Innovative practice has existed for several millennia. However, only during the last 100 years have innovations been the subject of scientific study. There are three stages in the formation and development of the theory of innovation:
First stage, called the period of basic innovation in this field of scientific knowledge, from the 1910s to the 1930s. During this period, the formation of the fundamental foundations of the theory takes place.
Second phase 1940s-1960s - development and refinement of the basic innovative ideas of the previous period;
Third stage since the mid-1970s - a new theoretical breakthrough associated with the development and spread of the fifth technological order, a wave of epoch-making and basic innovations during the formation of a post-industrial society and the emergence of a technological order. This period covers the first two decades of the 21st century. and probably may cover the third decade.
Consider the main features and achievements of each period. Formation of the foundations of the theory of innovation occurred primarily in the economic and technological spheres in the framework of the formation of a general theory of cycles and crises. The prerequisites for understanding the role of innovation in overcoming economic crises follow from the understanding of M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky, the decisive role of investment fluctuations in changing the phases of the industrial cycle, since investments are usually associated with innovation. One of the classics of Keynesianism, E. Hansen, estimating the contribution of M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky, in the development of the theory of cycles and crises, wrote: “The cycle is dominated and controlled, thus fluctuations in the size of investments; consumption rises and falls as a result of these fluctuations. Such was the highly original and essentially new theory for that time put forward by Tugan-Baranovsky.
The great Russian economist N.D. Kondratiev, expounding the doctrine of large cycles of the conjuncture of approximately half a century in duration, substantiated the natural connection between the “upward” and “downward” waves of these cycles with the waves of technical inventions and their practical use: “Before the beginning of the upward wave of each large cycle, and sometimes at its very beginning, there are significant changes in the basic conditions of the economic life of society. These changes are usually expressed (in one combination or another) in profound changes in the technique of production and exchange (which in turn are preceded by significant technical inventions and discoveries), in changes in the conditions of money circulation, in the strengthening of the role of new countries in world economic life.
In essence, it is a wave of technological and economic innovation. N.D. Kondratiev links these waves with radical changes in other areas of society: “Periods of upward waves of large cycles, as a rule, are much richer in major social upheavals and upheavals in the life of society (revolutions, wars) than periods of downward waves.” Thus, we can conclude that N.D. Kondratiev laid the foundations of a general theory of innovation, covering not only technology and the economy, but also the socio-political sphere, and also revealing the mechanism of interaction between innovations in various spheres of society. The founder of the theory of innovation is considered Joseph Schumpeter, who developed the main ideas of N.D. Kondratieff in this area. I. Schumpeter, focusing on economic innovations, highly appreciated the role of an entrepreneur - an innovator in economic progress. “The function of entrepreneurs is to reform or revolutionize production, using inventions, or more generally, using new technological solutions to produce new goods or to produce old goods in a new way, opening up new sources of raw materials or new markets, reorganizing the industry and etc. The beginning of railroad construction, the production of electricity before the First World War, steam power, steel, the automobile, colonial enterprises are all bright examples of a large family of phenomena, including countless more modest representatives, right up to the introduction of new varieties of sausages and original toothbrushes. It is precisely this kind of activity that is the main cause of the periodic "ups" that revolutionize the economic organism, and the periodic "recessions" arising from the imbalance in the production of new goods or the application of new methods. It is always difficult to do something new, and the implementation of innovation reflects an independent economic function, firstly, since everything new lies outside the routine, understandable tasks for everyone, and, secondly, since one has to overcome the resistance of the environment ... ". This quotation sums up the foundations of the theory of innovation II. Schumpeter: innovation activity as the most important function of entrepreneurs; distinction between innovations-products and innovations-processes, radical (basic) and improving, technological and economic innovations; the place of innovation in the cyclical dynamics of the economy; the inevitability of overcoming the force of inertia, the resistance of the environment. The second period of development of the theory of innovation is not characterized by such fundamental breakthroughs. Theoretical developments were hindered by the Second World War, and in the conditions of the post-war arms race, activities in the innovation sphere were aimed at mastering and disseminating the basic innovations of the IV Kondratiev cycle and the technological order adequate to it. Such studies were of a more practical, applied nature. Among the fundamental works of this period, it should be noted the monograph of the outstanding English scientist John Bernal "Science in the History of Society" (Science in History), published in London in 1954 and in the USSR in 1956. Although the researcher focuses on the progress of scientific knowledge for all historical epochs, it reveals the inseparable relationship of this progress with the development of technology, starting from the Paleolithic. J. Bernal notes the change of periods of ups and downs in the development of science and its technological application: “The progress of science is anything but uniformity in space and time. Periods of rapid pace of its development alternate with longer periods of stagnation and even decline. In the course of time, the centers of scientific activity moved and usually followed the movement of the centers of trade and industrial activity rather than directed it. The monograph reveals the connection between scientific, technical and social innovations at all stages of the history of the development of society. J. Bernal notes that "the heyday of science usually coincides with periods of increased economic activity and technological progress." And although in the early stages science used innovations rather than initiated them, in modern society, it is scientific innovations that serve as the starting point for innovations in engineering and technology and in other areas of society. During this period, significant attention was paid to the relationship of innovation with economic growth. In 1917 Simon Kuznets formulated a number of new approaches to the theory of innovation, developing the ideas of I. Schumpeter and J. Bernal. S. Kuznets introduced the concept of epochal innovations underlying the transition from one historical era to another, as discussed above. S. Kuznets makes 4 main conclusions:
innovations in other areas of society: “The constant emergence of technological innovations, which is characteristic of modern economic growth, and the social innovations that accompany them, facilitating the necessary adaptation, are the main factors influencing the structure of the economy and society”, lead to “innovations in the field of law, in institutional structures and even ideologies. This is especially true for developing countries: “Remarkable progress in economic development
developing countries may require changes in existing production technologies and probably even more significant innovations in political and social structures.
During the same period, technological innovations were also explored in terms of innovation management. We can name the book of Brian Twiss "Management of scientific and technological innovations", the first edition of which was published in 1974. B. Twiss notes the importance of the ideas of N.D. Kondratiev to understand the uneven dynamics of innovation and the decisive role of the latter in ensuring economic growth. “The nature of technical development is changing. In recent years, the work of N. D. Kondratiev, who suggested the existence of long waves of economic development, has received new recognition. G. Mensh, who studied the frequency of scientific and technical innovations, also confirmed the presence of half-century cycles, active innovations in the phase of the deepest depression. In each case, new technologies underlay the formation of new industries that accelerate economic growth. In the light of these ideas, the importance of scientific and technological innovation as a source of economic growth is growing.”
The book contains a statement by J. Bright, characterizing the unique role of innovation in the development of society: “The only process of its kind that unites science, technology, economics, entrepreneurship and management is the process of scientific and technical innovation. It embodies the knowledge that a competent leader, an efficiently working scientist, an intelligent official and simply an educated member of society must have tomorrow. It is the process of transforming scientific knowledge into a physical reality that changes society.”
B. Twiss emphasizes the essence of innovation as a process in which an invention or a scientific idea acquires economic content. At the same time, the creative nature of innovation activity reveals the main factors that determine the success of innovation. These include: market orientation, compliance with the goals of the corporation, evaluation methods, effective project management, creativity, innovative environment and the presence of a “project advocate”, which characterizes the features of innovation at different stages of the industry life cycle, methods for evaluating the effectiveness of innovative projects.
Experience in technological innovation was generalized by national and international economic organizations, which contributed to improving the efficiency of innovation. However, mostly only at the evolutionary stage of the spread of innovations. The beginning of the third (modern) stage in the development of the theory of innovation is considered to be the publication of the monograph by the German scientist Gerhard Mensch "Technological stalemate: innovations overcome depression" and subsequent publications and international conferences devoted to the theory of long-wave fluctuations in the economy by N.D. Kondratiev and I. Schumpeter. Among these publications, the monographs of J. Van Dein “Long waves in economic life”, A. Kleinknecht “Innovations in times of crisis and prosperity”, K. Freeman, J. Clark, L. Sute “Unemployment and technical innovations. Studying long waves of economic development”, I. Nikolova “Long waves of Kondratiev”. During this period, the development of the theory of cycles and innovations began to be given attention by Soviet and Russian scientists. A fundamental study of long-term trends in the dynamics of science, technology and economics was carried out by Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences A.I. Anchishkin. A.I. Anchishkin singled out three epochal revolutions in the history of scientific and technological progress that implemented clusters of basic innovations: first industrial revolution late 18th - early 19th centuries; second industrial revolution the last third of the 19th - early 20th centuries; third industrial revolution beginning in the middle of the 20th century. and developed into a scientific and technological revolution. In the penultimate decade of the 20th century, as noted by A.I. Anchishkin, signs of a new, second wave of scientific and technological revolution began to take shape, the main features of which are a radical restructuring of production technology based on electronics, biotechnology, automation of complex technical systems, an information explosion, the absolute dominance of technology on a scientific basis, the transformation of the materialization of scientific knowledge into the main source of expanded reproduction. A series of monographs on the problems of innovation theory was published by Yu.V. Yakovets in 1978-1988
y.y. In these works, innovations were considered as an indispensable part of scientific, technical and economic cycles (medium-term, long-term, super-long-term), the basis for overcoming the crisis, the relationship of scientific, technical, innovative, economic, educational, organizational and managerial cycles and their innovative phases was studied. By the end of the 80s. In the 20th century, the legacy of N.D. Kondratiev, his doctrine of large cycles of the conjuncture and related long-term fluctuations in economic dynamics.
