Анализа Доктората


Детаљна анализа доктората Синише Малог објављена је на сајту Пешчаник:
http://pescanik.net/velike-tajne-malog-majstora-ili-kako-je-sinisa-mali-ukrao-doktorat/

Резултатима анализе обављене софтверским алатима за детекцију плагијата TurnitIn може се приступити кликом на графикон. Кликом на графикон добићете детаљне резултате о копирању текста и изворима из којих је господин Синиша Мали текст копирао.

Поред преписивања текста из разних извора написаних на српском који су представљени на графикону изнад, господин Синиша Мали се користио и директним преводом радова написаних на енглеском језику. Тако је из докторске дисертације Стифаноса Хаилемариама о приватизацији о Еритреји плагирао већи део другог поглавља своје тезе о теоријским концептима и искуствима процеса приватизације, а преписао је и његове референце и прегледлитературе, прескачући једино анализу конкретне ситуације у Еритреји. Дисертација др Хаилермариама је у целости доступна на интернету.

Преглед директно преведеног текста из тезе др Халемариама можете да видите у табели испод. Господин Синиша Мали тезу др Хаилемариама није ни једном навео у свом „докторату” као коришћени извор:

Mali, str. 14

Hailemariam, str. 11

U literaturi na temu privatizacije, ovaj pojam se
definiše na različite načine. Neki autori definišu privatizaciju samo
kao prodaju državne imovine. Na primer, Kikeri, Nellis i Shirley
definišu privatizaciju kao transfer većinskog vlasništva u državnim
kompanijama privatnom sektoru putem prodaje kapitala kompanija ili
prodaje imovine nakon likvidacije1.
Ramamurti proces privatizacije definiše kao prodaju delimičnog ili
kompletnog vlasničkog udela koji država ima u državnim kompanijama
privatnom sektoru2. Konačno, Svetska
banka definiše privatizaciju kao odricanje vlasništva nad kompanijama,
zemljištem i drugom imovinom od strane države3.

In the literature, several authors define
privatisation differently. Some authors define privatisation narrowly to
mean the sale of stateowned assets. Kikeri, Nellis and Shirley [1994]
defined privatisation as the transfer of a majority ownership of
state-owned enterprises to the private sector by the sale of ongoing
concerns or assets following liquidation. Ramamurti [1992, p. 225]
argues that privatisation “refers to the sale of all or parts of a
government’s equity in state-owned enterprises to the private sector.”
According to World Bank [1996, p. viii], privatisation is defined as
“the divestiture by the state of enterprises, land or other assets.”

Mali, str. 14-15 

Hailemariam, str. 11-12

Neki drugi autori, pak, privatizaciju  sagledavaju
šire – kao fenomen koji povezuje aktivnosti koje umanjuju nivo
vlasništva države i njen uticaj na kontrolu poslovanja i aktivnosti koje
su usmerene na promociju učešća privatnog sektora na upravljanje
kompanijama pod državnom kontrolom. Vickers i Wright pod privatizacijom
podrazumevaju zajednički imenitelj većeg broja različitih aktivnosti
koje su usmerene na jačanje tržišta i smanjenje uticaja države4.
Hartley i Parker definišu privatizaciju kao „kreiranje tržišne
ekonomije sa ciljem da kompanije posluju na komercijalnoj osnovi“5.
Cook i Kirkpartick, definišu proces privatizacije kao spektar
različitih politika usmerenih ka promeni ravnoteže između državnog i
privatnog sektora i usluga koje oni nude6.
Konačno, Blommestein, Geiger i Hare privatizaciju vide kao „bilo koji
transfer vlasništva nad državnom kompanijom drugim agentima koji za
rezultat ima efektivnu kontrolu poslovanja u privatnom vlasništvu“7.
Ovi autori smatraju da nije neohodno da država proda većinski udeo u
svojim kompanijama i da neki državni organ, recimo ministarstvo
finansija, može i dalje da zadrži vlasnički udeo u privatizovanim
kompanijama.

Several other authors see privatisation as a wider
phenomenon encompassing interconnected activities that reduce the
government ownership and control of enterprises and that promote private
sector participation in the management of state-owned enterprises.
Vickers and Wright [1988] view privatisation as an umbrella term for a
variety of different policies that are loosely linked which mean the
strengthening of the market at the expense of the state. Hartley and
Parker [1991, p. 11] define privatisation as “the introduction of market
forces into an economy in order to make enterprises work on a more
commercial basis.” They argue that privatisation embraces
denationalisation or selling-off state-owned assets, deregulation
(liberalisation), competitive tendering, as well as the introduction of
private ownership and market arrangements in the ex-socialist states.
Cook and Kirkpatrick [1988, p.3] define privatisation as “a range of
different policy initiatives intended to change the balance between the
public and private sector and the services they provide.” They
distinguish three main approaches to privatisation: a change in the
ownership of the enterprise, liberalisation or deregulation, and a
transfer of goods or services from the public to the private sector even
if the government retains ultimate responsibility for supplying the
service. From a transition point of view, Blommestein, Geiger and Hare
[1993, p.11] see privatisation as “any transfer of ownership of a state
enterprise to other agents which results in their effective private
control of the business.” They argue that privatisation does not require
a majority stake to be held by any private owner or group of owners; it
is also compatible with some shares being retained by the ministry of
finance (or another body charged with holding state assets).

Mali, str. 15-16 

Hailemariam, str. 13

Literatura iz oblasti privatizacije se uglavnom
bavi ciljevima privatizacije, njenom opravdanju, kao i modelima
privatizacije. Što se tiče ciljeva, opšti stav je da preduzeća u
državnom vlasništvu posluju negativno i da je cilj privatizacije da
ovakva preduzeća učini profitabilnim i efikasnim. Pretpostavka je da
preduzeća u privatnom vlasništvu posluju profitabilnije nego preduzeća u
državnom, odnosno društvenom vlasništvu. U privatnom sektoru, preduzeća
imaju potrebu za ekonomskom disciplinom koja ne postoji u državnom
sektoru. Osim toga, privatna preduzeća su fleksibilnija prema potrebama
potrošača na tržištu, posluju radi profita i posluju u konkurentskom
okruženju, što ih usmerava da budu efikasnija od državnih.

The literature on privatisation in developed economies reveals the objective of privatisation, the justification for privatisation and the forms of
privatisation methods used as well as the privatisation experiences of
these countries. Many state-owned enterprises are loosing   money
and policy makers are trying to privatise these enterprises. One of the
objectives of privatisation is, therefore, to transfer ownership to
private investors so that the enterprise will become efficient and
profitable. The objective of privatisation is based on the view that
private sector operations outperform their public counterparts. The
World Bank [1996, p. 49] reports that “In established market economies
and middle to high income developing economies there is little doubt
that private ownership is a significant determinant of economic
performance.” The private sector enterprises are subject to economic
disciplines not present in the state sector, and they respond to choices
made by consumers. The disciplines of competition and the need to earn a
profit keep private business leaner and more efficient than their
public counterparts.

