Any analyzed definition has a problem. Business Goal and Outcome: Ratio Problems

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 - to 30 million rubles / month (by +12 million rubles / month).
That is, to reach the level of +3 million / week (by shipment) in a month.
At the same time, I would like not to find out at the end of the month whether they came out or not (because if we don’t come out, then by selling for less than 30 million rubles, we will lose a good wholesale discount from the supplier), but to know and control the progress of execution.

Therefore the task:

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

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

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

Date: 04/22/2016
Product:	Qty:	Volume of applications:



Points where abandoned
Points for tomorrow

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

Date: 04/22/2016
Product:	Qty:	Volume of applications:
New retail outlets that he took to work
Points with which he actually contacted
Points where they agreed and made an application
Points where abandoned
Points for tomorrow

Well, okay, 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 had already flown by. Better, of course, to know this in half a week than in a month. But all the same - what to do now?

There is no desired result - what to do?

What reaction does the leader have in such a situation? How do many people reason?

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

Or "what to tell the employee, what to do with him to achieve the desired result?"
Or "what and how should I 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 to be 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.

Saying come on? - resistance will grow. For if he does not have laziness, and he really tried, then your pressure will devalue his efforts. And if there is laziness, then the pressure will provoke more laziness.
Say "I believe in you, you can"? - there will be a feeling of falsehood (if he cannot and it is visible, and you speak, as if from your words he suddenly can). And from such a falsehood, your authority will fall, and therefore the significance of the task.
Are you going to chew "what to do" step by step? - will stop thinking altogether. Such chewing will be perceived as your connivance at the lack of its results - and this is a provocation to think even less further.
Threaten with punishment / deduction / something else? - then we will simply switch part of the employee's attention and forces from performing the main task - to the task of “protecting ourselves”.

The second option is to do something yourself, to re-plan.

Lower the bar? - we risk that he will stop treating the goals and objectives as something important: seeing connivance, he will stop striving to achieve anything at all.
Reschedule to make the task easier? - we run the risk of going with an employee into a mode when his work and results will require more and more managerial time, which means more expensive. And for you - more troublesome and more problematic.
Add another resource of time or money? - we risk that he will begin to relax, each time flooding his mistakes and miscalculations with our additional resource.

Not reacting at all is the same as completely devaluing this task and everyone else.

What to do?

When we don't get the desired result, we have a new task.

Correction task.

And, no matter how punishing 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 adjust to get the result?
What should I do for this?
What to tell the employee?

It is correct - when four questions, including “what to do to me” and “what to say to the employee”, (and not the opposition of points 3 and 4 without answers to questions from points 1 “what is the reason” and 2 “what to correct ").

What is the reason?

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

The leader began to find out. Received, for example, one of the following 9 options:

1. You won't get through to the right person.

AND. Some of those clients with whom you need to communicate are large companies, there you won't be able to break through to the real decision-maker, failed to contact.
B. Some of those with whom you need to communicate are large companies, there it is not so easy to get through to a person who really makes decisions, it was not possible to get in touch. I began to look for more clients, to plan not 4, but more contacts, so that if someone is not there - 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 communicate are large companies, there it is not so easy to get through to a person who really 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 - immediately call another. But it turned out that we simply do not have the required number of clients. Began the search, maybe there is someone else not captured by our attention. But for now did not find new ones.

2. There is a similar one in the range.

AND.Contacted, but they take something similar, so do not need anything.
B.I contacted, but they take something similar, so don't. I suggested they try it. They said, what is there, why try? We don't understand why we should try. Refused.
IN. I contacted, but they take something similar, so don't. I offered to try. They said, what is there, why try? We don't understand why we should try. He argued that “one supplier” would reduce the risk - they would not be able to search from scratch, but have already tested goods. Well, the assortment is larger. They said they would think. Polite refusals.

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

AND. 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 it for trial. 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 it for trial. They said why, if there is a cheaper one? Arguedthat let's look not at the price, but at how it will be sold. Did not work.

What does the leaders immediately look at when they hear such speeches of employees, how does he react?

According to options A and B - "well, did not meet".

According to options B - "Well, if so, it is clear why I failed, there is nothing to catch here ..."

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

And again the same false dilemma:

or “the employee did something wrong, did not cope with it,” you need to motivate him, / depreciate / train him, (and someone will say “you need to kick him, reproach, punish him, force him, sand him, and so on”, the choice is usually rich) ;
or “I’m trying to solve the unsolvable here,” we need to lower the bar / change the task / go another way, we need to look for more qualified employees, in the end, and so on.

