About Interrelation of Noospheric Ideology and Homeostatic Management Methods

The article is devoted to the improvement of management methods in social and economic systems. As the author thinks that the operating management methods don’t meet the increased demands of public life. The main drawback of the operating management system is the lack of the entire vision of the current financial and economic processes. According to the author academician V.I. Vernadsky scientific discovery of the bio-sphere transformation phenomenon into noo-sphere allows to put into the basic social and economic development methodology the ideology of intelligence sphere which possesses the whole content and reflects the regularities of nature and society development. Intelligence sphere methodology reflects a new way of thinking which is qualitatively different from the traditional one prevailing all over the world. Intelligence sphere methodology declares the maintenance of social and economic systems’ development viability and sustainability for a long perspective as its target function. Such a position mostly corresponds to the content of homeostatic management methods being the basis for cyber science ideology. The author considers the public development target function as providing bio-social viability and sustainability. It is possible to mention the quantitative determination of such a target function as maximization of new cost growth rate by minimizing socially necessary cost. The article shows that homeostatic management methods can be the most important lever mechanism of implementing such a target function into reality.

wholeness theory, noo-sphere management ideology, contradictions and non-determinations, macroeconomics, microeconomics, operating margin, profitability, collapse of innovative and investment policy, target management function, basic philosophical principles of cybernetics

1. Abramova N. R. Tselostnost’ i upravleniye [Wholeness and management]. Moscow, Science, 1974, 248 p. (in Russian).

2. Vernadsky V. I. Biosfera i noosfera [Bio-sphere and noo-sphere]. Moscow, Iris Press, 2004, 576 p. (in Russian).

3. Yakovets Yu. V. Epohalniye inovatsii ХХI veka [Epoch innovations of the ХХI century]. Moscow, Economics, 2004, 437 p. (in Russian).

4. Zarnadze A. A. Tselostnost’ upravleniya sovremenoy ekonomiki [Modern economy’s wholeness management]. Moscow, Transport Center, 2011, 232 p. (in Russian).

5. Zarnadze A. A. O edinstve tselostnosti i institutsial’nosti sistemi upravleniya [About wholeness integrity and institutionality of management system]. Upravlencheskiye nauki — Management Sciences, 2015, no. 2 (15), pp. 6–12 (in Russian).

6. Moiseyev N. N. Zaslon srednevekovyu [A backstop to Middle Ages]. Moscow, Тandex Co., 2008, 312 p. (in Russian).

7. Kleyner G. B. Strategiya predpriyatiya [Enterprise strategy]. Moscow, Affair, 2008, 568 p. (in Russian).

8. Kleyner G. B. Sistemnaya paradigmа i ekonomicheskaya politika [System paradigm and economic policy]. Obtshestveniye nauki i sovremenost’ — Public Sciences and Modernity, 2007, no. 3, pp. 99–114 (in Russian).

9. Vernadsky V. I. Neskol’ko slov o noosfere [Some words about noo-sphere]. Uspehi sovremenoy biologii — Modern Biology Achievements, 1944, no. 18, Issue 2, pp. 113–120 (in Russian).

10. Bir St. Kibernetika i upravleniye proizvodstvom [Cybernetics and enterprise management]. Moscow, 1963, 275 p. (in Russian).

11. Zarnadze A. A. Institutsial’naya priroda soglasovaniya ekonomicheskih interesov v upravlenii predpriyatiyem [Institutional nature of coordination the economic interests in enterprise management]. Ekonomicheskaya nauka sovremenoy Rossii — Economic Science in Modern Russia, 2014, no. 2, pp. 92–102 (in Russian).

12. Glazyev S. Yu. Strategiya operezhayutshego razvitiya Rossii v usloviyah global’nogo krizisa [The strategy of forward-looking Russia development under the conditions of global crisis]. Moscow, Economics, 2010, 254 p. (in Russian).