Mali, str. 16 

Hailemariam, str. 13

U literaturi se mogu naći argumenti u korist i
protiv privatizacije. Neki od argumenata u korist privatizacije su da
(a) privatizacija povećava privatni sektor i samim tim stopu rasta, (b)
privatizacija jača tehnološki razvoj i preduzetništvo, (c) privatna
preduzeća su efikasnija od državnih, i (d) proces privatizacije je
koristan za državni budžet8. S druge
strane, isti autor ističe argumente protiv privatizacije: (a)
privatizacije vodi povećanju troškova, (b) privatizacija smanjuje stepen
zaposlenosti, i (c) privatizacija vodi gubitku kvaliteta. I pored svih
navedenih argumenata, autor zaključuje da je u praksi dokazano da su
privatna preduzeća efikasnija od državnih, dok su svi ostali navedeni
argumenti više teorijski i malo istraženi.

There are arguments in favour and against
privatisation. Some of the arguments in favour of privatisation
summarised by Boorsma [1994, p. 25] are: “1. Privatisation increases the
(private sector and hence) economic growth. 2. Privatisation reinforces
technological development and innovative capacity. 3. Private
enterprises are more efficient than public enterprises. 4. Privatisation
gives a budgetary advantage.” On the other hand also, Boorsma [1994, p.
29] presents the following arguments against privatisation: “1.
Privatisation leads to higher costs. 2. Privatisation leads to reduction
of employment. 3. Privatisation leads to quality loss.” However,
according to Boorsma [1994, p. 28] “The arguments in favour of
contracting out and the efficiency gain that can be achieved in that
case have a theoretical underpinnings and have been tested empirically.
Other arguments are hardly substantiated theoretically or little
research is available to support them.”

Mali, str. 18 

Hailemariam, str. 4

Privatizacija je element tranzicione politike
jedne zemlje koji uključuje reforme i na makroekonomskom i na
mikroekonomskom nivou. Makroekonomske reforme uključuju liberalizaciju
cena i trgovine, odgovarajuće promene u fiskalnoj i monetarnoj politici,
kao i mere stabilizacije. Jasno je, međutim, da je za uspeh
privatizacije potrebno mnogo više od samo makroekonomskih reformi.
Iskustva pokazuju da promene na makro nivou ne izazivaju automatske
promene u restrukturiranju i načinu poslovanja na nivou kompanija.

Privatisation is generally one aspect of a
transformation process that includes macroeconomic and micro-economic
reforms. Macro-economic reforms include, price and trade liberalisation,
monetary, fiscal currency exchange policies and stabilisation measures.
These reforms have been introduced in many transition countries.
However, the hoped-for overall regeneration of industry and the
achievement of industrial competitiveness in the former socialist
countries have not yet taken place. It is now clear that the success of
transformation in the former socialist countries will depend on more
than macro-economic reforms.

Mali, str. 18 

Hailemariam, str. 4

Kako bi se kreirala kompanija koja bi bila
atraktivna za investitore, i država i rukovodstvo preduzeća moraju da
započnu proces restrukturiranja – koje uključuje organizaciono,
tehnološko, tržišno, finansijsko, proizvodno i upravljačko
restukturiranje12. Jedna od najvećih
dilema ekonomija u tranziciji je da li restrukturiranje treba da
prethodi privatizaciji ili ne, i veliki broj autora je diskutovao na tu
temu. U svakom slučaju, najčešće je restrukturiranje, bar delimično,
neophodno kako bi se kompanija učinila atraktivnijom za potencijalne
investitore. Menadžeri državnih kompanija veruju da je prethodno
restrukturiranje neophodno za uspešnu privatizaciju13.

In order to create enterprises which are saleable
to investors, the firm’s management, as well as, the government may need
to engage in enterprise restructuring, like organisational,
technological, labour, market, financial, product and management
restructuring [Carlin et al., 1995]. A major dilemma in the transition
countries is whether restructuring should precede or follow
privatisation. There has been a great deal of argument over the
appropriate sequence of restructuring and privatisation [Kikeri, Nellis,
and Shirley, 1992; Pinto et al., 1993; Boycko, Shleifer, and Vishny,
1996a]. There is, however, often a need to restructure companies, at
least partly, to make them viable to attract buyers, while later further
restructuring by the new buyers may be required to make companies
internationally competitive. According to Pinto et al. [1993, p.222],
“state-owned enterprises’ managers believe that prior restructuring is
necessary for privatisation.”

Mali, str. 18-19 

Hailemariam, str. 4-5

Najčešće mere koje se preduzimaju u procesu
pripreme kompanija za privatizaciju su smanjenje broja zaposlenih, kao i
organizaciono i finansijsko restrukturiranje, u cilju smanjenja
troškova, odnosno povećanja profitabilnosti. Kako bi se svaka od ovih
mera ocenila sa stanovišta svoje opravdanosti, neophodno je razumeti
kako svaka od njih utiče na vrednost kompanije i ponašanje njenog
rukovodstva. Stoga je neohodno identifikovati faktore koji utiču na
vrednost kompanija (Value Drivers), kako bi se utvrdio njihov potencijal
za kreiranje, odnosno povećanje vrednosti kapitala. Upravo u sledećem
delu rada ćemo detaljnije analizirati ove faktore vrednosti i objasniti
na koji način oni utiču na finansijske pokazatelje uspešnosti poslovanja
jedne kompanije i vrednost kapitala koja se kreira za njene vlasnike.

In line with this argument, the Government of
Eritrea has taken some restructuring measures in 1995 to prepare
enterprises for sale such as labour shedding, organisational
restructuring and financial restructuring through the introduction of
hard budget constraints to make enterprises self financing. A third
characteristics of this study will thus be assessing the adequacy of restructuring measures before privatisation.
In order to assess the adequacy of these measures, it is necessary to
evaluate the impact of these changes on company value and management
behaviour. How far profitability and competitiveness have been restored
in the manufacturing sector during the transition period will be
assessed. This means that the determinants of company value have to be
identified. Enterprises need to be managed to enhance value to compete
in the new market environment. A fourth characteristic of this study
then is that it tries to evaluate how the manufacturing enterprises in Eritrea create value.
However, how value has been created is only one part of creating viable
enterprises. The other part is the question whether more value could be
created. Sources of value creation potential in enterprises needs to be
assessed. Viable enterprises contribute to the economic growth of a
country by providing employment and generating wealth. In order to study
this, we interviewed managers. The final characteristic of this study
is, therefore, that we use management opinions in evaluating whether value is adequately created and whether it can also be created further.

