Innovation culture as the main component of the innovation process infrastructure. Formation of an innovation culture

11.10.2019

Courses a la "paint a picture in 3 hours." Before a person removes control, he himself must believe that he has creative abilities. Small courses, trainings, classes that allow a person to quickly get a creative result, allow you to quickly start the processes of innovation. It is important that employees really see their work (scribing, photography, LEGO SERIOUS PLAY, sculpting, creative technologies), and they have value.
Sometimes it is enough for people to try to do something so that they themselves see that they can create, and, accordingly, come up with new business models and products.

The openness and availability of any information allows you to remove barriers and make the interaction as trustful and fast as possible.

The ability to choose work, projects and teams gives a chance to do only what you like and, accordingly, people do not need to be additionally motivated.
Mentoring, coaching and mentoring allow teams to quickly and efficiently move through processes, transfer experience and values between employees and develop non-stop.
Discipline keeps innovative companies from falling into chaos.
Acceptance of limits is used for growth and development, constant exploration of boundaries is used by innovative companies as an engine for generating ideas.
Conscious mistakes allow you to gain experience where, most likely, no one even tried to walk.

Structure

How does the company organize innovation activities and should its management structure change?
We have identified four key characteristics that increase the innovative potential of the company structure:
1) Variability
2) Modularity
3) Network
4) Redundancy
These qualities are often at odds with the ways in which we organize our work, but they provide opportunities for creativity and innovation.

Everything for communications
Breakthrough solutions are primarily a matter of communication between employees. And the formation of the right environment is one of the most accessible and convenient tools.
Random suppressions
precompetitive spaces.
Here and now.
.

Leadership

Leadership is not a status, but a process
2) The leader is not a strategist, but an alchemist
3) Moral leadership - as a daily practice
In innovative companies, leadership, like roles, becomes fluid. It practically loses its status attributes: directors do not have any
special rooms, teams are mixed and everyone works in parallel. Innovative business is built not on the laws of hierarchy, but on the laws of synergy. Therefore, leadership becomes distributed, belonging to all project participants, and temporary: the whole team must feel who right now needs to take control into their own hands.

Formation of an innovative educational culture

INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………... .3

SECTION 1. Innovative educational culture as one of the main elements of a successful educational process...……..4

SECTION 2. Innovative activity in the system of scientific and methodological work of a teacher …………………………………………………....6

2.1. Innovative culture of the teacher: the psychological and pedagogical essence of the concept ...…………………………………………………………………….6

2.2. Features of the development of teacher culture in the context of the transition to a new humanistic-innovative paradigm of education ..………….7

2.3. Formation of an innovative culture of a teacher in the system of intra-school methodological work ………….………………………………….9

CONCLUSIONS………………………………………………………………………………9

LIST OF USED LITERATURE ………………...……..11

ADDITIONS ………………………………………………………………..….1

INTRODUCTION

In modern conditions of reforming the educational system, the contradiction between the required and actual level of culture of pedagogical activity, which is necessary for the implementation of the most important functions, is deepening. It is possible to resolve this contradiction if, in the conditions of any educational institution, optimal conditions are created for the manifestation of a high culture of innovative pedagogical activity. Currently topical there are certain problems of training an innovative teacher who has competence, is ready to use and create innovations, and is able to conduct experimental work. Consequently, relevant is to identify and overcome the contradiction between updating the paradigm modern education- transition to new type humanistic and innovative education, which involves the innovative activities of all participants in the educational process, and the unpreparedness of a significant part of teachers for the corresponding changes.

aim research work is to determine the role of innovation in the system of scientific and methodological work of the teacher and the coverage of the process of formation of innovative educational culture at various stages of the educational process.

The goal is to solution such tasks:

consider innovative educational culture as one of the main elements of a successful educational process;

highlight the essence of the phenomenon of innovation and innovation processes;

define innovative technologies as an object of the cultural space of education;

reveal the psychological and pedagogical essence of the concept of a teacher's innovative culture;

to determine the features of the formation of a teacher's innovative culture in the system of intra-school methodological work.

Research material the process of forming a professional culture of a teacher has become, which becomes more effective when creating an innovative environment in an educational institution, i.e. conditions for constant search, updating techniques and methods of professional activity.

The object of study became the phenomenon of the existence of an innovative educational environment and its influence on the culture of pedagogical activity.

Subject of analysis became professional activity of the teacher, aimed at achieving the highest possible results in the training, education and development of students.

Methodological basis research was the fact that innovative activity is considered not as a teaching method, but as a type of joint activity of a teacher and a student, as well as the theory of personality development (L.S. Vygotsky, O.M. Leontiev) and the theory of pedagogical creativity. This is a dialectical approach to innovation culture as an integral system that is in constant dynamics, an understanding of innovation as a key factor in the development of pedagogical culture, a statement about the relationship between the form and content of innovation processes.

Main research methods are systemic, axiological, descriptive, structural, comparative, as well as methods of systematization, classification, comparison of cultural phenomena.

Materials and results can be found practical use teachers of different profiles at all stages of the educational process.

SECTION 1.

Innovative educational culture as one of the main elements of a successful educational process

The basic definition of the concept of "innovation" is the understanding of innovation, established in professional communication, as a realized innovation, regardless of the scope of application.

The innovation itself, i.e. scientific, scientific and technical development, invention, including in the field of education, becomes an innovation, as a rule, in the form of a product, service, method. Therefore, the innovation cycle is preceded by research, experimental or design work. Their results basically create the groundwork on the basis of which innovation activity begins in a specific area of their application.

Innovation also refers to the process of implementing innovation. In a broad sense, innovation is a synonym for the successful development of social, economic, educational, managerial and other spheres based on various innovations.

So, the phenomenon of innovation is primarily understood as a chain of implemented innovations. It is more successful when it covers more than one narrow area, but also includes areas that affect the overall result. Therefore, innovative development should be complex.

One cannot but agree with I.F. Isaev, who believes that the subject of innovation, the content and mechanisms of innovation processes should lie in the plane of combining two interrelated processes, i.e. on the one hand, and the study, generalization and dissemination of pedagogical experience, and on the other hand, with the problem of developing and implementing pedagogical innovations.

The innovative orientation of the formation of a professional and pedagogical culture of a teacher of an educational institution involves his inclusion in the activities of creating, mastering and using pedagogical innovations in the practice of teaching and raising children, creating an innovative cultural environment in an educational institution.

The innovation process in the education system is caused by the influence of many factors. The actions of innovators are nothing but the realization of their individual needs to expand their own social space through professional activities. If they meet general pedagogical interests, then the proposed innovations will bring undoubted benefits to educational institutions. However, when individual and social-group needs are absolutized, the result can be directly opposite. The complex structure of needs gives rise to many contradictions between society and the education system, between the subjects of the education system itself. Each innovation finds both support and opposition. This is an objective reality. Consequently, in matters of managing the education system, a clear orientation in the essential nature of innovations is necessary, which is reflected in the principles of state policy, the criteria for selecting knowledge from the sphere of science and production into the education system, taking into account the objective conditions for the transmission of knowledge to students and factors that contribute to and oppose the implementation of this tasks .

