Any analyzed definition has a problem. Business Goal and Result: Correlation Issues

Let's take the same introductory, the same goal and the same tasks that were considered in the previous article:

It is necessary to increase sales from 18 million rubles / month - up to 30 million rubles / month (+12 million rubles / month).
That is - in a month to reach the level of +3 million / week (for shipping).
At the same time, I don’t want to find out at the end of the month whether we left or not (because if we don’t, then selling for less than 30 million rubles, we lose a good wholesale discount from the supplier), but to know and control the progress of execution.

Therefore the task is:

In the first week, reach a sufficient number of customers who have not yet taken this product from us, and in three weeks reach the total shipment level of +3 million / week.

So, there is a final goal, we understood the milestone goals. Got the tasks.

Assigned to an employee. We control. We assume it will be like this:

Date: 04/22/2016
Product:	Qty:	Application volume:



Points where refused
Dots for tomorrow

And here are the first days, the first results, and they are deplorable. Everything is not as we would like.

Date: 04/22/2016
Product:	Qty:	Application volume:
New outlets that he took to work
Points with which he actually contacted
Points where you agreed and made an application
Points where refused
Dots for tomorrow

Well, the first day is not an indicator, let's see what happens on the second or third.

But the second and third days are the same. And it is clear that this is not an accident, but simply there is no desired result.

But half a week has already flown by. Better, of course, to know this in half a week than in a month. But anyway - what to do now?

There is no desired result - what to do?

What is the leader's reaction in such a situation? How do many people think?

How is the question posed? Usually one of two things:

Or “what to tell the employee, what to do with him so that he achieves the desired result?”.
Or “what and how do I need to do differently - plan, ensure, in order to get the desired result?”.

First, do something with the employee and his actions:

No matter how you talk to an employee, if he himself does not consider his results deplorable, or simply does not know and does not understand what can be done differently, then no matter what you tell him, nothing will change.

Say "come on"? - will increase resistance. For if he has no laziness, and he really tried, then such pressure of yours will devalue his efforts. And if there is laziness, then pressure will provoke greater laziness.
Say "I believe in you, you can"? - there will be a sense of falseness (if he cannot and it is visible, and you speak as if he could suddenly be able to from your words). And from such a falsehood, your authority will fall, and hence the significance of the task.
Will you chew on the steps "what to do"? - completely stop thinking. Such chewing will be perceived as your connivance for the lack of its results - and this is a provocation to continue thinking even less.
Threaten with punishment/deduction/something else? - then we will simply switch part of the attention and strength of the employee from performing the main task - to the task of "securing yourself".

The second option is to do something yourself, reschedule.

Lower the bar? - we run the risk that he will cease to treat goals and objectives as something important: seeing connivance, he will generally cease to strive to achieve anything.
Reschedule so that the task is easier? - we run the risk of switching with an employee to a mode where his work and results will require more and more managerial time, and therefore more expensive. And for you - more troublesome and problematic.
Add another resource of time or money? - we run the risk that he will begin to relax, each time flooding his mistakes and miscalculations with our additional resource.

In general, not reacting in any way is the same as completely devaluing this task and all the others.

What to do?

When we do not get the desired result, we have a new task.

Correction task.

And, no matter how punning it may sound, you need to correctly solve this problem for correction.

What is the reason for not getting the desired result?
What needs to be done, what to correct in order to get the result?
What should I do for this?
What to say to an employee?

Correct - when four questions, including both “what should I do” and “what should I tell the employee” (and not the opposition of points #3 and #4 without answers to the questions from points #1 “what is the reason” and #2 “what to correct ").

What is the reason?

(I, like in the last article, thought: simplify, and bring fewer options? Or not simplify, and bring as many as it usually happens?
As a result, I decided not to simplify - in life there are no simplifications, there are more than enough details. For convenience - grouped options).

The leader began to investigate. Got, for example, one of the following 9 options:

1. You will not get through to the right person.

A. Some of those clients with whom you need to talk are large companies, you can’t easily get through to a real decision maker failed to contact.
B. Some of those with whom you need to talk are large companies, where you can’t easily get through to a person who actually makes decisions, it was not possible to get in touch. I began to look for more clients, plan not 4, but more contacts, so that if someone is not there, I immediately call another. But it turned out that We simply do not have the required number of clients.
IN. Some of those with whom you need to talk are large companies, where you can’t easily get through to a person who actually makes decisions, it was not possible to get in touch. I began to look for more clients, plan not 4, but more contacts, so that if someone is not there, I immediately call another. But it turned out that we simply do not have the required number of customers. I started searching, maybe there is someone else not covered by our attention. But for now did not find new.

2. There is a similar assortment.

A. Contacted, but they take something similar, so do not need anything.
B. Contacted, but they take something similar, so do not. I suggested they try it. They said, what is there, why try? We don't understand why we should try. Refused.
IN. Contacted, but they take something similar, so do not. Suggested to try. They said, what is there, why try? We don't understand why we should try. He argued that they would reduce the risk of "one supplier" - they would be able not to search from scratch, but to have an already tested product. Well, more variety. They said they would think. Polite refusals.

3. There is an analogue, and it is cheaper.

A. I contacted, they would be ready to take it - but there is already an analogue, only cheaper. Didn't take.
B. I contacted, they would be ready to take it - but there is already an analogue cheaper. He offered to take a sample. They said why, if there is a cheaper one? Refused.
IN. I contacted, they would be ready to take it - but there is an analogue cheaper. He offered to take a sample. They said why, if there is a cheaper one? Argued that let's look not at the price, but at how it will be sold. Didn't work.

