In conditions of increasing competition in global and local markets, the problem of creating and maintaining competitive advantages is one of the most pressing tasks. To date, a significant number of theoretical works have been presented in the field of studying the nature of competitive advantages (in particular, D. Ricardo, I. Kravis, J. Vanek, M. Porter, M. Posner, K. Arrow, T. Levitt, W. Broll, S. Heimer, S. Kindleberger, V. Premier, H. Johnson, D. Thiess, R. Kavs, R. Coase, P. Buckley, M. Casson, D. Dunning, M. Perlitz, G.L. Azoev, A.P. Chelenkova, V.G. Yudanova, P.I. Golubkova, etc.). When analyzing theories that in one way or another address the problem of forming competitive advantages, it becomes obvious that, despite the variety of approaches, the question of their functional identification remains open.

Due to the multidimensional application of this category in various fields of knowledge, there are a number of definitions in the scientific literature, sometimes contradicting each other.

So in the textbook on marketing edited by Romanov A.N. The following definition of competitiveness is proposed: “competitiveness is understood as a complex of consumer and cost (price) characteristics of an enterprise that determine its success in the market, that is, the advantage of this particular enterprise over others.”

The definition given by Gorbashko E.A., namely: “competitiveness means the ability of an enterprise (potential and/or real) to withstand competition”, more accurately reflects the essence of this category, but does not explain how this ability can arise.

In general, the competitiveness of an enterprise is a relative characteristic that expresses the differences in the development of a given company from the development of competitive companies in terms of the degree to which their products satisfy people’s needs and in the efficiency of production activities.

The competitiveness of an enterprise characterizes the capabilities and dynamics of its adaptation to the conditions of market competition.

The competitiveness of an enterprise depends on a number of factors such as:

• - competitiveness of the enterprise’s goods in foreign and domestic markets;
• - type of product produced;
• - market capacity (number of annual sales);
• - ease of access to the market;
• - homogeneity of the market;
• - competitive positions of enterprises already operating in this market;
• - industry competitiveness;
• - the possibility of technical innovations in the industry;
• - competitiveness of the region and country.

As the world practice of market relations shows, the interconnected solution of these problems and the use of these principles guarantees an increase in the competitiveness of the enterprise.

To better understand the essence of the problem, let us highlight several important consequences of this position.

• 1. Competitiveness includes three main components. The first is strictly related to the product as such and largely comes down to quality. The second is connected both with the economics of creating sales and service of a product, and with the economic opportunities and limitations of the consumer. Finally, the third reflects everything that may be pleasant or unpleasant to the consumer as a buyer, as a person, as a member of a particular social group, etc.
• 2. The buyer is the main appraiser of the goods. And this leads to a very important truth in market conditions: all elements of a product’s competitiveness must be so obvious to a potential buyer that there cannot be the slightest doubt or other interpretation regarding any of them. When we form a “competitiveness complex,” in advertising it is very important to take into account the characteristics of psychological education and the intellectual level of consumers, and many other personal factors. An interesting fact: almost all foreign advertising manuals highlight material related to advertising in an illiterate or intellectually undeveloped audience.
• 3. As you know, each market is characterized by “its own” buyer. Therefore, the idea of ​​some kind of absolute competitiveness not related to a specific market is initially invalid.

The market economy, and after it its scientists, long ago and well understood that trying to schematically express the competitiveness of a product is the same as trying to show with a diagram all the complexity and all the subtleties of the market process. For them, competitiveness has become simply a convenient term that concentrates attention and thought, behind which all the variety of strategic and tactical techniques of management in general and marketing in particular is built. Competitiveness is not an indicator whose level can be calculated for yourself and for a competitor, and then win. First of all, this is a philosophy of working in market conditions, focused on:

• - understanding consumer needs and trends in their development;
• - knowledge of the behavior and capabilities of competitors;
• - knowledge of the state and trends of market development;
• - knowledge of the environment and its trends;
• - the ability to create such a product and bring it to the consumer in such a way that the consumer prefers it to a competitor’s product.

In theoretical discussions on the problem of strategic success of an enterprise in the long term, two points of view predominate - industrial-economic (or market) and resource-based.

Within the framework of the market concept, the external environment takes on special importance, i.e. attractiveness of the industry. This direction is based on the fact that to achieve success, an enterprise needs to pay a lot of attention to studying the industry and choosing markets. In studies that consider the resource approach as the main factor of success, the special role of intra-firm parameters has been identified, which have a stronger impact on achieving success than industry characteristics. As a result, priority positions were taken by the internal resources and capabilities of the enterprise, which need to be developed to create advantages over competitors. If in the industrial-economic approach the aspect of heterogeneity in the provision of resources and their mobility was almost completely excluded from the analysis, then in the resource approach sustainable competitive advantages are considered as a result of specific abilities and resources, as well as the presence of unique factors at the disposal of the enterprise. The main task of strategic enterprise management, along with creating the potential for success, is to turn it into strategic success factors. However, the resource approach does not provide a comprehensive answer to the question of the formation of strategically important resources and capabilities.

The literature has suggested the potential effectiveness of combining approaches as they complement each other. Taking into account not only the product, but also the resources that generate it allows the manager to develop a more accurate implementable strategy. The concept that compares the resources that provide competitive advantages (and thereby the products produced) and the economic fields (markets) of the enterprise is a resource-market portfolio. Thus, the success of a trading company - the main object of study within the framework of strategic management - could be viewed from a new angle as a result of the attractiveness of the industry and the competitive position of the enterprise in it. However, there are no examples of the implementation of this approach at a practical level, which implies a certain formalization of this procedure, in the economic literature. In the existing variety of methods and models focused on classical market tools, as well as on the resource base, the author has identified approaches that assume the broadest view of the problem. Analysis of the competitive environment by M. Porter, focusing on the external environment; SWOT analysis, which realistically assesses the enterprise’s own resources and capabilities in relation to the needs of the external environment in which the company operates.

These approaches, which most fully reflect the specifics of possible areas of emergence of competitive advantage, were used as the basis for a methodology for identifying potential competitive advantages, covering both aspects of the possible emergence of potential for success. It is based on a synthesis of the main ideas of the SWOT analysis matrix, the model of competition in the industry and the concept of the value chain proposed by M. Porter.

This synthesis makes it possible to provide a unified methodological approach when conducting a SWOT analysis by standardizing the assessed parameters, which are used to analyze the sources of potential competitive advantages; rank identified potential competitive advantages; ensure comparability of data for different periods of time.

The methodology for identifying potential competitive advantages involves seven stages.

The first stage of analysis is the study of the internal environment. The area of ​​the internal environment of the enterprise is divided into two fields: strengths and weaknesses.

The criteria for analyzing the internal environment are based on the value chain proposed by M. Porter, consisting of two blocks:

• - main activities:
• - supplies of raw materials and supplies;
• - output;
• - ensuring sales of products;
• - marketing;
• - service;
• - supporting activities:
• - logistics;
• - technology development;
• - human resource management;
• - company infrastructure.

The second stage is an assessment of the external environment, also divided into two fields: opportunities and threats.

At this stage, the criteria by which lists with environmental characteristics will be compiled are introduced:

• - the threat of new competitors;
• - the ability of buyers to bargain;
• - the ability of suppliers to bargain;
• - the threat of the emergence of substitute goods and services;
• - rivalry between existing competitors.

The third stage is a new matrix with criteria introduced into it.

The fourth stage is the determination of characteristics for analyzing the internal environment of the enterprise. Each zone of the region (strengths, weaknesses) is sequentially filled with characteristics describing the state of the enterprise according to one or another criterion, indicating all the characteristics related to this subsection. An analysis of a company's weaknesses is carried out in the same way as an assessment of its strengths.

The fifth stage is the search for potential competitive advantages due to the external environment. Opportunities and threats are analyzed taking into account characteristics that, depending on their significance, can be indicated in the zone of threats or opportunities. The strongest competition is between firms representing the same industry and offering the same type of goods or services. The intensity of competition between sellers is manifested in how effectively they use the means of competition they have: low prices; improved product characteristics; higher level of customer service; long warranty periods; special ways of promoting products to the market; release of new products; advertising. The competitive environment is extremely dynamic; changes at one of the competing firms entail changes at other enterprises. Therefore, it is necessary to constantly monitor and evaluate changes occurring in the external environment.

The sixth stage is ranking the attractiveness of potential competitive advantages due to emerging industry opportunities. The list of all potential benefits is analyzed taking into account the probabilistic degree of their occurrence, as well as the prospective strength of their influence on the enterprise.

The seventh stage is to identify the most serious factors that threaten potential competitive advantages from the external environment.

