Possibilities of Streamlining Competitive Interaction in the Light of A. A. Bogdanov's "Tectology"

Alexander I. Kovalenko
{"title":"Possibilities of Streamlining Competitive Interaction in the Light of A. A. Bogdanov's \"Tectology\"","authors":"Alexander I. Kovalenko","doi":"10.37791/2687-0657-2023-17-3-126-137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper considers the general doctrine of organization – A. Bogdanov’s Tectology from the standpoint of modern theories of management, entrepreneurship and competition. A. Bogdanov’s views on entrepreneurship, competition, and the source of economic initiative are studied. The author of the article tries to answer the question of how A. Bogdanov treated organizational principles in market processes, transactional relations between economic entities. The author tries to understand exactly how A. Bogdanov understood entrepreneurship and competition. For these purposes, a contextual and formal-logical content analysis of the text of A. Bogdanov’s Tectology was carried out on the key terms “entrepreneurship”, “competition”, “initiative”. The views of A. Bogdanov are compared with the modern views of representatives of the neo-Austrian economic school, the positions of scientists in the field of the theory of entrepreneurship and competition. The author comes to the conclusion that A. Bogdanov, following K. Marx, did not distinguish between the socio-economic roles and statuses of an entrepreneur and business owners, generalizing them into a single class – the bourgeoisie. The figure of an entrepreneur (individual, serial, intracompany, social) carries a threat to the very idea of the class organization of society, since an entrepreneur can belong to any class: the bourgeoisie, the peasantry, the technical intelligentsia, or the proletariat. A. Bogdanov refers the entrepreneur to the bourgeoisie, the ruling class from which organizational activity passes to the lower classes. The author of the article comes to interesting conclusions when analyzing the use of the term “competition” by A. Bogdanov. In our opinion, A. Bogdanov generally denied the term “competition” in the semantic core of the concept, arguing that this term is used in different, unrelated senses in different industries and spheres of human activity.","PeriodicalId":269031,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern Competition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Modern Competition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37791/2687-0657-2023-17-3-126-137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper considers the general doctrine of organization – A. Bogdanov’s Tectology from the standpoint of modern theories of management, entrepreneurship and competition. A. Bogdanov’s views on entrepreneurship, competition, and the source of economic initiative are studied. The author of the article tries to answer the question of how A. Bogdanov treated organizational principles in market processes, transactional relations between economic entities. The author tries to understand exactly how A. Bogdanov understood entrepreneurship and competition. For these purposes, a contextual and formal-logical content analysis of the text of A. Bogdanov’s Tectology was carried out on the key terms “entrepreneurship”, “competition”, “initiative”. The views of A. Bogdanov are compared with the modern views of representatives of the neo-Austrian economic school, the positions of scientists in the field of the theory of entrepreneurship and competition. The author comes to the conclusion that A. Bogdanov, following K. Marx, did not distinguish between the socio-economic roles and statuses of an entrepreneur and business owners, generalizing them into a single class – the bourgeoisie. The figure of an entrepreneur (individual, serial, intracompany, social) carries a threat to the very idea of the class organization of society, since an entrepreneur can belong to any class: the bourgeoisie, the peasantry, the technical intelligentsia, or the proletariat. A. Bogdanov refers the entrepreneur to the bourgeoisie, the ruling class from which organizational activity passes to the lower classes. The author of the article comes to interesting conclusions when analyzing the use of the term “competition” by A. Bogdanov. In our opinion, A. Bogdanov generally denied the term “competition” in the semantic core of the concept, arguing that this term is used in different, unrelated senses in different industries and spheres of human activity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
波格丹诺夫“技术”视域下竞争互动流线型化的可能性
本文从现代管理理论、创业理论和竞争理论的角度出发,考察了组织的一般学说——波格丹诺夫技术。研究了波格丹诺夫关于企业家精神、竞争和经济主动性来源的观点。本文的作者试图回答波格丹诺夫如何处理市场过程中的组织原则、经济实体之间的交易关系的问题。作者试图准确理解A. Bogdanov是如何理解企业家精神和竞争的。为此,对a . Bogdanov的《技术学》文本进行了语境和形式逻辑内容分析,关键词是“创业”、“竞争”、“主动性”。将A. Bogdanov的观点与新奥地利经济学派代表的现代观点、企业家精神和竞争理论领域的科学家的立场进行了比较。作者得出结论,波格丹诺夫在马克思的基础上,没有区分企业家和企业主的社会经济角色和地位,将他们概括为一个阶级——资产阶级。企业家的形象(个人的、连续的、公司内部的、社会的)对社会阶级组织的概念本身就有威胁,因为企业家可以属于任何阶级:资产阶级、农民、技术知识分子或无产阶级。波格丹诺夫(A. Bogdanov)把企业家指为资产阶级,即组织活动从其转移到下层阶级的统治阶级。这篇文章的作者在分析A. Bogdanov对“竞争”一词的使用时得出了有趣的结论。在我们看来,A. Bogdanov基本上否认了“竞争”这个概念的语义核心,认为这个术语在不同的行业和人类活动领域中有不同的、不相关的含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Use of VR Technologies in the Competitive Environment of the Restaurant Business Role of Organizational and Managerial Innovations in the Development of the Russian Electronics Industry Application of Innovative Approaches in Сrisis Management of Internet Platforms Business Game as a Method of Developing Entrepreneurial Skills of Competition Blind Spots in the Procedure for Analyzing the State of Competition in the Commodity Market
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1