On the impact of excessive document flow on the labor activity of a budgetary organization employee

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The causes and results of the formation of excessive workflow in budgetary organizations are analyzed with the help of mathematical modeling. The model was built taking into account the opinion of the former head of the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation Maxim Oreshkin, according to whom excessive reporting consumes a huge amount of resources, and therefore can be generated with a hostile intent to create an obstacle to achieving national goals. The model is based on the following assumptions: An agent (an employee of a budgetary organization) cannot refuse to carry out the reporting burden. An official (an employee of a higher ranking organization or a representative of government bodies) has an uncontrolled and unlimited opportunity to demand that the controlled organization draw up documents in the form proposed by him and provide them within the specified time. The utility of the official increases with receipt of these documents. It is shown that under such conditions the official benefits by unlimitedly increasing labor intensity of the reporting burden imposed on the agent. As a result of an increase in the amount of unpaid effort spent by an agent on reporting, his activity, which is determined by the part of paid efforts that exceed their minimum volume, drops to zero. The activity of two officials is compared: one of them has no hostile intentions and simply increases his work’s utility, while the other pursues a hostile goal to paralyze the work of the controlled organization. It is shown that there is only a quantitative difference in the results of their activities: the threshold value of the complexity of tasks, the achievement or exceeding of which destroys the activity of the agent, is lower in the case of a hostile official. Three possible ways of limiting the activity of an official are discussed: taxing the controlling organization with a corrective tax, full compensation for the costs of the controlled organization, and legislative restriction of document flow.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Vladimir I. Tsurikov