A new stage in the development of the theory of innovation in the 1980s was associated with a deep crisis in the world economy in the mid-1970s and early 1980s, caused by the transition to the fifth Kondratieff cycle. This transition took place against the background of the world energy crisis and the price revolution: the index of world export prices for 1971-1980. increased 8.1 times, including raw materials - 14.1 times, agricultural products - 8 times, finished products - 6.3 times. A non-standard, from the point of view of the theory of crises, phenomenon arose, called stagflation, i.e. galloping inflation in the face of a decline in production. And although in the next 5 years, export prices, especially for fuel and raw materials, decreased, and then their moderate growth with unstable dynamics was observed, the situation in the world economy has changed. It became obvious that there was a need to implement a cluster of basic innovations. As a result, only with the help of such innovations it was possible to overcome the global depression of the 1980s.
Since the second half of the 1980s, relatively high rates of economic growth have been observed (with a hitch at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s). As a result, the volume of GDP "of the world over 15 years increased by 63%, world production - by 60% (including finished products - by 65%), exports - by 2.83 times (including finished products - by 3, 96 times) with an increase in export prices by 3.31 times (including for raw materials - by 1.94 times, for agricultural raw materials - by 2.29 times and finished products - by 4.02 times).
The improvement of world economic indicators in the 90s of the XX century weakened the attention of scientists to the theory of innovation, brought to the fore the applied problems of development and dissemination of improving innovations. However, the global economic crisis of 2001-2002, which marked the transition to a downward wave of the fifth Kondratiev cycle, and then the global financial crisis of 2008-2010, again poses the problem of mastering clusters of basic innovations that ensure the transition to the sixth technological order, adequate to the post-industrial technological mode of production, which is will cause increased interest in the problems of the theory of innovations, the mechanism of their development and distribution in the context of the globalization of the economy, the revival of interest in the theory of cycles, crises and innovations N.D. Kondratiev, I. Schumpeter, G. Mensch. Now in economic science more attention is paid to the main patterns of development of the modern economy - cyclicality and unevenness, characterized by a change in basic technological processes, as well as the growth and development of the economy based on innovative transformations.
The theory of changing technological patterns is based on the concepts of Kondratiev N.D., Schumpeter I, Mensch G., where an attempt was made to link the change in technological patterns with the activity of entrepreneurs in the production and implementation of basic technological innovations. Further, this concept was supported and developed by Russian scientists Glazyev S., Maevsky V., Dagaev A., Yakovets Yu. Menshikov S. and others.
There are opponents of this concept. The Russian economist M. L. Khazin criticizes the theory of Kondratiev cycles and, accordingly, technological patterns from the position that he considers economic growth a function of the degree of economic development of available territorial markets (M. Khazin calls them technological zones). According to the economist, the development of the market lies in the maximum possible growth of specialization. Once the maximum possible value has been reached, no further growth is possible despite any technical innovations.
The most significant results of the development of the theory of innovation in the second half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 20th century include:
1. The study of long-wave fluctuations in the economy and the waves of basic innovations associated with them. The theory of cycles and innovations of N.D. was accepted, statistically confirmed and developed. Kondratiev and J. Schumpeter.
G. Mensh substantiated the provisions on basic innovations, improving innovations and pseudo-innovations; revealed the interrelationships of long-term cycles in the field of inventions, innovations and the economy.
2. Along with the long-wave fluctuations of inventions, innovations, and economic activity, ultra-long secular and millennial waves of epoch-making innovations were put forward and studied, transforming not only technology and the economy, but the entire structure of society. A. Toynbee studied the cycles in the dynamics of local civilizations, the periodic change of their generations. “The growth of civilizations is a progressive movement. Civilizations develop through an impulse that leads them from challenge through response to further challenge: from differentiation to integration and back to integration. The progress we call growth is a cumulative forward movement.” At the core of the transformative power of responding to a challenge is a cluster of landmark and groundbreaking innovations. If a civilization proves incapable of it, it leaves the stage of history. F. Braudel, following R. Cameron, substantiated the presence of not only half-century Kondratieff, but also secular trends lasting from 150 to 300 years, believing that longer historical cycles do not exist.
A different opinion is shared by E. Toffler, one of the authors of the concept of post-industrial society. He believes that the result of the biggest innovations are big waves that open up entire eras in the history of mankind. First wave began 8-9 thousand years ago with the development of agriculture and cattle breeding, the transition to artificial reproduction, a productive lifestyle, and then to the formation of construction and crafts. Second wave- the birth of an industrial civilization, the beginning of which was laid by the industrial revolution. At the end of the XX century. started third wave, during which humanity is moving to a new technological revolution. It brings with it a truly new way of life based on differentiated, renewable sources of life, electronic cottages, locally transformed schools and corporations. “The beginning of a new civilization is the single most explosive fact of the times we live in. Humanity is in for a profound change. It faces a profound social upheaval and a theoretical reorganization of all time. Without yet clearly distinguishing this amazing new civilization, we are participating in its construction from the very beginning.
From what has been said, it follows that each local civilization goes through different stages of its life cycle: in the phases of revival and rise, it is characterized by high innovative activity, in the phases of stagnation and crisis - low. The study of the impact of globalization on the fate of civilizations shows the increased territorial differentiation of the innovation process. The group of developed countries with a high level of per capita income (15% of the world's population) concentrates the bulk of innovation and high-tech industries. Poor countries with a low level of per capita income are, as a rule, in a state of technological stagnation, do not have sufficient financial resources and qualified personnel to implement basic innovations. As a result, the technological and economic gap between countries and civilizations is growing. 5. Much attention was paid to the economic mechanism for implementing innovations, practical issues of technology commercialization. Most researchers stand on the point of view of the need to combine the competitive market mechanism (especially in relation to improving innovations) with active state support for basic innovations that determine the country's competitiveness. Discarded as positions of refusal of state support for innovation; hopes for the all-powerful and saving “invisible hand of the market”, as well as the desire to nationalize the entire innovation field, to concentrate all innovation resources from the state and implement innovations at bureaucratic discretion.
Modern technogenic civilization has several key features. The main one is that in such a society, scientific progress always comes first and
The term "technogenic civilization" or "technocracy" appeared in 1921. It was first used by a sociologist In his book Engineers and the Price System, the researcher emphasized the importance of uniting the efforts of engineers from all over the world to improve life on earth.
This concept quickly became popular in the scientific community. Veblen's followers continued the research of their predecessor. Several theories have emerged about what a technogenic civilization is. First of all, it was opposed to traditional society. Such a civilization is characterized by the fact that its members try to preserve their former way of life. They are guided by traditions and painfully endure change. It is a society with slow social development. Technogenic civilization is built around opposite principles - individual freedom, progress, innovation in all spheres of life, readiness to adapt to rapid changes.
Technocracy is not only a civilization (that is, a way of society), but also an ideology. Its supporters believe that there is nothing more important than the development of science. At the same time, the development of technology leads to changes in social life. Technological growth is not just the fun of scientists. It is also a way to solve many social problems (for example, to close the gap between the rich and the poor).
Modern civilization (technogenic) changes not only the way of life of people, but also the political system. Such an ideology implies that the state should be ruled not by a clear institution of power. The mechanisms of governing the country in a technocratic society work without regard to a particular politician. In fact, the personality of the ruler becomes secondary. In the first place is the state machine itself, which, with the help of its social elevators, lifts only high-quality managers to the top, and not populists who promise voters in elections
Today it is difficult to deny that science is the main engine of progress. However, the attitude towards the development of technology was not always rosy. Even when humanity left behind the era of barbarism, science for a long time was the lot of the marginalized. The first world civilizations that arose in Antiquity, of course, belonged to the group of traditional societies. In all of them, traditions and customs occupied an important place.
The first prerequisites for the emergence of technogenic civilization can be noted in ancient Greek policies. These were independent cities, in whose life thinkers and scientists played an important role. The policies were governed by the principles of democracy, which replaced the classical tyranny of a single despot. It was in these cities that many significant human inventions appeared.
The difference between traditional society and technogenic civilization is colossal. Therefore, people had to prove their right to progress for many centuries. A noticeable development of technogenic civilization began in the 15th-16th centuries, when Western Europe learned about the existence of the New World. The discovery of lands on distant shores spurred the curiosity of the inhabitants of the Catholic world. The most enterprising and enterprising of them became navigators and explorers. They opened the world around them and enriched the knowledge of their compatriots. This process could not but affect the general state of minds. In the end, the quantity of knowledge turned into quality.
One of the main obstacles to the development of early technogenic society was religion. The church in medieval Europe was an important institution, both spiritual and political. Her opponents were declared heretics and burned at the stake. At the beginning of the 16th century, the Reformation movement was born in Germany. His inspiration, Martin Luther, advocated reform of the church. The preacher had many supporters, including in the princely German dynasties. Soon an armed struggle began between Protestants and Catholics. It resulted in the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), after which the principle of religious freedom was established in many European countries.
In the new society, much more resources went to the development of education. Universities opened, people studied and learned about the world around them. The development of technology has led to economic growth. Such important inventions as, for example, the steam boiler, allowed some countries to increase their own production and improve the well-being of citizens.
XIX century made England a major world power with colonies in all parts of the world. Of course, it was already a technological civilization. The problems of its development were related to the fact that people who became the masters of the whole world did not immediately learn how to use its resources correctly.
During the Renaissance and the Enlightenment there was a synthesis of many ideas of the ancient world and Christian civilization. The new ideology received only the best from these two foundations. In particular, it was love for a person. The ideas of the Enlightenment said that there is nothing in the world more important than a single individual.
Today, these principles form the basis of the constitutions of most states of the world. Human-centeredness was first proclaimed as a key idea after the declaration of US independence. In the constitution of this new country, all the basic modern civil liberties were enshrined. A few years later, France followed a similar path, where a revolution took place that destroyed the old order in the face of a conservative absolute monarchy. In the future, for another two centuries, different societies achieved civil liberties in their own ways, without which it is impossible to imagine a technogenic civilization.
