Shvedun V.

Doctor of Science (Public Administration), Full Professor, Head of the Scientific Department on Problems of Management in the Civil Defence Sphere National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv 

Ruban A.

PhD (Public Administration), Associate Professor of the Department of Supervisory and Preventive Activities National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv

 Ihnatiev O.

Doctor of philosophy (Public Administration), Associate Professor of the Department, National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv

SPECIFICS OF INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC SYSTEMS IN THE STATE

DOI: 10.52363/passa-2023.1-2

Abstract

The article is devoted to analysis of the specifics of innovative development of socio-economic systems in the state. The authors prove that the innovative behavior of socio-economic systems is diverse. Violent products have a high quality associated with a high level of standardization, unification and manufacturability and low prices typical of mass production. Many violents are multinational companies which create an oligopolistic market. Patents seek to avoid direct competition with leading corporations. In specialized production, the stock of competitiveness of the product arises mainly due to the high consumer value of the product. The patent has to pinpoint and enforce it. Small enterprises actively promote new products and technologies, massively creating new services on their basis. This accelerates the process of diffusion of innovations. Medium and small businesses focused on meeting local and national needs are engaged in commutator enterprises (connectors). An expletive (pioneer) strategy is associated with the creation of new or with the radical transformation of old market segments. Each of the types of companies (violents, commutants, patents and explerents) has its own characteristics and different degree of implementation of the strategy for achieving the competitiveness of the products.

Key words: innovative development, state, socio-economic systems, innovative companies.

References

1. Crawford Vincent P. (2007), Theory and Experiment in the Analysis of Strategic Interaction, Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications, Seventh World Congress, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1, 206.
2. Ishcheikin К. (2017), “Factors of effective implementation of the direct democracy`s instruments”, European political and discourse, 4-3, 124–131.
3. Foster J. (2000). Competitive Selection, self-organisation and Joseph A. Schumpeter, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10(3), 311-328.
4. Mendling J., Pentland B., Recker, J. (2020), “Building a Complementary Agenda for Business Process Management and Digital Innovation”, Eur. J. Inf. Syst., vol. 29, pp. 15–27.
5. Pasichnyk V.V., Shakhovska N.B. (2008), Data warehouses: textbook. Way, Lviv, Magnolia.
6. Rosemann M., de Bruin T. (2005), “Towards a business process management maturity model”, The 13th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2005), Regensburg, Germany, 26–28 May, 2005, The London School of Economics: London, UK.
7. Singh S. K., Rathore S., Park J.H. (2019), “BlockIoTIntelligence: A Blockchain-enabled Intelligent IoT Architecture with Artificial Intelligence”, Future Gener. Comput. Syst., vol. 110, pp. 721–743.
8. Van Looy A., Poels G. A. (2019), “Practitioners’ Point of View on How Digital Innovation Will Shape the Future of Business Process Management: Towards a Research Agenda”, The 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Grand Wailea, HI, USA, 8–11, volume 6.
9. VanVoorhis C.R.W., Morgan B.L. (2007), Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes, Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 3(2), 43‐50.