1. Kedrov N.A. (2024). Costoyanie i perspektivy rosta predprinimatel’skogo insorsinga v sektore informatsionnykh tekhnologii. Gumanitarnye, sotsial’no-ekonomicheskie i obshchestvennye nauki, 2. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sostoyanie-i-perspektivy-rosta-predprinimatelskogo-insorsinga-v-sektore-informatsionnyh-tehnologiy?ysclid=mb2o7m8f2p760885583.
2. Kiryushkin S., Kanev S., Varlamov K., Kovnir E., Kravchenko A. (2010). Uchebnik 4CIO. Nastol’naya kniga IT-direktora. https://book4cio.ru.
3. Kobiashvili N.A., Zhenzhebir V.N., Galitskii Yu.A., Fadeev A.S., Medvedev V.M., Shestov A.V., Nemtsev I.V. (2015). Strategiya diversifikatsii sistemy upravleniya na osnove vydeleniya biznes-edinits. Naukovedenie, 7(3). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/strategiya-diversifikatsii-sistemy-upravleniya-na-osnove-vydeleniya-biznes-edinits?ysclid=mb2o6yz6ys362150455.
4. Stapran D.A. (2017). Tekushchee sostoyanie i perspektivy rosta predprinimatel’skogo autsorsinga v sektore informatsionnykh tekhnologii. Kreativnaya ekonomika, 11(9). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/tekuschee-sostoyanie-i-perspektivy-rosta-predprinimatelskogo-autsorsinga-v-sektore-informatsionnyh-tehnologiy?ysclid=mb2o6gvblv250794410.
5. Tushavin V.A. (2014). Osobennosti autsorsinga v sfere informatsionno-kommunikatsionnykh tekhnologii. Menedzhment i biznes-administrirovanie, 1: 79-86. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=21396501&ysclid=mb2o5qgtl8423621352.
6. Tsovma D.V. (2018). K voprosu ob opredelenii gruppy kompanii kak bol’shoi i slozhnoi sistemy. V: Novaya rossiiskaya ekonomika: investitsii, klastery, innovatsii i dorozhnye karty: sbornik statei Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii. Samara, NITs «Aeterna»: 79-84. https://aeterna-ufa.ru/sbornik/NK-EC-91.pdf?ysclid=mbs8tvy8f9957855495.
7. Adams C., Larson E., Khia W. (2007). A trend toward more centralized information technology (IT) management. AMCIS Proceedings: 166. http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2007/166.
8. Agarwal R., Sambamurthy V. (2002). Principles and models for organizing the IT function. MIS Quarterly Executive, 1(1): 6.
9. Ambroselli S. (2021). Subsidiary decision-making autonomy: A systematic literature review of the determinants. International Journal of Business Research and Management, 12(4): 205-248.
10. Boetoro R., Welly J. (2022). Streamlining information technology (IT) functions and operating model across group case study: PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia, Tbk. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 7(4): 206-210. https://doi.org/10.24018/ ejbmr.2022.7.4.1536.
11. Chen L.-J., Tsou H.-T., Chen C.-C. (2019). An enabling mechanism for subsidiary autonomy. Journal of Management Research, 12(1): 1. https://doi.org/10.5296/jmr.v12i1.15595.
12. Čudanov M., Jaško O., Miloš J. (2009). Influence of information and communication technologies on decentralization of organizational structure. Computer Science and Information Systems, 6(1): 93-109. https://doi.org/10.2298/CSIS0901093C.
13. Ein-Dor P., Segev E. (1978). Organizational context and the success of management information systems. Management Science, 24(10): 1064-1078. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.24.10.1064.
14. Ein-Dor P., Segev E. (1982). Organizational context and MIS structure: Some empirical evidence. MIS Business Computer Science, 6(3): 55-68.
15. Geleilate J.-G., Andrews D.S., Fainshmidt S. (2019). Subsidiary autonomy and subsidiary performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of World Business, 55(4): 101049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2019.101049.
16. Gurianova E.A., Gurianov I.N., Mechtcheriakova S.A. (2014). The influence of phase the organizational life cycle on organizational structure, management and transaction costs. Asian Social Science, 10(20): 137.
17. Janicijevic N., Milovanović M. (2015). The impact of information and communication technology on decentralization: The role of organizational culture. Ekonomika preduzeca, 63(3-4): 171-181.
18. Jentsch C., Beimborn D., Reitz A. (2017). How to decompress the pressure - The moderating effect of IT flexibility on the negative impact of governmental pressure on business agility. In: Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Big Island, Hawaii. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2018.582.
19. Kang T., Chen H.-C., Sun J. (2016). Does organizational structure influence IT investment and its effects on operational capability. Journal of Research in Business Economics and Management, 7(1): 1012-1019.
20. Kirca A.H., Bearden W.O., Roth K. (2011). Implementation of market orientation in the subsidiaries of global companies: The role of institutional factors. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39: 683-699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0234-1.
21. Martins F.S., Lucato W.C., Vils L., Ribeiro Serra F.A. (2020). The effects of market and entrepreneurial orientation on the ambidexterity of multinational companies’ subsidiaries. European Business Review, 32(1): 4-25.
22. Meagher K., Wang W. (2009). Firm organization and market structure: Centralization vs. decentralization. SSRN Electronic Journal, January. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1324002.
23. Oliveira I., Figueiredo J., Cardoso A., Nascimento Cunha M. (2023). Empirical evidence of the parent company’s infuence on spin of: From creation to performance. International Review of Economics, 70(3): 1-16.
24. Van Grembergen W., De Haes S., Thorp J. (2007). implementing information technology governance: Models, practices and cases. ResearchGate, January. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-924-3.