Associate Professor, PhD V.A. Kudinova¹
Professor, Dr.Hab. V.Y. Karpov²
Professor, Dr.Hab. A.A. Kudinov³
Associate Professor, PhD R.V. Koz'yakov^4
1Volgograd Agricultural University, Volgograd
²Russian State Social University, Moscow
³Volgograd State Academy of Physical Culture, Volgograd
⁴Russian State Social University, Moscow

Keywords: effectiveness, efficiency, physical culture sector personnel, performance, regions of the Russian Federation.

Background. We used formal statistical reports for the period of 2000 through 2015 (Form #1-FK) to perform a comparative analysis of the key performance rates and acquire the physical culture and sports sector development consolidated rates by the regions of the Russian Federation. Furthermore, we applied a key performance rate of our own design that we call the sport mastery equivalent rate indicative of the numbers of the Class I-III athletes, Candidates for Master of Sport, Masters of Sport and World Class of Sport of Russia trained by the regions per year – to measure and analyze the physical culture sector personnel performance efficiency rates by regions.

We calculated regression equations and applied them to find correlations of the overall regional physical culture and sports sector performance efficiency rates (y) with the physical culture personnel performance efficiency rates (у = 0.012 х₁ + 0.05) and the sport assets usage efficiency rates (у = 0.189 х₂ + 0.38). The study data analysis found that the physical culture personnel performance efficiency rates and the sport assets usage efficiency rates vary in a positive one-way manner only when the following threshold values are achieved: 175.0 conventional units for the former and 8.7 conv. units for the latter.

As things now stand, the contribution of the physical culture sector personnel performance efficiency rates (as compared to the sport assets usage efficiency rates) to the overall regional physical culture and sports sector performance efficiency rates in the Russian Federation appears to be notably higher. Regretfully, contributions of these rates are largely neglected by the statistical reports of the physical culture and sports sector management agencies at every management level.

The national physical culture and sports sector of the Russian Federation has long been in need of serious reforms with top priority to be given to the qualitative improvement of the physical culture sector personnel performance efficiency at every level of the physical culture and sports sector management system [1, 3, 5]. The growing disproportion of the performance efficiency rates across the regions of the Russian Federation has heavily contributed to the existing contradictions and the overall crisis of the national physical culture and sports sector [2, 4].         

Objective of the study was to find promising ways to improve the national physical culture and sports sector personnel performance efficiencies by the regions of the Russian Federation.

Study results and discussion. As of 2015, Russian statistics reported 361,741 formally employed staff members in the national physical culture and sports sector (281,178 in 2006; and 319,339 in 2011) with the personnel distribution across the regions of the Russian Federation being seriously uneven, as follows: 32,438 in Moscow city (20,832 in 2008, and 27,100 in 2011); 19,920 in the Moscow region (14,491 in 2008, and 16,656 in 20111); 17,580 in Saint Petersburg city (10,791 in 2008, and 13,989 in 2011); 15,089 in the Krasnodar Territory (10,690 in 2008, and 12,125 in 2011); 198 in the Chukchi Autonomous District (158 in 2008, and 167 in 2011); and 371 in the Jewish Autonomous Region (294 in 2008, and 365 in 2011).

The following regions were leading in the numbers of local population per one physical culture sector specialist: Ingush Republic (673.2), the Ulyanovsk region (594.8), the Tambov region (586.5), and the Stavropol Territory (586.0) and the Primorye Territory (560.5) in 2011; and Sevastopol (773.8) and the Republic of Crimea (691.5) in 2014. The following regions were lagging behind with the following rates: Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District (252.3), the Republic of Sakha (275.5) and the Republic of Tyva (279.9) in 2011; and the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District (208.5) and the Republic of Sakha (235.7) in 2014. These reported data are variable within the range of 16-20%.

The reported rates of the physical culture and sport trainees per one physical culture sector specialist are also variable within the range of at least 30%, with the following regions showing the highest rates: the Republic of Mari-El (163.1) and the Republic of Chuvashia (155.1) in 2011; and the Astrakhan Province (194.1) and Mari-El Republic (179.6) in 2014. The following regions reported the lowest rates: Ingush Republic (23.6), Dagestan Republic (31.7) and Karachai-Cherkessia (47.9) in 2011; and Ingush Republic (48.0), Altai Republic (56.9) and the Khanti-Mansi Autonomous District (68.3) in 2014.