The proposed methodology for identifying potential competitive advantages was proposed by M. Porter, and ensures the achievement of the following results:

• - identification and classification of a possible environment for searching for sources of competitive advantage;
• - introduction of a standard set of parameters by which the analysis of sources of potential competitive advantages is carried out;
• - eliminating the generalizing factor and thereby ensuring a focused analysis of the sources of competitive advantages for a particular enterprise;
• - ranking of identified potential competitive advantages to determine the strongest advantages and their use in creating real advantages;
• - comparison of potential competitive advantages, the source of which is the external environment, and their assessment from the point of view of the presence/absence of the necessary resources at the enterprise, the use of which will facilitate or hinder the transformation of potential advantages into real ones;
• - ensuring comparability of analysis data for different periods of time due to a single set of parameters;
• - using the methodology in practice within the framework of the activities of marketing services of various enterprises.

By analyzing the key characteristics of the state of an enterprise and known approaches to assessing and increasing its competitiveness, we can formulate the basic principles - concepts for ensuring the competitiveness of enterprises:

• 1. The task of ensuring the competitiveness of an enterprise includes ensuring the competitiveness of products and the competitiveness of the enterprise itself.
• 2. It is necessary to highlight different criteria for the competitiveness of an enterprise depending on the planning and management horizon of the enterprise.
• 3. The main indicator of the competitiveness of an enterprise at the operational level is the integral indicator of product competitiveness.
• 4. At the tactical level, the competitiveness of an enterprise is ensured by its general financial and economic condition and is characterized by a comprehensive indicator of its condition.
• 5. At the strategic level, the competitiveness of an enterprise is characterized by investment attractiveness, the criterion of which is the growth of business value.
• 3. Competitiveness of the enterprise in Russia

To create a competitive enterprise, it is necessary not only to modernize production and management, but also to clearly know why this is being done, what goal must be achieved. The main thing should be one thing: the ability to determine, quickly and effectively use your comparative advantages in competition. All efforts must be directed toward developing those aspects that distinguish you from potential or actual competitors.

First of all, you need to engage in professional training of your staff. The international experience of enterprises that are successful in doing business in the WTO shows that they spend at least 20% of total costs on training and certification of their personnel. In Russia, this figure is significantly lower and currently amounts to no more than 0.8% for small and medium-sized businesses and 12% for large businesses. Particular attention here should be paid to the study of disciplines on global standards, regulations, certificates, international accreditation and licensing agreements. Without solving this problem, it is impossible to compete successfully in the WTO.

Next, it is necessary to build a unified system for managing the quality of resources, products or services at the enterprise. Moreover, the main emphasis should be placed on the quality of management in order to prevent defects in the products or services produced and attract full-fledged human and financial resources. Such quality management systems should cover not only the production, but also the financial activities of the enterprise.

Finally, it is necessary to create a transparent financial reporting system based on IFRS, and in the future, introduce a global financial reporting system, as successful corporations do in the WTO. This again requires developing a new generation of accountants who can do what CFOs currently do, which is manage assets and their fair market value. Auditors are also required to develop new knowledge of global financial reporting, particularly as it relates to environmental and social assets.

The competitiveness of an enterprise is determined by the following factors:

Quality of products and services;

Availability of an effective marketing and sales strategy;

Level of qualifications of personnel and management;

Technological level of production;

The tax environment in which the enterprise operates;

Availability of funding sources.

In order to determine priority measures for industrial reform, it is necessary to determine the reasons for the loss of competitiveness of Russian enterprises. Let's look at the example of the WTO.

In Russia, some enterprises have managed to modernize over the past 10 years and, in principle, comply with the best foreign WTO standards, but there are few of them (no more than 5%). But basically these enterprises are concentrated in several territories of Russia (the capital, the central region and Western Siberia) and operate in several economic zones with high labor costs. These enterprises successfully acquire foreign assets and compete with local companies in both Russian and foreign markets. Their experience shows that, of course, the main requirement from the WTO in relation to such enterprises is their quality of management, transparency of corporate governance and financial reporting, which serves as a guide for investors and customers. Such enterprises are highly competitive. Moreover, not only local, but also global competitiveness. The WTO is a godsend for such enterprises, as it helps to reform tax and customs policies that are extremely relevant for them and reduce the amount of reporting for fiscal authorities.

This is followed by all other, no less important requirements, the fulfillment of which increases competitiveness, namely an increase in quality and a reduction in the price of products (services), regardless of where these products (services) are sold - in the domestic or foreign markets. In many ways, the price of a product or service is now influenced by the cost of mandatory or voluntary international certification.

Further, the competitiveness of the company's management and products should be based on access to borrowed funds, successful production and trading activities, and highly qualified personnel. And for successful activities in attracting third-party financial resources, you need to learn how to work with standard asset management programs from real estate to intellectual property, which have passed the appropriate international accreditation and received an international rating from one of the reputable international organizations. And for this it is necessary to build the processes of the financial activity of the enterprise in accordance with the requirements of the ISO 9001:2000 standard.

And finally, an ideal enterprise should carry out full accounting and external audit of its financial activities in accordance with IFRS, not at the request of the tax office with its extremely confusing and multi-page reporting, but in accordance with the requirements of global financial reporting standards accepted throughout the world, and on the basis of approved management of the enterprise guidance on QMS and global financial reporting. Moreover, both internal and external audits must be carried out taking into account the requirements of the global standard ISO 19011.

Let's consider existing approaches to the classification of methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise:

Graphic methods for assessing competitiveness;

Expert methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise

Matrix methods for assessing competitiveness;

Index methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise

Graphical methods competitiveness assessments are based on the construction of the so-called competitiveness polygon (Figure 1.2.1).

The construction of this polygon occurs as follows: competitiveness factors are selected (their number is arbitrary and depends on the industry, field of activity, etc.). Depending on these factors, the number of outgoing rays from the zero point is determined. Next, on each scale, evaluation criteria are established from 0 to a selected value, for example 6. For the enterprises being compared, the strength or weight of each factor is determined, and connecting lines are drawn between the rays, forming an irregular polygon. From Fig. it will be clear how enterprises differ from each other by the selected criteria.

Fig.1. Competitiveness polygon

This graphical method is more visual and simple. However, its disadvantage is the impossibility of determining the total integral indicator, which depends on the degree and share of influence of each factor on different enterprises.

Matrix methods assessments of an enterprise's competitiveness include the following:

Ansoff Matrix;

McKinsey Matrix;

M. Porter's matrix of competitive forces;

BCG Matrix (Boston Consulting Group).

These methods of assessing competitiveness are based on the use of a matrix - a table with interrelated elements.

The BCG matrix considers two evaluation components: the market growth rate and the relative share of the enterprise in the market. It is based on the theory of the life cycle of an enterprise or product. In the company's portfolio there are several types of products, goods that have different values ​​for the company. Some bring a significant amount of profit in the short term, others are in decline due to lack of demand, others require investments to generate income in the future, etc.

This matrix allows you to simply and clearly analyze market trends and the competitive position of various product groups in the market. However, its disadvantage and limitation should be considered significant inaccuracy, difficulty in assessing the scale of the market, market growth rates and the enterprise’s share in it. Moreover, the estimated indicators “market growth” and “market share” are not always a factor of success and an indicator of market attractiveness.

Rice. 1.5. Boston Advisory Group Matrix This method allows you to compare the positions of businesses within the same portfolio in large corporations and ensure the right mix of units that need capital for their growth with businesses that have excess capital. To determine the development prospects of each enterprise, one indicator is used - the growth in demand for the enterprise's products. It determines the vertical size of the matrix. The horizontal line specifies the ratio of the market share owned by a given enterprise and the market share owned by its main competitor. This ratio determines the comparative competitive position of the enterprise in the future. BCG offers the following management solutions for corporations:

“stars” - enterprises with a high market share and high growth rates must be protected and strengthened; with the advent of maturity, “stars” can turn into “cash cows”;

“dogs” are the least efficient of the enterprises that make up the corporation; they should be disposed of whenever possible unless there are compelling reasons to keep them;

“cash cows” require strict control of capital investments;

“wild cats” are the most promising enterprises; with effective management, they can be turned into “stars”.

This is a simplified analytical method for assessing the competitiveness of the positions of enterprises within one portfolio. The use of this method is limited: only in stable operating conditions of the enterprise and at stable growth rates

The MacKinsy matrix is ​​a more advanced form of the BCG matrix. As can be seen from Fig. 2, it no longer consists of 4 but of 9 quadrants and characterizes the long-term attractiveness of the industry and the competitive position of the enterprise in it.

Rice. 2. MacKinsy Matrix

This is a multifactor matrix that takes into account a large number of influences.