SECTION 2

Innovative activity in the system of scientific and methodological work of the teacher

2.1. Innovative culture of the teacher: psychological and pedagogical essence of the concept

The professional activity of a teacher involves a constant change and addition of requirements for it. In the space of innovative educational culture, the teacher must be competent in relation to promising school technologies, develop and use their own creative projects.

The teacher's innovative culture is a component of professional and pedagogical culture. Through participation in it, the teacher has the opportunity of self-realization, disclosure of creative potential, application intellectual abilities and putting innovative ideas into practice.

Considering the psychological essence of the concept of innovative activity of a teacher, it should be noted that the concept of activity is generally assessed not as a teaching method, but as a type of joint activity of students and teachers (L.S. Vygotsky, S.L. Rubinshtein, A.R. Luria).

The issue of the pedagogical aspect of understanding professional culture is defined by the majority of researchers (V.M. Grineva, N.B. Krylova, I.F. Isaev) as a set of general cultural, moral, intellectual and physical qualities, professional knowledge and skills necessary for successful educational and educational work .

The specifics of the teacher's professional and pedagogical activity, including innovative, led to the allocation of pedagogical culture as one of the most important components of the culture of society. In the work of V.M. Grineva points out that “teacher’s professional goals, motives, knowledge, skills, qualities, abilities, attitudes are reflected through the teacher’s culture. That is, pedagogical culture is a phenomenon of the teacher's manifestation of his own "I" in professional and pedagogical activity through the unity of his goals, motives, knowledge, skills, qualities, abilities, relationships, united in a certain system of pedagogical values.

In the context of the transition to a new humanistic-innovative paradigm of education, the culture of a teacher can be considered a qualitative pedagogical characteristic of a specialist, which indicates his ability to organize and carry out innovative activities.

The culture of a teacher is an integral qualitative characteristic, the formation of which is due to the interaction of aspects: emotional and value (unity of goals, motives, personal qualities, pedagogical ethics), cognitive (knowledge of the technology of innovative activity) and procedural (skills and abilities regarding the organization, management and implementation of innovative activities) .

Khoruzha L.L. determines that each of the components of a teacher's culture is a derivative of the basic components of education: professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills of a teacher, its spiritual and ethical background.

The definition of spirituality as a basic component is due to the fact that culture is considered as a component of the universal culture and professional culture of the teacher. The Ukrainian Pedagogical Dictionary (Goncharenko S.U.) defines spirituality as “an individual expression in the system of motives of two fundamental needs: the ideal need for knowledge and the social need to live and create for others.”

One of the components of a teacher's spirituality in the process of implementing an innovative culture is professional and pedagogical ethics. It acts as a defining characteristic of the teacher's activity, determines the moral and ethical requirements for him and reflects the degree of their transformation in consciousness and behavior.

The ethics of the teacher's behavior is a projection of his personal attitude to various objects of professional activity: students, himself as a person, the profession of a teacher, the introduction of innovations. It is through the system of relations that the personal-moral and professional readiness of the teacher to understand the features of innovative activity and ways of its implementation is manifested.

Another no less important professional skill of a teacher in the works of scientists is considered a pedagogical tact, "with the help of which he in each case applies to students the most effective method of educational influence in certain circumstances" . The way to regulate the pedagogical tact is tolerance, which is characterized by the absence or restraint of the teacher's reaction to any adverse factors of influence, emotional stability.

The model for the formation of a teacher's innovative culture in the system of intra-school methodological work should begin with the creation of a pedagogically expedient organization of a set of incentives that would encourage the development of pedagogical innovative thinking, teachers' interest in innovative activities. Creating an atmosphere of creative interpersonal interaction between the subjects of the educational process is the next step on the way to the development of innovative cultural space. This is followed by familiarization of teachers with the algorithms for the implementation of innovative activities, understanding and participation in it through their own creativity. This model ends with the promotion of the activation of social activity of all participants in innovative activity, the emotional experience of this process itself.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The formation of an innovative educational culture involves identifying and overcoming the contradiction between updating the paradigm of modern education - the transition to a new type of humanistically innovative education - and the unpreparedness of a significant part of teachers for the corresponding changes.

2. The general definition of the concept of "innovation" is the understanding of innovation, established in professional communication, as an implemented innovation, regardless of the scope of application.

3. The teacher's innovative culture as an integral part of professional and pedagogical culture reflects the totality of all methods of innovative transformation of pedagogical reality based on forecasting, planning, managing, designing and modeling educational and educational phenomena, processes and systems.

4. The actions of innovators are nothing but the realization of their individual needs to expand their own social space through professional activities.

5. The specificity of the teacher's professional and pedagogical activity, including innovative, led to the allocation of pedagogical culture as one of the most important components of the culture of society.

LIST OF USED LITERATURE

Bespalko VP Components of pedagogical technology. - M .: Pedagogy, 1990.

Bobrov VV Actual problems of the modern content of education// Philosophy of education. - 2002. - No. 5. - http://www.philosophy.nsc.ru/Obraz.htm.

Vaschenko G. Zagalnі methodi navchannya: Pіdruchnik dlya pedagodiv. – K.: Ukr. Vidavnicha spilka, 1997.

Goncharenko S. U. Ukrainian Pedagogical Dictionary. - K .: Libid, 1997.

Grinyova V. M. Formation of the pedagogical culture of the future teacher. - K., 2001.

Zabrodska L. M., Onoprienko O. V., Khoruzha L. L., Tsimbalaru A. D. Informational and methodological support for the design and technological activity of the teacher. – H.: View. gr. "Osnova", 2007.

Ksenzova G. Yu. Perspective school technologies. - M .: Pedagogical Society of Russia, 2000.

Nikolaev A. Process of innovative development. - http://stra.teg..ru/lentainnovation/1362.

Pedagogical Ethics: Textbook / Ed. E. A. Grishina. - Vladimir, 1975.

Pedagogical glossary / As edited by active member of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine M. D. Yarmachenko. - Pedagogical thought, 2001.

Postalyuk N. Yu. Pedagogy of cooperation. - Kazan: Kazan Publishing House. un-ta, 2000.

Professional ethics of the teacher: hour and time / For the zag. ed. B. M. Zhebrovsky. - K., 2001

Sinitsa I. O. Pedagogical tact and mastery of the teacher. - K .: Radianska school, 1981.

Samorodova A.P. Some aspects of the innovative orientation of the formation of the professional and pedagogical culture of the educator of a preschool educational institution. - http://stra.teg..ru/lentainnovation/1362.

Yasvin V.A. Educational environment: from modeling to design. – M.: Meaning, 2001.

Innovation culture as

core infrastructure component

innovation process

RSTU

Improving the interconnected segments of the financial market using a systematic approach is necessary to enhance the innovative development of the economy. Innovative development should be understood in the dynamic unity of its aggregated participants: society, the corporate sector and the state. To form the ability for self-reproduction and self-regulation, the innovative environment must be saturated not only with innovative technologies, but also with an innovative culture.

The creation of an innovative system that produces and technologizes innovations, turning them into innovations (i.e., into regularly used innovations), should be considered from the point of view of a socio-economic approach. For a new economy with a prevailing human factor, a technocratic approach to the innovation process is initially ineffective: if technology is inert to innovations, and a person is receptive, an innovation process can be initiated, but if a person is not receptive to innovations, even high technological innovations will not give the expected positive effect. It follows from this that the innovation process is not so much technological as social. Therefore, in order to cultivate an innovative economic system, it is necessary to develop an innovative culture.

