4.2.1 New forms of organizations in the structure of the Russian economy

Analysis of the structure of any state indicates the presence in it of three necessary areas that perform the most important functions of the system:

• production sphere providing the foundation of the system and its existence;
• the sphere of power, ensuring the integrity and sustainability of the entire system;
• sphere of ideology, policy, ensuring the movement and development of the system, giving it focus.

What from the point of view of system analysis and ongoing economic reform is happening with our statehood? First of all, it should be noted that in the Soviet period there was a terrifying confusion in the functions of the above-mentioned spheres. The ideology in the person of the party apparatus performed the functions of a subsystem of power, but did not perform its own functions — ideological — to determine and prioritize financing of promising strategic directions for the development of the economy. The subsystem of the Soviet government in general did not bear any independent functions, but only transformed the instructions of the party apparatus. The sphere of production was not focused on the market, but on the instructions (directive figures) of the party apparatus.

At present, the functions of all three subsystems of statehood are being restored and put in order. The power subsystem, separated from the sphere of production of material goods, should be engaged in managing the living conditions of people (housing, shops, medical services, schools, roads, etc.). The production sphere is demarcated and actually separated from the state. It is now focused on the needs of the market. The Center for Strategic Studies and other government centers are developing a country's development strategy.

One of the main reasons for the weakness of the Soviet model of the economy was its single-structuredness - one state sector. For many years we have been engaged in the struggle against objective economic laws. So, for example, cybernetics ^* - the science of management - is the law of the necessary diversity ^* , according to which the economy of any country must have the necessary and sufficient variety of forms of its development, that is, it must be multi-structured. We were guided by a single-economy. Therefore, the formation of a rational structure of the economy, that is, the creation and development of enterprises of various forms of ownership has become the primary task of the state.

At present, Russia is completing a large-scale restructuring of the national economy, accompanied, in particular, by noticeable changes in the distribution of forms of ownership. So, back in 1990, the state sector was a monopoly form of ownership and amounted to 85%, and in 1996, as a result of economic reforms, Russia became one of the most "capitalist" countries in the world, with the public sector of the economy only 9.9%, the non-state sector was respectively 90.1%. The structure of industrial production by ownership is presented in table. 3.5 [11].

T a b e and c a 3.5

The structure of industrial production by ownership,%

The shift of industrial development priorities from state-owned enterprises to joint-stock enterprises occurred in 1994, which can be considered the year of the final victory of the "capitalization" policy of Russian industry. For example, the integral share of quasi-state forms of ownership from 1993 to 1996 fell 3.8 times (Table 3.6).

Table 3.6,

Dynamics of restructuring of the national economy

An analysis of the results of the distribution of enterprises and organizations by organizational and legal forms in Russia as of 1996 is as follows: non-profit organizations - 15.2%, commercial organizations - 84.4%. Among them, joint-stock companies and partnerships account for 39.8%.

Joint-stock enterprises are the predominant and most promising form of ownership throughout the world, for example, the process of creating such popular enterprises is very actively developing in the United States. Thus, according to estimates of the National Center for Workers' Property, in the beginning of 1989, about 10,000 companies operated in the USA, whose employees fully or partially owned shares of their enterprises, and in 1,500 of them it was the workers who owned controlling stakes. The scale of this process is evidenced by the fact that more than 10 million people have become shareholders of their enterprises, which is approximately 25% of those employed in the corporate sector of the US economy. It is estimated that the total assets of these popular enterprises amount to more than $ 25 billion.

Of course, there is no particular reason to say that enterprises that are fully or partially owned by the workers constitute the majority or play a decisive role in the economic life of the United States. However, the trend of recent years is that the number of such enterprises increases annually by 600-700 units. Moreover, not only dwarfs, but also giants of the American industry with the number of workers in tens of thousands of people are more and more actively involved in the orbit of this process. Some of them operate very successfully and dramatically increase the efficiency and profitability of their activities, others suffer losses and go bankrupt. But in general, perhaps, we can say that in most cases, the transition to collective ownership allows you to use new reserves to increase profitability and therefore finds more and more supporters among American businessmen. A similar trend is characteristic of Russia.

Particular attention should be paid to the development and support of small enterprises that are able to intensify the restructuring of the economy, solve the problem of the unemployed, and intensify competition. Small enterprises can be created on the basis of any form of ownership by individual citizens as well as by various organizations and government agencies.

In the transition to different forms of ownership, there should be real and permanent strengthening of enterprises, the use of modern forms of organizing their joint activities on the basis of direct (without intermediaries) and a variety of horizontal links. Enterprises are the basis of any state. They provide a steady flow of taxes and allow you to implement a wide range of social tasks.

The large-scale structuring of the national economy towards the creation and development of enterprises of various forms of ownership has led to the need for:

first, a radical restructuring of organizational structures;

secondly, the restructuring of integration processes at the level of an economic entity.

Without the solution of these fundamental tasks, it is practically impossible neither to form market relations and their infrastructure, nor to move to the regulatory role of the government bodies.

The process of restructuring the national economy, noticeable shifts in the distribution of ownership forms put forward a number of theoretical issues, primarily such as the relationship between the categories of property and management organization, their interconnection and mutual influence on each other.

The process of formation of various forms of ownership and basic market structures will take a long time. And here it is necessary to distinguish two key factors of economic development: management status and property status.

Property status is a permanent factor in the development of a country, the basis of the entire economic system. The state, changing the rule of the game through tightening or easing taxes, can help accelerate the development of one sector and drastically reduce the other. So it was in the early 90s, when cooperatives paid taxes in the amount of 3-5% of their income. In cooperatives, due to the low tax rate, wages were several times higher than in state-owned enterprises. Started the rapid outflow of labor from the public sector to the cooperative. When in the mid-1990s, cooperatives equalized in taxes compared to other sectors, their number dropped sharply.

The use of diverse and equal property relations ensures the position of the owner to each worker and represents the possibilities of possession and disposal of the means of production and the results of labor belonging to him.

However, it should be borne in mind that the forms of ownership, in and of themselves, in their pure form do not yet solve the tasks facing the economy as a whole or as a separate enterprise. They need to be managed skillfully and professionally - with the help of economic levers, organizational structures, information systems, intelligence, psychological methods.

Management status is a complex of structures, connections, communications and production potential of an enterprise, which allows making and implementing informed decisions. At the same time, the status of management acquires special importance and practical relevance.

The process of privatization of enterprises in the form of a single repurchase, sale by installments, rent with subsequent repurchase, corporatization, foreign investment, etc., leads to major structural changes within the enterprises themselves:

• cessation of activities of many industrial structures (workshops, main and auxiliary production);
• the merger of individual production structures and the creation of a new business entity;
• merger and termination of activities of separate management structures (IEE, HTA, production department, etc.);
• the emergence of new structural entities (marketing department, prospective development department, "trading house", etc.);
• diversification of production (the emergence of new industries, including non-core ones, for example, at the instrument-making enterprise, the production of light and food industries is opened);
• Production structures within the enterprise acquire the status of independent ones and therefore all or part of the managerial functions are closed on themselves (for example, supply, production planning, sales, etc.).

All the changes discussed above are certainly fundamental. They require adequate measures to change the organizational structures, forms, methods and management style. Without this, one cannot count on an increase in the efficiency of enterprises. It is good governance ^{* that} creates economic and social development.

The formation of a mixed economy inevitably leads to the separation of property rights and management functions. If earlier the ownership right belonged exclusively to the state, now the integral share of quasi-state forms of ownership is about 10%. This circumstance has led to the emergence of a new function - property management. Sometimes (the sphere of trade and services) the rights of the owner and the functions of the manager can be combined in one person. In other cases, the owner, owning a controlling stake or a major shareholder, hires a professional manager. The contract, which specifies the accountability system and the limits of managerial independence in decision-making, is the main form of relations between the owner and manager.

Analyzing the trends of organizational changes in Russia, it should be noted the need for an individual approach to the organizational structure of business entities. Transformation of state enterprises into joint stock companies, limited liability companies requires fundamental changes in the management structure of new formations. A similar problem arises in terms of diversification of production. Diversification of production requires flexible management of interrelated structures:

• resource maneuvering;
• rapid response to the diverse needs of the market;
• orientation to innovations;
• risk investments, etc.

In the status of management, the coordination function is of particular importance . The significance of this function is aggravated by the fact that a deep division of labor is taking place, and the level of specialization of parts of the enterprise is increasing.

In the status of management, the issues of centralization and decentralization of management are acquiring a new sound, while in most cases the preference is given to a democratic management style ^* . It is characterized by the delegation of operational authority to lower levels of management, minimizing standard techniques and methods. At the highest level, the functions of integrating the activities of a firm and developing strategic directions for development and relations with external organizations are concentrated. Such an approach to solving management problems leads to a reduction in the number of managerial personnel ^* , a decrease in the rigidity and hierarchy of the structures being formed.

The increasing complexity of management tasks, the increase in information volumes, the risk in decision making, the many-sided nature of problems lead to the need for an active transition from narrow specialization in the content and nature of management activities to its integration and collective forms in decision making.