Mali, str. 19 

Hailemariam, str. 6

Elementi koji utiču na vrednost kompanija su
ključni za utvrđivanje prave vrednosti, odnosno cene kapitala kompanija
koje se prodaju kroz proces privatizacije. Za uspešnu privatizaciju, sa
stanovišta države, bitno je da se utvrdi tržišna vrednost kapitala koja,
s jedne strane, omogućava pronalaženje adekvatnog investitora dok, s
druge strane, državi kreira odgovarajuće prihode. Upravo stoga je
ključno utvrditi kako se procenjuje vrednost kapitala ovih kompanija i
koji metod procene koristiti kako bi se uspešno i transparentno završio
proces njihove privatizacije, o čemu ćemo više govoriti u nastavku rada.
Atraktivnost kompanija koje se privatizuju zavisi od njihove
profitabilnosti ili potencijala za isti, produktivnosti, postojanja
strateškog partnera i specifičnih karakteristika svake pojedinačne
kompanije14.

The determinants of the value of the firm during
privatisation are essential for fixing the price and for avoiding
overvaluation or undervaluation. Hemming [1995] states that if an
enterprise is sold at its fair market value, everybody can benefit from
efficiency improvements not achievable under state ownership. If there
is free disposal or heavy discounted selling of companies, it is
inconsistent with equitable sharing of national wealth. However,
determining the value of an enterprise for sale is not easy in a
transition economy because there are no mature market mechanisms that
one can rely on. The issue of how to evaluate companies and which method
to use is essential for successful and transparent privatisation of
enterprises. “The saleability of companies to be privatised depends upon
the profitability or potential for profit, productivity, strategic
buyer and specific characteristics of the individual company [Shafik,
1995, p. 1146].”

Mali, str. 19 

Hailemariam, str. 7

Ključni zadatak koji se postavlja pred privrede u
tranziciji je kako transformisati državna preduzeća u privatne kompanije
čiji je cilj maksimizacija stvorene vrednosti. Stoga transformacija ne
podrazumeva samo promenu vlasničke strukture, već i povećanje poslovne
efikasnosti, fleksibilnosti i konkurentnosti kompanija. Profitabilne
kompanije privlače veći interes potencijalnih investitora i stoga je
ključno naći način da se njihove poslovne performanse povećaju, a time i
verovatnoća njihove uspešne prodaje, odnosno privatizacije.

The key task of the economies in transition is to
transform state-owned enterprises (SOE’s) into value maximising private
firms. Therefore, transformation is not simply changing ownership, but
also increasing efficiency, flexibility, and competitiveness of
enterprises. Profitable enterprises attract plenty of interest from
investors; therefore, the critical issue of transformation is how to
improve the performance of the enterprises to make them profitable.
“Selling an enterprise as a competitive going concern is, moreover,
easier and quicker to accomplish [UNIDO, 1994, p. 58].”

Mali, str. 20 

Hailemariam, str. 13-14

U svojoj analizi procesa privatizacije u Velikoj
Britaniji, grupa autora navodi da postoje tri osnovna faktora koja
opravdavaju proces privatizacije: finansijski, informativni i kontrolni15.
Finansijski aspekt privatizacije utiče kako na državu, tako i na
privatizovano preduzeće. Država prestaje da plaća subvencije državnim
preduzećima i ostvaruje prihode od privatizacije. S druge strane,
privatizovano preduzeće slobodnije može da nađe potrebna sredstva za
poslovanje na tržištu kapitala…

Bishop, Kay and Mayer [1995] in describing the
experience of privatisation in the UK explained that there are three
factors that justify privatisation: finance, information and control. The issue of finance affects
both the government and the firm in a privatisation situation. The
government avoids paying subsidies to ailing state-owned enterprises and
raises revenue in the process of disposing of assets. The firms are
also free to raise funds from the capital markets….

Mali, str. 20 

Hailemariam, str. 14

Druga grupa autora je analizirala performanse 11
britanskih kompanija koje su privatizovane u periodu od 1981. do 1988.
godine, sa ciljem da utvrdi da li se njihova profitabilnost povećala
nakon privatizacije16. Rezultati
istraživanja, međutim, nisu bili precizni – autori su našli vezu između
aktivnosti restrukturiranja koje su prethodile privatizaciji i
ostvarenih poslovnih performansi, ali nisu mogli da utvrde da li bi
poslovne performanse tih kompanija mogle da se poboljšaju i bez procesa
privatizacije.

Martin and Parker [1997] examined whether 11
British firms, privatised during 1981-88, improved profitability after
being privatised and they found out mixed results. The authors found
evidence of performance improvement relating to restructuring prior to
being privatised (but not afterward). However, they could not determine
whether performance could have been improved without the spur of
incipient divestiture or subsequent privatisation.

Mali, str. 20 

Hailemariam, str. 14-15

Takođe, još jedna grupa autora je analizirala performanse kompanija pre i nakon privatizacije u razvijenim i zemljama u razvoju17.
Autori su uporedili finansijske i operativne performance 61-og
preduzeća iz 18 zemalja (12 razvijenih i 6 zemalja u razvoju) i 32
privredne grane, koja su se privatizovala u periodu od 1961. do 1990.
godine. Zaključak istraživanja je da preduzeća nakon privatizacije
obično povećaju obim prodaje, postanu profitabilnija, postanu poslovno
efikasnija (merenjem nivoa prodaje po zaposlenom i neto dobiti po
zaposlenom) i povećaju nivo investicija. Osim toga, suprotno
očekivanjima, prosečan broj zaposlenih se nije smanjio nakon
privatizacije već, štaviše, povećao.

More recent analysis of performance before and
after privatisation in industrial and developing countries reaches
stronger conclusions in favour of private ownership, that privatisation
improves performance [Megginson and Netter, 1999]. Megginson et al.
[1994] compared the financial and operating performance of sixty-one
companies from eighteen countries (twelve developed economies and six
developing economies) and thirty-two industries that experienced full or
partial privatisation between 1961 and 1990. Financial indicators were
used including profitability, sales levels, operating efficiency,
capital investment, leverage ratios and dividend payout figures. They
found that following privatisation firms typically increased sales,
became more profitable, increased investment and improved their
operating efficiency (measured by sales per employee and net income per
employee). They also found that on average employment did not decrease
after privatisation, as might have been expected, but it actually
increased…

Mali, str. 20 

Hailemariam, str. 15

Jedno istraživanje je ukazalo da je osnovna razlika između privatnih i državnih preduzeća trošak zaposlenih18.
Državna preduzeća obično imaju veći broj zaposlenih od optimalnog. Osim
toga, dok se u privatnim firmama odluke donose na osnovu ekonomskih
faktora, u državnim kompanijama se odluke često donese kao posledica
političkih uticaja.

The privatisation of state-owned enterprises is
also justified on the basis that there are also factors that
differentiate public and private firms. Pirie [1988] summarised the
following main characteristic differences: labour cost, consumer input,
decision-making, conditions of equipment and responsiveness to cost
control. According to Pirie [1988] labour costs are often the key to
differences in efficiency between the private and public sector. Public
enterprises are usually overstaffed. Moreover, he argues that the
consumer is able to exercise a degree of control on private firms by
deciding whether to shop with them or to seek satisfaction elsewhere.
The goods and services have to be oriented towards consumer satisfaction
in order to attract customers and to make profits. They have to be the
goods and services which consumers will choose to buy, and they have to
offer the variety and the quality sought. In addition, Pirie stated that
decision making in the private side of the economy is heavily based on
economic factors.

Mali, str. 21 

Hailemariam, str. 52

Restrukturiranje podrazumeva raznovrsne aktivnosti kao što su prodaja delova preduzeća (Divestitures), odvajanje delova preduzeća (Spin offs),
akvizicije, otkup akcija, koje su sve u isto vreme i transakcije, ali i
strukturne promene koje su uvedene u svakodnevno upravljanje
poslovanjem. Rappaport klasifikuje iste kao prvu fazu restrukturiranja, a
one promene koje donose kontinuirano povećanje vrednosti kroz
svakodnevno upravljanje poslovanjem, kao drugu fazu restrukturiranja19.
Isti autor tvrdi da kompanije moraju da se kreću od prve ka drugoj
fazi, jer je u drugoj fazi pristup stvaranja vrednosti za akcionare
primenjen ne samo prilikom kupovine i prodaje preduzeća ili promene
strukture kapitala firme, već i u planiranju i praćenju performansi svih
poslovnih strategija na kontinuiranoj osnovi. Uspešna implementacija
druge faze restrukturiranja ne samo da obezbeđuje da menadžeri
ispunjavaju svoje obaveze u smislu razvoja poslovnih performansi u
skladu sa zahtevima vlasnika, već i smanjuje brigu menadžera od
neprijateljskog preuzimanja.

Restructuring involves diverse activities such as
divestiture of underperforming business, spin-offs, acquisitions, stock
repurchases and debt swaps, which are all a one time transaction, but
also structural changes introduced in day-to-day management of the
business. Rappaport [1986] classified the above listed one time
transactions as Phase I restructuring and those changes that bring
continuous value improvement through day-to-day management of the
business as Phase II restructuring. Rappaport [1986] argues that
companies need to move from Phase I restructuring to Phase II because in
Phase II, the shareholder value approach is employed not only when
buying and selling a business or changing the company’s capital
structure, but also in the planning and performance monitoring of all
business strategies on an on-going basis. A successful implementation of
Phase II restructuring not only ensures that management has met its
responsibilities to develop corporate performance evaluation systems
consistent with the parameters investors use to value the company, but
also minimises the Phase I concern of managers that a hostile takeover
is imminent.

Mali, str. 21 

Hailemariam, str. 52

Menadžeri treba da restrukturiraju kompanije kako
bi povećali vrednost kapitala jer, u suprotnom, kompanija može da
postane predmet neprijateljskog preuzimanja20.
Autori tvrde da je u najboljem interesu i menadžera i akcionara da jaz
između potencijalne i stvarne (sadašnje) vrednosti kompanije bude što
manji. Menadžment može unaprediti poslovanje povećanjem prihoda ili
smanjenjem troškova, kupovinom ili prodajom imovine i poboljšanjem
finansijske strukture kompanije.

Copeland, Koller and Murrin [1990] also argue that
managers should restructure companies to improve value, otherwise,
external raiders will get an opportunity to take-over the company.
Therefore, they claim that it is in the best interest of both managers
and shareholders to keep the gap between potential and actual value as
close as possible. Management can improve operations by increasing
revenue or reducing cost, acquiring or disposing of assets and improving
the financial structure of the company.

Mali, str. 21 

Hailemariam, str. 52

Menadžeri često restrukturiraju svoja preduzeća
kako bi povećali produktivnost, smanjili troškove ili povećali bogatstvo
akcionara. Bowman je ispitivao uticaj aktivnosti restrukturiranja na
performanse preduzeća. On klasifikuje aktivnosti restrukturiranja u tri
kategorije: portfolio restrukturiranje, finansijsko restrukturiranje i
organizaciono restrukturiranje21.

Company executives often restructure their
companies for enhancing productivity, reducing costs or increasing
shareholder wealth. Bowman, et al. [1999] summarised the findings of the
corporate restructuring literature of 1990s that examined the impact of
restructuring on performance. They classified restructuring activities
into three categories, portfolio restructuring, financial restructuring
and organisational restructuring.

Mali, str. 21-22 

Hailemariam, str. 52-53

Portfolio restrukturiranje podrazumeva
značajne promene u strukturi sredstava ili linijama poslovanja,
uključujući i likvidacije, pripajanja, prodaju imovine i odvajanje
delova preduzeća. Menadžment kompanije može da restrukturira svoje
poslovanje prodajom poslovnih jedinica koje ne predstavljaju njihovu
osnovnu delatnost (Non-core Assets), u cilju dobijanja dodatnog kapitala
ili izlaska iz delatnosti koje ne kreiraju rast. Štaviše, kompanija
može da ide na agresivnu kombinaciju akvizicija i prodaju delova
preduzeća kako bi restrukturirala svoj proizvodni portfolio. Prema
istraživanjima koje je sproveo autor, aktivnosti prodaje imovine i
izdvajanja delova preduzeća generišu dobit, dok akvizicije u proseku ne
dovode do poboljšanja.

Portfolio restructuring includes
significant changes in the mix of assets owned by a firm or the lines of
business in which a firm operates, including liquidation, divestitures,
asset sales and spin-offs. Company management may restructure its
business in order to sharpen focus by disposing of a unit that is
peripheral to the core business and in order to raise capital or rid
itself of a languishing operation by sellingoff a division. Moreover, a
company can entail on an aggressive combination of acquisitions and
divestitures to restructure its portfolio. According to the findings of
Bowman et al. [1999] spin-offs and sell-offs generate gains while
acquisitions and divestments generate no improvements on average. Of
course these results have differed over time [Baker, 1992] and also
possibly over countries.

Mali, str. 22 

Hailemariam, str. 53

Finansijsko restrukturiranje podrazumeva značajne promene u strukturi kapitala firme, uključujući LBO (Leveraged buyouts), intenzivno zaduživanje preduzeća u cilju privlačenja gotovine koja se distribuira akcionarima (Leveraged recapitalizations), kao i zamenu sopstvenog kapitala pozajmljenim izvorima (Debt for equity swaps).
Finansijska struktura se odnosi na alokaciju priliva gotovine iz
poslovanja i njihovu distribuciju između različitih poslovnih jedinica
kompanije. Rezultati istraživanja autora pokazuju da finansijsko
restrukturiranje generiše ekonomsku vrednost za kompanije.