Innovation culture should be understood as a set of knowledge, skills and competencies used and acquired in the process of comprehensive development and production of innovations in various areas of human activity while maintaining a dynamic unity of traditions, innovations and innovations in the system. It is the innovative culture that combines the intangible assets necessary for the effective functioning of the financial sector in the new economy.

A model of uncontrolled oligarchic capitalism characterized by a high degree of social cynicism, a crisis of mistrust between business and government, the disintegration of Russian society and social entropy: economic actors do not show a desire for constructive interaction, because they are sure that they are surrounded by hostile, selfish and powerful individuals, groups and institutions that oppress and suppress them. [i] In the context of such destabilization, the implementation of innovative programs using a technocratic approach seems unlikely. It is necessary to systematically develop an innovative culture with the use of innovative management tools - innovative management and innovation management.

Competitiveness and profitability of modern network corporate and financial structures is based on a developed corporate culture. Now it is necessary to turn the corporate environment towards an innovative culture. The transformation of corporate culture into an innovative culture occurs through the formation and achievement of the target setting for the creation, development and promotion of innovations. An innovative corporate culture allows not only to quickly adapt to changes in the internal and external environment, but also to receive a positive effect from these changes. Thus, among the positive features of the crisis, entrepreneurs of municipalities named the acquisition of competitive advantages in crisis turns by capturing the market share of bankrupt competitors, which is the result of competent anti-crisis management.

Without an innovative culture, the implementation of a large-scale state innovation strategy is doomed to stagnation, which means that national actors take the position of an outsider. The formation of an innovative culture should become both one of the priorities of the state and business, and the main tools for modeling a new infrastructure of business-authority relations.

For financial institutions, the issue of developing an innovative culture becomes decisive in the context of a financial crisis. Innovations in the financial sector, used in favor of opportunistic behavior (rent-seeking behavior), led the global financial system to collapse. And since the dependence on the financial flows of the corporate sector has not weakened, it is necessary to develop tools for the formation of an innovative culture in the field of the formation and distribution of financial flows. In this case, the financial system will serve as a translator of innovative culture to all actors in the financial environment.

The very modeling of innovation culture is largely determined by its factor-component composition:

1. infrastructure of the corporate system, including:

1.1. technology level;

1.2. sources and quality of material resources;

1.3. structure and quality of financial resources;

2. the quality of the non-material assets of the corporation, namely:

2.1. quality management;

2.2. staff competencies;

2.3. the quality of human capital;

2.4. quality of process capital;

2.5. the loyalty of the company's staff.

3. level of innovation potential:

3.1. level of susceptibility to innovation

3.2. tools of motivation and development of human potential;

3.3. development initiative.

Corporations act as concentrators of innovative potential carriers - a certain type of people called passionaries, who serve as a source for the formation of a new business elite. [v] In this regard, state support for the development of an innovative culture of corporations serves as a powerful source of renewal of the country's human resources potential.

The formation of a corporation's innovative culture largely depends on top management and its leadership potential. The creative qualities of top management are realized in a certain type of thinking characteristic of the managers of the new economy (knowledge economy) - a high intellectual potential, which is in unity with innovative loyalty. The management model, headed by such a manager, acquires a synergy effect in the innovation process, since innovative technologies are not only replicated, but also grow, thanks to the mechanism of creative coaching and partnership.

The most important component of the corporation's resources is human capital - this is the stock of knowledge, skills, abilities and aspirations of the employee, which determine the effectiveness of his work and thus can affect the growth of his income. The technocratic approach to management is gradually giving way to a humanitarian one. Management should be based on the personnel value system and form the common values of the innovation culture, which will be an internal resource for the development of the corporation. In this case, it is necessary to combine two systems of motivation: economic and moral. In an innovative economy, non-material incentives come to foreground However, the lack of economic interest of the staff will lead to the expansion of opportunism and the development of rent-seeking in relations.

Stimulating factors that are loyal to the innovation culture should be aimed at developing the personal potential of employees. At the same time, they must correspond to the quality of human capital and the level of its human potential, otherwise the equalizing bonus system, which has already become traditional, levels out the initiative for development. Those employees who create an innovative field around themselves, modeling new standards of activity, determined by the goals of the corporation, should be encouraged. The innovative charge of such "cores" of corporate subsystems is broadcast over social network and raised to the standard.

Assessing the experience of "toxic" or "viral" innovations, it should be noted that self-dissemination of the elements of an innovative culture requires a high level of interest. Most of the innovations in the course of the innovation process lose their effectiveness precisely because of rejection by management. Only a high personal interest can become the basis for cultivating an innovative culture.

The innovation process on a macroscale is realized in the dynamic unity of three sectors: public, corporate and private. The flow of innovation cannot be discrete, since the overall level of innovation development is made up of levels of subsectors. (picture 1). For the successful implementation of the policy of forming an innovative culture, a tripartite impact on innovation is necessary to find the sources of internal development.

https://pandia.ru/text/78/071/images/image002_77.gif" width="444" height="444 src=">

Figure 1. Model of translation of innovation culture

Innovative and innovative management is now implemented as interaction in a social network, and innovative culture acts as a unifying supersystem in any form of organization. The innovation culture should become an immanent property of the corporate structure, since it is the ideological content of the management process that is a powerful driver of the innovation process. The innovative culture of a corporation is, first of all, a common system of values that makes it possible to combine the goals of the corporation's personnel in the implementation of the innovation process. And since the corporation is an actor in social and business networks, therefore, the innovative culture will be broadcast, reborn into an institution.

The effective implementation of the innovation strategy of the national economy presupposes, as a social basis, the formation and sustainable reproduction of an innovative social culture. A person as an actor of socio-economic reality in the process of activity transforms (updates) his environment, transferring part of his human capital to the production process and to the product itself. Thus, in the new economy (knowledge economy), innovation should not be narrowly interpreted as the science of the process of creating new technologies, but should also take into account social, economic, psychological and other factors that determine the effectiveness and quality of the innovation process.

To preserve the national economy, it is necessary to focus on fundamentally new technologies, not only for production, but for the entire system of managing socio-economic processes. The use of old technologies in new conditions, as well as the use of new technologies without a modernized infrastructure component, will not achieve the goal, but will only create an excessive administrative, organizational and financial burden on the economy. New technologies should become "breakthrough" innovations that will bring economic systems and subsystems to fundamentally new level resistance to destructive virtual processes. Breakthrough innovations can ensure the self-sufficiency of the national economy, not excluding its integration into the global economic system. Moreover, this kind of innovation should affect, first of all, the environment that served as the source of the crisis, that is, the financial system.

The target environment for the introduction of innovation can significantly, and sometimes diametrically, change the positive effect of innovation. With the implication of innovation, there is a conflict between traditional patterns and new, still alien, processes.

The translational function of innovation culture is associated with the temporal and spatial translation of established types of innovative behavior that have been tested in the corporate sector and acquired a value coloring within society (Figure 2).

The selection function of innovative culture is revealed in the process of selecting newly created or borrowed innovative behavioral models that best meet the needs of society at a certain stage of its development.

In the process of implementation by the innovative culture of its "core" - innovative - function, the creative possibilities of the socio-cultural mechanism are revealed.

