Methods for determining competitiveness. Modern approaches and methods for assessing competitiveness

competitiveness products assessment impact

Assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise 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.

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.

Matrix methods

A group of methods is based on assessment marketing strategy enterprises, based on the construction of a matrix of competitive strategies. The methodology is based on an analysis of competitiveness taking into account the life cycle of the enterprise's products. The essence of the assessment is to analyze a matrix constructed according to the principle of a coordinate system: horizontally - the rate of growth (decrease) in sales volume; vertically - the relative share of the enterprise in the market. The most competitive enterprises are those that occupy a significant share in a fast-growing market.

Advantages of the method: if information is available on sales volumes and relative market shares of competitors, the method allows for high adequacy of the assessment.

Disadvantages of the method: excludes analysis of the causes of what is happening and complicates the development management decisions, and also requires the availability of reliable marketing information, which entails the need for appropriate research.

Methods based on assessing the competitiveness of enterprise products

This group of methods is based on the judgment that the higher the competitiveness of an enterprise, the higher the competitiveness of its products. To determine the competitiveness of products, various marketing and qualimetric methods are used, most of which are based on finding the price-quality ratio.

The competitiveness indicator for each type of product is calculated using economic and parametric competitiveness indices. In turn, these indices are determined by summing the partial indices for each assessed parameter, taking into account weighting coefficients.

Each of the partial indices for the corresponding parameter is taken as the ratio of the actual value of the estimated parameter to the value of the corresponding indicator for competing products (or other products selected as a basis for comparison). In this case, the parametric index is determined based on an assessment of the technical (quality) parameters of the product, while the economic index is determined based on the cost parameters. List of cost and technical parameters, as well as the weight of each parameter is established expertly. In particular, in a number of methods, the amount of costs for after-sales service of products is considered as one of the cost parameters.

Parametric and economic competitiveness indices make it possible to calculate the integral indicator of the competitiveness of the product in question in relation to competing products. It is defined as the ratio of the parametric index to the economic index.

Competitiveness indicators are calculated for each type of product of the enterprise. Next, the competitiveness coefficient of the enterprise itself is determined: the weighted average value is found among the indicators for each type of product, where the volume of sales of the corresponding type of product acts as weights.

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. The disadvantages are that it allows you to get a very limited idea of ​​the advantages and disadvantages of the enterprise, since the competitiveness of the enterprise takes the form of product competitiveness and does not affect other aspects of its activities. In addition, certain criticism is caused by the reduction of product competitiveness to an assessment of the price-quality ratio, which does not take into account the degree of product innovation, which is essential when positioning products on the market.

Methods 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 - enterprise resources. Assessing the performance of each department involves assessing the effectiveness of its use of these resources. The approach is based on the assessment of group indicators or competitiveness criteria.

The essence of the approach is to assess the ability of an enterprise to ensure competitiveness. Each of the preliminary analysis the ability of an enterprise to achieve competitive advantages is assessed by experts from the point of view of available resources. At the same time, the composition and structure of the assessed abilities vary significantly in different methods: from cost indicators and financial stability to the ability of the enterprise to adapt to innovations.

Subsequently, depending on the method, in order to assess the competitiveness of the enterprise, the obtained expert assessments are subject to various mathematical processing. Most often, the indicator of an enterprise’s competitiveness is found by calculating the weighted average value from the obtained expert assessments, taking into account specific gravity, which is assigned to each of the assessed abilities in achieving competitive advantages of the enterprise.

The advantages of this approach include taking into account very diverse aspects of the enterprise’s activities. At the same time, the underlying premise that the indicator of an enterprise’s competitiveness can be determined by simply summing up the enterprise’s ability to achieve competitive advantages is unproven, since the sum of the individual elements of a complex system (which is any enterprise), as a rule, does not gives the same result as the entire system as a whole.

Complex methods

The methods included in this approach are defined as comprehensive due to the fact that the assessment of the competitiveness of an enterprise within the framework of each method is carried out on the basis of highlighting not only the current, but also the potential competitiveness of the enterprise. The approach is based on the statement according to which the competitiveness of an enterprise is an integral value in relation to current competitiveness and competitive potential.

Current and potential competitiveness and their ratios within the integral indicator of an enterprise’s competitiveness may vary depending on the method. Thus, in a number of cases, current (real) competitiveness is determined on the basis of an assessment of the competitiveness of the enterprise’s products, potential - by analogy with methods based on the theory of effective competition.