Financial restructuring includes
significant changes in the capital structure of a firm, including
leveraged buyouts, leveraged recapitalisations and debt for equity
swaps. Financial structure refers to the allocation of the corporate
flow of funds-cash or credit-and to the strategic or contractual
decision rules that direct the flow and determine the value-added and
its distribution among the various corporate constituencies. According
to Donaldson [1994, p. 7], “the elements of the corporate financial
structure include the scale of the investment base, the mix between
active investment and defensive reserves, the focus of investment
(choice of revenue source), the rate at which earnings are reinvested,
the mix of debt and equity contracts, the nature, degree and cost of
corporate oversight (overhead), the distribution of expenditures between
current and future revenue potential, and the nature and duration of
wage and benefit contracts.” The findings of Bowman et al. [1999]
revealed that financial restructuring generates economic value.

Mali, str. 22 

Hailemariam, str. 53

Organizaciono restrukturiranje podrazumeva
značajne promene u organizacionoj strukturi firme, uključujući i promenu
u aktivnostima poslovnih jedinica, promenu hijerarhijskih nivoa
odlučivanja, širenje raspona kontrole, smanjenje diversifikacije
proizvoda, reviziju sistema kompenzacija i bonusa, reformu menadžmenta,
kao i smanjenje broja zaposlenih. Autor ukazuje da otpuštanja koja nisu
praćena drugim organizacionim promenama imaju tendenciju da imaju
negativan uticaj na performanse. Shodno ovom istraživanju, najava
smanjenja broja zaposlenih u kombinaciji sa organizacionim
restrukturiranjem verovatno će imati pozitivan, iako mali uticaj na
performanse.

Organisational restructuring includes
significant changes in the organisational structure of the firm,
including redrawing of divisional boundaries, flattening of hierarchic
levels, spreading of the span of control, reducing product
diversification, revising compensation, streamlining processes,
reforming governance and downsizing employment. The findings of Bowman
et al. [1999] indicated that lay-offs unaccompanied by other
organisational changes tend to have a negative impact on performance.
Downsizing announcements combined with organisational restructuring are
likely to have a positive, though small effect on performance.

Mali, str. 22 

Hailemariam, str. 51

Pojam strukture korišćen u ekonomskom kontekstu
predstavlja specifičan, stabilan odnos između ključnih elemenata
određene funkcije ili procesa22.
Restrukturiranje predstavlja proces promene strukture jedne institucije
(kompanije, grane, tržišta, zemlje, svetske ekonomije), od koga se mnogo
očekuje i koji se preduzima sa određenom namerom.

“The word structure used in an economic
context implies a specific, stable relationship among the key elements
of a particular function or process. To restructure means the
(hopefully) purposeful process of changing the structure of an
institution (a company, an industry, a market, a country, the world
economy, etc.) [Sander et al., 1996, p.1].”

Mali, str. 22-23 

Hailemariam, str. 51

Ova struktura definiše ograničenja pod kojima
institucije funkcionišu u njihovim svakodnevnim operacijama i njihovom
traganju za boljim ekonomskim performansama. Restrukturiranje se može
tumačiti kao pokušaj da se promeni struktura institucija u cilju da se
one relaksiraju nekih ili svih kratkoročnih ograničenja.
Restrukturiranje je u vezi sa promenom strukture u potrazi za dugoročnom
strategijom. Autori Crum i Goldberg pojam restrukturiranja definišu kao
skup diskontinuelnih i odlučnih mera koje se preduzimaju u cilju
povećanja konkurentnosti preduzeća i povećanja njegove vrednosti23.

This structure defines the constraints under which
institutions function in their day-to-day operations and their pursuit
of better economic performance. Restructuring can therefore be
interpreted as the attempt to change the structure of an institution in
order to relax some or all of the short-run constraints. Restructuring
is concerned with changing structures in pursuit of a longrun strategy.
Crum & Goldberg [1998, p.340] define restructuring of a company as
“a set of discrete decisive measures taken in order to increase the
competitiveness of the enterprise and thereby to enhance its value”.

Mali, str. 23 

Hailemariam, str. 64

Iskustva u restrukturiranju preduzeća u
tranziciji, prvenstveno u Centralnoj i Istočnoj Evropi, otkrila su da
postoji potreba za restrukturiranjem preduzeća pre i posle
privatizacije. Autori Johnson, Kitchen i Loveman tvrde da postoji
potreba za planom integrisanog restrukturiranja koji usklađuje promene u
poslovnoj strategiji, finansijama i investicijama, sistemu kontrole,
marketingu i upravljanju ljudskim resursima u kompanijama koje prolaze
kroz proces privatizacije25.

In order to study the experiences of restructuring
enterprises in transition, we reviewed the literature of the Central
and Eastern European countries. In the literature, researchers have
found that there is a need of restructuring enterprises pre and post
privatisation. Johnson, Kotchen and Loveman [1996] claim that there is a
need for an integrated restructuring plan that aligns changes in
business strategy, enterprises finances and investment, control systems,
marketing, operations and human resources.

Mali, str. 23-24 

Hailemariam, str. 64

Drugi autor tvrdi da država kao vlasnik često
naglašava svoju nameru da prvo nadograđuje i restrukturira preduzeća u
državnom vlasništvu, pa da ih tek kasnije proda26.
Glavni argument ovakve strategije je da se veliki potencijal nekih
preduzeća ne reflektuje u početnoj ponuđenoj ceni i, kako bi se postigla
mnogo viša cena za kapital ovih preduzeća, ona moraju prvo biti
modernizovana. Na primer, ako preduzeće nije dovoljno atraktivno
privatnim investitorima, jer ima stare dugove ili neke delove koji nisu
profitabilni i koji se lako mogu odvojiti, onda početno restrukturiranje
može značajno poboljšati položaj prodavca, u ovom slučaju države, u
pregovorima sa zainteresovanim kupcima.

Major [1993] argues that governments frequently
emphasise their intention to upgrade and restructure the state-owned
companies first and to sell them later. The governments’ chief argument
is that in several cases, enterprises to be sold have vast potential,
that is, not reflected in the initial offer prices, and in order to
obtain a much higher price for these companies, they must be modernised.
There may be cases, according to Major, where such an argument is
relevant. For instance, if an enterprise is not attractive enough to
private investors because it carried old debts or it has some units,
which are liabilities rather than assets and which can be detached
easily, then an initial restructuring can improve the seller’s
bargaining position considerably.

