Process and Project Model of the Russian Oil Industry Management:
Impact on Sustainable Development
Dmitry Rodnyansky
, Ivan Makarov
2,4 b
, Victor Kolesnikov
, Oleg Levchegov
and Elena Pokidova
Kazan federal university, Kazan, Russia
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Lipetsk branch, Lipetsk, Russia
Institute of business career, Moscow, Russia
Moscow State University of Technology and Management named after K.G. Razumovski, Moscow, Russia
Keywords: Project Management, Oil Industry, Process and Project Model.
Abstract: Traditional methods and instruments of state regulation of the oil industry are losing their effectiveness. In
the context of a significant influence of external factors (OPEC + agreements, COVID-19), digital
transformation of business and public administration, as well as an increase in the speed of changes in the
economic system, specialized bodies are faced with the need to improve the tools of sectoral management.
Justification of the need to transform the system of state regulation of the oil industry in Russia, as well as the
development of the concept and definition of tools and elements of the process-design model of sectoral
management in this area.The validity and reliability of the conclusions obtained in the course of this study are
provided by the use of analysis methods such as statistical and retrospective analysis, as well as mathematical
modeling tools. The article proposes a concept of a process-design model of sectoral management of the oil
industry in Russia, substantiates its advantages, and describes its subjects, elements and mechanisms.
Over the past 15-20 years, project management has
gone through several stages of development - from a
new management style, or rather a set of skills and
techniques used in the activities of creative, audit and
construction companies to a whole paradigm and
philosophy of management (Brunet, 2018), (Eklund
and Simpson, 2019), (Leybourne, 2012), (Salovaara
et al., 2020). At the same time that the concept of
project management was gaining ground in business
schools and large corporations, research was
emerging looking at the benefits of using routine,
process and structure, and combining the two
concepts of management to improve productivity
(Wuliang et al., 2010), (Artto et al., 2008), (Atkinson,
This is an important issue, not least because there
is currently a significant imbalance between the
declared principles, technologies and management
skills spelled out in various international standards,
such as PMI, IPMA, and the actual actions of project
The active implementation of the project
management methodology and tools, including in the
public sphere, was based on the assumption that the
use of a standard project management structure and
system would increase project efficiency and increase
the number of successful projects. However, some
authors have noted that there are costs, risks and
threats to implementing a design approach because
the methodology usually requires tracking, signing
and using guidelines and checklists. In some cases,
the volume of documentation can be very time-
consuming and is often viewed as the main
Rodnyansky, D., Makarov, I., Kolesnikov, V., Levchegov, O. and Pokidova, E.
Process and Project Model of the Russian Oil Industry Management: Impact on Sustainable Development.
DOI: 10.5220/0010586700940100
In Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure (ISSDRI 2021), pages 94-100
ISBN: 978-989-758-519-7
2021 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
disadvantage of using project management
techniques and tools (Dicks, 2000), (Kerzner, 2001).
According to a number of authors, for any use of
project management tools, there must be an element
of continuous assessment and improvement, which
takes time and effort, increases management costs
and, in essence, is already an element of process
management. Thus, it seems wrong to oppose the
process and project management approaches.
A number of researchers also indicated that
further work is needed to explore this assumption that
project management methodologies increase success,
arguing that the concept of project success is too
narrowly focused (considering only some aspects of
project management practice), and sample sizes in a
number of studies were are too small to provide
statistically reliable evidence (Thomas and Mullaly,
Over the past decade, significant attention has
been paid to changing management paradigms, as
evidenced by trends such as the destruction of
hierarchies, the elimination of "command and
control", and the formation of new concepts, such as
new public management or Management 2.0.
Most of these new developments and concepts are
aimed at uncovering and solving problems associated
with the complexity and ambiguity in planning and
executing projects. Another challenge is the increase
in improvised work, often driven by the need to help
with time and cost overruns or volume changes. There
are also problems associated with the changing
demographics of project workers, which leads to the
need to adopt new ways of managing project
negotiations and activities, as well as to amend and
change the adopted project procedures and
procedures. These problems dictate the changes that
scientists and practitioners are trying to implement in
the system of strategic and operational management
of companies, regions and states.
