Assessment of the economic efficiency of industrial enterprise management during the Kazakhstan integration into the EAEU

• Autorzy: Nurekenova Elvira S. , Sholpanbayeva Kanshaim Zh. , Apysheva Assel A. , Rakhimberdinova Madina U. , Shaikhanova Nurgul K.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17512/pjms.2022.26.1.15

Warianty tytułu

PL

Ocena efektywności ekonomicznej zarządzania przedsiębiorstwem przemysłowym w czasie integracji Kazachstanu z EUG

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The purpose of this study is to examine the effectiveness of the measures taken and to identify areas for further integration cooperation. The originality of the study is determined by the fact that the formalisation of Kazakhstan integration into the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) structures allows expanding the possibilities of building cooperative ties. This requires greater involvement of enterprises in the integration and the development of a unified state system to assess the effectiveness of integration associations. The authors show that, in general, the integration of Kazakhstan and the EAEU can be assessed based on a common methodology for the economic efficiency of individual enterprises. The authors suggest the adapted methodology of the balanced scorecard system since it is appropriate in this case. The practical significance of the study is determined by the need to clarify the structural features of integration and calculate efficiency in general based on the results of the cooperation of Kazakh enterprises with external partners. The development of such an assessment system can also be implemented taking into account the need to counter the global economic crisis.

PL

Celem niniejszego opracowania jest zbadanie skuteczności podejmowanych działań oraz zidentyfikowanie obszarów dalszej współpracy integracyjnej. O oryginalności opracowania decyduje fakt, że sformalizowanie integracji Kazachstanu ze strukturami Eurazjatyckiej Unii Gospodarczej (EUG) pozwala na rozszerzenie możliwości budowania powiązań kooperacyjnych. Wymaga to większego zaangażowania przedsiębiorstw w integrację i budowy jednolitego systemu państwowego do oceny efektywności stowarzyszeń integracyjnych. Autorzy pokazują, że generalnie integrację Kazachstanu i EUG można oceniać w oparciu o wspólną metodologię efektywności ekonomicznej poszczególnych przedsiębiorstw. Autorzy proponują zaadaptowaną metodologię systemu zrównoważonej karty wyników, ponieważ jest ona w tym przypadku odpowiednia. Praktyczne znaczenie badania przesądza o potrzebie doprecyzowania cech strukturalnych integracji i obliczenia efektywności w ogóle na podstawie wyników współpracy kazachskich przedsiębiorstw z partnerami zewnętrznymi. Opracowanie takiego systemu oceny może być również realizowane z uwzględnieniem konieczności przeciwdziałania światowemu kryzysowi gospodarczemu.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

crisis; structure; formalisation; integration; efficiency

PL

kryzys; struktura; formalizacja; integracja; efektywność

• Wydawca: Czestochowa University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Management Studies
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 26, No. 1
• Strony: 233--249
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 28 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Nurekenova Elvira S.

• School of Business and Entrepreneurship, D. Serikbayev East Kazakhstan Technical University, Ust-Kamenogorsk, Republic of Kazakhstan

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2944-6968

autor

Sholpanbayeva Kanshaim Zh.

• Department of Finance and Accounting, Sarsen Amanzholov East Kazakhstan University, Ust-Kamenogorsk, Republic of Kazakhstan

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8688-887

autor

Apysheva Assel A.

• Department of Finance and Accounting, Sarsen Amanzholov East Kazakhstan University, Ust-Kamenogorsk, Republic of Kazakhstan

• https://orcid.org/0003-0798-1078

autor

Rakhimberdinova Madina U.

• School of Business and Entrepreneurship, D. Serikbayev East Kazakhstan Technical University, Ust-Kamenogorsk, Republic of Kazakhstan

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9009-8686

autor

Shaikhanova Nurgul K.

