Evaluation and certification of personnel for business and personal qualities: Methodology “360 degrees. Custom fields Same criteria

Certification of blue-collar professions is well developed - these are tariff-qualification examinations and assignment of the next ranks / rates. The greatest difficulty is the assessment of managers and specialists. According to various sources, more than half of domestic enterprises do not carry out this procedure at all, somewhere it is formal, and only a few can boast of a well-functioning certification policy. Meanwhile, certification can be a powerful tool that stimulates the development of personnel.

The main one is that traditional methods are extremely cumbersome, time-consuming and inefficient. Attestation commissions, which are created at some enterprises, do not justify themselves due to big share subjectivism in assessments: those who are certified are represented by their leader, who, as a rule, gives his subordinates the most flattering description, as a result of which members of the commission cannot objectively evaluate employees of other departments. Naturally, the results of such certification do not meet the requirements of modern enterprises.
In recent decades, in the West, and for some time now in domestic business, a special methodology for assessing the business and personal qualities of personnel - "360 ° Certification" has gained popularity.

We note its main advantages:

• ease of organization and execution;
• practically does not distract staff from work;
• does not require the formation of attestation commissions;
• covers all the main aspects of the life of the team;
• not only measures the quality of employees, but also significantly affects their development.

The essence of the "circular" certification is that the employee is evaluated according to certain competencies-criteria by his environment (experts): manager, work colleagues, subordinates. According to the same criteria, a specialist performs self-assessment, which is compared with the characteristics of experts.

Such a scheme involves triple feedback: from top to bottom - from the immediate supervisor, horizontally - from colleagues and from bottom to top - from subordinates. Unlike traditional certification, with this approach, the assessment is multilateral, the most complete and objective.
Let us dwell on the applied aspect of the methodology.

The “circular” and mass nature of assessments minimizes the subjective factor in assessments, multifactorial allows you to get an integral assessment of both an individual employee and the rating of specialists in a comparable group.

Thus, a kind of “photo” of the opinions of others about the business and personal qualities of a specialist is obtained.

For any company, the goals and objectives of personnel certification are approximately the same, namely:

• identify the level of qualification of employees, their ability to evaluate the professionalism and quality of each other's work;
• establish adequate wage levels;
• make informed decisions about appointments and movements;
• motivate employees to achieve specific results and a certain level of work quality;
• develop a training program for employees, set goals and objectives for the next certification period;
• set status ratings, trace the dynamics of their changes.

When preparing for certification, it is very important to select quality assessment criteria (a list of what an employee should be able to do in order to fulfill his official duties). The basic criteria for assessing (competence) a specialist, as a rule, cover the most important areas:

• knowledge (general and special);
• work skills;
• ability to master new activities (technologies, markets, customers);
• personal qualities and characteristics of behavior.

Over time, the criteria may change slightly, if necessary, be replaced by others: you need to strive to ensure that, in the end, all of them correspond to the specifics of the company's activities and requirements.
Should be paid Special attention on the fact that, on the one hand, not everyone is able to express constructive criticism without fear of offending a colleague, on the other hand, few can adequately perceive it. Therefore, the most important factor in the high objectivity of certification is the anonymity of assessments and the confidentiality of the results, which is achieved through questioning. After computer processing of all questionnaires, the results of certification with detailed assessments, integral characteristics, rating, etc., are handed over to the employee in a sealed form. In addition, access to certification sheets has only his immediate supervisor. This allows you to evaluate each other's qualities without fear of reprisals and negative attitudes from the side of the person being assessed.
Employees themselves, as a rule, show great interest in the results of certification. It is important for them to compare the results obtained with the results of the previous certification, to analyze how their self-assessment differs from the assessment of the team. This will help everyone identify their strengths and weaknesses, think about how to correct shortcomings and achieve better results in the future.

Another significant difference between the “360° Certification” methodology is the establishment feedback between the department head and subordinates. Objective information about how employees, management, clients evaluate the boss can become an incentive for his further personal and professional development. Moreover, participation in the certification of the immediate supervisor, along with subordinates, significantly increases interest and trust in it.