And these are the same 2 points:

what the employee did wrong;
what did I do 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 tell the employee for this.

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

Misconception # 1

Often leaders look at things like this:

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

This view is a myth!

In reality, I am what I am.

“Another me” - I do not have. I won't be different in an hour or a day. If I want to get results with the help of my own decisions, I should take into account my objective limitations. Somewhere I will be able to immediately find good solutions, but somewhere I will not.

My employees are what they are.

I have no other employees right now. If I want to get results with the help of my employees, it is worth considering their limitations. Something they can do well, but something they can not.

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. The 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:

tasksfacing the system;
conditionsin which to act;
resourcesthat the system has;
system capacity provide the desired result.

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

Misconception # 2

Listen to the leaders - they want to create a system that is independent of the employees - that is, to plan, organize the work so 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 may be. they did everything right the first time, and even so that I was satisfied. After all, otherwise - "Why am I paying him money then?" This does not happen at the same time :-)

Or universal Soldier - but then motivation, which means the coordination of motives, and not payment schemes.

Or there are no irreplaceable- but your company will not be an irreplaceable place of work and income for him.

Businesses are different, teams are different, managers are different. It happens so and so.

But if you demand both options at the same time, there will be no 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 start getting the result we need. If there is no result, then we must continue to agree.

This is the job of a manager - he does not control "a machine in which you just need to turn the necessary handles, turn on the gas or press the brake." He runs the system.

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

If the sales staff 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 simply waste more.

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

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

The tasks facing the system are not consistent with the properties of the system.
The tasks are not consistent with the conditions in which it operates.
The 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 does not have enough ability to overcome obstacles. But this information is not enough for us.

There are a lot of things in these options that are not clear.

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

Having answers to these questions, one can understand or more reliably assume under what conditions customers would be more willing to try.

In one case, this may be support with promotions (so that customers try the product, and after trying it, take it).
In the other, promotions are not needed, but you need the ability to order day after 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 the contact ends after the first refusal), the system does not adjust its actions, and for it any current conditions are an obstacle.

And then “to do something with the employee” is not an option.

You can, of course, "train" him according to some algorithm - but the market "swayed" a little, conditions changed - and all the training 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 uncertainty in remuneration. Only the employees will have more anxiety, and the desire to hedge themselves.

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

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

They encountered an obstacle, and said, "Well, there is nothing to catch, give other clients."

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

As one Soviet leader once said, "I have no other people for you, you can get by with those who are."

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

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

What to do? - Harmonize the system!

Deal with the conditions:

what kind of clients;
how our shipping target relates to their turnover;
what proposal did we come to them with;
and what is important to them, what problems or tasks in their business we solve with our proposal, and then with what it is worth going to each group;

Understand what the resources are:

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

What is the system's ability to achieve the result:

If, under 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 at what other resources the system will show the result under the existing conditions.

Having clarified all this, we are looking for realistic options how to agree

In this situation, we are unlikely to change the conditions. Let's not move to a new market ... But speaking about 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, on what basis they make decisions ”.

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

And into this inconsistent system, it is useless to simply “pour resources”, especially material ones (add more managers, give discounts or make promotions). The system will “merge” it, 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 the clients can be identified by the similarity of the answers "why they work"; and "which particular 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 (on specific clients) - but there is a fundamental understanding about client groups, "why are they with us" and "what is important to each group" - then give managers the criteria "how to distinguish, to which group to assign a client", and “What questions to ask for this”.

And if the head does not have this idea ("why do they work with us")?

Then the project "+3 million rubles / week" should be closed, and the anti-crisis "who are our clients and why are they working with us" should be opened. And the leader, alone or together with the managers, should go “into the fields”.

In which there are direct costs "definitely not less" - and a multiplier for incompetence. Ours (that something was not foreseen) or him (that he does not know everything, understands, knows how, etc.).

And this, too, should 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's important:

The manager does not control 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, strengthen, or fill it with resources, especially material ones. We will increase the costs, but not the result.

If the system works ineffectively, then before doing something with this system, you need to understand where and what is not agreed in it, and where and what it is possible to agree on. 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-reconcile.

And for such coordination (and not for strengthening the work of an uncoordinated system!) We direct an additional resource from the "gap" specially laid down for coordination, for correction tasks.

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

I illustrated the entire chain in these three parts of the article, from setting a goal and correctly highlighting tasks, decomposing them, and up to the moment of correctly setting corrective tasks to harmonize the system.

