APPLIED RESEARCH

Development of a system of indicators of the effectiveness of the implementation of 1C: processing time of operations, the number of errors, labor costs, financial effect

Authors

  • Maxim V. Rostotskii Far Eastern Federal University, 10 Ajax Bay, Russky Island, Vladivostok, 690922, Russia
  • Maria A. Fedorova Far Eastern Federal University, 10 Ajax Bay, Russky Island, Vladivostok, 690922, Russia
  • Anna A. Kurilova Far Eastern Federal University, 10 Ajax Bay, Russky Island, Vladivostok, 690922, Russia
  • Sergey S. Verbitckii Far Eastern Federal University, 10 Ajax Bay, Russky Island, Vladivostok, 690922, Russia
  • Galina L. Berezkina Far Eastern Federal University, 10 Ajax Bay, Russky Island, Vladivostok, 690922, Russia

How to cite

GOST Rostotskii M. V., Fedorova M. A., Kurilova A. A., Verbitckii S. S., Berezkina G. L. Development of a system of indicators of the effectiveness of the implementation of 1C: processing time of operations, the number of errors, labor costs, financial effect // STROITEL'NYE I DOROZHNYE MASHINY. 2026. Vol. 70. No. 3. P. 268-279.
APA Rostotskii, M. V., Fedorova, M. A., Kurilova, A. A., Verbitckii, S. S. & Berezkina, G. L. (2026). Development of a system of indicators of the effectiveness of the implementation of 1C: processing time of operations, the number of errors, labor costs, financial effect. STROITEL'NYE I DOROZHNYE MASHINY, 70(3), 268-279.

Abstract

Development of a comprehensive system of indicators allows for a multidimensional assessment of the results of the implementation of the 1C:Enterprise platform in construction and design organizations, taking into account the specifics of the industry with its long production cycles, territorial distribution of objects, multi level subcontract cooperation and high capital intensity. The main focus is on four interrelated groups of indicators that reflect the time characteristics of processing operations, data quality metrics through the number and structure of errors, labor costs for key departments, and integrated financial results taking into account direct and indirect effects. Analysis of data from the surveyed enterprises reveals a steady reduction in the time required to perform standard accounting and management procedures by an average of 71.4 percent, with the greatest effect in operations related to the formation of KS-2 and KS-3 acts, payroll calculations, and month-end closures, where the share of template calculations is high, while procedures requiring expert evaluation show less dynamic changes. Structural changes in the distribution of errors show a decrease in their frequency across all categories, from 67 to 92 percent, with a shift from the dominance of arithmetic and formatting errors to methodological and contractual errors, reflecting the transformation of accounting functions towards analytical activities and increased process stability. Labor cost savings reach 33.7 percent of the original fund, varying from 32.8 percent in the production and technical department to 44.4 percent in the cost department, with a pronounced economies of scale in larger organizations. The financial effect calculated using a modified net present value model with an industry-specific discount rate demonstrates a positive trend over three years, reaching an average of 10.83 million rubles per project with a profitability index of 2.93 and a payback period of 1.4 years, where significant contributions are made by reducing labor costs, penalties, accelerating turnover, and increasing profitability. The established correlation-regression dependencies between groups of indicators, with a determination coefficient of 0.84 for the financial result, justify the use of an integral indicator obtained by the analysis of hierarchies method for the classification of implementation efficiency levels. The system takes into account changes in regulatory legal regulation, including requirements for information modeling, resource index normalization and accounting information reliability, ensuring compliance of the information infrastructure with current regulatory standards. The practical value of the approach lies in the possibility of regular monitoring, comparative analysis between organizations, justifying investment decisions on the development of systems, and adapting the methodology to other digital tools of the construction industry, including BIM platforms and solutions based on artificial intelligence. Despite the certain complexity of collecting primary data and the conditional nature of assessing some indirect effects, the proposed toolkit significantly increases the validity of management decisions in the field of digitalization, contributing to the dissemination of best practices and the optimization of processes for managing property complexes at all stages of the life cycle of capital construction projects.

Keywords

performance indicator system implementation of 1C:Enterprise construction organizations financial effect labor costs

Funding

The authors did not declare any external funding for this research.

References

Абдуллаев К.А. Методические подходы к определению эффективности внедрения информационных технологий на предприятии // Вопросы структуризации экономики. 2006. № 2. С. 71–74.

Абдуллаев С.Г. Методы повышения эффективности внедрения информационных систем // Телекоммуникации и информатизация образования. 2006. № 3. С. 17–25.

Алексеев А.С., Панов С.Ю. Методика оценки эффективности внедрения средств автоматизации // Горный информационно-аналитический бюллетень. 2004. № 7. С. 147–148.

Гиберт Е.В. Методы оценки эффективности деятельности // Вопросы новой экономики. 2007. № 1. С. 95–98.

Голов Р.С. Совокупность эффектов от применения системы управления // Научные труды Вольного экономического общества России. 2009. Т. 119. С. 432–439.

Грасс Е.Ю. Методические подходы к оценке эффективности системы управления предприятия // Вестник ИМСИТ. 2006. № 3-4. С. 16–18.

Данилина С.А., Владимирова А.В. Особенности расчета экономической эффективности внедрения современных информационных технологий // Наука Удмуртии. 2009. № 7. С. 38–39.

Дубова Д.И. Оценка эффективности деятельности предприятия на основе системы ключевых показателей // Управленческий учет. 2008. № 7. С. 54–60.

Ключевые показатели эффективности. 75 показателей, которые должен знать каждый менеджер // Эффективное антикризисное управление. 2014. № 2 (83). С. 20–23.

Крюков И., Шадрин А.Д. От результативности процессов к эффективности предприятия // Стандарты и качество. 2003. № 9. С. 62–65.

Леньков С.Л. Методика повышения эффективности работы экономиста // Человек и труд. 2003. № 10. С. 76–78.

Монтегю Д. Улучшаемая подстройка: эффективность операторов. Часть 2 Повышение эффективности операторов // Автоматизация и IT в энергетике. 2015. № 2 (67). С. 40–41.

Палаткина А.В., Степанова Н.И. Ошибки, возникающие при создании и внедрении системы ключевых показателей // Научный вестник Московского государственного технического университета гражданской авиации. 2012. № 181. С. 94–97.

Смирнов В.Е. Оценка эффективности управления // Научные труды Вольного экономического общества России. 2006. Т. 73. С. 105–107.

Яцкин А.Н. Современные методы оценки эффективности внедрения автоматизированной банковской системы // Имущественные отношения в Российской Федерации. 2005. № 3 (42). С. 69–74.

Metrics

222 views
0 downloads
Want to publish with us?
Submit an article

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.