What types of corporate structures are used in industry. Corporate governance structures. Typology of corporate cultures

Many family-owned businesses do not live up to their fourth generation, but some manage to grow into large international conglomerates that successfully trade in one or more international markets. The long-term survival of a family business depends on balancing and balancing business, ownership and family relationships. To survive, it is necessary to transform the business into a corporate structure with a team of qualified managers, a board of directors and competent managers.

The corporate world is constantly changing, and it becomes more and more difficult to assess what the corporate structure is and what management positions exist in it. It is just as difficult to be constantly aware of which people are responsible for what and what they influence within the company.

Modern names for managerial positions can drive the average investor crazy. The various positions are often referred to as "Group C": Chief Executive Officer CEO, Chief Finance Officer CFO, Chief Operating Officer COO, Chief Information Officer CIO, Chief Strategy Officer CSO, and so on. Other titles - such as VP President and VP - can also be confusing, even for company employees. To make matters even more confusing, different firms, especially startups, use all of these names in a huge number and in an approximate sense - either to create the image of a serious corporation, or to lure talented managers with a beautiful job title.

Given that there is a strong link between the performance of an organization and its market share, investors should pay attention to news about executives, including CEOs, CFOs, and vice presidents. The past recommendations of these executives are especially important in terms of short-, medium- and long-term value creation.

To create an organization that protects the interests of the owners, many companies have followed the path of creating a two-tier corporate hierarchy. The first level is the board of directors: it consists of people chosen by the owners of the shares in the company. The second level is administrative management: at the head is the CEO, the team consists of people recruited by the directors or CEO.

The task of the board of directors is to oversee the management of the company so that the course is in the interests of the owners. In general, the board of directors should ensure that the interests of the owners are protected and that those interests are cared for. Council members are elected by the owners of the company, and the council itself consists of two groups: the first group includes a management team from among the company's employees.

This group may include CEO, CFO, VP, or other managers working full-time for the company. The second group is selected from employees external to the company; it is assumed to be independent of the company.

Board members can be divided into three categories:

(A) The head of the board of directors. He is responsible for ensuring that the work of the council is carried out quickly and efficiently. In fact, he is the leader of the organization. His job typically involves maintaining strong relationships with the CEO and other managers, developing the company's business strategy, presenting the company to the public and with owners, and maintaining corporate unity. The head is chosen from among the members of the board of directors.

(B) Executive directors. They approve plans and budgets prepared by the management team, as well as key corporate initiatives and projects. The directors can be either the owners of the company or the managers recruited from among the employees. They let other board members know what's going on inside the company. They are also called “internal directors” when they are part of the management team within the company.

(B) Non-executive directors. In terms of strategic direction and corporate policy, they have the same responsibilities as executive directors... The difference is that they are not directly involved in the management team in the company. The main purpose of having such people on the board of directors is to obtain a balanced and impartial vision of the company's prospects.

The administrative management team is directly responsible for the day-to-day management of the company, including overseeing the profitability of the business and the implementation of the business strategy.

1) The CEO, as a rule, reports directly to the board of directors for everything that happens in the company. His responsibilities include implementing council decisions and overseeing the smooth running of the company. The management team helps him in this. The CEO is often simultaneously the president of the company and, accordingly, one of the executive managers on the board of directors (unless he is the head of the board).

2) The COO, often referred to as the senior vice president, is responsible for marketing, manufacturing, sales and human resources. As a rule, he is "closer" to the real business of the company than the CEO. The COO monitors what is happening in the company on a daily basis and reports back to the CEO.

3) CFO, who is also sometimes called vice president, reports directly to the CEO. He controls financial condition organizations, analyzes and verifies financial data, prepares reports on financial efficiency work of the company, draws up a budget, monitors costs and expenses. The CFO reports regularly on these matters to the board of directors and provides information to the owners and supervisory authorities. He regularly reviews the financial soundness and integrity of the company.

Running a public company, from the board of directors to executive managers, is primarily concerned with maximizing the profits of the owners. In theory, executive management is responsible for the day-to-day running of the company and the management of the business, and the function of the board of directors is to adequately represent the interests of the owners. In practice, however, it turns out that many boards of directors are made up entirely of managers.