Criteria for determining market attractiveness may be:

Market growth indicator;

Market volume;

Competition in the market;

Entry barriers, etc.

For the competitive position of a business unit:

Market share;

Share growth;

Product quality;

Brand reputation;

Sales network, etc.

By assigning a certain weight to each criterion in %, you can determine the competitive position of a business unit or product. The position of a business unit on the matrix can be represented as follows (see Fig. 1). Product A with a relative market share of 25% and with a market size indicator equal to the diameter of the circle and a tendency to move to a certain quadrant of the matrix indicated by an arrow.

Fig.1. Business unit

The main disadvantage of this matrix is ​​the difficulty and subjectivity in determining the weight of any factor.

More comprehensive when assessing the competitiveness of enterprises are index methods. The implementation of index methods provides:

1. Selection of several analogous enterprises to create a comparative base.

2. Determination of the most important indicators affecting the level of competitiveness of the enterprise.

3. Determination of influence coefficients for each indicator.

4. Enterprise assessment for each enterprise.

5. Calculation of the enterprise competitiveness index.

The main methods are

Determining the competitiveness of an enterprise by the level of competitiveness of its products, namely: by the price-quality ratio, that is, by the consumer properties of the product;

Method by the level of production costs, profit margin, sales volume, etc. The enterprise that has higher indicated indicators also has a higher competitive position in the market;

integral method based on comparison of 2 criteria: degree

Satisfying consumer demands and production efficiency (indicators of profitability, capital, assets, asset turnover).

If the integral indicator is equal to 1, the level of the analyzed enterprise is equal to the level of competitiveness of the competing enterprise; if it is less than 1, then the analyzed company is less competitive and vice versa.

Assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise also involves identifying indicators that are significant from the point of view of consumer requirements and separating them into groups of economic and consumer parameters. It should be noted that indicators of interest to a particular consumer must comply with established safety and environmental requirements. Otherwise, further assessment of the enterprise's competitiveness is impractical.

The technique involves comparing the competitiveness of a particular enterprise’s products with basic analogue products. In a comparative analysis, the products of a particular enterprise and the basic analogue product must meet the following requirements: the same value of classification indicators; belonging to one market segment; availability of products on the market during the assessment period.

The assessment of the competitiveness of products (analyzed and basic) is determined by the formula:

Ai= ∑diLi ,

where Ai is the integral assessment (competitiveness index) of the i-th product;

di is the share of importance of the i-th indicator in the sum of importance indicators;

Li - index determined by the formula

Li = Ximin / Ximax,

where Xi min, Xi max are, respectively, the minimum and maximum values ​​of the characteristics among the ideal and analyzed products.

Hence, methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise in a specific market or its segment are based on a thorough analysis of the technological, production, financial and sales capabilities of the enterprise; it is designed to determine the potential capabilities of the enterprise and the measures that the enterprise must take to ensure a competitive position in a particular market.

Assistant of the Department of Marketing, Commerce and Logistics Moiseenko I.V.

5th year student of the specialty

“Organization Management” Omelchuk A.V.

Far Eastern Federal University, Russia

Basic methods for assessing the competitiveness of an organization

Despite the fairly deep level of development of the problem of competitiveness, there is still no unified approach to its quantitative assessment. The problems of analyzing and assessing competitiveness are complex and multifaceted. Such foreign and domestic scientists as M. Porter, F. Kotler, E. Dichtl, E.P. made their contribution to solving these problems. Golubkov, A.N. Pechenkin, A. Glukhov, P.S. Zavyalov, G.L. Bagiev et al., who developed theoretical and methodological aspects of assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise. However, there is still no clear systematization of the research results obtained. The most well-known models and methods for assessing the competitiveness of goods and enterprises today can be divided into two groups: analytical and graphical methods. This division into methods for assessing the competitiveness of a product and methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise is quite arbitrary, since they largely coincide, only the object of research changes. The classification of methods for assessing the competitiveness of goods and enterprises is presented in Figure 1.

Table 1 presents the classification, advantages and disadvantages of methods for assessing the competitiveness of a product and an enterprise.

The vast majority of methods are based on identifying the factors that determine the competitiveness of business entities, with the emphasis being on identifying the maximum number of these factors and creating an exhaustive list of them. Next, the selected factors are processed using various mathematical methods.

Figure 1 – Hierarchy of methods for assessing competitiveness

Thus, the number of competitiveness factors is almost infinite, therefore, no matter how extensive their list is, it will still not be exhaustive, which means that an assessment of an enterprise’s competitiveness based on such an incomplete list will be inadequate. As a result, all existing lists of competitiveness factors are very conditional, which does not allow them to be used to assess the competitiveness of enterprises. By focusing on an exhaustive list of enterprise competitiveness factors, researchers find themselves in a dead end, since such a list is impossible in principle. The limited list determines the limitations of the method. To assess the competitiveness factors identified by researchers, as well as to determine a number of other indicators, approximate, approximate estimates and “expert methods” are used, which suffer from significant subjectivity and convention.

Most methods involve comparing almost identical enterprises that produce similar goods and services and operate in similar economic conditions. At the same time, the development of commodity-money relations leads to increasing diversification of enterprises, increasing differentiation of goods and services, and increasingly aggravating differences in the economic conditions of enterprises. It is becoming increasingly difficult to determine clear geographical boundaries of a particular market, to establish a list of competing goods and enterprises, which entails the inapplicability of such methods for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises.

Table 1 – Classification of methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise

End of table 1

Compiled by:

The noted shortcomings of existing approaches to assessing the competitiveness of enterprises determine the low possibilities of practical application of most of them. The main reason for this is that the concept of enterprise competitiveness and the criteria for assessing this indicator are initially not clearly defined by most economists. This, in turn, is due to the lack of a generally accepted concept of enterprise competitiveness.

Thus, in a competitive environment, an enterprise is immediately influenced by several groups of factors, forming and constantly modifying the competitive environment of its activities. The noted complexity is aggravated by the fact that each of the mentioned groups, in turn, consists of many elements, and the composition and structure of the elements are unique for each specific enterprise. Because of this, competition cannot be presented as an exhaustive list of competitive forces and factors.

Literature

1. Dushenkina, E. Enterprise economics: lecture notes / E. Dushenkina - M.: Eksmo, 2009. - 160 p.

2. The level of competitiveness of an enterprise as a basic result of the efficiency of resource use. / Bartkova N.N., Krupina N.N. // Scientific Bulletin of the Ural Academy, 2010. - No. 2(12) – from 35-48.

3. Methodological foundations of dynamic states of competition. / Zhigun L. A., Tretyak N. A. // Modern competition, 2008. - No. 4 – p. 35-58

Review of methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise

Voronov Dmitry Sergeevich, Ph.D. econ. sciences
Ural Federal University

For practicing researchers, we offer a dynamic method for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises (with a detailed example of calculations), as well as an enterprise competitiveness calculator, which will allow you to quickly determine the level of competitiveness of the company you are interested in.

Along with theoretical studies of the essence of competition and competitiveness, the problem of practical assessment of competitiveness has long been discussed in the economic literature. It can be stated that to date, certain successes have been achieved in assessing the competitiveness of products; quite acceptable methods for assessing the competitiveness of identical goods and services have been developed. The situation is more complicated when assessing the competitiveness of enterprises. Despite the fact that certain steps have been and are being taken in this direction, economists have not currently developed a universal and generally accepted methodology for a comprehensive assessment of the competitiveness of an enterprise.

At the same time, there is a need to assess the competitiveness of an enterprise, since in a market economy, assessing one’s competitive position is an integral element of the activities of any business entity. The study of competitors and competitive conditions in the industry is required by an enterprise, first of all, in order to determine what its advantages and disadvantages are over competitors, and to draw conclusions for the enterprise to develop its own successful competitive strategy and maintain a competitive advantage. Determining the competitiveness of an enterprise is an integral element of the activities of any economic entity. In particular, assessing the competitiveness of a business entity is necessary for the purposes of:

• development of measures to improve competitiveness;
• selection of counterparties for joint activities;
• drawing up a program for the enterprise to enter new markets;
• carrying out investment activities;
• implementation of state regulation of the economy.

In any case, assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise has the goal of determining the position of the enterprise in the market under study.

The main task of every economist studying the problem of assessing the competitiveness of enterprises is to find criteria for competitiveness, its sources and factors. An analysis of economic literature on the topic under consideration allows us to identify several approaches to solving the formulated problem. Next, the main known methods for assessing the competitiveness of companies will be analyzed and their advantages and disadvantages will be summarized.