The current competitiveness of an enterprise, in turn, is defined as the ability of an economic entity to generate profit on invested capital in the short term not lower than a given profitability and is considered by the author as the ratio of the aggressiveness of the existing strategy to the level of aggressiveness required in the future (strategic standard).

Competitive potential - the potential opportunity (current prerequisites) to maintain or increase competitiveness in the long term - is seen by the author as the ratio of the current potential of an enterprise to the optimal potential (standard of capabilities), specified by the level of future instability external environment.

The weighting coefficients show the share of total strategic capital investments that go to investments in strategy and capacity, respectively (costs of strategic planning, market research, development new products and launching it into mass production, buildings and equipment, sales network, marketing); investments in the potential of the enterprise (hiring and training of personnel, acquisition of technologies, costs of creating functional services, etc.).

Definition of each of the indicators discussed above within the framework this method carried out expertly on the basis of various evaluation tables and matrices.

The advantages of the approach include the fact that it takes into account not only the achieved level of competitiveness of the enterprise, but also its possible dynamics in the future.

As a disadvantage of this group of methods, it should be noted that the specific methods and techniques used in determining current and potential competitiveness ultimately reproduce the methods used in the previously discussed approaches, which also entails disadvantages of the corresponding approaches.

Table 1 - Methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise

Method name	Essence of the method	Advantages
1. Assessment from the perspective of comparative advantage	Since production and sales are preferable if production costs are lower than those of its closest competitors, the main criterion used in this method is low costs.	Ease of assessing the level of competitiveness
2. Assessment from the perspective of equilibrium theory	Each factor of production is considered with the same and at the same time the greatest productivity. In this case, the enterprise does not have additional profit due to the action of any of the factors of production, and, therefore, there is no incentive to improve the use of one or another factor. The main criterion in this case is the presence of production factors that are not fully used.	Ability to determine internal reserves
3. Assessment based on the theory of competitive efficiency	The main criterion when using a structural approach to assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise is the concentration of production and capital. The assessment of competitiveness with a functional approach is carried out taking into account the ratio of price, costs and profit margins.
4. Evaluation based on product quality	The criterion of competitiveness is product quality.	Possibility of taking into account consumer preferences while ensuring the level of competitiveness
5. Requirements profile	Using a scale of expert ratings, the degree of advancement of the organization and the strongest competitor are determined. Profile comparison is used as a criterion.	Visibility
6. Polarity profile	The criterion used is a comparison of the parameters of ahead or behind the closest competitors.
7. Matrix method	The methodology is based on an analysis of competitiveness taking into account the product life cycle.
8. SWOT analysis	The method allows you to analyze the weaknesses and strengths of the internal environment of the enterprise, the potential dangers of the external environment and, based on the results of the analysis, identify existing opportunities for the development of enterprises.
9. Construction of a “hypothetical polygon of competitiveness”	The competitiveness of an enterprise is assessed based on eight factors: - the concept of goods and services on which the activities of the enterprise are based; - quality, expressed in the product’s compliance with the high level of market leaders; - price of the product with a possible markup; - finances; - trade; - after-sales service; - international trade enterprises; - pre-sale preparation.
10. Method of expert assessments	The method is based on the organized collection of judgments and assumptions of experts with subsequent processing of the responses received and the formation of results	Allows you to quickly and without much time and labor costs obtain the information necessary to develop a management decision
11. Method for assessing the main group indicators and criteria for the competitiveness of an enterprise	Assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise includes the following stages: - selection of criteria for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise; - calculation of weight coefficients of selected criteria; - determination of quantitative values ​​of individual indicators; - calculation of weight coefficients selected single indicators; - calculation of quantitative values ​​of enterprise competitiveness criteria; - calculation of the enterprise competitiveness coefficient.

Currently, many companies are trying to solve problems of product competitiveness and reduce production costs use a methodology for continuous product improvement, production technologies, organizational structures, namely, functional-cost analysis.

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 the competition of companies in market economy has the form of product competition, and the company's ability to compete on a certain commodity 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. Next we present short description 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 chosen 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.

