CC BY
16
Экономика
THE ENTERPRISE ECONOMIC CRISIS FORMALIZATION
УДК 332.053.2
Sergey Aleksandrovich Orehov,
Doctor of Economics, Professor, Professor of General and Strategic Management Department of MSUESI (MESI) Tel.: (495)442-2398, E-mail: [email protected]
Vladimir Ivanovich Mednikov,
specialist IBK Construction Group Tel.: (347)481-7244, E-mail: [email protected]
The paper describes an enterprise economic crisis model in market, explains the conditions of economic crisis acquisition, compares our crisis reason and Keynes's crisis reason, explains crisis scale spread and crisis penetration.
Keywords: production circle, economic crisis conditions, crisis scale, crisis penetration.
Сергей Александрович Орехов,
д.э.н., профессор, профессор кафедры Общего и стратегического менеджмента МЭСИ
Ten.: (495)442-2398, E-mail: [email protected]
Владимир Иванович Медников, специалист IBK Construction Group Ten.: (347)481-7244, E-mail: [email protected]
ФОРМАЛИЗАЦИЯ ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОГО КРИЗИСА ПРЕДПРИЯТИЯ
Статья описывает модель экономического кризиса предприятия, условия приобретения им состояния кризиса, дается сравнение нашей причины кризиса с причиной кризиса по Кейнсу, объясняется рост масштаба и распространение кризиса.
Ключевые слова: производственный цикл, условия экономического кризиса, масштаб кризиса, распространение кризиса.
1. Introduction
The purpose of creating any enterprise is to satisfy environment needs in its production. This needs is satisfied by means of interaction between them. Market is one kind of interactions between enterprise and its environment. The exchange the enterprise production and environment resources takes place in market. Market specific presents these two directions; moreover, these directions exist simultaneously and compulsorily. In hindsight, the tree kinds of enterprise models we know. Model 1 is geographic territory with manufacturing; any violations in manufacturing bring some damage to people or to the enterprise or to regional economic. Model 2 presents the dependence the enterprise main activity indicator on some potential [1]. Model 3 represents the system of four enterprise activity indicators named "Balansed ScoreCard" (BSC) [2] Because crisis is a dynamic characteristic of enterprise or environment, the reviewing these models shows that neither model 1 nor model 2 nor model 3 is a good candidate for crisis description and formalization. These models are inconvenient and incapable of explaining economic crisis because of its incomplete. We suggested most complete enterprise or environment model. This is some function collections. Seven resource components represent realization means of every function [3]. Our enterprise model is
f ( =
1 2 n
Po + PlS+ P2 S+ - + PnS
where p - the amount of main activity indicator in i-th moment of time; s - argument; n - size of registration time interval n a t; A t - elementary time interval; r - the resource amount in i-th moment of time. The amount of r should wrote by means of rectangle-matrix n x 7 (7 - number of matrix-lines in accordance with number of resource components: environment (sr), money (de), communicative (ko), technical (te), human (lu), time (vr), protection (za). Example 1: we can write money-component rde as matrix-line r = [r de], iM{0; n}; j(s) - initial conditions of enterprise activity. Example 2: for named resource components, we can represent the appointment function fap(s) as a sum of its seven components:
f (s) = f (s) + f , (s) + f k(s) + f t(s) + f ,(s) + f (s) + f (s).
ap ap sr ap de ap ko ap te ap lu ap vr ap za
Note worthy: it's possible to reduce both the numerator degree and denominator degree of fap(s) though reducing the registration interval n a t. In this case we must replace a linear programming of enterprise activity modeling on dynamic programming. Informatively it means that smooth behavior of main indicator p(s) instead on its digital behavior. Our model is nearest to real enterprises, is scale (small enterprise - big enterprise - region, etc.) and most appropriate between known to explain crisis state. Environment model is analogous.
Explicitly our enterprise and environment model is very complex and contains variety structures (including nonstationary), parameters of internal processes, internal function executions, quantitative resource characteristics, unique interactions. One of these unique parameters is so named "industrial circle" (IC) (enterprise ICo or environment ICenv). Mostly IC presents a time interval of manufacturing produce unit. We know the other similar characteristics: "production manufacturing circle", "production life circle", "production consumption circle" and other more complex.
