Khanty-Mansiysk, Khanty-Mansiysk, Russian Federation
The relevance of this study is determined by the increasing dependence of law enforcement agencies on information and telecommunications systems and the need for objective monitoring of the effectiveness of information technology and communications units. The objective of the study is to comparatively analyze existing approaches to assessing the performance of information technology and communications units of law enforcement agencies, identifying their advantages, limitations, and prospects for adaptation to the specifics of law enforcement agencies. The article presents a typology of approaches, including basic IT service management methodologies (ITIL, COBIT), IT process maturity models, key performance indicator (KPI) systems, specialized standards, and expert assessment methods. Common shortcomings of existing approaches are identified (weak connection between technological metrics and operational results, insufficient consideration of active counteraction conditions). The significance of the study lies in the formation of a systematized scientific basis for further developments in the field of methodological support for assessing the performance of IT units of law enforcement agencies. The practical significance lies in the possibility of using the identified advantages and disadvantages of the analyzed approaches in the development of departmental methodological documents and automated systems for monitoring the activities of IT units. Prospects for further research are related to the development of a comprehensive model for assessing the performance of IT departments of law enforcement agencies, integrating technological metrics with operational performance indicators at all levels of management.
performance evaluation, information technology, communications, law enforcement agencies, key performance indicators, IT departments, evaluation methods
1. Alberts D. S., Hayes R. E. Power to the edge: Command... control... in the information age. – 2003.
2. Sproles N. Establishing measures of effectiveness for command and control: A systems engineering perspective. – 2001. – №. DSTOGD0278.
3. Davis L. M., Jackson B. A. Evaluating Information Technology // Information technology and the criminal justice system. – 2005. – P. 29.
4. Isaev O.V. Development of models and algorithms for analyzing the effectiveness of information structures and processes of security systems: dissertation for the degree of candidate of technical sciences, 2014. - 177 p. - EDN KRQMUN.
5. Gracheva E.A., Ponachugin A.V. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the IT department // Economics. Informatics. - 2022. - Vol. 49, No. 1. - Pp. 153-158. - DOIhttps://doi.org/10.52575/2687-0932-2022-49-1-153-158. - EDN PJEPUI.
6. Ernawati Y., Wang G. Assessing IT services management with ITIL framework V3: A case study // Journal of System and Management Sciences. – 2023. – V. 13. – No. 4. – P. 152-164. – DOI https://doi.org/10.33168/JSMS.2023.0409
7. Mosweu O. E. An assessment of the capacity management process of the information technology infrastructure library (ITIL) framework in delivering value in public sector. – Cape Peninsula University of Technology, 2017. – URL: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11838/2662
8. Hanafi R., Wibowo L. A., Rahayu A. Organization and IT strategic alignment, determination of IT process priorities using COBIT 5 // 2020 International Conference on Advancement in Data Science, E-learning and Information Systems (ICADEIS). – IEEE, 2020. – pp. 1-6. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1109/ICADEIS49811.2020.9277302
9. Essien I. A. et al. Optimizing cyber risk governance using global frameworks: ISO, NIST, and COBIT alignment // Journal of Frontiers in Multidisciplinary Research. – 2022. – V. 3. – No 1. – P. 618-629. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.54660/.JFMR.2022.3.1.618-629
10. Isaev E.A., Korovkina N.L., Tabakova M.S. Assessing the readiness of the company's IT department for digital business transformation // Business Informatics. - 2018. - No. 2 (44). - P. 55-64.
11. Becker J., Knackstedt R., Pöppelbuß J. Developing maturity models for IT management: A procedure model and its application // Business & information systems engineering. – 2009. – V. 1. – No. 3. – P. 213-222.
12. Chrissis M. B., Konrad M., Shrum S. CMMI for development: guidelines for process integration and product improvement. – Pearson Education, 2011.
13. de Sousa Pereira R. F., Da Silva M. M. A maturity model for implementing ITIL v3 // 2010 6th World Congress on Services. – IEEE, 2010. – P. 399-406. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1109/SERVICES.2010.80
14. Ernawati Y., Wang G. Assessing IT services management with ITIL framework V3: A case study // Journal of System and Management Sciences. – 2023. – V. 13. – No. 4. – P. 152-164. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.33168/JSMS.2023.0409
15. Alberts D. S., Huber R. K., Moffat J. NATO NEC C2 maturity model. – 2010.
16. Bruzzone A. et al. CGF for NATO NEC C2 maturity model (N2C2M2) evaluation // Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC) 2009. – 2009. – P. 1-9.
17. Kaplan R. S., Norton D. P. Linking the balanced scorecard to strategy // California management review. – 1996. – V. 39. – No. 1. – P. 53-79. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2307/41165876
18. Kaplan R. S. Conceptual foundations of the balanced scorecard //Handbooks of management accounting research. – 2009. – V. 3. – p. 1253-1269. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S1751-3243(07)03003-9
19. Ivancík R., Necas P. System of Balanced Scorecard and its Implementation in Management of Norwegian Air Force and other Military Organizations // Incas Bulletin. – 2012. – V. 4. – No. 4. – P. 141. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.13111/2066-8201.2012.4.4.13
20. United States Department of Defense. DoD Information Technology Standards Registry (DISR). – Washington: DoD CIO, 2021. – URL: https://itlaw.fandom.com/wiki/DoD_Information_Technology_Standards_and_Profile_Registry (accessed: 15 October 2025).
21. Carmona S., Grönlund A. Measures vs actions: the balanced scorecard in Swedish Law Enforcement // International Journal of Operations & Production Management. – 2003. – V. 23. – No. 12. – P. 1475-1496. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/01443570310506722
22. Northcott D., Ma'amora Taulapapa T. Using the balanced scorecard to manage performance in public sector organizations: Issues and challenges // International Journal of Public sector management. – 2012. – V. 25. – No. 3. – P. 166-191. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/09513551211224234
23. Parmenter D. Key performance indicators: developing, implementing, and using winning KPIs. – John Wiley & Sons, 2015.
24. Vitus O.V., Iliashenko O.Yu. Definition and monitoring KPI for the local IT Department / O. V. Vitus, // SPbPU Science Week: Proceedings of the scientific conference with international participation. Institute of Industrial Management, Economics and Trade. In 3 parts, St. Petersburg, November 18–23, 2019. Vol. Part 1. – SPb: Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 2019. – P. 15–19. – EDN DMVLPQ.
25. Weaver J. M. NATO Communications & Information Systems Group (NCISG) // NATO in Contemporary Times: Purpose, Relevance, Future. – Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. – P. 123-136. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68731-1_10
26. Folorunso A. et al. The impact of ISO security standards on enhancing cybersecurity posture in organizations // World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews. – 2024. – V. 24. – No. 1. – P. 2582-2595. – DOIhttps://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.24.1.3169
27. Boyes H., Higgins M. D. An overview of information and cyber security standards // Journal of ICT Standardization. – 2024. – V. 12. – No. 1. – P. 95-134. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.13052/jicts2245-800X.1215
28. Martins J. et al. Information Security–Military Standards Versus ISO 27001: A Case Study in a Portuguese Military Organization // Information Warfare and Security. – 2013. – P. 191.
29. Mulazzani F., Sarcia S. A. Cyber security on military deployed networks // 2011 3rd International Conference on Cyber Conflict. – IEEE, 2011. – P. 1-15.
30. Buryanin S.N. Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of communications units and radio technical support for flights of aviation of the Aerospace Forces // Control, Communications and Security Systems. - 2020. - No. 4. - P. 220-239. - DOIhttps://doi.org/10.24411/2410-9916-2020-10408. - EDN EBRJSH.
