Американский Научный Журнал REGIONAL INNOVATIVE INVESTMENT SYSTEM: STRUCTURAL QUALITIES

46 American Scientific Journal № ( 31) / 20 19
ЭКОНОМИКА , ЭКОНОМЕТРИКА И ФИНАНСЫ

REGIONAL INNOVATIVE INVESTMENT SYSTEM: S TRUCTURAL QUALITIES

Maia Chechelashvili
Doctor of Economic (PhD),
Professor of G eorgian Technical University,
Tbilisi, Georgia
Lia Berikashvili
Doctor of Economic (PhD),
Professor of Georgian Technical University,
Tbilisi, Georgia
Elisabed Malania
Doctor of Economic (PhD),
Professor of Georgian Technical University,
Tbilisi, Georgi a
Tamar Rostiashvili
Doctor of Economic (PhD),
Professor of Georgian Technical University,
Tbilisi, Georgia
Maia Soselia
Doctor of Economic (PhD),
Professor of Georgian Technical University,
Tbi lisi, Georgia

Abstract. The article discusses the innovatio n and investment system in the framework of the economic
structure of society. The aim of the authors was to prove that it is among the functional ones. The authors showed
that in this sense, the system has independence, acting as a self -organizing entity with its own laws.
Since the innovation and investment system, according to the authors of the article, serves the real sector of
the economy, acting as an accelerator, the authors conclude that i t can be safely attributed to infrastructure.
Key words : inn ovation, innovation and investment system, research and development, infrastructure, real
sector of the economy.

The innovation and investment system within the
economic st ructure of society is among the functional
systems, and in this sense, it has inde pendence, acts as
a self -organizing entity with its own laws. Since it
serves the real sector of the economy, saturating it with
its resources, accelerating or slowing down t he
processes of its development, the innovation and
investment system can be attri buted to infrastructure.
Innovation and investment system has a number of
qualities: openness, flexibility, dynamism, variability,
multifunctionality, ability to update, comp lexity,
integrity, hierarchy, stability, balance, informational
content. Some of t hem are structural - complexity,
integrity, hierarchy; others are functional.
The number of participants in the innovation and
investment system is not constant; the pace and
direction of investment are changing. Therefore, the
system does not have clearly defined boundaries, it is
dynamic, open to the effects of the tax, credit,
monetary, currency systems, and responds to political
changes and the presence of foreign capital. At the
same time, the innovation and investment system is
among the complex syste ms. Its subjects enter this
sphere, pursuing different interests. From an
institutional point of view, it is beneficial for a person
to obey the norms if they facilitate his interaction with
other economic entities and contribute to the realization
of inte rests.
The institutionalization of economic interests
consolidates certain types of economic interaction into
various institutions, which makes these interactions not
only pe rmanent but also mandatory. On this basis, a
system of economic sanctions and mech anisms for
resolving conflicts between institutional entities that
limit their economic freedom are being developed.
The final institutionalization of economic interests
is t he creation of an institutional role structure of
interests, as well as organizati ons and institutions that
ensure the functioning of the corresponding economic
institution, and the management and control of its
activities.
World practice shows that even l arge companies
are no longer able to cover all the necessary scientific
and techni cal disciplines, as it was 20 -30 years ago (for
example, the experience of IBM, AT&T, etc.).
Therefore, on the one hand, they strengthen the
specialization of corporate resea rch laboratories, and
on the other, they are increasingly entering into various
cooperative ties (in the form of: technological alliances,
networks, ventures, mergers and acquisitions; contracts
with universities and research centers; attracting
specialize d research, consulting, training and similar
services; purchase of technologies - materialized and
non -materialized, etc.).
A holistic system is always internally united, with
the same focus on the actions of all its elements. Each
of the elements of the s ystem exists because it is a