In the 20th century, man and technogenic civilization moved to a new stage of their development. At this time, the pace of social change dramatically accelerated. Today, there is so much new in the life of one generation as there was not a few centuries before. Technogenic civilization is also sometimes called "Western", emphasizing the place of its origin. Today, the main abodes of such orders are Europe and the USA.
It is important that today the crisis of technogenic civilization can no longer occur, because the sources of its development were not new cultural zones as before (colonialism, etc.), but the restructuring of an already existing order. The main success of the transition from a traditional society to a technocracy can be considered a change in values. Today, the most important thing for society is any innovation, something new, as a phenomenon.
Traditional and technogenic civilization cannot coexist together. Therefore, modern society is characterized by dynamic spread to all corners of the planet. Traditional societies become obsolete by themselves in contact with the latest technologies. Adherents of traditions and haters of progress have only one way to survive in today's world - to put their society on the path of isolation. This is how North Korea lives, which does not recognize the discoveries of the West and does not even maintain economic relations with it.
One of the most important dominants in technogenic civilization has always been the desire of man to subjugate nature. Man did not immediately learn to take care of the world around him. Its vigorous activity associated with the intensive use of natural resources often leads to harmful environmental conditions. In a series of similar examples, one can note the tragedy at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. This is the case when people too quickly took up the use of new technology, not yet learned how to use it. Humanity has only one home. An irrational attitude to nature is one of the main problems of technocracy.
It is fundamentally necessary for a member of such a society to engage in transformative activity. It is with this rule that the values of technogenic civilization are associated, thanks to which it constantly changes its own foundations.
The emergence of technogenic civilization has changed the position of man in society. In a traditional society, people are extremely dependent on the supreme power, traditions and caste system.
In the modern world, the individual is autonomous. Each person can, at will, change his environment, contacts, working circle. It is not tied to dogmatic orders. Modern man is free. Independence is necessary for the personality for development and self-realization. Technogenic civilization, which is built on innovation and discovery, encourages and supports the individuality of each individual.
From history of innovation
E.A. Shkatova, E.A. Lepekha (SVGU, Magadan)
Under innovationinnovation"- innovation, innovation, innovation) refers to the use of innovations in the form of new technologies, types of products and services, new forms of organization of production and labor, service and management. In the Modern Dictionary of Foreign Words of 2009, innovation is treated as innovation. In the "Dictionary of a Practical Psychologist" of 1998, innovation is interpreted - in a socio-psychological aspect - as the creation and implementation of various types of innovations that generate significant changes in social practice.
The emergence of the term "innovation" is associated with a long evolution of the term "development", which originated in the philosophical teachings of Aristotle, and then in classical Latin literature (Priscian, Corippus). It should be noted that Aristotle used this term in the worldly sense - "unraveling opinions", and Cicero - as "opening the book".
A fairly broad definition of innovation is given by B.A. Reisberg and L.Sh. Lozovsky, believing that innovation is an innovation in the field of technology, technology, labor organization and management, which is based on the use of scientific achievements, as well as the use of these innovations in various fields and fields of activity.
K.R. McConnell and SL. Bru refers to the launch of a new product, the introduction of new production methods, or the use of new forms of business organization.
F. Kotler defines innovation as a product or technology that has been put into production and has already entered the market, perceived by the consumer as new or having some specific unique properties.
B. Twiss defines innovation as a process in which an invention or idea acquires economic content.
F. Nixon believes that innovation is a set of technical, industrial and commercial activities that lead to the emergence of new and improved industrial processes and equipment on the market.
I. Schumpeter interprets innovation as a new scientific and organizational combination of production factors motivated by an entrepreneurial spirit.
Innovation became the subject of scientific study only in the 20th century.
For example, in science, the term "innovation" began to be used in the 19th century in the study of anthropology and ethnography. In the 20th century, the term "innovation" was introduced into science as an economic category. Entrepreneurs were the initiators of innovations (for example, G. Ford, the founder of a car manufacturing companyFordMotorcompany. He developed a system of mass production of cars based on a flow conveyor, which he first applied in the automotive industry), political and statesmen (Schumpeter, Kondratiev, etc.), architects (I. Hoffman, E. Saarinen, G. Hering, etc.) , artists, musicians (A. Sachs, P. Barth, T. Edison, etc.).
Let us consider in more detail how the theories of "innovation" developed.
A great contribution to the foundation of the theory of innovation was laid by N.D. Kondratiev - economist, founder of the theory of economic cycles, theoretically substantiated the "new economic policy" in the USSR. He linked technological and economic innovation waves with radical changes in other areas of society. N.D. Kondratiev laid the foundations for a general theory of innovation, covering not only technology and the economy, but also the socio-political sphere, as well as the mechanism for the interaction of innovations in various spheres of society.
In essence, the founder of the theory of innovation is Joseph Schumpeter, who picked up and developed the main ideas of N.D. Kondratieff in this area. Joseph Schumpeter is an Austrian and American economist, political scientist, sociologist and historian of economic thought. He concentrated his attention on economic innovations, highly appreciated the role of the innovative entrepreneur in economic progress. The studies of Kondratyev's like-minded person, Pitirim Sorokin, are considered important. He laid the foundations for innovation in the socio-cultural sphere, understanding it in a broad sense - not only art and culture, social and political relations, but also the dynamics of scientific discoveries and inventions, interstate and civil wars. He also gave quantitative estimates of innovative waves in a number of areas of spiritual reproduction.
In the second half of the XX century. theories of innovation began to develop rapidly: Arnold Toynbee studied cyclesAT" the dynamics of local civilizations, the periodic change of their generations. Fernand Braudel, following R. Cameron, substantiated the presence of not only half-century Kondratieff, but also secular trends lasting from 150 to 300 years, believing that longer historical cycles do not exist.
The Nobel lecture by Simon Kuznets was devoted to the problem of the relationship between innovation and economic growth, where he formulated new approaches to the theory of innovation, which developed the ideas of Joseph Schumpeter and John Bernal. S. Kuznets introduced the concept of epoch-making innovations, he believed that they underlie the transition from one historical era to another. He believed that the main breakthrough in the development of human knowledge was provided by epoch-making innovations or innovations. S. Kuznets said that economic history can be divided into economic epochs, each of which is determined by an epoch-making innovation with its own characteristics of growth. According to S. Kuznets, it is the epochal innovations and the waves of basic innovations that realize their potential that underlie the transition not only of the economy, but of the entire society as a whole, from one stage to another.
B. Twiss (an American economist) made a significant contribution to the theory of innovative development, emphasizing the essence of the innovation process, in which an invention or scientific idea acquires economic content, the creative nature of innovation activity. He also identified the factors that determine the success of innovations.
New ideas in the development of the theory of innovation are associated with a deep crisis in the world economy in the mid-1970s and early 1980s. This transition took place against the background of the global energy crisis and price changes.
A significant contribution to the development of the theory of innovation at the present stage was made by such economists as Adam B. Yaffe, Josh Lerner, Scott Stern, M. Gyaratana, S. Torrisi and Alessandro Pagano. In their studies on economic well-being, they cited examples of economic growth in developing countries through innovation. They also tried to identify various factors of economic growth. In their opinion, one of the factors of innovative development of the economy is education. Special education plays a major role in supporting technological progress, just as large companies' spending on research and development, together with the efforts of small entrepreneurs, is complementary to the innovation process, which means that the result of mutual action is more beneficial to the economy than single action.
Adherents of the same theory are A. Arora and A. Gambardela, who believed that highly educated specialists are the main factor in innovative development. In their opinion, in all countries where the high-tech sector of the economy is developing, there are highly educated specialists in relation to the level of development of this region. That is, the internal resources of the region contribute to the development of certain industries, for example, in Japan - this is the electronics industry, in Finland - telecommunications, etc.
Thus, education provides technical knowledge and skills to entrepreneurs involved in the process of innovation and economic growth, as well as stimulates creativity and imagination, and facilitates the process of adapting innovation to life.
According to scientists K.R. McConnell and SL. Bru, large companies are a factor in the innovative path of economic development, since the latest technologies require the use of large capital, large markets, a comprehensive, centralized and rigorously integrated market, rich and reliable sources of raw materials. That is, only large companies can provide a technical breakthrough, as they have sufficient resources.
M. Gyaratana, S. Torrisi and A. Pagano adhere to the same theory. They substantiated their views on the practice of Ireland, where the arrival of transnational companies preceded the growth of the innovative sector of the economy. But at the same time, they singled out three more factors for the development of the economy: an excess of highly qualified personnel, international relations, and domestic demand.
It should be noted that the modern Russian school of innovation in unity with the theory of cycles and crises originates from 1988 in the works of Yu.V. Yakovets. Yu.V. Yakovets - Doctor of Economics, Professor of the Department of Theory and Practice of State Regulation of the Market Economy of the Russian Academy. He proposed a classification of innovations (technical innovations) according to the level of novelty, introduced the concept of an innovation cycle, defined its structure, revealed the connection with scientific, inventive and innovation cycles, considered the mechanism for mastering innovations, characterized the differential scientific and technical income.
In domestic literature, the problem of innovation has long been considered in the system of economic research. However, over time, the problem arose of assessing the qualitative characteristics of innovative changes in all spheres of social life, but it is impossible to determine these changes only within the framework of economic theories.