Figure 2 - Translation of innovation culture in the economic system

They manifest themselves in the development of new types of innovative behavior based on models of innovative activity that arose within the culture itself or were instilled from outside. The quality of the performance of the innovation function is determined by the degree of organicity of the behavioral models institutionalized by the innovation culture in relation to the structure of economic, political, cultural and other relations that has developed in a given society.

Innovation culture, as a special form of human culture, implies a close relationship with its other forms, primarily with legal, managerial, entrepreneurial, corporate. Through an innovative culture, a significant impact on the entire culture of professional activity and industrial relations can be achieved. With the international nature of innovation culture, efforts to develop it should be based on the cultural traditions of the country and the field of activity. It can equip practice with methods for assessing and suppressing the use of innovations that can harm a person, society, and nature.

In view of the foregoing, it seems that the innovative culture has a powerful anti-bureaucratic and creative charge, and in accordance with the current needs of the development of the state. Strategic resource new economy is an innovative culture.

List of sources used

[i] Lebedeva N., Tatarko A. Values of culture and development of society. Moscow: GU-HSE, 2007. p. 51.54.

Astaltsev relations and the formation of innovative culture // Economic Bulletin of the Rostov State University No. 2.

Results of the rating survey of IC FINAM // Business Journal No. 3.

Myasnikov L. Russian mentality and management // Questions of Economics. 2000. No. 4. from. 41-42.

[v] Antonov B. Problems of corporate governance in Russia // Marketing. 2005. No. 6. p. 10.

Scientific bases of identification and use of socially functional innovations / , etc.; Ed. . - Minsk: Law and Economics, 2004.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

innovative culture development implementation

Introduction
Conclusion
List of sources used
Introduction
The current stage of world development is characterized by the increasing acceleration of technical and technological development, which causes unprecedented transformation processes in the world. Innovative factors have become the fundamental factors in the development of any economic system. The predominant use of a combination of innovative factors in the development of the economy of any economic entity is the essence of its transfer to a qualitatively new type of development, allowing it to acquire the most important property in a market environment - competitiveness.
The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that Russia found itself in a difficult situation of choosing the path of further economic development and the formation of the country as one of the equal members of the world community. Russian economy in the second half of the 20th century. developed mainly on the basis of extensive factors (due to the exploitation of the raw material base and low-level technologies). The high level of fundamental science was accompanied by insufficient development of its applied aspects. The introduction of new scientific developments was associated with significant difficulties. This was one of the reasons for the formation of a technological gap between Russia and industrialized countries, especially in the information sphere.
Science cities are called upon to carry out scientific, scientific and technical, innovative activities, experimental developments, tests, as well as to train personnel in accordance with state priorities for the development of science and technology. However, today science cities are facing a number of serious problems that hinder the development and effective functioning of these research centers, and they are called upon to play a significant role in the system of science and education in our country. It is also important to note that the problems of science cities also affect society, as they have great influence to the districts and regions in which they are located. From all this it follows that the study of the state of science cities and the analysis of their problems is especially relevant today.
The object of study of this work is the role of innovative culture in the country's economy.
The purpose of this course work is to analyze the innovation culture and the problems of its formation in Russia.
To achieve this goal, the following tasks will be solved:
· Considered the essence and significance of innovation culture;
· The analysis of problems of formation of innovative culture in Russia is carried out.
The methodological basis of the study is the structural-functional and comparative-historical approaches.
1. Role and importance of innovation culture
1.1 Innovation culture: concept and meaning
The problems of introducing innovations, carrying out innovative activities, realizing the innovative potential of society have always been in the focus of attention of states and governments. However, it was in the 80-90s. 20th century the issues of forming an innovative culture came to the fore when the processes taking place in the world community began to require new managerial, legal, organizational and technological approaches. The priority of the formation of professionals of a new formation, members of society - distributors of a new culture, generators of ideas and their embodyers, initiators of innovative processes, was sharply designated.
The members of the European Union, evaluating the nature and prospects of innovative activities of the leading states, came to the conclusion that it is necessary to create a program document that defines the main directions for the development of innovations. As a result of comprehensive discussions, on December 20, 1995, the Green Paper of Innovation in Europe was signed.
In June 1996, the European Commission approved The First Action Plan for Innovation in Europe, which established the principles of developing a "true innovation culture" in education, business and government. Analyzing the results of the implementation of the "Action Plan", as well as the recommendations of the "Green Book", it should be noted that not all provisions are reflected in the activities of the countries of the European Union.
In the Russian Federation, the problems of forming an innovative culture of society at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. determined the creation of the Institute for Strategic Innovations. On the initiative of the Institute, in 1999, the first policy document was signed - the Charter of Innovative Culture, which conceptually determined that "the sustainable development of the current civilization is possible only through constant innovations (innovations) in science, education, culture, economics, management ...". Giving a strategically decisive importance to the culture of innovation, representatives of science, culture, education, government and public administration, business circles identified the reasons for the lag of innovation processes in society and noted the need for an integrated approach to the problems of forming an innovation culture, developing the innovation potential of an individual, overcoming innovation stagnation in society.
In 2001, the Committee on Innovative Culture was established as part of the Commission of the Russian Federation for UNESCO. The business meetings, seminars and conferences initiated by him only confirmed the relevance of this issue. Giving priority to the areas of education, science, culture and communications, the activities of the Committee contributed to the dissemination of positive experience in the formation of an innovative culture in various industries and areas of activity.
At present, interest in an innovative culture is observed not only in the scientific community and specialized structures. The task of forming an innovative culture is a priority for the state and society. An increasing number of representatives of government and business are paying close attention to the issues of innovative development, highlighting the problems of forming an innovative culture, since it is the innovative culture that will contribute to the development of an innovative society in Russia.
According to B. Santo, “an innovative society is a highly intelligent society, moreover, on a global scale, it is the path of those who have chosen the goal and form of their activity to be non-stop intellectual cognition, the path of those whose existence is characterized by increased intellectual activity and the desire to realize their ideas." Tracing the features of the formation of the concept of "innovation" since the 1950s, the author believes that innovations reflect the essence of human activity. From the position of members of society, this is the ability for self-development and creative participation in the development of this society. This point of view assumes that the main characteristic of an innovative society is its high innovative culture and the developed innovative culture of its members.
The authors of the monograph “Philosophy of Creativity” present innovative culture as “knowledge, skills and experience of purposeful preparation, integrated implementation and comprehensive development of innovations in various areas of human life while maintaining the dynamic unity of the old, modern and new in the innovative system; in other words, it is the free creation of something new in compliance with the principle of continuity.” Researchers pay special attention to the social task of forming an innovative culture of society and the individual, equating it with the culture of creative activity. A developed innovative culture, in their opinion, is the basis of a modern innovative economy.
The Russian philosopher B.K. Lisin considers innovative culture as a form of universal culture, defines it as an area of the general cultural process, "characterizing the degree of susceptibility of a person, group, society to various innovations ranging from a tolerant attitude to readiness and ability to turn them into innovations." Innovative culture characterizes the conscious desire of society for material and spiritual self-renewal, being the initial prerequisite for qualitative changes in people's life and the methodological basis for progress and harmonization of all spheres of society's life. It is the innovative culture that determines the relationship between innovations that have grown from traditions and traditions that serve as the basis of the creative process, which in turn is the source of innovative culture.
L.A. Kholodkova distinguishes between cultures of "innovative" and "traditional" types. In her opinion, innovative culture can be considered as "a complex social phenomenon that organically combines the issues of science, education, culture with social and, above all, with professional practice in various areas of the community: in management, economics, education, culture." The author considers science and education to be the main determinants of the development of an innovative culture, which provide the definition of goals, objectives, methods and mechanisms for the formation of an innovative culture, as well as an empirical analysis of the components of an innovative culture, their state and interaction.
VV Zubenko points to the innovative culture of society as a historically established system of ideas, stereotypes, values, norms of behavior and knowledge aimed at improving all spheres of life. Describing innovative culture as an innovative component of the culture of society, he does not single it out as one of the types of culture, but assigns a place of a common property that permeates each of the cultures (economic, legal, etc.), “because one of characteristic features any culture is its reciprocal influence.
The “duality” of innovative culture is emphasized in the works of V. I. Dolgova, who distinguishes it, on the one hand, as a special type of culture, and on the other hand, as an element that is present in every type of culture. It considers innovation culture as a certain area of intersection of different types of cultures (organizational, legal, political, professional, personal, etc.), reflecting their progressive development, progressive trends, and innovative nature. Innovative culture, from the point of view of Dolgova, determines the entire life of society and man, relying on and developing existing traditions.
The Chinese philosopher Shang-kang He wrote: “The basis of an innovative culture is an innovative modeling of human life, behavior and thought. In addition, an innovative culture is a kind of innovative spirit, ideology and human environment.” Being a means of personal self-realization, innovation involves the development of a person's innovative abilities: he can take a fresh look at ordinary, familiar things, independently generate an idea, outline ways to implement it and reach the end in achieving the goal. The development of an innovative culture of an individual can be considered as the development of its individual creative abilities and creative potential.
A.Yu. Eliseev, relying on the semantics of the phrase “innovative culture” of a personality, believes that this is “a culture of life where the motivation for human actions is the thirst for renewal, the birth of ideas and their implementation ...<…>The popularization of an “innovative” approach to life should be inevitable for every member of society, gradually causing a feeling of rejection of the principle “to live as one lives”. Step by step, she will be able to help a person make a choice in favor of “innovation”, that is, “to live thoughtfully, organizedly”, and, finally, creatively.” The author believes that an innovative culture helps to create an atmosphere in society in which a new idea is perceived as a value accepted by this society and supported by it.
The point of view of V. D. Tsvetkova is noteworthy, according to which the formation of an innovative culture of a personality at a conscious level allows a person “not only to generate external diversity in his activity, but also to acquire internal stability and unity in the face of an endless process of renewal… The humanistic potential of an innovative culture connected with its function of ensuring the unity of human existence in an innovative society. Being an element of the culture of a modern person, an innovative culture allows the individual, supported by the constructive attitude of society towards innovations, to reveal their inner capabilities and self-realization. Associated with the innovative culture of society, it contributes to the development of the individual.
Director of the Institute for Strategic Innovations A.I. Nikolaev, discussing the problems of innovative development and the formation of an innovative culture, noted: “Innovative culture reflects the holistic orientation of a person, fixed in motives, knowledge, skills, as well as in patterns and norms of behavior. It shows how the level of activity of the respective social institutions, and the degree of satisfaction of people with participation in them and the results. The level of the most innovative culture of the individual directly depends on the attitude of society towards innovations and the work that is carried out in society to form and develop an innovative culture.
Considers innovative culture as part of the culture of society S. G. Grigorieva. She presents the formation of an innovative culture of the individual as a dynamic process of "transition from ignorance to knowledge, from the improvement of some skills to the emergence of others, from some personal and mental properties and qualities to other neoplasms." In relation to the sphere of professional development of a personality, the author pays attention to the integration of innovative and professional activities, the transformation of the innovative behavior of a future member of the professional community.
1.2 Formation of an innovation culture within the framework of the modern economic system
Intellectual resources are a condition and basis for the development of an enterprise and society as a whole. Intellectual resources are a set of individual intellectual potentials of the enterprise's personnel that can cause a synergistic effect. In turn, the personal intellectual potential of an individual worker is his knowledge, skills, abilities for creativity and self-development.
If for an enterprise intellectual resources are a potential factor of production, which should be used in an optimal way when minimal cost, then for society as a whole it is the potential for economic growth and development, the degree of implementation of which is determined by the level of social and technical development.
Effective management of intellectual resources, which are further considered in the narrow sense of the word, and their active use, aimed at creating modern goods and services that meet the requirements of the market, provides significant competitive advantages and allows enterprises to realize their strategic goals and objectives. Management of intellectual resources at the level of a single enterprise is associated with the search for ways effective creation and use of knowledge and information to achieve the set economic goals - such as profit growth, cost savings, increase in sales volumes.
Modern conditions impose special requirements on the organization of the intellectual resource management process and make it expedient to single out the intellectual resource management subsystem as an independent functional subsystem of a dynamically developing enterprise (see Fig. 1).