What do managers immediately look at when they hear such speeches of employees, how do they react?

According to options A and B - "well, I didn't get it."

According to options B - “well, if so, it’s clear why he didn’t manage, there’s nothing to catch here ...”

And sometimes - "well, you can still check if it's true."

And again the same false dilemma:

either “the employee did something wrong, didn’t do enough”, he needs to be motivated, / de-bonded / trained, (and someone will say “you need to kick him, reproach him, punish, force him, scold him, and so on”, the choice here is usually rich) ;
or “I’m trying to solve the unsolvable here”, we need to lower the bar / change the task / go in another way, we need to look for more qualified employees, after all, etc.

And these are the same 2 points:

what the employee did wrong;
What have I done wrong.

And the steps are not a choice between two items, but a list of four:

What is the reason;
What to adjust to get the result;
What should I do for this;
What to say to the employee.

Before looking for the cause, let's eliminate a couple of misconceptions.

Misconception #1

Leaders often look at things like this:

“I have to plan well, and the employee must perform well, and if everyone does their part, then we will get the result.”

This view is a myth!

In reality, I am who I am.

"Other me" - I do not have. I won't change in an hour or a day. If I want to get results using my own solutions, I should also take into account my objective limitations. Somewhere I can immediately find good solutions, but somewhere not.

My employees are what they are.

I don't have any other employees right now. If I want to get results with the help of my employees, it is worth considering their limitations. Some things they can do well and some things they can't.

And if the system does not give the desired result, then the reason is not that the employee did not do something, or the manager did not do something. Limitations in the abilities of employees and managers are not the reason why there is no result, but the conditions under which this result must be obtained.

If there is no result, then the reason is that they are not consistent with each other:

tasks facing the system;
conditions in which one has to act;
resources, which the system has;
system capability provide the desired result.

And we must take into account the real ability of the system (my ability, the ability of employees).

Misconception #2

You listen to the leaders - they want to make a system independent of employees - that is, to plan and organize work in such a way that "there are no irreplaceable ones." Otherwise, if we work individually, i.e. “We dance to him” - he will only “star” more.

And at the same time - they want employees to be "universal soldiers", whatever the conditions are - i.e. they did everything right the first time, and even so that I was satisfied. After all, otherwise - "What am I paying him money for then?" It doesn't work at the same time :-)

Or Universal Soldier- but then motivation, and hence the coordination of motives, and not pay schemes.

Or no one is indispensable- but your company will not be an indispensable place of work and income for him.

Businesses are different, teams are different, leaders are different. It happens this way and that.

But if you require both options at the same time - will not be in any way. One out of two.

But, in both cases - both those and other people always have objective limitations.

People, both the leader and his subordinate - should not be super-heroes.

The role of the leader is to make such adjustments in order to harmonize the objective properties of the system with the objective conditions of reality.

As soon as this is agreed, we will begin to get the result we need. If there is no result, then it is necessary to continue to coordinate.

This is the job of a leader - he does not manage "a machine in which you just need to tighten the necessary knobs, add gas or press the brake." He controls the system.

The reason for the situation with which the conversation began is that the system is not coordinated.

If the employees of the sales department cannot cope with the introduction of a new product to the market, then the decision to “attract more employees” will only increase costs, the result will remain the same.

If you add a material resource to an inconsistent system, you will simply waste more.

Look for where the mismatch is, and look for a way to eliminate it.

Where inconsistency can be located: in any of the relationships between tasks, conditions, resources, and system properties.

The tasks facing the system are not consistent with the properties of the system.
Tasks are not coordinated with the conditions in which it operates.
Resources are not consistent with the properties of the system - it will not be able to use them correctly.

In those nine options above, it is only clear that the system's ability to overcome obstacles is not enough. But this information is not enough for us.

There are many things that are unclear about these options.

For example, it is not clear how they chose which of the clients to contact - those who are already taking - or those with whom they communicated, but they have not yet taken anything from us.
It is not clear how the “volume that we want them to take” (0.1 million rubles / week) correlates with their total volume, how large or small it is.

With the answers to these questions, one can understand, or more reliably guess, under what conditions customers would be more willing to give it a try.

In one case, this may be support with promotions (so that buyers try products, and, having tried them, take them).
In another, promotions are not needed, but you need the opportunity to order the same day, and in small batches.
In the third, special conditions for deferrals and discounts are critical.

It is also clear that in options A (when contact is completed after the first failure) - the system does not correct its actions, and for it, in general, any current conditions are an obstacle.

And here “doing something with an employee” is not an option.

You can, of course, “coach” him according to some algorithm - but the market “swinged” a little, the conditions changed - and all the coaching will go by. When conditions change, it is also possible to often change the remuneration calculation system (which is usually called the “motivation system”), but even here, if he does not receive enough, the uncertainty in obtaining the result will simply be supplemented by the uncertainty in remuneration. Only the anxiety of the employees will be greater, and the desire to insure.

But, let's say you, having received deplorable results A, decided that everything in the sales department needs to be changed - both people, and the scheme of work, etc. It happens.

But even here - if you conclude “you can’t cook porridge with such people until everything has changed, then there’s nothing to expect results”, and remove the task, then you are doing exactly the same thing as your subordinates.

They ran into an obstacle and said “well, there’s nothing to catch here, give other clients.”

So you - "well, there's nothing to catch here, give other managers" :-)

As one Soviet leader once said, “I don’t have other people for you, make do with those who are.”

Therefore, you still need to look for options in which you will get the desired result with the existing properties of the system.