One of the disadvantages of the widespread use of
project management, in addition to its obvious
limitations associated with the type of activity and the
specifics of the organization, is the lack of creativity
and a creative or improvisational component in the
process of project implementation. At the same time,
it was precisely the creative, non-standard approach
to solving the assigned tasks that often led to more
successful and effective methods of achieving goals.
In this context, the concept of Australian scientists
presented by them on the pages of the International
journal of project management (Too and Weaver,
2013) seems to be remarkable. In their work, they
propose to distinguish between two English words -
governance and management. Closest to the word
governance in the Russian language is the concept of
"leadership" or "government". In the context of an
organization, governance provides a framework for
ethical decision-making and management action that
is grounded in transparency, accountability and roles.
Thus, the core values of a well-governed organization
are within the purview of the leadership of an
organization, which includes its vision, values and
ethics, a commitment to corporate social
responsibility, and how the “board” manages itself.
These values are not absolute and should be the sole
responsibility of the "governing board" or its
Responsibility for the overall management system
is assigned to the "board" or "management", and
responsibility for the implementation of certain
aspects of the management system is transferred to
the appropriate levels of management together with
the necessary authority to carry out management
work in the established functional areas. So,
summarizing the concept described above, leadership
or "board" includes a set of relationships between the
company's management, its board, shareholders and
other interested parties. Management also provides a
framework by which the objectives of the company
are set and the means of achieving those objectives
and monitoring performance are determined. A good
"governing board" should stimulate management and
the board of directors to achieve goals that are in the
best interests of the company and its shareholders.
Management defines the structures used by the
organization, assigns rights and responsibilities
within those structures, and requires assurance that
management operates effectively and appropriately
within defined structures. The role of management is
to govern the organization within the framework
defined by a system of governance or "governing".
All the aspects noted above apply to process and
project management both at the corporate, and at the
sectoral and state levels.
By analogy with the concept described above,
"management" or "board" is responsible for all
aspects of project and process management, but does
not replace them, but creates conditions for effective
interaction between managers in their areas of
responsibility. In fig. 1 schematically shows the
separation of these three management hierarchies
within the framework of the described concept.
Process and Project Model of the Russian Oil Industry Management: Impact on Sustainable Development
Figure 1: Distribution of management levels.
All further generalizations and conclusions in this
work are based on the use of this concept.
It is important to note that the system of process or
project management cannot function without
effective support of the management system of the
economic system as a whole. Thus, a project-based
approach to management in such a multi-project
environment as an industry or the state as a whole has
two key functions. The first function is deciding
which projects should be approved, supported,
financed and worked out in detail. At the same time,
the levels of acceptance, management and execution
of projects are different. In the oil industry, for
example, at the industry level, projects can be adopted
by the President, the Government, or supervising
deputy prime ministers, and executed and coordinated
by the relevant ministry of energy. The second
function of a project management system in this
context is to oversee and ensure implementation.
These functions include aligning project provisions
with current strategic industry development
documents, long-term planning concepts, and
answering the question of how projects approved
under this strategy contribute to the achievement of
strategic goals.
A similar situation is observed in the
implementation of the process approach to
management. In most sectors of the economy, a
number of processes are continuous and constant.
These processes need to be managed, coordinated and
interacted between different levels of processes and
management decision making. It is obvious that the
success of the implementation of any project largely
depends on the quality of the organization of process
management in the field. For this reason, it seems that
the only correct solution to improve the quality of
sectoral management is the introduction of a process-
project management model, as well as the
implementation of a new project management toolkit
and elements of the process approach into the sectoral
management system.
In fig. 2 presents the main elements of the sectoral
management system. Moreover, it is important to note
that these tools, as well as the managers responsible
for their use and implementation in the management
system, are not only in constant interaction with each
other, but also in a periodic situation of conflict over
resources, powers and areas of responsibility, which,
in their turn, leads to a decrease in the effectiveness
of industry management and regulation.
Figure 2: The main elements of the sectoral management
At the same time, it is important to note that
conflicts mainly arise during the contact of individual
elements of process and project management systems.
A system of leadership, coordination, or
“governance,” as described above, acts as an arbiter
in dispute resolution. However, the wider the scope
of the tasks set, the more often and more acute
conflicts can arise between managers and specialists.