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Rice. 1. The intellectual resource management system in common system enterprise management
The prerequisites for organizing an independent intellectual resource management system as part of an enterprise management system are: a variety of forms and types of intellectual resources; the need to develop a comprehensive strategy in the field of managing the intellectual potential of enterprises; specificity of tools, methods and variety of intellectual resource management functions; a significant number of services and departments involved in the process of generating and converting information about intellectual resources; the need for coordination in the process of managing intellectual resources; high profitability of transactions with objects of intellectual property; high risk of unfair competition.
Creation and development of an intellectual resource management system, providing conditions for its effective functioning, performance evaluation and search for ways to further improve the organization of management - all these are the most important aspects of managing an enterprise's intellectual resources.
A feature of the development of innovation processes in Russia is the identification of innovation policy and science and technology policy. With the unity of the strategic goal - a competitive economy, a high quality of life for the population and national security - they should differ in strategic tasks and ways to solve them. If the main task of scientific and technological policy and activity is to create scientific groundwork for the future, then the task of innovation policy and activity is to use science (the accumulated array of knowledge and technology) in the interests of the economy in the present.
When declaring the “implementation task” as a strategic priority of scientific policy, the scientific and technical sphere is doomed to investment unattractiveness. Science-intensive and high-tech projects may or may not be investment-attractive not because of the novelty and theoretical significance of the super-technologies and scientific achievements used (implemented) in them, but because of the high market potential (public demand) of their final product.
Thus, the motivation of scientific activity and innovative activity is different. Hence follows the task of correctly formulating the goals, priorities of a particular policy, and even organizing practical actions to ensure them.
For Russia, integration into the world market of science-intensive technologies is extremely important. At present, there is almost no solvent demand in the country for a significant part of science-intensive products, which leads to stagnation and aging of the most advanced technological base.
Everything greater value for the development of domestic science acquires international scientific and technical cooperation. In recent years, there has been an intensive involvement of Russian scientists in the global scientific environment.
New forms of international scientific and technical cooperation in Russia include the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC), which is an intergovernmental organization established in 1992 on the basis of an international agreement between the EU, the USA, Japan and the Russian Federation. The goals of the ICST are to "convert" researchers in the field of military technologies to civilian fields through the support of projects in Russia and other CIS countries. The Partnership Program, administered by the ISTC's Partnership and Sustainability Division, provides an opportunity for private sector enterprises, research institutes, governmental and non-governmental organizations to fund scientific research conducted by institutes from Russia and the CIS through the ISTC. To date, more than 380 government organizations and private companies have joined the ISTC Partnership Program and have funded nearly 700 joint R&D projects totaling $240 million. Participants from different countries of the world hope that the Partnership Program will make it possible to realize the huge scientific and technical potential of the former "weapons" specialists in Russia and the CIS, as well as to attract new international investments for further reorientation of their activities to work in civilian areas.
The most complete picture of the structure of the country's innovative potential and its place in the global world economy in certain areas of high technology is provided by the analysis of patent statistics. Until 1997, there was a decline in this direction. There were only 1.03 patent applications per 10,000 population. In 2006 this figure was 1.7. IN total in 2006, 30,651 applications were submitted, but in 2011, only 27,491 such applications were submitted.
Unfortunately, in contrast to industrialized countries, inventive activity in Russia falls as it approaches the end of the scientific and technological chain. The number of own patents in Russia is steadily declining, which contains a threat to the scientific and technical independence of the country. If in 2006 24,726 patents were issued, then in 2011 - 23,028. There is every reason to believe that we are becoming not only a source of raw materials, but also an intellectual appendage of the "center" countries.
According to Rospatent, our country is not very attractive for foreign applicants, so most of the applications were filed by domestic "inventors". For comparison, in 2011 there were 27,491 domestic applicants and 18,431 foreign applicants. The most active applicants in Russia are the USA, Germany and Japan.
As for the thematic areas in which there is an increased interest of foreign applicants, the most promising among them include:
· Drugs and preparations, methods of obtaining them and using them for diagnostics, therapy and research;
· Chemical and physical processes of general purpose, catalysis, colloid chemistry, organic chemistry, methods of obtaining and chemical processing of macromolecular compounds, compositions based on these compounds.
The international exchange of objects of intellectual property has now become an independent sphere of economic relations. Hence, the condition for the successful integration of Russia into the international system of economic relations is the expansion and increase in the efficiency of Russian foreign trade in these types of goods and services with the improvement of the national system of legal protection and transfer of intellectual property.
The structure of exports confirms the low technical and economic level of domestic production, the deepening of the innovative backlog of production from global trends. In many countries, the basis of economic growth is the production and export of high-tech and knowledge-intensive products. An extremely low technical and economic characteristic of the fixed capital of enterprises is characterized by the indicator of the age structure of equipment. Average age equipment 18-20 years old. Lack of equipment replacement possibilities inevitably increases the period of its use.
However, there are absolute advantages to the Russian economy that are not limited to rich natural resources. It should be noted that the general educational level of the population is quite high. Russia occupies a leading position in the international market of nuclear technologies, space technology and services, products of the military-industrial complex.
There are almost four thousand research and development organizations in Russia today (Table 1). The institutional structure of science is inherent whole line features that distinguish Russia from most developed countries of the world.
The basis of the scientific sector is formed by independent research organizations, isolated from production and education. In 2011, their number was 2036, and their share in the total set of organizations of the scientific and technical complex of the country was about 51.5% (see Table 1).
Table 1. Organizations performing research and development in Russia