Speaking about the classification of existing methods, first of all, we note that economists have proposed a huge variety of different methods for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises (there are dozens of them). To match this variety of methods, there are many classifications: according to theoretical content, according to the form of displaying assessment results, according to the form of mathematical connection of indicators, and a number of others. Within the framework of this study, the content (classical) classification of methods for assessing the competitiveness of companies will be analyzed. Also note that the study examines only the basic (most common) existing approaches. So, at present, the following main methods for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises can be distinguished.

Product Methods

The first thought that comes to mind when solving the problem of assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise is that competition between companies in a market economy takes the form of product competition, and a company’s ability to compete in a certain product market directly depends on the competitiveness of its product. This position is repeatedly confirmed by economic practice, indicating that the vast majority of competitive companies are represented on the market with competitive products. Conversely, it is difficult to imagine a successful enterprise producing products that are not in demand among consumers. Within the framework of the approach under consideration, the relationship between the competitiveness of a product and the success of a company is so strong that these categories are practically identified.

Product methods are based on the judgment that the assessment of the competitiveness of an economic entity can be made through an assessment of the competitiveness of its products: the higher the competitiveness of the product, the higher the competitiveness of the enterprise. At the same time, to determine the competitiveness of products, various marketing and qualimetric methods are used, most of which are based on finding the ratio price quality products. There are many methods for finding this ratio. Below is a brief description of the most common of them.

The indicator of an enterprise's competitiveness, as a rule, is determined by finding the weighted average value among the competitiveness indicators for each type of product, where the weights are the sales volumes of the corresponding type of product:

k i– competitiveness i-th type of product;

P– parametric index;

E– economic index.

The parametric index reflects an assessment of the totality of properties (parameters) of the analyzed product relative to competing (reference) products and is determined by summing the partial parametric indices for each assessed parameter of the analyzed type of product, taking into account the corresponding weighting coefficients:

P– parametric index;

b i- weight coefficient i-th parameter;

p i i-product parameter.

In turn, each of the partial indices for the corresponding parameter is calculated as the ratio of the actual value of the evaluated parameter of the analyzed product to the value of the corresponding indicator of a competing product (or a reference product selected as a basis for comparison). The list of evaluated product parameters, as well as the weighting coefficient of each parameter, are established by expert means.

p i– private parametric index i-product parameter;

g a– actual value of the estimated parameter;

g e– reference value of the estimated parameter.

The economic index is defined as the ratio of the total consumption costs of the analyzed products to the total consumption costs of competing (reference) products.

E– economic index;

Behind– total consumption costs of the analyzed products;

Z e– reference consumption costs.

Total consumption costs include both the cost of purchasing the product itself and the costs of its operation, purchase of consumables, maintenance (including repairs) and disposal.

Note that some researchers suggest using its market share as an indicator of a product’s competitiveness, which, in our opinion, is a more accurate reflection of competitiveness.

The undoubted advantages of the approach under consideration include the fact that it takes into account one of the most important components of the competitiveness of an enterprise - the competitiveness of its products. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine a successful enterprise that does not have a portfolio of competitive products.

The disadvantages are that the competitive strength of products is still not identical to the sustainable competitive advantage of the enterprise, since any price or quality advantages of products are relatively quickly copied by competitors and the economic benefits from them disappear. Also, certain criticism is caused by the reduction of product competitiveness to an assessment of the ratio price quality, which does not take into account the degree of its innovation, which is of great importance when positioning products on the market.

In addition, the use of the group of methods under consideration involves the comparison of similar products. At the same time, the development of commodity-money relations leads to increasingly aggravated differences in the economic conditions of enterprises, their increasing diversification, and increasing differentiation of goods and services. It is becoming more and more difficult to determine clear geographical boundaries of a particular market and establish a list of competing products, which entails the low applicability of such methods for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises.

However, the main disadvantage of this approach is that it allows one to obtain a very limited understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of the enterprise, since its competitiveness takes the form of product competitiveness and does not affect other aspects of its activities. After all, the competitiveness of products reflects the level of demand for products, and the competitiveness of an enterprise reflects the level of efficiency of economic activities. It is no coincidence that economic practice is replete with examples of how business entities producing quite competitive products fail. The reason for this is the fundamental contradiction between the competitiveness of an enterprise and the competitiveness of its products.

The fact is that the competitiveness of products is assessed primarily from the point of view of meeting the needs of the buyer. The competitiveness of an enterprise is assessed from the point of view of the interests of the owner (management, investor) of the business entity. In other words, the lower the price of a product, the greater its competitiveness. However, whether such a price can provide the necessary economic efficiency for further expanded reproduction of the enterprise is a big question. An enterprise that produces even the most wonderful products, but does so with chronic losses, cannot be competitive. It is precisely because of this that we consider assessing the competitiveness of an economic entity purely through assessing the competitiveness of its products to be fundamentally incorrect (for a detailed discussion of the issue of the relationship between the competitiveness of an enterprise and the competitiveness of its products, see).

At the same time, the inadmissibility of identifying the categories “competitiveness of an enterprise” and “competitiveness of a product” was not always obvious. Indeed, the main core competency in an industrial economy was production. Therefore, back in the first half of the 20th century, the essence of assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise was reduced to assessing the competitiveness of its products. Thus, product methods have historically been the first methods for assessing the competitiveness of business entities.

With the development of the post-industrial economy, when the structure of an enterprise has become much more complex than just an assembly shop, the number of key competencies of a company necessary for success has increased significantly. With the increase in the number of key competencies, the importance of the production function inevitably began to decline. Moreover, in the modern economy, when technology makes it possible to delegate the assembly of goods to subcontractors (often geographically located in other countries) without losing the quality characteristics of the product, the process of material production determines the competitiveness of the company less and less. Under these conditions, cardinal differences between the assessment of the competitiveness of an enterprise and the assessment of the competitiveness of its products appear.

Matrix methods

With the complication of the composition and structure of the enterprise's key competencies, the emergence of a new management discipline was associated - strategic management, which studies methods for developing and implementing actions leading to a long-term increase in the level of performance of the enterprise. It was within the framework of strategic management that the task of assessing the competitiveness of a company was first set, taking into account the full range of its functions and long-term goals.

The first tools for assessing the competitiveness of business entities through the prism of strategic management can be recognized as “matrix” methods developed in the 1960s. American consulting companies. These models got their name due to the use of a matrix form for displaying the results of assessment and analysis. Another characteristic feature of this group of methods is a pronounced emphasis on the marketing assessment of the enterprise’s activities, as a result of which the company is viewed as a collection of various business units (product portfolio).

Among the matrix models, it is first necessary to highlight the developments of the Boston Consulting Group ( Boston Consulting Group, hereinafter also referred to as BCG), famous for the “Relative Market Share” – “Market Growth Rate” matrix. The methodology is based on two concepts: the experience curve (according to which enterprises with a larger market share minimize their costs), and the product life cycle (according to which growing market segments have the greatest prospects).

Based on these concepts, the business units of an enterprise are differentiated in terms of relative market share (along one coordinate axis) and the growth rate of the corresponding markets (along the other axis). At the same time, the relative market share is the ratio of the share of a given enterprise to the share of the largest competitor in the market of the corresponding industry (shares are measured in natural units of production). Note that having a high market share, according to the experience curve concept, should lead to a minimum (relative to competitors) level of costs and a maximum level of profit.

Market growth rates are assessed relative to industry average (market average) values: business units where growth rates are higher than in the economy as a whole should fall into the “fast growth” cells, and in industries that grow more slowly, into the “slow growth” cells. Products with a high share in growing markets (“stars”) strengthen the company’s competitive position; a low share in stagnating markets (“dogs”) is weakened. On the matrix field, business units are designated as circles in the corresponding quadrants (the area of ​​the circles is proportional to the scale of activity of the business units). An example of constructing a matrix from the Boston Consulting Group is presented below.

The choice of strategy in relation to a specific business unit (line of activity) depends on which area of ​​the matrix it falls into. For example, if your business unit has a large market share with high growth rates (“star”), you will most likely pursue a growth strategy. On the other hand, if the business unit has a small market share and low growth rates (“dog”), you can choose a “cutting off the excess” strategy. Having analyzed the entire product portfolio of an enterprise, you can evaluate its competitive position and develop recommendations for optimizing this portfolio in the future.

One of the main advantages of the BCG model for its time was that the method uses objective indicators of attractiveness and competitiveness, reducing the likelihood of subjectivity. BCG's Product Portfolio Matrix has been a significant contribution to the company strategy developer's toolkit when it comes to assessing the attractiveness of a diversified company's businesses and preparing overall directions and strategies for each business unit in the portfolio. Evaluating a diversified group of businesses as a collection of cash flows and cash requirements (current and future) represents a major step forward in understanding the financial aspects of a company's strategy. The BCG matrix reflects the financial interactions within a company's portfolio and the financial considerations that should be taken into account, and also explains why priorities in the allocation of resources may differ between the individual enterprises of the company. It also provides a good basis for strategies for expanding or eliminating certain activities (products).