Then your subordinates, too, faced with uncertainty, will look for how to solve the problem.

What to do? - Coordinate the system!

Understand the terms:

what kind of clients;
How does our shipping target compare with their turnover?
with what offer we came to them;
what is important to them, what problems or tasks in their business we solve with our proposal, and then what should each group come up with;

Understand what resources are:

the opportunity for the manager to offer something according to the working conditions;
the ability of the company to provide something;
technologies of work with clients;

What is the ability of the system to achieve the result:

If in the current conditions and with the available resources the system does not show the result, then:

under what other conditions the system will show the result with the available resources;
or under what other resources the system will show the result in the existing conditions.

Having found out all this, we are looking for realistic options on how to agree

In this situation, we are unlikely to change the conditions. Let's not move to a new market... But, speaking about the conditions, we can not only change them, but also find out more and more about the conditions.

In particular, the questions “why clients work with us; why they take what they take; how and on what basis they make decisions.

And managers have a universal idea of "taking what is cheaper and new." And it, this idea - does not correspond to reality. Therefore, managers in their actions and conversations miss the mark.

And in this inconsistent system - it is useless to simply “pour a resource”, especially a material one (add more managers, give discounts or make promotions). The system will “merge” him, but there will still be no result.

We need to find out this missing critical piece of information about the conditions (why our clients work with us, what is valuable to them in what and how we do).

If the manager has this information (about which groups clients can be assigned by the similarity of answers “why they work”; and “which specific client belongs to which group”), it is necessary to give it, already as an information resource, to managers. And with this resource to harmonize the system with reality.

If we do not have this information (for specific clients) - but there is a fundamental understanding about client groups, “why they are with us” and “what is important for each group” - then give managers the criteria “how to distinguish which group to include a client in”, and "what questions to ask."

And if the head of this idea ("why they work with us") - no?

Then the project "+3 million rubles / week" should be closed, and the anti-crisis "who are our clients and why they work with us" should be opened. And the head, himself or together with the managers - to go "to the fields."

In which there are direct costs "definitely no less" - and a multiplier for incompetence. Ours (that something was not foreseen) or his (that he does not know everything that is needed, understands, knows how, etc.).

And this should also be remembered every time when starting a task where we are not completely sure that we will get the result - we make a gap for additional resources that may be needed.

Let's summarize

What is important:

The leader manages not the employees, and not their actions. The leader manages, first of all, the system, through its coordination with reality. And until this accountable system is agreed upon, it is useless to press on it, strengthen it or pour it with resources, especially material ones. We will increase the costs, but not the result.

If the system works inefficiently, then before doing anything with this system, you need to understand where and what is not agreed upon in it, and where and what can be agreed upon. This discrepancy becomes clear only when the first results are obtained. Therefore, it is so important to have detailed reporting in the first steps. To instantly find out where and what the inconsistency is, and re-coordinate.

And for such coordination (and not for strengthening the work of an inconsistent system!) We direct an additional resource from the “gap” specially pledged, allocated for coordination, for corrective tasks.

In the example above, the conditions and knowledge about these conditions are not agreed.

I illustrated the whole chain in these three parts of the article, from goal setting and the correct allocation of tasks, their decomposition, and up to the moment of correct setting of corrective tasks for system coordination.

I want your questions. And also - your situations, others, more complex, or from other areas - on which I can, by asking a few questions, illustrate these approaches.

A rational decision is based not on the manager's intuition and past experience, but on an objective analysis of the conditions in which the organization operates at the moment and which are expected to take place in the future.

At the source of any solution is a problem situation that needs to be resolved. Therefore, one of the most important conditions for making the right decision is to analyze the situation and identify the problem.

Identification and analysis of problems is carried out in several stages (Fig. 6.2).

The first step towards solving a problem is its definition (or diagnosis), which is quite complete and correct. As they say, to formulate a problem correctly is half to solve it. The process begins with an analysis of the problem situation. The sources from which a manager can learn about the existence of a problem are personal review of the situation, analysis of relevant information, public opinion, etc. The opinion of other managers and subordinates is also an important source when a problem is discovered.

Rice. 6.2.

A reasoned definition of the reasons for making a decision is very important. If the problem situation predicted for solution is not analyzed deeply enough, the reasons for its occurrence are not established, then it is unlikely that the proper definition of both the subject of the problem situation and the time of decision making is unlikely.

Following the receipt of a signal about the occurrence of a problem, it is necessary to formulate and describe the problem situation in which it is to be solved as clearly as possible. In order for the description to be reliable, it is recommended to get answers before, as ancient philosophers advised, to the following questions: what, where, who, why, for what purpose and under what conditions? After obtaining the required information, one can form an unambiguous idea of the essence of the problem situation, the main factors and conditions for its development, the relevance and urgency of solving the problem. Complete clarity for the initial stage will be ensured regarding not only the economic, but also the social significance of the problem, expressed to the maximum extent possible in quantitative terms.

As a result of the analysis of the problem situation, the boundaries in which the symptoms of the problem manifest themselves are revealed - the so-called problem field. Symptoms of the existence of problems in the organization can be conflicts, failures, deviation of the actual state of the system from the planned one, deterioration of the situation compared to the previous period, weak growth in sales, labor productivity, deterioration in the quality of goods and services, etc. The study of the symptoms of the problem allows you to identify, describe and formulate the problem as a whole - without this it is impossible to delve into the details and make a decision.