2. Crisis model
Both elementary time interval A t and registration time interval n a t adhered to astronomical and calendar time intervals such as "hour", ..., "year" in our model. In turn, ICo or ICenv length apparently depends on their technique and organizational particulars. IC length approximately is equal to sum of manufacturing operations length and of registration - report procedures length.
We found the decrease of enterprise activity and simultaneous decrease of environment activity are absent on formal condition IC = IC . In practice however IC
J o env A o
exceed or lack ICenv in k times. So for registration time interval n a t we can transform this condition into equality n a t/ICo = kn a t/ICenv. We read this equality in mundane language this way: "decrease is absent, if environment consumption severely equal enterprise productivity". We named this equality as "harmonization interaction condition between enterprise and environment".
№6, 2010
n
96
Drawing 1
Important notice: we can use the parameter k in right part of this equality by way of parameter that follows all market states (consumption decline-erase circles [4] on Drawing 1).
The other important notice: the parameter n a t/ICo in left part of this equality quantitatively meets parameter Q in one of Cobb-Douglas equations [5]
a P
Q = A K L
where A, a , P are enterprise model parameters; the amount A depends on units Q, K, L and on manufacturing effectiveness; K is capital; L is labor.
Our formal equality interpretation affords opportunity to establish the next. The enterprise activity dynamic must to depend on alteration of state of market and on its dynamic. Besides, both of the manufacturing efficiency and capital and labor expenses (see above) are valuable for the enterprise marketing. The enterprise economic crisis acquisition is the consequence of manufacturing "unnecessary" production for a long time. "Unnecessary" means the state of market that less enterprise unique threshold. We can phraise analogous establishments for environment.
Our formal equality interpretation for interaction "influence" exceeds the limit of this article.
Enterprise activity decrease ("dis-har-monization" of interaction) is the initial stage of enterprise crisis. The decrease appears (Drawing 2), if enterprise "is late" "to buy" enough resources for its next IC, i.e. if IC < IC. (necessary enterprise
o rnv v J Í
crisis condition). Management function f(s) = f/(1 - bf ), where f - appointment function, b < 1, formalizes this deterioration enterprise state [6].
Analogously: environment "consumption" decrease appears when ICenv < ICo (necessary environment crisis condition).
We remember [6] that different resource components r (see above) have the distinguishing value or weight (w) for their activity (Drawing 3).
Management restores the enterprise
Drawing 2
activity successfully, if lack (shortage) of some resource components (or resources damage) is less the established threshold value ("risk" [6]) and if lawful means against decrease applied. These means are: decrease expenses, crossing to other markets, credits and debt re-structuring, changing of marketing orientation (so names "diversification"). The way of Management decrease liquidation is chosen on base of knowledge "w" of all enterprise resource components. This liquidation is rather successful the less w.
The decrease takes the ir-reversible state (good enough crisis condition), if lack of some resource components (or resources damage) exceeds established threshold value ("threat" [6]) and also lawful means against decrease used unsuccessfully. If the enterprise activity decrease is consequence of temporary absence of environment consumption, the crisis is consequence of lengthy absence one.
Practice shows that decrease state duration has reversal dependence on nDt/ IC. Also we know, that an ordinary bank gets into ir-reversible state, if number of "threaten" clients more than 8% of borrowers number. Bases on given layout and known practice, we keep up our opinion that crisis takes place, if ratio "decrease duration/IC" changes at a rough guess from 2-3 (for large IC) to 1500-1600 (for small IC).
This ratio uniquely characterizes good enough crisis condition for enterprise or for environment. This ratio is important amount for the protection theory developing, because it establishes the size of time interval, that makes crisis valuation competent, reliable.
Keynes J.M. established the well known reason of crisis. This is lost control of financial flows in market. This reason is the result of outside view on markets. The main evidence of this allegation is the next: in order to form crisis models Keynes J.M. and other economists used statistical data or facts, which published in specialized magazines and reviews, special issues, i.e. outside not internal information about enterprises activity. It's high
Drawing 3
time we would have given a reason of crisis based on inside view. This is lengthy "dis-harmonization" of interaction between unique enterprise production circle and consumption circle (between number of producers and number of consumers).