It is to minimize such conflicts, as well as to achieve
a synergistic effect, that it is proposed to transform
the design tools and elements of the process approach
into a single process-project model of sectoral
management. At the same time, it should be noted that
the governance system is also included in this model
for effective coordination of project and process
elements of management. A schematic representation
of the process design model is shown in Fig. 3.
Project management
Process management
Sectoral management
ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure
Figure 3: Image of process-project (process-design) model
Process management in corporations has become
widespread. There are a huge number of different
tools and mechanisms of process management,
among which the ISO 9000 quality management
system standards, the balanced performance
scorecard (BSC) toolkit, the Deming PDCA cycle and
many others stand out. The basis of the process
management concept lies in the development of
uniform standards of processes, goals, objectives and
algorithms for their achievement, so that the
management system functions accurately and in a
timely manner, regardless of personal factors and the
impact of the external environment. In turn, with
significant changes in the macroenvironment, the
management can change the settings of processes,
improving and thereby developing process
Due to the specifics of the public administration
system, not all process management tools can be used
in this area, but in recent years there has been an
active borrowing of technologies, mechanisms and
tools with their subsequent adaptation for the needs
of the public sector. Thus, one of the most common
mechanisms for the implementation of the process
approach to management is a system of balanced
performance indicators adapted to the realities of
public administration. Process management in federal
executive bodies, which are actually regulators of the
country's sectoral development, acts as a basic tool for
the implementation of both current and strategic
management, a platform for the implementation of
national and federal projects and programs. Indeed,
without a clearly and effectively built operational
management system, the implementation of any
projects seems impossible.
Thus, for effective work and high-quality sectoral
management of the oil industry in the Russian
Federation, it seems necessary to have a competent
combination of both project and process management
tools in order to achieve long-term goals and
objectives specified in the basic regulations.
At present, when analyzing the main directions
and tools of sectoral management of the country's oil
industry, it can be concluded that there is a significant
asymmetry in favor of project management. The
importance of a project management approach has
received more and more attention and attention in
recent years. In each region and in each federal
executive body, so-called project offices have been
created. At the same time, the desire to present in the
form of a project any process and any phenomenon,
which has recently been observed in almost all
ministries, agencies and services, seems
counterproductive. The rejection of the classical
process management, the methodology for setting,
monitoring and adjusting goals and plans leads to
excessive bureaucratization of relations, expansion of
the project portfolio and its filling with quasi-projects
and pseudo-projects (Gaspar Ravagnani et al., 2012),
(Marques et al., 2014), (Thurber, 2011), (Paz Antolín
and Ramírez Cendrero, 2013), (Bolivar et al., 2015),
(Clegg et al., 2018).
The problem that this work is aimed at is that the
traditional methods of sectoral management of the oil
industry, both design and others (federal target
programs, budgetary and tax instruments,
administrative regulations, etc.) in the modern
dynamically changing world have a number of
Firstly, it is the existing contradictions between
the short-term and long-term goals of the state and oil
industry enterprises, which creates an imbalance in
the process of implementing regulatory functions.
Secondly, the inconsistency of a number of
government and corporate decisions made with the
provisions of the Energy Strategy of the Russian
Federation, as well as the lack of mechanisms for
coordinating the provisions of various federal target
programs and projects with each other. Third, at
present, sectoral management in the oil sector is
carried out practically without using the methodology
and tools of process management, on the basis of a
project approach and "manual" management.
Therefore, the scientific problem is to determine the
tools of project and process management, which will
be implemented in the system of state sectoral
management of the oil industry. In this regard, it is
proposed to create a multi-factor process-project
model of sectoral management of the oil industry in
the Russian Federation and its constituent entities,
which will allow, firstly, to optimize the instruments
model of
industry state
Process and Project Model of the Russian Oil Industry Management: Impact on Sustainable Development
of state regulation of both the industry as a whole, and
organizations and enterprises of this sphere in
particular, second, to create a tool for coordinating
and assessing the regulatory impact of various federal
target programs, projects, and enterprise development
concepts from the point of view of the state's long-
term strategic interests in the oil industry. This model
will increase the speed, quality and efficiency of
government decision-making in the oil industry.
In order to improve the quality and efficiency of
the sectoral management of the oil industry in Russia,
a combination of project and process management
tools in this area is proposed. At the same time, it is
proposed to significantly expand the tools and
mechanisms of both project and process management
of the industry.
