CC BY
19
Ван Чунь Лань, Сизова Ю.С.
Предпринимательская культура и нетехнологические изменения в бизнесе
Ван Чунь Лань — аспирант, базовая кафедра ФАС, ФГБОУ ВО «Российский экономический университет имени Г.В. Плеханова», Москва, РФ. E-mail: 23436628@qq.com
Сизова Юлия Сергеевна — кандидат экономических наук, старший преподаватель, ФГБОУ ВО «Российский экономический университет имени Г.В. Плеханова», Москва, РФ.
E-mail: Sizova.YS@,rea.ra SPIN-код РИНЦ: 6833-5112
Аннотация
Актуальность представленной статьи заключается в необходимости формирования научно обоснованного подхода к взаимосвязи природы предпринимательской культуры и системы нетехнологических изменений в бизнес-организациях, направленных на повышение эффективности предпринимательской деятельности. Целью является определение места и роли качественных нетехнологических изменений в подстройке внутренней среды предпринимательских структур к осуществлению технологических инноваций, в определении степени влияния индивидуальной предпринимательской культуры организации на направление и возможность внедрения нетехнологических изменений. Проведен анализ существующих в российской и зарубежной научной литературе подходов к воздействию внутренних и внешних институциональных факторов на развитие предпринимательской культуры и обусловленных ею качественных изменений в предпринимательских организациях.
Ключевые слова
Предпринимательская культура, институциональная среда предпринимательства, виды предпринимательской культуры, бизнес-процессы, качественные изменения, нетехнологические изменения.
For defining the role of entrepreneurial culture in the nature of internal non-technological changes in enterprises, it is better to start with finding out its key specific traits that distinguish it from general organizational culture. The problem of organizational culture was extensively and elaborately studied by numerous Russian and foreign authors, in terms of various types of social and economic structures. As defined by L.S. Leontyeva, organizational structure is an enterprise-specific system of (a) formal and informal rules of conduct that organization members, authority structure and competences are subject to, and (b) reward and pay distribution system. This set of regulations includes values intrinsic to this very enterprise, communication models, subconscious basic commitments that are shared by organization members, defining their vision of themselves and environment1.
The priority of economics, management, and law — key factors driving development of business processes — affects the dynamics of changes in these processes. It is impossible to ignore the importance of the cultural aspect of business environment in the context of its
1 Леонтьева Л.С. Организационная культура: региональный аспект. М.: Мирбис, 2004. С. 9.
significance to entrepreneurial activity in general. Specifically, Brian Toyne and Peter Walters note, "national markets are considered in terms of their economical, trade, political, and legal environment. However, market demands and capabilities cannot be exclusively defined based on information and technologies. Markets and market behavior of sellers and buyers are exposed to strong influence of cultural factors" . This is why any changes in business organizations — marketing, HR, institutional — are by various types of entrepreneurial culture.
Environmental factors, such as cross-cultural differences in business practice, politics, law, state regulation, economics, competition, infrastructure, and technology influence entrepreneurial culture. Qualitative changes appear in the context of domestic or international business, manifesting themselves on different levels. In the microenvironment (company level), they are subject to in-house corporate culture; in the mesic environment to intercorporate communication culture; in macro environment to alignment with extra corporate culture. Non-technological changes in these terms may be defined as a method enabling a group of people to sort out issues or dilemmas, by virtue of internal transformation of elements responsible for enterprise growth . According to Terpstre and David's business-oriented approach, "culture is an explorable, dividable, irreducible, and interrelated set of symbols constituting classified layers of culture; values of these symbols determine the set of orientations for members of a community. These orientations, considered in the system they form, determine solutions to problems that shall be sorted out by any community, provided that such a community seeks to survive"4. With that, qualitative changes are inevitable as they are essential for implementation of technology innovations.
Technological changes in enterprises are a kind of response to growing competitive advantages of other "external parties"; these changes are driven by the need for enhancing competitive capabilities in conquering new markets. However, introduction thereof assumes a complex of qualitative non-technological transformations that affect such internal subsystems as general team management, HR management, intellectual property management, marketing, etc. At the entity level, entrepreneurial culture forms the company image, fosters production performance by virtue of efficient use of intangibles and quality improvement of products and services, and thus increases income.
2 Toyne B, Walters P.G.P. Global Marketing Management: A Strategic Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1993. P. 244.
3 Trompenaars F., Hampden-Turner Ch. Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Cultural Diversity in Business. London: Nicolas Brealey Publishing, 2000. P. 6.
4 Terpstra V., DavidK. The Cultural Environment of International Business. Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western Publishing Co, 1992. P. 6.
As defined by a notorious researcher M.G. Lapusta5, entrepreneurial culture is a defined and established system of business activity principles, methods, and techniques followed by entities in compliance with existing state legislation, business conduct, ethical and moral rules, and codes of conduct.
German scientist Rolf Rüttinger6 defines entrepreneurial culture as a system of collectively designed and substantial convictions and visions of values. Visions of values provide the concept of what is important for a company, while convictions give the view of how an enterprise shall work.
E.E. Kuzmina suggests the similar opinion . In her view, entrepreneurial culture consists of the following elements:
- material elements (enterprise maturity status in terms of managerial and information technology);
- mental elements (professional expertise, experience and habits, economical thinking);
- personal elements (possibility of wealth, economical freedom);
- institutional elements (social values and rules, including belief and conviction).
Based on this approach, we conclude that qualitative non-technological changes affect immeasurable essences of business activity, which influence the "lagged" effect.
This entrepreneurial culture defines vectors of qualitative changes in environment, management style, internal relations, and values of the company.
Dynamics and need for consistent transformation of the elements of entrepreneurial culture under the influence of external changes, is the condition for stable competitiveness.
5 Лапуста М.Г. Предпринимательство: учебник. М.: ИНФРА-М, 2007.
6 Рюттингер Р. Культура предпринимательства. М.: ЭКОМ, 1992.
7 Кузьмина Е.Е. Организация предпринимательской деятельности: учеб. пособие для бакалавров. М.: Юрайт, 2012. Р. 239.
8
Table 1. Classification of Entrepreneurial Culture
Types of Entrepreneurial Culture Brief Description
Trade culture Trade culture is marked by rapid feedback and relatively low risk. Young and active people, ready for experiments, often become marketplace specialists. These people are usually amicable and good-looking; usually they do not need high morals. They are masters of declamation and use humor responsibly. Eagerness to communicate and share knowledge is the factor that makes sales a truly communicative field of activity; this openness causes the feeling of being needed, and community spirit.
Bargain culture (speculative culture) Speculative culture is characterized by fast feedback of successful (or unsuccessful) enterprises, and medium or high risk. This type of culture is common for areas dealing with bargains with securities, means of payment, raw materials, etc. Elements of such culture can be widely met in fashion, cosmetics, professional sport, advertising, and venturous investing. Fields where speculative culture is common form a substantial ground for subculture of a businessperson; they develop aggressive traits, firm decision-making, and eagerness for challenging others. Therefore, there is a need for suppressing sensitivity and emotions.
Investment culture Investment culture manifests itself most extensively in production sector — especially in fuel industry, construction, investment banking, and manufacturing of production means. This type of culture exhibits pronounced vision for the future. Specialists of this field are cautious, patient, and stubborn. They have to endure a relatively high period of uncertainty provided with little feedback. When it comes to making definitive decisions, respect for authority and competence matters. People are inclined to follow decisions and arrangements concluded before.
Administrative culture Administrative culture declares itself in public services, at enterprises and large administrative companies, banks, and insurance firms. Specialists are usually accurate and dependable, cautious enough, meticulous, faultfinding. Nevertheless, they can be flexible. Communication in fields where administrative culture governs is typically comprehensive and emphasizes the hierarchy.
In Table 1 we highlight specific traits of staff, which are subject to qualitative transformations. Level thereof is barely measurable; they can be evaluated only by means of expert examination. However, as a result, precision of these measurements allows for augmenting business income.
8 Рюттингер Р. Указ. соч.
Pace and quality of non-technological innovations highly depend on the level of institutional culture of the entrepreneurial environment. To date, Russia has no consistent institutional culture. According to Doing Business ranking (World Bank)9, as for June 2018, Russia was on the 35th place among 190 countries by the ease of doing business (meanwhile, Singapore got the silver, US were on the 5th place, and China took the 78th rank). Institutional environment is what is forming continuously. Puffer and McCarty noted that instability, poor legislation, excessive regulation, irrelevant infrastructure not responding to demands of business — all these factors create a maze that Russian entrepreneurs have to unthread while starting up and running a company10. There have already been many discussions around what role institutional environment plays in development of entrepreneurship. Over the last 30 years, scientific community has been trying to find out what can inhibit growth of small and medium enterprises in Russia. Therefore, two major explanations were proposed11.
According to the first one, Russian entrepreneurs have too little experience and poor skills in doing business — this due to long historical gap since the previous state-planned economy development period, which had not assumed (except for the New Economic Policy) evolution of private enterprises, and lack of tradition to do business. Even in some publications which became popular in Russia during the reforms of 1990th and 2000th it is possible to come across the allegations that Russian national character and business are incompatible; that Russian mentality is orthodox and radically antibourgeois; that Russian people completely reject market values. It was even stated that any Russian person has no genetic predisposition of business and all entrepreneurial ideas were artificially planted form abroad.
The second explanation refers to the state of the today's business environment, where instable rules force entrepreneurs pursue short-term profit by means of illegal activities. This is the consequence of numerous impediments in the environment, which include high corruption, unfavorable legislation, and lack of funding. Studying how institutional environment affects business development becomes one of the highest priorities in research, and the major focus is made on specifics of complex and volatile interaction between institutional factors and growth of enterprises based in emerging economies. Since 1990s, studies that are theoretically based on the institutional approach on macro, meso, and micro levels, have been evolving rapidly due to transformation processes that have taken and take place in emerging economies. National institutional environment is always unique, forming
9 Рейтинг стран // DOING BUSINESS: Оценка Бизнес Регулирования [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://russian.doingbusiness.org/rankings (дата обращения: 16.01.2018).
10 Puffer S.M. Navigating the Hostile Maze: A Framework for Russian Entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Executive. 2001. Vol. 15. No. 4. P. 24-38.
11 Kihlgren A. Small business in Russia factors that slowed its development: an analysis // Communist and post-communist studies. 2003. Vol. 36. No. 2. P. 193-207.
"rules or, to be more correct, restrictions that structure interactions between people ... [and]
12
define choice of individuals" ; these rules affect growth and behavior of enterprises, regulating how they interact and defining subjects of managerial decision-making. Institutional environment, in its turn, is the system of political, social, and economic conditions (rules) that influence qualitative changes in business and form the immaterial
13
foundation for production, exchange, and distribution . Consequently, the quality of changes in a company turns out to be affected by the national institutional environment that enterprises grow within. This affection is mostly typical for small companies that are unable to transform this environment due to lack of all resources. There is an approach that in emerging economies, institutional environment acts as a driver or inhibitor, in terms of rapidity and dynamics of transformations taking place within, which may lead to unpredictable changes in enterprises14.
Institutions can decrease the uncertainty in the environment, arrange transformations, and define boundaries within which they shall take place in order to enhance business performance. All institutions have been always commonly divided into two groups: formal (laws) and informal (traditions, rules of conduct). Besides, they include codes of behavior, complemented by enforcement means that are to obligate individuals to comply with these codes. Specific traits of the national entrepreneurial culture and capabilities of each enterprise to implement various types of transformations reflect the relation between these two groups. Formal institutions approve legal regulations that define economical and legal system on the macro level; government implements the system of commercial laws stipulating and maintaining those regulations. Without any doubt, in the field of formal institutions, any qualitative transformations in the internal environment of an enterprise may be possible only in case of radical macro level changes. Informal institutions are traditions, social codes, unwritten rules of conduct within an enterprise; actual internal growth processes historically condition them. These institutions transform though various training mechanisms (e.g. learning provided by more experienced colleagues). Transformation drivers may be personal or collective penalties. Sanctions for violating informal institutions arise spontaneously and depend on the in-house social and psychological climate15.
12 North D.C. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance: the political economy of institutions and decisions series. Cambridge, New York and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
13 ШаститкоА.Е. Новая институциональная экономическая теория. 3-е изд. М.: Экономический факультет МГУ, ТЕИС, 2002.
14 Yamakawa Y. What drives new ventures to internationalize from emerging to developed economies? // Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice. 2008. Vol. 32. No. 1. P. 59-83.
15 Кузьминов Я.И., Бендукидзе К.А., Юдкевич М.М. Курс институциональной экономики: институты, сети, трансакционные издержки, контракты // Ведомости. 2006. № 24(1551). C. 410-426.
Works aimed at studying transformations as a kind of manifestation of cultural differences and role thereof in entrepreneurship, gained special momentum16. It is expected that cultural characteristics are factors that condition specifics of how small Russia-based
17 18
innovative companies will enter the international market . Studies based on the Hofstede , model explored influence of the national culture on entrepreneurial orientation19.
Institutional approach was often used in research of informal institutions. According to Dr. North, «formal rules may reshape in an instant as a result of political or court
resolutions, while informal restrictions represented by customs, traditions, and codes of
20
conduct are more protected against the purposeful policy ». Examination of adequacy of formal institutions is more than important, since regulating authorities form visible forces affecting qualitative changes that define strategic development of small and medium enterprises and their interaction with the institutional environment.
In agreement with G.V. Shirokova and T.V. Tsukanova21, institutional environment can be defined as a specific target of research in terms of the institutional approach, as it is required to find out functions it is intended to perform for providing conditions favorable for enterprises. Firstly, institutional environment is aimed at framework regulation, limiting the set of alternatives that a company may choose from. Secondly, this environment shall ensure predictability and stability that would enable companies following some guideline A to achieve result B with calculable related efforts and costs. Thirdly, institutional environment shall provide freedom and safety, i.e. if an enterprise follows formal rules, the probability of court action shall be significantly lower. Fourthly, institutional environment shall facilitate minimization of costs related to transaction security, including partner search and supervision of obligations undertaken. Fifthly, it shall foster exchange of knowledge of rules of conduct in the in-house environment, between community members.
If the abovementioned functions are performed properly, the institutional environment may be expected to become a driver for qualitative transformations, and its interaction with an enterprise may be evaluated as efficient. However, in most emerging
16 Trompenaars F., Hampden-Turner Ch. Op. cit. P. 6.
17 Tovstiga G. et al. Preparing Russian Small Innovative Enterprises for International Competitiveness: A Scoping Study // Journal of International Entrepreneurship. 2004. Vol. 2. Issue 1-2. P. 89-108.
18 Hofstede G. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: Mc Graw Hill BK, 1991. P. 385.
19 Marino L., et al. The Moderating Effect of National Culture on the Relationship between Entrepreneurial Orientation and Strategic Alliance Portfolio Extensiveness // Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2002. Vol. 26. Issue 4. P. 145-160.
20 North D.C. Op. cit.
21 Широкова Г.В., Цуканова Т.В. Влияние национальной институциональной среды на степень интернационализации фирм малого и среднего бизнеса из стран с переходными экономиками // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Менеджмент. 2012. № 1. С. 26-51.
economies, institutional environment is characterized as unfavorable, for it is transforming, being very unstable. Due to this, in Russia there appeared need for forming institutional entrepreneurial culture which we define as the system of elements aimed at forming the
business environment in order to improve entrepreneurial activity on the micro level (entity
22
level), meso level (partners/counterparties), and macro level (state) . At the micro level, business culture will contribute to more efficient production, better quality of products and services and, consequently, higher business income. At the meso level, it will contribute to the creation of favorable conditions and performance of duties for developing active business environment. At the macro-level, it will help to support business entities including institutional mechanisms and infrastructural elements23.
Moreover, as considered by Yu.S. Sizova, the micro level as the main level of enterprise structure formation is the most important. At the level of a separate enterprise subject entrepreneurial culture is the defining factor of corporate culture of the organization; it is aimed at the company survival in certain business environment; defines internal integration of the organization; promotes increase in efficiency of a business unit performance and contributes into its social responsibility formation. At the level of a separate business unit, it is necessary to consider political, legitimate, economic, social and cultural factors of the external environment. Business units need effective institutional support at all stages of life cycle, including recession and disintegration. Entrepreneurial culture at the mesolevel depends on such factors as the level of a regional business environment development; share of highly competitive enterprise structures; the degree of regional economy demonopolization; state support availability the state for small and medium business units. At the macro level, support of business units has to involve institutional mechanisms and infrastructural elements24.
Entrepreneurial culture on each stage of a life cycle also possesses its distinctive features. In the course of changes happening in the organization, in the course of support from the institutional environment, entrepreneurial culture evolves alternatively. Respectively, it is possible to draw a conclusion that at each stage of a life cycle business units have varying needs for support from external institutional environment.
22 Сизова Ю.С. Entrepreneurial Culture: Essence and Items // Международный научно-исследовательский журнал. 2016. № 12. Часть 5. С. 161-165.
23 Leontieva L.S., Sizova Y.S., Ilin A.B. Institutional support of small and medium-sized businesses at various stages of development: evidence from Russia // Espacios. 2018. Vol. 39. No. 24. P. 17.
24 Сизова Ю. С. Этапы жизненного цикла организации и развитие предпринимательской культуры // Стратегия формирования экономики знаний и инноваций в России сборник статей, включающий материалы круглого стола в рамках V Московского экономического форума. М., 2017. С. 209-215.
This is why it we can conclude that the institutional environment has the direct impact on the entrepreneurial climate and activity. Implementation and further transformation of backbone rules based on enhancing entrepreneurial culture through infrastructural elements aimed at support of small and medium companies may be efficient in developing enterprises. Introduction of technological innovations in startups and emergence of new entrepreneurial structures must lead to a balanced and parallel-implemented complex of qualitative non-technological transformations. On the level of establishing new companies, they will be of the introductory nature, forming the entrepreneurial culture of this new company. In case of integrating technological innovations into a mature structure, qualitative changes (managerial, marketing, personnel) will heavily depend on the existing internal culture and its relevance to the external institutional environment.
References:
1. Кузьмина Е.Е. Организация предпринимательской деятельности: учеб. пособие для бакалавров. М.: Юрайт, 2012.
2. Кузьминов Я.И., Бендукидзе К.А., Юдкевич М.М. Курс институциональной экономики: институты, сети, трансакционные издержки, контракты // Ведомости. 2006. № 24(1551). C. 410-426.
3. ЛапустаМ.Г. Предпринимательство: учебник. М.: ИНФРА-М, 2007.
4. ЛеонтьеваЛ.С. Организационная культура: региональный аспект. М.: Мирбис, 2004.
5. Рейтинг стран // DOING BUSINESS: Оценка Бизнес Регулирования [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://russian.doingbusiness.org/rankings (дата обращения: 16.01.2018).
6. Рюттингер Р. Культура предпринимательства. М.: ЭКОМ, 1992.
7. Сизова Ю.С. Этапы жизненного цикла организации и развитие предпринимательской культуры // Стратегия формирования экономики знаний и инноваций в России сборник статей, включающий материалы круглого стола в рамках V Московского экономического форума. М., 2017. С. 209-215.
8. Сизова Ю.С. Entrepreneurial Culture: Essence and Items // Международный научно-исследовательский журнал. 2016. № 12. Часть 5. С. 161-165.
9. Шаститко А.Е. Новая институциональная экономическая теория. 3-е изд. М.: Экономический факультет МГУ, ТЕИС, 2002.
10. Широкова Г.В., Цуканова Т.В. Влияние национальной институциональной среды на степень интернационализации фирм малого и среднего бизнеса из стран с
переходными экономиками // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Менеджмент. 2012. № 1. С. 26-51.
11. Hofstede G. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: Mc Graw Hill BK, 1991.
12. Kihlgren A. Small business in Russia factors that slowed its development: an analysis // Communist and post-communist studies. 2003. Vol. 36. No. 2. P. 193-207.
13. LeontievaL.S., Sizova Y.S., Ilin A.B. Institutional support of small and medium-sized businesses at various stages of development: evidence from Russia // Espacios. 2018. Vol. 39. No. 24. P. 17.
14. Marino L., et al. The Moderating Effect of National Culture on the Relationship between Entrepreneurial Orientation and Strategic Alliance Portfolio Extensiveness // Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2002. Vol. 26. Issue 4. P. 145-160.
15. North D.C. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance: the political economy of institutions and decisions series. Cambridge, New York and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
16. Puffer S.M. Navigating the Hostile Maze: A Framework for Russian Entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Executive. 2001. Vol. 15. No. 4. P. 24-38.
17. Terpstra V., DavidK. The Cultural Environment of International Business. Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western Publishing Co, 1992.
18. Tovstiga G. et al. Preparing Russian Small Innovative Enterprises for International Competitiveness: A Scoping Study // Journal of International Entrepreneurship. 2004. Vol. 2. Issue 1-2. P. 89-108.
19. Toyne B, Walters P.G.P. Global Marketing Management: A Strategic Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1993.
20. Trompenaars F., Hampden-Turner Ch. Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Cultural Diversity in Business. London: Nicolas Brealey Publishing, 2000.
21. Yamakawa Y. What drives new ventures to internationalize from emerging to developed economies? // Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice. 2008. Vol. 32. No. 1. P. 59-83.
Wang Chun Lan, Sizova Yu.S. Entrepreneurial Culture and Non-technological Changes in Business
Wang Chun Lan — postgraduate student, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Moscow, the Russian Federation. E-mail: 23436628@qq.com
Yulia S. Sizova — PhD, Senior Lecturer, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Moscow, the Russian Federation. E-mail: Sizova.YS@rea.ru
Abstract
The relevance of this paper is in need of creating an evidence-based approach to relation between the nature of entrepreneurial culture and the system of non-technological changes in business aimed at increasing performance. The purpose is defining the role of high-quality non-technological changes in adapting the internal environment of enterprise structures to implementation of technology innovations, in determining the extent of how individual business culture affects the course and possibility of non-technological changes. Existing Russian and foreign approaches to effect that external and internal institutional factors have on development of entrepreneurial culture and qualitative changes in enterprises driven by the latter, were analyzed.
Key words
Entrepreneurial culture, institutional business environment, types of entrepreneurial culture, business processes, qualitative changes, non-technological changes.
