Social infrastructure of industrial enterprise and its role in the system of employee motivation

The aim of the article. The aim of the article is to develop the bases of methodology for determination the priority of social infrastructure of industrial enterprises in the system of employee motivation. It is based on two-tier employees survey.The results of the analysis. Firstly, the author analyzed methods that can be used at the initial stage of diagnostics. It is formed a primary selection of respondents. For its formation the author suggests to use special methodology which is based on the method of V.I. Herchikov. It enables to identificate those employees who can be interested in provision of social services of enterprise infrastructure. Then it is advisable to rank objects of social infrastructure by their popularity among enterprise personnel. This is possible due to using a modified motivational ladder of McKinsey. Within the article it is appropriate to analyze imaginary situation with typical industrial enterprise.Supposedly the company has seven social institutions: 1) medical-sanitary part; 2) sanatorium; 3)camp; 4) cultural center; 5) hotel; 6) workers catering; 7) sports club. For quantification of the priority of social infrastructure it is necessary to develop matrix with combination of two parameters the list of infrastructure objects (from 1 to 7, respectively) vertically and their priority (from 1 to 7) across. During the survey respondents are asked to identify their own priorities among social institutions of enterprise. This is indicated by value numbers from 1 to 7. The most significant institution for them is occupied the first place, the least significant the seventh. The processed results of a written questionnaire are entered into the matrix. Each social object that occupies some space from the first to the seventh (blank or null value is not allowed), so the total number of columns vertically and horizontally is always the same and equal to the number of processed forms. If we have ratings of each object of infrastructure then we can make their ranking.This approach to prioritizing of social infrastructure services to the view of employees enables to identificate specific list of social institutions that have the highest motivational potential in percentage. Typically when the number of social objects is no more then 8, this list will include from three to four institutions.Conclusions and directions of further researches. Rejection of unpromising directions of social institutions activity enables efficient planning of policy for social objects management in dynamics, building separate development strategies of each institution. It is important for companies that have a lot of social objects. Under these conditions the company will provide social benefits and services to their employees through balanced proposal, leveling weaknesses of social policy in favor of competitive types of socialproposals.In further studies it is necessary on the base of submitted survey method to find out which social services are not included in the list of proposals but there is a need in them. Survey can also provide information on the feasibility of changing conditions of service provision. Then it is appropriate to calculate the economic impact from staff motivation system improving with a focus on their own social infrastructure.