The total consumption costs include both the cost of purchasing the product itself and the costs of its operation, acquisition Supplies, 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 innovativeness, which has 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 worsening differences in economic conditions activities of enterprises, their increasing diversification, 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 economic activity. 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 required for success key competencies the company has increased significantly. With the increase in the number of key competencies, the importance production function inevitably began to decline. Moreover, in the modern economy, when technology makes it possible to delegate the assembly of goods to subcontractors (geographically often located in other countries) without loss quality characteristics products, process material production determines the company's competitiveness 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. The product portfolio matrix proposed by BCG was a significant contribution to the toolkit of the strategy developer in the company when we're talking about on assessing the attractiveness of the activities of a diversified company and preparing general 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 conditions 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 strategic planning.

Classic SWOT analysis involves identifying strengths and weaknesses in the company’s activities, potential external threats and opportunities and their assessment relative to industry averages or in relation to data from strategically important competitors. The form for presenting the results of such an analysis was the compilation of tables (matrices) strengths in the activities of the company (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. In the presence of necessary information Matrix models make it possible to ensure high reliability of assessing 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 an assessment of the combination market characteristics product portfolio (market share, growth rates 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 factor 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 methods for processing initial indicators - here we use various techniques statistical data processing: 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 can be not 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 apply credit organizations, applying 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 use 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, 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 allows us to compare the results and prospects of activity various enterprises, which means assessing 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 securities the analyzed enterprises had 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. Conversely, any information about the dynamics economic indicator makes the picture of the process many times 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: defining key indicators activities of an economic entity and the application of 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 reporting period it is necessary to make calculations in a similar way for several lookback 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) to conduct the 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) cause low opportunities practical application 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.

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 enterprises within the same portfolio in large corporations and ensure the right mix of businesses that need capital to grow 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 can be turned into "stars".

This is simplified analytical method to assess 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.

Market attractiveness		Competitive position of the business unit
			Investing, growth, holding positions
		Investing, growth, holding positions	Segmentation and selective investing	Harvesting, leaving the market
		Segmentation and selective investing	Harvesting, leaving the market	Harvesting, leaving the market

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 - 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.

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 between the development of a given company and the development competitive firms by the degree to which their products satisfy people's needs and by 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 shown world practice market relations, the interrelated solution of these problems and the use of these principles guarantee 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 market conditions truth: 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 materials;
• - 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 reflected in how effectively they use the means of competition they have: low prices; improved product characteristics; more high level consumer services; 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.

Analyzing key characteristics state of the enterprise and known approaches to assessing and increasing its competitiveness, we can formulate the basic principles - the concept of 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 advantage. 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 big business. 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, you need to build at the enterprise unified system quality management of resources, products or services. 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. To do this, it is again necessary to prepare a new generation of accountants who are able to do what they are currently doing. financial directors, that is, to 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 cost work force. 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 - domestically 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, 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.

In the study of microcompetitiveness, the traditional direction is the assessment and analysis of the competitiveness of enterprises, as well as products and services.

The choice of a method for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise is a key decision, which, on the one hand, must satisfy the functional completeness and reliability of the assessment, and on the other hand, reduce the cost of time and money for its determination. Therefore, the choice of an assessment method, which consists in revealing its essence, justification, feasibility and the possibility of obtaining an assessment with a minimum error, is one of the main stages of the assessment procedure. In addition, the assessment method determines the possibility of obtaining an objective quantitative and qualitative assessment and can be the basis for the formation and management of the competitive advantages of enterprises and their competitive potential.

Currently, there is no generally accepted methodology for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise; therefore, a number of studies by domestic and foreign scientists are devoted to the theoretical and methodological foundations. In this regard, it becomes important to analyze existing methods in order to find those with the help of which in the future it would be possible to determine the level of competitiveness of objects with the least error in the assessment results.

All existing methods of economics and management for assessing the competitiveness of various objects can be classified according to two main criteria: the degree of objectivity (subjectivity) of the assessment results, as well as the approach to assessment - qualitative or quantitative. As a result, the typology of methods for assessing competitiveness can be presented on a two-dimensional field (Fig. 4 4).

Figure 4 - Typology of methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise

All methods can be combined into four groups in each of the resulting quadrants. Qualitative methods for assessing competitiveness include objective models for assessing competitive forces and value chains (five-factor “diamond” model, M. Porter’s value chain), strategic analysis models (STEP analysis SWOT analysis) as well as subjective matrix methods (BCG GE / McKinsey ADL matrices ). The subjectivity of matrix methods is due to the fact that although they provide visual assessment results, they reflect the level of competitiveness of an object (enterprise) only within a clearly defined industry framework. In addition, matrix models are usually greatly simplified. Thus, in the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) matrix, the attractiveness of a market is determined by its growth rate, and the competitive status of a company is determined in accordance with its share in this market. Therefore, a more accurate assessment can be obtained by taking into account a larger number of parameters affecting attractiveness and competitive status.