Often the problem is not what it seems at first glance. A well-known specialist in the field of management P. Drucker notes that nothing can be more dangerous than the right solution to the wrong problem. As a rule, the wrong solution to the right problem can be corrected and corrected. If the results don't match your expectations, you'll find out very soon and realize that the decision was wrong.

But correcting the right solution to the wrong problem is very difficult, if not impossible, because it is extremely difficult to identify. Effective decision makers have learned to start from the assumption that the problem will not really be what it first appears. After that, they do everything to realize the real problem.

How do people who make effective decisions identify the right problem? They ask the following questions:

– What are we talking about?
- What is typical for this situation?
- What is the most important thing in this situation?

Such questions are not new, but they play a crucial role in defining the problem. To make sure you're solving the right problem, you need to look at the situation from every possible angle.

It is important to establish with acceptable accuracy how serious the reasons that caused the need to make a decision are, whether they arose by chance as a result of unforeseen circumstances or their appearance was expected, who specifically was involved in this.

The reasons that gave rise to a problem situation can be very diverse. To study them, you can use the scheme shown in Fig. 6.3.

Rice. 6.3.

To identify specific causes of problems, it is necessary to causal analysis, proceeding from the fact that changes in one element of the situation (cause) give rise to corresponding changes (consequences) in others.

The basis of the analysis is building a hierarchy ("trees" )problems based on the classification according to the following criteria:

– in order of importance - the impact of the problem on the present and future of the organization;
– magnitude – the number of people affected by the problems;
– the magnitude of the risk – losses from possible undesirable consequences;
– urgency – the importance of immediate problem solving; it is believed that up to 80% of emerging problems need to be solved immediately, 15% can be discussed, and 5% of problems do not require solutions at all;
– structuredness - the ability to divide the problem into separate, but interconnected elements, which allows you to model the solution to the problem;
– solution possibilities - it is believed that 25% of problems cannot be solved in principle; 15% cannot be solved under the given conditions; there are no obstacles to solve 10% of problems and this can be done at any time; 50% of problems are imaginary.

Based on the analysis, an assessment of the problem is made, i.e. establishing its scope, severity, degree of urgency, as well as an assessment of the amount of resources and means to solve it.

Bringing the assessment of the problem to its quantitative certainty (structuring) requires from managers not only knowledge and experience, but also talent, intuition, and a creative approach. The assessment of the problem ends with the formulation of the main tasks and the definition of the content of the work aimed at solving it. The tasks may include de-escalation of the situation; its complete change, when the problem ceases to exist as such, etc. At the same time, adjustments are made to the existing solution or a new one is developed (which requires much more effort and money).

The principal content of the analysis of the problem situation can be reduced to the following points: identifying the causes of the situation, determining the degree of its novelty and relationships with other problems, establishing a measure of the solvability of the problem, primarily from the standpoint of its information and resource support. Particular attention should be paid to forecasting trends in the likely development of the problem in the future in order to exclude the possibility of a sudden occurrence of events that does not leave time for making a reasoned decision.

However, as experience shows, managers often suffer from an excess of information, including information that is not related to the problem under consideration. Therefore, it is important to see the difference between relevant and irrelevant information and be able to separate one from the other. Relevant information ( relevant - relevant) - this is data related only to the problem under consideration.

Olga Moskvicheva
Results, problems and prospects for the introduction of the GEF of preschool education

Moskvicheva O. V., head

MDOU "Kindergarten No. 7 "Crane"

results, problems and prospects for the introduction of GEF DO MDOU"Kindergarten No. 7 "Crane" Rtishchevo, Saratov Region"

Purpose of implementation GEF DO was placed before preschool education Order of the Ministry education and science of the Russian Federation from 17.10.2013 No. 1155 "On approval of the federal state".

In September 2014, in accordance with the order of the Ministry Education Saratov region No. 1529 dated June 18, 2014 11 preschool educational institutions. Rtishchevo became pilot sites for the implementation educational standard of preschool education. Including preschool institution №7"Crane".

So what has been done in this period in our kindergarten? To which result Are we approaching the start of this school year?

IN preschool the institution was brought into line with the standard legal and regulatory framework. Designed to meet the requirements educational program, which allows pupils as a whole and each child individually to come to the planned positive results. Program preschool education institutions gives a comprehensive description educational activities and training of the student, reflects the degree of compliance educational standard and the child's need for activities, achievements of the planned results. This preschool The institution creates equal starting opportunities for schooling for all children.

educational The program takes into account opportunities for children with special needs. One of the sections educational program of our preschool institution, defines the program education for children with special needs in the compensatory group. Upon completion of the development of compensatory educational programs, children receive all the necessary knowledge, skills, which contribute to the further successful development and education of the child.

But not all children can attend preschool Therefore, a counseling center operates in the institution to assist in the upbringing and development of such children. On the basis of the center, teachers, speech therapists, educational psychologists, doctors provide advice to the parent on the education and development of the child. This center has existed in the institution for a year. This activity is new to preschool, but necessary for providing pedagogical assistance and accompanying families where children cannot attend kindergarten for health reasons.

Modern concept GEF, wherein educational The standard is understood as a social contract, focused on taking into account the interests and needs of the child, his family and society. For this reason, one of the tasks preschool education when implementing the standard, parents were informed and involved (legal representatives) and the public to participate in the life of a child in kindergarten.

To complete this task in preschool the institution systematically updates the website, information stands. Parents take an active part in the life of children in kindergarten, attending educational activities. Educators organize round tables on topical problems, discussion club for parents of older children preschool age. The form of work for middle-aged parents has proven itself very successfully. preschool age"family living room". And of course, preschool An institution cannot do without the help of parents in organizing additional development.

