Human capital theory in recent decades has become the basis for educational policy in many developed countries. Expert discussions, however, often undervalue research findings and developments related to this theory that since the 1970s have consistently enriched understanding of how human capital contributes to personal well-being and socioeconomic development of society as a whole. Educational policy lags behind these elaborations, which leads to a decline in the impact of education upon development worldwide. In the 21st century, fundamentally new trends in socioeconomic dynamics pose unprecedented challenges for educational systems around the world, including Russia. Despite the quantitative growth of money and time spent on education, performance per unit of education costs has fallen. The human potential, created by education, is facing more and more difficulties in its capitalization: economic growth is slowing down at both at the country level and globally. This situation brings to life new attempts to claim insignificance of education for economic growth and for individual success. So far, these attempts have not been very influential in educational policy, but in many countries, such arguments already serve as a backdrop for budget decisions that are detrimental for education. Educational systems need to complement practices that contribute to the development of human capital. In this regard, several theoretical elaborations that have not yet became part of the mainstream discussion on human capital, could be helpful for understanding the role of human capital in socioeconomic progress and possible ways to improve it in the short and long term.
We present the dynamics of the position of Russian manufacturing subsidiaries of Western MNCs in 2012–2016. The analysis is based on interviews with the heads of subsidiaries, a repeated survey of plant managers and on secondary data on subsidiaries’ activities. We propose a new portfolio model that desalinates “the core” and “the periphery” of the corporation and further allocates peripheral subsidiaries into several classes depending on intensity of value transfer from and to a subsidiary and the possibility to apply a “standard” set of instruments for capital allocation decisions. We argue that in the current situation of the Russian economy the only possibility for Russian manufacturing subsidiaries to remain close to the corporate core is to demonstrate high net profitability of assets. Otherwise subsidiaries are downgraded into “sticks”. That position enables subsidiary managers to enjoy high autonomy and wide subsidiary mandates, but endanger the long-term perspectives on maintaining innovativeness and competitiveness of subsidiaries.
The subject of this article is the entrepreneurial activity of the population in the post-socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), its goal — to identify different types of ecosystems of entrepreneurship in these countries by means of the analysis of entrepreneurial activity in various countries/groups of countries taken in the context of their societal and economic development. Empirically article is based on data from the “Global Entrepreneurship Monitor” (GEM). On the basis of an analysis of strengths and weaknesses of existing approaches in the relevant literature to taxonomy of business ecosystems, using a set of key country level indicators of the GEM for 2011, it proposes a taxonomy of entrepreneurship ecosystems based on two "axes" — the quality of entrepreneurial activity (high, average, below average) and the state of entrepreneurship framework conditions in respective countries (favourable, average, below average). The result is a clustering of CEE countries’ entrepreneurship ecosystems, where the worst cluster is consisting of solely Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the best one — of Czech Republic. Russia belongs to a cluster with mid-level indicators along of both axes. The results might be used to implement a more focused entrepreneurship promotion and small businesses support policies which must move away from generalist schemes to policy options taking into account the resources and limitations of each of the selected types of entrepreneurship ecosystems.
The introductory article by the guest editor reveals the essence of the concept of “entrepreneurial ecosystem” (EE), its main components, and outlines the main directions of EE research with an emphasis on countries with economies in transition presented in the papers of the special issue.
Enhancing innovation performance in the industrial sector of the Russian economy is a long overdue. Since 2010 the government has conducted a kind of «incumbent» policy approach, encouraging mainly the largest state-owned companies. The latter are obliged to elaborate and implement innovation development programmes (IDPs) in order to accelerate modernization of the Russian economy and increase demand for innovation. This paper analyzes the results of the monitoring of STI activities undertaken by the state-owned companies in relation to implementation of innovative development programmes. It evaluates the interim results of government initiatives to foster innovation in the related business segment, notes the negative effects of excessive «compulsion» to innovate and provides recommendations for improving policy. Monitoring shows that the actual priority for most companies is modernization of fixed assets through acquisition of modern machinery and equipment. Technology adoption, along with R&D investments, significantly surpasses other possible mechanisms encouraging innovative development (including support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), education and training in innovation, co-operation with other actors in the framework of technology platforms, venture funding). The innovation outputs of the surveyed group of companies are in fact comparable to the Russian average although monitoring does not allow the assessment of corporate patent strategies or the novelty of innovative products that are produced and exported. The author argues that the fundamental policy effect through organizational changes and investments may manifest itself in the next decade. However, the quality of the corporate management, employee loyalty to structural change and organisational culture that supports innovation, would likely be more important in enhancing overall performance. Policy recommendations include: differentiation of government incentives according to the companies' specificities, development of their external linkages with SMEs and universities, linking innovation strategies to corporate policies, and integration of IDPs into the roadmaps of technological development of Russian regions and markets.