Mali, str. 24 

Hailemariam, str. 64

Zbog gore navedenog, tokom privatizacije je važno
da se osmisli politika za poboljšanje performansi održivih preduzeća,
ali koja posluju sa gubitkom, kao i nekonkurentnih preduzeća za koje je
država odlučila da ih odmah ne prodaje. Pri tome, ako potencijalna
vrednost tih preduzeća može da se poboljša, aktivnosti restrukturiranja
podrazumevaju refinansiranje obaveza iz poslovanja, reorganizaciju
delatnosti kako bi se smanjile ili eliminisale neprofitabilne
aktivnosti, kao i dovođenje novih menadžera.

During privatisation, it might thus be important
to devise policies to improve the performance of viable but at present
loss-making and non-competitive enterprises that remain (for the time
being) under effective control of the government. This raises important
issues, of how to increase their autonomy and their profit orientation.
If the enterprise potential value could be enhanced, restructuring could
involve refinancing of debt, reorganising operations to reduce or
eliminate unprofitable activities, slimming down the payroll or bringing
in new management [UNCTAD, 1993].

Mali, str. 24 

Hailemariam, str. 64

Autor Filatotchev tvrdi da su promene u
poslovanju, investiranju/finansiranju i upravljanju bitni elementi
restrukturiranja tokom tranzicije27.
Poslovne promene odnose se na rast i diversifikaciju, obuku i
zapošljavanje i odnos sa interesnim grupama u preduzeću. Investicione i
finansijske promene obuhvataju promene u trajnim obrtnim sredstvima,
investicijama, platama i izvorima finansiranja investicija. Promene u
upravljanju se odnose na promene u vlasništvu i kontroli koju vrše
vlasnici, menadžeri, zaposleni i drugi.

Filatotchev [1996] argues that changes in
operations, financing and governance are essential elements of
restructuring during the transition. Operating changes relate to growth and diversification, training and recruitment and relationship with stakeholders, such as trading partners. Financial issues include changes in working capital, investment, wages and source of finance for investments. Governance relates to ownership and control exerted by owners, managers and employees and others.

Mali, str. 24 

Hailemariam, str. 64

Poslovno restrukturiranje označava promene u
postojećem proizvodnom miksu, uvođenje novih proizvoda, poboljšanje
distributivnih kanala, smanjenje radne snage i materijalnih troškova i
preusmeravanje proizvodnje prema klijentima koji imaju tražnju za robom
koja povećava profitabilnost kompanije.

Operational restructuring denotes
changes in the existing production mix, introduction of new products,
improving distribution channels, reducing labour and material costs and
reorienting production towards customer demanded goods to increase the
profitability of the company.

Mali, str. 24-25 

Hailemariam, str. 64-64

Iskustvo Centralne i Istočne Evrope pokazuje da
većina preduzeća još pre privatizacije smanjuje radnu angažovanost kako
bi povećala konkurentnost i smanjuje obim proizvodnje kako bi se
prilagodila novom tržišnom okruženju. Ovo je posledica liberalizacije
cena i povećanja cene sirovine i energije, kao i smanjenja potražnje za
domaćom robom zbog uvozne konkurencije. Smanjenje potražnje potrošača za
domaćom robom rezultira niskom iskorišćenošću kapaciteta preduzeća.
Menadžeri koji se susreću sa padom prodaje usled gore navedenih faktora,
rešenje pokušavaju da pronađu kroz sprovođenje aktivne politike
prodaje, promenu proizvodnog miksa i profila proizvodnje ka traženijim
proizvodima, diversifikacijom proizvodnje, kao i smanjenjem troškova
proizvodnje. Prema autoru Belka, jedan od ključnih faktora
prilagođavanja preduzeća tokom tranzicije je brzina i efikasnost kojom
kompanije uspevaju da povrate svoju domaću mrežu distribucije28.
Oni koji uspeju, u stanju su da odbiju stranu konkurenciju, pa čak i
šire. Onima koji ovaj aspekt poslovanja zanemaruju, u prvoj fazi
tranzicije predstoji težak zadatak oporavljanja, zbog teškog i skupog
tržišta novih i poboljšanih proizvoda, kao i nedostatka adekvatnog
marketinga i stručnjaka prodaje. Međutim, iskustvo privreda u tranziciji
pokazuje da se samo mali broj menadžera u preduzećima koja treba da se
privatizuju bavi uvođenjem novih proizvoda, razvojem novih procesa i
razvojem novih tržišta.

The experience of the Central and Eastern European
countries reveals that most of the enterprises engaged in labour
reduction to compete in the market environment and reduced outputs to
adjust to the new market environment prior to privatisation. The
liberalisation of prices and trade increased the prices of materials and
energy and decreased the demand for domestic goods due to import
competition. The decrease in customers’ demand for domestic goods
resulted in low capacity utilisation by the firms. Managers encountering
a severe sales problem tried to find a way out by conducting an active
sales policy, changing the mix and profile of output towards more
sellable products, diversifying production and reducing of production
costs [Estrin & Gelb, 1995; Dolgopyatova & Evseyeva, 1995].
According to Belka et al. [1993], one of the key factors of enterprise
adjustment during transition is the speed and efficiency of the
company’s efforts to restore its domestic distribution network. Those
who succeed are able to fend off foreign competition and even expand.
Those who neglected it in the first stage of transition faced the
formidable task of recovering due to a difficult and expensive market
with new or improved products and a lack of adequate marketing and sales
specialists. However, the experience of transition economies shows that
only a few managers engaged in the introduction of new products, the
development of new processes and the development of new markets prior to
privatisation.

Mali, str. 25 

Hailemariam, str. 65

Investiciono restrukturiranje označava promene u
fiksnoj i obrtnoj imovini preduzeća. Preduzeća u tranziciji obično
koriste stariju opremu, što im ugrožava konkurentnost u odnosu na uvozne
proizvode iz razvijenih ekonomija. Oprema je često kupljena još u vreme
osnivanja kompanije, a mogućnost njihove zamene se zanemaruje kako se,
kroz modernizaciju, broj zaposlenih ne bi smanjivao. Ova praksa je bila
prepreka modernizaciji i unapređivanju tehnologija u državnim
kompanijama u Centralnoj i Istočnoj Evropi i stoga su se ova preduzeća
suočavala sa teškoćama u konkurentskoj borbi na tržištu nakon pada
komunizma. Prema već navedenom istraživanju Belka-e, osnovna sredstva su
bila dotrajala, uz stope amortizacije od 60-70%. Pri tome, najviše
projekata modernizacije je preduzeto sa ciljem smanjenja troškova (za
uštedu energije, manju potrošnju materijala i sl.), dok je mali broj
investicionih projekata za cilj imao povećanje proizvodnih kapaciteta
preduzeća. Osim nedostatka finansijskih sredstava za investicije, u
osnovna sredstva je manje ulagano i zbog nedostatka jasnih vlasničkih
perspektiva preduzeća i jasnog stava rukovodstva. Ovo pokazuje da
neizvesnost može imati snažan negativan uticaj na podsticaj da preduzeća
odmah krenu da iskoriste mogućnosti za investiranje, što je razlog koji
govori u prilog privatizaciji preduzeća u državnom vlasništvu.