So, at present, the Russian oil industry is
characterized by the same set of project and process
management tools that are used by the relevant
government authorities to regulate and manage any
other industry. The tools of project management
include the Energy Strategy of Russia until 2030, the
forecast of scientific and technological development
of the fuel and energy sector and a number of other
key regulations with a project structure - specific
goals and objectives, the stated implementation
period and budget to achieve the set goals. Also,
elements of the project management system are
national projects, national programs, federal projects
described above. Various departmental and sectoral
projects can also be attributed to project management
tools, for example, the project of digitalization of the
activities of the Ministry of Energy, digitalization of
production, etc.
The process tools of sectoral management of the
oil industry in Russia include all federal laws,
government decrees, orders of the Ministry,
regulations and other regulatory legal acts that
regulate current issues related to taxation, excise
taxes, fines, duties, licenses, auctions, etc. ... A
separate place in this list is occupied by the Doctrine
of Energy Security of the Russian Federation, which
spells out the main challenges and threats to the
development of energy industries, as well as possible
reactions of state authorities and corporations to
minimize these threats. In fact, most of the regulation
and management of the Russian oil industry is carried
out using process management tools.
It seems expedient to combine the two
approaches, while adding tools and mechanisms of
both project and process approaches in order to form
a process-project model of sectoral management of
the Russian oil industry. Thus, in the previous
chapters, it was shown that some of the tools that have
a significant impact on the oil market and the oil
industry are used separately, by different actors and
without appropriate coordination with other areas of
activity. Formally, such instruments are separate
elements, processes or actions of various economic
entities and are not included in the list of sectoral
management instruments, however, in fact, they can
have no less, and often a much greater impact on the
economic indicators of the sector's development. We
are talking about such instruments as integration
processes, intersectoral interaction, the formation and
development of energy clusters, the actions of
companies with state participation and their
integration interactions. All of these areas of activity
should be considered as tools (mechanisms) for the
implementation of the process-design model of
sectoral management of the oil industry in Russia. In
fig. 54 schematically presents the elements of the
process-design model of the sectoral management of
the oil industry.
The model shown in the figure is a combination
of project management tools and process
management elements. At the same time, in the white
rectangles there are already existing, implemented
and operating in the system of sectoral management
of the oil industry tools and elements. The blue
rectangles highlight project management tools and
process management elements that exist
independently, but are not included in the industry
management architecture.
The formation and further development of the
process-project model involves active interaction and
combination of various tools (mechanisms) of both
process and project management in order to improve
the quality and efficiency of public administration in
this area.
ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure
Figure 4: Elements of the process-design model of sectoral management of the oil industry
Another important component of the process-
design model is the list of decision-makers and
actually engaged in sectoral management in the oil
industry. It seems reasonable that representatives of
all sectors of the economy have the opportunity to
influence the development of programs, tools and
mechanisms for sectoral management of the relevant
area (Fig. 5).
Figure 5: Subjects of the process-project model of the
sectoral management of the oil industry of the Russian
Due to the fact that within the framework of the
formation of the process-project model of the sectoral
management of the oil industry of the Russian
Federation, some project management tools and
elements of process management are additionally
included, it seems reasonable to conduct a more
detailed assessment of the consequences of the
integrated use of such tools and mechanisms. So, at
present, in accordance with the current legislation, the
assessment of the regulatory impact of a regulatory
legal act of a constituent entity of the federation must
be made without fail. At the same time, at the federal
level only federal laws go through a detailed analysis
of the consequences of the adoption of normative
legal acts. Decrees of ministries, Decrees of the
Government may not be included in the list of acts in
respect of which it is necessary to conduct a
regulatory impact analysis.
A feature of the process-design model, according
to the author, is the use of the tools described above
in such a way that, within the framework of this
model, a single mechanism for analyzing the
opportunities, threats and consequences of making
Normative regulation
(strategy, forecast for
the technological
Project management toolkit
Process management
National projects,
national programs, FTP,
departmental projects
Economic regulation
(taxes, duties, tariffs)
regulation (licenses,
Planning, organization,
coordination, control of
industry processes
Process-project model
of sectoral
management of the oil
industry in Russia
Subjects of the process-project model
Government of the Russian
Federation and federal executive
Commission under the President
of the Russian Federation for the
strategic development of the fuel
and energy complex
State-owned enterprises,
private business
NGOs, expert
Process and Project Model of the Russian Oil Industry Management: Impact on Sustainable Development
management decisions was built. Thus, within the
framework of the process-design model, a mechanism
should be formed for the long-term assessment of the
consequences from the use of such inherently
different tools as monitoring integration processes,
the activities of companies with state participation
and the implementation of federal target programs.
