PROACTIVE MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR A TECHNOLOGICAL BREAKTHROUGH

The article reasons the need for changing the model of management education and corresponding tools and approaches to bring them in line with the challenges of a technological breakthrough and organisational transformations in the national economy that is going through an unprecedented overhaul of global economic ties and is restricted by sanctions. The authors suggest a paradigm of proactive training that is characterised by its focus on foreseeing changes by having a breakthrough research agenda, a quick conversion of research results into the educational content, research projects and activities, the flexibility of the content and formats of the educational process. The conceptual mechanism of a system for the anticipatory training of managers has been designed; potential methodologies have been identified for building educational modules for bachelor’s and master’s degree programs. By analysing the methodologies it was possible to develop a comprehensive approach to creating high-value educational products. The article describes some of the proprietary technologies that the authors use when implementing proactive education programs in practice.

The scientific novelty of the article lies in the formulation of the training concept for managers aimed at solving complex interdisciplinary tasks of a technological breakthrough. In terms of the practical value, the article presents a mix of educational technologies for the implementation of the concept. It includes electronic proactive leaning system, conveyor of continuous competence enhancement, digital modular architecture of the learning process, “module-in-module” technology.

1. Баранов И.Н., Кислова А.Р., Радаев И.В., Тарасов С.А., Юрченков В.И. (2020). Обучение в новой нормальности: вызовы и ответы: аналитический отчет. М.: Корпоративный университет Сбербанка.

2. Богачев Ю.С., Трифонов П.В., Абдикеев Н.М. (2022). Основные направления и механизмы цифровизации промышленности РФ. Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент, 13(2): 151–159. DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2022-2-151-159.

3. Гительман Л.Д., Исаев А.П., Кожевников М.В. (2020a). Опережающее управленческое образование для индустрии будущего. Екатеринбург: Изд-во УрФУ.

4. Гительман Л.Д., Исаев А.П., Кожевников М.В. (2020b). Реформирование управленческого образования – условие устойчивого развития экономики. Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент, 11(3): 238–249. DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2020-3-238-249.

5. Гительман Л.Д., Исаев А.П., Кожевников М.В., Гаврилова Т.Б. (2022a). Междисциплинарные компетенции менеджеров для технологического прорыва. Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент, 13(3): 182–198. DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2022-3-182-198.

6. Гительман Л.Д., Исаев А.П., Кожевников М.В., Гаврилова Т.Б. (2022b). Фундаментальные знания и гибкость мышления – приоритеты управленческого образования для технологического прорыва. Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент,

7. 13(2): 92–107. DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2022-2-92-107.

8. Гительман Л.Д., Кожевников М.В., Рыжук О.Б. (2020c). Технология ускоренного трансфера знаний для опережающего обучения специалистов цифровой экономики. Экономика региона, 16(2): 435–448. DOI: 10.17059/2020-2-8.

9. Сенге П.М. (2011). Пятая дисциплина. Искусство и практика обучающейся организации. М.: Олимп-Бизнес.

10. Трачук А.В., Линдер Н.В. (2020). Влияние технологий индустрии 4.0 на повышение производительности и трансформацию инновационного поведения промышленных компаний. Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент, 11(2): 132–149.

11. DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2020-2-132-149.

12. Bessonova E., Gonchar K. (2019). How the innovation-competition link is shaped by technology distance in a high-barrier catch-up economy. Technovation, 86–87: 15–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2019.01.002.

13. Brenner B. (2018). Transformative sustainable business models in the light of the digital imperative – A global business economics perspective. Sustainability, 10: 4428. DOI: 10.3390/su10124428.

14. Brooks H. (1994). The relationship between science and technology. Research Policy, 23: 477–486.

15. Byun S.K., Oh J.-M., Xia H. (2020). Incremental vs. breakthrough innovation: The role of technology spillovers. Management Science, 67(3): 1779-1802. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2019.3507.

16. Can the universities of today lead learning for tomorrow? The university of the future. (2018). Ernst & Young. https://cdn.ey.com/echannel/au/en/industries/government---public-sector/ey-university-of-the-future-2030/EY-university-of-the-future-2030.pdf.

17. Chantarasombat C., Rooyuenyong W. (2020). The development of learning module of educational administration and educational institute for students in master of education degree in Thailand. World Journal of Education, 10(3): 19–32. DOI: 10.5430/wje.v10n3p19.

18. Edquist H., Henrekson M. (2006). Technological breakthroughs and productivity growth. https://www.ifn.se/Wfiles/wp/wp665.pdf.

19. Falkenberg R., Fochler M., Sigl L., Burstmayr H., Eichorst S., Michel S., Oburger E., Staudinger C., Steiner B., Woebken D. (2022). The breakthrough paradox. How focusing on one form of innovation jeopardizes the advancement of science. EMBO Reports, 23: e54772. DOI: 10.15252/embr.202254772.

20. Gitelman L.D., Gavrilova T.B., Gitelman L.M., Kozhevnikov M. V. (2017). Proactive management in the power industry: Tool support. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 12(8): 1359–1369. DOI: 10.2495/SDP-V12-N8-1359-1369.

21. Gitelman L., Kozhevnikov M., Ryzhuk O. (2019). Advance management education for power-engineering and industry of the future. Sustainability, 21(11): 5930. DOI: 10.3390/su11215930.

22. International trends in higher education (2015). University of Oxford. https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/International%20Trends%20in%20Higher%20Education%202015.pdf.

23. IT Industry Outlook 2019. An exploration of the forces shaping the information technology industry, its workforce, and its business models in the year ahead (2019). CompTIA. https://comptiacdn.azureedge.net/webcontent/docs/default-source/research-reports/comptia-it-industry-outlook-2019_web.pdf?sfvrsn=669cb2d8_2.

24. IT Industry Outlook 2022 (2022). CompTIA. https://connect.comptia.org/content/research/it-industry-trends-analysis.

25. Martinez W. (2018). How science and technology developments impact employment and education. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(50): 12624–12629. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1803216115.

26. Minton S., Goepfert J., Vacca A., Slaharova I., Membrila R., Iwamoto N., Bisht A., Anand N., George J. (2018). IDC’s worldwide semiannual IT spending guide by industry and company size taxonomy. Ibm.com. https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/KGVOKVGN

27. Pereira G.I., Specht J.M., Silva P.P., Madlener R. (2018). Technology, business model, and market design adaptation toward smart electricity distribution: Insights for policy making. Energy Policy, 121: 426–440. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.06.018.

28. Porter M.E., Heppelmann J.E. (2014). How smart, connected products are transforming competition. Harvard Business Review, November. https://hbr.org/2014/11/how-smart-connected-products-are-transforming-competition.

29. Savastano M., Amendola C., Bellini F., D’Ascenzo F. (2019). Contextual impacts on industrial processes brought by the digital transformation of manufacturing: A systematic review. Sustainability, 11: 891. DOI: 10.3390/su11030891.

30. Seba T. (2009). Solar trillions – 7 market and investment opportunities in the emerging clean-energy economy. San Francisco: Tony Seba.

31. Seba T. (2014). Clean disruption of energy and transportation: How Silicon Valley will make oil, nuclear, natural gas, coal, electric utilities and conventional cars obsolete by 2030. California: Tony Seba; Beta Edition.