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

There are significant achievements in the activities of the IAEA, but there are also serious problems.

In October 2005, the IAEA and its CEO Muhammad el-Baradei were awarded Nobel Prize Peace for its efforts to prevent the use of atomic energy for military purposes and to ensure its use in the safest possible manner. This has become an unconditional recognition of the success of this organization by the world community. Nevertheless, even these successes still raise many questions and doubts.

Positive results include the adoption of the "International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against ionizing radiation and safe handling of radiation sources ”, as well as the development and implementation of the“ Model Project for Strengthening the Radiation Protection Infrastructure ”. The main goal is to help the participating countries organize their infrastructures in such a way as to improve the control of radioactive radiation. Both of these documents include specific provisions related to the safety and security of radiation sources.

The IAEA has developed a Safety Action Plan radioactive radiation"," Classification of radioactive sources "and the international database, which recorded radiation emissions. In addition, the Agency organized a number of international conferences at which specific recommendations were made for the establishment of national registers of radioactive sources, the decontamination of abandoned radiation materials and the prevention of the illegal use of nuclear and other radioactive materials.

Many international programs The IAEA aims to use nuclear technology to benefit people:

In densely populated Bangladesh, isotopes are being used to improve flow control groundwater and reducing the health effects of arsenic pollution. Unsafe drinking water poses a threat to the health of almost 60 million people (inhabitants).
Ethiopia, Brazil and Sri Lanka are successfully treating women suffering from fatal breast and cervical cancers, using radiotherapy equipment and personnel provided by the IAEA program.
In the Philippines, the risks posed by toxic algae to seafood consumers are being mitigated by the use of IAEA-provided nuclear technology devices.

Perhaps the most significant achievement of the IAEA has been in assisting Member States with training, equipment and expertise to improve the safety of existing radioactive technologies. The Agency has provided effective assistance in assessing the control and regulatory infrastructure for radiation protection in Member States.

In general, the IAEA copes with the task of ensuring the technical side of nuclear safety quite effectively, but the situation is different with the achievement of two other main goals of the organization: nonproliferation nuclear weapons and technology transfer.

The trend of proliferation of "peaceful" nuclear technologies, which is gaining momentum due to high prices for hydrocarbon energy resources, has come into conflict with the IAEA's task of containing or non-proliferating nuclear weapons. The Agency actually failed to ensure effective control over the use of "peaceful" nuclear technologies. It has practically no working methods of "forcing peaceful" use of technologies, as well as leverage on states seeking to obtain nuclear weapons. True, in its activities the Agency relies on the UN Security Council, which can make decisions on the imposition of international sanctions on the basis of IAEA reports. But the activities of the Security Council also turn out to be ineffective due to significant differences in the positions of its member countries.

One of the latest confirmations of this fact is the practically deadlocked negotiations with Iran. The stories of the military programs of Iraq, South Africa and North Korea are also good examples of this. Now the number of states that have gained access to nuclear technologies and on this basis are creating their own nuclear weapons bypassing the Non-Proliferation Treaty exceeds the number of official owners of nuclear weapons.

The ineffectiveness of this activity by the IAEA is connected not only with the internal contradiction between the fulfillment of the tasks of proliferation and non-proliferation of the same nuclear technologies, but also with insufficiently perfect methods of tracking the production of fissile materials at power and research facilities.

The IAEA was unable to prevent the emergence of nuclear weapons in India, Pakistan, Israel, South Africa, North Korea and the formation of a whole club of "threshold" countries - countries actively preparing to become nuclear. Disclosure in the early 1990s. Iraq's secret nuclear weapons program prompted the IAEA to implement more stringent measures to improve the detection of undeclared nuclear activity.

Reform of the IAEA is long overdue. Perhaps, the function of transferring "peaceful" nuclear technologies should be excluded from its activities, since now the Agency has actually turned into one of the channels for the proliferation of nuclear weapons. But this comes into conflict with the global tasks of humanity to use the atom in the interests of progress.

Another possible direction of reform is associated with the increased danger of terrorist attacks at nuclear facilities. The IAEA could make one of the main directions of its policy ensuring the security of such facilities.

IN modern world the challenge of stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons while facilitating the transfer of peaceful nuclear technology runs counter to the logic of progress and is therefore difficult to achieve.

The IAEA faces a difficult choice in its current development strategy: whether to continue to combine nuclear technology transfer with nuclear nonproliferation control, or choose a different path of development.

