Enterprises Communication in e-Environment: Case Study of Latvia and Kazakhstan

2018

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.2478/jec-2018-0014
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Abstract The performed scientific studies show that proper and skilful use of modern technologies can contribute to significant development of companies. Growth of technologies occurs rapidly, and the electronic environment continuously develops and improves along with it. The electronic environment now already offers companies practically all necessary marketing and communication tools for ensuring company development by creating competitive advantages; nevertheless, not all companies can employ the opportunities rendered by the e- environment, in order to increase company competitiveness and productivity. (Ščeulovs, Gaile-Sarkane 2014). The aim of the paper is to study and compare the enterprises communication in e-environment in two countries – Latvia and Kazakhstan. Study material – 130 enterprises of Latvia, 100 enterprises of Kazakhstan; method – survey. The study was conducted within the Erasmus+ project ‘Mobility between programme and partner countries (KA107)’. Using previous researches and scientific studies, as well as survey of enterprises representatives in Latvia and Kazakhstan, in this paper, the authors a) give an overview of the main trends of enterprise communication in e-environment and b) compare the experience of the two countries.