We will dwell in more detail on innovations developing in the educational system. Innovations are inherent in any education - this is a characteristic feature of world pedagogy. Innovative pedagogical activity in Russia was carried out
not only in the last 20 years, but even in Soviet times, although it took place in a regulated manner, mainly on the basis of experimental schools. Pedagogical innovation processes have been the subject of special study in the West since the late 1950s, and in Russia since the 1980s.
Consequently, innovations in the Russian educational system have been talked about since the 80s of the XX century, and until now this phenomenon is one of the most uncertain and ambiguous from the standpoint of the categorical apparatus of pedagogy. As N.Yu. Postalyuk, it was in the 1980s that the problem of innovation in pedagogy and, accordingly, its conceptual support became the subject of a special study.
In the late 80s and early 90s of the XX century, the experience of innovative teachers (Sh.A. Amonashvili, I.P. Volkov, N.N. Dubinin, E.N. Ilyin, V.F. Shatalov, M.P. Shchetinin, etc.), which stimulates and activates innovative processes in the national school. Since the 1990s domestic education begins to actively borrow foreign pedagogical experience. The creative application of foreign pedagogical experience is becoming an important source of innovation. Consequently, the modern innovative "orientation" of pedagogical activity is a natural, socially and historically determined stage in the development of domestic education.
In the last 20 years, the problem of innovations in the field of education has been considered in the works of domestic teachers and psychologists: N.V. Gorbunova, V.I. Zagvyazinsky,MB. Cla-rina,B. C. Lazareva, V.Ya. Laudis, M.M. Potashnik, S.D. Polyakova, V.A. Slastenina, V.I. Slobodchikova, T.I. Shamova, O.G. Yusufbekova and others. The terms "innovation in education" and "pedagogical innovation", used as synonyms, were scientifically substantiated and introduced into the categorical apparatus of pedagogy by I.R. Yusufbekova.
Therefore, we can conclude that, continuing the tradition of N.D. Kondratiev, O. Spengler, J. Schumpeter, P. Sorokin, innovation researchers extended them not only to technology and economics, but also to other areas of society, including science, political and social life, culture, ethics, religion.
Bibliographic list:
1. Akimov A.A. Systemological foundations of innovation / A. A. Akimov. - St. Petersburg. : Peter, 2012. - 38 p.
2. Bell D. The Coming Post-Industrial Society / D. Bell. - M. : Academy, 2009. - 786 p.
3. Gamidov G.S. Innovative economy: strategy, policy, solutions / G.S. Gamidov, T.A. Ismailov. - St. Petersburg. : Philosopher, 2011.- 132 p.
4. Emelin V.A. Technological temptations of the information society: the limit of human external extensions // Questions of Philosophy. -2010. -No. 5.-S. 84-90.
5. Erofeeva N.I. Project Management in Education // National Education. - 2002. - No. 5. - S. 94.
6. Ivanova V.V. Knowledge-Based Economy as a Stage of Society's Economic Development // Bulletin of the International Nobel Economic Forum. - 2012. - No. 1. -S. 192-198.
7. Kuzmin M.N. The problem of preserving the unified educational space of Russia // Pedagogy. - 2004. - No. 4. - S. 3.
8. Mamchur E.A. Fundamental science and modern technologies // Questions of Philosophy. - 2011. - No. 3. - S. 80-89.
9. Orlova A.I. Revival of education or its reform? // Teaching history at school. - 2006. - No. 1. - S. 37.
10. Foster L. Nanotechnologies. Science, innovations and opportunities / L. Foster. - M.: Technosfera, 2008. - 352 p.
HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF THE THEORY OF INNOVATION
© G.V. Grudinin1
Irkutsk State Technical University, 664074, Russia, Irkutsk, st. Lermontov, 83.
The relevance of the historical evolution of the theory of innovation is indicated. The main stages of innovative development are given. The relationship between the theory of innovative development and the formation of legal protection of intellectual property and its commercialization is revealed. Il. 3. Bibliography. 19 titles
Key words: history of innovations; the evolution of innovation; innovative development; intellectual property.
HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF INNOVATION THEORY G.V. Grudinin
Irkutsk State Technical University, 83 Lermontov St., Irkutsk, 664074, Russia.
The article indicates the relevance of the historical evolution of the theory of innovation. It gives the main stages of innovative development and reveals the correlation between the theory of innovative development and the formation of intellectual property legal protection and its commercialization. 3 figures. 19 sources.
Key words: history of innovation; evolution of innovation; innovative development; intellectual property.
In recent years, processes have been formed in the world focused on the development of a new type of economy, where the basis of progress is the production of knowledge, its development and capitalization. Innovative activity is becoming the main direction of investment and concentration of both public and private sectors of the economy.
The concepts of innovation, innovation activity are given different meanings depending on the scope of these terms, disputes about what belongs to them and what does not, do not subside both in the scientific and in the legal field. In a broad sense, innovations mean something that generalizes innovations, often regardless of their fundamentality, depth and scope, as well as the area and scope of use. Consider some of the wording used in legislative acts:
Innovation - a new or significantly improved product (good, service) or process introduced into use, a new sales method or a new organizational method in business practice, workplace organization or in external relations.
Innovation is the introduction of some new or significantly improved product (good or service) or process, a new method of marketing or a new organizational method in business practice, workplace organization or external relations.
In general, these formulations convey the modern meaning of the term innovation, but we will try to focus on the technological part of innovation in the context of historical development and change. Throughout human history
technological progress played a key role in the development of civilizations. Starting from the processing of stone and the development of fire, agriculture, the invention of the wheel and writing, to the creation of the World Wide Web and deciphering the structure of DNA, discoveries and inventions allow a person to rise to a new stage of evolution. Despite this, the attitude towards innovations, inventions and discoveries for many centuries did not find the deserved attention among contemporaries. We will not take into account the primitive communities and the Ancient World, but since antiquity, when the first works on mathematics, mechanics, astronomy appeared, the innovator was more of an innovator, the influence of science on the life of society was negligible compared to religion, military craft, agriculture. In particular, this arises from the opposition of science to technology, in contrast to Ancient China, where, in addition, a different religion allowed for many centuries to promote the development of science, invention and innovation. In many ways, religious dogmas became a brake on innovation in relation to the scope (mainly the socio-political history of the development of society), the instrument (actions of a religious and moral order) and ethical and moral principles throughout the Middle Ages. The Renaissance, the secular nature of its culture and anthropocentrism give impetus to the rethinking of the mind, creativity and innovation. These qualities are encouraged, it becomes possible to evaluate the role of thought and talent in human activity, and its result has the highest value and criterion for evaluating society. The subsequent reformation in chronological order and the emergence of Protestantism with its fundamentally
1Grudinin Grigory Vladimirovich, postgraduate student, phone: 89041119473, e-mail: [email protected] Grudinin Grigory, Postgraduate, tel.: 89041119473, e-mail: [email protected]
with a different attitude to savings, work, creativity and entrepreneurship have made a huge step towards the perception of innovation as the most important factor in development. I would like to emphasize that the Protestant work ethic and its characteristic feature - doing business not only for the sake of increasing personal consumption, but as a virtuous activity contributed to beneficial development in the coming era of capitalism.
European encyclopedists of the 18th century. in their works highlighted the importance of the relationship between science and production throughout human history. The French educator Jean Condorcet noted in his work “Sketch of a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind” that “the progress of science ensures the progress of industry, which itself then accelerates scientific progress; and this mutual influence, the action of which is constantly renewed, must be ranked among the most active, most powerful reasons for the improvement of the human race. In the key work of his time, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, the Scottish economist Adam Smith also finds the following pattern: “With the progress of society, science, or speculation, becomes, like any other occupation, the main or only profession and occupation of a special class of citizens. Like any other occupation, it also falls into a large number of different specialties, each of which provides employment to a special category or class of scientists; such a division of occupations in science, as in any other business, increases skill and saves time. Each individual worker becomes more experienced and knowledgeable in his specialty; in general, more work is being done and the achievements of science are increasing significantly. The considerable increase in the production of every kind of object resulting from the division of labor leads, in a society properly governed, to that general welfare which extends even to the lowest strata of the people. Thus, he affirmed the importance of science as an engine of progress, recognizing it as an element in the chain of division of labor, but leaving it with the role, rather, of a function, a secondary factor that ensures the development of production. In our opinion, the importance of this statement should be noted due to the fact that in the XIX century. it was adhered to by most economists, including Karl Marx, who considered the development of productive forces to be the basis, and scientific and technological progress to be a superstructure, that is, a consequence, and not a cause, of the development of production. Based on the theoretical and methodological heritage of the classics, creatively comprehending it and strengthening it with the methods of materialistic dialectics and the principle of historicism, Marx continues the study of technological dynamics. In particular, he puts forward and scientifically substantiates the position that the material basis of the medium-term economic cycle is the movement of fixed capital, from the renewal of which, and therefore, from
activation of innovation and investment processes, the way out of the next economic crisis begins. At the same time, Marx interprets innovation as a process that develops in "leaps" during a crisis and depression and slows down in other phases of the cycle. Confirmation of this can be found in his model of the movement of total capital in simple and expanded reproduction, which assumes the constancy of the organic structure of capital.
At the same time, an extended version of the consequences of mass innovations is presented, which are dialectically involved in the consideration of the laws and patterns of the development of society. It is with mass technological improvements, which cause a number of interrelated changes in the productive forces, that Marx connects subsequent adequate changes in organizational, economic and socio-economic production relations and the transition to the highest formation stage.
Thus, innovation activity was somehow considered as an important component of economic development, but its role was rather secondary and was not the subject of a separate and serious economic study. Moreover, historically, innovative activity has not been properly rewarded and protected by certain rights for many centuries. Considering innovation activity, it is impossible not to touch upon such an important point as intellectual property for inventions. We will try to analyze the historical development of this concept.