Personnel officers using this technique note significant discrepancies in the assessments of the person being certified by managers, colleagues and subordinates, inadequate self-esteem, etc. The results of the certification open up a wide field of activity for management and personnel officers for planning and implementing company personnel development programs.

BENEFITS 360 Degree CERTIFICATIONS

"360° Certification" is widely used; formation personnel reserve; choosing a specialist vacant position; identifying the needs of personnel in training and analyzing its effectiveness; making plans professional growth specialists.

• Advantages and advantages of the methodology in comparison with other methods (traditional certification, modern complex - for example, through the Assessment Center):
  assessment of the assessed (or homogeneous functional group) based on individual criteria, combined with sincere assessments of colleagues, allows you to make the most objective conclusion about the employee's compliance with the company's requirements;
• comparison of self-assessment with the assessment of the team stimulates the employee to develop best qualities and the elimination of the shortcomings indicated by colleagues;
• comparing the results of the current and previous certifications, the manager can trace the dynamics of the development of a specialist.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PREPARATION AND CONDUCT 360 Degree CERTIFICATIONS

The experience of using in various companies allows us to formulate several general recommendations on the organization of its preparation and certification:

1. It is recommended to include only those who have worked in the company for at least five to six months to be certified. Such a period is necessary so that the employee can objectively evaluate his colleagues and so that others can evaluate him.
2. There should be no more than 20–25 people in one group: in such a team, everyone is in close contact and has an idea about each other's work. In addition, the risk of getting many "blank" or random ratings is reduced.
3. The group of experts for a complete and objective assessment should include at least 6-7 people (line and / or functional executives, colleagues and subordinates - at least two or three people each).
4. On the eve of certification, all employees must be familiar with the rules for its implementation.
5. For each position, 10–12 of the most important of 30–40 corporate evaluation criteria are selected, for example: work experience; professional knowledge; business relationship with the head, colleagues, subordinates; labor discipline; independence in work; use of authority; labor intensity; conflict.

Similarly, special criteria are formed taking into account professional features groups (for example, for managers - organizational and managerial skills; the ability to motivate subordinates, interact with the client).
6. It is not recommended to immediately link the results of the first certification with administrative decisions - personnel transfers, changes in wages, etc.
7. We advise you to plan re-certification no earlier than in six months or a year, since the employee needs time to work on his shortcomings.
8. It is advisable to conduct a pilot (trial) certification in one typical unit to use the experience gained in branched organizational structures.
Openness is essential corporate culture in a company, when each employee is tuned in to an objective and reasonable assessment of other employees and is used to counting on a similar attitude towards himself from his colleagues.

Well-designed and well-organized allows not only to assess the personnel potential of the enterprise with all the ensuing opportunities for its optimization, but also allows each certified employee to take a fresh look at himself, to better assess his potential, to understand what he needs to improve, draw up or adjust a plan for your further professional development or refine your career plan. Those. performance appraisal can be structured in such a way as to bring mutual benefit to both parties - both the organization conducting the appraisal and its employees.

What should be the form?

In the questionnaire, which is used as part of the "360 degrees" method, one should not only offer the experts, that is, those who will evaluate the employee, a scale for evaluation, but explain what each wording means, otherwise the experts with different experiences will interpret the scale values ​​differently. For example, if the questions in the questionnaire are formulated as follows: “Evaluate the managerial potential of Ivanov I.I. on a scale from 1 to 5", then for the usual Russian employee scale from 1 to 5 is a direct analogy with school grades, where 5 is excellent, 4 is good, 3 is satisfactory, and 2 is unsatisfactory. As you can see, the 5-point scale turns into a 4-point scale. In addition, the values ​​of the scores in the understanding of the expert may differ from the values ​​laid down by the evaluators.
Many Western-oriented companies use a five-point scale to evaluate the performance of their staff, with the following description:

5 - the level of skill that allows you to show given quality in super-difficult conditions, develop his standards and train others;
4 - the level of extended experience, allowing to show quality not only in standard, but also in difficult conditions;
3 - the level of basic experience that allows you to show quality in most work situations;
2 - the level of development, when business quality is not always manifested, but the employee already understands the importance of its manifestation and tries to develop it;
1 - quality is not shown.

