The article analyzes the concepts of managerial potential and managerial alacrity of executives. A three-component model of managerial readiness, which has been tested and demonstrated the effectiveness on a sample of about three thousand heads of the state civil service in the Russian Federation, is approved in the paper. Three components of the model are presented: leadership, expert-analytical and managerial. Their essential characteristic is given and the extent of expressiveness, expanding or narrowing the range of possible managerial roles that the leader can effectively perform is described. Indicators that reflect the development level of each of the highlighted components and serve as meta-competencies for civil service leaders used in the process of their personal and professional diagnosis are distinguished. The connection between meta-competencies and the components of managerial alacrity and managerial potential of executives is discussed. The results of similar foreign and Russian studies are given. Based on the results of the above studies, it is concluded that considering the development of each of the meta-competencies is identified as an important indicator in assessing the actual readiness of executives to replace specific managerial positions and can be the basis for both assessing the potential for development and building individual career paths in respect of the resources available to the leader.

Purpose:The purpose of this study is to consider options for adjusting primary reporting to clarify energy efficiency indicators. Design/Methodology/Approach: In particular, models based on the study of correlation of gross regional product with regional production factors are considered. This will make it possible to refine the actual output in the regional context. Findings: In comparison with the developed countries Russia essentially lags in the level of power consumption. For this reason, energy intensity is one of the priorities of the country's development. According to the data of Russian and international organizations, assessments of the state program of energy-saving implementation are very controversial, which does not allow making an objective conclusion about the achieved results. Practical Implications: For such assessments, methods of factor analysis of reasons for energy efficiency changes, which are difficult to implement in Russia, are widely used in the world. The reason for this is the low reliability of the initial data due to the peculiarities of obtaining them. As a result, there is an abnormal dispersion of data both throughout the country's economy and in the energy efficiency of regions. Originality/Value: A systematic analysis of the country's energy efficiency problem also requires data from a regional perspective. It is here that the main difficulties are observed, caused by the impossibility of objectively linking production volumes to the actual location of energy resources used.

This article attempts to make a comprehensive analysis of the impact of "geopolitical competition" policy on the state and future development of national security of the Russian Federation. We believe that geopolitical competition is caused not only by the need to protect national interests, but also acts as the condition that generates threats (challenges) to national security. The article deals with external factors, such as the transformation of geopolitical competition, changes in the post-Soviet space, and the development of the Arctic, as well as two internal factors, which concern the attainment of national identity and the militarization of public life, because we believe that these factors have the most negative impact on the state of national security in the Russian Federation. Geopolitical competition is currently increasing because of the aggravation of relations between states because of the distribution of spheres of influence.

development of an innovative economy: The promotion of investment growth in production infrastructure and innovation, increasing the orientation of research institutions to the needs of the real economy, the development of entrepreneurship in all sectors of the economy and the creation of necessary conditions. The article considers the key elements of innovation infrastructure. Also this article is given a brief description of the complex target