Innovating during insolvency procedures

Inoviranje v podjetjih je pomembno za obstoj, rast in napredovanje podjetja, pomembno pa je tudi, da so različne metode inovacij in obseg njihove uporabe v podjetjih različno zastopani. Metode inoviranja so močno prisotne v nekaterih panogah, npr. v avtomobilski, elektro- in farmacevtski industriji in podobno. Velika, uspešna podjetja tudi pri svojem oglaševanju in aktivnostih za krepitev svoje blagovne znamke javno objavljajo rezultate lastne inovativnosti. To jim še dodatno krepi ugled. Vendar pa vsa podjetja niso enako poslovno uspešna. Podjetja se lahko v svojem življenjskem ciklu srečujejo z različno uspešnimi obdobji. Po ustanovitvi podjetja navadno nastopi obdobje razmaha, uspešnega poslovanja in rasti po merilih, kot so število zaposlenih, prihodki iz prodaje in višina dobička. Obdobju pozitivne rasti in dobrih poslovnih rezultatov pa lahko sledi obdobje krize, ki se ga nekatera podjetja zavedejo že ob prvih znakih, druga pa ga prepoznajo pozno, včasih prepozno. Kriza se lahko izkaže v blažji ali težji obliki. Ena najtežjih oblik krize v podjetju je insolventnost. Na vprašanje, zakaj je podjetje zašlo v krizo, navadno ni preprostega odgovora, dejavnikov je čedalje več. Ali je lahko odsotnost metod inoviranja, če je intenzivno inoviranje navadno povezano z uspehom podjetja, razlog za nastanek krize? Bližajoča se in dejanska insolventnost v povezavi z metodami inoviranja je v tej raziskavi v središču pozornosti. Insolventnost za podjetje pomeni krizno situacijo, v kateri se je treba odzvati v smeri odprave insolventnosti in ponovne vzpostavitve pozitivnih trendov v poslovanju. Izbrani vidik obravnave v tej raziskavi je vprašanje, katere inovacije lahko pomagajo insolventnemu podjetju, da se reši iz krizne situacije, in kako. Edini postopek zaradi insolventnosti, ki je namenjen prestrukturiranju podjetja z namenom, da preživi, je prisilna poravnava (osnovna ali poenostavljena prisilna), ki je lahko uspešna le, če aktivnosti sprožimo pravočasno. Postopek prisilne poravnave natančno opredeljuje ZFPPIPP, vendar o inoviranju ne pove ničesar. V magistrski nalogi sem povezavo med postopki inoviranja in prisilno poravnavo proučila na primeru podjetja Beti, d. d. Podjetje je zašlo v insolventnost, reševalo pa jo je s postopkom prisilne poravnave. Proučila sem, ali so bile metode inoviranja v podjetju prisotne že pred nastopom insolventnosti ali šele pozneje med izvajanjem postopka prisilne poravnave. Preverila sem, ali so metode inoviranja pripomogle k pravočasni zaznavi insolventnosti in k večji uspešnosti postopka prisilne poravnave. V Poslovnem registru Slovenije (eObjave v postopkih insolventnosti) sem na vzorcu 37 podjetij z uporabo računovodskih izkazov preverila prisotnost nekaterih metod inoviranja. Na podlagi rezultatov vzorčnih podjetij in podjetja Beti, d. d., sem ugotavljala veljavnost postavljene hipoteze.Innovation in business is essential for the existence, growth and progression of any company. Despite their great importance, different methods of innovation are differently represented in businesses. Innovation methods are strongly present in certain industries such as the automotive industry, electrical industry, pharmaceutical industry, etc. Large, successful companies publish the results of their own innovation also in their advertising, and in the brand strengthening activities in order to fortify their public image. However, not all companies are equally successful in business at any given moment. Companies may be met with different levels of success in different periods of their life cycle. Upon establishing the company, there usually follows a period of growth, sucessful management, and expansion of the company as measured by the number of employees, turnover, and profit rates. The period of positive growth with good business results may, however, be followed by a period of crisis. Some companies are able to detect the early signs of the crisis, while others may become aware of them late in the day, oftentimes too late. The crisis may either be mild or severe. One of the most difficult forms of crisis for a company is insolvency. There are no easy answers to why the company may be met with a crisis. Surmising that the presence of intense innovation is associated with the success of a company, the question is, can the absence of innovation methods cause a crisis?The correlation between the imminent, or an ongoing insolvency, and the presence, or lack thereof, of methods of innovation is the focus of this study. For a company, insolvency is a crisis situation that calls for an immediate reaction, and the re-establishing of a positive business trend. This research concentrates on the question how, and in what ways, can innovation help the insolvent company out in a situation of crisis. The only legal procedure intended to restructure the company in order to grant its survival is the (basic, or the simplified) compulsory settlement that can only be successful when the activities are initiated on time. The compulsory settlement procedure is specified in the Financial Operations, Insolvency Proceedings and Compulsory Dissolution Act (ZFPPIPP), but the law says nothing about innovation.In my master thesis, I examine the example of the Beti d. d. company. Upon its insolvency, the compulsory settlement proceedings ensued. I studied whether the methods of innovation were at all present in the company prior to, and during the insolvency and the compulsory settlement proceedings. I studied whether the methods of innovation can contribute to a timely detection of insolvency, and whether they contribute to improving the effectiveness of compulsory settlement proceedings.In order to test my hypothesis, I gathered a sample of 37 companies from the Slovenian Business Register (eObjave in insolvency proceedings) and used their financial statements to verify the presence of certain methods of innovation as compared to the Beti d.d