Investment restructuring denotes the
changes in fixed capital and in working capital investment of a
business. Enterprises in the transition economies are using old
machinery, which hampers competition with the imported products from the
developed economies. The machinery is often purchased at the time of
establishment of the company and replacement may be neglected due to the
fact that managers were more concerned with employees’ welfare. Since
modernisation of the machinery might reduce the labour force, they have
been using outdated machinery. This practice hampered modernisation and
technology advancement of factories and when the market was liberalised
after the fall of communism in Central and Eastern Europe, the
enterprises faced difficulties in competing in the market. According to
Belka et al. [1993] the fixed assets are worn out, with depreciation
rates of 60-70%, and the process of decapitalisation is steadily
accelerating. Most modernisation projects undertaken aim at the
reduction of cost (energy saving, smaller consumption of materials,
lower input of labour). Very few fixed asset investment projects
undertaken actually enlarge the production capacities of the firms. The
main cause of low investment was the lack of financial resources. The
decline in profitability of the state-owned enterprises each year
decreased the financial reserves of the companies. Besides, according to
Belka et al. [1993, p. 39], “the low investment in fixed assets was due
to the high risk of investment decision because of lack of clear
ownership prospects of an enterprise and clear management stance, due to
the drop in consumer demand resulting from much lower purchasing power
and due to the absence of an essential financial infrastructure (an
efficient banking system and a capital market).” As demonstrated by
Dixit [1989] uncertainty can have a powerful negative effect on the
incentive to move promptly to take advantage of investment
opportunities. Indeed, when the environment is uncertain, potential
entrepreneurs have a strong incentive to delay even attractive projects,
if part of the investment is irreversible.

Mali, str. 25 

Hailemariam, str. 65

Finansijsko restrukturiranje u toku privatizacije
uključuje otpis ili smanjenje starih dugova od strane države, kako bi
kompanije bile atraktivnije za kupce, ubrizgavanje kapitala za nova
ulaganja, konverziju duga u akcijski kapital kada su poverioci preduzeća
saglasni da prihvate vlasništvo u preduzeću, refinansiranje spoljnog
duga (kao na primer restrukturiranje duga po sniženim kamatnim stopama i
sa dužim rokovima dospeća, kao i delimičan otpis duga), prodaju
imovine, i sl.

Financial restructuring during
privatisation includes [Rideley, 1996; Saez, 1996], elimination or
reduction of old debts to the government to make companies attractive to
buyers, injecting capital for new investments, debt to equity swaps in
which the creditors of an enterprise agree to accept ownership shares
once the enterprise becomes a corporation, refinancing external debt,
debt relief such as debt restructuring at reduced interest rates and
with longer maturities and partial debt write-downs, sale of assets,
equity issues simultaneous with the privatisation of existing stock and
transfer of part of the sales proceeds to the company itself.

Mali, str. 25-26 

Hailemariam, str. 66

Iskustvo zemalja Centralne i Istočne Evrope
pokazuje da država uglavnom prestaje da direktno subvencioniše
preduzeća, kako bi izvršila pritisak na njih da počnu sama da se
finansiraju i kako bi menadžerima prenela autonomija u upravljanju.
Međutim, prema autoru Kornai, menadžeri gubitaških preduzeća su često u
stanju da ublaže ova budžetska ograničenja i da ne poštuju finansijsku
disciplinu, jer političari obično nisu spremni da likvidiraju preduzeća
gubitaše, zbog socijalnih posledica29.
Slično je i sa državnim bankama koje su takođe odobravale kredite
gubitašima bez rigoroznih analiza, iz straha da će, u slučaju da ova
preduzeća bankrotiraju, one izgubiti novac koji su već pozajmile ovim
preduzećima.

The experience of Central and Eastern European
countries reveals that the governments generally stopped direct
subsidies to pressure companies to become selffinancing and gave
managers autonomy to govern enterprises. However, as Kornai [1990]
predicted the managers of loss making enterprises were often able to
soften the budget constraints because the politicians were not ready to
liquidate loss-making enterprises due to the social consequences and
they have been guaranteeing bank loans to these companies. Kornai [1980]
explained that an enterprise has soft budget constraints when it
expects to be bailed out in case of financial trouble. This creates an
incentive problem because the manager of the organisation will fail to
observe financial discipline. The state-owned banks also have been
approving loans to loss making companies without rigorous analysis
because if the companies become bankrupt they will lose the money that
they had already loaned to these companies.

Mali, str. 26 

Hailemariam, str. 66

…Pri tome, najveći broj država naglašava potrebu
finansijskog restrukturiranja, upravo zbog toga što su jedan od faktora
koji je uticao na mali interes investitora za državna preduzeća bili
akumulirani dugovi iz prošlosti. Da bi se privukli investitori, skoro
sve vlade zemalja Centralne i Istočne Evrope su, nakon pada komunizma,
pokušale da očiste bilanse preduzeća, kako bi se povećala njihova
atraktivnost. Pri tome, njihov se pristup ovom problemu razlikovao –
neke zemlje su direktno otpisivale dugove preduzeća, dok su druge
odvajale preduzeća u finansijskoj nevolji ili prenosile odgovornost
restrukturiranja duga sa preduzeća na banke.

The accumulation of debts deterred the buyers of
enterprises at the time of privatisation and in order to attract
investors, the governments of the Central and Eastern European countries
tried to clean the balance sheets of the enterprises to make the
companies sellable. Though all governments tried to tackle this problem
by absorbing the enterprises’ debts, their approach differed. Some
countries directly wrote-off enterprises’ debts while others segregated
financially troubled enterprises or transferred the responsibility of
enterprise debt restructuring to banks.

Mali, str. 26

Hailemariam, str. 66

Iskustva Mađarske i Bugarske, na primer, pokazuju
da su vlade ovih država otpisale stare dugove preduzeća kako bi im
olakšale poslovanje. Problem je, međutim, što umesto da stare dugove
otpišu jednom, vlade su dugove otpisivale nekoliko puta u periodu 1992. –
1994. godine, čime su izgubile kredibilitet i poslale pogrešnu poruku
menadžmentu tih preduzeća. U Poljskoj i Rumuniji, s druge strane,
problematična državna preduzeća su bila izolovana („hospitalizovana”) i
bila predmet restrukturiranja. Države su obezbedile dodatne izvore
finansiranja, osnovale agencije za restrukturiranje i dale vremenski
period rukovodstvima ovih preduzeća da postanu samoodrživa u roku od dve
do četiri godine. Ukoliko se u ovom periodu preduzeća ne bi uspešno
restrukturirala, bila su predmet likvidacije. Rezultati ovih aktivnosti,
međutim, nisu bili sjajni prvenstveno zbog toga što rukovodstvo
kompanija nije bilo spremno na velike rezove u poslovanju i otpuštanje
radnika.

