Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Research background: Under the current conditions of increasing competitiveness and interdependence, national economies are more influenced by the global business environment and its development. Constantly changing economic, social, political aspects, and many other factors, cause the differences in the global competitiveness of economies, so the economies are forced to analyze their competitive level more complexly. Despite that, there is a lack of research studies analyzing the international competitiveness of EU-28 economies from the point of view various multi-criteria indices. Purpose of the article: The paper investigates the relations between the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) and other selected multi-criteria indices, namely the Global Innovation Index (GII), the Doing Business Index (DBI), the Economic Freedom Index (EFI) and the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) in the case of EU?28 economies. Methods: In order to investigate the relations between the global competitiveness and selected multi-criteria indices affecting the EU?28 economies, the multiple linear regression analyses were applied. The multiple regression model was quantified for every single year, as well as, the regression model using the average score of all analyzed indices. The secondary data concerning the scores of individual indices were collected based on annually published online reports over the period of 2014?2018. Findings & Value added: The research confirmed that there is a statistically significant dependence between the global competitiveness, corruption and the level of innovation potential within the EU?28 economies. Besides, we identified the worst results in the context of competitiveness evaluation especially in the area of corruption and innovation activities. In this regard, the issue of insufficient innovation development and inappropriate corruption perception is considered to be key determinants influencing the assessment of the global competitiveness of the EU?28 member states. In our opinion, to improve the competitiveness of these countries, targeted activities should be implemented in the frame of national competitive strategies, programs, and policies.
EN
Research background: In the context of constantly changing business environment, the financial sector is focusing on new trends in financial management systems. Nowadays, there is a need to achieve long-term financial growth, so financial managers try to develop new models for managing and improving the financial performance of businesses in economic practice. Purpose of the article: This article aims to determine the financial performance of travel agencies by applying modern business performance evaluation methods in order to create a performance portfolio (ranking) for the years 2013-2017, subsequently to reveal the concordance rate of order of the selected business entities by comparing applied financial methods in the context of performance benchmarking. The research question is as follows: Does the multidimensional PCA method in the form of the performance portfolio of travel agencies provide similar financial results compared to the EVA indicator? Methods: For measuring the financial performance of businesses, the method of Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and the indicator Economic Value Added (EVA) were chosen. Spearman's rank-order correlation was applied in order to reveal the concordance rate of the analyzed travel agencies. Findings & Value added: The results indicate that by applying the PCA method, 6 key performance factors can be identified. Moreover, the findings revealed that the assessment of travel agencies using the PCA method and EVA indicator did not lead to the same financial results. Individual financial methods identified a different number of strong-performing and inefficient business entities. In this backdrop, we concluded that the business performance measurement based on the PCA method is not a suitable alternative to measuring performance using the EVA indicator.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.