Kostroma State Agricultural Academy, Kostroma, Russian Federation,

Author for correspondence.
Email: emm@cemi.rssi.ru

Канд. физ.-мат. наук, доктор экон. наук, доцент

Russian Federation

References

  1. Амбарова П.А. (2018). Сверхбюрократизация как аномалия развития высшего образования в России // Известия Уральского федерального университета. Сер.1 Проблемы образования, науки и культуры. № 1 (171). С. 173-183. [Ambarova P.A. (2018). Over-bureaucratization as abnormity of higher education development in Russia. Izvestia. Ural Federal University Journal. Ser. 1. Problems of Education, Science and Culture, 1 (171), 173-183 (in Russian).]
  2. Вольчик В.В., Филоненко Ю.В., Аверкиева Е.С., Ширяев И.М. (2016). Бюрократизация и адаптивное поведение в сфере высшего образования // Вопросы регулирования экономики. № 4. С. 57-71. [Volchik V.V., Filonenko Yu.V., Averkieva E.S., Shiryaev I.M. (2016). Bureaucratization and adaptive behavior in higher education. Journal of Economic Regulation, 4, 57-71 (in Russian).]
  3. Голик Ю.В. (2021). Бюрократизация науки недопустима (заметки после прочтения книги В.Н. Протасова «Методологические проблемы защиты диссертаций (на примере юриспруденции)») // Государство и право. № 12. С. 67-72. [Golik Yu.V. (2021). Bureaucratization of science is unacceptable (notes after reading the book by V.N. Protasov “Methodological problems of defending dissertations (on the example of jurisprudence)”). State and Law, 12, 67-72 (in Russian).]
  4. Каплун К.Р., Труханович Д.С. (2020). Бюрократизация образовательного процесса как проблема реализации образовательной политики (на примере Мясниковского района Ростовской области) // Тенденции развития науки и образования. № 62-8. С. 89-93. [Kaplun K.R., Trukhanovich D.S. (2020). Bureaucratization of the educational process as a problem of the implementation of educational policy (on the example of the Myasnikov district of the Rostov region). Trends in the Development of Science and Education, 62-8, 89-93 (in Russian).]
  5. КрасинскаяЛ.Ф. (2016). Модернизация, оптимизация, бюрократизация…Что ожидает высшую школу завтра? // Высшее образование в России. № 3. С. 73-82. [KrasinskayaL.F. (2016). Modernization, optimization, bureaucratization…What awaits higher education tomorrow? Higher Education in Russia, 3, 73-82 (in Russian).]
  6. Курбатова М.В. (2016). Реформа высшего образования как институциональный проект российской бюрократии: содержание и последствия // Мир России. № 4. С. 59-86. [Kurbatova M. (2016). Higher education reform as an institutional project of the Russian bureaucracy: The content and the outcomes. Universe of Russia, 25, 4, 59-86 (in Russian).]
  7. Курбатова М.В., Донова И.В. (2019). Эффективный контракт в высшем образовании: результаты реализации проекта // Journal of Institutional Studies. № 11 (2). С. 122-145. [Kurbatova M.V., Donova I.V. (2019). Effective contract in higher education: Some results of project implementation. Journal of Institutional Studies, 11 (2), 122-145 (in Russian).]
  8. Курбатова М.В., Левин С.Н., Саблин К.С. (2021). Импорт инструментов научной политики в современной России // Журнал институциональных исследований. № 13 (3). С 37-52. [Kurbatova M.V., Levin S.N., Sablin K.S. (2021). Import of scientific policy instruments in contemporary Russia. Journal of Institutional Studies, 13 (3), 37-52 (in Russian).]
  9. Никонов В. (2015). Как оптимизировать отчётность в системе образования? Режим доступа: https://russkiymir. ru/publications/189024/ [Nikonov V. (2015). How to optimize reporting in the education system? Available at: https://russkiymir.ru/publications/189024/ (in Russian).]
  10. Орешкин предложил Кудрину искать врагов в Счетной палате (2019) // Интерфакс. 28 октября. [Online] Режим доступа: https://www.interfax.ru/business/681995 [Oreshkin invited Kudrin to look for enemies in the Accounts Chamber (2019). Interfax. 28 october. [Online] Available at: https://www.interfax.ru/business/681995 (in Russian).]
  11. Осипов А.М. (2020). Бюропатология и бумажный прессинг в российском образовании // Вестник РУДН. Серия: Социология. № 4. С. 953-966. [Osipov A.M. (2020). Bureaupathology and paper pressure in Russian education. RUDN Journal of Sociology, 4, 953-966 (in Russian).]
  12. Протасов В.Н. (2017). Иррациональные методы властвования как инструмент самосохранения и экспансии бюрократически организованных систем управления // Государство и право. № 10. С. 55-61. [Protasov V.N. (2017). Irrational methods of ruling as a tool for self-preservation and expansion of bureaucratically organized management systems. State and Law, 10, 55-61 (in Russian).]
  13. Слива А.В., Березовский В.А., Фокина В.Н., Басов В.А. (2015). Финансовые и интеллектуальные потери вуза вследствие излишней бюрократизации в системе образования // Экономика образования. № 5 (90). С. 4-16. [Sliva A.V., Berezovsky V.A., Fokina V.N., Basov V.A. (2015). Financial and intellectual losses of the university due to excessive bureaucratization in the education system. Economics of Education, 5 (90), 4-16 (in Russian).]
  14. Смолин О.Н. (2015). Высшее образование: борьба за качество или покушение на человеческий потенциал? // Социологические исследования. № 7. С. 30-37. [Smolin O.N. (2015). Higher education: Struggle for quality or encroachment on human potential? Sociological Studies, 7, 30-37 (in Russian).]
  15. Тамбиянц Ю.Г., Шалин В.В. (2021). Бюрократизация отечественного высшего образования: факторы и перспективы // Общество: философия, история, культура. № 5. С. 31-39. [Tambiyants Yu.G., Shalin V.V. (2021). Bureaucratization of domestic higher education: Factors and prospects. Society: Philosophy, History, Culture, 5, 31-39 (in Russian).]
  16. Тамбовцев В., Рождественская И. (2014). Реформа высшего образования в России: международный опыт и экономическая теория // Вопросы экономики. № 4. С. 97-108. [Tambovtsev V., Rozhdestvenskaya I. (2014). Reform of higher education in Russia: International experience and economic theory. Voprosy Ekonomiki, 4, 97-108 (in Russian).]
  17. Тамбовцев В.Л. (2020). Действенность мер российской научной политики: что говорит мировой опыт // Управление наукой: теория и практика. № 1. С. 15-39. [Tambovtsev V.L. (2020). Effectiveness of measures of Russian science policy: What the world experience says. Science Management: Theory and Practice, 1, 15-39 (in Russian).]
  18. Тощенко Ж.Т. (2019). Высшее образование на перепутье: куда ведут реформы (заметки скептика) // Мониторинг общественного мнения: Экономические и социальные перемены. № 4. С. 400-417. [Toshchenko Zh.T. (2019). Higher education at the crossroads: Where are the reforms leading (notes of a skeptic). The Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes Journal, 4, 400-417 (in Russian).]
  19. Фризен П.Д. (2019). Оптимизация документооборота как средство реализации правоохранительной функции в регионе // Евразийский юридический журнал. № 4 (131). С. 346-347. [Friesen P.D. (2019). Document flow optimization as a means of implementing the law enforcement function in the region. Eurasian Law Journal, 4 (131), 346-347 (in Russian).]
  20. Abbott K., Genschel P., Snidal D., Zangl B. (2021). Beyond opportunism: Intermediary loyalty in regulation and governance. Regulation and Governance, S1, 83-101.
  21. Besley T., Burgess R., Khan A., Xu G. (2022). Bureaucracy and development. Annual Review of Economics, 14, 397-424.
  22. Cadot O. (1987). Corruption as a gamble. Journal of Public Economics, 2, 223-244.
  23. Choi J.P., Thum M. (2005). Corruption and the shadow economy. International Economic Review, 3, 817-836.
  24. Coccia M. (2009). Bureaucratization in public research institutions. Minerva, 1, 31-50.
  25. Crawford S.E.S., Ostrom E. (1995). A grammar of institutions. American Political Science Review, 3, 582-600.
  26. Downs A. (1967). Inside bureaucracy. Boston: Little Brown and Co.
  27. Furubotn E.G., Richter R. (2000). Institutions and economic theory: The contribution of the new institutional economics. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
  28. Gailmard S.F., Patty J.W. (2007). Slackers and zealots: Civil service, policy discretion, and bureaucratic expertise.
  29. American Journal of Political Science, 4, 873-889.
  30. Holmstrom B.R., Milgrom P. (1991). Multitask principal-agent analyses: Incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 7 (special issue), 24-52.
  31. Niskanen W.A. (1968). Peculiar economics of bureaucracy. American Economic Review, 2, 293-305.
  32. Niskanen W.A. (1975). Bureaucrats and politicians. Journal of Law and Economics, 3, 617-643.
  33. Park S. (2021). Politics or bureaucratic failures? Understanding the dynamics of policy failures in democratic governance. Journal of Policy Studies, 3, 25-36.
  34. Prendergast C. (2003). The limits of bureaucratic efficiency. Journal of Political Economy, 5, 929-958.
  35. Rose-Ackerman S. (1978). Corruption: A study in political economy. Cambridge: Academic Press.
  36. Tullock G. (1965). The Politics of Bureaucracy. Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2023 Ekonomika i matematicheskie metody