it is to the criterion.

The main requirements for the criterion are as follows: it should provide a reliable quantitative assessment of production efficiency, its estimates should be easy to compare, and their dynamics should reflect real savings in production resources, and it should be easy to plan, stimulate its growth, that it and the system of indicators constructed on its basis allowed to receive full idea of a condition of the enterprise and branch.

The main criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of the enterprise according to the approach of D. Scott-Sink [25]:

1. Effectiveness - the level of achievability of the target criteria.

2. Cost-effectiveness - the level of performance of tasks at minimal cost.

3. Quality - the level of compliance of the economic system of the enterprise with social requirements.

4. Profitability - the ratio of economic benefits (profits) to costs (including alternative).

5. Productivity - the ratio of the number of manufactured products and the amount of resources consumed.

6. Quality of working life - the nature and intensity of the reaction of all business participants to the socio-technical aspects of the production system.

7. Innovation - the ability to generate and implement new ideas.

Summarizing the existing views of scientists on the formation and definition of criteria for the effectiveness of G.E. Kudenko, Н.В. Kanarska, V.N. Belentsov, S.I. Sevostyanov come to the conclusion that existing approaches can be represented by three groups. Depending on the number of optimization parameters, we mean monocriteria (optimize one of the parameters) and polycriteria (total optimization of parameters) problem statement. In assessing economic efficiency optimize income, profits (losses), productivity and more.

The second approach to the formation of criteria is that one part of the indicators (which need to be improved) is attributed to the numerator and the second part of the indicators (which need to be reduced) - to the denominator. The main disadvantage of this approach is that by reducing the denominator, with a small value of the numerator, you can provide a large value of the criterion. Therefore, such a criterion can be used to define constraints on either the value of the criterion, or the numerator, or the denominator. The best known of these types of criteria is the "result / cost" criterion.

The third approach is to maximize or minimize one of the indicators and impose restrictions on the others. Research allows us to recommend the following criteria for practical use:

- Maximize profits with given restrictions on the amount of costs and the level of risk;

- Minimize the amount of costs with given restrictions on profits and risk levels;

- Minimize the level of risk with given restrictions on profits and costs.

A separate area in the study of efficiency is to determine the effectiveness of management. Thus, in the literature, economists distinguish between the following aspects of management efficiency:

• Internal efficiency - efficiency in terms of using the internal capabilities of the organization or in terms of managing internal resources (costs and capital);

• External efficiency - efficiency in terms of using the external capabilities of the organization;

• Overall efficiency - efficiency as a composition of its two components - internal and external efficiency;

• Market efficiency - how fully meets the needs of the consumer;

• Target or strategic efficiency reflects the extent to which the goals of the enterprise are achieved;

• Cost or tactical efficiency reflects the costeffectiveness of ways to transform resources as a result of production activities of the organization.

Since the main goal of entrepreneurial activity in market relations is profit, the criterion of economic efficiency is to maximize profits per unit cost of capital (resources) with a high level of labor quality and competitiveness of products.

It is possible to estimate efficiency of functioning and business activity of the enterprise only on relative indicators of profitability and on a ratio of growth rates of the basic indicators: aggregate assets (T act), volume of sales (T vrp) and profit (T n): 100% <T act <T v rp <T n (1.1)

The first inequality of 100% <T act shows that the company increases the economic potential and scale of its activities. From the point of view of the life cycle of the enterprise, this inequality is true at the stage of origin.

The second inequality T act <T v rp indicates that sales are growing faster than economic potential. From this we can conclude that the intensity of resource use in the enterprise. From the point of view of the life cycle of the enterprise, this inequality is true at the stage of growth.

The third inequality T v rp <T n means that the company's profit grows faster than sales and total capital, which indicates an increase in profitability. In terms of the life cycle of the enterprise, this inequality is true at the stage of maturity.

These ratios are called the "golden rule of enterprise economics". If this proportionality is met, it indicates the dynamics of enterprise development and strengthening its financial well-being.

In our opinion, to assess the effectiveness of organizational development it is necessary to establish a limited number of efficiency criteria, which will assess the effectiveness of enterprise development regardless of the stage of development.

Since organizational development is a dynamic process, the criterion for the effectiveness of its course is the speed, or rather the intensity of the process.



References

1. Афанасьев Н.В., Ророжин В.Д., Рудыка В.И. Управление развитием предприятия: Монография. - Х. : ИД "ИНЖЭК", 2003. - 184 с.

2. Гончарук В.А. Развитие предприятия. - М.: Дело, 2000. - 281 с.

3. Короткий економічний словник/під ред. А.Н. Азріліяна. - М: Інститут нової економіки, 2001.

4. Пономаренко В.С. Концептуальні засади управління стратегічним співробітництвом підприємства з іншими суб'єкта для забезпечення інноваційного розвитку. Проблеми науки. - 2006. - №5. - с.14-19

5. Рассказов С.В., Рассказова А.Н. Стоимостные методы оценки эффективности менеджмента компании. Финансовый менеджмент. - 2002. - №4. - С. 13 - 25.

6. Гибкое развитие предприятия: Эффективность и бюджетирование / Самочкин В.Н., Пронин Ю.Б., Лагачева Е.Н., Барахов В.И, и др.. - М.: Дело, 2000. - 352 с.

7. Сычевский Н.П. Развитие и повышение эффективности производства пивобезалкогольной промышленности: Монография - К. : УГУПТ, 1998. - 112 с.

8. Василенко В.А. Менеджмент устойчивого развития предприятий: Монография. - К.: Центр учебной литературы, 2005, 281 с.

9. О.О. Бакаєв, В. І. Гриценко, Л. І. Бажан, Л.О. Бакаєв, К.А. Бобер Економіко-математичні моделі економічного зростання / К.: Наукова думка, 2005, с. 234.

10. Василенко В.А. Диагностика устойчивого развития предприятий. - К.: ЦУЛ, 2005. - 142 с.

11. French W., Bell C. Organisation Development - 4thed. - Prentice Hall, 1990, p.145.

...