• Department of Finance and Accounting, Sarsen Amanzholov East Kazakhstan University, Ust-Kamenogorsk, Republic of Kazakhstan

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7005-5504

Bibliografia

• 1.Abrams, C.E., von Känel, J., Müller, S., Pfitzmann, B. and Ruschka-Taylor, S. (2007). Optimized enterprise risk management. IBM Systems Journal, 46(2), 219-234.
• 2.Adams, C. and Roberts, P. (1993). Manufacturing Europe. New York: Sterling Publishing.
• 3.Aguilar, R., Mendoza, A., Krauth, J. and Schimmel, A. (1997). Strategic planning for small and medium-sized enterprises: The compass project. Production Planning and Control, 8(5), 509-518.
• 4.Bharathy, G.K. and McShane, M.K. (2014). Applying a systems model to enterprise risk management. EMJ - Engineering Management Journal, 26(4), 38-46.
• 5.Boyson, S. (2014). Cyber supply chain risk management: Revolutionizing the strategic control of critical IT systems. Technovation, 34(7), 342-353.
• 6.Chakraborty, S. and Sharma, S.K. (2007). Enterprise resource planning: An integrated strategic framework. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 4(5), 533-551.
• 7.Clodnitchi, R. and Tudorache, O. (2022). Resource efficiency and decarbonisation of economies in the European Union. Management & Marketing. Challenges for the Knowledge Society, 17(2), 139-155.
• 8.Dima, A.M., Tantau, A. and Maassen, M.A. (2022) Models for analysing the dependencies between indicators for bioeconomy in the European Union. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 35(1), 3533-3550.
• 9.Elbashir, M.Z., Collier, P.A. and Sutton, S.G. (2011). The role of organizational absorptive capacity in strategic use of business intelligence to support integrated management control systems. Accounting Review, 86(1), 155-184.
• 10.Hoyland, C.A., Adams, K.M., Tolk, A. and Xu, L.D. (2014). The RQ-Tech methodology: a new paradigm for conceptualizing strategic enterprise architectures. Journal of Management Analytics, 1(1), 55-77.
• 11.Jarratt, D.G. (1998). A strategic classification of business alliances: A qualitative perspective built from a study of small and medium-sized enterprises. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 1(1), 39-49.
• 12.Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71-79.
• 13.Khalatur, S., Pavlova, H., Vasilieva, L., Karamushka and Danileviča, A. (2022). Innovation management as basis of digitalization trends and security of financial sector. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 9(4), 56-76.
• 14.Kraus, S., Harms, R. and Schwarz, E.J. (2006). Strategic planning in smaller enterprises - new empirical findings. Management Research News, 29(6), 334-344.
• 15.Maisel, L.S. (1992). Performance measurement. The balanced scorecard approach. Journal of Cost Management, 6(2), 47-52.
• 16.Martin, G. and Beaumont, P. (2001). Transforming multinational enterprises: Towards a process model of strategic human resource management change. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(8), 1234-1250.
• 17.McNair, C.J., Lunch, R.L. and Cross, K.F. (1990). Do financial and non-financial performance measures have to agree? Management Accounting, 72(2), 28-36.
• 18.Meek, T., Conaonaigh, S.M. and Thurston, C. (2008). The challenge of integrating information management systems into the enterprise: How to make faster, more informed business decisions with data. American Laboratory, 40(6), 14-17.
• 19.Perrott, B.E. (2011). Strategic issue management as change catalyst. Strategy and Leadership, 39(5), 20-29.
• 20.Polyakov, M. (2017). Positive impact of international companies on development of knowledge economy. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15(2), 81-89.
• 21.Rampersad, H.K. (2004). Universal system of performance indicators: How to achieve results while maintaining integrity. Moscow: Alpina Business Books.
• 22.Ratnatunga, J. and Alam, M. (2011). Strategic governance and management accounting: Evidence from a case study. Abacus, 47(3), 343-382.
• 23.Rezvani, A., Dong, L. and Khosravi, P. (2017). Promoting the continuing usage of strategic information systems: The role of supervisory leadership in the successful implementation of enterprise systems. International Journal of Information Management, 37(5), 417-430.
• 24.Rouse, W.B. (2006). Enterprise transformation - implications for enterprise information systems. IEEJ Transactions on Electronics, Information and Systems, 126(9), 1069-1072.
• 25.Sere, K.A. and Choga, I. (2017). The causal and cointegration relationship between government revenue and government expenditure. Public and Municipal Finance, 6(3), 23-32.
• 26.Shi, J.J. and Halpin, D.W. (2003). Enterprise resource planning for construction business management. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(2), 214-221.
• 27.Spivey, W.A., Munson, J.M. and Spoon, D.R. (2002). A generic value tree for high-technology enterprises. International Journal of Technology Management, 24(2-3), 219-235.
• 28.Worthington, I. and Patton, D. (2005). Strategic intent in the management of the green environment within SMEs. An analysis of the UK screen-printing sector. Long Range Planning, 38(2), 197-212.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MEiN, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2022-2023).