If we consider the period from antiquity to the late Middle Ages, then the protection of the results of mental labor is not even discussed. One can only mention the very first case of copyright protection, described by the Greek historian Philarkus: according to the custom of the ancient province of Sibarius, the chef who invented a new dish received the sole right to prepare it for a year. But in fact, this is the exception that proves the rule. This can partly be explained by the fact that the vast majority of inventors were from the upper classes, and they did not need it. Changes occurred in the late Middle Ages, when the first form of intellectual property protection arose - the feudal privilege for invention. Let's highlight its main characteristics:
Issued by the will and mercy of the ruler;
It extended to any type of activity (trade, production, invention, etc.);
No specific benefits were fixed (exemption from tax, the exclusive right to trade, the issuance of a land allotment, etc.);
Only the novelty in the given territory was significant, and it did not matter whether the author was the invention or the person who borrowed it from him.
Starting from the XII century. privileges spread throughout Europe. They were most developed in the Venetian Republic, where the first legal act was issued regulating the receipt of privileges and the use of the invention. However, since
over time, this method of stimulating technical progress became more and more a brake on the growth of productive forces. This was due to the following reasons:
1. Feudal monopolies, in fact, turned into a means of unscrupulous enrichment of the court camarilla, at whose mercy the most important types of production (salt, iron, sulfur, paper, glass, etc.) were given. This caused price gouging for essential goods, bribery and speculation flourishing under the protection of "royal privileges".
2. Privileges were abused by the guilds. All their activities were based on strict secrecy, and the number of artisans initiated into the secret "remained unchanged with a growing population", which absolutely excluded both the growth of production and the progress of technology. In the eyes of the workshop, the innovator-inventor was a dangerous subject who could suddenly undermine the complex system of organization, arranged with great difficulty and bringing large incomes to its members. Therefore, workshops did not support inventors and were often cemeteries of ideas.
Thus, the old feudal practice of privileges gradually begins to die out and new forms of protection for inventions appear - patents.
First, let's look at the fundamental differences between a patent and a privilege:
A patent is issued on the basis of a law that is the same for all;
A patent applies to new, unused innovations;
Only inventions can be the object of a patent.
Based on these differences, it can be said with certainty that the patent is aimed at the development of technical progress on equal terms for all.
From a historical point of view, the leadership in the field of patent law belongs to the Venetian Republic. On March 15, 1474, its Senate (116 votes against 10 with 3 abstentions) adopted the Venetian Party, which can be interpreted as the world's first Patent Law. According to this law, every citizen who made a car that had not previously been used on the territory of the state received a privilege, according to which everyone else was prohibited from making such cars for a certain period. It is worth noting that the Italian republics of the Middle Ages did not have royal power, and it was a different legal structure that allowed them to get ahead of their neighbors in this matter. For example, in England, only in 1624 was the "Statute of Monopolies" adopted, later called the "Magna Charter of the Rights of Inventors." This law is still considered the foundation of English patent law. By comparison, in the Russian Empire in 1812 privileges began to be used, and in 1830 patent law was introduced.
On March 20, 1883, at an international diplomatic conference in Paris, representatives of 11 countries signed a convention (subsequently
received the official name "Paris", on which the Union for the Protection of Industrial Property was established. This marked the transition from a system of national (i.e. valid only within one country) patents to an international system in which inventions patented in one member state of the Paris Convention could be protected in all other member countries. The USSR joined the Paris Convention on July 1, 1965.
Thus, the history of the development of intellectual property rights is historically inextricably linked with the development of attitudes towards innovation as a separate concept. It is important to note that with the change in attention to technology and innovation as the engines of progress and the final legalization of intellectual property rights and, accordingly, the receipt of income from it, the economic category of innovation arises.
The first who seriously began to consider innovation as an economic category can be called J.A. Schumpeter. In his 1911 work The Theory of Economic Development (German: Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung), the following main theses can be distinguished:
1. A clear separation of the concepts of economic development and economic growth.
Schumpeter himself pays great attention to this, trying to explain his vision on this issue as clearly as possible, which is reflected in large and various corrections and additions in subsequent editions. He understands development as “a special phenomenon, distinguishable in practice and in consciousness, which does not occur among the phenomena inherent in the circulation or the tendency to equilibrium, but acts on them only as an external force”, capable of shifting the circulation of the national economy from a given center of gravity to another. The usual growth of the economy "does not give rise to new, in terms of quality, phenomena, but only gives impetus to the processes of their adaptation, just as it happens when natural indicators change" .
2. Introduction of the concept of innovation (“implementation of new combinations”), which ensures economic development. It covers the following areas of activity:
making a new one, i.e. still unknown to consumers, the good or the creation of a new quality of this or that good;
introduction of a new, i.e. in this branch of industry is still practically unknown, the method (method) of production, which is based on a new scientific discovery and which may also consist in a new way of commercial use of the relevant product;
development of a new sales market, i.е. such a market in which the given branch of industry of this country has not been represented so far, regardless of whether this market existed before or not;
obtaining a new source of raw materials or semi-finished products in the same way, regardless of whether the existing
whether this source existed before, or was considered inaccessible, or it had yet to be created;
carrying out an appropriate reorganization, for example, securing a monopoly position (through the creation of trusts) or undermining the monopoly position of another enterprise.
3. The key role of the entrepreneur as the main initiator of innovative transformations.
An entrepreneur, according to Schumpeter, is a subject of economic activity, the least susceptible to the negative effects of fluctuations and recessions in comparison with an economic entity, which is firmly fixed in the coordinate system of a static economic formation. An entrepreneur has a great motive for his activity, he tends to apply new combinations, use new knowledge faster, his activity is more creative in conditions of risk.
Thus, this work gave rise to the theory of innovation and served as a starting point in its subsequent research.
A great contribution to the development of innovation was made by the Soviet economist N.D. Kondratiev. In his main work "Great cycles of conjuncture" (1925), he introduces the concept of the same name, also called "long waves". Kondratiev, on the basis of statistical data on the average level of commodity prices, interest on capital, nominal wages, foreign trade turnover, analysis of the extraction and consumption of coal, as well as iron and lead in Britain, France and the USA, considers a certain periodicity of 40-55 years in the rise and economic downturn in general. The interdependence of these cycles with fluctuations in scientific and technological progress is given: “for about two decades before the start of an upward wave of a large cycle, there is a revival in the field of technical inventions. Before and at the very beginning of the upward wave, there is a widespread use of these inventions in the field of industrial practice, associated with the reorganization of production relations. The beginning of large cycles usually coincides with the expansion of the orbit of world economic relations. Kondratiev also links upward waves with social tensions that arise in the same time periods, considering this to be a consequence rather than a cause of fluctuations: “both wars and social upheavals are included in the rhythmic process of the development of large cycles and turn out to be not the initial forces of this development, but a form of it. manifestations". In 1939, Schumpeter's work "Business Cycles" was published, in which he positively assessed the work of Kondratiev and developed his theory, linking long waves with short cycles of Juglar and Kitchen, thereby developing the ideas of the Soviet economist.
The works of Kondratiev, based on analytical data, made it possible to put forward innovation as the main factor in economic recovery over a long period of time.
sociocultural and historical perspective. Friend and like-minded N.D. Kondratiev, Pitirim Sorokin laid the foundations for the theory of innovation in the socio-cultural sphere, understanding it in a broad sense - not only as art and culture, social and political relations, but also as the dynamics of scientific discoveries and inventions, interstate and civil wars. In published in 1937-1941. In his four-volume Social and Cultural Dynamics, he studied, in particular, the trend in the dynamics of technical inventions over more than 5 millennia of the history of society, as well as the largest innovations observed over the millennia in other areas of society. Among the fundamental works of this period, it should be noted a large monograph by the outstanding English scientist John Bernal "Science in the history of society" (Science in History), published in London in 1954 and in the USSR in 1956. Although the focus of the researcher is the progress of scientific knowledge for all historical eras, he reveals the inseparable relationship of this progress with the development of technology, starting from the Paleolithic.
The next outstanding scientist who seriously dealt with the problems of the theory of innovation from an economic standpoint is the Nobel laureate in 1971, the Russian-American economist Simon Kuznets. The works of Schumpeter and Kondratiev, in particular the aforementioned relationship between the development of technology and the economy, had a huge influence on his scientific views. The main theme of his scientific work was a comprehensive study of economic growth at the macro level. Based on his research, Kuznets pays special attention to the emergence of life-changing, epoch-making innovations, their development and impact on changing not only technical, but also social life: “we can today easily follow the sequence from the introduction of the passenger car as a mass means of transportation , to the growth of the suburbs, to the movement of the more affluent from the city centers, to the concentration of lower income recipients and unemployed immigrants in the slums of the inner city core, to the acute urban problems, financial and other, and to the trend towards metropolitan consolidation. But the nature and implications of this sequence were certainly not apparent in the 1920 "s, when passenger cars began their mass service function in the United States ". Thus, the emergence of innovations and their development transforms society, while their impact may be imperceptible at the first stages of implementation, and even the innovators themselves may not assume their subsequent revolutionary changes by inventions.In addition, Kuznets emphasizes the importance of the development of science as a whole as a factor in economic growth: “Mass application of technological innovations, which constitutes much of the distinctive substance of modern economic growth, is closely connected with the further progress of science, in its turn the basis for additional advance in technology. recent scientific discoveries provide a positive
feedback. Not only do they provide a larger economic surplus for basic and applied research with long time leads and heavy capital demands, but, more specifically, they permit the development of new efficient tools for scientific use and supply new data on the behavior of natural processes under the stress of modification in economic production".
