Professional Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/An-Empirical-Study-Of-The-Content-Chara 👈

1. Management Studies, ISSN 2328-2185
January 2014, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1-9
An Empirical Study of the Content Characteristics of Social
Projects (According to In-depth Interviews)
Larisa Nikitina, Maria Tabachnikova
Voronezh State University (VSU), Voronezh, Russian Federation

This paper specifies substantial characteristics of social projects at the present stage of development of the Russian
civil society. A social project is considered as a project system based on a set of measures of social orientation; has
specific objectives; and is located in space and time-restricted. The sample data of 25 in-depth interviews with
representatives of the business community, public authorities, and civil society institutions, all active participants in
community development in the Voronezh administrative region served as an empirical basis for this paper. The
analysis of respondents’ views on the importance of social projects has enabled to define their descriptive and
normative features. The main descriptive features include the following: overcoming specific urgent problems in a
society; implementing state social policy; quantitative changes in the material life conditions of an individual or a
social group; creating labor markets; implementing social innovations; two-way influence of the quality and
quantity of social projects and the level of socio-economic structure (company, region, country). Normative
features include: encouraged development of state institutions; stability of the environment; balanced
socio-economic development; formation of a community of reasonable individuals; development of human
potential. Conclusions have been made about the nature, characteristics, and goals and objectives of social projects
and their role in social and economic development of the region, spheres of social projects implementation
significant for Russia, about active participants, success and failure factors of social projects, prospects and
intensity of social engineering in the Voronezh administrative region and Russia as a whole. Soft systems
methodology has been used for stating and structuring the empirical data. The results obtained have enabled to lay
the foundation for finding the concepts and mechanisms to coordinate the participants in community development.
Keywords: social project, project management, project system, community development, root definition, goals and
objectives of social projects
Introduction
Social projects’ development and implementation is an essential element in managing sustainable
development in any country. In this regard, it is of vital importance to carry out both theoretical and applied
research in social engineering as a form of social activity of the economic entity and as a process of
implementation of social innovations.
A contradictory situation in the regions of Russia has occurred due to imbalance between the potential and
Larisa Nikitina, Doctor of Science, Full Professor, Economic Department, Voronezh State University.
Maria Tabachnikova, Candidate of Science, Associate Professor, Economic Department, Voronezh State University.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Maria Tabachnikova, 20-Let VLKSM, building 54A, apt. 64,
Voronezh, 394036, Russian Federation. E-mail: gmasha3@gmail.com.
DA
VID PUBLISHING
D

2. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE CONTENT CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROJECTS
2
the results of social and economic development. Outstanding innovative ideas come about which can provide
an effective solution of social problems, state structures with a fixed social functionality are formed, there is
proven experience in project implementation by the business elite. An example is the positive dynamics of
social projects implementation of the largest Russian companies during the period from 2004 to 2010 (see
Table 1).
Table 1
Social Projects Implementation by Russian Companies
Availability of projects
Proportion of the total number of companies (%)
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Projects targeted at employees and their families 70 71 80 79 77 77 79
Projects targeted at population at the companies’ location 53 53 60 65 75 67 65
Projects for the companies’ contractors 17 11 18 26 32 31 29
Note. Source: Survey of corporate governance in Russia: A comparative analysis of the results 2004-2010 (Retrieved from
http://rid.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/1CG-research-2004-2010.pdf).
The development and implementation of social projects is a system of multilateral and multi-level
cooperation of representatives of business structures, government and civil society, permanently altering their
role in social welfare and solving social problems under the influence of a number of trends. The latter include
low susceptibility of a number of social problems to the traditional measures of influence, deepening
inequalities between social groups, expansion of the social needs of the population, and others (Moskovskaya,
2011).
However, a clear interaction between the key participants in the social and economic processes is missing,
thus not allowing to reach the full potential of each participant. Actions of public authorities, business
structures, and civil society institutions are often spontaneous, causing short-term isolated effects not related to
the general concept of the strategic development of the region and the country as a whole.
The need to study the characteristics of social projects is caused by a profound structural transformation of
all social relations associated with the post-industrial transition. A number of structural changes that have a
major impact on social practices should be highlighted.
First, social needs and development priorities undergo changes. According to researchers, today the most
significant social priority is not prosperity, but equal access to healthcare and education for all population
groups (Grigorieva, 2011).
Second, the methodological context of understanding social phenomena (practices) changes. Today it
includes such concepts as nonlinearity, chaos, multi-purposefulness and others (Castel, 2009). Thereby, the
criteria for validity of social knowledge shift towards the multiplicity of possible explanations for the processes
under study (Yadov, 2009).
Third, new challenges, such as social ecology, social security, and super-intensification of migration
processes, grow urgent, and relevant (Bogomolov, 2010).
Fourth, the essential characteristics of social services change in a way that they become continuous,
individualized, and global (Mau, 2012). A modern man continuously increases his/her cultural and educational
level, uses healthcare services, chooses a pension plan. The trajectories of choice of services become more
individualized, and they become global and competitive.
Fifth, social processes, like all modern practices, become more dynamic and technologically advanced.

3. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE CONTENT CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROJECTS 3
Such forms of effective interactions appear as social networks, communities of practice, crowdsourcing, etc..
The above-mentioned structural changes are bound to affect the substantial characteristics of all
contemporary social practices, including social projects.
In the context of post-industrial changes, provisions of the new system paradigm proposed by Kleiner
(2011) are brought into focus. In this paradigm, all social and economic phenomena are considered in the light
of the creation, interaction, evolution, transformation, and elimination of economic systems. Under this theory,
a social project is seen as a project-type system based on a set of measures of social orientation, which has
specific objectives, is located in space and restricted in time.
Data Description and Research Methodology
The major problem of any socio-economic survey is the availability of empirical data (or the possibility of
obtaining it). In other words, the researcher is faced with the problem of quality and reliability of the sample
data. Good quality of the empirical data is related to their amount, necessary, and sufficient for adequate
representation. In turn, reliability of the data is provided by choosing the right methods for data collection and
processing methods.
During the period from July to October 2012, 25 in-depth interviews were conducted with representatives
of business structures, civil society institutions, government and management authorities actively engaged in
the development and implementation of social projects in the Voronezh administrative region. The respondents
from the business structures included owners and managers of the enterprises operating in Voronezh. Among
representatives of the civil society were social projects proponents, founders of movements and non-profit
organizations, heads of the largest universities in the region, and actors of youth organizations and journalists.
On the part of government and management authorities participated in the study were heads of departments,
divisions and sections of the government of the Voronezh administrative region.
The questionnaire included three sets of questions on the nature of social projects, the mechanism of social
project management, and personal participation in social projects. This article presents the results of research
into the nature, characteristic features, objectives of social projects and their role in socio-economic
development of the region, spheres of project implementation significant for the current Russian reality, on
active participants, success and failure factors of social projects, prospects and the intensity of social
engineering development in the Voronezh administrative region and Russia as a whole.
First of all, the study found that from a business perspective a social project is a project of public relations
development, social organization, performing an external organizing function. In addition, the study
demonstrated that in business structures actively implementing social projects the functions of ownership and
control are combined, so the second most important aspect of social engineering is a businessman’s (owner’s)
need for self-fulfillment, according to 70% of the experts.
For representatives of civil society institutions a social project is inextricably linked with the improvement
of the quality of life of the whole population or its certain groups and thus benefits the society. Most experts
(65%) associate social projects with improved quality of life, and 35%—with the solution of specific problems
for the benefit of the society or individual social groups.
From the point of view of the representatives of public authorities, a social project is an instrument of the
state social policy whose main distinguishing feature is implementation of social innovation.
Most representatives of business community associate social projects’ objectives with material support,

4. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE CONTENT CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROJECTS
4
quantitative changes in the conditions of the life of an individual or of certain social groups, and to a much
lesser extent with the change in qualitative characteristics of an individual. Thus, only one of the business
experts points out that “a social project should change something in people’s minds”.
One-third of the representatives of the civil society perceive the project objectives as something specific,
they do not have an abstract view of a social project only in reference to a particular quantitative social issue.
Fifty-five percent of the experts distinctly point out that the project objectives are linked to external improved
quantitative indicators of the living conditions, i.e., to social environment features which people consider
external. Only 22% of experts in this group denoted the inward goal of social projects, i.e., a qualitative change
in the human condition.
All representatives of public authorities qualified creation of a comfortable environment and fight against
anti-social phenomena as social project objectives. One of the experts associates the project objectives with
implementation and dissemination of social innovation, “A social project is not just about the implementation
of standards and government regulations. It is characterized by a novelty value—new forms of service, new
types of activity”. None of the representatives of public authorities associates the project objectives with the
development of self-awareness. Thus, the problems of individual people are not considered in general
goal-setting.
It should be noted that even at the stage of defining the essence, nature, and goals of the project the
experts’ opinions fall into three groups of binary oppositions: quantitative-qualitative, external-internal, and
action-process. External goals include changing conditions of the environment and overcoming the problems
that have already emerged in a society (reactive goals). Internal goals include changing societal needs
corresponding to structures of the social reality of the project initiators (proactive goals). Quantitative changes
mean changes in the material life conditions of a particular person, group, or society. Qualitative changes mean
a change in an individual’s, group or society consciousness. An action is a single procedure of implementing a
social project, a process is the implementation of the long-term projects with a common social purpose.
Most business people pointed out that the hallmark of a social project is absence of commercial orientation.
Besides, experts believe that social projects and business projects differ radically at all stages of their life-cycle,
including the stage of accomplishing all the goals or objectives. Only one of the experts in this group
mentioned the interrelation between the two, noting that “a social project is always a part of a business project
in terms of the problems of employment, self-fulfillment, and education”.
Civil society representatives identified two distinctive characteristics of a social project: first, the
complexity of measuring goals and objectives in financial terms (55%), and second, cost and need for external
financing (45%).
Among the distinguishing characteristics of social projects representatives of state bodies named the effect
of projects in a social sphere (67%) and absence of profits (33%). One of the experts pointed out that “the
concept ‘social’ is absolutely incompatible with the concepts of ‘business’ and ‘politics’”.
It should be noted that such a polarization of expert opinions (i.e., to see a social project as part of the
business project and, conversely, to completely exclude business and politics from the social aspects) clearly
illustrates a mutual mistrust of key actors in the process.
In response to a question about the role of social projects in the socio-economic development of the
country, the region, a company, and an individual, almost all business representatives were unanimous. Most
experts agreed that high-quality system social projects at any of the above levels make the process of

5. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE CONTENT CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROJECTS 5
socio-economic development balanced and sustainable, form relationships significant to the economy,
contribute to the stability of the environment.
Civil society representatives identified more practical aspects of the role of social projects, such as
creation of labor markets, maintaining balance and social equilibrium, formation of a community of reasonable
individuals, development of human potential.
The majority (65%) of public authorities’ representatives noted that social projects stimulate growth and
development of public institutions, other experts pointed to a cause-and-effect relationship between the level of
social and economic development and the quantity and quality of social projects implemented.
The analysis of respondents’ views on the importance of social projects has enabled to define their
descriptive and normative features. The descriptive features include the following:
 overcoming specific urgent problems in a society;
 implementing state social policy;
 quantitative changes in the material life conditions of an individual or a social group;
 creating labor markets;
 implementing social innovations;
 two-way influence of the quality and quantity of social projects and the level of socio-economic structure
(company, region, country).
Normative (standard-setting, desirable, target) features include:
 encouraged development of state institutions;
 stability of the environment, balanced socio-economic development;
 formation of a community of reasonable individuals;
 development of human potential.
In response to the question on priority and importance of community development areas (healthcare,
education, culture, and sports), 70% of the representatives of the business community emphasized the need for
equal and harmonious development of all areas, 30% of them pointed to the importance of implementing
projects in one of them.
Most representatives of the civil society (63% and 54%, respectively) considered education and healthcare
as priority ones, and only a third of experts believed that the above-mentioned social spheres are equally
important.
Similar comments were received from the representatives of the state, who considered education and
healthcare as priority (half and half, respectively), while 33% pointed to the importance of all the spheres.
Overall, more than a half of the experts been surveyed (56%) shared the same opinion on the matter and
considered social projects in education as priority. Almost all of the experts believe that the situation in the
Voronezh administrative region, in general, is no different from the nationwide practice of social engineering.
In response to the question of the role of the government, business and non-profit organizations in social
engineering, all business representatives pointed out that the state has a key responsibility in social
development, personality formation, his/her values and ideals. At the same time, 70% of the respondents
mentioned that the government should encourage businesses to participate in social projects, not imposing any
unusual functions and not interfering with the business processes, and noted untapped and underused business
potential in social projects. Only 40% of experts emphasized a creative role of non-profit organizations in

6. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE CONTENT CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROJECTS
6
social engineering.
Over a half of the civil society representatives (55%) see non-profit organizations as the initiators, insiders
and monitors of the process, 45% of them think that the state plays a key role in social engineering. A
significant proportion of experts (55%) refer to the role of business in financing projects, however, half of them
mention that in a negative context.
All government officials underline the key role and responsibility of the state. “Vector, regulatory
frameworks, standards, algorithm and goals are all set by the state, all the rest can join. We have very weak
non-profit board practices”, according to an expert. Only one representative of public authorities mentioned the
need for public-private partnerships in implementation of social projects.
It is obvious that such a spread of experts’ opinions on these issues emphasizes mistrust and disagreement
of the participants’ opinions on various aspects of social projects. At the same time, it is quite symptomatic that
all the experts noted the leading role of the state.
In response to the question on active participants in social projects, most business representatives defined
them as devotees—people with a proactive approach to life, the leaders, that is, individuals. Almost half of the
respondents (42%) reported an active role of the state and business in social projects implementation.
Representatives of the civil society (80%) consider community organizations, volunteers, and people with
their everyday concerns and unresolved questions as active participants in social projects. Only 20% of
respondents indicated an active role of the state and business, and one of the experts stated that “a social project
can only be inspired by an individual’s personality”.
All representatives of public authorities consider state structures as active participants in social projects.
Only 30% of the experts mentioned business structures alongside with the state ones.
The responses to a set of questions related to the key actors of the process highlight the need for their
cooperation, information exchange, creation of a concept of social projects customers, support and
encouragement of devotees and volunteers.
The question “Who is most interested in the results of social projects?” caused quite a wide range of
opinions among the business representatives. One third of the experts reported that all participants in the
process are equally interested, but from different perspectives. According to one of the experts, “The state is
interested in increased power and influence, customers are interested in the regularity of social projects and
support, business structures pursue an objective of better public relations and motivation of personnel, since
employees are proud of their enterprise participating in social projects”. One third of respondents believe that
customers are those mostly interested for the sake of stability and productivity; 28% emphasized that target
users of a social project are those most interested in its implementation. One expert noted that it is an individual
personality who is most affected by a project.
Most of the civil society representatives responded that target users are affected, since “their problems of
security and social guarantees are resolved”; 27% of the experts stated that everybody should be interested in
an effective project. According to one of the experts, “Everyone living here who believes this to be their
country. There should not be any contradiction. As soon as we start to make distinctions, social problems come
up”. The same percentage (27%) of experts believe that they project initiators and implementers of the process
are those most interested in results, since they gain “the capitalization of a human personality”.
Half of the representatives of public authorities noted that the results of social projects are of most interest

7. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE CONTENT CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROJECTS 7
to the citizens, the population. One third of the experts believe that everyone should be interested; two experts
mentioned that the main interested party is the state. According to one of them, “The state is the most
concerned as all the effects of social projects are large-scale, long-term, and global. The result is often
postponed”.
Differences in the contextual definition used by different groups of experts seem worth emphasizing. Thus,
business representatives name target users as those most interested in social project results, civil society
representatives mention the society, beneficiaries, individuals, and the representatives of public authorities’
report of the citizens, the population.
In response to the question “What determines the success of a social project?”, the majority of business
representatives pointed out three factors, clear goals and objectives, the right selection and formation of
instruments, and adequate resources. Many experts (42%) highlighted the role of the individual leader and
implementer of the project. Two of the experts drew their attention to the readiness and maturity of the project
consumer (target user). One expert pointed out the importance of a systemic vision and actions in the field of
social engineering.
Most civil society representatives consider personal characteristics of the initiators, leaders, project team,
and project partners as the key success component of a social project. According to one of the experts, “Success
of a project depends on the initiator persistence, the strength and power of the first intention”. Most experts
stress the importance of coordination and resource management skills, while 35% believe the “right goals” are
a significant success component. Two experts noted the importance of the information component, social
project publicity.
What stands out in the survey is the diversity of opinions of the representatives of public authorities on the
components of success of a social project. Half of the surveyed experts stress the importance of the project
timeliness and its focus on a specific category of citizens. One third of the respondents believe the key success
factor is the interaction between all project participants, another third consider financing as a significant
measure of success, one of the experts emphasizes a proactive leader’s position, and another one notes the
personnel and management competence.
The final question in the essential set was the one on the factors that affect the intensity of development of
social projects in Russia and the Voronezh administrative region. Most representatives of the Voronezh
business structures believe that the intensity of development is directly related to the activity and demands of
civil society, and 42% of respondents believe that it is essential to create effective institutions for social projects
preparation and implementation. However, most experts emphasize that it is the state structures which are
responsible for the creation of such institutions.
Most civil society representatives associate the development of social engineering with the development of
a society, citizens’ initiatives, and preservation of the democratic trend. What stands out in the survey is the
analysis and inclusion of the own civic position in development factors. Thus, according to one of the experts,
“For many involved in social projects it is a form of internal emigration, civil immunity, a meaningful existence
in this paradoxical world”. Over one third (36%) of respondents relate the intensity of development of social
projects with governmental support and initiatives.
Most representatives of public authorities associate the development of social engineering with
government agencies, government support, and gubernatorial initiatives; and only one of the experts links
community development with the development of the civil society.

8. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE CONTENT CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROJECTS
8
Results and Conclusions
It is advisable to use the structure of “root definitions” from the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) by
Checkland and Scholes (1990) as a tool to organize and record the empirical data. A root definition reflects a
particular point of view on the process, the vision of the system by a party or parties. This is a clear and concise
description of the process vision, through the mandatory structural elements. Information structured with
consideration of all the foregoing elements, on the one hand, make the report concise, and on the other hand,
quite amply reveal the position of the process parties (see Table 2).
Table 2
Substantial Characteristics of the Structural Elements of Social Projects
Structural elements
Representatives of business
structures
Representatives of civil society
institutions
Representatives of public
authorities
Clients (benefit from social
projects implementation)
Society ready to accept a
social project
Specific users, beneficiaries,
whose problems of security and
social protection are solved
Citizens, population
Actors (key participants of the
process)
Active people, the state as a
regulator of the relations,
business leaders establishing
the level for social
responsibility
Public organizations, volunteers,
people with long-standing
unresolved problems
State structures, business
structures
Transformation (description of
the nature of social changes)
Development of public
relations, quantitative and
qualitative changes in living
conditions
Solving specific social problems,
quantitative and qualitative
change of the living conditions
Creation of a comfortable
environment, elimination of
anti-social phenomena,
introduction of social innovation
Outlook (basic assumptions
about the significance of the
results of social projects)
Stable, harmonious and
balanced socio-economic
development
Creation of labor markets,
preservation of social
equilibrium, human
development, formation of
tastes, rituals, social criteria,
consumer culture
Stimulate the development of the
state, region, accelerate
economic growth
Owners (people who seriously
affect the launch and
implementation of social
projects, able to dramatically
change the effectiveness of
their implementation)
Public authorities, major
business
Society, public authorities Public authorities
Significant environmental
factors
Development of the civil
society, social project
customer institutionalization,
promotion and popularization
of social activity
Social landscape of the region,
personal activity of citizens, civil
society development,
government support
Government support, governor’s
initiatives
The empirical evidence derived from this study has enabled to identify the sore points of the process:
(1) Mistrust and lack of coordination of participants, search for options for cooperation, distribution of
responsibilities;
(2) The need for creation of stimulating public policies (regulatory, legislative, tax regulations, and
procedures);
(3) Lack of social order, customers not ready, lack of consumers’ interest;
(4) Absence of effective institutions for social projects preparation and implementation, need for training
personnel;
(5) Lack of awareness, lack of promotion and popularization of social activity, ideas, project initiatives.

9. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE CONTENT CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROJECTS 9
References
Bogomolov, O. T. (2010). Non-economic facets of economy: The unknown interference. Moscow: Institute of Economic
Strategies.
Castel, R. (2009). Metamorphosis of the social issues: Chronicles of wage labor. St. Petersburg: Aletheja.
Checkland, P., & Scholes, J. (1990). Soft systems methodology in action. New York: John Wileys Sons Inc..
Grigorieva, I. A. (2011). Current social policy: Opportunities and limitations. St. Petersburg: SU named after Alexander Pushkin.
Kleiner, G. B. (2011). System resource of economy. Problems of Economics, 1, 87-114.
Mau, V. A. (2012). Economy and politics in 2011: Global crisis and search for a new growth model. Problems of Economics, 2,
7-30.
Moskovskaya, A. A. (2011). Russian and global social entrepreneurship. Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of
Economics.
Yadov, V. A. (2009). Modern theoretical sociology as a conceptual framework. St. Petersburg: Intersotsis.