To determine the level of satisfaction introduction The standard was monitored. The monitoring showed the planned "road map" result parents - 92% job satisfaction preschool.

Introduction standard affected all components preschool education - teachers, children, family. However, the employees of DOs were the first to feel the changes, because the standard cannot change the work of the kindergarten in one second. Its requirements for preschool education serious enough and involve a lot of preparatory work. The entire team underwent the necessary retraining at refresher courses on the organization of work GEF DO. Teachers studied the Standard through Internet webinars, seminars, consultations, round tables. The most interesting forms of work with the team are the work of creative microgroups in search of new, more effective and promising forms of work with children; relay race of pedagogical skills, etc. At the end of the academic year, the final teachers' council was held " The effectiveness of the introduction of the Standard, prospects work in the next phase. In addition, teachers were provided with psychological and pedagogical support ( problematic survey, financial incentives, trainings, advisory center work "Your question is our answer").

In pursuance of the decision of the Regional meeting of workers education"Actual directions of development of the system education of the Saratov region: tasks for the 2014-2015 academic year” in 2015, a regional team of tutors was created to support innovative development educational organizations implementing programs preschool education. The purpose of the tutor's activity is to ensure the training of teaching staff to solve new professional problems. One of the tasks of tutor support was the creation of a bank of best pedagogical practices for the implementation GEF DOs both at the regional and municipal levels. The regional bank of best pedagogical practices includes the work of educators of MDOU No. 7, 9 and 12.

One of the performance indicators introductions The standard is the success of graduate education preschool organization at school. Quality preschool education depends on the succession system preschool and school standards. Our kindergarten and school No. 4 are actively cooperating in this direction through various forms of work (concluding a networking agreement, drawing up a plan for joint work, a seminar “Implementing succession preschool and primary schooling under implementation GEF”, mutual visitation of teachers and educators educational process in kindergarten and school, round table "We work in the conditions of the Standard", advisory point " GEF DO and GEF NOU: problems and solutions"). The next stage of cooperation between the preschool educational institution and the school will be the exchange of information on achievements preschoolers in the process of learning at different school stages.

I would like to note that the pupils of our preschool educational institution for the second year become the winners of the municipal traditional competition « Preschooler is an intellectual» , the sports team of pupils is the winners of the 5th District Spartakiad in all three stages, the young talents of the kindergarten are the winners of the competition "Star Rain".

So way, introduction of the Standard in our preschool organization has led to What:

The nature of the pupils' activity has changed to research, creative, and the game has become the main content educational activities;

Teachers have intensified their desire to implement the Standard at its next stages;

Increased parental involvement preschool organization;

An effective management system has been organized.

perspective further work on the Standard will be directed on:

Attraction of additional funds for the development of the material and technical base;

Go to educational program approved by the Ministry education and science;

Creation of a socio-psychological service;

Development of the succession mechanism GEF DO and GEF NOU, namely the definition of control and measuring materials for tracking the starting level (intermediate program results) .

There are problems. But they are solvable. It must be remembered that even the most wonderful methodological materials and the most modern equipment will not result unless you start with yourself. A guarantee of successful achievement of the goal education according to the new standard, a new consciousness, a new position, a new attitude to the pedagogical activity of all participants can become educational process.

Related publications:

Problems of the continuity of preschool and primary education in the context of the Federal State Educational Standard (from work experience) Succession is a continuous process of raising and educating a child, which has general and specific goals for each age period.

Ensuring the availability of quality preschool education in the context of the introduction of the Federal State Educational Standard of preschool education Kalimullina Saniya Fagimovna - educator of the MBDOU "Kindergarten of a general developmental type" Traffic Light "of the city of Buinsk, Buinsky Municipal.

March 28, 2017 at the Mordovian State Pedagogical Institute. ME Evsevyeva hosted the Interregional Scientific and Practical Conference.

Plan-program of professional self-development of a teacher Topic: “Solution of the problem of social partnership with the family in the context of the introduction of the Federal State Educational Standard.

Federal state standard of primary general education: results, problems and ways to solve them.

Gumarova Marina Nikolaevna

Deputy director for water resources management

MBOU "Secondary school of the village of Mariets"

Since September 1, 2011, all schools in Russia have switched to the FGOS IEO. MBOU "Secondary school of the village of Mariets" was no exception. In 2011, the first grade began to study according to the new standards. For our school, work on the GEF IEO has become a responsible step. A working group was created at the school, whose members worked on the regulatory framework of the Federal State Educational Standard, the development of the main educational program for primary general education, work programs in subjects, and an extracurricular activity program. In preparation for the implementation of the Federal State Educational Standard, all teachers worked on improving their skills through: taking courses, attending various seminars, studying scientific and methodological literature. This academic year, all students in grades 1-4 are studying according to the new standards.

Analyzing the process of implementation of the Federal State Educational Standard for four years, the following can be noted positive trends.

Observations of students in grades 1-4 when attending various events show:

that the children began to speak better;

easier to respond to teacher questions;

enter into a dialogue, draw conclusions;

participate in project activities.

Tell about 5th grade

The following indicators can also be attributed to the positive results of the introduction of the Federal State Educational Standard:

school teachers began to actively improve their skills, master new technologies and teaching aids;

increased activity of parents of students in participation in educational activities.

As in any business, in addition to the positive aspects in the transition to the Federal State Educational Standard in elementary school, we, of course, encountered many problems.

