Economy, finances, management: Topical issues of science and practical activity

FISHCHUK Natalia – Candidate of Agricultural Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Agrarian Management, Vinnytsia National Agrarian University (21008, Vinnytsia, 3 Sonyachna Str., e-mail: natalfis2016@gmail.com).

The global financial and economic crisis, which began in 2007, is difficult to overcome as it has numerous negative consequences. Ukraine, like the entire post-Soviet space, is burdened with problems of the transformation period, is experiencing difficult times. In recent years, the economic system in the country didn’t get signs of stable development. The crisis, as it is known, is able to break the balance in any sector of the country's economy and in a separate enterprise. The global financial and economic crisis, political instability, imperfection of legislation and insufficient level of state regulatory policy make a significant impact on the activity of domestic enterprises. In order to prevent the negative impact of risk factors on both the external and internal environment, it is necessary to review and improve special tools and approaches of crisis management that are used in the practice of economic activity. Taking into account these and other factors, the article considers the question of the essence and the objective necessity of using of crisis management approaches in the current conditions of agrarian sector enterprises activity.

The necessity of forming of crisis management system, conducting of anti-crisis monitoring of the state of enterprises and diagnostics, as its specific function, determining of acceptability of various diagnostic models, need in developing of anti-crisis approaches and strategies for the development of agricultural enterprises have led to the relevance of the chosen topic.

Despite the fact that a huge amount of theoretical and applied material has been developed in the world, the theme of crises, crisis management and diagnostics, as its providing component, remains in the sight of foreign and domestic scientists. This problem was particularly acute in agrarian enterprises of Ukraine, due to certain objective reasons. First of all, this is due to the lack of generalized methodological approaches, recommendations and criteria sufficiently adapted to the specific conditions of the domestic agrarian economy and good accounting and reporting system.

The purpose of the article is to substantiate the necessity of carrying out diagnostics as the basic function of crisis management; approbation of the use of the most common foreign and domestic methods of diagnosing the crisis, assessing the possibility of their use in the conditions of agricultural enterprises.

Ukraine has a strong agro-industrial potential and significant prospects for its future development. This is an essential component of the financial and food safety of the country, which guarantees the further economic development of the country as a whole. The results of agricultural enterprises activity do not correspond with the resource potential and opportunities of the industry. The current crisis, remaining difficult and tense, is a reflection of the accumulated internal economic and political problems reinforced by the effects of the global financial crisis.

Opposition to crisis phenomenons and the revival of the normal course of business activity of entrepreneurs need to improve the practice of crisis management of enterprises, increased attention to issues of diagnosis of the level and causes of the crisis, the development of sufficiently adapted methods for its implementation.

Diagnostics, being the category of crisis management, aims in-time recognition of the signs and nature of the crisis, the localization of its undesirable effects, is a meaning of obtaining reliable, high-quality information about the actual state and capabilities of the enterprise in the initial stage of the crisis, the basis for the introduction of special methods and mechanisms of crisis management.

Bankruptcy diagnostics is a system of targeted financial analysis in order to find and identify the parameters of crisis development that can disbalance the system, reduce its risk-taking and pose a threat of the bankruptcy in the future.

Individual features of agricultural enterprises, their condition, reasons and depth of crisis signs require different methods of getting out of a crisis state. There are no universal methods for dealing with the crisis. Therefore, each enterprise must independently develop its plan of anti-crisis actions that will ensure its survival.

World experience and practice of crisis management at the enterprise level today offer a number of techniques for conducting bankruptcy diagnostics, both quantitative and qualitative; express and deep analysis of crisis signs. The most well-known and used multifactorial models for the diagnosis of the crisis situation and the prediction of bankruptcy, developed by foreign authors are: the models based on the Z-coefficients of Altman, Springate, Biver, Liss, the predicted models of Taffler and Tisshaw, the Fulmer model, Beerman model, the model of rating numbers of Sayfulin and Kadykov, the score method of Argenti and others. Despite the fact that these models are quite actively used in Ukraine, it is obvious that they are weak in their adaptation to national realities, peculiarities of management, the specifics of domestic practice, and sectoral operating conditions. This explains the possibility of obtaining wrong, biased conclusions, significant errors in evaluating and forecasts.

