UDS: 658.14/17

Kruglov V.N.

Institute of management, business and technology

Institutional approach to the management of innovation system

Annotation. The relevance of the article is defined by the necessity of perfection of mechanisms of innovation development of territories. The effectiveness of most of them leaves much to be desired. And therefore require appropriate adjustments.

The cluster approach is used when creating technological parks, seems the one of the most promising directions. It contains not only necessary, but also self-contained components of the innovative development of the system. And in this regard, it can be a catalyst for development of territories.

It is proved that the most important factor in the development of cluster production is a factor of the state regulation, defining, ultimately, the growth dynamics of economic development.

Keywords. Cluster industrial Park, development of territories, the region, the pace of growth. Innovations, investments, administration, management, partnership.

The phenomenon of concentration in limited areas of companies in the same industry, or forming a single production chain examined and was first called "economic cluster" Harvard Professor and economist Michael porter in the 1980-ies. Clustering, he identified as one of the most important ways of increasing business competitiveness by optimizing production chains. The residents of one cluster are to each other in complex ways: on the one hand, there are elements of symbiosis and division of labour, with another – competition and competition [1, p. 293].

In 2012 the Prime Minister approved the list of 25 selected by competition of territories with the support of the state will be formed "innovation territorial clusters". The money from the Federal budget it was supposed to go to 5 billion rubles a year for five years. Subsequently, however, the amount has decreased to 1,3 billion But this money the government is going to allocate with an important caveat: the region must reaffirm the importance of the cluster for the territory, not only in words, but in deeds – by with funding from its own budget [2, p. 337].

From the point of view of the government from the macroeconomic cluster as a unit is much easier to deal with than with disparate players (companies, research institutes, universities), sometimes requiring point support: you can think about the development of entire territories, their hard and soft infrastructure. The only condition that the cluster is not completely artificial entity, which is designed to receive budgetary funds.

A typical example of a cluster that is formed around a large science – Biotechnological innovation territorial cluster Pushchino. This city is already a well-established scientific brand, is an internationally recognised centre of biotechnology, which is densely populated about 30% of scientists specializing in this field. The potential of this kernel is obvious, however, this site has limitations: it is impossible to develop a production company, because the city is located on the reserve. The development of this cluster sees of extraterritoriality, opening branches in the regions. Pushchin the very same in these plans play the role of an R & d centre for the entire cluster [3, p. 376].

But directly copying successful examples is not possible, it all depends on the characteristics of the area. Therefore the needs of clusters even with the same specialization can significantly vary. For example, if you take the biopharmaceutical industry and look at different regional clusters, we will see a completely different model. For example, in Kaluga the main purpose of the cluster is to attract investors, so there is a significant role played by the regional authorities and the main function of the cluster development.

In Moscow a significant point of growth of a cluster is the zone R & d, so there is focused on the management of scientific projects, collaboration with small research groups. The St Petersburg cluster, which also was included in the "favorites list", sees its role in the formation of partnerships between domestic investors and city authorities for the implementation of specific projects [4, p. 332].

However, the most involved in the process are interested in how the state intends to stimulate the participation of large state-owned companies in the activities of regional clusters. According to residents, weak domestic demand for innovative products is one of the main problems of development of small and medium-sized innovative companies. You must create an adequate system of monitoring of cluster initiatives. And ideally – to track in real time the dynamics of growth of cluster formations, and to analyse situations that hinder their development. This practice already exists in Europe, where in 2007 he founded the European system for monitoring the development of clusters (European Cluster Observatory). This is an online platform that provides a single access to information about clusters and cluster policy in European States. Within this system created a tool for mapping of clusters, allowing to track employment statistics and effectiveness about two thousand clusters in 32 European countries [5, p. 359].

However, the European successful clusters is also very selective. In Russia, however, the expected positive effect in most regions even more difficult. Though, because usually the industry for which cluster policy is formed, do not possess competitive advantages. And try to use political decisions to create these advantages that looks pretty utopian. If the business does not invest, and prints money, what a cluster development can be said? All additional measures of support of innovation development is appropriate only when the entire strategy of the state aimed at supporting business.

Literature

1. Vasilieva N. And., Kruglov V. N. Investment provision of innovative development of the region. /N. And.Vasiliev, V. N. Kruglov//Audit and financial analysis. – 2013. – No. 1. – p. 292-297.

2. Vasilieva N. And., Kruglov V. N. Economic and social aspects of the implementation of priority national projects in the region (on the example of Kaluga region). /N. And.Vasiliev, V. N. Kruglov// Audit and financial analysis. – 2013. – No. 3. – S. 336-351.

3. Kruglov V. N., Leontieva L. S. problems of innovation development of small business in the Russian Federation. /L. S. Leont'eva, V. N. Kruglov// Audit and financial analysis. – 2013. – No. 3. – p. 374-379.

4. Kruglov V. N., Leontieva L. S. Path resource provision of innovative development of the economy. /L. S. Leont'eva, V. N. Kruglov// Audit and financial analysis. – 2013. – No. 4. – p. 326-333.

5. Kruglov V. N., Leontieva L. S. scenarios for the formation of forward-looking development of the region. /L. S. Leont'eva, V. N. Kruglov// Audit and financial analysis. – 2013. – No. 5. – S. 358-367.