The unpreparedness of teachers in the introduction and implementation of the Federal State Educational Standard. This problem arose not because the teacher does not want to readjust, but because it is DIFFICULT to readjust. The stable methodology of conducting the lesson that has developed over the previous years still hinders the introduction of new forms and technologies; also, the implementation of project activities requires the teacher to master the techniques and technologies of the project method to perfection.

Problem solving: organizing methodological work, holding seminars, master classes on issues that cause difficulties.

Lack of diagnostic materials to assess the development of meta-subject and personal results.

Problem solving: selection of the necessary diagnostics, creation of a journal for evaluating UUD, work with a school psychologist to diagnose personal results.

Insufficient provision of the material and technical base of the educational institution in accordance with the requirements of the Federal State Educational Standard (the library fund for primary grades needs to be expanded; each classroom must be connected to the Internet, a computer class for primary school, or at least equip the place of work of each teacher)

Solution to the problem: at the moment, this problem is practically solved: primary school teachers have personal computers in their classrooms, a projector (1 per primary school), two classes are connected to the Internet, in addition to the computer class, primary school teachers can use the classroom with an interactive set-top box.

There are not enough classrooms in the school building to organize extracurricular activities.

Solution to the problem: networking with the central library, the House of Culture

Lack of student motivation to learn, desire to learn.

Although I put this problem in last place, it is one of the main ones that needs to be solved first. The teacher plays an important role in solving this problem.

Let's try to find a solution to this problem together!

How to interest children in studying subjects, make the lesson favorite, exciting? Many educators and teachers are looking for answers to these questions.

“All our plans, all searches and constructions turn into dust if the student has no desire to learn.” The teacher must be able to arouse this desire in students, which means that he must form the appropriate motivation in students.

Motivation- motivation that causes activity and determines its direction.

Components of motivation:

- Meaning of teaching- the inner attitude of the student to learning. Psychologists note that the meaning of teaching is a complex personal formation that includes two points: the child's awareness of the objective significance of teaching; the child's understanding of the subjective significance of learning.

- Teaching motive

- Goal setting

- Emotions

- Interests -

Our further work will be carried out in groups, there are five groups in total, according to the number of motivation components.

Each group is offered its own task: from the proposed attitudes and actions, teachers must choose those that will contribute to the formation of one of the components of the motivational sphere of the teaching, highlight these statements with a marker on the sheet. After the end of the work, each group finds a joint decision on the problem of increasing motivation.

Attitudes and actions of the teacher:

- joint work with children to comprehend and accept the goal of the upcoming activity and setting learning objectives;

- choice of means adequate to the goal;

- taking into account the age characteristics of schoolchildren;

- the choice of action in accordance with the capabilities of the student;

- use of problematic situations, disputes, discussions;

- non-standard form of conducting lessons;

- creating a situation of success;

- creating an atmosphere of mutual understanding and cooperation in the classroom;

- the use of group and individual forms of organization of educational activities;

- emotional speech of the teacher;

- the use of cognitive and didactic games, gaming technologies;

- application of encouragement and censure;

- the teacher's faith in the student's abilities;

- formation of adequate self-esteem of students;

- encouraging students to choose and independently use different ways of completing tasks without fear of making a mistake;

- assessment of the student's activity not only by the final result (correct - incorrect), but also by the process of achieving it.

Task for group I:

Dear Colleagues! Based on personal experience, I suggest that you choose from the proposed attitudes and actions of the teacher those that will contribute to the formation of the component of the motivational sphere of learning - the meaning of the doctrine .

The meaning of the doctrine- the inner attitude of the student to learning. Psychologists note that the meaning of teaching is a complex personal formation, which includes two points:

the child's awareness of the objective significance of learning;

the child's understanding of the subjective significance of learning.

Task for group II:

motive of teaching .

Teaching motive- a motive, an internal personal motivation for action, a conscious interest in its commission.

Task for group III:

Dear Colleagues! Based on personal experience, we suggest that you choose from the proposed attitudes and actions of the teacher those that will contribute to the formation of the component of the motivational sphere of learning - goal setting .

Goal setting- this is the focus of the student on the implementation of individual actions included in the educational activity. Through setting goals, the motives of the teaching are embodied.

Task for group IV:

Emotions- the reaction of the child to the influence of internal and external stimuli. Emotions depend on the characteristics of the student's educational activity; they accompany the process of learning and precede it. Activity supported by emotions proceeds much more successfully than activity to which a person forces himself with the cold arguments of reason.

Task for group V:

Interests - cognitive-emotional attitude of the student to learning. For the teacher, this is the ratio of the meaning of the teaching, the nature of motives, the maturity of goals and the characteristics of emotions.

The result of the work in groups: the overall result is the sum of the selected answers of each group.

To motivate students to learn...

There are many problems. They are solvable. The main thing is not to retreat and follow the intended path.

“We live in a changing world, and if you turn a standard into an anchor that once fell from a ship at one point, then it will turn into a brake.” Alexander Asmolov, one of the main developers of new standards.

List of sources:

1.Internet source. Information for the teachers' council.

link address: https :// www . google . en / url ? sa = t & rct = j & q =& esrc = s & source = web & cd =1& cad = rja & uact =8& ved =0 CBwQFjAAahUKEwiRsvnZwozIAhWk 93 IKHSb 3 AKY & url = http %3 A %2 F %2 F 40422- s -010. edusite . en %2 FDswMedia %2 Fpedsovet . doc & usg = AFQjCNH 60 X 7 JHWvK 707 EWdjw 8 QBZwfLarw

Medvedev A.N., Chief Auditor of CJSC "Audit BT", member of the Scientific and Expert Council of the Chamber of Tax Consultants, Ph.D.

