Economic bases of innovative activity in public health services

The structure of workers of the innovative enterprises is not homogeneous. So, along with science officers in these organisations engineers,

Economic bases of innovative activity in public health services

Дипломная работа

Иностранные языки

Другие дипломы по предмету

Иностранные языки

Сдать работу со 100% гаранией
s main point of model differ. Distinction consists what the standard model basically uses relative factors, and offered model? The absolute. To show this difference it is possible on a simple example: the standard model will tell that it is necessary to put money, as each enclosed rouble will bring 20 copecks of the income (i.e. Let's enclose 1 rouble, we will receive 1 rouble of 20 copecks), whereas the offered model of an estimation of efficiency will tell what to put up money in the innovative project costs, as the enclosed 1000 roubles will return as 1200 roubles. It is obvious, what this distinction not essential since at use of that and their other model it is possible to add with corresponding indicators? Standard model absolute, offered? The relative. The standard model uses relative indicators owing to tradition; the offered model uses absolute indicators from convenience reasons? At application of offered model it is possible to draw a conclusion of such grade that for realisation of the innovative project it is necessary to involve 14011 c.u. that through 7 months to receive 19873 c.u. Under the maintenance of indicators two considered models basically coincide. We will prove it. The standard model does not give possibility to execute an estimation of competitive advantages of the goods (service) offered by the considered project. However the standard model should contain this indicator as intermediate result? If the project is not directed on manufacture of a competitive product the project will be unprofitable and inefficient. A similar situation with a market capacity indicator? This indicator is not necessary for application of standard model, however, it does not mean that the offered model wins at standard, having this indicator. Capacity calculation is designated as an obligatory indicator at application of offered model. This indicator is not present as a part of standard model, however for calculations of factors of standard model anyhow it is necessary to know the capacity requested by the project. For this reason for application of standard model more low we will use this factor, but counted within the limits of application of offered model. Calculation of necessary volume of investments is necessary for application of both models: in offered model it is taken out as a separate indicator, in the standard? Is present at quality of parametre (intermediate result) at calculation of all indicators of standard model. Means, at application of standard model we will address partly to results of application of offered model. The break-even point pays off at application of offered model, but anything similar is not present in standard model. It is caused by what a break-even point? An indicator absolute whereas the standard model uses relative indicators. As to such characteristics of the project, such as profit (total and pure), profitability of production, profitability of the funds, the full cost price, the labour input, the predicted price for production, a critical sales volume and release, a time of recovery of outlay, a stock of financial durability? All of them are present at offered model, and at standard model there are only relative indicators, namely: efficiency of capital investments and analogue of an indicator of profitability of production. If the purposes of application of models coincide, some indicators and intermediate results are crossed, in what a difference between them and what for it is necessary to use two models? First of all, the numerical characteristics given by models, not should differ strongly from each other as we consider their application to the same project: If the standard model gives any numerical indicator its accuracy will be difficult for improving owing to that the standard model has already proved. We will draw conclusions by results of considerations of techniques of an estimation of efficiency of innovative projects. How it was possible to notice, the standard model is less labour-consuming in the application? In it, undoubtedly, there is an advantage of standard model before offered model. However, the basic difference between standard and offered models what the offered model gives more information on the concrete project? And in it the big advantage of offered model before the standard. For example, the standard model of an estimation of efficiency of the project cannot answer on a question, in what volume it is necessary to make production that the project was profitable? The standard model uses this indicator, but does not count it whereas the offered model at first counts it, and then uses. So, both those and other models can tell that, for example, as a result of three years of realisation the project will be profitable whereas the offered technique can tell that the project will pay off in 7 months. The offered model also has one essential lack? All basic indicators pay off on the basis of the sales volume forecast. But it is the forecast, obviously, can be only approximate. Hence, all basic indicators of offered model will be approximate. In the following chapter the comparative analysis of application of standard and offered model on an example of the concrete innovative project will be given.



3. The estimation of efficiency of the innovative project in public health services


3.1 Estimation of efficiency of the innovative project by a standard technique


1) Calculation of factor of the pure resulted cost (NPV) For application of a standard technique of a case of the innovative project considered in the present degree work, all basic numerical data will undertake from point 3.2 of the present work. So the forecast, let us assume, becomes that the investment (IC) will generate within 3 years, revenues at a rate of CF1, CF2, CF.... The general saved up size of the discounted incomes (PV) (Present Value) and the pure resulted cost (NPV) (Net Present Value) Pays off.



Here n - quantity of the periods of time on which the investment is made, r - norm of profitableness (profitableness) from an investment. It is known that if: NPV> 0 the project should be accepted; NPV <0 the project should be rejected; NPV = 0, the project not profitable and not the unprofitable. For our project



Here and more low in work we will believe that 1 c.u. = 1$. We will notice also, what at the moment of 01.04.04 Central Bank rate of the Russian Federation of the American dollar made 28 rbl. 13 copeck Here in the first composed number 14011 of c.u. with a minus corresponds to the full cost price of the project, r=0,166, or, what the same, r=16,6 %? Level of profitability (profitableness) of the project. For our project the settlement size is more than zero, the project profitable means. 2) calculation of an index of profitability of investments (PI) Pays off a profitability index (Profitability Index) (PI) under the formula:


PI = ∑k [Pk / (1 + r)k] / IC,


Let's remind that if: PI> 1 the project should be accepted; PI <1 the project should be rejected; PI = 1, the project neither profitable, nor unprofitable. For our project it is had:

Here 8721 c.u.? Net profit size. In brackets three composed as we investigate the project within three years? 2005, 2006 and 2007 whereas we begin project realisation in 2004. For the considered project this size is more than unit, hence, the project profitable. 3) calculation of internal rate of return or norm of profitability of the investment (IRR) (Internal Rate of Return) (IRR) understand value of factor of discounting As internal rate of return or norm of profitability of the investment r at which NPV the project it is equal to zero: IRR = r, at which NPV = f (r) = 0.




Where CFj - an entrance monetary stream during j th period, INV - value of the investment. Strictly speaking, this factor dismisses not so much, how many the equation, having solved which, we will find the norm of profitableness INN is minimum necessary for realisation of the project. For our project it is had a following equation:. We will notice that in the left member of equation three composed owing to that consideration is conducted for three years. A trial and error method we find that for performance of following equality it is necessary, that approximate equality was observed. It means that the norm of profitableness of 8,1 % whereas from following point it will be visible that norm of profitableness of our project of 16,6 % is necessary for a project recoupment. It means that it is necessary to recognise the project profitable. We will draw conclusions by results of calculations of the basic factors of model under the decision on acceptance or a project deviation is accepted after consideration of values resulted above factors. As we saw, all these factors have yielded that result that the project profitable and it should be accepted to realisation.


3.2 Estimation of efficiency of the innovative project by an offered technique


Industrial competitive advantages. For device manufacturing? The biotest? Components will be used inexpensive, not scarce, широкодоступные, but at the same time qualitative, basically import manufacture. In this connection the device will have high consumer properties at the low cost price. A market estimation. The market of the medical equipment in Russia is not sated enough by the equipment of the given direction [23] whereas the developed device has no strong contenders both on Russian, and in the foreign market. It promotes fast advancement of the device on the market of Russia and the near abroad. Changes in the given market can occur under the influence of following external factors: - occurring in

Похожие работы

<< < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>