Financial and economic processes: problems of theory and practice

Tungyshbai Akerke Omirtaikyzy

Karaganda Technical University named after Abylkas Saginov

Scientific instructor Kernebaev A. S. Doctor of PhD., Shohabaeva A.S. Master's degree

FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC PROCESSES: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

The Abstract: The article rendered concrete interrelation between the modern crisis processes and current problems of the theory and practice of management. The conclusion is that the economic crisis in the global and domestic economy is due not only to the globalization, financial and institutional factors, and the objective reasons of administrative character. Among them, a special attention is paid to the tendency to increase the scope and complexity to the structure of modern organizations, which are updated by the problems of effective risk management and makes new demands on the organization of risk management and crisis management. It is shown that for Russia the existence of crisis processes simultaneously exposes available in the management of problems caused by lack of efficiency and an inadequate level of crisis, and information management.

Keywords: Economic crisis, management, economic systems, crisis management, information management.

The global economic crisis of 2007-2009 has become one of the deepest in the last few decades. Starting in the United States with problems in the mortgage lending market, the crisis has grown to global proportions and has actually covered all regions of the world. The Russian economy, already largely integrated into the global credit and financial system and still dependent on the dynamics of world energy prices, has not been left out either.

The depth and scale of the crisis processes have led to the fact that in the modern economic literature this problem is given the closest attention. At the same time, the views of scientists on the causes of the crisis differ significantly. A number of authors reasonably see in what is happening the inadequacy of the current model of development of financial globalization, based on the dominance of leading economic powers, primarily the United States (M. Delyagin [6], L. Grigoriev, M. Salikhov [4]). As A. points out. Makushkin, "instead of consolidating the resource, producing and managing (transactional) sectors of the world economy around the transactional economy of the United States, the world has received a destabilization of the capital market and sharply increased risks associated with the launch of large international projects.

Instead of the progressive development of financial globalization, the destabilization of the international capital market has occurred, which is based on the natural institutional crisis of world finance, trade and law" [11, p. 451. G. Popov [12] and V. Glushchenko [3] take a much broader view of the problem, noting the global nature of the crisis and negative transformations in the fictitious and loan capital markets, expressed in the imbalance of the system of market and industrial socio-economic relations. G. Rapoport and A. Hertz assigns a significant role to China's economic expansion, which worsened the macroeconomic parameters of the United States, as well as to the active social policy of European countries against the background of rising energy prices [13]. V. Inozemtsev [7], E. Skoblikov [11], M. Khazin [12], etc. it is not unreasonable to compare the current state of the modern global financial system with a financial pyramid

The presented positions reflect only a small range of points of view available in modern economics on the nature of the crisis. Without disputing the rational seeds of the above opinions, it is impossible not to notice that in addition to the financial-globalization and institutional factors of the crisis, the crisis state of management theory and practice is of no small importance. According to the author, this relationship needs to be specified. Moreover, crisis processes continue to take place at many Russian enterprises.

First of all, the difficulties in managing modern economic systems are due to their increasing scale, which, in turn, follows from objective trends in the development of productive forces and scientific and technological progress. Modern post-industrial development is based on the dominant role of knowledge-intensive industries and information technologies. Information becomes one of the most important factors of production, which reinforces the trend that began in the industrial era towards the enlargement and complication of systems, as a result of which their management processes become more difficult [1]. Managed economic systems (organizations) are becoming not just large-scale, which in itself manifests itself in a significant number of parts and elements, inputs and outputs, a variety of functions performed. At the same time, as D.S. Vakhrushev points out, they have a complex hierarchical structure of the organization, which provides for a combination of centralized management with the autonomy of parts. At the same time, there is a complexity of behavior with external integrity: complex, intertwining relationships between variables, including feedback loops, lead to the fact that a change in one entails a change in many other variables.

In the context of the consideration of the problems of modern crisis processes, the tendency to the consolidation of economic systems primarily actualizes the issues of effective risk management. The sustainable functioning of both the systems as a whole and their component parts requires adequate risk management at all hierarchical levels.

It is obvious that the solution to the problem of effective risk management in modern organizations should lie in the development of a comprehensive risk management strategy, which is a set of decision-making rules that adjust the possibilities of system development, taking into account the retention of risks at an acceptable and manageable level. The risk management system should cover both the level of strategic management and the level of organizational units. A systematic approach to risk management is objectively necessary due to the fact that risk management activities should affect all significant relationships and relationships in modern organizations with their scale and complexity of structure.

At the same time, an integrated risk management system and its elements should take into account a number of principles - regulation, formalization, optimal combination of centralization and decentralization of risk management, rapid response. The principle of regulation focuses on the fact that all processes taking place in an organization should be clearly regulated, i.e. a detailed system of established rules and regulations should determine the functioning of both the system as a whole and its individual structural units. The principle of formalization means the consolidation of norms and rules in internal local acts, which will streamline the risk management process, make it systematic, rational, reliable and predictable. The principle of optimal combination of centralization and decentralization of risk management is due to the significant scale of modern systems and provides for the need for stable vertical connections in the system with simultaneous flexibility and variability of possible behavioral characteristics at the subsystem level. Finally, the principle of rapid response is designed to minimize in risk management the negative impact of economies of scale associated with an increase in the time for information transmission. Meanwhile, the implementation of these principles in practice is not always possible due to the fact that at different stages of the economic cycle, management entities assess risks differently, as a result of which difficulties arise with the actual functioning of risk management systems in conditions of immanent uncertainty.