Numerous publications are devoted to the topic of a business goal in tax legal relations, which are based, as a rule, on an analysis of the position of the highest judicial instances of the country, set out in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of October 12, 2006 No. 53, as well as in the Rulings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 8, 2004 No. 169-O and dated June 4, 2007 No. 320-O-P.

The assessment of a reasonable business purpose in transactions is present in many tax disputes (see, in particular, the decisions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Central District of October 22, 2007 in case No. A54-2571 / 06-C5, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga-Vyatka District of April 27, 2007 in case No. А79-4114/2006, Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Urals District dated October 29, 2007 No. Ф09-8821/07-С2 in case No. А07-27580/06, Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated August 2, 2007 in case No. КА- А40/3580-07 etc.)

Recall the legal position set out in the Ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of June 4, 2007 No. 320-O-P, which, in turn, referred to the position of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in Resolution No. 53 of October 12, 2006 “On the assessment by arbitration courts of the validity receipt by the taxpayer of tax benefits":

— the reasonableness of the expenses taken into account when calculating the tax base should be assessed taking into account the circumstances indicating the intentions of the taxpayer to obtain an economic benefit as a result of real entrepreneurial or other economic activity; at the same time, we are talking about the intentions and goals (orientation) of this activity, and not about its result; at the same time, the validity of obtaining a tax benefit cannot be made dependent on the efficiency of capital use;

- tax legislation does not use the concept of economic expediency and does not regulate the procedure and conditions for conducting financial and economic activities, and therefore the validity of expenses that reduce income received for tax purposes cannot be assessed in terms of their expediency, rationality, efficiency or the result obtained, - in By virtue of the principle of freedom of economic activity, the taxpayer carries out it independently at his own risk and has the right to independently and solely evaluate its effectiveness and expediency (let us pay attention to a kind of “Freudian clause”: in the documents of the two highest judicial instances of the country there is precisely this sequence: first, efficiency, and only then - expediency, while in life it happens the other way around: first, expediency is evaluated, and only then - the effectiveness and efficiency of the result obtained!);

- Judicial control is not intended to check the economic feasibility of decisions made by business entities that have independence and wide discretion in business, because due to the risky nature of such activities, there are objective limits in the ability of the courts to identify the presence of business miscalculations in it.

Thus, the main condition for recognizing expenses as justified is the direction of the expenses incurred to generate income. And if there is no income, then what?

What is a "goal"?

According to the Dictionary of the Russian Language by S.I. Ozhegov, the word "goal" has two meanings:

- the place in which you need to get when shooting;

- an object of desire.

Let's start with the first meaning of this word and give one instructive story.

In February 2004, during the large-scale military exercises "Safety-2004", it was planned to launch a ballistic missile from the Barents Sea, which was supposed to hit a target in Kamchatka. The President of Russia watched the launch of missiles from the navigation bridge of the Arkhangelsk nuclear submarine. However, the rocket did not launch because the rocket did not leave the missile silo of the Novomoskovsk nuclear submarine.

What do the military do in this situation?

Do they admit that the launch was thwarted, and the target was not hit?

Nothing like this! You don't know our admirals well!

If the goal is not achieved, then what do the military do?

Adjust the goal, bringing it to the result!

The rocket didn't come out of the mine? So that was the goal! And the rocket did not come out because "the satellite blocked the signal to launch rockets"! Then the military corrected the target again and stated that a "conditional launch - an electronic launch of a missile without a practical exit of the missile from the mine" was carried out.

Curiously, what then was the Supreme Commander-in-Chief watching from the navigation bridge of the nuclear submarine? For a "conditional launch"? Or for blocking the launch from the satellite?

Nevertheless, the military reported on the achievement of the goal, adjusting the goal to the result.

The above example quite logically fits into the logic of the Definition of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 320-O-P: first, efficiency is evaluated, and only then expediency.

Unproductive (from the point of view of tax authorities) business trip.

Now let's move from naval life to civilian life.

Suppose an employee of an organization was sent on a business trip to conclude a contract. In the order for a business trip and in the travel certificate, it is so directly stated: "The purpose of the business trip is to conclude an agreement."

And what do you order to do if the contract was not concluded during the business trip?

To admit to the inefficiency of the business trip and, as a result, to the groundlessness of expenses?

And that's exactly what the tax authorities think.

And you can, using naval experience, first evaluate the result, and based on this, adjust the goal. And even better - initially set a goal so big that it was impossible not to hit it (for this, no specifics are needed in the purpose of the trip - just write a phrase like "to solve production issues" - and what issues will actually be resolved, those become both a result and a goal).

Example 1

During the tax audit, it was found that the taxpayer included in the expenses the costs of the employee's business trip to Frankfurt. The tax inspectorate believes that these costs are economically unjustified, since the deal was not concluded as a result of the negotiations.

The taxpayer defended in court the economic feasibility of the disputed costs, since as a result of the business trip, business ties were established with German partners and an agreement was reached on the possibility of cooperation.

Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District

So, in the case under consideration, the business goal (and the result at the same time!) Was not the conclusion of a deal (since the contract was not concluded!), but the establishment of business ties with German partners, the establishment of personal contacts, and the achievement of an agreement in principle on the possibility of cooperation!

What is the business purpose of hiring an intermediary?

Quite often, tax authorities make claims to taxpayers if they purchase inventory items through an intermediary. The taxpayer's argument usually boils down to the following:

- could buy directly from the manufacturer, but artificially created a "scheme";

- purchase through an intermediary cost more, as a result of which the deduction of input VAT also increased, which was the goal of the taxpayer.

