Search results

Strategic decision making, strategic alternatives.

This case is suitable for undergraduate and postgraduate business and management, MBA programs; the case could be used in strategic management, strategic analysis methods, change management courses.

This case illustrates how Storm, a small innovation company located in the city of Novosibirsk, Russia, tackled the problem of future development. The company was set up in 1992 by young scientists to produce equipment for automatic process control systems in power engineering. All the engineering solutions were based on the developments of the company's founders. Currently Storm is the regional leader in creating engineering complexes for power generating companies. However, because of the drastic changes in the business environment and increased market competition, the company faced the challenge of further development. The company's management and owners saw the further development prospects and risks differently. Three strategic alternatives are available and the company is required to choose one of them, substantiating the choice made.

After completing the case study assignment, learners should be able to: state the strategic problems of small business development; identify the challenges of the external environment for company development; apply the tools of strategic analysis for evaluation of the company's market position; analyze the company's internal strengths and weaknesses; and elaborate and evaluate strategic alternatives for the company's growth.

Teaching notes are available – consult your librarian for access.

The purpose of this paper is to conduct comparative research of small innovative entrepreneurship under different types of institutional environment in Russia and the USA.

A survey was administered among small innovative firms in the State of Minnesota (USA) and Novosibirsk Oblast (Russia). Mann-Whitney test for median differences adjusted for multiple comparisons using Benjamini-Hochberg procedure is used to establish statistically significant dissimilarities between Siberian and Minnesotan populations.

The results indicate that there are significant differences in the challenges faced by the Russian and American firms. The most important among them are the lack of legal structure for innovation and availability of qualified staff in Russia.

The study is limited to two regions with comparable economic and geographic environments.

It is indicated in the results that significant changes in institutional business environment are necessary for the future development of innovative entrepreneurship in Russia.

This study is the first of its kind to compare the challenges facing small innovative entrepreneurship in Russia and the USA.

Technological audit at the enterprise makes it possible to assess the economic level, indicators and opportunities for further development.

Based on the data obtained, the auditors form a list of possible production activities, a number of measures to improve work with the existing indicators and financial capabilities of the organisation. The author considers the mechanism for the development of modern entrepreneurship through the methodology of technological audit. The purpose of the article is to study the methods of conducting a technological audit at an industrial enterprise.

In the process of research, the author defined the purpose of a technology audit as an opportunity to assess the capacity of the organisation, the ability to create, develop and include research and development in the process of work and product creation, the possibility of a patent, sale of developments by searching for worthy partners.

The principles, the observance of which is necessary for conducting a technological audit, are analysed. Thanks to the results of a technology audit, one can see not only the organization's prospects in the field of innovation but also identify possible threats, as well as draw up a strategy for increasing income through the development of innovation and intellectual property.

This purpose of this study is to explore the integration of the sustainable development concept and goals into the curriculum of higher education studies using the example of three faculties of the University of Belgrade.

A qualitative content analysis has been applied on two levels: the evaluation of the sustainability of courses starting from the criteria defined using the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (ASHE, 2017), and the analysis of the outcomes defined in the curricula of subjects within the three faculties using the UNESCO learning objectives related to selected sustainable development goals (SDGs) as a criteria.

While the largest number of courses were analyzed from the Faculty of Architecture, the highest proportion of sustainability courses was found in the Faculty of Security Studies. Both study areas reflect a stronger interdisciplinary orientation, although it should be strengthened in the case of the Andragogy study program. Based on the experience of the Faculty of Architecture, the courses implemented by linking theory and practice may significantly contribute to achieving the LOs and to implementing the education for sustainable development. At the University of Belgrade, strategic documents are missing that would encourage and oblige the faculties to apply the concept of sustainability.

This is the first study to apply this type of curricula analysis at the University of Belgrade. It is performed by teachers from the university, coming from different disciplinary fields but oriented towards an interdisciplinary perspective. Although performed in three specific study areas within a single university, the identified gaps and trends may be useful for planning interventions toward accelerating the implementation of SDGs in the higher education curricula.

The purpose of the paper is to develop a concept of organization of the system of science and education in the form 4.0 based on human and artificial intellectual capital.

The methods of regression and correlation analysis are used. The role of human and artificial intellectual capital for provision of effectiveness and competitiveness of the system of science and education is determined, as well as its correspondence to the modern challenges. Analysis of perspectives and limitations of automatization of the system of science and education based on AI is conducted; a model of organization of the system of science and education in the form 4.0 based on human and artificial intellectual capital is compiled.