Another Nobel laureate in economics Friedrich August von Hayek, an outstanding representative of the Austrian school and the most famous of its members, along with J.A. Schumpeter in his works adheres to the concept of economic liberalism. From his point of view, the state apparatus should create minimal obstacles on the path of an entrepreneur-innovator, it is necessary to develop institutions that encourage competition. According to him, the less rigid and centralized the government is, the more chances there are for the development of spontaneous processes of scientific and technological development. As an example, "in imperial China, the most remarkable of these countries, great advances in civilization and sophisticated industrial technology took place during recurring 'epochs of unrest' when government control was temporarily loosened." In addition, he mentions the period of industrialization, which was most active in the city-kingdoms of Italy, southern Germany, the Netherlands and England, where there was soft power. Nevertheless, Hayek entered history as a developer of the theory of "scattered knowledge". According to this theory, the knowledge of each individual cannot be fully formalized, explained and transferred to another, they are of an irrational, intuitive nature. You can not have the entire integrity of the information of the system, being outside of it. Hayek puts forward the market as a multidimensional complex mechanism that combines the entire diversity of individual knowledge and ensures its unconscious self-organization. Hence the Austrian's hatred of monopoly in all its manifestations. Because the human mind cannot appreciate the complexity of the economy, this limitation will only interfere with the “invisible hand” of the market. Thus, the works of Hayek allow a better understanding of the complexity of the knowledge economy, the economy of innovation.
The German scientist Gerhard Mensch brought the theory of innovation to a fundamentally new level with his 1975 work “Technological stalemate: innovation overcomes depression”. The publication published after the oil crisis deservedly attracted the attention of the scientific community. Mensch introduces a classification of innovations:
Basic (contribute to the emergence of new industries and new markets), in turn, are divided into technological and non-technological;
Improving (not of a revolutionary nature, rather aimed at modernization);
Pseudo-innovations (create only external changes, not constructive ones).
If previous researchers found a connection between fluctuations in the economy and the emergence of innovation
tions, then Mensch introduces the concept of the cyclical appearance of basic innovations, approximately coinciding in duration with the Kondratiev cycles, but advancing it by 10-20 years, i.e. occurring during the recession. Thus, a depressed economy launches an innovative process, the author has assigned the term depression trigger effect to this fact. According to Mensch, each long cycle has a shape described by a B-shaped logistic curve that describes the trajectory of the life cycle of a given technical production method. At the final stage of the old technical basis, a new one arises. The author called this dependence the “model of metamorphoses”. In addition, Mensch introduces the concept of technological stalemate - the stagnation of economic development that occurs when basic changes exhaust their potential. Industrial development is nothing but a change in technological stalemates. A technological stalemate implies a consistent transition from basic innovations to improving ones, and then to pseudo-innovations. This is explained by the fact that, under generally favorable conditions, market participants will give preference to improving innovations as the least risky, and each subsequent improvement has a weaker effect than the previous one, reaching pseudo-innovation at its extreme stage, which subsequently leads to a stalemate. A favorable situation arises for the emergence of new basic innovations.
The innovative concept of long waves includes the work of Alfred Kleinknecht and Jacob van Dyck.
In his 1987 work, Innovation in Crisis and Boom, Kleinknecht explores the presence of long-term fluctuations in basic innovation, which he calls "radical". At the same time, he considers it important to divide them into innovations in products and innovations in technology. In contrast to Mensch, who derives the mechanism of the emergence of long cycles from the interaction between basic and improving innovations, including the lowest category of the latter - “pseudo-innovations”, he sees a similar relationship between innovations in products and technology. Analyzing the post-war industry in developed countries from the point of view of this approach, Kleinknecht comes to an interesting observation: the timing of the emergence of product innovations falls on the period of depression, and technology innovations - on the stage of rising waves. This can be explained based on the practice of the fact that during a period of depression, the company's strategy is to minimize risk, and therefore to refuse innovation. He considers the most likely increase in innovation in the phases of recovery and the beginning of the rise. Thus he disagrees with Mensch on this.
The monograph by J. Van Deyn "Long waves in economic life" was published in 1979. A special role in this work is given to the formation of infrastructure. Van Deijn lists it as one of three drivers of fluctuation, along with innovation and the life cycle: “innovation and life cycles.”
cycles act as a form of functioning of the long-wave mechanism on the release side; infrastructure investments driven by innovation are both input and output factors.” This work caused some controversy, but the importance of introducing infrastructural changes in relation to fluctuations allowed the development of a theory of innovation.
Since the 80s. 20th century comes the next major shift in the theory of innovation. In their works, authors from different countries introduce the concept of "national innovation system" (NIS). The foundation of this concept of NIS was laid by such Western scientists as B. Lundvall (Bengt-Ake Lundvall), K. Freeman, R. Nelson and others.
The recognition of innovation as a key factor in economic development has been outlined above. But there has not yet been a more systematic view of the formation of innovations and processes that favor this.
In 1985, an article by B.-A. Lundwall "Product Innovation and User-Producer Interaction", which introduced the concept of an innovation system and presented its concept. But in fact, the work of K. Freeman in 1987 "Technology, Policy, and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan" is considered to be the first generally recognized and fundamental work in this area. In this book, the author analyzed the post-war development of Japan, approaching from the point of view of the national innovation system that catalyzes the process of technological development in the country.
The national innovation system is understood as a set of legislative, structural and functional components that ensure the development of innovation activities in the country.
The structural components of the NIS are organizations of the private and public sectors, which, in interaction with each other within the framework of legal and informal norms of behavior, provide and conduct innovative activities on a public scale.
shock. These organizations operate in all areas related to the innovation process in research and development, education, production, marketing and service of innovations, financing of this process and its legal and legal support.
The concept of NIS has been rapidly spreading not only in economic but also in political circles, and already in 1993 Finland officially uses it in the work of the Ministry of Science and Technology Policy. Further, in 1997, the international union, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), issues a review entitled "National Innovation Systems" (No. Aopa1 Innovation Systems), which publishes consulting information on recommendations for the formation and functioning of the NIS. Such a rapid recognition of this concept once again proved the awareness of the importance of the formation of state programs in the field of innovation and its recognition as an essential element of development on a global scale.
In parallel with the research of NIS in the 90s, a modern theory of innovative processes was formed, which denotes the transformation of scientific knowledge, ideas into the final product. The author of this theory is generally acknowledged to be Roy Rothwell. In his main work of 1994, Towards the fifth-generation innovation process, he analyzed in detail such an important problem at the present stage as the formation of innovative products. He created a classification of models of innovative processes:
1. Model of "technological push" (G1) - a linear process from scientific discovery, industrial development, engineering and manufacturing activities, marketing to the introduction of a new product or process on the market.
2. Model of "market attraction" (G2) - a linear process from market demand to subsequent development, production and release of the product.
3. Combined model (G3) - a linear process similar to G2, but with feedback (Fig. 1).
Rice. 1. Combined model
4. Model of integrated business processes (04) - shows the emerging transition from an exclusively scientific component of innovation to closer interaction with other business processes, as well as a similar convergence between them (Fig. 2).
5. Model of integrated systems and networks (05) - even closer and deeper interaction already at the intersectoral level, providing greater flexibility and lower costs when creating innovations (Fig. 3).
According to the above, the human mind is limited and it is impossible to learn everything and have all the necessary information. This is fully consistent with open innovation.
The current stage of development of the theory of innovation focuses on the two most important aspects mentioned above:
1. Development of a mechanism for state support of the innovative institutional and infrastructural environment, which minimally hinders the creative potential of innovators and maximally favors
Rice. 2. Model of integrated business processes
Science and technology infrastructure
Competitors
Key SR® Suppliers Consumers
Literature, including patents
Strategic partners, marketing alliances, etc.
Mergers, investors, etc.
Rice. 3. Model of integrated systems and networks
current development of competition and the formation of national breakthrough technologies.
2. Theoretical and applied research in the field of accelerating the timing of the formation of the idea of innovative development and its practical implementation.
Summing up the development of innovation as an economic category over the centuries, we can say that the path has been passed from the misunderstanding and obscurity of the authors of many life-changing inventions and the lack of attention on the part of economists and scientific researchers to innovation to the development of legal protection of intellectual property and the recognition of innovation as a flagship economic development and the main catalyst for progress. At the present stage, innovations are the object of detailed study, ranging from the development process to the problems of interaction at different levels: economic, social and political.
Article received on January 24, 2014. References
1. Federal Law “On Amendments to the Federal Law” 2. Azgaldov G.G., Karpova G.G. Valuation of the Intellectual Law “On Science and State Scientific and Technical Property and Intangible Assets. M., politics "» N 254-FZ of July 21, 2011. 2006. P.56-64.
In addition to Ruthwell, many scientists, including Stephen Wheelwright (S.C. Wheelwright), Kim Clark (K.B. Clark) and others, were engaged in the study of existing and the development of new models of innovative processes. But their work was largely united by a similar view of the closed nature of innovation. A fundamentally new view on this topic was proposed in 2003 by Henry Chesbrough in the book Open Innovation. Creating Profitable Technologies". According to this theory, when developing innovations, companies should communicate as much as possible with partners, try to involve other scientists from all over the world in order to expand the environment in which the right solution to the problem can appear. The artificial framework of the company does not work in the G5 model, and in many cases there may not be enough existing staff to create an innovation, therefore, that asset of competent specialists becomes insolvent. According to Hayek's theory of "scattered sign"
3. Bayaskalova T.A. Change of theoretical approaches to the process of renewal of fixed assets // Bulletin of the Irkutsk State Technical University. 2010. V.42, No. 2. S.30-35.