American Scientific Journal № ( 31) / 2019 47

necessary system, ensures its functioning as a whole,
interacts with its other elements, forming the unity of
their actions. Within complex systems, a number of
subsystems are distinguished.
So, at the micro -level (enterprises, joint -stock
companies, financial and industrial groups), a
subsystem of self -fina ncing, or internal investment,
operates. This subsystem includes a mass of individual
innovation and investment processes, combined by
economic relations of enti ties organizing extended
reproduction. The innovation and investment
subsystem is the external investment of innovative
projects - at the expense of borrowed funds of co -
owners (shareholders) and at the expense of credit and
financial institutions. It is c haracterized by the presence
of appropriate markets.
Innovation and investment processes with t he
participation of the state is another subsystem that is
formed with the state participation, through direct
financing of innovative projects, through government
procurement or state participation in various innovation
and investment programs.
The ratio of the listed subsystems is formed within
the macroeconomic system and depends on the
measures of participation of subjects in the regulation
of innovati on and investment activity and the
possibility of assigning the results of this activity at
different l evels of management. The institutional
structure of the economy determines which
coordination mechanisms (the mechanism of direct and
feedback between th e elements and components of the
system, existing institutions) are dominant in a given
socio -economic system, which ultimately makes it
possible to attribute this system to one or another class
of socio -economic systems : either to the class of
systems wi th mechanisms of horizontal cooperation, in
which private property plays the leading role as the
basic institution, or to the class of systems with
mechanisms Vertical, coordination, in which the
institutions of government institutions dominate the
propert y, but because private property plays a
subordinate role. The whole question is the synergy of
the priv ate and public sectors. Now it is becoming
increasingly clear that the state and the market
complement each other. The state provides the
institutional b ase on which the market and private
entrepreneurship are developing. Private firms seeking
profit, crea te the wealth, and therefore the financial
resources that the state needs to fulfil its social
functions.
Institutional structures are developing on the basis
of an integrated mechanism of self -regulation and state
regulation, which, on the one hand, provi des them with
independence of choice, economic freedom,
competitiveness, on the other hand, insures against risk,
uncertainty, and reduces transaction co sts, i.e. allows
you to function more efficiently.
Within the framework of market relations, such
crite ria stimulating innovation and investment activity
as a social activity, creative initiative, the selection
ability of the market to ensure the selection and survival
of the most effective and adapted innovations are
manifested. Innovation and investment a ctivities are
designed for a long -term period, and short -term, market
decisions prevail in the behaviour of business entities
of the market, ignoring non -production factors - the
environment, social sphere, etc. In addition, the system
of movement of infor mation about innovations is
imperfect, which makes it difficult to disseminate
research and development results, exchange of
innovations and know -how. Th erefore, for the effective
functioning of innovation and investment activities, its
state regulation is necessary. Moreover, in the modern
arsenal of forms and methods of state regulation of
innovation and investment processes, a number of
aspects can be d istinguished: regulatory,
administrative, organizational and economic.
The basis of legal regulation in Georgia is
constituted by laws, normative legal acts adopted by the
Parliament of Georgia, the Government of Georgia,
legislative and executive bodies o f the subjects of
Georgia, which regulate the development of innovation
and investment.
The administrat ive and organizational aspect of
regulation includes licensing, certification, control of
innovation and investment activities and determines the
role of state authorities at the state and regional levels
in the clear provision of scientific and technologi cal
development.
It is fashionable to conditionally divide the
economic methods of state regulation of innovation
and investment processes into 2 groups:
• Direct (financing of scientific and
innovative activities at the expense of state and
regional budgets , development of targeted scientific
and technical programs, placement of state orders on
a competitive basis);
• Indirect (taxation, lending, depreciation ,
customs policy, etc.).
With regard to direct state regulation of
innovation processes, it should be n oted that the
prevailing world practice shows that the more
attention the government pays to the creation of
scientific and technological potential, the higher the
cost of scientific development on the part of the
private sector.
The institutional structur e of Georgian science,
formed during the Soviet period of our history, does
not meet the requirements of the market. For a long
time, its characteristic features were significant
scale, centralized management, full state funding.
Thus, we can conclude that today the main form
of organization of scientific activity in Georgia is
research institutes, which are in no way connected with
enterprises and are ver y weakly connected with higher
education institutions. Institutional changes occur
mainly as a result o f the disaggregation of existing ones
or as a result of the creation of new scientific
organizations in the form of research institutes. Given
that the v olumes of ensuring their functioning are very
insignificant, further fragmentation of research
structur es may lead to the complete non -viability of
most of them.

48 American Scientific Journal № ( 31) / 20 19
References :
Dornbusch R., Fisher S. Macroeconomics. - M.:
Publishing House of Moscow State U niversity, 1997
.-- S. 708 -718.
North D. Institutions and Economic Growth: A
Historical Introduction // Thesis. Tom Structures and
institutions. - 1993 . -- S. 78.
Schumpeter J. Theory of Economic
Development. - M.: Progress, 1982. - S. 169 -170.
Blakely E.J . Local Economic Development
Planning: Theory and Practice. - Thousand Oaks,
1994 . -- W. 15.
Freeman S. Technological policy and economic
indicators. - London: Pinter Publishers, 1987.
Ingstrup M.B., Damgaard T. (2013).
Simplification of clusters in terms of cluster life
cycle. European Planning Studies // European
Planning Studies - No. 4. - P. 556 –574
Ore gon Cluster Mobilization: Private -Public
Partnership for Economic Growth (2013) US Cluster
Mapping Project. Clustermapping.us.

IMPROVING MOTIVATION OF SALES REPRESENTATIVES AS AN INSTRUMENT OF
UPGRADING QUALITY OF DISTRIBUTOR'S HUMAN RESOURCES

Elena Vor onina
Associate Professor, PhD in Economics,
Associate Professor at the Department of Management and Business,
Institute of Eco nomics and Management,
Surgut State University, Surgut
Nailia Khadasevich
Associate Professor, PhD in Economics,
Head of the Dep artment of Public,
Municipal and Personnel Management,
Institute of Economics and Management,
Surgut State University, Surgut
Irina Sergeyeva,
PhD in Economics, Senior Teacher at the Department
of Public, Municipal and Personnel Management,
Institute o f Economics and Management,
Surgut State University, Surgut

Abstract. Aim – improving motivation of distributor's representatives. Methods – analysis, synthesis,
mathematical modeling. Result – improving quality of distributor's human resources, enhancing the efficiency of
distribution. Conclusions – the effect from improving the motivation system of sales representat ives manifests
itself in reduced actual labor costs (per unit), an increase in actual manufacturers’ compensation share by more
than 70%.
Key words: distribution, motivation, human resources quality, key performance indicators KPI.

In the field of commerce, the development of labor
potential is one of the main sources of boosting the
efficiency of financial results of an activity and
ensuring company's competitiveness in the market [4;
5]. The front office in the field is frontline e mployees –
sales representatives.
Aiming to increase the efficiency of the
commercial department (sales department) of a
company, the management should consider qu ality
management of human resources of the company to be
the primary task [4].
Quality of human resources is the degree to which
all features of labor combined and its organizational
culture meet the requirements set by the inner and outer
environment to f orm competitive advantages [4].
Quality management system for human resources
of a trading company includes the following elements
[4]: object and subject of management, management
mechanism.
Objects of quality management in human
resources in a trading c ompany are: real and potential
workforce; organizational culture; activities ca rried out
by heads of departments, HR managers and other HR
employees; infrastructure of labor market [4].
Subjects of human resources quality management
of a trading company ar e: a real or potential employee;
a body carrying out management on the company' s
level; a body or a person carrying out management on
the state or municipal level of government or
management [4].
Management mechanism in human resources
quality management i n a trading company is a specific
impact of the management subject on the manag ement
object, including certain forms and methods of
influence [4].
A subject of management uses modern scientific
approaches, methods and principles of human
resources manageme nt and fulfills the following
functions: planning, organization, motivation and
control [4].
The structural flowchart of the mechanism of
human resources quality management on the company
level is presented on Figure 1 [4].