In addition, by inviting experts to give a digital assessment of a person’s qualities, we can judge how attractive he is to others and how effectively he is able to build his relationships with colleagues. This means that we will be able to assess the degree of team cohesion rather than business qualities and competence of the test person.
For example, a block of the questionnaire in which we invite experts to evaluate the creativity of an employee should not look like this:

• Badly
• below the average
• moderately
• above average
• high

Before asking an expert to rate creativity, an organization should clarify what the term means and what kind of creativity is unacceptable to it. That is, it makes sense to evaluate the qualities of an employee not in general, but in relation to a given company. For example, if an organization encourages creativity in its employees, the relevant section of the questionnaire might look like this:

• never makes new proposals, rejects the proposals of others;
• seeks to adhere to proven approaches in work, treats new ideas with caution, implements new methods only under pressure from management;
• management readily responds to suggestions to think about new methods and technologies;
  proactively proposes new approaches and solutions to management;
• always filled with many new ideas, uses every opportunity to come up with a new solution;

Lead specific example, which, in your opinion, most fully characterizes the attitude of Ivanov I.I. to new ideas and approaches.

If for a company it is not the creativity of employees in itself that is important, but its positive results, then the same section of the questionnaire may look like this:

Mark those points that most accurately characterize the behavior of Ivanov I.I. At work:

• does not come up with new proposals or his proposals often go to the detriment of the common cause;
• his ideas and approaches sometimes allow to reduce some costs or avoid costs;
• his proposals often bring tangible optimization of business processes, technologies, production processes;
• his approaches and solutions increase the efficiency of the company;
• his proposals significantly develop the company's business. Give a specific example that, in your opinion, most fully characterizes the contribution of Ivanov's proposals I.I. to the common cause.

It is very important that the 360-degree assessment questionnaire be built on the basis of a system of criteria that is universal for a given organization. Only in this case, the information obtained as a result of the survey can be compared with other already available data.

It is also desirable that the questionnaire not only ask experts to give numerical scores, but also to select a behavioral indicator and give an example. Ideally, the questionnaire should provide high-quality information that an automated system or personnel assessment specialists will then digitize. Thus, as a result, we can obtain two types of information - qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative information allows you to describe exactly how an employee performs at work, and quantitative information makes it possible to compare employees with each other.

If the assessment system is built in the company from scratch, then before the survey, an even more difficult task will have to be solved - to create a competency model, a competency assessment scale, and a description of behavioral indicators.

Questionnaire forms

The form of the evaluation depends primarily on the objectives of the procedure. If the purpose of the 360-degree assessment is, first of all, to collect high-quality information about a small number of employees (up to one hundred people), then the questionnaire can be both on paper and on electronic media. Questionnaires are distributed, filled out and processed manually. At the same time, as a rule, each assessed person can talk about the results of the assessment with specialists.

If, according to the “360 degrees” method, a large number of employees, this process is usually automated (distribution, collection and processing of questionnaires takes place using special automated systems). Employees are practically deprived of the opportunity to maintain feedback with information processors. As a rule, the respondent receives the results of his assessment in electronic form.

Automated 360-degree assessment systems are used in cases where the collection of quantitative data to compare employees with each other on certain parameters is of paramount importance (for example, when forming groups for training). Some automated systems they themselves form recommendations for employee training, offer a list of references, electronic courses, a list of trainings. Similar programs are offered by several companies and cost from a few hundred to several tens of thousands of dollars.

360 Degree Assessment: Sample Questionnaire

The number of questions and the time it takes to complete the questionnaires are essential factors for the success of the method. If there are too many questions (more than 50) or they are difficult to understand, there is a risk of a formal attitude to the procedure, people will get tired of answering, which will lead to a decrease in the reliability of the results.

