Managing the development of innovative and start-up forms of businesses and verification of INMARK concept

Abstract

This monograph critically indicates the evident, mass, and negative (brake) processes and tendencies, which dominantly determine the long-term crisis in most transition countries. In phenomenological terms, it is about systemic and institutional failure, which have been rooted in the most common social subsystems: culture, politics, and knowledge. A society that allows the formation and strengthening of alternative institutions for a long-term dominance is condemned to general development delay, reproduction of the crisis, distortion, and reduction of value criteria.It is indisputable that institutional failure (fiasco, deficit) began in a period of transition from one institutional monism (dirigisme) into another (neoliberalism). Therefore, it is natural that all our critics, in addition to other braking factors, are oriented towards the ideology and practice of quasi-neoliberalism. The entire period of post-socialist transition was marked by the dominance of nomenclature (narrow, privileged) interests over national (mass and social) interests. It has been presented incompetently, media, orchestrated, and apologetically as a Messianic Grail, although it is clearly a new form of dogma, embodied in the sophisticated, improvisational and individual totalitarianism. This manuscript does not tend to show the absolute truth. Although, the authors hope that it will help to discover at least some segments of truth and find some skillfully blurred boundaries that make it impossible to understand and differentiate the apparent from real, the rhetorical from practical. One of the main anti-development causes is certainly the abuse of real institutions by alternative institutions (from the shadow), which are based on various forms of opportunistic behavior and social pathology. This has motivated us to define the title of this monograph.The monograph has been published in a period unfavorable for books in general, especially unfavorable for science. Today, few people read books, publications have small circulation, and modern readers use new media formats. Therefore, this is an opportunity to point to the more frequent remarks of many journalists and selfproclaimed analysts, who in the (un)believable ignorance arogantly and chorally declare that the "academic community is silent"! Without any desire to respond to them in the media, we leave them to live in delusion, and we claim that writing is, yet, an alternative and equal way of expression. Since they obviously do not read professional and scientific literature, we have no hope that they will ever learn the truth about the activities of the academic community. Authors lism, creativity, knowledge, and science, party affiliation, authority, eligibility arein favour. The criminalization of the economy, widespread corruption and a range of socio-pathological phenomena have flourished. The rhetoric of change has substituted the real change -civilization change, institutional change, and other types of fundamental changes. References