The reported rates of the local population per one physical culture sector specialist were found to correlate with the numbers of the local trainees (r = 0.514); and the Class I-III athletes qualification data were reported to correlate with the reported rates of the physical culture and sport trainees per one physical culture sector specialist (r = 0.554); albeit the numbers of Masters of Sport and World Class Masters of Sport of Russia trained in the regions for the period showed no correlation with the above (r = 0.162). Therefore, optimal rates of the physical culture and sport trainees per one physical culture sector specialist must be somewhat lower than the current Russian average (92.1 in 2011; 119.1 in 2014; and 120.2 in 2015).

Most successful in the Masters of Sport and World Class Masters of Sport of Russia training process (people per 1 thousand physical culture sector specialists) were the following regions: Ingush Republic (53.3), Chechen Republic (29.7), Saint Petersburg city (27.7), the Voronezh region (27.4), the Ivanovo region (23.5) and the Pskov region (23.2) in 2011; Volgograd region (39.8), Altai Republic (36.6), Ingush Republic (33.3) and the Arkhangelsk region (29.1) in 2011; and Krasnoyarsk Territory (88.9), the Ryazan region (64.2) and the Volgograd region (50.6) in 2014.

As of 2011, the following regions were lagging behind in the Masters of Sport and World Class Sport Masters of Russia training process success (people per 1 thousand physical culture sector specialists): the Arkhangelsk region (2.2), the Republic of Tyva (2.7), the Amur region (2.8) and the Kurgan region (3.6) in 2011; the Amur region (3.6) and Sevastopol (4.3) in 2014; and the Tambov region (3.4) and Republic of Tatarstan (5.7) in 2015.

As of 2014, most successful in the Class I-III athletes training process were the following regions: Republic of Mari-El (46.8) and Republic of Chuvashia (31.6). The least successful in this process were the following regions: Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District (0.11), Jewish Autonomous Region (0.49) and the Republic of Tatarstan (0.71).                                                   

Leading in the rates of the sport assets throughput capacity per one physical culture sector specialist were the following regions: the Tambov region (41.7), the Bryansk region (40.7), Altai Republic (39.8), the Republic of Chuvashia (39.8), Karachai-Cherkessk (7.1) and Ingush Republic (8.8) (as of 2014). These performance rates were found to correlate with the Masters of Sport and World Class Sport Masters of Russia training success in the regions (r = 0.674).     

The sector personnel efficiency rates were found the highest in the following regions: the Kaluga region (412.9 conv. units), the Republic of Mari-El (319.2 conv. units) and the Ulyanovsk region (295.1) in 2008; the Republic of Mari-El (399.2 conv. units), Kaluga region (264.5 conv. units), Ingush Republic (261.9) and the Voronezh region (259.2) in 2011; Republic of Mari-El (372.1 conv. units), the Republic of Chuvashia (323.3 conv. units) and the Volgograd region (302.1 conv. units) in 2014; and the Krasnoyarsk Territory (575.4 conv. units), the Republic of Mari-El (444.3 conv. units) and the Ryazan region (441.1) in 2015. Lagging behind were the Magadan region (41.4 conv. units), the Republic of Crimea (46.0 conv. units) in 2014; and the Chukchi Autonomous District (11.1 conv. units) in 2015.

The physical culture sector personnel performance efficiency rates for the period under analysis were mostly on the fall. The Russian average rates sagged to the lowest level in 2014 (107.8 conv. units) followed by a sharp growth in 2015 to as much as 214.3 conv. units.

It should be noted that a range of negative developments in the sector was noted for the period under study, including cuts in the numbers of the physical education teachers at schools and primary vocational training establishments; while the numbers of instructors at preschool education establishments, secondary and higher education establishments, domiciliary physical culture specialists, instructors at advanced education establishments, physical culture and sport facility management specialists and physical culture personnel in government agencies – have been on the rise for the period.

Our study data and analyses showed the following regions being in the lead in terms of the optimal physical culture sector staffing (qualitative and quantitative) rates (as of 2015): Saint Petersburg city (59.0 points), the Belgorod region (57.5 points) and Moscow city (55.2 points). However, these rates still hardly reach the average level, whilst the worst rates are far in the low-level zone.

The study showed the distribution of the physical culture sector personnel being very uneven across the regions of the Russian Federation, with the human resource management in the national physical culture and sports sector still being largely inconsistent in fact. The current physical culture sector specialist training process fails to meet the growing demand of the labour market since the national physical culture and sports agencies and facilities are still in need of qualified specialists.

