Abstract: The article raises the question of whether it is correct to use the term "efficiency" when evaluating judicial activity using quantitative indicators of judicial statistics. These indicators are focused on the departmental needs of a closed-in judicial system. The article shows that in relation to the assessment of the activity of courts according to judicial statistics, it is correct to use the term "productivity". The thesis of the article is that when evaluating the work of courts and judges, to distinguish productivity from efficiency. It is noted that the productivity of ships and their efficiency are not directly dependent. Particular attention is paid to determining what constitutes the effectiveness of judicial activity.   The author comes to the conclusion that the effectiveness of judicial work can be investigated by studying the assessments of courts and judges by their "clients" - litigants, other persons involved in the case, society as a whole. Courts act effectively if their "reputation capital" increases in the eyes of society. The currently used indicators of judicial statistics should be replaced by an assessment of the effectiveness of justice based on a sociological study of the reputation of the judiciary. The judiciary should have its own structures to monitor changes in public opinion regarding the reputation of the courts. When considering a possible methodology for assessing the reputation of courts and judges, it is noted that it is not expressed in quantitative data. Shifting the emphasis in the evaluation of judicial activity to the study of efficiency will provide feedback to the judicial system with its "clients", will form additional motivation for judges to take care of their own reputation in the eyes of public opinion.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the impact of assessment of judicial performance in accordance with the indicators of judicial statistics upon the organization of culture of the Russian court, which incorporates the shared by majority of judges informal rules of conduct, traditions, and values. The article describes such criteria for assessment of judicial performance as “quality”, “quantity”, and “terms”. In studying the historical origin of judicial performance assessment based on judicial statistics, it is demonstrated that the tradition of such assessment was founded in the 1930s, when political leadership who carried out repressive policy instigated “socialistic competition” between the courts and the judges. The article analyzes the impact of the “struggle for statistics” upon conduct of judges. Such circumstance that in consideration of cases the judges take into account judicial statistics violate the requirement of procedural fairness. There is a contradiction between the Russian legislation, which for the most part complies with the universally recognized international principles, and conservative organizational culture of the Russian courts. Mechanism of reproduction of the latter is the inertia of the “struggle for statistics”. In order to bring into compliance the representations of Russian judges on the acceptable conduct with the values of democratic justice, the system of assessment of judicial performance requires revision.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the impact of assessment of judicial performance in accordance with the indicators of judicial statistics upon the organization of culture of the Russian court, which incorporates the shared by majority of judges informal rules of conduct, traditions, and values. The article describes such criteria for assessment of judicial performance as “quality”, “quantity”, and “terms”. In studying the historical origin of judicial performance assessment based on judicial statistics, it is demonstrated that the tradition of such assessment was founded in the 1930s, when political leadership who carried out repressive policy instigated “socialistic competition” between the courts and the judges. The article analyzes the impact of the “struggle for statistics” upon conduct of judges. Such circumstance that in consideration of cases the judges take into account judicial statistics violate the requirement of procedural fairness. There is a contradiction between the Russian legislation, which for the most part complies with the universally recognized international principles, and conservative organizational culture of the Russian courts. Mechanism of reproduction of the latter is the inertia of the “struggle for statistics”. In order to bring into compliance the representations of Russian judges on the acceptable conduct with the values of democratic justice, the system of assessment of judicial performance requires revision.