The experience of Hungary and Bulgaria, for
instance, revealed that the government wrote-off enterprises’ debts to
alleviate the financial problem that the companies had been facing. This
relieved enterprises from interest payments. However, the debt
write-off should be done only once. Otherwise, it gives an indication to
the management that the government will bail–out the companies in case
of financial problem and thus may tempt them to undertake projects that
destroy company value. According to Dobrinsky [1996, p.393], “the
governments of Hungary and Bulgaria wrote-off companies’ debts several
rounds during 1992-1994.” This may have been reducing the credibility of
hardening of budget constraints. Some governments (such as Poland and
Romania) also isolated financially troubled enterprises
(‘hospitalisation’) and tried to restructure them to make them viable.
The governments provided finances, set up a restructuring agency and
asked managers to turn around their companies in two to four years.
Enterprises, which did not improve after the isolation program, were
liquidated. These programs were not very successful because the managers
were appointed by workers and thus, were not able to lay-off redundant
workers.

Mali, str. 26-27

Hailemariam, str. 68

Studije slučajeva preduzeća u tranziciji koje su
sačinjene od strane konsultanata, međunarodnih agencija kao što su
Svetska banka i Organizacija za razvoj Ujedinjenih nacija (UNIDO) i
drugih istraživača, otkrivaju kako se preduzeća mogu restrukturirati i
pripremiti za uspešnu privatizaciju30.
Ove studije pokazuju da su preduzeća koja sužavaju svoj proizvodni
fokus i smanjuju svoj ciklus proizvoda, bila u stanju da se
restrukturiraju i privuku investitore. Pored toga, tržišno orijentisani
menadžeri odigrali su ključnu ulogu u restrukturiranju svojih kompanija.
Konačno, niske cene rada u Centralnoj i Istočnoj Evropi u poređenju sa
Zapadnom Evropom dale su prednost preduzećima u ovim zemljama kako bi
privukli zainteresovane kupce.

The case studies of enterprises in transition
studied by consultants, international agencies such as World Bank and
United Nations Development Organisation (UNIDO) and other researchers
reveal how enterprises can be restructured for successful privatisation.
The success and failures of enterprises to restructure may provide a
lesson for Eritrea. Appendix A4-2 summarises case studies of some
companies in the Central and Eastern European countries [Estrin et al.,
1995; Johnson, Kotchen and Loveman, 1995 and Martin, 1996]. The case
studies indicate that companies which narrowed their product focus and
reduced their product cycle were able to restructure and attract
investors. Moreover, market oriented managers played a key role in
restructuring their companies. In addition, low labour cost in the
Central and Eastern Europe in comparison with the Western Europe gave a
competitive advantage to the enterprises in these countries.

Mali, str. 27

Hailemariam, str. 69

Geografska blizina Centralne i Istočne Evrope
tržištu Zapadne Evrope takođe je pomogla preduzećima da poboljšaju svoje
finansijsko stanje. Uspešne kompanije su obnovile tehnologiju i
modernizovale svoje mašine, kako bi proizvodile kvalitetnije i
konkurentnije proizvode. Poznanstvo sa stranim kooperantima je pomoglo u
eventualnim privatizacijama preduzeća. Takođe, kanali distribucije
preduzeća promenjeni su od veleprodajnih i maloprodajnih lanaca ka
direktnoj prodaji krajnjim kupcima.

The geographical proximity of the Central and
Eastern Europe countries to the market in the Western Europe helped the
companies to improve their financial condition. The successful companies
also upgraded their technology and modernised their machinery to
produce quality and competitive products. The successful companies
subcontracted work to West European companies, in particular in textiles
clothing, to take advantage of the low labour cost. The acquaintance
with foreign subcontractors has helped in eventual privatisation of the
companies. The companies’ distribution channels also changed from
wholesale and retail chains to direct sales to final customers.

Mali, str. 27

Hailemariam, str. 69

Osim do sada navedenih istraživanja, studije
slučaja analiziraju i preduzeća koja nisu uspela da se prilagode novom
tržišnom okruženju. U ovim preduzećima, menadžment je pokazao malo volje
da sprovede reforme, a kompanije su uglavnom bile proizvodno a ne
tržišno orijentisane. Ovi menadžeri su pokušali da lobiraju za
subvencije, a ne da se angažuju u restrukturiranju svojih preduzeća.
Međutim, kako su države smanjivale subvencije, dug ovih preduzeća je
rastao, čime se dalje pogoršalo njihovo finansijsko stanje i time
stvorila i dodatna prepreka za privlačenje investitora.

The case studies also show companies which failed
to adapt to the new market environment and which have problems in
getting investors. In these companies, the management showed little will
to implement reform and they were mainly production oriented. These
managers tried to lobby for subsidy rather than to engage in
restructuring their companies. However, the government cut subsidies and
the companies’ debt increased. The creditors also demanded payment. The
worsening financial condition of the companies was becoming a
constraint not only for attracting investors but also for getting
qualified managing directors as well.

Mali, str. 27

Hailemariam, str. 69-70

U studiji ruskih preduzeća, autori Earle, Estrin i
Leshchenko identifikovali su aktivnosti restrukturiranja (u oblasti
proizvodnje, zaposlenosti, investicija i marketinga) koje poboljšavaju
vrednost preduzeća31. Autori su
koristili ove aktivnosti da testiraju svoje hipoteze da li razlika u
vlasništvu rezultira različitim aktivnostima restrukturiranja od strane
menadžera. Zaključak studije je pokazao da vlasnička struktura ne utiče
mnogo na različitost aktivnosti restrukturiranja. Osim toga, shodno ovom
istraživanju, za menadžere su bile bitnije aktivnosti restrukturiranja u
oblasti investiranja i marketinga nego u oblasti proizvodnje.

In their study of Russian enterprises, Earle,
Estrin and Leshchenko [1996] identified restructuring activities
(production, employment, investment and marketing) that enhance
enterprise value and used managers’ own views in evaluating the
restructuring activities needed…The authors used these activities to
test their hypothesis that difference in ownership will result in
different restructuring actions by managers. However, the responses of
the managers showed that there was little variation in the restructuring
measures in the different ownership types tested (state-owned,
employee-owned, management-owned, outsider-owned and newly established
firms). The managers’ responses, however, showed that the managers
regard marketing and investment/finance activities as slightly more
important than production or employment related restructuring
activities, regardless of ownership category…

str. 28-30, poglavlje 2.2.4. osim poslednjeg paragrafa na str 29-30

prevod sa str. 71-72

str. 30-31, osim dva poslednja paragrafa

prevod sa str. 73-74