Despite the noted advantages, the BCG matrix is ​​imperfect. Its disadvantages include the fact that it is mainly based on the concept of the experience curve. At the same time, it is known that the relationship between relative market share and profitability is not as close as postulated in the BCG model. The degree of importance of accumulated production experience in terms of reducing unit costs in different industries may be different. This connection is especially “unpredictable” in the modern economy. Sometimes a larger market share translates into a unit cost advantage, and sometimes it doesn't. Consequently, the use of a hypothesis about the relationship between relative market share and profitability potential makes this technique only strictly applicable in the presence of experience effects, that is, in industries with mass production.

Following the Boston Consulting Group, McKinsey ( McKinsey & Co) in the 1970s. developed a strategic analysis matrix for General Electric ( General Electric), due to which this model is also called the General Electric Matrix. Unlike the BCG model, which has a dimension of , the McKinsey matrix has a larger dimension and is built in the “Market Attractiveness” – “Competitive Position” axes.

Market attractiveness is determined based on the size and growth rate of the market; technological requirements; the intensity of competition, the magnitude of barriers to entry into and exit from the industry; seasonal and cyclical factors; capital needs; emerging opportunities and threats in the industry; actual and projected industry profitability; social, environmental factors and degree of regulation. To obtain an indicator of industry attractiveness, factors are given weights based on their importance. The sum of weighted ratings of all factors characterizes the attractiveness of the market. Attractiveness ratings are calculated for each product line represented in the company's portfolio.

Factors taken into account when assessing competitive position include: market share; relative state of unit costs; product quality; knowledge of customers and markets; availability of competencies in key areas; sufficient level of technological know-how; management qualifications; and profitability relative to competitors. To obtain a quantitative measure of the competitive position of the company's divisions, each of them is assessed using the same approach as when assessing the attractiveness of the industry (through the sum of weighted ratings).

A quantitative assessment of the attractiveness of the industry and the competitive position of each separate division of the company serves as the basis for assigning them to one of the nine cells of the matrix (see yb;t). In this case, the area of ​​the circles is proportional to the size of the industry, and the numbers in them reflect the share of the enterprise.

The divisions (products) that have a high competitive position with high market attractiveness have the greatest investment attractiveness (the position corresponds to the “stars” from the BCG model). Conversely, the weakness of the competitive position in markets of low attractiveness determines the need to exit such assets (by analogy with the “dogs” of the BCG model). Similarly, each of the nine positions of the McKinsey matrix is ​​prescribed its own development strategy. Therefore, by analyzing its product portfolio using the McKinsey Matrix, a company can assess its current competitiveness and determine a strategy for each element of its product portfolio.

The popularity of matrix analysis tools at one time was so great that subsequently many variations on this theme appeared, differing both in the criteria of differentiation (coordinate systems) and in the degree of differentiation (dimension of matrices). Let us briefly describe other well-known matrix models.

Shell model ( Shell) is very similar to the McKinsey matrix, being a development of the idea of ​​strategic business positioning. A feature of the Shell matrix is ​​the assumption that the market is an oligopoly. Therefore, for business units with weak competitive positions, an immediate or gradual exit strategy is recommended. Also, the attractiveness of the industry implies the existence of long-term development potential for all market participants, and not just for the enterprise in question.

The Shell model is a matrix of dimensions and built in the axes “Industry Prospects” - “Competitive Position”. As in the McKinsey model, each of the dimensions is determined by finding a multifactor rating indicator. At the same time, the Shell model places even greater emphasis on the quantitative parameters of business. By analogy with the previously described models, a specific strategy is prescribed for each position of the Shell matrix.

Another development of the McKinsey concept is the Hofer and Schendel model ( Hofer/Schendel). In it, the search for the optimal strategy is carried out in the axes “Stages of market evolution” - “Competitive position”. At the same time, the “Competitive Position” indicator is also a multifactor rating value. The Thompson-Strickland matrix is ​​built using a similar principle, as well as the model developed by the company Arthur D. Little(matrix A.D.L.). Separately, it should be noted the matrix of J. J. Lambin, which is built on the basis of the ratio of prices and costs of the analyzed enterprise relative to competitors.

As part of the discussion of matrix methods, one cannot fail to mention the SWOT matrix, also known as SWOT analysis. This method was developed by K. Andrews around the same time as the advent of the BCG matrix and was the result of the development of the school of strategic planning.

Classic SWOT analysis involves identifying the strengths and weaknesses in a company's activities, potential external threats and opportunities and assessing them relative to industry averages or in relation to data from strategically important competitors. The form of presentation of the results of such an analysis was the compilation of tables (matrices) of the strengths in the company’s activities (S), its weaknesses (W), potential favorable opportunities (O) and external threats (T).

Some researchers classify SWOT analysis as a method for assessing the competitiveness of companies. Agreeing that the analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of an organization is certainly close in scope to the analysis of a company’s competitiveness, we nevertheless believe that SWOT analysis is to a greater extent a tool for forming and planning an enterprise strategy and allows us to assess rather the competitive environment of the enterprise, rather than its competitiveness.

Concluding the review of matrix methods for assessing the competitiveness of companies, we note that today there are many different strategic management matrices, which to one degree or another are a development of the models discussed above.

The advantages of matrix methods for assessing competitiveness include their simplicity and clarity. If the necessary information is available, matrix models make it possible to provide a highly reliable assessment of the competitive positions of the enterprise's product portfolio.

At the same time, matrix methods also have a number of significant disadvantages. First of all, it should be noted that many researchers consider it fundamentally incorrect to consider a company as a product portfolio. Thus, within the framework of the resource concept, a company is viewed not as a set of business units, but as a set of key competencies.

In addition, economists note methodological defects in the approach under consideration. First, in order to use these models, it is necessary to properly define the market and its parameters, and this often requires a huge amount of analytical work and the availability of reliable marketing information, which entails the need for very labor-intensive research. As a result, too many simplifications and subjective assumptions are used when constructing matrices. The result of this is an extremely limited use of quantitative parameters and mathematical apparatus within the framework of the methods under consideration, which, in turn, reduces the possibility of analyzing the dynamics and factors of competitiveness of an enterprise.

Secondly, many researchers do not agree that the analysis of a company’s competitive position can only be reduced to assessing the combination of market characteristics of the product portfolio (market share, growth rate and market attractiveness). In other words, matrix methods significantly limit the complex of factors characterizing the competitive situation in the industry and the competitive advantages of enterprises.

The consequence of these methodological shortcomings is that the use of matrix methods minimizes the possibility of analyzing the causes of what is happening and complicates the development of management decisions. Simplified recommendations—starve a “dog” or raise a “star”—are far from sufficient to serve as reliable guides for company management.

Operating methods

The identification of operational methods as an independent tool for assessing the competitiveness of business entities occurred as a development of the tools of matrix models of strategic planning. In accordance with the operational approach, the most competitive enterprises are those where the work of all divisions and services is best organized (also in the literature, this group of methods is known as “methods based on the theory of effective competition”).

The efficiency of each of the company's services is influenced by many factors - enterprise resources. Assessing the performance of each department involves assessing the effectiveness of its use of these resources. At the same time, the resources of an enterprise are understood broadly - this is not only capital in financial and material form, but also personnel, the state of management, the quality of connections with contact audiences, and the organization of marketing. Each enterprise resource defined in this way can be assessed by an appropriate quantitative or qualitative indicator. Thus, the competitiveness of a company appears as a set of private indicators of the effectiveness of its implementation of individual aspects of economic activity - operations.

To assess the competitiveness of the enterprise under study using the operational method, it is first necessary to determine a list of operations and indicators that are significant for ensuring competitiveness. As a rule, these indicators are classified into groups into marketing, economic, production, organizational, personnel, etc. The composition and structure of the assessed indicators and operations vary significantly depending on the industry being studied and the author of the methodology. To evaluate the performance of operations, both indicators known to economic science and newly introduced by the authors are used. Their number can reach several dozen (from profitability and liquidity to staff turnover, the degree of satisfaction of counterparties and the ability of the enterprise to adapt to innovations). If it is impossible to collect and process certain indicators, expert methods are widely used.

In order to assess the competitiveness of the enterprise under study, each of the indicators is compared with a similar indicator of a competing business entity (or a reference value), as a result of which partial efficiency coefficients are determined for each operation:

k i– partial efficiency coefficient for i th operation;

l a- meaning i- indicator of the enterprise under study;

l e– reference value i-th indicator.

