Search

Introduction. The widespread development of digital technologies in recent years has become one of the most significant resources for transforming the activities of enterprises and organizations. The purpose of our study is to evaluate indicators that characterize Russian organizations using both digital technologies in general and specialized software that provide financial calculations, electronic document management and automation of production processes. Materials and Methods. The official information of the Federal State Statistics Service for 2020, based on the results of surveys conducted by the heads of organizations, revealing the use of digital technologies, was used as the initial empirical data. The territorial features of the use of digital technologies were analyzed on the basis of the development of mathematical models such as normal distribution functions. The use of these models made it possible to establish the levels of digitalization of managerial and production tasks, including the use of specialized applied computer programs. Results. The results of the study proved that 82.2 % of all organizations used digital technologies in 2020. It was found that 41.7 % of organizations used specialized programs for financial settlements. It was revealed that a little more organization (54.3 %) used electronic document management in their activities. The results of calculations showed that specialized programs for the production of products or individual technological processes are implemented in 7.4 % of organizations. Discussion and Conclusion. The practical significance of the study for state and regional authorities lies in obtaining new information on the current differentiation of the indicators’ values under consideration for organizations operating in all regions of Russia. The findings of the study can be used to justify activities related to the regulation and planning of the development of digital technologies and the formation of proposals for the allocation of additional resources to regions with a low level of digitalization. The methodology proposed in the study can be applied by regions with a large number of municipalities to conduct a comparative analysis of similar indicators.

Introduction. The paper analyzes the specificity of the dialectical development of the integrated social systems of such a personality and society. The presence of positive (natural) contradictions is recognized as a necessary and creative factor in social practice. Under the influence of this type of contradiction, the old, outdated forms of social structure (individual components of the social system) are denied and transformed to new, more perfect ones occurs as a result of their successful resolution. Methods. In the analysis, the author relied on a system-holistic approach, traditional general philosophical methods: induction and deduction, theoretical analysis and synthesis, extrapolation, etc. Discussion. The social system as an integrated unity goes through a number of stages from inception, formation and maturity to the transition to a qualitatively new state. Accordingly, the process of the emergence and development of dialectical contradictions also has several stages: from insignificant differences between opposite sides at the beginning of the emergence of the system to their strengthening and exacerbation. The nature of the contradictions depends on the specifics of the opposing sides, as well as on the conditions in which their interaction unfolds. The determining factor here, in the opinion of the author, is the positive (natural) direction of social opposition, under the influence of which the essence of the contradictions themselves is formed. Conclusion. According to the dialectical approach, the source of social development is the unity and struggle of opposites within the social system. However, the presence of opposite sides is a necessary but insufficient condition for development. They create the preconditions for it, but do not act as its driving force. Only a change in one opposition relative to another creates alternative tension, giving rise to a dialectical contradiction. Therefore, the antagonistic or non-antagonistic character of the latter is due to the positive (natural) or negative character of the social opposition itself.