Let's take a closer look at the questionnaire.

Statement Questions

Of great importance is the correct wording of questions-statements (the questionnaire may also consist of closed questions, although it is statements that quite often represent a more universal and convenient form). They should cover the core competencies that are planned to be assessed. The more quality the company needs, the more questions about it should be included in the questionnaire. It is very important that they are understandable and do not use complex or ambiguous terms.

An example of an unsuccessful question-statement: "Tolerant to the characteristics of other people" - not all respondents may know this term. Another example: "In a conflict, he is prone to compromise solutions." The answer depends on how one understands the compromise strategy. Perhaps he perceives it at the everyday level as a desire to meet others halfway or considers it not the most successful, because he prefers cooperation (especially if he has successfully completed conflict management training). As a result, the assessment will not be completely reliable.

When compiling questions-statements, in most cases, one should not use wording that implies extreme answers (“always appears”, “never appears”), because then they cannot be honest, objective and unambiguous at the same time. For example:

“Never, in any form, criticizes the decisions of the management and the strategy of the company”;

"Always ready to sacrifice his own interests for the common";

“Always takes the initiative, makes rationalization proposals”;

"Never gets annoyed, never shows negative emotions."

Thus, when formulating questions-statements, it is recommended to adhere to the following rules:

• avoid complex terms and ambiguity;
• use words that everyone understands;
• avoid extremes (the exception is checking the sincerity and objectivity of the respondents).

Rating scale

You should definitely avoid the 5-point scale, because this leads to the manifestation of school-student stereotypes: 3 is bad, and 5 is good. It is impossible in a short time to sincerely believe that 3 is the norm (not perfect, but meets the requirements), and 5 is excellent (this rating is extremely rare). Therefore, it is recommended to move away from scores to descriptive characteristics altogether. In addition, it is worth using a scale in which there are no more than 6 points, since with more of them, the respondent may get confused.

Along with the rating scale, there should also be a “I have no information” column, since not all employees have the opportunity to see the manifestation of absolutely all competencies in a colleague. Accordingly, when determining the average score, the number of grades actually taken into account decreases.

The scale, which includes extreme options ("always" and "never"), allows you to increase the validity (reliability) of the answers.

Ensuring the validity of responses

Sincerity Scale

It is recommended to include in the questionnaire several questions-statements that do not require "extreme" wording of answers. They help to find out the sincerity of the participants in the study. For example, it is impossible to give unambiguous polar assessments in the case of such statements:

“Does not make mistakes even in small details”;

“He is never partial to people, he always avoids personal likes and dislikes”;

“Definitely positively perceives any decisions of management, etc..”

If the evaluator gives an “extreme” answer to these questions-statements, this indicates either his insincerity (as a rule, overestimation of the marks out of good intentions, for example, out of sympathy for a colleague), or a formal approach to the survey.

When such an answer occurs 1-2 times, it is worth reducing the estimated score by 1 unit, but if there are many such options, then this questionnaire should be excluded from the general analysis, since the reliability of the results is in question.

Shift questions

Some tend to choose predominantly the same responses for peer evaluation. Most often, this is not an average rating (“appears in about half of the cases”), but a stable choice of responses such as “always appears” or “appears in most cases”. Choosing this approach, the employee does not really think about the questions and answers formally. To avoid this, the inclusion in the questionnaire of questions, the best answer to which is “Never shows”, will help to avoid this.

It is worth warning employees about the presence of such "shifters", and this will increase the likelihood of correct answers.

Double questions

These questions allow assessments to be analyzed for objectivity and validity and to exclude those that do not meet these criteria. The bottom line is that two or three questions have different wording, but are absolutely identical in content (it is important that they are not located next to each other). An example of such a double:

“Knows how to manage conflicts from a position of cooperation, that is, in such a way that all parties are in the maximum gain”;

“In a conflict, they usually do not seek to drag the situation in the direction of their interests.”

There is another kind of questions of this type - close questions. Not being complete duplicates, they imply a gap in the answers of no more than 1 point, otherwise the result is assessed as low-reliable.

Survey-Based Decisions
It should be borne in mind that the assessment according to the “360 degrees” method is subjective in any case, therefore, it should not be considered as a tool for making administrative decisions - rewards, punishments, promotions, etc. In addition, if employees learn about such consequences of the assessment, then the answers will either overestimated because of the reluctance to “set up” colleagues, or underestimated in order to settle scores. Most foreign companies, where this practice came from, the 360 ​​Degrees questionnaire serves as a tool for the employee’s self-development or (less often) the subject of a joint analysis with his supervisor.

Based on the results of the assessment, it is necessary to identify areas:

A - overestimated self-esteem in comparison with the assessment of others;

B - low self-esteem in comparison with the assessment of others;

B - high and low scores;

D - differences in the assessment of the same competencies among evaluators of different levels.

In cases A and B, you should find out from colleagues and managers the reason for the discrepancies. The probable conclusion is that a person cannot see himself from the outside. He should definitely initiate receiving feedback from others more often, compare behavior - his own and those people who are considered as a standard, that is, who have competencies that are significant for this company.
Situation B gives the most full view about the strong and weaknesses ah worker. A big plus in this case is that a person can see himself from the outside, understand how others around him react to him.

Section D is very important for analysis by both the assessee and his manager. It is worth clearly identifying the cause of the discrepancies and adjusting your behavior during communication at those levels, which include employees who gave low ratings. The manager, if his opinion differs significantly from the ratings given by peers or subordinates, needs to be more attentive to the employee's behavior: focus on the merits (if the boss's rating was lower than that of the others) or learn to identify socially desirable behavior (if the rating is higher).

Here is an example of a questionnaire that was used in one of the companies (you should not consider it as universal, suitable for any organization). Try to test yourself and highlight:

• competencies that are tested by this questionnaire;
• questions related to the scale of sincerity;
• flip questions;
• questions (there may be 2 or more), the difference in the answers to which should not be more than 1 point (example of duplicate questions).

360 degree questionnaire (example)

Instructions for survey participants
Dear employee!
This survey will help your colleague (evaluated) to better understand their strengths and weaknesses, to see the potential for further growth and development. No incentives or punishments will be taken based on the results of the study. We guarantee anonymity and confidentiality. In this regard, we ask you to give the most truthful, frank and thoughtful answers. If, by the nature of interaction with this person, you do not see the manifestation of some aspects of behavior and cannot judge how he manifests himself in the situations described, please choose the answer: "I have no information." In addition, some of the questions involve the best option the answer is “Always manifests”, and some - “Never manifests”. Be careful! There are also several questions, the answers to which will allow us to assess the reliability of the result; in case of low reliability, the questionnaire will have to be filled out again, which is undesirable.
The survey takes an average of 30 to 45 minutes. We recommend that you fill out the questionnaire immediately from beginning to end, without distraction. This way you can save time and increase the reliability of the results. You can be of great help to a colleague in understanding his strengths and weaknesses and planning further development and growth. Thank you for your sincere answers!

* Answers:

1. - I have no information;
2. - always shows up
3. - appears in most cases;
4. - appears in about half of the cases;
5. - appears rarely;
6. - never shows up.

Answers to the questionnaire (deciphering the types of questions and competencies)

1. Questions with reverse scaling: 2, 3, 8, 14, 19, 20, 36, 37, 46, 49. If the answers to the remaining questions are at the level of 4–5 points, then answers to questions of this type should be assessed in 1–2 points. If the answers to questions with inverse scaling correspond to the level of 4-5 in two or more cases, then their reliability is considered as low.
2. Clearly positive answers to questions 6, 15, 16, 30, 33, 41, 50 indicate a high degree of probability that they are socially desirable. If there are more than two such answers, it is recommended not to count the results, but to offer to fill out the questionnaire again.
3. Groups of questions, the scores for answers to which should have a discrepancy of no more than 1 point (two or more discrepancies allow us to consider validity as low): 10–12, 18–22–25, 34–38–40–41, 39–45 , 43–44.