Perhaps, functions should be shared with another international structure in this area. The IAEA could focus its efforts on ensuring safety, and the existing UN International Energy Agency would be involved in the transfer of technologies in the field of nuclear energy, as well as other alternative energy sources.

A. Medvedev, 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 business purpose in tax legal relations, which, as a rule, are based on an analysis of the position of the highest courts 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 Definitions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 8, 2004 No. 169-O and dated June 4, 2007 No. 320-O-P.

Evaluation of a reasonable business purpose in transactions is present in many tax disputes (see, in particular, Resolutions of the FAS of the Central District of October 22, 2007 in case No. A54-2571 / 06-C5, FAS of the Volgo-Vyatka District of April 27, 2007 . in case No. A79-4114 / 2006, FAS of the Ural District of October 29, 2007 No. F09-8821 / 07-C2 in case No. A07-27580 / 06, FAS of the Moscow District of August 2, 2007 in case No. KA- А40 / 3580-07, etc.)

Let us recall the legal position set forth in the Ruling of the RF Constitutional Court 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 receipt of tax benefits by the taxpayer ":

- the validity of the costs taken into account when calculating the tax base should be assessed taking into account the circumstances indicating the taxpayer's intentions to obtain an economic effect as a result of a real entrepreneurial or other economic activity; at the same time, it is about the intentions and goals (direction) 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 justification of expenses that reduce the income received for tax purposes cannot be assessed in terms of their expediency, rationality, efficiency or the result obtained, - 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 assess its effectiveness and expediency (let's pay attention to a kind of "Freudian clause": in the documents of the two highest courts of the country, there is just such a sequence: efficiency first, and then - expediency, while in life it happens the other way around: first, expediency is assessed, 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, since due to the risky nature of such activities, there are objective limits in the ability of the courts to reveal the presence of business errors in it.

Thus, the main condition for recognizing expenses as reasonable 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 to get to when shooting;

- the subject of aspiration.

Let's start with the first meaning of this word and give a cautionary tale.

In February 2004, during the large-scale military exercises "Security-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 missile launch from the bridge of the Arkhangelsk nuclear submarine. However, the missile was not launched because the missile did not leave the missile silo of the Novomoskovsk nuclear submarine.

What are the military doing in this situation?

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

Nothing like this! You poorly know our admirals!

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

Correct the goal, bringing it to the obtained result!

The rocket didn't come out of the mine? So that was the goal! And the rocket didn’t come out because “the satellite blocked the signal to launch the rockets”! Then the military once again adjusted the target and announced that a "conditional launch was made - an electronic launch of a rocket without a practical exit from the mine."

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

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

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, the effectiveness is assessed, and only then - the appropriateness.

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

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

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

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

To admit the ineffectiveness of the business trip and, as a result, the unreasonable expenses?

And this is exactly what the tax authorities think.

Or, using the naval experience, you can first evaluate the result obtained, and based on this, adjust the goal. And even better - initially set a goal so big that it was impossible not to get into it (for this purpose, no specifics are needed for the purpose of a business trip - it is enough to write a phrase like "to resolve production issues" - and what questions will be resolved in fact, those and become both the result and the 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 considers that these costs are economically unjustified, since the deal was not concluded based on the results of negotiations.

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

Resolution 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 the deal (since the contract was not concluded!), But the establishment of business ties with German partners, the establishment of personal contacts, the achievement of a principled agreement on the possibility of cooperation!

What is the business purpose of hiring an intermediary?

Quite often, the tax authorities make claims to taxpayers if they purchase inventory through an intermediary. Typically, the tax authorities' argumentation boils down to the following:

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

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

Example 2.

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

Considering the tax dispute, the courts came to the conclusion that the calculation was unreasonable, the methodology used by the inspection did not comply 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 as 0.9 of the base oil price. The tax authority did not take into account that, as a result of oil refining, a number of vacuum gas oil related goods of different prices were obtained, which were subsequently sold and brought profit to the society.

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

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

Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District

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

What was the business purpose of acquiring inventory through an intermediary, if you could purchase directly from the manufacturer?

Here is just one argument:

Clause 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 explains:

“The counterparty in a transaction concluded with him by the commission agent on behalf of the principal does not have a right of claim against the principal, unless the obligations of the commission agent have passed to the principal through an agreement on the transfer of debt or on the basis of law.

A closed joint stock company (seller) filed a claim with an arbitration court against an individual entrepreneur (the first respondent) and a limited liability company (the second respondent) to collect jointly and severally the debt for the delivered goods.