Number of organizations - total
including:
research organizations
design bureaus
design and design and survey organizations
pilot plants
higher education institutions
research and development departments in organizations
other organizations

Their number for the period 1990-2011. increased by 1.2 times. The noted growth was associated with both the disaggregation of existing and the creation of new scientific organizations. In particular, federal ministries and departments were endowed with such a right.
At the same time, the total number of organizations engaged in research and development over the same period decreased by 14.8%, and organizations involved in the design and implementation of production technologies - at times. Thus, the number of design organizations decreased by 12.1 times, design bureaus - by 1.9 times, industrial enterprises engaged in research and development - by 1.7 times.
The main reason for this disproportion is the sharp decline in effective demand for the results of scientific and technical activities at the beginning of economic reforms. In the 1990s, the situation in almost all sectors of the economy was assessed as critical. As a result, it was precisely those scientific organizations that were directly tied to production that suffered the most. Despite the fact that the economic situation has improved markedly in recent years, the massive demand for scientific results has not yet been restored.
Research organizations, for various reasons, have proven to be more resilient to market transformations than other types of scientific organizations. They concentrated 59.3% of scientific personnel, design organizations - 22.5%.
In Russia, corporate science is underdeveloped - scientific divisions at industrial enterprises. In 2011, the share of industrial enterprises performing research and development together with pilot plants in the total number of scientific organizations was approximately 8.2%. As the experience of developed countries shows, it is the scientific and technical laboratories of large industrial companies that have a clear advantage in the markets for innovative products. We are talking about the ability to concentrate resources on the development of scientific and technical products that are in demand, to carry out a wider range of research and selection of promising developments on their basis.
Analyzing the above points of view regarding innovation culture, as well as the approaches of various researchers to the issues of its formation and development, we can draw a number of conclusions:
1. Within the framework of social philosophy, there has not yet been formed common approaches to understanding innovation culture. Researchers consider it as an area of the general cultural process, a special kind of culture, part of the culture of society, a property or element of culture. Therefore, it is necessary to consolidate the efforts of scientists and specialists to improve the conceptual and categorical apparatus of innovation culture.
2. Despite different approaches to defining the phenomenon of innovative culture, all researchers consider it as the basis for the innovative development of society. Representatives of the authorities and business circles adhere to the same point of view, paying close attention to the formation and development of an innovative culture of society and the individual. And, therefore, the definition of directions for the development of innovative culture, the identification of factors contributing to or, on the contrary, preventing its formation should be reflected in the works of scientists and researchers.
3. The innovative culture of society lies in the fact that all possible types of innovations are implemented and supported in it, and a person is actively involved in the innovative processes taking place in society, which affects his spiritual improvement and the desire for self-realization and self-development.
4. Being the subject of an innovative culture, a person is simultaneously a part of society and a product of the innovative culture of this society. The interaction of the innovative culture of the individual and the innovative culture of society is a prerequisite for its formation. There is a so-called interchange or transition of the innovative culture of the individual into the innovative culture of society and vice versa. Contributing to the formation of highly intelligent and creative individuals, society ensures its innovative development and the formation of an innovative culture.
2. Problems of innovation culture
2.1 Main trends in the formation of an innovative culture and innovative development
Enterprise management presupposes the existence of certain ideas about the formation, use and features of the reproduction of intellectual resources. All the accumulated knowledge, abilities, skills, creative possibilities, actually included in the production of goods and services, and bringing income to their owner, will act in the form of intellectual capital. The ability to work acquires the properties of intellectual capital when there is a fundamental, qualitative modification of the entire set of properties that make up the quality of the labor force, which makes its owner able to create a stable, excess, surplus product demanded by society, and, accordingly, an excess surplus value, which becomes stable. source of additional capital income.
The management of intellectual resources involves the performance of a number of functions aimed at the rational formation, use and development of the intellectual resources of an enterprise, which can be systematized in separate areas of activity (see Table 2).
When evaluating intellectual capital, firms face a lot of problems. These include:
· limited opportunities for a strictly formal and adequate description and measurement of intellectual resources;
a high degree of uncertainty (entropy) of the results of scientific research;
· methodological problems of determining the standards of creative work (or even creativity itself) and their reliability.
Table 2. Functional subsystems for managing enterprise intellectual resources