It is established that in the system of science and education, the decisive production factor is intellectual capital, but human intellect does not necessarily have to dominate in its structure. AI is one of the most popular technologies of Industry 4.0 in the system of science and education, which has wide perspectives of practical implementation. As experience of the leading world universities, which had the highest level of digitization in 2018, showed, foundation on non-breakthrough digital technologies (computer equipment and Internet) does not allow opening the potential of increase of indicators of effectiveness and competitiveness of the system of science and education and bringing it in correspondence to the modern challenges based on digitization. However, correlation of activity of application of artificial intellectual capital with these indicators is four times higher (0.2), as compared to correlation of these indicators with activity of application of human intellectual capital (0.05). This shows demand for digitization of the system of science and education, but based on breakthrough digital technologies, of which AI should become the key one.

It is substantiated that higher education could be automatized based on AI by 85% and science by 63%. Therefore, on the whole in the system of science and education, the share of AI in the structure of intellectual capital could reach 74% ((85 + 63)/2). It is recommended to use the developed model of organization of the system of science and education in the form 4.0 based on human and artificial intellectual capital.

Global trends in higher education are calling now for public university reforms which aim to increase the competitiveness of the university on the world markets, enlarging its role in the economy and in society by making it more entrepreneurial, more efficient, and closer to practical life. In order to achieve these goals, universities should be managed in a different way. The principles of New Public Management (NPM), which are being actively introduced in Russian universities, substantially transform educational and scientific practices. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the growing crisis of NPM-based university institutional reforms in terms of legitimisation, to reveal which factors shape legitimacy, and to show why legitimacy as such cannot be achieved within the framework of NPM.

The productivity and efficiency of the NPM-based strategy are mainly defined by the attitudes of all actors, or stakeholders. As such, it is very important to investigate local responses on a workplace level, in order to understand how insiders – lecturers and researchers – view the structural changes taking place within Russian universities. In order to do so, an empirical research of lecturers in four national research universities (NRUs) in St Petersburg has been organised. Using a self-designed questionnaire, the authors assessed the academic perceptions and evaluations of certain changes which have taken place in Russian universities over the last few years. In all, 126 teachers of four St Petersburg NRUs took part in the survey, which was conducted between January and February 2015 and consisted of questions measuring resources of legitimacy and legitimacy markers.

Legitimacy markers were revealed such as acceptance of goals, positive perception of results and emotional state. A serious conflict between the existing cognitive culture of universities and the new managerialistic approach was diagnosed. The legitimacy of NPM-based reforms in Russian NRUs was proven to be low for the following reasons: the objectives of reforms are unclear or even unknown to employees; the results of the reforms are either not seen or negatively evaluated; and the reforms provoke stress and professional burnout. The following factors influencing the process of legitimisation were proven to be significant: the agreement of personnel with reforms and the changes they bring, positive perception of changes, opportunity to participate in decision making (engagement), and, to some extent, influence. Remuneration has only a slight effect on legitimacy.

The findings of this study are not free from limitations. The data were collected within only four research universities in St Petersburg. Furthermore, the authors’ findings are based on self-reported data, which can be biased. Increasing the volume of the sample and the number of NRUs could be one solution. In the future, research could be developed by enhancing the sample, by making international comparisons, and by providing a more detailed questionnaire.

Higher education systems in many countries in the world are going through similar reforms and are facing similar issues: increasing competition for funds, students and teachers, massification and commercialisation of education, a new managerialistic approach to governance, research valorisation, and effective contracts. New managerial ideology is having a big impact on university culture and can cause passive resistance to reforms, along with disappointment, frustration and professional burnout. These are important issues which cannot be ignored if a successful “third generation” entrepreneurial university is to be built. This study provides important insights into the perceptions of reforms and requires us to pay more attention to university as a social and public value.

The research is original. It is interesting and new because it discusses the NPM-based reforms in higher education in the Russian Federation, a country which was earlier quite well-known for the quality of its education and richness of its university traditions, and empirically tests the factors influencing their legitimacy. Prior research on legitimacy applies the concept mainly in politics. Otherwise, legitimacy is still a concept which is difficult in terms of both theoretical interpretation and empirical validation. The results of the study have practical implications for providing and developing more effective governance in public organisations.