Russian Enterprises' Adaptation to New Economic Realities
Increased attention and focus has been laid on the strategic importance of intellectual capital for modern management. However, intangible resources appear difficult to measure. Today, there are several methods, both financial and nonfinancial ones that allow managing them, to provide benchmarking and analyze its value added function (Sveiby, 2007). The rare investigations of intellectual capital in Russian enterprises show that “Almost in all industries it is still more profitable to invest in tangible assets rather than in intangible ones” (Volkov, Garanina, 2007). Still, some investigations on the micro level show that there are enterprises with high level of technological capital and innovative activity. The researchers called them “innovative leaders” and empirically proved that they have high labour productivity and are awarded by market through extra profit (Gonchar et al., 2010). Using the research sample and Pulic’s Value Added Intellectual Coefficient (VAIC™) the authors investigate empirically the dynamics and structure of VAIC, and study the relation between the intellectual capital and indicators of organizational performance, such as labour productivity, sales growth and profitability. Additionally, the VAIC™ model allows analysing the role of human, structural and physical capital. This paper outlines the study based on 350 Russian industrial enterprises’ annual statistical and account reports from 2005 through 2007. Besides, the authors adopt the VAIC calculation according to the Russian accounting system’s specifications and limitations. The findings support the hypothesis that a company’s intellectual capital influences favourably the organizational performance, and may indicate future competitiveness. A proof showing that the explanatory power of models is higher when considering the additional variables such as investment in fixed capital, R&D expenditures and a company’s size is represented. The results extend the understanding of the intellectual capital role in creation of sustainable advantages for companies in developing economies where different technological advancements may bring different implications for organizational value creation efficiency.
From the outset of privatization in Russia researchers from a number of countries have been studying the emerging real estate market and the residential sector development in Russian cities. Typically, their attention has been focused on legal and institutional challenges like the inconsistency and inadequacy of legislation, blurred or duplicated functions of different power bodies, the immaturity of real estate market infrastructure and low professionalism of the market's agents (appraisers, developers, intermediaries, notaries, etc.). They also pointed out that privatization required tighter control over area development, and introduction of new townplanning instruments and regulations. While accepting many points raised by the above publications, we must nevertheless emphasise that the development of real estate market in Russia has shown impressively high rates. Despite all the difficulties the private sector now prevails in construction; and professional associations of realtors, appraisers, and notaries, as well as associations of mortgage banks and insurors are in good progress. The state sector's level of adjustment to market is less impressive, but one should not forget that the main reason behind all reform's controvercies and inconsistencies is politics. The existing political pattern of Russian legislative bodies blocks radical market transformations, and the confrontation between the President and the State Duma leads to controvercial decisions.
The review provides a detailed analysis of main trends in Russia's economy in 2013. The paper contains 6 big sections that highlight single aspects of Russia's economic development: the socio-political context; the monetary and credit spheres; financial sphere; the real sector; social sphere; institutional challenges. The paper employs a huge mass of statistical data that forms the basis of original computation and numerous charts.
Based on the data of national representative surveys carried out by IS RAS in 2014-2016, the author presents analysis of consumption specifics in middle-income groups in times of current economic crisis. It is shown that although in modern Russian society middle income groups make up the majority of population, they cannot be directly correlated with the middle class defined in class theory framework. Middle-income groups are heterogeneous in different aspects, including their consumption specifics. Their standard of living remains quite modest, although it is significantly higher than the “survival standard”. New economic conditions led to widespread economy practices among them - primarily on consumption, followed by economy on hobbies and vacations. Economy practices also seriously affected middle-income strata investments in human capital – usage of paid educational and health services (this type of economy was more widespread among lower middle-income group than higher). Although representatives of the middle- income strata are quite actively using paid medical services (and relatively rarely – paid educational services), the reason for this more often lies in inaccessibility of free analogues rather than in search for the higher quality. Process of durables renewal in middle strata during the crisis was not as active, but their standard set of durable goods still widened over the past two years - primarily due to the relatively complex technological durables that they are gradually transferred from the category of innovation goods to the extended standard. In this regard, the upper middle income group successfully performs the function of the innovative consumer.
This book is about twenty-year's experience of privatization in different countries including Russia. The book also includes sestematozation of academic views at the problems of state failures and effectiveness of the state owership.
We review the transition of the Russian banking sector focusing on the interplay between ownership change and institutional change. We find that the state's withdrawal from commercial banking has been inconsistent and limited in scope. To this day, core banks have yet to be privatized and the state has made a comeback as owner of the dominant market participants. We also look at the new institutions imported into Russia to regulate banking and finance, including rule of law, competition, deposit insurance, confidentiality, bankruptcy, and corporate governance. The unfortunate combination of this new institutional overlay and traditional local norms of behavior have brought Russia to an impasse - the banking sector's ownership structure hinders further advancement of market institutions. Indeed, we may now be witnessing is a retreat from the original market-based goals of transition.
Polish model of system transformation and its flexible approach to privatization of state-owned enterprises appeared to be successful. While the vast majority of East European countries as well as Russia suffered a GDP contraction, Poland goes on ahead, though at a slower pace. The article analyses concepts and mechanisms of privatization in Poland, reveals its strong points and opportunities which may provide Russian decision-makers with a necessary insight to develop strategies under Russian reality.
Our results suggest a more nuanced view of Russian privatization than that offered by either its critics or its defenders. We confirm earlier findings that the average impact on productivity of privatization to domestic owners is around -3 to -5 percent, though some regions show productivity gains similar to those in Central Europe (an increase of 10 to 20 percent). The regional variation is strongly positively associated with the size of the regional bureaucracy. Notwithstanding the average negative effect, our updated results through 2005 (the most recent year for which comparable data are available) show a pronounced change after 2002 as the productivity effects of Russian privatization have begun to approach those seen elsewhere much earlier. Privatization became most effective west of the Urals, in areas with greater market access. Initially an outlier, by 2005 Russia appeared to be becoming more of a “normal country,” at least in the narrow sense of the impact of private ownership on firm productivity.
The authors explore mechanisms, which help practice partnership relations between the state and private business, and show that partnership projects are part of privatization and nationalization variants.
The author analyzes the most widely applied risk management standards in Russia, emphasizing the lack of a clear system for operational risk management. Reviewing the challenges emerging on European markets due to the introduction of the Solvency II directive, he suggests approaches to the solution of possible problems for Russian insurers.
портовый менеджмент, показатели деятельности, анализ эффективности, система учета, распределение издержек, методы анализа деятельности портовой системы
At present many industries reveal tendency for setting up of vertically integrated companies (VIC) the structure of which unites all technological processes. This tendency proved its efficiency in oil industry where coordination of all successive stages of technological process, namely, oil prospecting and production -oil transportation - oil processing - oil chemistry - oil products and oil chemicals marketing, is necessary. The article considers specific features of introduction of "personnel management" module at enterprises of oil and gas industry.
vertically integrated companies; personnel management