Elements of the enterprise intellectual resource management system
1. R&D and technological innovation management subsystem	- planning, organization, control and regulation of the process of development of scientific and technical knowledge of specialists; - formation of an intellectual-information environment conducive to the generation of new ideas, the development of creativity, ingenuity, rationalization; Formation of an intellectual base that allows the enterprise to adapt and maintain its position in a changing external environment;
2. Subsystem for managing innovation potential and employee development	- formation and effective use of knowledge funds; - forecasting the need for intellectual resources; -identification of the emotional, psychological and intellectual potential of employees; -providing conditions for continuous improvement and development of personnel; Development of action programs for the improvement and development of intellectual resources;
3. Subsystem for managing internal and external information and communications	- coordination of actions of specialists involved in the process of managing intellectual resources, through the formalization and regulation of various procedures; Formation of a system for collecting, transmitting, processing, storing and using internal and external information;
4. Subsystem for managing a portfolio of rights to intellectual resources	- optimization of the composition of the portfolio of ownership of intellectual resources in accordance with the development strategy of the enterprise; Development of organizational and technical measures to ensure the protection of intellectual resources;
5. Subsystem for managing the commercialization of intellectual resources	-providing conditions for obtaining the maximum benefit from the use of intellectual resources; Analysis and evaluation of the value of intellectual property rights, monitoring of the commercial potential of intellectual resources.

All this not only complicates, but also casts doubt on the correctness of setting the very task of rationing intellectual processes and creative activities. But on the other hand, in the conditions of market pricing, this intellectual potential of the company can be assessed or correlated with cost categories.
The first (rather controversial, approximate, although not the only) sign of an intellectual company is the level of its market capitalization, which exceeds the book value of fixed assets, tangible and financial assets. The excess of the company's market value over its book value is formed precisely due to intellectual assets: the novelty and prospects of the proposed products or services, expectations to occupy new market segments, expected profit from patents, trademark(prestige), business control, customer relationships, etc. The degree of excess also matters: not every successful stock market the company is intelligent.
According to experts, the excess should be multiple and stable, not subject to sporadic market fluctuations. Some experts believe that the intellectual capital of a high-tech company is usually 3-4 times higher than the book value of its income; others that the ratio of intellectual capital to the value of tangible means of production and financial capital in such companies should be in the range from 5:1 to 16:1 (Stewart, 1998). The market capitalization of a large corporation like Microsoft is estimated at hundreds of billions of dollars, but the value of the material assets on the company's balance sheet is only a few billion dollars. At the same time, the absence on the balance sheet of a significant amount of material resources in the form of fixed assets and working capital is not fundamental, since a modern intellectual company can attract them from outside, paying as a service.
An important sign of an intellectual company is the amount of investment directed to research and development: if they exceeded the amount of investment in fixed assets, then this indicator can also serve as a defining characteristic of an intellectual company.
In the context of large-scale economic reforms carried out in Russia in recent decades, one of the important tasks is to create conditions for the preservation and development of the country's scientific and technical potential.
The prerequisite for the emergence of a movement for the creation of science cities was the uncertain status of a closed administrative-territorial entity (ZATO).
The term science city was introduced for the first time in the city of Zhukovsky, Moscow Region, by famous scientists S.P. Nikanorov and N.K. Nikitina in 1991 during the creation of the movement "Union for the development of science cities" to develop coordinated positions on the most important issues of their life. The movement took the initiative to develop a draft Concept of State Policy for the Preservation and Development of Science Cities. The first versions of the draft law "On the Status of the Science City of the Russian Federation", developed one - in the Federation Council, the other - in the State Duma, appeared in 1995.
The law on science cities was adopted on April 7, 1999. In accordance with this law, a science city is a municipal formation with the status of an urban district, which has a high scientific and technical potential, with a city-forming scientific and production complex. Legal regulation of the science city status is carried out in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws on general principles organizations of local self-government, on science and state scientific and technical policy, other federal laws, the Federal Law "On the Status of the Science City of the Russian Federation", constitutions, charters and laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
The status of a science city is assigned to a municipal formation by the Government of the Russian Federation for a certain period. A municipality applying for the status of a science city must have a research and production complex located on the territory of this municipality. The research and production complex of a science city is understood as a set of organizations engaged in scientific, scientific and technical, innovative activities, experimental development, testing, training in accordance with the state priority areas for the development of science, technology and technology.
The research and production complex of a municipality applying for the status of a science city must be a city-forming complex and meet the following criteria:
· the number of employees in organizations of the research and production complex is at least 15% of the total number of employees;
the volume of scientific and technical products (corresponding to the priority areas of development of science, technology and technology of the Russian Federation) in value terms is at least 50% of the total output of all economic entities located on the territory of this municipality, or the cost of fixed assets of the complex actually used in production scientific and technical products, is not less than 50% of the cost of actually used fixed assets of all business entities located on the territory of the municipality, with the exception of the housing and communal and social sphere.
The research and production complex includes legal entities registered on the territory of this municipality:
1. scientific organizations, institutions of higher vocational education and other organizations carrying out scientific, scientific, technical and innovative activities, experimental development, testing, training of personnel, if they have state accreditation if necessary;
2. organizations, regardless of organizational and legal forms, engaged in the production of products, performance of work and provision of services, provided that the share of production of science-intensive products (in value terms) corresponding to the priority areas of development of science, technology and technology of the Russian Federation during the previous three years, is at least 50 percent of their total production.
The first Russian science city, in 2000, was Obninsk, where developments in the field of peaceful atom were and are being carried out. In this city, testing of the institutional mechanisms for the functioning of science cities in Russia was previously carried out. This event gave impetus to the further development of science cities in Russia.
When assigning the status of a science city to a municipal formation, the government approves the priority areas for this science city of scientific, scientific, technical, innovative activities, experimental development, testing, and training. In this regard, it is customary to single out seven main specializations of science cities in Russia:
1. aviation, rocket science and space research;
2. electronics and radio engineering;
3. automation, machine and instrument making;
4. chemistry, chemical physics and creation of new materials;
5. nuclear complex;
6. energy;
7. biology and biotechnology.
These science cities are different not only in terms of sectoral focus, but also in terms of population, budget volumes and revenues mobilized to the budget, the volume of innovative products, etc.
According to the nature and profile of scientific complexes, science cities are divided into single-profile, mono-oriented and complex.
Mono-oriented science cities have several city-forming enterprises of the same sphere of scientific and technical activity. These are, for example, Zhukovsky, where the largest research and testing complexes of the aviation profile are located; Chernogolovka is a scientific center of the Russian Academy of Sciences with research institutes and laboratories in the field of chemical physics.
The most characteristic example of a complex science city is Dubna, where, in addition to the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, there are scientific, design and research and production centers for aerospace, instrument-making, shipbuilding, and an international university.
Today, the status of a science city has been officially assigned to 14 settlements in Russia that specialize in a particular area of science.

At the same time, the status of a science city is claimed by:

· 19 municipalities in the rocket and space industry;

· 14 municipalities in the nuclear industry;

· in the field of biotechnology 4 municipalities;

· in the field of electronics and radio engineering 3 municipalities;

· in the field of mechanical engineering 5 municipalities;

· in the field of chemistry and physical chemistry 5 municipalities.