Distribution of questions by competence groups

Compliance corporate values(questions 1-29, 43-50)

1. Customer focus - 11, 21, 26.
2. Loyalty to the company, patriotism - 16, 22, 47.
3. Orientation to the result, responsibility for it - 17, 20, 24, 49, 50.
4. Initiative - 23, 46, 48.
5. Adaptability, openness to new things - 27.
6. Independence and decision-making skills - 14, 29.
7. Understanding the business environment - 13, 19, 28, 44.
8. Resistance to procedures and detailed work - 15, 43.
9. Stress resistance - 25.
10. The desire for communication and communication skills with people in the company - 12, 18, 19, 45.

Management skills (questions 26-42)

1. Control current work - 30, 35, 41.
2. Team management - 28, 33, 34.
3. Planning - 27, 29, 39.
4. Training - 26, 32, 34, 38, 42.

Motivation - 31, 33, 34, 36, 37, 40.

With full or partial use of materials, a link to the site site is required

Parents often support their adult children financially by helping them buy their first car or pay their rent. Miles Dunkley's father, Graham, went even further - he gave his son a share in the expensive cosmetics and hygiene products company, which he founded 15 years earlier. Miles took a 25% stake in his father's SLG company just as she closed her first deal to buy another business.

It was in 2000: Dunkley was 33 and his 63-year-old father was preparing to retire from running the business. Five years later, the father handed over control of the entire company to his son. Dunkley is currently in office CEO SLG, the company has £40m in revenue and 160 employees in the UK and Shanghai.

The transfer of control is easier if the heir is no longer a young man and he has enough experience, as in the case of SLG. If there are multiple children in the family, there is a risk that someone will feel left out, said Bernard Rennell, head of family management and company succession at HSBC.

David Glassman, a freelance lecturer at the Cranfield School of Management and a family business advisor, says the most important thing when transferring control of a business is to avoid favoritism or any hint of it. “For all positions in the company, use clear performance criteria. A well-thought-out system will give all current and future employees a clear idea that the most talented achieve success here,” he advises.

Difficult decision

98% 2/3 of companies worldwide are family owned. However, for many of them, the transition from a startup to a smoothly functioning family business is not easy, Cohen points out. “When a business is built from the ground up, it’s hard for entrepreneurs to let both experienced managers and their own kids run the business,” he says.

Dunkley Jr. had the opportunity to show his father what he was capable of: before joining the co-ownership of the company, he worked there for several years as a manager. “I was eager to move the company forward, and my father, understandably, slowed down,” he recalls. Dunkley received a second, majority stake from his father when SLG began to grow rapidly through acquisitions and the strategy chosen by his son.

Money is at the root of the problem, according to Allan Cohen, a professor at Babson College, a business school specializing in entrepreneurship studies. “If the company is the source of the future financial well-being of the entire family, relatives may fear that the family member chosen to run the company will not be able to ensure that the business flourishes,” he explains.

Dunkley Jr. has three children and could pass his business on to the next generation. However, the eldest is only 16 years old, and it is still premature to make a decision. To always remember his own good fortune, Dunkley keeps a framed greeting card from his father, written at the time when he handed over to his son the management of the company. “I consider myself lucky because from the very first day my father believed in me incredibly,” says Dunkley, adding that so far he has been able to justify this trust, “without breaking the wood.”

Translated by Nadezhda Belichenko

A solemn summing up of the results of the All-Russian project "RATINGS OF THE AUTO OF THE YEAR - 2018" took place in Moscow. Representatives of the press, participants of the "Auto of the Year" quest, executives of large companies, representatives of PR and marketing of automotive companies and autobloggers.

According to the head of the Car of the Year in Russia project Vladimir Bezukladnikov, the “Ratings” differ from the spring project “Car of the Year Award” in that people from all over the country vote in them. They choose cars according to the same criteria as in life. The "premium" is selected according to the indicators of manufacturers. This year the voting was held in four nominations - "Workhorses", "Modern", "Family", "Reliable" cars.