When investors are evaluating a company, it is a good idea to ensure that there is a balance between performers and non-performers on the board. The division of roles between the CEO and the head of the board is good signs, as well as the availability of comprehensive professional expert support from lawyers, accountants and executors.

Given the state of business in emerging economies, it is fairly common for the board to have no top managers (such as CEOs and CFOs), but instead have family members or people appointed by the owners. This does not necessarily mean that the investment in such a company will not pay off, but investors should consider whether such a corporate structure will actually work in their interests.

January 29, 2016

The name of the corporate structure comes from the Latin corporatio - association, community. An important factor that distinguishes the corporate structure is the specific conditions of activity, requiring the participation of many organizations, groups, the goals of which are combined with the general goals of the corporation. All characteristics of the organizational structure are formed in accordance with corporate goals, corporate strategy, interests and values.
Let's consider some of the most significant characteristics. The corporation has a sustainable development strategy recognized by the team and society. The corporate structures known in the world are recognizable by their characteristic qualitative features. According to the economist A. Chandler, the structure is determined by the strategy. Obviously, it is also true that the structure gives the strategy clarity, concreteness, vitality, * realizability. Through structure, strategy becomes an influencing factor, a means of control and a structural element. Thus, the Sony corporation, which is focused on constant updating of products, has in its management structure special links for marketing, innovations, and quality circles. But the main thing is the formation of a special innovative thinking of people and in the system of motivation aimed at innovations. Together with the image of the company, the image of the organizational culture of the corporation is created as a complex characteristic of the management structure.
The priority characteristic of the corporate structure is the combination and unification of the interests of shareholders, personnel and managers in the implementation of the corporate strategy. Particular attention is paid to the interests of shareholders through their participation in the affairs of the company, an atmosphere of trust and interest is created "in expanding capital. In the relationship between managers and personnel, a style of cooperation is formed through the correct selection of a motivation system and its focus on common interests and goals. -ractive structure is also a special system for assessing personnel, their qualifications, performance results and personal contribution to the overall group, or collective, result.
In fig. 5.3 is a diagram of the organizational structure of the General Electric Corporation. The corporation has a wide range of manufactured equipment: from aerospace to household products, which is grouped by enterprises in different regions of the United States and other countries. A small number of functional areas of activity are concentrated at the highest level of management. At the same time, the production sphere has four levels of management links, which is due to
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
m Chairman of the Board of Directors Commission under the Board of Directors - Revision Commission
Payment Commission Deputy
Deputy
Deputy
Groups
Central services
Personnel
Research
Long-term planning
Design training
Marketing
Relationship
with the government
Current planning
Manager training
Finance
Legal
Technological preparation
Relationship
with consumers I- Administrative
Aerospace
Aircraft engines
¦ Household electrical appliances
Consumer goods
Materials
Construction equipment
Industrial equipment
Information systems
Power equipment
Branches (4-5 per group)
Departments (2-4 per department)
Factories (1-3 per department)
Rice. 5.3. General Electric Corporation management structure
organizational and production specifics of the corporation. The scheme is limited to considering only hierarchical relationships, and corporate governance is interesting for cross-functional relationships, interaction and coordination of their interests and employee motivation.
This structure is dominated by the principle of production specialization by types and types of expanding product range, which increases the hierarchy and complicates vertical interactions. Production specialization is important in the formation of corporations, but corporatism manifests itself in a combination of production, economic and organizational integration, when the combined enterprises and organizations create a single organism that ensures the reproductive nature of activities. Corporateness is a management characteristic, and the degree of its manifestation in modern systems different. Our attention is drawn to this characteristic due to the fact that the formation of such structures has many positive aspects for the reforming economy of Russia.

Corporate culture is a set of fundamental values ​​and standards, beliefs, ethical standards, beliefs and expectations, which are unprovenly accepted by the majority of employees, set the benchmarks for people in their activities and determine the way of uniting and coordinating the actions of management, structural units and individual employees.

The structure of corporate culture includes: the philosophy of the enterprise, the key goal or mission of the company, the prevailing values ​​of the company, the style of leadership, the system of employee motivation, as well as the system of incentives and penalties for the team. It often happens that the changes planned by the senior management of the company are extremely difficult to take root in the team. This is due to the fact that new principles are difficult to fit into already the existing system values ​​of this team.

Corporate culture includes a number of components:

An idea of ​​the mission (purpose) of the organization, its role in society, the main goals and objectives of the activity;

Value attitudes (concepts of acceptable and unacceptable), through the prism of which all actions of employees are assessed;

Behavior models (response options) in various situations (both ordinary and non-standard);

Organization leadership style (delegation of authority, making important decisions, Feedback etc.);

The current communication system (exchange of information and interaction between the structural divisions of the organization and with the outside world, the accepted forms of address "boss-subordinate" and "subordinate-boss");

The norms of business communication between team members and with clients (other institutions, government officials, the media, the general public, etc.);

Ways to resolve conflicts (internal and external);

Traditions and customs accepted in the organization (for example, congratulating employees on their birthday, joint trips to nature, etc.);

Organization symbols (slogan, logo, clothing style of employees, etc.).

Moreover, these components must be accepted and supported by all members of the team (or the overwhelming majority of them).

The corporate culture includes the following structure:

1. Intellectual concept of the enterprise, including its mission, values, goals of existence.

2. Organizational structure and chain of command.

3. Enterprise management system.

4. Control mechanisms.

5. Symbols of the company, including elements of corporate identity (logo, anthem, corporate colors, etc.).

6. Everyday behavior of employees, including rituals, habits, etc.

7. Corporate mythology, including stories of successes and failures of the company and its individual employees.

There are the following types of corporate culture:

1. The culture of power.

It is characterized by the concentration of managerial functions in the hands of a small group of people or one person, an authoritarian leadership style, strict control over the implementation of decisions, and a low level of bureaucratization. A culture of power is characteristic of authoritarian organizations.

2. Role culture.

This type is characterized by a high level of bureaucratization, delegation of responsibilities and rights depending on the position held, but not personal competence, collective decision-making, control in accordance with complex procedures.

3. Culture of tasks.

This type is characterized by the presence of small groups of employees responsible for solving a certain range of tasks. Rights and responsibilities are delegated to employees who are able to perform certain actions. A task culture is adopted in organizations where the majority of employees have good professional quality and are able to work for the result.

4. The culture of individuals.

This type is formed in enterprises, the majority of whose members believe that they work better alone than in a group. This calls into question the existence of such enterprises. However, a firm with a culture of individuality can successfully exist if its employees are interested in each other's professional knowledge and skills.

University of Illinois professor Robert Cook used the following typology of corporate cultures:

1. Constructive cultures. They are distinguished by the willing cooperation of staff with each other, the desire of members of the organization to jointly solve work problems.

2. Passive-protective cultures. They are characterized by the desire of employees of the organization to interact with each other so that their personal interests are not affected.

3. Aggressive defense cultures. In organizations with this culture, employees interact with each other primarily in order to maintain their own position.

The external level of corporate culture is quite manageable: the symbols, mythology, rituals, ceremonies, ceremonies inherent in the enterprise. It is possible to form and improve the basic level, which is quite laborious and complex: the declared values ​​and norms of behavior expressed in the mission, vision, code, internal rules, regulations, regulations, etc.

But there is also an internal level - an informal part of the corporate culture, manifested in the unwritten rules of the relationship of employees both with each other and with the outside world. Precisely because of the discrepancy between the internal level and the external, culture can play a disorganizing role, be unproductive. In these cases, the practical "inclusion" of the employee in activities aimed at realizing the declared value so that it becomes his personal value helps.

The actions of top managers have a decisive influence on corporate culture. Their behavior, the slogans and norms proclaimed by them, and, most importantly, organizational resources aimed at their implementation and approval in the minds of enterprise members, become the most important guidelines for the behavior of employees, which often serve as a more important factor in organizing behavior than formalized rules and requirements.

Corporate culture gives people a sense of belonging, commitment; promotes communication, initiative; creates an efficient, highly productive work collective. And the constant search for a lasting advantage over competitors leads the enterprise management directly to the need to deal with cultural issues.

So, corporate culture is a complex organizational phenomenon that determines the existence of an enterprise and indicators of the effectiveness of its functioning. The corporate culture of an enterprise can be described by a number of quantitative and qualitative characteristics.

Moreover, the corporate culture of an enterprise is a complex system that includes a number of heterogeneous elements, among which are:

Objects of the material world;

Objects of the social world;

Social relationships;

Characteristics of objects of the material world;

Characteristics of objects of the social world;

Characteristics of social relationships.

In addition to the complex structure, when describing corporate culture, one cannot fail to mention its heterogeneity as a system. The corporate culture contains three interconnected subsystems:

Ideological basis of the organization (ideology);

Management culture of the organization (management);

Social culture of the organization (society).

These systems relate to each other as equivalent and mutually influencing each other (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Subsystems of corporate culture of the enterprise

These three subsystems essentially represent the links of a single management process, where the management system is the subject of management (including its characteristics), society is the object of management, and ideology is the fundamental basis of relationships and interactions between the subject and the object of management. Thus, the exclusion of any link in the chain leads to the disintegration of the process. Accordingly, the subsystems are of equal importance.

The mutual influence of the subsystems of managerial culture can be traced using the terms of the sociobiogenetic concept of the enterprise. Let us assume that the subsystem of managerial culture is infected with a "virus" (the efficiency of its functioning decreases). First of all, this is manifested in changes in the ideology of the enterprise, which immediately affects the society (the social culture of the enterprise). At the same time, it cannot be said that the nature of the influence on society will be indirect. The influence from the "infected" managerial culture occurs directly, but the influence through the ideological sector will be much deeper and more extensive, as it entails not only external, but also structural changes in the social culture of the enterprise. The "infected ideology" will absolutely directly change and influence the managerial and social culture. Moreover, the initially ineffective ideology will have a decisive influence on the formation and formation of managerial and social culture.

The subjective corporate culture is distinguished by the leading role of the management sector, based on the characteristics of the subject of management (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Subjective corporate culture of the enterprise

The positive aspects of such a distribution of forces in corporate culture:

1. The central element of the system, which is its core, has been determined;

2. To change the system of corporate culture, it is necessary to change only one of its elements, everything else can avoid even correction.

Negative sides:

1. Subjectivity of building a system of corporate culture;

2. A large number of random factors affecting the core of the system;

3. Dependence of the system on one element.

A democratic corporate culture is characterized by the leading role of the social sector, based on the characteristics of the object of management (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Democratic corporate culture of the enterprise

Positive aspects of this corporate culture:

1. Corporate culture can combine various subjective directions;

2. The collective beginning in the corporate culture, giving a synergistic effect of increasing energy for the organization as a whole.

Negative sides:

1. Multidirectional ideological basis of corporate culture;

2. Difficulty of change;

3. Difficulties in managing the system.

The fundamental corporate culture is characterized by the leading role of the ideological sector, the formation of which is carried out purposefully, regardless of the existence of the organization, with an orientation towards objective requirements and subjective requests for its functioning (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Fundamental corporate culture of the enterprise

Positive sides:

1. The underlying objective ideology makes the existence of the organization, all its macro and micro processes predictable and manageable;

2. An objective set of elements of the ideological subsystem makes it possible to put forward objective requirements for the management and social sectors;

3. Unity of criteria for assessing the existence of an organization and the effectiveness of its functioning;

4. The stability of the organizational culture to the influence of external factors.

Negative sides:

1. Difficulty in carrying out the processes of corporate culture change;

2. Decreased flexibility in relation to the external environment.

Thus, it is obvious that an organization with targeted development of the ideological sector forms a more stable corporate culture than a subjective and democratic management culture.

Corporate culture matters to the team for the following reasons:

1. A feature of corporate culture is a sense of security enshrined in the minds of employees from belonging to a company or its value system. It is a set of rules and codes of conduct specific to a given enterprise.

2. When an employee shares the general culture of the company, its priorities and values, his personal responsibility for the result increases. If each member of the work team works with this attitude, then the overall picture of the productivity of the enterprise improves. Newcomers get into the workflow faster and more adequately perceive the events taking place in the team.

3. The presence of common goals and values ​​in the team helps to psychologically tune in to achieve a result together.

4. Corporate culture stimulates the development of the company's image as a whole.

5. The employee identifies with the company, takes pride in being a part of it.

7. The corporate culture exists in the company all the time - from its foundation to its closure. Even if the company does not have a department that regulates its activities. However, competent corporate culture management can significantly improve all indicators of a company's success.

It should be borne in mind that in addition to the dominant corporate culture at the enterprise, the values ​​and norms of which are accepted and shared by the majority of employees, there may be subcultures (cultures of various structural divisions, informal groupings).

By the way, the presence of subcultures at the enterprise is a good sign: this indicates that employees are kept together not only by job assignments, but also by personal interest. The main thing is that the existing subcultures do not conflict with each other and do not enter into dissonance with the general corporate culture of the enterprise.

Thus, in a modern enterprise, corporate culture plays a huge role. The corporate culture determines the employees' perception of the company and is an important source of stability and continuity. Corporate culture is a set of values, norms, opinions that are reflected in the actions of employees at all levels of the enterprise and form an unwritten code of conduct. Corporate culture gives people the opportunity to identify with the enterprise, fosters a sense of commitment, responsibility for everything that happens, awareness of the importance of communications, creates the basis for stability, saves enterprise funds and increases capitalization.

In Russian practice, despite the relative short duration of the property redistribution process, there are certain stages in the formation of corporate governance structures. In particular, A. V. Bandurin identifies several such stages, which are discussed below.

After 1917, economic relations in Russia changed significantly and began to be based on categories such as plan, government regulation, expediency. The property turnover split into state, based on the methods of centralized regulation, and private - serving consumers. At first, there were trusts and syndicates. The further curtailment of commodity-money relations and the strengthening of planning and regulating principles in society finally turned the syndicates into ministries, to which enterprises, which later became state-owned, were subordinate through intermediary links (trusts). During economic development In Russia, certain prerequisites for creating an effective corporate environment were formed, but at the same time, certain contradictions arose in the systems of corporate governance. The periods of development were associated with a new understanding of the country's leadership of economic problems and the development of ways to solve them.

The period up to 1987 was characterized by the fact that the administrative-command methods of centralized management of the state economy over time ceased to meet the requirements of the macroeconomic situation. Excluded from real participation in the management of enterprises, middle and lower-level workers in the perestroika period organized small cooperative business or individual entrepreneurship, however, due to the lack of proper economic and legal regulation, this did not give a large economic effect. Corporateness as a production management system was increasingly identified with the clannishness of the party-nomenklatura elite and caused a contradictory attitude of novice entrepreneurs.

During this period, the corporate environment resembled a system of party and economic assets, in which all key posts in enterprises were distributed not in accordance with the professionalism of managers, but on the basis of old party nomenklatura ties. At that time, there were no domestic highly qualified independent managers on the labor market, and enterprises, in turn, were not ready to pay high salaries for the labor of foreign specialists-managers. The exchange of accumulated corporate experience has not been established between the countries with developed market economies and the countries of the former socialist camp.

In the period from 1987 to 1991, the monopolized and centralized organization of the economy disintegrated; encouraged independence and permitted lease of enterprises prompted the directors' corps to gradually transfer them to subordination to groups of workers who shared the position top management, that is, corporatism acquired a tinge of loyalty to the authorities, but the participation of collectives in the management of enterprises through councils provided for by legislative norms labor collectives did not receive development due to the unpreparedness of workers for effective participation in management and the unwillingness of managers to “share power”. This period was characterized by the formation of the foundations of the corporativeness of the directors' corps and structures close to the party nomenclature governing bodies. In addition to the industrial, in Russia, arose and began to develop financial capital in the banking and insurance sectors of the economy. Sources and the first instruments of capital accumulation appeared.

In the period from 1991 to 1994, as a result of active voucher privatization, there was a primary redistribution of property among the director corps and formed financial and banking structures. Participation in privatization was possible primarily through open and hidden cooperation with the administration of the regions and the State Property Committee of the Russian Federation. Created in the course of privatization on the basis of large state enterprises Joint-stock companies could already be classified as corporations, but the undeveloped shareholding law, the underestimation of property, as well as the unpreparedness of the personnel of enterprises reduced corporate governance to traditional methods of management, which, in the execution of non-professional managers, led to the further collapse and bankruptcy of enterprises.

At the same time, a certain corporate style the relationship of individual structures, such as banking structures, oil and gas enterprises and others, arising when self-governing corporations come to replace state governing bodies. The alienation of the majority of the population from active participation in property management, the loss of jobs and economic illiteracy have formed a negative attitude towards all processes of economic reform. But it was during this period that the foundations of true corporatism were laid among the new entrepreneurial structures created by young educated, ambitious entrepreneurs who had only two ways: either to enter into cooperation with former state structures, or to oppose them with a civilized business based on the experience of foreign corporations. In addition, the decisions made in corporations began to be influenced by the already received high-quality foreign education in areas that were new for the Russian economy of that time: in the financial and stock markets, in the market for obligations, in marketing, management. Active interpenetration of Western and Russian corporations, joint work on the Russian stock market inevitably pushed domestic managers to understand the specifics of corporate governance.

The transition of Russia to a market economy, which began in 1992, necessitated structural reforms in the country's electric power industry and the creation of new forms of intra-sectoral and inter-sectoral economic relations... In many industries, corporatization was carried out and the privatization of enterprises began. Partial privatization took place in the branches of natural monopolies, in particular in the electric power industry. Simultaneously with the corporatization of electric power enterprises, the industry was restructured. This was due to the uneven distribution of generating capacities and the dependence of most Russian regions on intersystem flows of electricity and capacity. The sectoral capital structure was formed in such a way that the controlling stake in most sectoral companies was transferred to RAO UES of Russia. This ensured a certain continuity of management in a difficult transition period. The existing structure of industry management, in many respects repeating the previous system of administrative and branch management, functioned already on the basis of property relations, which made it possible to ensure sustainable energy supply to consumers.

The structure of RAO "Gazprom", which includes, as subsidiaries, enterprises engaged in geological exploration and well drilling, gas field development, equipment and supply, mechanical engineering and instrumentation for the needs gas industry and other activities, during the economic downturn, it allowed maintaining the stability of the industry, reliable gas supply to consumers and the flow of large export revenues to the country's budget.

In the period from 1994 to August 1998, further monetary privatization took place against the background of the adoption of laws on joint stock companies, on the securities market, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, clarification of legislation on privatization. The composition of the market infrastructure is being actively formed: investment corporations and funds, depositories and registrars, mutual funds, insurance corporations, auditing and consulting corporations, pension funds, etc. Large foreign corporations open their branches, representative offices or create joint firms in Russia.

The main part of the problem of attracting investment is shifting from the federal center to the regions. Regional authorities adopt local laws on the formation of insurance funds to attract investments, and land and other real estate objects become the object of purchase and sale in accordance with the adopted regional laws.

The period from August 1998 was characterized by a situation of external and internal default, a general lack of financial resources. Capital flight from Russia forced them to look for new financial instruments or mechanisms for using old assets.

The tension in the foreign exchange market, along with the almost complete absence of a corporate securities market, made regional financial instruments practically the only way to protect against inflation and generate income in Russia.

Against this background, the weak preparedness of Russian managers (especially the top echelon of management) for choosing a development strategy, attracting capital and investment, retaining and conquering sales markets, taking into account the true motivation of business partners was revealed. All this led to a further redistribution of property, but this time against the background of shareholders using their rights.

In 2001, the post-crisis recovery of the domestic economy ended. However, such problems as the weak competitiveness of the domestic industry, its concentration on raw materials exports and the insufficient investment attractiveness of the processing sector have not been completely resolved. Their aggravation was manifested in a decrease in the average annual growth rates of industry and GDP in the period 1999-2001. from 109.2 and 106.5%, respectively, to 104.0 and 104.1% in January-September 2002. The increase in investments in fixed assets decreased from 10.4 to 2.5%.

At the same time, the relatively stable state of the world economy in 2002 ensured the expansion of demand for Russian exports and contributed to the growth of its physical volume. An increase in domestic demand due to an increase in real household incomes after their significant reduction in 1999 supports the growth of production in the food industry and maintains stable production volumes in light industry, civil engineering and other industries producing consumer goods.

The positive growth rates of the Russian economy are provided by an increase in production in export-oriented industries: fuel industry, nonferrous metallurgy, chemical and petrochemical, forestry, woodworking and pulp and paper industries, as well as in the food industry, where there is an increase in competitiveness.

The development of the machine-building complex in Russia, whose products make up a significant share in the production of the processing sector, is not the main factor in industrial growth. Neither the ownership structure nor the level of cooperation with leading foreign companies allow attracting significant investments in this sector. Foreign sales markets for engineering products are controlled by large international corporate structures with competitive production technologies.

In Russia, a model of a raw materials market economy has developed, where the dependence of its growth rates on the external economic situation is evident. The high level of profitability of mining and export of minerals leads to the displacement of investments from other industries in raw materials. Export profits and investments are concentrated in the extractive industries. To eliminate imbalances in the development of industries, a set of measures is required, including increasing the efficiency of the tax system, de-bureaucratizing and demonopolizing the economy, and other measures.

The accelerating processes of strengthening the vertical of state power allow the state to pay attention to the problems of development of large domestic producers. Strengthening the power of the state, stabilizing the national economy give real opportunities to develop various mechanisms and instruments of state support for domestic business, which is not only a necessary element of the development of the national economy, but also an element of ensuring national security... It is necessary to further improve the regulatory framework governing the activities of business and corporate structures, in accordance with the changing economic conditions, the needs of the state and society.

Corporate governance is built on the basis of well-established and effective norms in the field of finance, securities, management, labor relations, contractual obligations, a system of business partnerships, typical organizational structures, and marketing. The accumulated experience makes it possible to build a system of effective corporate relations at the level of a specific corporation, thus setting benchmarks for other Russian corporations and enterprises.

In each specific case, any corporation, represented by its top management, makes a choice in favor of the gradual inclusion of employees in the system of business relationships in the field of property instead of strict management of hired personnel. This represents the most important trend in the formation of corporate relations.

Self-study questions

• 1. Highlight the main stages of the formation and development of corporations.
• 2. What are the features of the process of forming corporate structures in Russia?
• 3. What is the specificity of domestic corporate governance?

Each stage in the development of a market economy should correspond to its own market structures, which objectively grow out of previous economic relations.

The stability of the market environment can be ensured by the registration of the former participants in economic relations in new economic structures. The dependence is direct here. The market environment determines the emergence of new types of corporate structures, but the newly emerging economic structures support and develop the market environment. In the modern economy, there is a constant decrease in the number of companies that operate completely independently of each other in an autonomous mode. This is due to the increasing complexity, diversification, internationalization of economic, technological and financial ties between the participants in the economic process. Therefore, companies, firms, enterprises, banks, financial, investment, insurance institutions are combined into various kinds of integrated structures.

There are the following signs of the classification of corporations:

1) by breadth of geographical coverage:

Transnational;

Interstate;

National;

Industry-specific;

Regional;

Enterprise as an independent business entity;

2) for the purpose of creation:

Commercial;

Non-profit;

3) by the type of capital pooling:

Property associations;

Contractual forms of associations;

Associations of business structures.

Let us characterize the main types of corporate structures created by the type of capital pooling, which are most common in the world and Russian economies (table 1)

Table 1 - The main types of corporate structures created by the type of capital pooling

Types of corporate associations	Essential characteristic
Property associations
holding	A group of companies where the management or parent company owns controlling stakes in other companies and performs control functions in relation to them. Subsidiaries carry out independent economic activities. The parent company in most cases does not run its own economic activity, it exercises the rights of ownership and disposal of shares. Holding advantages: 1) simultaneous consolidation of financial resources; 2) concentration of research activities in the parent company; 3) free, operational management of local companies. Distinguish between a pure holding (performing only financial and controlling functions) and mixed (the above functions and independent participation in business).
Concern	Consolidation on a long-term basis of companies linked by common interests, agreements, capital, participation in joint activities, where the parent company is most often a manufacturing company that is the holder of controlling stakes in subsidiaries. Concern properties: 1) centralization of operational management; 2) tough inter-farm ties; 3) orientation for a long term of operation.
Conglomerate	An association for the production of technologically unrelated products, the so-called closed capital market, within which cash from diversified activities. Properties: 1) broad decentralization of management: responsibility for making decisions and ensuring profitability rests with the branches themselves; 2) top management focuses on making strategic decisions and is not engaged in ongoing planning; 3) conglomerates are formed by the takeover by a large company of several dozen small and medium-sized firms of various industries and spheres of activity that do not have production, sales or other functional ties among themselves.
Trust	An amalgamation in which the companies belonging to it merge into a single production complex and lose their legal, industrial and commercial independence. All merged companies are subordinate to one parent company. The total profit of the trust is allocated according to the equity interests of the individual companies. The most severe of all the forms of association considered.
Contractual forms of associations
Consortium	A temporary union of independent companies, the purpose of which is different types their coordinated business activities. The organization of the consortium is formalized by agreement. This form of association is convenient for a joint struggle to obtain large orders or projects and their joint implementation. Advantages: 1) the urgency of the merger (for a certain period); 2) the companies that are part of the consortium fully retain their legal and economic independence, with the exception of the part related to the achievement of the goals of the consortium; 3) companies can simultaneously enter into several consortia, since they can simultaneously participate in the implementation of several projects. Disadvantage: Companies do not integrate, they only pool resources, so there is less opportunity for mutual control.
Cartel	Consolidation of companies of the same industry that enter into an agreement with each other regarding different parties commercial activities, a form of collusion of a group of producers with the aim of completely or partially eliminating competition between them and obtaining monopoly high profits. The cartel agreement has a direct connection: with the peculiarity of the product, with the degree of concentration of production, with market conditions. The cartel is characterized by the following features: 1) the contractual nature of the association; 2) preservation of the ownership rights of the cartel members to their companies; 3) unification of companies of the same industry; 4) joint activities for the sale of products, in some cases extended to the production of products; 5) the existence of a system of coercion, including the identification of violations and sanctions for violators.
Pool	A temporary business combination in which the profits of all members of the pool go to a common fund and then are distributed among them according to a predetermined proportion. It is a kind of cartel.
Strategic alliance	An agreement on the cooperation of several independent companies to achieve a specific commercial goal and to obtain a synergistic effect from the combination of complementary strategic resources of the companies. Properties: 1) is not an independent legal entity; 2) created for the implementation of large investment projects; 3) the possibilities of coordination of the alliance members and the degree of mutual control decrease, since a system of participation in capital is not created.
Syndicate	An association of homogeneous industrial companies created for the purpose of marketing products through a common sales office. Properties: 1) participants retain legal and industrial independence, but are limited in commercial; 2) the products of the syndicate participants are sold centrally through a single sales body, which is either created anew, or its functions can be assigned to one of the participants; 3) depending on the terms of the agreement, not all, but only a certain part of the products of the syndicate participants can be sold through a single body.
Form of Association of Entrepreneurial Structures
Association	Voluntary association legal entities for the achievement of a general economic, scientific, cultural or any other, as a rule, non-commercial purpose. The mildest form of integration. Created for the purpose of cooperation of recommendatory activities. The members of the Association fully retain their independence. The Association is not responsible for the obligations of its members, does not provide an opportunity to receive commercial benefits for the members of the Association.

Recently, the concept of an integrated business group has appeared in the economic literature. An integrated business group (IBG) is a collection of enterprises and organizations belonging to different industries and sectors of the economy, united by a common group of owners and top managers, within which financial, material and human resources are redistributed from industry to industry. As a rule, the sales volume of these companies is more than $ 1 billion. These include: Alfa Group, Interros, AFK Sistema, MDM, Industrial Investors, etc. The disadvantage of IBG is that it is not formalized into a specific organizational and legal form, therefore it is difficult to assess and sell. Before the default, the centers of the IBG were, as a rule, banks, now - manufacturing companies.