Subsequently, depending on the method, in order to assess the competitiveness of the enterprise, the resulting partial efficiency coefficients are subjected to various mathematical processing. Most often, an enterprise’s competitiveness indicator is found by calculating the weighted average of partial efficiency coefficients:

K

a i– weight factor i th operation (determined by expert method);

k i– partial efficiency coefficient i th operation.

Note that various variants of the group of methods under consideration may include a rather complex mathematical apparatus. This is expressed in the methods of processing initial indicators - various methods of statistical data processing are used here: standardization and normalization of values, interpretation and ranking of expert assessments, etc. In addition, the form of connection between partial coefficients of operational efficiency and the final indicator of the enterprise’s competitiveness may not be only additive (as in expression (3.1.7)), but also multiplicative, and even exponential and power.

The form of presentation of the results of assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise can also be different. Researchers build various diagrams, polyhedra and “radars” of competitiveness, as well as other forms of displaying research results. In particular, the following figure shows a variant of the graphical interpretation of the operational model for assessing the competitiveness of an economic entity, proposed by V. A. Moshnov.

The advantages of operational methods include taking into account very diverse aspects (operations) of an enterprise’s activities, which creates the maximum prerequisites for the most accurate assessment of its competitiveness.

The disadvantage of operational methods is that they are based on identifying factors (indicators) that determine the competitiveness of business entities, while the emphasis is on identifying the maximum number of these factors and creating an exhaustive list of them (some methods involve processing dozens of different indicators of financial and economic activity) .

However, the system of enterprise competitiveness factors is open, and many elements of this system are unclear. In pursuit of the most complete list of company performance parameters, proponents of the operational approach often include in this list factors that are functionally dependent (for example, profitability and cost levels), or factors at different levels of hierarchy (for example, gross profitability and net profit margin), which not entirely correct from a methodological point of view. In addition, an excessive increase in the number of variables in the competitiveness model (in the case of the theoretical assumption of the possibility of forming an absolutely complete list of factors) leads to the fact that the complexity of their mathematical processing becomes extremely high, and the task of collecting the necessary data becomes practically impossible, and this significantly reduces the practical applicability similar methods for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises.

To assess the competitiveness factors identified by researchers, as well as to determine performance indicators for various operations, approximate estimates and “expert methods”, which suffer from significant subjectivity and conditionality, are widely used. Of course, in some cases it is impossible to avoid such an approach, however, the use of such assessments as a basic method leads to a very weak mathematical connection between the initial conditional factors and the assessed indicator of the company’s competitiveness.

Some criticism is caused by the reduction of different sized and heterogeneous indicators (for example, the level of labor productivity and the probability of bankruptcy of an enterprise) into a single indicator of the competitiveness of an economic entity. Here, economists introduce coefficients that determine the weighting value of each of the factors being assessed, and at the same time tidy up the dimensionality of the indicators. However, the coefficients used in most cases are very arbitrary, which entails an inadequacy in assessing the influence of certain factors on the competitiveness of the enterprise. But it’s not just a matter of arbitrary weighting coefficients. Various economic factors in each specific economic situation influence the competitiveness of enterprises to varying degrees. Therefore, it is incorrect to deliberately establish uniform weighting coefficients for assessing the competitiveness of various economic entities.

Summarizing the noted shortcomings, it can be argued that many of the operational methods for assessing the competitiveness of companies presented in the literature, due to a number of methodological flaws, do not always allow for an adequate assessment of the competitiveness of business entities. If we abstract from methodological aspects, the main problem of operational methods is that their use requires the collection of large amounts of data about the objects of assessment, due to which the labor intensity and cost of conducting such an assessment becomes excessive.

At the same time, it would be incorrect to say that, due to the above, operational methods are not used in practice or are used extremely little. Not at all. Since the need to assess the competitiveness of enterprises objectively exists, and methodologically, operational methods are much more reliable than product ones, analysts are forced to use operational methods.

Only specialized organizations can afford to study the competitiveness of an enterprise using operational methods, due to their high labor intensity. These primarily include rating agencies that establish investment ratings for business entities. Rating models of specialized agencies are nothing more than a weighted assessment of the creditworthiness of companies, based on taking into account quantitative indicators of financial and economic activity, qualitative management data, indicators of group or state support, credit history parameters and warning signals. Similar rating models are used by credit institutions that apply internal ratings of borrowers in accordance with the Basel Accords on the assessment of banking risks. In the terminology of this study, rating models are operational methods.

There is no doubt that an assessment carried out by a reputable rating agency (for example, Fitch, Moody's, Standard & Poor's or RA "Expert") will be the most reliable reflection of the prospects of any company. And even more so, there is no need to doubt the objectivity and accuracy of the rating assessments made by banks in relation to their borrowers. And, nevertheless, we believe that the question of the methodology for assessing competitiveness with rating models is not exhausted.

Secondly, the rating models of specialized agencies are closed and non-public. On the one hand, this makes possible manipulation and distortion of ratings (which the world's leading agencies have been accused of in connection with assigning high ratings to issuers and default-grade securities before the 2008 liquidity crisis). On the other hand, the free use of rating models by other market entities (besides the model owner) becomes impossible.

Thirdly, the use of rating models (operational methods) is so labor-intensive, “cumbersome” and, as a result, expensive that only the largest companies and credit institutions can afford to use them.

For these reasons, operational methods are not widely used in the practice of microeconomic analysis of the competitiveness of companies.

Combined methods

The methods assigned to this group are defined as combined due to the fact that the assessment of the competitiveness of an enterprise within their framework is carried out on the basis of highlighting not only achieved, but also potential competitiveness. The approach is based on the statement according to which the competitiveness of an economic entity is an integral value (combination) of the current competitiveness of the enterprise and its competitive potential.

Current and potential competitiveness and their ratios within the integral indicator of an enterprise’s competitiveness may vary depending on the method. In most cases, current (achieved) competitiveness is determined based on an assessment of the competitiveness of the enterprise's products (product methods), potential - by assessing private indicators of the effectiveness of its implementation of certain aspects of economic activity (by analogy with operational methods).

The mathematical apparatus used for the assessment (both current and potential) is also similar to the corresponding product and operational techniques.

The advantages of this group of methods include the fact that they take into account not only the achieved level of competitiveness of the enterprise, but also its possible dynamics in the future. The complementarity of product and operational methods, it would seem, should level out their weaknesses and combine their strengths.

In reality, everything turns out to be more prosaic: the specific methods and techniques used in determining current and potential competitiveness ultimately reproduce the methods used in the previously discussed approaches, which also determines the presence of shortcomings of the corresponding approaches. It can be stated with regret that as a result of the “crossing” of approaches, instead of enhancing their advantages, their shortcomings were multiplied: the methodological inconsistency of product methods was aggravated by the labor intensity of the operational approach, as a result of which combined methods find the least application among researchers of enterprise competitiveness. Thus, the practice of economic analysis inexorably demonstrates that the seemingly correct message of combining the advantages of product and operational methods ultimately allowed us to combine only their shortcomings.

Business valuation methods

In a separate group we will highlight methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise based on assessing the value of the business. These methods are based on the assumption that sales volume, profit, cost, and other financial indicators (liquidity, financial stability, asset turnover and efficiency) are intermediate characteristics of individual economic aspects of the enterprise. And only the market assessment of the company, combining all the key indicators of its external and internal environment, is the final criterion of financial well-being and economic efficiency. Consequently, business value serves as an integral indicator of the company's development. Because of this, it is concluded that comparing the dynamics of the value of various economic entities makes it possible to compare the results and prospects of the activities of various enterprises, and therefore to assess their competitiveness.

The assessment of the value of a business can be carried out taking into account the results of the cost, income and comparative approaches, or by determining the capitalization of the company based on the quotes of its securities on the stock market. In both cases, the value of the business is determined on the basis of an independent expert assessment, taking into account the entire set of essential information about the activities of the company being valued. The only difference is in the number of experts: in the case of securities quoted on the stock market, the number of experts is so large that the probability of an error in the assessment tends to zero.

Absolutely agreeing with the theoretical premise underlying the method of assessing the value of a business, we consider it the most reliable method for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise (especially the dynamics of the company’s stock capitalization). And at the same time, its application requires either an extremely expensive procedure for assessing the value of a company (more precisely, assessing the value of several competing companies as of several reporting dates - so that dynamics can be compared), or it requires that the securities of the analyzed enterprise be in circulation on the stock market. These limitations make it impossible to use business valuation methods for the vast majority of enterprises.