Native theory and practice of crisis management also offer a number of methods for assessing the probability of bankruptcy. Among the most well-known are methods of Yershova N., Matviychuk A., Tereshchenko O., methodology for solvency assessment of Ligonenko  L. and Kovalchuk G., Hayvoronskaya Y., and others. They are more adapted to domestic realities and reduce imperfections of foreign models. At the same time, due to individual characteristics and factors of each enterprise, there is no universal model of bankruptcy forecasting.

The publication deals with the most common models for predicting of the crisis situation of enterprises, their special features of using and disadvantages. The possibility of using of some foreign and domestic models in the diagnosis of the crisis state of enterprises in order to prevent bankruptcy is explored. Checking of the possibility of using of different models and the objectivity of the obtained results is made on the basis of analytical data of one of the structural subdivisions of the Ukrainian Scientific and Educational Consortsium, the State Enterprise "Experimental Farm "Salyvonkivske" of the Institute of Bioenergetic Cultures and Sugar Beet of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine.

Calculations were carried out according to the models of Altman, Springate, Liss, Biver, which basically operate on indicators of operational, investment and financial activity of the enterprise, and considered with their different level of relaions and mutual influence. Among the national models the methodology of O.Tereschenko and the six-factor model approved by the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine have been used.

The obtained results of calculations and their comparison with the limit values demostrate full capacity of the state enterprise "DG" Salyvonkivske" to continue its activity, show condition of financial well-being and the absence of bankruptcy risks. There were no discrepancies in the obtained results.

Foreign models are suitable for using in Ukrainian conditions with certain conditions, as evidenced by numerous publications. All of them have their advantages and disadvantages, which are manifested in varying degrees, depending on the features and specifics of the object of analysis, its financial and economic state. It is recommended when using foreign models of diagnostics, to choose such approaches that would enable to obtain a more reliable and accurate assessment of the financial and economic condition, relying on the results of one model analysis is not worthwhile. Careful selection and integrated using of several models at the same time, including specially designed and recommended for domestic enterprises, will significantly increase the reliability and ensure maximum accuracy of forecasts. Conducting of anti-crisis monitoring will enable to detect unwanted deviations in a timely manner and prevent problems, ensuring a stable financial position, which is the main objective of crisis management.