4. Bernal J. Science in the history of society. M., 1956. 743 p.
5. Zavgorodnyaya E.A. Theory of innovation: problems of development and categorical certainty [electronic resource] // Official website of the Institute of Economics and Forecasting of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine [website] 1^1 .: http://www.ief.org.ua/IEF_rus/ET/Zavgorod406. pdf (accessed 10.12.2012).
6. Condorcet J.A. Sketch of a historical picture of the progress of the human mind. M., 1936.
7. Kondratiev N.D. Large cycles of conjuncture. M., 1925. P.15.
8. Menshikov S.M., Klimenko L.A. Long waves in the economy. When society changes its skin. M., 1989. 276 p.
10. Smith A. Research on the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. M., 2007. P.74.
11. Sorokin P.A. Social and cultural dynamics. SPb., 2000. 1176 p.
12. Federal portal for scientific and innovative activities [website] URL: http://www.sci-innov.ru/law/base_terms/#21 (accessed 12.12.2012).
13. Hayek F.A. Pernicious arrogance. The mistakes of socialism. M., 1992. 304 p.
14. Schumpeter J. Theory of economic development. M., 1982. S.157-184.
15. Chesbrough G. Open innovations. Creation of profitable technologies / transl. from English. V.N. Egorova. M., 2007. 336 p.
16. Kuznets S. Nobel Prize Lecture, Stockholm, 1971.
17. Mensch G. Stalemate in Technology: Innovations Overcome the Depression. New York, 1979. 241 p.
18. Rothwell R. Towards the fifth-generation innovation process // International Marketing Review, Vol.11, No.1, Bradford, 1994. P.7-31.
19 Schumpeter J.A. Business Cycles: a Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process, Oxford University Press, 1939. 384 p.
UDC 338.23 (517.3)
OBJECTIVE NEED FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF MONGOLIA
© Davaasuren Avirmed1
Baikal State University of Economics and Law, 664003, Russia, Irkutsk, st. Lenina, 11.
Taking into account the trends in regional development of the countries of the world, the need for regional development and solving the problems of eliminating sharp socio-economic differences between the regions of Mongolia is considered, the measures taken by the government to create a legislative and legal basis for the development of state policy for the regional development of the country are outlined; the analysis of the volumes of the gross regional product of Mongolia is given, the sectoral structure of the GRP of the regions is considered with trends in the reduction of agricultural production in the Western, Khangai, Eastern and Ulaanbaatar regions and the growth in industrial production, construction in all regions of the country. Based on the analysis, the possibility of specialization of the Western and Eastern regions in the production of agricultural products, and the Khangai, Central and Ulaanbaatar regions - in the production of industrial products, trade and the provision of various types of services is determined. The necessity of developing a regional policy of the country, capable of eliminating sharp differences in socio-economic development and creating conditions for the sustainable functioning of the regional economy, is substantiated. Tab. 1. Bibliography 7 titles.
Keywords: Government of Mongolia; gross regional product (GRP); Khangai, Central, Western, Eastern and Ulan Bator regions; specialization; Agriculture; industry; services sector.
OBJECTIVE NECESSITY FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN MONGOLIA Davaasuren Avirmed
Baikal State University of Economics and Law, 11 Lenin St., Irkutsk, 664003, Russia.
Considering regional development trends in the global aspect, the article deals with the need for regional development and elimination of well-marked socio-economic differences between Mongolian regions. It describes the measures carried out by the Government of Mongolia to create a legislative framework for the development of state policy on regional development of the country. Having analyzed the gross regional product (GRP) of Mongolia, it compares the sectorial structure of GRP in the regions featuring the reduction trend in agricultural output including Western, Khangai, Eastern and Ulaanbaatar regions with that of all regions of the country featuring the trend of growth of industrial production and construction. The analysis allowed to determine the possible specialization for Western and Eastern regions is agricultural production, while Khangai, Central and Ulaanbaatar regions are to specialize in industrial production, trade
1Davaasuren Avirmed, doctoral student, candidate of economic sciences, professor, leading researcher at the Institute of International Studies, Mongolian Academy of Sciences, e-mail: da [email protected]
Davaasuren Avirmed, Doctoral Candidate, Candidate of Economics, Professor, Leading Researcher of the Institute of International Studies of Mongolian Academy of Sciences, e-mail: [email protected]
Two or three years ago, the question put in the title could indeed be a subject for discussion between adherents of the existing model of the economy based on the extraction of minerals and supporters of the high-tech vector of development of the national economy. However, the global economic crisis has deprived the defenders of the raw material orientation of the last arguments. It became obvious that Russia's place in the world directly depends on whether we can overcome the technological gap with the leading countries.
Looking back, I will immediately note that, unlike skeptics, I am convinced that building an innovative economy in Russia is a solvable task. It is enough to look back at our Soviet past. The first thing that comes to mind as an illustration of the most important achievements of Soviet science is the atomic and space projects. Regardless of my political views, it must be admitted that, implemented in the 1940s-1960s, they not only changed our country, but also seriously influenced the geopolitical alignment of forces throughout the globe. Their significance is still felt today.
It is also true that already in the 1970s and 1980s, our country began to lose ground in the innovation competition. The Soviet research institute became a symbol of the inefficient use of intellectual potential, which was not long in affecting the economy. Soviet data are well known: the maximum achieved level of labor productivity in the USSR was only 29.4% of the American one.
That is why M. Gorbachev's first initiative as General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, even before the famous perestroika, was the concept of acceleration based on the achievements of scientific and technological progress. The leadership of the state realized that the lag in the field of high technologies in the conditions of "competition between the two systems" could have fatal consequences. The result of these initiatives is well known.
Since then, 25 years have passed. What do we have today? Colossal changes have taken place in the life of the country. However, something has remained unchanged: labor productivity in Russia compared to the United States is still 30%. I think it takes a certain amount of intellectual courage to interpret this as a breakthrough success: as much as 0.6% in just a quarter of a century.
Thus, the Soviet economy has not coped with the task of innovative development. The Russian market economy has not yet been able to cope with it. But unlike the Soviet economy, the Russian one potentially has such a chance.
In this regard, it seems to me that three stages can be distinguished in the development of the economy in modern Russia.
The 1990s is a stage in the development of the foundations of a market economy. It is clear that the task of ensuring large-scale economic growth, and even more so building an innovative economy, was simply impossible to solve in those years due to the lack of institutions, tools, legislation, qualifications, personnel, business, social infrastructure, and much more.
The basic task that was solved in the 2000s was the launch of economic growth. We all remember the concept of "doubling GDP" that was implemented. But at the same time, it is clear that the growth driver was Russian exports, in which 85% are oil, gas, and metals. But the concept of growth based on this driver has been exhausted.
19. Innovation process: concept, goals, features of the type of innovation.
Innovation process generally means the sequence of transition from the idea of a possible innovation to the creation, sale and diffusion of this innovation.
Innovation process means the innovative activity of any subject of the economy, i.e. a process aimed at developing, implementing the results of completed scientific research and development or other scientific and technological achievements into a new or improved product sold on the market, into a new or improved technological process, used in practice, as well as additional research and development related to this.
The essence of the innovation process It manifests itself in the fact that it is a purposeful chain of actions to initiate innovation, to develop new products and operations, to implement them on the market and further diffusion.
According to I.T. Balabanov, the innovation process includes seven elements, the combination of which into a single sequential chain forms the structure of the innovation process. These elements include:
initiation;
marketing innovation;
release (production) of innovation;
implementation of innovation;
promoting innovation;
evaluation of the economic efficiency of innovation;
diffusion of innovation.
The beginning of the innovation process is initiation. Initiation (from the Latin initiatio - the performance of the sacraments) is an activity consisting in choosing the goal of innovation, setting the task performed by innovation, searching for the idea of innovation, its feasibility study and materializing the idea.
The materialization of an idea means the transformation of an idea into things (goods), i.e. into property, a new product, into a property right document (a license for the right to use know-how, technology) and into a document on a technological operation. Initiation is not only the starting point of the innovation process, but also the basis for the further normal course of the innovation process itself.
After the justification of a new product (operation), marketing research of the proposed innovation is carried out. In the course of marketing research, the demand for a new product or operation is studied, the quantity or volume of their release is determined, if they are limited, consumer properties and product characteristics are determined, which should be given to innovation as a product entering the market. Then the innovation is sold, i.e. the emergence of a small batch of innovation on the market, its promotion, evaluation of effectiveness and diffusion.
Innovation promotion is a set of measures aimed at the implementation of innovations (information transfer, advertising, organization of the trading process, etc.).
The results of the implementation of the innovation and the costs of its promotion are subjected to statistical processing and analysis, on the basis of which the economic efficiency of the innovation is calculated. The innovation process ends with the diffusion of innovation.
Diffusion (lat. diffusio - distribution, spreading) of innovation is the spread of once mastered innovation in new regions, new markets and a new financial and economic situation. Diffusion may be associated with a change in the characteristics of financial innovation and the conditions for its promotion (change in the interest rate by the bank, terms of the deposit, etc.), with the capture of new sales markets.
20. Functions of the innovation process and personal qualities of performers. Combination of functions and their inadequate execution.
The innovation process is a process of successive transformation of an idea into a product, passing through the stages of fundamental and applied research, design development, marketing, production and sales.
On a larger scale, the innovation process can be divided into two main stages: the first stage (it is the longest) includes scientific research and design development, the second stage is the product life cycle.