All this will make it possible to achieve management
synergy and improve not only the quality of decisions
made, but also improve the socio-economic indicators
of the state's development.
Artto, K., Martinsuo, M., Dietrich, P., Kujala, J. (2008).
Project strategy: strategy types and their contents in
innovation projects. International Journal of Managing
Projects in Business. 1(1):49-70.
Atkinson, R. (1999). Project management: Cost, time and
quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to
accept other success criteria. International Journal of
Project Management.17 (6):337-342.
Bolivar, M.P.R., Sanchez, R.G., Lopez Hernandez, A.M.
(2015). Managers as drivers of CSR in state-owned
enterprises. Journal of Environmental Planning and
Management, 58(5):777-801.
Brunet, M. (2018). Governance-as-practice for major
public infrastructure projects. A case of multilevel
project governing. International Journal of project
management, pp. 1-15.
Clegg, L.J., Voss, H., Tardios, J.A. (2018). The autocratic
advantage: Internationalization of state owned
multinationals. Journal of World Business.
Clovis, A.B. de P. (2018). Corruption and compliance in
state-owned companies: rationality of Brazilian State-
Owned Companies Law. Administrative Law Rewiew,
Dicks, R. S. (2000). The paradox of information: Control
versus chaos in managing documentation projects with
multiple audiences. Proceedings of the 18th annual
ACM International Conference on Computer
Documentation. Technology and Teamwork.
Cambridge, pp. 253–259.
Ding S., Chunxin, J., Wu, Z., Zhang, X. (2014). Executive
political connections and firm performance:
Comparative evidence from privately controlled and
state owned enterprises. International Review of
Financial Analysis. pp.1-15.
Eklund, A.R., Simpson, B. (2019). The Duality of
Design(ing) Successful Projects. Project Management
Journal, pp.1-13.
Gaspar Ravagnani, A.T.F.S., Costa Lima, G.A., Barreto,
C.E.A.G., Munerato, F.P., Schiozer, D.J. (2012).
Comparative Analysis of Optimal Oil Production
Strategy Using Royalty & Tax and Production Sharing
Petroleum Fiscal Models. SPE International Oilfield
Chemistry Symposium Proceedings, pp.1-9.
Kerzner, H. (2001). Project management: A systems
approach to planning, scheduling and controlling (7th
ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
Levine O. (2017). Acquiring growth. Journal of financial
economics, 126(2):300-319.
Leybourne, S.A. (2012). Advancing Project Management:
Authenticating the Shift From Process to «Nuanced»
Project-Bassed Management in the Ambidextrous
Organization. Project Management Journal. pp. 5-15.
Marques, L.M., Gaspar, A.T.F.S., Schiozer, D.J. (2014).
Impact of the New Brazilian Fiscal System on
Development of Oil Production Strategy. SPE
International Oilfield Chemistry Symposium
Proceedings. pp. 1-12.
Paz Antolín, M. J., Ramírez Cendrero, J. M. (2013). How
important are national companies for oil and gas sector
performance? Lessons from the Bolivia and Brazil case
studies. Energy Policy, 61:707–716.
Salovaara, P., Savolainen, J., Ropo, A. (2020). Project Is as
Project Does: Emerging Microactivities and Play
Ontology. Project Management Journal, pp.1-13.
Thomas, J., Mullaly, M. (2007). Understanding the value of
project management: First steps on an international
investigation in search of value. Project Management
Journal, 38:74–89.
Thurber, M.C., Hults, D.R., Heller, P.R.P. (2011).
Exporting the «Norwegian Model»: The effect of
administrative design on oil sector performance.
Energy Policy, 39:5366-5378.
Too, E., Weaver P. (2013). The management of project
management: a conceptual framework for project
governance. International journal of project
management, 7:1-13.
Wuliang, P., Fanbo, M., Decai, K. A. (2010). Project
management system for product development. Third
International Symposium on Information Processing,
ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure