DonNTU   Masters' portal

Igor Dubovoy

Faculty of Engineering

Department of Economics and Marketing

Speciality Project management

Project management of industrial enterprise development

Scientific adviser: Ph.D., Professor Kucher Vyacheslav

Resume Abstract

Abstract

Content

• Introduction
• 1. Theme urgency
• 2. The purpose and objectives of the study, the planned results
• 3. Theoretical and methodological aspects of enterprise competitiveness
• Conclusion
• References

Introduction

1. Theme urgency

The relevance of the theme being developed for the qualification work is due to the fact that in modern socio-economic conditions increasing the competitiveness of an enterprise is one of the main factors contributing to raising the level of economic development of an enterprise, developing its potential, and occupying leading positions in the industry.

The administration of the enterprise needs to take measures to improve the competitiveness of both the enterprise and its products, to develop measures aimed at improving the quality of products, pricing for goods, increasing the volume of products sold, and improving the financial performance of the company.

2. The purpose and objectives of the study, the planned results

The aim of the work is to assess the competitiveness of PE Bankor in the market of frozen semi-finished products in the city of Donetsk and to identify areas for increasing its competitiveness.

Main tasks of the research:

1. Determine the nature, role and main factors of competitiveness of the enterprise;
2. To characterize the economic methods of assessing the competitiveness of the enterprise;
3. Consider the methodological basis for improving the competitiveness of the enterprise;
4. To conduct a comprehensive analysis of the economic activities of the Bankor Private Enterprise, an analysis of the marketing environment of the enterprise;
5. Consider the organization of the system of labor protection in the enterprise;
6. To justify the socio–economic effectiveness of the proposed activities.

Research object: The process of improving the competitiveness of enterprises in market conditions of operation.

Research subject: Theoretical and methodological, organizational and economic aspects of improving the competitiveness of food industry enterprises. In the formation of competitive advantages.

3. Theoretical and methodological aspects of enterprise competitiveness

Competitiveness of the enterprise is one of the most important categories of market economy and characterizes the possibility and efficiency of adaptation of the enterprise to the conditions of the market environment. In the literature, there is no generally accepted definition of the notion of enterprise competitiveness. Thus, A. Thomson understands the competitiveness of an enterprise as the real and potential ability of an enterprise to design, manufacture and sell products that in their price and non-price characteristics in a complex are more attractive to consumers than competitors' products. The analysis of the literature allowed us to single out the following approaches to the definition of the concept enterprise competitiveness. G. Azoev, A. Yudanov interpret the competitiveness of an enterprise as a rivalry, struggle.

G. Azoev defines competitiveness of an enterprise as a rivalry in any field between individual legal entities or individuals (competitors) interested in achieving the same goal [ 2 ]. A. Yudanov gives the following definition of enterprise competitiveness. Competitiveness is the struggle of firms for a limited amount of consumers' effective demand, being conducted by them in inaccessible market segments.

J. Schumpeter and P. Romer defined the competitiveness of an enterprise as the ability to create new technologies, new markets and ideas. E. Chemberlin and J. Robinson adhere to this concept, who consider the competitiveness of an enterprise not only as the ability to fight with competitors, but also to bypass confrontation with them through the development of new markets for differentiated products. Representatives of the third approach consider the competitiveness of an enterprise as the result of a comparison of similar enterprises, goods, and services. Thus, according to P. Zavyalov, competitiveness is determined on the basis of the comparison results of both enterprises and products.

R. Fatkhutdinov believes that competitiveness is a property of objects that characterizes the degree of satisfaction of a specific need in comparison with the best similar objects represented in a given market at the enterprise, region, industry, any sphere of the macro environment, the country as a whole [ 3 ].

B. Henderson and O. Williamson as the basic basis for the competitiveness of enterprises consider the low cost of production, resulting from the use of the most efficient production methods with prices similar to those of competitors.

G. Hemel, K. Prahad, N. Yashin, I.A. Spiridonov associate the concept of enterprise competitiveness with the possibility of adapting the enterprise to modern market conditions. G. Hemel and K. Prahad define competitiveness as the possibility of foreseeing the situation on the market in the future, based on experience, skills and intellectual leadership.

N. Yashin argues that the competitiveness of an enterprise is connected with its ability and dynamics of adaptation to the conditions of market competition.

I. Spiridonov considers competitiveness as an opportunity for an enterprise in modern market conditions to profitably conduct its economic activity, which is ensured through the rational use of organizational, managerial, economic, scientific, technical, technological, marketing, manufacturing and other means of doing business.

The multidimensionality of the concept of enterprise competitiveness implies the need to take into account the interests of consumers, owners, investors, competitors' positions, etc. The role of enterprise competitiveness is the ability to use its efforts in the area of production of goods or services where it can take a leading position in domestic and foreign markets. To successfully compete, the seller and the manufacturer in the system of consumer cooperation need not only systematically study the market, assess their level of competitiveness, identify opportunities and vulnerabilities of competitors, but also have a controlling effect on their own competitiveness in order to determine the direction of its increase. In the process of competition, participants pursue the same goals — maximizing profits by capturing consumer preferences. However, the ways and means of achieving this common goal are different. Thus, the main directions of improving competitiveness are:

1. mproving the quality of goods (non–price competition);
2. improving the quality of service, product;
3. price reduction (price competition);
4. reduce customer operating costs;
5. based on the use of all the competitive advantages of the object and the subject (integral competition).

One of the important characteristics of enterprise competitiveness is its competitive advantages over other firms, which can be divided into two categories: superiority in skill and superiority in resources. The first category is due to the effectiveness of the work of marketers and direct marketing, and includes: know–how in research and design; use of marketing; sales promotion organization; initiative of all parts of production and sales activities, etc. The second category of advantages is determined by: access to raw materials, energy, components; finance, staffing and qualifications; low–cost manufacturing capabilities; availability of a developed system of scientific, technical, industrial, commercial cooperation, etc. A comprehensive systemic assessment and improvement of the level of competitiveness of an enterprise is based on the determination of its internal and external characteristics — the primary factors of competitiveness. The factors of competitiveness should be understood phenomena and processes of production and economic activity of the enterprise and the socio-economic life of society, which cause a change in the level of competitiveness of the enterprise. Factors can change the competitiveness of an enterprise upward and downward.

So, M. Porter distributed the factors of enterprise competitiveness into five groups: human resources; physical resources; knowledge resource; monetary resources; infrastructure [ 4 ].

N. Krasnostanova, P. Makoveev identified the following factors of enterprise competitiveness: production; marketing; staff; organization, etc. (image, advantageous location, access to financial markets, availability of patents and L. Shevchenko identifies the following internal factors of enterprise competitiveness–personnel; research and development base; technical and technological base; finance; marketing; organization management.

Dolzhansky I.Z. It divides the factors of an enterprise’s competitiveness into internal and external, which include a number of quantitative and qualitative indicators of an enterprise’s activity, which determine the level of enterprise’s stability and the ability to produce products in demand in the optimal volume. External and internal factors of enterprise competitiveness are presented below in (Figure 1).

Evaluation of the competitiveness of the company in a particular market or its segment is based on a thorough analysis of the technological, production, financial and marketing capabilities of the company. It is designed to determine the potential of the firm and the activities it must take to ensure a high level of competitive advantage.

Assessment of the enterprise’s competitiveness is a tool that provides the company management with actual data on the acquisition of competitiveness by an enterprise, information on achieved competitive advantages, their levels of protection and renewal.

The subject of assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise may be a natural or legal person who assesses competitiveness according to certain requirements that are currently in force (company management, experts). The object is the components of the competitiveness of a particular enterprise.

There are various methods for assessing and analyzing the competitive position of an enterprise. Each requires a differentiated approach, analysis of the specifics of the industry and the target consumer. There are a significant number of methods for assessing the competitiveness of the enterprise. Their general classification is presented below in (Figure 2).

The approach to assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise from the standpoint of comparative advantage suggests defining a list of factors affecting the competitiveness of an enterprise, then determining the indicators by which the influence of each factor is established. The difficulty is in defining indicators. It is obvious that the composition of the indicators will vary depending on the industry characteristics of enterprises. An increase in the number of indicators studied increases the reliability of the result obtained, on the other hand, the statistical error also increases.

Assessment of the competitiveness of enterprises is most often carried out through a comparative analysis of competing enterprises according to established indicators [ 5 ].

M. Porter determines the position of the company according to its competitive advantages, which are divided into two main types: lower prices and product differentiation.

Conclusion

This section discusses the theoretical and methodological aspects of the competitiveness of the enterprise.

In a market economy, competitiveness is a decisive factor in the commercial success of a product and the enterprise itself. This is a multidimensional concept, which means that a product corresponds to market conditions and the specific requirements of consumers, not only in terms of its quality, economic, aesthetic characteristics, but also in terms of commercial and other conditions for its implementation.

In the economic literature, the concept of competitiveness is defined as the ability of the enterprise and its products. In turn, goods and services that possess certain consumer properties are a unified expression of the economic, scientific, technical, production, organizational & managerial, marketing, and other capabilities of a country, enterprise, or individual commodity producer.

One of the important characteristics of enterprise competitiveness — its competitive advantages over other firms, which can be divided into two categories: superiority in skill and superiority in resources.

Factors of competitiveness of goods can be considered as components of competitiveness and divided into three groups: technical & economic, commercial, regulatory & legal factors.

References

1. Abramov, V.L. Intellectual component in the formation of competitive advantages / Marketing. – 2004. – № 6.
2. Azoev, G.L. Competitive advantages of a company / G.L. Azoev, A.P. Chelenkov – Moscow: OJSC Printing House NEWS, 2000. – 459 p.
3. Bulakh, I. V. Otsіnka konkurentnopromozhnost pіdpriєmstva spheres telekomunіkatsіy: monographs / І. V. Bulakh, T. B. Nadtok. – Donetsk: DVNZ DonNTU, 2010. – 244 p.
4. Semenova, E.I. Competitiveness as a factor in the marketing environment: diss. Dr. Econ. sciences. – M., 2001. &ndash 287 p.
5. Simuchenkov, D.E, Ermilova, ON, Features of the marketing policy in the industrial equipment market /// Electronic version of the magazine Marketing in Russia and abroad, Access Mode: http: //www.dis.ru/market.
6. Beketov, N.V. The concept of competitiveness and its evolution / N.V. Beketov // Marketing in Russia and abroad. – 2007. – № 6. – p. 82 – 86.
7. Evdokimov, F.I. Economics of an industrial enterprise: studies. manual / F.I. Evdokimov, T.B. Nadtok. – ed. 2nd, pererab. and add. – Donetsk: Druk–Info, 2005. – 434 p.
8. Assessment of competitiveness: theoretical and practical aspects: Tutorial / team of authors; TSUE.–Vl–ok: Publishing House TSUE, 2007.–144s.
9. Poltrac, A.F. Calculation and collection of income tax // Finance. – 2000. – №6. – p. 35–38.
10. Kupriyanova, T. Enterprise Competitiveness: How to Achieve It? / T. Kupriyanov // Director Consultant. – 2001. – № 11. – p. 17–29.