Currently, the governments of a number of countries, including Russia, consider the promotion of open source software as an important policy tool for the development of information and communication technologies (ICT). Since 2010, our country has been implementing an initiative to create a National software platform focused on the development of applications based on Open Source and their enforcement in public administration. The article assesses the effectiveness of public policy in the field of open-source software and provides recommendations for its improvement.
Analyzing the specifics of the functioning of the software market, comparing the strengths and weaknesses of its two main segments — proprietary ("closed") and open, as well as possible "extreme" policy approaches in relation to the latter (direct stimulation or complete withdrawal of the state from regulating the choice of users), the authors conclude that no mandatory approach is indubitable. It is necessary to take into account the not only software development itself, but also the entire complex of complementary assets that determine the economic effect of innovation. Only the joint work of suppliers and consumers on the introduction of new technologies (co-invention) creates synergy, which is a key condition for the effective use of information technologies in the economy and the development of the ICT sector as a whole. Consequently, protectionism (stimulating the producer by limiting consumer choice) is fundamentally inconsistent with the specifics of the sector, and the forced transition to new software will result in significant losses in terms of the associated switching costs and lost benefits from network effects. At the same time, indirect measures, such as informing users and supporting the dissemination of open standards, are more likely to increase customer choice by reducing the cost of switching from one software to another. Such mechanisms are not only compatible with the specifics of the market in question, but also make it possible to derive maximum benefit from it, both for producers and consumers.
This article is devoted to an analysis of the mechanisms and tools that promote innovative activity at Chinese companies. We describe and evaluate the model of the Chinese innovation ecosystem with its major subsystems and their interconnections. Personnel training and development are considered an element of the subsystem “Education” within the innovation ecosystem, which serve as tools for the formation of human resources to ensure the transformation of the national economy into a global center of innovation. The authors analyze the main challenges connected with level of development of the environment and the socioeconomic institutions that may impede the effective management of human resources and the various practices for training personnel at innovative companies in China. The data analyzed for this empirical study on training and development practices includes structured interviews at 60 medium and large innovative companies in China. Objective economic indicators of innovative activity were taken as measures. The analysis results allow one to identify four clusters of companies: “Innovators,” “Leader in Training,” “Stars,” and “Lagging behind,” describing the different company approaches to providing personnel training and development. Clusters vary in quantitative and qualitative indicators for personnel training and development processes, as well as economic indicators of innovation activity. The results prove that a relationship exists between approaches to personnel training and development and innovative activity results and suggest that training and development initiatives are effective tools for managing innovative companies.
Nowadays many business models rely heavily upon adequate IT management practices. Quite often in developed economies, the role of IT has organically evolved over decades from a mere business support function to an efficiency driver and enabler, and finally (at least in some cases) to a driver of business innovation and digital transformation. Unlike developed countries, little is known about the role of IT in companies of countries with transitional economies, such as Russia. Historical, political, and geographical reasons have in many areas of life led to Кeywords: information systems management; transition economies; role of IT; digital business transformation; case study research a "Russian way of doing things". Does this also hold true for IT management? By way of case study research, this contribution investigates the features of the IT-role and use in large Russian companies that are aware of the need for digital business transformation. The obtained results allow one to not only gain a better understanding of the situation in Russian companies through the prism of IT management practices but also to identify possible trends and challenges that appear relevant for organizations in other countries in economic transition or even in developed economies as well.