1. Vlasiuk, V.Ie., & Hordienko, K.O., & Pshenychna, A.O. (2017). Otsinka ymovirnosti bankrutstva vitchyznianykh pidpryiemstv (na prykladi PAT «Kombinat «Teplychnyi») [Estimation of the probability of bankruptcy of domestic enterprises (on example of PJSC "Combine Works" Teplichny"]. Ekonomika ta upravlinnia natsionalnym hospodarstvom – Economics and management of the national economy, 12, 58-62 [in Ukrainian].
2. Voronkova, T.Ie., & Cherniuk, Yu.V. (2012). Sravnitelnaia kharakterystika metodov otsenky krizisnogo sostoianiia predpriiatyi s prymenenyem formul E. Altmana i A.A. Tereshchenko [Comparative characteristics of methods for assessing of the crisis state of enterprises using the formulas of E. Altman and A.A. Tereshchenko]. Collection of materials from: Mizhnarodna naukovo-praktychna konferentsiia “Ukraina-BolgariiaEvropeiskii Soiuz: sovremennoe sostoianie i perspektivy” – International scientificpractical conference “Ukraine-Bulgaria-European Union: current state and prospects”, Kherson, PP Vishemirskiy V.S., pp. 60-64 [in Russian].
3. Sait derzhavnoi sluzhby statystyky Ukrainy [Site of State Statistics Service of Ukraine]. Available at: http://www.ukrstat.gov.ua [in Ukrainian].
4. Mazur, V.A., & Tomchuk, O.F., & Branitskyi, Yu.Yu. (2017). Metodyka analizu finansovoho stanu pidpryiemstva vidpovidno do vymoh vnutrishnikh i zovnishnikh korystuvachiv [Methodology for analyzing of the financial condition of an enterprise according to the requirements of internal and external users]. Ekonomika. Finansy. Menedzhment. Aktualni pytannia nauky i praktyky – Economy. Finances. Management. Actual issues of science and practical activity, 3, 7-20 [in Ukrainian].
5. Matviychuk, A. (2007). Diahnostyka bankrutstva pidpryiemstv [Diagnostics of bankruptcy of enterprises]. Ekonomika Ukrainy – Economy of Ukraine, 4, 20-28 [in Ukrainian].
6. Melnychenko, O.A. (2015). Antykryzova polityka derzhavy: sutnist ta priorytetni napriamy [Anti-crisis policy of the state: essence and priority directions]. Rozvytok systemy derzhavnoho upravlinnia v Ukraini – Development of the system of public administration in Ukraine, 2(49), 3-8 [in Ukrainian].
7. Muliar, T.S. (2017). Implementatsiia metodyk ta modelei diahnostyky kryzovoho stanu v praktyku ahrarnykh pidpryiemstv [Implementation of methods and models of diagnostics of a crisis state in the practice of agrarian enterprises]. Ekonomika ta derzhava – Economy and the state, 4, 41-45 [in Ukrainian].
8. Nakaz Ministerstva ekonomiky Ukrainy vid 17.01.2001 №10 zi zmin. ta dop. Vid 19.01.2006 № 81 «Pro metodychni rekomendatsii shchodo vyiavlennia oznak neplatospromozhnosti pidpryiemstva ta oznak dii z prykhovuvannia bankrutstva chy dovedennia do bankrutstva» [Order of the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine dated January 17, 2001 No. 10 with amendments and additions from January 19, 2006 № 81 “About methodical recommendations for revealing signs of insolvency of the enterprise and signs of actions to conceal bankruptcy or bring to bankruptcy”]. Available at: http://zakon1.rada.gov.ua.
9. Rakosiy, P.V. (2016). Osoblyvosti pobudovy mekhanizmu antykryzovoho upravlinnia na pidpryiemstvakh ahropromyslovoho kompleksu [Features of creation of the mechanism of crisis management at the enterprises of the agro-industrial complex]. Naukovyi visnyk Polissia –` Scientific bulletin of Polissia, 1(5), 110-113 [in Ukrainian].
10. Skibitskyi, O.M. (2009). Antykryzovyi menedzhment [Anti-crisis management]. Kyiv, Tsentr uchbovoi literatury [in Ukrainian].
11. Tereshchenko, O (2003). Dyskryminantna model intehralnoi otsinky finansovoho stanu pidpryiemstva [Discriminant model of the integrated assessment of the financial condition of the enterprise]. Economika Ukrainy – Economy of Ukraine, 8, 38-44 [in Ukrainian].
12. Tereshchenko, O.O. (2004). Antykryzove finansove upravlinnia na pidpryiemstvi [Anticrisis financial management at the enterprise]. Kyiv, KNEU [in Ukrainian].
13. Yankovets, T.M., & Cherniuk, Yu.V. (2016). Porivniannia suchasnykh modelei diahnostyky ymovirnosti bankrutstva pidpryiemstva: zakordonnyi ta vitchyznianyi dosvid [Comparison of modern models for diagnosing of the probability of bankruptcy of an enterprise: foreign and native experience]. Investytsii: praktyka ta dosvid – Investments: practice and experience, 20, 58-62 [in Ukrainian].
14. Sait Vinnytskogo Natsionalnogo Agrarnogo Universytetu [Site of Vinnytsia National Agrarian University]. Available at: www.vsau.org/web/vsau.nsf/webgrviev/Gr.PNF2C?OpenDocument&cant=5& RestrictToCategory=GrPNF2C [in Ukrainian].