The claims against the first respondent are based on the sale and purchase transaction concluded between him and the plaintiff. The claim to the second respondent was put forward in view of the commission agreement concluded between the defendants, in which the principal (second respondent) is obliged, on the basis of paragraph 4 of Article 1000 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, to release the commission agent (the first respondent) from obligations to pay for the goods accepted by the first respondent in the sale and purchase transaction with the plaintiff ...

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

Since the commission agent enters into a transaction on his own behalf, the rights and obligations under this transaction arise for him in all cases without exception (paragraph 2 of paragraph 1 of Article 990 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). These rights and obligations can be transferred to the principal on the basis of part 2 of Article 1002 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in the event of the commission agent's bankruptcy. In the present case, there was no such reason for the transfer of the duties of the first respondent to the second. ”

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

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

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

- on the other hand, all possible risks of this operation are reduced to almost zero, and possible claims (including raider claims) 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 will be business purpose - reduction of possible own risks when purchasing inventory holdings with their redistribution to an intermediary! And the increase in costs is only consequence, i.e. necessary payment for reducing business risks!

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

And it will not be ashamed to take advantage of the rich experience of "people in uniform", whose results always correspond to the set goal. Even outright failure, they quite convincingly pass off as their success!

So, for example, having found in Rosfinmonitoring information about a transaction in the amount of 1.3 billion US dollars, policemen all over the country trumpeted 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 at all), and the astronomical amount of 1.3 billion US dollars was taken by the Yaroslavl bank from the transaction passport! Nevertheless, the police reports went to the authorities and now their compilers expect well-deserved awards, promotions and ranks ...

A rational decision is based not on the manager's inspiration and his 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 origins of any solution is a problem situation that requires its resolution. 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, correctly formulating a problem is to solve it in half. The process begins with an analysis of the problem situation. Sources from which a manager can learn about the existence of a problem are a personal overview of the situation, analysis of relevant information, public opinion etc. The opinions of other managers and subordinates are also an important source when a problem is discovered.

Figure: 6.2.

Argued determination of the grounds for making a decision is very important. If the problem situation predicted for solution has not been analyzed deeply enough, the reasons for its occurrence have not been established, then it is unlikely that a proper definition of both the subject of the problem situation and the time for making a decision is possible.

Following the arrival of a signal that a problem has arisen, 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 before getting answers, as ancient philosophers advised, to the following questions: what, where, who, why, for what purpose and under what conditions? After receiving the required information, you can form an unambiguous idea of \u200b\u200bthe essence of the problem situation, the main factors and conditions of its development, the urgency and urgency of solving the problem. For the initial stage, complete clarity will be provided regarding not only the economic, but also the social significance of the problem, expressed as much as possible in quantitative terms.

As a result of the analysis of the problem situation, the boundaries are identified in which the symptoms of the problem appear, 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 in comparison with the previous period, weak growth in sales volume, labor productivity, decrease in the quality of goods and services, etc. Studying the symptoms of a problem allows you to identify, describe and formulate the problem as a whole - without this, you cannot go into the details and make a decision.

Often, the problem is not what it seems at first glance. Well-known specialist in the field of management P. Drucker notes - nothing can be more dangerous than the correct solution to the wrong problem. Typically, the wrong solution to the correct problem can be corrected and corrected. If the results do not meet your expectations, you will very soon find out about it and realize that the decision was wrong.

But the correct solution to the wrong problem is very difficult, if not impossible, to fix because it is extremely difficult to identify. People who know how to make effective decisions have learned to start from the assumption that the problem in reality will not be what it seems at first glance. 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 main thing in this situation?

These questions are far from new, but they play a crucial role in defining the problem. To make sure you are solving the right problem, the situation needs to be considered from all possible angles.

It is important to establish with reasonable 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 was specifically 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.

Figure: 6.3.

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

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

– by importance - the impact of the problem on the present and future of the organization;
– scale - the number of people affected by the problem;
– magnitude of risk - losses from possible undesirable consequences;
– degree of 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 a solution at all;
– structuredness - the ability to divide the problem into separate, but interconnected elements, which allows you to simulate the solution to the problem;
– solution possibilities - it is believed that 25% of problems cannot be solved in principle; 15% cannot be solved in the given conditions; there are no obstacles to solve 10% of problems and this can be done at any time; 50% of the problems are imaginary.