Low payroll funding, poor social and domestic benefits and insufficient labour motivation system to encourage efficient performance in the sector may be mentioned as the key factors of influence on the physical culture sector specialist career being still unappealing for the young people. The shortage of highly qualified specialists and the disproportions in the sector personnel distribution across the regions have long been of negative effect on the quality, content, process management and efficiency of the academic and off-class training practices at different establishments and organizations across the regions.

We believe that the physical culture, sporting and health improvement activity and the sport assets usage efficiency across the regions of the Russian Federation may be improved if and when a high priority is given to the physical culture sector personnel prudent distribution across the regions with due consideration for the local specifics, actual needs of the educational establishments, institutions and organizations and interests of the sport sector development process in the regions; and based on calculations of the optimal standard ranges of the physical culture sector staffing demands by the areas. 

Conclusion. Top priority in the national physical culture and sports sector advancement policies of the Russian Federation will be given to the physical culture sector personnel performance efficiency. The physical culture sector human resource will be prudently managed with due consideration for the local specifics, actual needs of the educational establishments and institutions and interests of the sport sector development process in the regions; and based on calculations of the optimal standard ranges of the physical culture sector staffing demands by the areas.

References

1. Vinogradov P.A., Okunkov Y.V. O sostoyanii i tendentsiyakh razvitiya fizicheskoy kul'tury i massovogo sporta v Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Problemy razvitiya fizicheskoy kul'tury i sporta v Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Status and trends of development of physical culture and sports in the Russian Federation. Problems of development of physical culture and sports in the Russian Federation]. Moscow: Sovetskiy sport publ., 2013, 144 p.
2. Golovov V.A. Regional'noe upravlenie razvitiem fizicheskoy kul'turoy i sportom (na primere Respubliki Komi) [Regional management of development of physical culture and sports (case study of the Republic of Komi]. Fundamental'nye issledovaniya, 2007, no. 12, pp. 31-34.
3. Karpov V.Y., Kudinova V.A., Seselkin A.I., Bakulina E.D. Monitoring effektivnosti razvitiya fizicheskoy kul'tury i sporta v sub'ektakh Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Monitoring of effectiveness of development of physical culture and sport in subjects of Russian Federation]. Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoy kultury, 2016, no. 3, p. 56.
4. Kudinova V.A. Modeli upravleniya kachestvom fizkul'turno-sportivnoy deyatel'nosti v sub'ektakh Rossiyskoy federatsii [Quality management models in physical education and sports activity in subjects of the Russian Federation]. Volgograd: VGSHkA, 2012, 255 p.
5. Fetisov V.A. O kriteriyakh i pokazatelyakh razvitiya fizicheskoy kul'tury i sporta v zarubezhnykh stranakh (Criteria and indicators of development of physical culture and sports in other countries]. Moscow: Sovetskiy sport publ., 2005, 80 p.

Corresponding author: vu2014@mail.ru

Abstract

The article gives accounts of the physical culture sector staffing rates and the sector personnel performance efficiency rates by regions of the Russian Federation. The highest numbers of the physical culture and sport sector trainees per sector specialist were found for the following regions: the Republic of Mari-El (163.1) and Republic of Chuvashia (155.1) in 2011; and the Astrakhan region (194.1) and the Republic of Mari-El (179.6) in 2014. The highest sector personnel performance efficiency rates, as verified by the numbers of Masters of Sport and World Class Masters of Sport of Russia (people per 1 thousand sector specialists) trained by the regions were found in the following regions: Ingush Republic (53.3) in 2011; the Volgograd region (39.8) in 2014; and the Krasnoyarsk Territory (88.9) in 2015.

As reported for the period of 2000 through 2015, the physical culture sector personnel performance efficiency rates in the Russian Federation were mostly on the fall (sagging from 249.9 to 214.3 conventional units) with the lowest rate of 107.8 conv. units fixed in 2014. The following regions were leading in the sector staff performance efficiency rates: the Kaluga region (412.9 conv. units) and the Republic of Mari-El (319.2 conv. units) in 2008; the Republic of Mari-El (399.2 conv. units) and the Kaluga region (264.5 conv. units) in 2011; the Republic of Mari-El (372.1 conv. units), the Republic of Chuvashia (323.3 conv. units) and the Volgograd region (302.1 conv. units) in 2014; and the Krasnoyarsk Territory (575.4 conv. units) in 2015.