Zaitseva Tatyana Vyacheslavovna

In recent decades, the issue of compensation fairness has become one of the central topics in both academic and applied research. Given the expansion of the public sector in the Russian economy, increasing geopolitical risks, and growing competition, ensuring fair compensation in state organizations has evolved from a matter of managerial discretion into a strategic imperative.
From a theoretical perspective, compensation fairness can be analyzed through various conceptual frameworks. Theories such as Equity Theory, Relative Deprivation Theory, and Social Comparison Theory highlight the profound psychological mechanisms through which perceptions of fairness influence employee behavior. Furthermore, Organizational Justice Theory expands this discourse across four key dimensions — distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational — creating additional analytical perspectives.
These theoretical frameworks served as the foundation for a secondary analysis of research data on critical challenges in ensuring compensation fairness within Russia’s public sector organizations, as well as for summarizing findings from a study conducted among employees of a Chinese state-owned rail transit corporation. The results demonstrate that fairness should not be viewed merely as an abstract managerial ideal but rather as a dynamic evaluative system that bridges formal organizational structures with employees' subjective perceptions. This linkage fosters psychologically critical factors for organizations — trust, work motivation, and resilience to external challenges.

Digitalization is one of the key elements of the development of the control system. For the local level, the introduction of digital technologies and the formation of a culture of digitalization is heterogeneous, due to the digital inequality of municipalities. The article is devoted to the analysis of the regulatory framework and practical tools for the digitalization of municipal control. The purpose of the study is to identify gaps, collisions and other problematic aspects of digitalization of an administrative and technical nature. Federal legislation and strategic planning documents do not contain provisions that separate municipal control from the system of public control. There are also no separate provisions regarding the introduction of digital tools in urban and rural areas. Based on the analysis of the websites of the cities-administrative centers of the federal districts, the author comes to the conclusion about the incompleteness of providing information on the use of digital tools in municipal control and the average level of convenience of these sites for the user. To assess the effectiveness of digitalization and digital municipal control, it is necessary to develop new criteria that replace the "stick" quantitative indicators.