Yuzhakov Vladimir

The article is based on the results of the research work “Formulation of proposals for various methods of financial incentives in state civil service” conducted in 2014 as a part of the state assignment by the employees and experts of the Center for Public Administration Technologies, Institute for Applied Economic Studies of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, among others - Yuzhakov V.N., Dobrolyubova E.I., Alexandrov O.V., Klochkova E.N., Maslennikova E.N., Tatarinova L.N., with the participation of the Lipetsk branch of the RANEPA, including - Shiukina T.V., Brusentsova V.A. The key results of collecting, compilation and analysis of the data on financial incentives practices of state civil servants submitted by 73 federal executive bodies are presented in this article. According to the analysis presented in the article, the existing system of financial incentives of the state civil servants is not oriented on improving their performance, it is nontransparent and depends on many subjective factors. The use of this system leads to significant differentiation in pay levels among position groups and individual state civil servants.

This article was prepared based on the results of research work carried out by the Center of Public Administration Technology, Institute of Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration within the stated task framework of RANEPA 2014. According to the results of the analysis of legislation, it identified shortcomings of the current legal regulations on pre-trial appeals against decisions and actions (inaction) of the authorities and their officials in the exercise of state control (supervision). These are and include: the lack of adequate legislative regulations of a special orders on pre-trial appeals; the absence of a set list of grounds (subjects) on pre-trial appeals in compliance and enforcement activities; a considerable general lengthy term for the examination of the complaint which is often beyond the deadline of the appealed orders; the absence of specific, differentiated responsibilities of «guilty» officials for refusing to consider the complaint, the unjustified refusal to satisfy it, and the elimination of their consequences. Presented herein are proposals for the development on pre-trial appeal mechanisms in the exercise of state control (supervision) and their regulations.

Russia has accumulated certain experiences in the development of mechanisms and tools of performance management for government agencies, as well as their implementation. Inadequately compelling effects of their use, and their heavy burdens imposed on public authorities often raise doubts as to the capabilities of the principle of results-based management. According to the authors, these concerns and the need for further work on the development of this principle in the public administration has been determined because of the incomplete and undulating nature of this process. This article discusses the problems in the current implementation phase of this activity in the Russian state authorities, as well as formulating the purpose and key objectives of its third, emerging phase («3.0»). The article is based on the past results of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), 2014 V Round Table on the implementation of, performance management mechanisms in the activities of state and local authorities on the topic titled: «Managing by Results: paths to version 3.0». The event was prepared based on research on the experience of design, implementation and further development of mechanisms and tools of performance management in public administration held in RANEPA in 2012 and 2013.