Based on the analysis, an assessment of the problem is made, i.e. establishing its scale, severity, degree of urgency, as well as assessing the amount of resources and means for its solution.

Bringing the assessment of the problem to its quantitative certainty (structuring) requires from the leaders 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 work aimed at solving it. Decreasing the severity of the situation may appear as tasks; its complete change, when the problem ceases to exist as such, etc. In this case, adjustments are made to the current solution or a new one is developed (which requires much more effort and resources).

The fundamental content of the analysis of a problem situation can be reduced to the following points: identifying the causes of the situation, determining the degree of its novelty and interrelationships with other problems, establishing a measure of solvability of the problem, primarily from the standpoint of its information and resource support. Particular attention should be paid to predicting the trends of the probable development of the problem in the future, in order to exclude the possibility of sudden occurrence of events, leaving no time for making a reasoned decision.

However, experience has shown that managers often suffer from an excess of information, including information not related to the problem under consideration. Therefore, it is important to distinguish between relevant and irrelevant information and be able to distinguish one from the other. Relevant information ( relevant - relevant) is data that is relevant only to the problem at hand.

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

Gumarova Marina Nikolaevna

Deputy Director for OIA

MBOU "Average comprehensive school village Marits "

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

Analyzing the process of implementing 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 activities show:

that the children began to speak better;

more easily respond to teacher questions;

enter into dialogue, draw conclusions;

participate in project activities.

Tell about grade 5

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 qualifications, master new technologies and teaching aids;

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

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

Unavailability of teachers in the introduction and implementation of the federal state educational standard. This problem has arisen not because the teacher does not want to rebuild, but because it is DIFFICULT to rebuild. The stable lesson methodology that has developed over previous years is still hindering the introduction of new forms and technologies; Also, the implementation of project activities requires the teacher to master perfectly the techniques and technologies of the project method.

Solution to the problem: organization methodical work, conducting seminars, master classes on issues causing difficulties.

Lack of diagnostic materials to assess the development of metasubject and personal results.

Solution to the problem: selection of the necessary diagnostics, creation of a journal for assessing UUD, work with a school psychologist-teacher 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 (library fund for primary grades needs to be expanded; each office must be connected to the Internet, a computer class for an elementary school, or at least equip a place of work for each teacher)

Solution to the problem: at the moment this problem has been practically solved: primary school teachers in the classrooms have personal computers, a projector (1 on primary school), two classes are connected to the Internet, in addition to the computer class, primary school teachers can use an office with an interactive attachment.

The school building does not have enough classrooms for organizing extracurricular activities.

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

Lack of students' motivation to learn, desire to learn.

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

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

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

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

Motivation- motivation that causes activity and determines its direction.

Motivation components:

- The meaning of teaching - the internal attitude of the student to learning. Psychologists note that the meaning of teaching is a complex personal education, which includes two points: the child's awareness of the objective significance of teaching; the child's understanding of the subjective significance of teaching.

- Motive of teaching

- Setting goals

- Emotions

- Interests -

Our further work will take place in groups, there are five groups in total, according to the number of components of motivation.

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 learning, highlight these statements with a marker on the sheet. After the end of the work, each group will find a joint solution to the problem of increasing motivation.

The teacher's attitudes and actions:

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

- the choice of means adequate to the goal;

- taking into account the age characteristics of schoolchildren;

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

- the use of problem situations, disputes, discussions;

- non-standard form of lessons;

- creating a situation of success;

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

- use of group and individual forms of organization learning activities;

- emotional speech of the teacher;

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

- the use of encouragement and censure;

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

- formation of adequate self-esteem of students;

- encouraging students to choose and self-use different ways of completing tasks without fear of making mistakes;

- assessment of the student's performance not only by the final result (right or wrong), but also by the process of achieving it.

Task for group I:

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

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

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

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

Task for group II:

motive for learning .

The motive of the teaching - an incentive, an internal personal urge to action, a conscious interest in its implementation.

Task for group III:

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

Goal setting - this is the orientation of the student to the implementation of individual actions included in educational activities. Learning motives are embodied through goal setting.

Task for group IV:

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

Task for group V:

Interests - the cognitive and emotional attitude of the student to learning. For a teacher, this is the ratio of the meaning of 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 from each group.

In order for the student to have a motivation 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, which at one time fell from the 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 to the teachers' council.

link address: https :// www . google . ru / 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 . ru %2 FDswMedia %2 Fpedsovet . doc & usg = AFQjCNH 60 X 7 JHWvK 707 EWdjw 8 QBZwfLarw