LADA Largus took the first place in the Workhorses category by a large margin of almost 5,000 votes. Second and third place went to HYUNDAI, SOLARIS and GAZ, GAZEL NEXT. Among the "Modern" SUBARU, FORESTER are in the lead. It is followed by VOLVO, XC90, respectively, with a small margin, and 3rd place by AUDI, A8. The first three "Family" are divided among themselves at SKODA, KODIAQ, SUBARU, FORESTER, LADA, LARGUS. TOYOTA, LAND CRUISER PRADO, has been the first among the most “Reliable”, for many years now. Russians consider this car the most adapted to Russian roads. In second and third place are SUBARU, FORESTER and TOYOTA, CAMRY. In general, in this category, TOYOTA products take 5 places out of the top ten.

One of the winners of the contest, the beautiful SUBARU, FORESTER, was given as a prize to the winner of the "Auto of the Year" quest, which recently ended in Sochi. Captain Evgeny Kopytov, together with his team, successfully completed all the tasks and deservedly received the award. In addition to the keys to the car, the gift included a set of premium Continental VikingContact 7 tires and a spare engine oil TOTAL Quartz. The rest of the team also received certificates for sets of tires as a gift.

In general, about five hundred higher educational institutions and twice as many branches were evaluated in Russia. There were several evaluation criteria:
- average USE score of applicants;
- calculation of scientific and design work per employee;
- share of foreign students in the total number of graduates;
- university income from all sources and the area of ​​educational and laboratory classrooms per student.
If the "examined" in one of the five indicators was below the threshold determined by the Ministry of Education and Science, then it was recognized as ineffective.

“We evaluate ourselves by the same criteria”
Such "generators" of scientific thought as the Radiotechnical and Medical Universities of Ryazan are among the favorites. The rector of the Russian State Technical University, Viktor Gurov, basically agrees with the selection criteria:
- Inside our university, we ourselves evaluate it practically according to the same parameters as in the ministry, - says Viktor Sergeevich. - 10 years ago, the concept of development of higher educational institutions was written, and I was not surprised by today's evaluation criteria. The only thing I do not agree with is that agricultural universities are assessed in the same way as others. They must be supported by the state, because they carry a significant social function. After all, their graduates must return to the village - this is the criterion that must be taken into account.
It was no coincidence that the rector of the “radik” drew attention to the universities of the agricultural profile. After all, the Ryazan Agrotechnological University in the same "table of ranks" was recognized as ineffective.

“There is no support, but the requirements are increased”
The management of RSATU, for obvious reasons, refrained from commenting, but the teachers did not remain silent, however, on condition of anonymity.
- I do not quite agree with this definition of "inefficiency", - says Ruslana, Ph.D., a graduate of the Ryazan Agricultural Institute. - I don’t want to praise my university, I’ll say one thing: it’s a shame that the state does not support us. We do not see normal funding from the Ministry of Agriculture (and in this matter we relate specifically to this ministry, and not to the Ministry of Education and Science, like others). Salaries for teachers are lower than in other universities in Ryazan by three to five thousand, student scholarships - respectively. Therefore, in order to survive, you have to work at several jobs. And this, you know, is not normal for scientific worker. Rumors about the reorganization have been circulating for two years now, I think that now they will become a reality ...

The fate of another Ryazan university will be decided in the last autumn month. In the list of "inefficient" - relatively recently reorganized from the State Pedagogical University - Yesenin Russian State University. The reform of 2005, when the Russian State University was made from a “peda”, had and still has both supporters and those who are skeptical about innovations.

One of them, Aleksey Gryaznov, a graduate of 2004, graduated with honors from Physics and Mathematics, worked for two years in a rural school, and now occupies high position in the capital:
- I was just graduating from the Pedagogical University when the reorganization was going on, - says Alexey. - We wondered what kind of diploma we would get. RSPU graduated not just teachers, it produced scientists. If you continue to study in graduate school, you are already a scientist with a teaching diploma. There were many young people at the university. Our course was taught by Associate Professor Retyunsky: “science-science” on the one hand, and on the other, understood us, because she herself had recently been a student. I am very glad that she led all five years: she knew everything well, she could explain. There were no random people at all then ...