Besides our model makes it possible to explain the reason of crisis scale grow: if no single enterprise, but cluster of enterprises gets into decrease state during approximately the same time interval. If missing resource components have equal "w" for those enterprises activity, everyone gets into this state. Important notice: usually crisis grows in direction "enterprise - branch", i.e. "from down to top". Hence, the fight against crisis has to run along the same direction - from enterprise to branch. We sure, that crisis is a compulsory and unavoidable element of contemporary ideology "Interests - Threads - Protection".
Crisis penetration from one group of enterprises to another group tightly communicates to crisis scale spread. The apparent condition of crisis penetration is presence of appropriate opportunities or channels. Let us elaborate on specifically. Some resource components (technique, time, etc.) of enterprise are its integral parts. Usually and definitely our enterprise takes on some resource components (money, human, energy) from suppliers (read: from environment). These takings are based on supply-contracts between enterprise and resources suppliers (environment). These contracts represent and define some risks for enterprise activity. They are mentioned above channels of crisis penetration. If resource supplier acquires crisis-state, its state penetrates into our enterprise through these channels. Importance of these channels depends on "w" (Drawing 3) of resource components. Similar taking on abroad forms the possibility of crisis penetration from abroad.
3. Conclusion
Inequality of enterprise production circle and environment production circle is necessary crisis condition. If enterprise
Экономика, Статистика и Информатика
№6, 2010
97
Экономика
activity decrease takes place during time interval from (2-3) IC until (1500-1600) IC, this is the good enough crisis condition. Crisis scale increases in accordance with increase number of enterprises, which have lack of resources. Existence contractual relationship between enterprise and crisis-state-supplier penetrates crisis state. Crisis is a compulsory element of contemporary ideology "Interests -Threads - Protection".
References
1. Dmitry U. Miropol'sky. The economic theory and types of economic systems. - Magazine "Economics and Management", 2007, #2, pp.22-28
2. Robert S. Kaplan, David P. Norton The strategy-focused organization. -2000, HBS Press, Boston, Massachusetts
3. Sergey A. Orehov, Vladimir I. Med-nikov. Effective Management of object of economics. - X Jubilee International
Scientific Conference «Enterprise Management. Theory and Practice», Cracow, November, 2007, pp.208-213
4. C.R McConnell, S.L. Brue Economics: Principles, Problems, and Policies. 11/ e Vol. 1 - Moscow: Respublika, 1993
5. Magnus J.R., Katyshev P.K., Pere-setskiy A.A. Econometric, 3/e - Moscow: Delo, 2000
6. S. A. Orehov, V. I. Mednikov. Model of safe management (Bases of the Protection Theory). - Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science 2009, Vol. II, pp.916920, WCECS 2009, October 2009, San Francisco, USA
Литература
1. Миропольский Д.Ю. Экономическая теория и типы хозяйственных систем - ж. Экономика и управление, 2007, №2, с.22-28
2. Каплан P.C., Нортон Д.П. Органи-
зация, ориентированная на стратегию.
- ЗАО "Олимп-Бизнес", Москва, 2005
3. Сергей А. Орехов, Владимир И. Медников Эффективное управление объектом экономики. - X Jubilee International Scientific Conference «Enterprise Management. Theory and Practice», Cracow, November22-23, 2007, р.208-213
4. Макконнелл K.P., Брю С.Л., Экономикс. Принципы, проблемы, политика. В 2т.: Пер с англ. 11 -го изд. Т.1. -М.: Республика, 1993
5. Магнус Я.Р., Катышев П.К., Пе-ресецкий А.А. Эконометрика. 3-е изд.
- М.: Дело, 2000
6. S. A. Orehov, V I. Mednikov. Model of safe management (Bases of the Protection Theory). - Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science 2009, Vol. II, pp.916920, WCECS 2009, October 20-22, San Francisco, USA.
№6, 2010