At the same time, all qualitative assessment methods - models of structural analysis of strategic analysis as well as matrix methods - are quite universal; they can be used to assess the competitiveness of objects in various sectors of the national economy. This explains their popularity and breadth of application in management theory and practice.

Quantitative methods for assessing competitiveness include subjective methods expert assessments based on intuition and the expert’s vision of professionalism (assessment of the company’s competitive strength according to the method of A.A. Thompson Jr. and A.J. Strickland III, etc.); as well as objective calculation and calculation-graphical methods (differential complex, etc.).

The objectivity of the latter is explained by the fact that to calculate the level of competitiveness of a particular object, a list of various evaluation criteria is used, on the basis of which, based on actual data, single group integral indicators of competitiveness are calculated. In addition, these techniques are often supported by graphic illustrations to visualize the results obtained, as well as to facilitate subsequent analysis.

Of course, objective methods are more labor-intensive and more demanding on the availability of certain information, but they can be considered more preferable for assessing the competitiveness of objects due to the accuracy of the results obtained.

However, expert assessments are often used in management activities. The main advantage of the expert assessment method is its versatility: with the help of an expert group, you can quickly and easily obtain an assessment of the condition of a particular enterprise. In addition, expert assessments are indispensable in cases where some necessary parameters cannot be quantified.

From our point of view, assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise must be carried out in two stages: first, it is necessary to identify and evaluate the features of the influence of factors of the external and internal environment of the subject; determine key factors success using qualitative methods. A qualitative assessment will pave the way for further quantitative, more rigorous assessment. In Fig. 1. The general direction in the study of competitiveness is shown by a large arrow.

It should be noted that expert opinions quite often act as a supplement to known methods for assessing competitiveness, as a rule, to determine the significance (weight) of the parameters selected for assessment; and in qualitative evaluation methods to facilitate interpretation and analysis of results.

There are a huge number of calculation and graphical methods for assessing competitiveness. Each of the methods has its own characteristics: the authors justify the use of various approaches for calculating competitiveness indicators, the need to take into account certain factors for assessment, etc. These features are due to the specifics of enterprises and industries, on the example of which the proposed methods were tested.

We present a systematic list of assessment methods in Table. 1.

Table 1 - Methods for assessing the competitiveness of a subject entrepreneurial activity

Method name	Scope and features of application
General scientific methods
Differential method	A method for assessing competitiveness based on a comparison of single parameters of the analyzed and analogue/reference subject. Using this approach makes it possible to establish: whether the level of parameters of the object under study has reached the parameters of the base/reference; what parameters have not been achieved; which of the parameters differ significantly from the analogue
Complex method	A method for assessing competitiveness based on the use of group integral mixed indicators. The assessment is carried out by comparing the indicators of the analyzed subject with similar indicators of the standard. The advantage of this method is the simplicity of calculation and the possibility of unambiguous interpretation of the results, but the main disadvantage is the incomplete description of the organization’s activities
Specialized methods
Analytical methods	This group of methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise includes the method of assessing competitiveness through an integral indicator, assessing competitiveness based on calculating the market share, assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise based on the theory of effective competition, etc. The advantages of this group of methods lie in the simplicity of calculations with the available information, as well as a fairly easy comparison of the parameters of the analyzed enterprise and an analogue sample. The disadvantage of this group of methods is the subjective influence on the assessment by experts, as well as difficulties associated with the limited availability of the necessary data on the activities of the subject being assessed
Analytical and prognostic methods	They differ not only in the ability to take into account the influence of various environmental factors when assessing competitiveness business organization but also the possibility of a comprehensive analysis of the commodity market conditions of the technology. This group of methods includes the method brainstorming a method for assessing the competitiveness of products based on sales levels, etc.
Graphical methods	They allow you to clearly demonstrate the competitive position of an entity in comparison with competitors (competitiveness polygon, pie chart method, histogram method, etc.) However, the lack of precise quantitative characteristics of enterprises according to given criteria limits the possibility of using these methods

Supporting the point of view of leading Russian scientists in the field of entrepreneurship and organization of business activities, we believe that the use of only one method does not provide adequate assessments of the state of a business entity and its potential capabilities; therefore, for a more accurate and objective assessment, it is necessary to combine existing methods. The combined use of analytical and graphical methods, taking into account the advantages and disadvantages of various approaches, makes it possible to assess the real position of an enterprise in the competitive space and rank it relative to competitors. In this case, it becomes possible to present the competitiveness of a company as a multifactorial quantity, determine its condition based on different criteria and evaluate the selected parameters in statics and dynamics.