Three streams in one?
From November 6 to 14, a group of specialists from Moscow will work in Ryazan, which will first decide whether to approve the list of "inefficient" universities or exclude certain educational establishments"on the basis of their special significance for the development of the region or industry." This is exactly what the preamble to the results of the study says. And only then the interdepartmental commission will deliver the final verdict. This is the official point of view.

From sources that should be trusted, we learned that the merger of three universities: RGRTU, RGATU and RGU - will still happen. And the Radio Engineering University will head the scientific "conglomerate", and ... three financial flows will be combined into one. It should be noted that the Minister of Education Dmitry Livanov said that in the next three years it is planned to reduce universities by 20%, and the number of their branches by 30%. At the same time, he stated that the interests of all students will be taken into account during the reorganization. True, it is not clear - will the opinion of teachers be taken into account?

Details
A complete list of efficient and inefficient universities and branches:

Effective:
Ryazan State Medical University named after Pavlov;
Ryazan State Radio Engineering University;
Ryazan Correspondence Institute (branch) of Moscow State University of Culture and Art;
Ryazan Institute (branch) Lomonosov Moscow State Open University V. Chernomyrdin;
Ryazan branch of MESI.

Ineffective:
Ryazan State University named after Yesenin;
Ryazan State Agrotechnological University named after Kostychev;
Ryazan branch of the Moscow State University of Communications;
Branch of the Ivanovo State Textile Academy;
Branch of the Razumovsky Moscow State University of Technology and Management.

Pavel Averin

.
The research organization "Levada-Center" noted an almost twofold increase in the number of Russians dissatisfied with the rich.

In the case of fraud with real estate in the MiG corporation, the former general director of the corporation's subsidiary, OJSC MiG-Rost, Alexei Ozerov, and the deputy general director of PJSC Tupolev, Yegor Noskov, were arrested, Kommersant found out
According to the publication, we are talking about the events of 2001, when MiG decided to get rid of its supposedly non-core asset with an area of ​​22 thousand square meters. m in Moscow on Polikarpova street. The property was transferred to economic management"MiG-Rost", which was headed by Ozerov. Subsequently, when a plan appeared on the centralized sale of space freed up during the withdrawal production capacity RSK from Moscow, the assets were encumbered by a lease agreement, which was then extended for 49 years.

In 2004, the complex of buildings on Polikarpova Street was sold to Business-Active LLC, established in the same year. And a year later, this company with an asset of hundreds of millions of rubles for only 10 thousand rubles. bought by businessman Yegor Noskov, who is now the deputy general director of Tupolev PJSC for the property complex. "Business-Active" ceased to exist in 2010, and "MiG-Rost" - two years later, the newspaper writes.
The investigation also found that in 2005, all the property that once belonged to MiG was resold for almost 50 million rubles. Liberta-investment LLC, which has been leasing it for ten years, including to structures, part of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC). The investigators have no claims against Liberta-investment LLC as a bona fide buyer, the newspaper writes.

What will the accumulation of explosives of discontent in society lead to? The madness of the hedonists who are prozhiratsya the country is capable of causing a social explosion.
After all, everyone sees how the social sphere is being cut against the background of the furiously hysterical consumption of small groups of citizens covered at the highest state level. Here Ulyukaev speaks, and talks about the taxation system. Say, no progressive scale!
The rich will pay the same personal income tax as the poor. What is this, Europe? No. This is the robbery of the population and the fattening of the elite, who stole people's property in the course of gangster privatization and firmly stuck to it.

What is really needed new October? Continue to pressure the people with juvenile technologies, the destruction of education, falling incomes, non-transparent political games. At the same time defiantly eat three throats and take bribes of millions of euros.
Well, of course, wait.

"- Okay, okay, kids, just give me time,
There will be a squirrel for you, there will be a whistle!