21. Project: concept and main types.
A project is works, plans, activities and other tasks aimed at creating a new product (devices, works, services). Project execution is project activities which includes:
Carrying out management activities (project management). Achieved through the use, including principles and methods project management, which is part of the enterprise management system, universal for solving various production problems;
solution of a specialized problem:
· Development of products for the customer. Project products can be:
marketing research results (marketing),
· design documentation (design management). This set of documents is called project. It is designed to create a developed device, its operation, repair and elimination, as well as to verify or reproduce the intermediate and final solutions on the basis of which it was developed. (Note that the meaning of the word "project" in managerial and scientific and technical activities is different),
technological documentation (production management),
software (project management),
Solving internal production problems:
Improving product quality (quality management),
Improving the efficiency of labor organization (personnel management),
optimization of financial flows (financial management),
Projects can be combined into a program of projects to achieve a single result, or into a portfolio of projects for better management. A project portfolio may consist of programs.
Project types
They differ in the nature of the subject area of the project:
1. Investment- the main goal is the creation or renovation of fixed assets of organizations that require investments;
2. Innovative- the main goal is the development and application of new technologies, know-how and other innovations that ensure the development of organizations;
3. Scientific - research;
4. Educational;
5. Mixed.
22. Innovative project as a control system and its elements.
An innovative project is a system of interrelated goals and programs to achieve them, which is a complex of research, development, production, organizational, financial, commercial and other activities, properly organized (linked by resources, deadlines and performers), formalized in a set of project documentation and providing an effective solution to a specific scientific and technical task (problem), expressed in quantitative terms and leading to innovation.
The main elements of an innovative project include:
formulated goals and objectives reflecting the main purpose of the project;
a set of project activities to solve an innovative problem and achieve the goals set;
organizing the implementation of project activities, that is, linking them by resources and performers to achieve the goals of the project in a limited period of time and within the specified cost and quality;
the main indicators of the project (from target - for the project as a whole to specific - for individual tasks, topics, stages, activities, performers), including indicators that characterize its effectiveness. Innovative projects can be formed as part of scientific and technical programs - to implement the tasks of individual areas (tasks, sections) of the program and independently - to solve a specific problem in priority areas of science and technology development.
23. Forms of organization of innovation management and their features (linear, functional, matrix).
Linear structure – Principle: centralization. It highlights the performers involved in innovative development. The management of the ID is carried out directly by the line manager. Ties vertical. Advantages: clarity of tasks, a strict system of control over the execution and accountability of performers. Flaws– high professional requirements for the line manager on a wide range of issues. Scope of application- small business, where the relationship between the leader and subordinates must correspond in accordance with the principle of the range of control. Project type– development of certain types of concepts (analytical concepts).
Functional Structure - Principle- decentralization. It provides for the allocation of innovative performers (divisions) to the functional service. The management of the IS is carried out by the line manager through the managers subordinate to him, who, within their competence, manage a certain type of activity and personnel. Ties vertical. Advantages- job competencies. Flaws- possible physical and emotional overload of employees of functional units in the case of solving several innovative tasks, weak motivation of employees, insufficient level of professionalism. Applications- organizations that are weakly dependent on external conditions (invariable specialization of activities, a uniform pace of development). Project type- a small project aimed at improving individual species.
Matrix structure – Principle- combined centralization based on a linear and functional structure. Interaction Matrix between the project manager and the head of the functional unit carried out horizontally. Depending on the rigidity of the interaction system between the project manager and the head of the functional unit, 3 types of structures are determined: 1) weak matrix The project manager is fully responsible for the results of the project. The disadvantage is the lack of direct administrative power of the head over the performers. 2) a balanced matrix - the project manager is responsible for the cost and time parameters of the project, and the functional manager is responsible for the quality and urgency of completing specific tasks. 3) a rigid matrix - the project manager is fully responsible for the organization and results of the project, the functional manager - the allocation of employees to perform tasks.
Advantages– flexible maneuvering of human resources due to their redistribution between functional units and project teams; high quality of work on the project at the maximum speed of its implementation and minimum costs; the possibility of attracting highly qualified specialists to work on the project, incl. from the outside.
Flaws- the head does not have direct administrative control over the performers; overload of functional units as a result of an imbalance between the scope of work on the project and the capabilities of human resources; the relationship of dual subordination among the performers of the task on the project. Project type– small and medium projects related to the modernization of technologies, packaging, etc.
24. Project management, its advantages and disadvantages.
Project management means the implementation of certain special tasks within the existing structure of an enterprise or between different enterprises, in which, if possible, there should not be a negative impact on the original production tasks.
The organization of the project is aimed at solving within the framework of the existing enterprise: - single; - innovative and therefore - unreliable; - limited in time and - a complex task. The project manager has the authority to manage and implement the relevant project and coordinates all the actions necessary for its implementation in all functional areas of the enterprise, has extensive competence for this, and is also responsible for the success of the project.
The process of creating and implementing innovations based on project management methods has its drawbacks:
The created project group, despite the high qualification of the participants, does not have complete information regarding the problem area;
Projects can have a big impact on the allocation of resources and the state of affairs within an organization;
In some cases, the initial objectives of a project may be quite vague or may be revised over time;
The exchange of information and interaction between team members, as well as between a separate project group and the organization as a whole, is an acute problem, especially when implementing large projects;
Project management is, first of all, people management.
Benefits of project management in an enterprise
A project is a structured system of work processes that have a well-defined goal, planned in advance, and inscribed in a rigid framework of time, budget and quality control. All these characteristics allow:
At the planning stage, cut off all work processes that are not necessary to achieve the project goal and its intermediate goals, and also develop a clear work plan for managers and employees.
Stimulate the activity of managers and employees aimed at achieving the goals of the project, due to the need to perform work processes within the budget and time frames, as well as through the requirements for the quality of work performed.
Provide more complete and effective control over the execution of workflows by employees: planning and scheduling the project allows you to check in advance the stage at which a particular workflow is located.
Monitor project progress through planning and reporting, and make adjustments and changes to the initial plan.
At the final stage of the project, take into account all the positive and negative aspects of the project and draw appropriate conclusions for the future.
Many experts also note that innovation and project management is closely related to such a concept as "uniqueness", meaning that each project is developed specifically for the needs of a particular task. However, his experience can be used to solve the same typical problems in the future, i.e. for future projects.
Another advantage of project management in an enterprise is its flexibility and rapid adaptability to market changes. Many companies are switching to project management in order to revive and revive the business, reorient it in accordance with new challenges. Experts also predict that project management in the future will increasingly replace the classical models of enterprise management.
25. Organization of the project team: its numerical and qualitative composition, features of formation.
The project team is created by the project manager. The task of the project manager in the formation of the project team is to select team members who would provide:
The project manager appoints a project manager who manages the project, monitors the project on a regular basis, and coordinates the activities of team members. If the project is small in size, the functions of the project leader and project manager can be combined by one person.
The project manager determines the required number of specialists for the implementation of the project and, together with the manager, forms the team.
At different stages of development, management and implementation of the project, the size of the team may be different, depending on the number and complexity of project activities. However, the "backbone" of the team always remains unchanged. It consists of permanent members of the team - project manager, project manager, accountant, and, if necessary, a lawyer who is responsible for making decisions on project management within their competence.
It is important to note that, depending on the project, the team may include employees from various organizations, and not always located in the same city or even country. Geographical remoteness, national and linguistic features, in this case, introduce new nuances that must be taken into account when forming a team and organizing its effective work.
The size of the team is no less important than its composition. If it is incorrect to determine the number of specialists required for high-quality development and implementation of the project, then you will limit the effectiveness of the team.
As the experience of the most successful projects shows, if the number of your team exceeds 25 people, then we are no longer talking about a team. But if you have less than 3 members in your team, then you run the risk of feeling the lack of the necessary experience, knowledge and time. In general, the best option is 10 people. However, this number is not universal. For example, as experience shows, for tasks that require the participation of each member of the team, the size of the team should be within 5-7 people. This number is optimal for mobilizing the efforts, experience, abilities and creativity of team members.
At the same time, a situation is quite acceptable when, with a stable number of key team members, involved specialists will be invited to implement certain project activities. For the duration of their work on the project, they will also be considered members of the team.
Selection of project team members.
Unfortunately, the principle that the team should be carefully selected and formed as a whole is not always respected. For the development and implementation of many projects, team members are very often selected solely on their qualifications and experience, and the personal qualities of people are completely ignored. In other cases, people who are flexible are chosen. With such a selection system, professionalism and creative inclinations remain out of sight. Both options are far from ideal and a professional approach to team building.
In addition, when selecting project participants, it is necessary to take into account such criteria as work experience, medical characteristics and personal qualities. Of no small importance for the workability of the project team are also the personal characteristics of the employee - age, marital status, individual psychological characteristics (character, temperament, inclinations, etc.).
Determining whether a potential team member has the aforementioned abilities and meets the basic selection criteria is quite difficult. The ideal option is when a psychologist takes part in the process of selecting members of your team. However, if you do not have the opportunity to use the services of this specialist, you can find a lot of information about potential team members in other available ways. For example, you can find out how they worked in other teams, what their former or current bosses think about their ability to work in a team. You can also use the resumes of potential team members provided to you, questionnaires or tests that you have to assess the role of a person in a team; conduct an interview in person. It is also important to compare the results of different selection methods, such as tests and interviews.
When selecting participants for a project team, it is equally important to take into account not only the qualifications, experience and personal characteristics of specialists, but also the factor of their psychological compatibility, which is ensured by the unity of value orientations of applicants.
We all work differently. Some of us are guided by logic, analyze the situation, weigh all the circumstances, make decisions with caution, carefully considering all the facts. Others make decisions quickly, almost impulsively, relying on instinct or gut feeling. However, neither the first nor the second, nor many other ways of making decisions can be called right or wrong. They're just completely different.
However, differences between people are not the same as differences between ways of making decisions. We act differently, we have different values, we believe in different things, we communicate differently. Some of these differences are easily compatible with each other, some are not.