However, using all methods simultaneously is impractical since this will complicate the analysis due to the complexity of the volume and labor-intensive calculations. Therefore, it is necessary to determine priority parameters for assessing the competitiveness of a business organization.

It was proposed to classify all the variety of approaches to quantitative assessment of the competitiveness of enterprises according to the following criteria:

Type of method (calculation graphic; calculation-graphical);

Features of calculating competitiveness indicators;

Ability to predict competitiveness;

Competitiveness factors taken into account;

Using the weight of indicators;

Source of information for calculations (internal reporting of the enterprise, statistical data, expert opinions, etc.);

Labor intensity of calculations;

Competitiveness criteria.

Using these classification criteria, it is possible to create a classification table of assessment methods according to which, in accordance with the various goals of the subjects of assessment, the availability of information, etc. You can choose one of the methods as a basis. Based on the given classification criteria, 12 methods for assessing competitiveness were analyzed.

Methods for determining the integral competitiveness of an enterprise are quite common in the literature. The integral indicator of competitiveness is determined on the basis of private indicators of competitiveness (single and group) and is usually calculated using additive models using the general formula:

where K is an integral indicator of the enterprise’s competitiveness;

b i - weight indicator of the i-th competitiveness factor;

P i is a particular indicator of the competitiveness of the i-th factor of the type of activity. In turn, private indicators are usually also determined by calculation.

Slightly less common are multiplicative models for calculating integral competitiveness, even less common are nonlinear ones.

However, almost all of the considered methods use the competitiveness of the products produced by this enterprise as one of the main factors. This can be explained by the fact that the product is a kind of mirror reflecting the results of the work of the entire enterprise of all its divisions and services.

Thus, the products of an enterprise determine its success and, consequently, its competitiveness.

At the same time, all the methods considered have, in our opinion, one significant drawback: assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise only states its current state (based on actually achieved results and indicators).

However, being a tool for strategic planning in modern market conditions, the assessment of competitiveness should, if possible, give a forecast for the future. For any economic entity, the ability to predict a situation means, first of all, obtaining better results or avoiding losses.

To do this, it is necessary to take into account such factors as the reputation of the company, its innovative activity and others, representing a kind of investment in the future competitiveness of the company.

Rapid changes in the external environment of enterprises stimulate the emergence of new systems methods and approaches to competitiveness management. From our point of view, the most complete (comprehensive) and universal quantitative methods for assessing the competitiveness of an enterprise can be considered the methods of I.V. Gladysheva and V.A. Moshnova.

Evaluation is central to achieving competitiveness.

Figure 5 - Scheme for achieving the competitiveness of a subject

So in Fig. Figure 5 presents the mechanism for transforming competitiveness factors into competitive advantages, which ultimately contribute to the achievement of competitiveness of the subject of competitive relations. Factors of competitiveness are divided into internal and external - depending on the source of their occurrence. In identifying these factors, M. Porter’s structural analysis models play a huge role - value chain, 5-factor model, competitive diamond. Next, among these factors, key success factors (KSF) are identified based on their further quantitative assessment, as well as correlation factor and other types of statistical analysis. CFUs, in turn, are a source of competitive advantage, and competitive advantages contribute to achieving competitiveness. Assessment and analysis must be carried out regularly in order to timely take into account changes in the competitive environment as well as the internal state of the enterprise strategic objectives increasing the competitiveness of business entities and can serve as the basis for integrated approach on further development and construction of a model for managing the competitive advantages of an enterprise. A tool for developing and constructing a model can be the use of mathematical modeling, which allows us to identify the peculiarities of the functioning of an economic entity and, on the basis of this, predict its future behavior when any parameters change. In the model, all relationships between variables can be assessed quantitatively, which allows for a better and more reliable forecast. This diagram is the basis of the solution.

The interest of enterprises in the results of their activities reinforces the need to increase the competitiveness of their products, which requires improving the work of all services and divisions of an economic entity. Competitiveness stands out the most important factor ensuring the safety of the facility, i.e. his survival in harsh conditions reality" and its subsequent effective development.