Example 2

The tax authority concluded that the production and economic operations were unfair and the economic inexpediency of transactions for the sale of goods under the scheme of CJSC OMKHAS - LLC OMKHAS-M - CJSC OMKHAS, since it would be more profitable for ZAO OMKHAS to obtain the maximum economic effect to purchase gas oil directly at the manufacturing plant OAO Nizhnekamsk Oil Refinery, or from ZAO Taif-NK, since, by resorting to the services of an intermediary ZAO Taif-NK - under a commission agreement, ZAO OMKhAS increased the actual production costs export goods by 275%, or 2.75 times.

Considering the tax dispute, the courts came to the conclusion that the calculation was unfounded, the methodology used by the inspectorate was inconsistent with the provisions of the Instruction for planning, accounting and calculating the cost of production at oil refineries and petrochemical enterprises, approved by Order of the Ministry of Fuel and Energy of Russia dated November 17, 1998 N 371, according to which the cost of vacuum gas oil is determined as 0.9 of the base price of oil. The tax authority did not take into account that as a result of oil refining, a number of goods accompanying vacuum gas oil of various prices were obtained, which were subsequently sold and brought profit to the company.

In addition, the courts found that the purchase of gas oil from a subsidiary was caused by necessity: the goods were not enough to sell to a foreign buyer. The contractual relations between these organizations are aimed at making a profit by the holding as a whole, between the companies there is a separation of functions and sales markets: Omkhas-M LLC sells goods only on the domestic market, while Omkhas CJSC has an export license. Transactions with oil products made by Omkhas-M LLC are profitable, which is confirmed by the calculations presented in the case file.

These circumstances are reasonably regarded by the courts as excluding the influence of the interdependence of companies on the formation of transaction prices and contributing to their increase in order to recover VAT.

The argument of the tax authority that in order to obtain the maximum economic effect of OMKhAS CJSC it would be more profitable to purchase gas oil directly from TAIF-NK CJSC or directly from the Nizhnekamsk Oil Refinery OJSC manufacturing plant is untenable, since the tax authority did not provide evidence of the taxpayer has this option.

Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District

Perhaps, in some cases, unscrupulous taxpayers practice such a scheme for the purpose of tax optimization, but how can conscientious taxpayers fight off such claims?

What was the business purpose of acquiring inventory items through an intermediary, if it could be purchased directly from the manufacturer?

Here is just one argument:

In paragraph 2 of the information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation "Review of the resolution of disputes under the commission agreement" dated November 17, 2004 No. 85, it is explained:

“The counterparty in a transaction concluded with him by the commission agent on behalf of the committent does not have the right to claim against the committent, except in cases where the duties of the commission agent have been transferred to the committent by agreement on the transfer of debt or on the basis of law.

The closed joint-stock company (seller) filed a lawsuit with the arbitration court against an individual entrepreneur (the first defendant) and a limited liability company (the second defendant) to recover jointly and severally the debt for the delivered goods.

Claims against the first defendant are based on a purchase and sale transaction concluded between him and the plaintiff. The claim against the second defendant was put forward in view of the commission agreement concluded between the defendants, in which the committent (second defendant) is obliged, on the basis of paragraph four of Article 1000 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, to release the commission agent (first defendant) from obligations to pay for the goods assumed by the first defendant in a sale and purchase transaction with the plaintiff .

The court satisfied the claim against the first defendant and dismissed the claim against the second defendant, indicating that the rule of paragraph four of Article 1000 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation regulates internal relations between the committent and the commission agent and establishes the obligation of the committent, which can be performed in different ways, including by transferring to the committent debt of the commission agent to the plaintiff or direct repayment of this debt by the committent.

Since the commission agent concludes a transaction on his own behalf, he has the rights and obligations under this transaction in all cases without exception (paragraph two of paragraph 1 of Article 990 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). These rights and obligations may be transferred to the committent on the basis of Part 2 of Article 1002 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in the event of bankruptcy of the commission agent. In the present case, there was no such basis for the transfer of the duties of the first defendant to the second.

If the buyer directly concludes an agreement with the supplier, then all the risks arise directly from him!

If the buyer resorts to the services of an intermediary to purchase inventory items, then:

- on the one hand, the costs increase by the amount of the intermediary fee;

- on the other hand, all possible risks of this operation are reduced to almost zero, and possible claims (including raider ones) will be directed exclusively to an intermediary who has nothing to lose - in contrast to a buyer who has significant assets and a certain position in the market.

This is what it will be business purpose- reducing possible own risks when acquiring inventory items with their redistribution to an intermediary! And the increase in costs is only consequence, i.e. the necessary payment for reducing entrepreneurial risks!

Conclusions: So, in each specific case, it is necessary to formulate in writing the business goal for all expenses of the organization, without exception, so that the effect (result) obtained would correspond to the goal.

And it will not be shameful to take advantage of the rich experience of "people in uniform", whose result always corresponds to the goal. They quite convincingly pass off even outright failure as their success!

So, for example, having discovered in Rosfinmonitoring information about a transaction in the amount of 1.3 billion US dollars, policemen trumpeted throughout the country that they had blocked the channel for withdrawing money abroad; however, later* it turned out that this information was erroneous - no one transferred money anywhere (and very few people have such money now), and the astronomical amount of 1.3 billion US dollars was taken by the Yaroslavl bank from the transaction passport! Nevertheless, police reports went through the authorities and now their compilers expect well-deserved awards, promotions and ranks ...