Dynamic Methods

This group of methods got its name due to the fact that it is based on an assessment of the company’s key economic indicators in dynamics(in contrast to all of the above methods that evaluate indicators “statically”). Indeed, without taking into account changes over time, the value of even the most important indicator does not allow us to form a comprehensive picture of the analyzed process. And vice versa, any information about the dynamics of an economic indicator makes the picture of the process much more complete. Consequently, analyzing the indicators of an enterprise’s economic activity over time makes it possible to abandon the collection and processing of dozens of parameters, and at the same time significantly increase the reliability of the assessment of the competitiveness of companies.

Thus, the dynamic approach is based on two principles: identifying key indicators of the activity of an economic entity and applying dynamic analysis in relation to them. The company's profitability (operational efficiency) and market share dynamics (strategic positioning) are usually considered as key indicators. Then the competitiveness of the enterprise can be assessed using the following formula:

K– competitiveness of the enterprise under study;

K r– operating efficiency ratio;

K I– strategic positioning coefficient.

In more detail, the procedure for calculating operating efficiency ratios ( K r) and strategic positioning ( K I) cm. .

After assessing the company's competitiveness for the reporting period, it is necessary to similarly make calculations for several retrospective periods. The resulting dynamic series of competitiveness indicators ensures the representativeness of the data array and makes it possible to quickly carry out a reliable assessment of the competitive status of the enterprise. Due to this, the dynamic method makes it possible to level out the methodological shortcomings characteristic of other approaches to assessing competitiveness and is optimal in terms of the ratio of costs (labor, money and time) for conducting research and the reliability of the results obtained.

An analysis of the practical aspects of applying the methods for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises described in this review allows us to conclude that their shortcomings (discussed in detail above) determine the low possibilities of practical application of most of them. The exception is dynamic approach, which allows you to very effectively assess competitiveness both statically and dynamically. The application of this approach makes it possible to analyze time series of general and specific indicators of the competitiveness of business entities (both in tabular and graphical form).

The dynamic method, based on a clear and universal concept of a company’s competitiveness, allows us to take into account both the level of competitiveness of the enterprise’s products and the efficiency of its operational activities. At the same time, the methodological basis for assessing the competitiveness of an economic entity is so simple that it makes it possible to carry out calculations not only for the current (analyzed) period, but also in retrospect, which, in turn, allows, based on the obtained time series, to carry out a deep factor analysis of changes in the competitiveness of the enterprise and predict corresponding values ​​for the future.

The next section of our study will be devoted to consideration of the dynamic method for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises.

10.6. METHODS FOR ASSESSING THE COMPETITIVENESS OF ENTERPRISES

Polyanichkin Yuri Alekseevich, postgraduate student of the Moscow Institute of Entrepreneurship and Law

Abstract: market business conditions

stipulate the need for regular assessment of the competitiveness of an enterprise and analysis of its determining indicators. Methods for assessing competitiveness are varied and depend on the purpose of the study, the possibility of obtaining the necessary initial information and the subjects of the study.

Key words: competitiveness

enterprises, assessment indicators and competitiveness criteria, assessment methods

competitiveness.

METHODS OF AN ASSESSMENT OF COMPETITIVENESS OF THE ENTERPRISES

Polyanichkin Yury Alekseevich, Postgraduate student of NOU VPO "Moscow business and law institute".

Abstract: market conditions of managing cause the need for regular carrying out an assessment of competitiveness of the enterprise and the analysis of indicators defining it. Methods of an assessment of competitiveness are various and possibilities of obtaining necessary initial information and subjects of research depend on a research objective.

Keywords: competitiveness of the enterprise, indicators of an assessment and criteria of competitiveness, methods of an assessment of competitiveness.

Competitiveness, as an economic category, determined by the characteristics of a market economy, manifests itself in the process of competition between market participants. Economists identify four main competitive strategies that are used by enterprises participating in the market.

A “power” strategy is implemented when rival enterprises lure customers away from each other by offering them a product at a lower price (according to the “cheap, but decent” principle). The extreme manifestation of price competition is dumping, when sellers begin to set prices at the level of costs or even lower, giving up profits. This seemingly irrational behavior (used, for example, by Japanese firms when exploring new foreign markets) makes sense, since the winner in price competition can, having defeated rivals, inflate prices and make up for losses. However, this path is dangerous, since price competition can end in the mutual ruin of competitors. Force or price competition prevailed until the twentieth century, while firms were not very large, and buyers sought, above all, to minimize their costs. In a modern market economy, non-price competition predominates - competition for the quality of goods rather than for price.

A “niche” strategy is used when an enterprise relies on high

consumer value of their product, without considering it necessary to fight for low prices (according to the principle “expensive, but very high quality”). The clients of such enterprises are not mass buyers, but elite buyers. By winning their sympathy, the company captures a certain “market niche” - a segment of the market of buyers with special needs. This strategy is used, for example, by manufacturers of fashion goods, when a high price becomes a mandatory attribute of prestigious consumption.

The “connecting” strategy is manifested in the enterprise’s desire to individualize its products, varying the standard model in accordance with pre-collected customer requests (according to the principle “the client pays extra for the company to solve his specific problems”). The result is a combination of unification of the basic characteristics of the product with the maximum variety of its design and special devices. This is exactly how the car market in the USA is organized, for example. First, local shopping centers collect applications from buyers who want to purchase new cars with some special characteristics (say, with tinted windows or with a built-in audio player). Then, cars are assembled on the factory assembly line “for a specific client”, using both standard and special components and assemblies.

The “pioneer” strategy consists in the enterprise’s search for revolutionary technical and organizational solutions that would attract buyers with a low price and high quality (according to the “better and cheaper” principle). This path promises a lot if successful, but it is very dangerous, because when starting a scientific

research and development (R&D) projects, it is difficult to estimate the likelihood of success. It is thanks to this strategy that fundamentally new products or production methods appear - a conveyor belt, a light bulb, a ballpoint pen, a helicopter, a TV, a computer, a smartphone, etc.

The modern economy makes new demands on the efficiency of the functioning of enterprises, which is the result of the implementation of the competitive strategy adopted by the company and is largely manifested through the indicator of the competitiveness of the product they produce, or the implementation of the competitive advantages of the enterprise. This is manifested in the fact that when analyzing the level of competitiveness, it is quite difficult to do without a large group of indicators usually used in conducting a general analysis of production and economic activities

enterprises.

Currently, there is no common point of view among experts about the composition of indicators characterizing the level of competitiveness of an enterprise.

So, for example, according to Basovsky L.E., a group of indirect indicators that can serve as a reliable assessment of the level of competitiveness of a product, equipment, technology, enterprise or industry as a whole is a group of indicators characterizing the share of costs associated with research and development in the price product, or its cost intensity. The higher these indicators, the higher the technical and organizational level of the product,

techniques and technologies, enterprises and topics

their prospects are more favorable. In our opinion, such indicators cannot be used to assess the current level of competitiveness of a product or

enterprises, since they do not take into account many factors influencing today's consumer demands.

Izraileva O.V. believes that the choice of a group of indicators for assessing the potential capabilities and performance of an enterprise must be made based on the criteria for the competitiveness of the enterprise’s products. According to the author, one should start with the development of a system of criteria

competitiveness, that is, indicators for its assessment, which in the future should affect the performance of the enterprise and its potential capabilities.

Markina T.V. considers the following set of indicators to be the most complete for assessing the level of competitiveness: indicators of the scientific and technical level of production, the level of organization of production and labor, the level of management of economic activities. At the same time, not a single single indicator is able to characterize such a comprehensive concept as the level of competitiveness of an enterprise. This circumstance indicates the need to select a system of indicators that reflect the main aspects of the level of competitiveness of an enterprise. Analysis of the level of competitiveness, in contrast to the analysis of the economic activity of an enterprise, has its own specific features and tasks.

Firstly, an assessment of competitiveness, i.e. calculation of a quantitative indicator

the competitiveness of an enterprise is the starting point for assessing the effectiveness of its production and economic activities in a market economy.

Secondly, the study of competitiveness should be carried out systematically, taking into account the life cycle of the product being manufactured. This approach allows you to make timely decisions about optimizing the range of manufactured products, the need to search for new markets or new market niches, expansion and creation of new production capacities.

Thirdly, the specificity of the methodology for assessing the level of competitiveness of an enterprise necessitates the use of a number of indicators, the analysis of which cannot be dispensed with in a general assessment of production and economic activities

enterprises. These indicators, first of all, indicate the degree of stability of the enterprise’s position, the ability to produce products that are in demand among consumers and provide it with a stable profit.

Today, quite a large number of methods for determining the competitiveness of an enterprise have been developed and used in practice. Let us consider the main approaches proposed in the specialized literature for assessing competitiveness and conduct a comparative analysis of them.