Another 5 municipalities also claim the status of a science city, the sectoral affiliation of which is difficult to unequivocally assess. Already today these applicants are equated by experts with official science cities.

The analogue of science cities abroad are technopolises, the development of which on a large scale unfolded in the leading countries in the second half of the 20th century, in particular the famous Silicon Valley, a region in the state of California, characterized by a high density of high-tech companies associated with the development and production of computers and their components, especially microprocessors, and software, mobile communication devices, biotechnology, etc. The emergence and development of this technology center due to the concentration of leading universities, major cities less than an hour away, sources of funding for new companies, and a mild climate. At first glance, the structures of science cities and Silicon Valley are similar, but there is one very significant difference. It consists in the fact that the investment climate in Silicon Valley favors the emergence of new innovative companies. In our country, such infrastructures are very poorly developed.

The state assigns a number of functions to the science cities, the implementation of which is monitored and, if violations are detected, the science city may lose its status ahead of schedule. It also checks the target nature of spending the allocated funds.

Thus, support for science cities specializing in priority areas development of science, technology and technology, is one of the most important conditions for Russia's competitiveness in the global economy.

To date, there are 14 cities in the country that have officially received the status of science cities, and about 70 have declared their desire to receive this status. Science cities were conditionally divided into categories of "status" and "candidates". However, practice shows that many applicants had to refuse to obtain the status of science cities, since the procedure for approving the status turned out to be lengthy and scrupulous, and additional budget funding is not guaranteed and is regulated in detail. Over time, other problems of science cities began to appear - the aging of the research base and personnel, conflicts with the public, corruption scandals, and others.

Individual problems specific to science cities in Russia are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Selected problems specific to science cities in Russia

science cities	Problems
	there is no comprehensive development program, there is no permission to use land, there is no comprehensive nature of the formation of the list of projects (it is formed only at the expense of the federal budget)
	the problems of the science city are the inability to use unloaded federal property for commercial orders and the absence of a regional legislative framework for science cities
	there are no incentives for the development of commercial activities by research and production enterprises
	the problem of science city Reutov lies in the requirement of the law to spend budget subsidies only on infrastructure
	lack of extrabudgetary funding
	In 2010, the mayor of the science city was accused of corruption
Koltsovo	the problem of the outflow of young people from science; conflicting relations with local authorities over land. 3 criminal cases were opened against the head of the science city
Peterhof	the main problem is that Peterhof does not have the status of an urban district

Another key problem that deserves separate detailed consideration is the problem of legislation in the field of creation and development of science cities. According to federal law dated April 7, 1999 No. 70-FZ "On the status of the science city of the Russian Federation", the status of "science city" was granted for 25 years. It was assumed that a presidential decree would be issued for each city, defining its specialization - space, nuclear physics, medicine, etc. - and to approve the development program for 5-6 years. And according to the tripartite agreement (government - governor - municipality), each level of power had to take over certain obligations for the execution of the program.

In 2004, the law was amended, according to which the decision to assign scientific status was taken by the government, and it was granted only for five years. But the main change was the introduction of the per capita support method, instead of the software one. In practice, it looks like this: the money allocated from the federal budget for all science cities is distributed among them depending on the number of inhabitants.

At the end of 2011, the Ministry of Education and Science prepared a bill that could radically change the system of science cities. First of all, the document proposes to change the mechanism for assigning and maintaining the status of a science city. Now the document is being considered by other departments and the heads of regions that have science cities. If it does not fundamentally change, then the status of a science city will be assigned indefinitely, but it will have to be confirmed every ten years.

However, experts, including members of the Russian Science City Development Union, are dissatisfied with the new bill and believe that it contradicts the policy of the President of the Russian Federation regarding support for the development of scientific infrastructure in general, and support for science cities in particular. According to Mikhail Korolev, Doctor of Technical Sciences, professor at the National Research University of the Moscow State Institute of Electronic Technology, the Ministry of Education and Science does not fully understand how science cities are organized and what are the main goals of their activities.

Another significant problem that can be attributed to the sphere of legislation is the problem of taxation. As stated in the explanatory note to the bill discussed above, "it is aimed at stimulating scientific and innovative activities in science cities." However, according to experts, science cities need more a law on tax incentives, similar to those established in Skolkovo. Recall that according to the law recently signed by the president, Skolkovo is exempt from almost all taxes. All profits will go to the developers.

2.2 Prospects for the implementation of an innovation culture

Insufficiency of budget funding, an ill-conceived mechanism for its distribution and problems in legislative support are not the only problems of science cities. The largest and “richest” problem in 2011 for all cities of science, which calls into question the possibility and necessity of their existence, was the innovation city of Skolkovo.

In fact, Skolkovo is the same science city, which differs from the traditional ones in that it is not officially called a city. This is an innovative center, within which, however, it is planned to build a very real urban infrastructure suitable for both work and residence.

At the same time, the concept of a new science city from scratch did not win immediately. At first, it was proposed to create a center on the basis of existing scientific centers, for example, on the basis of Obninsk, where the first Russian nuclear reactor was made, or in Tomsk, which is the largest university city in Siberia. The name "Skolkovo" was officially announced in March. Until now, this small village near Moscow was known only for the business school of the same name. It was decided to build a full-fledged city in its place for the development of innovations. The name "science city" was replaced by "innovation city".

In March, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev named five areas of priority for this center - telecommunications, IT, energy, biomedical and nuclear technologies. Here it is worth noting that only the first two directions can be considered completely new for traditional Russian research centers. For example, there are about a dozen different science cities and ZATOs dealing with nuclear issues in Russia; from biomedical centers we can mention Pushchino or Koltsovo in the Novosibirsk region. The science cities did not deal with energy in its pure form (excluding the nuclear industry), but it is also impossible to say that this industry is new for domestic science and engineering.

Telecommunications and IT are the areas that developed most actively after the departure from the Soviet model of science development. Majority modern technologies created at the end of the last century and in this decade, domestic research centers, for various reasons, could no longer keep up with the current global scientific trends. Catch up in these areas of science, according to the ideas of the creators, should innograd Skolkovo.

Innovative activity in Russia now has many problems. An attempt to restore the traditional model for the development of science through state funding (in which, by the way, science cities received their status) has shown that significant breakthroughs in this area are not yet to be expected. Innograd should work differently, integrating the Western venture capital model of innovation financing into Russian reality.

However, independent experts are confident that even if individual projects are successful, the experience of Skolkovo will not bring Russia any closer to building an innovative economy. “The innovation economy is being created in countries with high level competition, where innovation becomes an urgent need for business, because without it, enterprises are simply doomed to defeat in the competitive struggle. With us, the guarantee of success is friendship with the governor, and not at all the introduction of any technology. Therefore, the current Russian economy does not create market demand for innovation. And without market demand, the Skolkovo project will have virtually no effect on the development of the domestic economy,” says Igor Nikolaev, Director of the Strategic Analysis Department at FBK. Thus, the main obstacles on the way to an innovative economy are not mutual misunderstandings between scientists and businessmen, but more important reasons. Experts are sure that even if the projects developed in Skolkovo are commercially successful, Russia will receive no more than one more science city patronized by the state, “and far from being the best.”

Innovation culture as the main component of the innovation process infrastructure. Formation of an innovation culture

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents