STRATEGIC ANALYSIS OF COMPETITIVENESS OF HIGH-TECH COMPANIES AS A TOOL FOR MANAGING THE REGION'S INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT
The sustainability of a high-tech business in a competitive environment which has been characterized by high turbulence is mainly due to its ability to adapt to changes that are already underway and anticipate future market transformations. Adaptability is a characteristic of an enterprise which gives by its management system. However, it depends on the state and degree of variability of the competitive environment. Despite the diversity of properties of the competitive environment, in our opinion, its complex characteristic that influences the ability of HTC to maintain stability to external changes taking place is turbulence, which has the property of mobility, complexity, uncertainty. Taking into account the analysis of the concept under study in physics and aerodynamics, we can consider turbulence to be irregular in time with the randomness of the fluctuations of the parameters of the competitive HTC environment. Our methodology for evaluating of CSHTC is based on the principles of complementarily and congruence and is based on measuring the discrepancy between the planned and achieved results on the indicators that are crucial for the key product groups of a high-tech company. Testing methods carried out on the example of high-tech companies in the pharmaceutical sector of the Central Federal District of the Russian Federation.
The work was prepared during implementation of project No 26.9642.2017/8.9 within the framework of the State task of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia.
1. Lee, K.N. (1993). Compass and Gyroscope – Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment: Washington, D.C., Island Press, 243.
2. Williams, B.K., Szaro,R.C. and Shapiro, C.D. (2009). Adaptive management: Washington, US Department of the Interior, 74.
3. Child, J. (1972). Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6 (1), 1-22.
4. Leavitt, H. (1965). Applied Organizational Change in Industry: Chicago, Rand McNally, 359.
5. Schetinina, E.D., Doroshenko, Y.A., Ovtcharova, N.V. (2015).The problems of innovations commercialization and approaches to their decision: International Business Management, 9, 6, 1074-1078.
6. Stolyarova, V.A., Kupriyanov, S.V., Stolyarova, Z.V., Saldanha, H.F.D., Sukhraj, R.A. (2015). The role of science as a factor of integration of countries in the context of globalization:Asian Social Science, 11, 7, 278-283.
7. Kremsater, L.F., Bunnell,D.H. &Dunsworth,G. (2003). Indicators to assess biological diversity: Weyerhaeuser’s Forest Project,The Forestry Chronicle, 79, 590–601.
8. Sturges, H. (1926). The choice of a class-interval: J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 21, 65-66.
9. Lorenz, E. (1993). Essence of chaos: UCL Press, 240.
10. Courtney, H.G., Kirkland,J. &Viguerie,S. (1997). Strategy in an uncertain world: Harvard Business Review, 5, 81-90.
11. Fredrickson, J.W. &Iaquinto,A.L. (1989). Inertia and creeping rationality in strategic decision processes: Academy of Management Journal, 32, 543-576.
12. Miller, D. & Friesen,P.H. (1983). Strategy Making and Environment: The Third Link. Strategic Management Journal, 4, 221-235.
13. Nooraie, M. (2011). Decision's familiarity and strategic decision-making process output: the mediating impact of rationality of the decision-making process: International Journal of Applied Decision Sciences (IJADS), 4, 385-400.
14. Papadakis, V.M., Lioukas,S. &Chambers,D. (1998). Strategic decision-making processes: the role of management and context: Strategic Management Journal, 19, 115-147.