1. Method of comparative advantage. The main idea of ​​this method is that the location of production between countries should follow the law of comparative

costs, i.e. each country specializes in the production of goods with the most sticky costs. Directly measure

comparative advantages are impossible, so the assumption is made: the lower the production costs in the industry, the greater the competitive advantages the industry has over its competitors.

2. The method of equilibrium of firms and industry. The method is based on A. Marshall's theory of equilibrium of the firm and industry and the theory of production factors. Equilibrium is understood as a state when the manufacturer has no incentive to change production volumes (change its market share). In this case, each of the factors of production has the same and at the same time the greatest productivity. The criterion of competitiveness within the framework of this model is the presence of such factors of production at the manufacturer that can be used with better productivity than competitors.

3. Structural approach. According to this approach, an assessment of competitiveness can be made based on knowledge of the level of monopolization of the industry, i.e. concentration of production and capital, and barriers to new firms entering. The main obstacles for new competitors include: the cost-effectiveness of large-scale production; degree of product differentiation; absolute cost advantages of existing firms; the amount of capital required to organize efficient production.

4. Method of “profiles” and quality. Various criteria for satisfying consumer requests regarding a product are identified, their hierarchy and comparative importance are established within the limits of those characteristics that the consumer can evaluate; Next, a procedure is carried out to compare the technical and economic data of the product with competing products in order to reduce sales time.

5. Functional approach. The main ones are

economic indicators of the company's activities: price-quality ratio; loading

production capacity; production volumes; rate of return, etc.

6. Matrix method. Theoretical basis of the method

is the concept of the product and technology life cycle, which is reflected in the market share and sales dynamics. The most famous is the BCG matrix, used to analyze the characteristics of goods and study

competitiveness of “strategic business units” - sales activities, individual firms, industries. The most competitive enterprises are those that occupy a significant share in a fast-growing market.

7. The “benchmarking” method (from the English bench mark - starting point). The process of evaluating a given company's strategies and actions relative to "best-in-class" companies operating both within and outside the industry in question. The goal is to identify best practices that can be adopted directly or with appropriate adaptation to improve the performance of a given company. Benchmarking as a comparison process

with benchmarks consists of four stages:

Identification of objects for which comparison is being made;

Identifying aspects of the business to be compared with benchmarks;

Collect meaningful data to allow comparisons between processes and activities;

Comparison with own processes.

8. Method of comparative analysis on a parametric basis. Applicable in case of shortage of information support. The method involves comparing competing enterprises according to certain parameters of economic activity, which include:

Price level;

Provision of material and technical

resources;

Staffing;

Sales policy, etc.

9. Method based on the theory of effective competition. According to this theory, the most competitive enterprise is the one where the work of all departments and services is best organized. The effectiveness of each service is influenced by many factors-resources of this company. Assessing the effectiveness of each department involves assessing the effectiveness of its use of these resources.

Thus, there are many methods for assessing the competitiveness of enterprises. However, none of the methods considered can be considered ideal; each has its own positive and negative sides.

Thus, considering the methods of comparative advantage, equilibrium of firms and industry, structural approach and “profiles” and quality, it is clear that they do not contain simple and unambiguous criteria that allow assessing the competitiveness of a manufacturer, while calculations become technically complex and economically impractical.

This disadvantage can be avoided by methods that rely on indirect generalized indicators or a system of indicators, such as, for example, the functional method, which is based on a comparison of enterprises according to competence vectors using the construction of polygons

competitiveness. A graphical representation of the results obtained greatly facilitates their perception and is an undoubted advantage of this method.

The functional approach is considered the most objective, covering all the most important assessments of the organization’s economic activities and allows a quick and objective assessment of the enterprise’s position in the industry market.

The advantage of the matrix method is the consideration of competition in dynamics, the identification of additional stages of the life cycle. Using this method, you can assess the competitive positions of “strategic business units”, as well as develop a strategy for behavior in the market.

The method of comparative analysis on a parametric basis also has its advantages and disadvantages. Its use is justified in conditions of shortage of initial information, when obtaining even

Public consolidated financial statements and statistics involve a significant investment of time and resources. In this case, the data for analysis is based on subjective judgments and informal sources of information, so the disadvantages of this method include the fact that the analysis is largely “qualitative”, informal in nature.

The competitiveness benchmarking method is one of the most modern approaches to assessing competitiveness. The advantages of this method are that benchmarking allows you to set goals that correspond to the development directions of the most successful competitors. In addition, this method stimulates management to achieve higher performance indicators of the company and makes the assessment of the contribution of individual divisions to achieving the goals more reliable. However, the method has a serious drawback: the necessary data on competitors may not be available for reasons of trade secrets.

A method based on the theory of effective competition. According to this theory, the most competitive enterprises are those where the work of all departments and services is best organized. The efficiency of each service is influenced by many factors - the company's resources. Assessing the performance of each department involves assessing the effectiveness of its use of these resources. The method is based on the assessment of four group indicators or competitiveness criteria:

Efficiency of the enterprise's production activities;

Financial position of the enterprise;

Efficiency of sales organization and product promotion;

Product competitiveness.

The advantages of this method include the following provisions: assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise covers all the most important assessments of the economic activities of an industrial enterprise, eliminates duplication of individual indicators, and allows you to quickly and objectively obtain a picture of the enterprise’s position in the industry market. The use of comparisons of indicators for different periods of time during the assessment makes it possible to use this method as an option for operational control of individual aspects of economic activity. According to all the positive and negative aspects, this method is the most convenient, rational, easy to use and provides an objective assessment of the competitiveness of an industrial enterprise.

As you can see, none of the methods is universal; the use of each of them is determined by the purpose of the study, the completeness of the initial information and the subject of the study.

Bibliography:

1. Aristov O.V. Competition and competitiveness: A textbook for distance learning in all specialties. - M.: Finstatinform, 1999.

2. Basovsky L.E. Economic analysis: (Comprehensive economic analysis of economic activity) /

L.E. Basovsky, A.M. Luneva, A.L. Basovsky - M.: Infra-M, 2003.

3. Demchenko A.A. Measuring the competitiveness of industry enterprises: Theory and methods of measurement / A.A. Demchenko, E.N. Kuzbozhev; edited by Kuzbozheva E.N. - Kursk: Kursk, 2000.

4. Eleneva Yu.Ya. Ensuring the competitiveness of industrial enterprises, - M.: Janus-K, 2001.

5. Kravchenko O.V. Management problems

competitiveness of an industrial enterprise. - Saratov: Volga region. interregion textbook center, 2000.

6. Maksimova G.V. Internal audit and management in market economic conditions. - Irkutsk: IGEA, 1998.

7. Moroshkin V.A. Strategic management of a company in a competitive environment: Textbook, - M.: MELI, 2000.

8. Modern management: Theory and practice / A.S. Bolshakov, V.I. Mikhailov. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2000.

1. Aristov O. V. Competition and competitiveness: The manual for correspondence course on all specialties. - M: Finstatinform, 1999.

2. Basovsky L.E.Economic analysis: (The complex economic analysis of economic activity) / L.E.Basovsky, A.M.Lunev, A.L.Basovsky - M: Infra-M, 2003.

3. Demchenko A.A. Measurement of competitiveness of the enterprises of branch: Theory and measurements / A.A methods. Demchenko, E.N.Kuzbozhev; under the editorship of Kuzbozhev E.N. - Kursk: Kursk, 2000.

4. Eleneva Yu.Ya. Ensuring competitiveness of the industrial enterprises, - M: Janus - To, 2001.

5. Kravchenko O. V. Problems of management of competitiveness of the industrial enterprise. - Saratov: Volgainterregional studies. center, 2000.

6. Maksimova G. V. Internal audit and management in market conditions of managing. - Irkutsk: IGEA, 1998.

7. Moroshkin V.A. Strategic management of firm in the conditions of the competition: The manual, - M: MELI, 2000.

8. Modern management: Theory and practice/ampere-second. Bolshakov, V.I. Mikhaylov. - SPb.: St. Petersburg, 2000.

REVIEW

The topic of the article under review seems relevant in modern conditions, because level setting

competitiveness of an enterprise and its assessment is a very important process in market conditions that must be competently managed.

Considering the importance of the issue, the author offers for consideration an overview of existing points of view on this problem, and conducts a comparative analysis of the methods for assessing competitiveness proposed by different authors. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods are discussed in detail, which makes it possible to choose the optimal method based on the amount of available information, the purpose and subject of the study. These questions are especially important when an enterprise chooses a competitive strategy for market behavior in modern conditions.

Yu. A. Polyanichkin’s article was written on a current topic, meets the requirements and can be published in a scientific collection of articles recommended by the Higher Attestation Commission.

Doctor of Economics, Professor