ИННОВАЦИОННЫЕ МЕНЕДЖЕРЫ ДЛЯ ТЕХНОЛОГИЧЕСКОГО СУВЕРЕНИТЕТА СТРАНЫ

В статье обосновывается позиция авторов, подкрепленная эмпирическими данными, о резком повышении интеллектуалоемкости управленческой деятельности и превращении профессии менеджера в одну из сложнейших, приобретающих особую значимость при организации инновационного процесса для технологического суверенитета. Показана возросшая роль управленческой науки в осмыслении происходящих турбулентных изменений, разработке методологий упреждающего управления и определения компетенций, востребованных в экономике. Доказывается необходимость в этих условиях внедрения опережающего обучения; приводится опыт авторов в его разработке и реализации в части конкретных организационных моделей, контента и методов обучения. В рамках предложенной концепции опережающего обучения обоснована необходимость введения в существующую систему высшего образования управленческого специалитета, ориентированного на конкретные отрасли промышленности, предусматривающего усиленную фундаментальную и прикладную подготовку, значительное увеличение объема практик и позволяющего студентам получить инженерно-экономические и инженерно-управленческие знания, необходимые для учета междисциплинарных взаимосвязей наукоемких технологий, экономики, финансов при принятии управленческих решений.

1. Bondarenko A. (2022). Problemy kadrovogo obespecheniya otraslei TEK. Energeticheskaya politika. 14 noyabrya. https://energypolicy.ru/problemy-kadrovogo-obespecheniya-otraslej-tek/neft/2022/15/14.

2. Vaino A.E., Kobyakov A.A., Saraev V.N. (2011). Uprezhdayushchee upravlenie slozhnymi sistemami. Vestnik ekonomicheskoi integratsii, 11(1): 7-21.

3. Gitel'man L.D., Isaev A.P., Kozhevnikov M.V. (2020). Operezhayushchee upravlencheskoe obrazovanie dlya industrii budushchego. Ekaterinburg, izd-vo UrFU.

4. Gitel'man L.D., Isaev A.P., Kozhevnikov M.V., Gavrilova T.B. (2022a). Mezhdistsiplinarnye kompetentsii menedzherov dlya tekhnologicheskogo proryva. Strategicheskie resheniya i risk-menedzhment, 13(3): 182-198. https://doi.org/10.17747/2618-947X-2022-3-182-198.

5. Gitel'man L.D., Isaev A.P., Kozhevnikov M.V., Gavrilova T.B. (2022b). Operezhayushchee upravlencheskoe obrazovanie dlya tekhnologicheskogo proryva. Strategicheskie resheniya i risk-menedzhment, 13(4): 290-303. https://doi.org/10.17747/2618-947X-2022-4-290-303.

6. Gitel'man L.D., Isaev A.P., Kozhevnikov M.V., Gavrilova T.B. (2022c). Fundamental'nye znaniya i gibkost' myshleniya - prioritety upravlencheskogo obrazovaniya dlya tekhnologicheskogo proryva. Strategicheskie resheniya i risk-menedzhment, 13(2): 92-107. https://doi.org/10.17747/2618-947X-2022-2-92-107.

7. Gitel'man L.D., Kozhevnikov M.V. (2023). V podgotovke menedzherov i inzhenerov neobkhodimy radikal'nye izmeneniya. Energetik, 10.

8. Zarochintsev S.V. (2021). «Uprezhdayushchee» gosudarstvennoe upravlenie i otsenka riskov natsional'noi bezopasnosti. Voprosy gosudarstvennogo i munitsipal'nogo upravleniya, 3: 200-218.

9. Isaev A.P. (2010). Osnovy upravleniya professionalizatsiei menedzherov promyshlennykh predpriyatii. Ekaterinburg, izd-vo UrFU.

10. Karikova A.S. (2023). Preodolenie bar'erov tsifrovoi transformatsii promyshlennykh predpriyatii pri pomoshchi mekhanizma vybora biznes-modeli. Strategicheskie resheniya i risk-menedzhment, 14(1): 74-85. https://doi.org/10.17747/2618-947X-2023-1-74-85.

11. Maiers D. (2010). Intuitsiya. Vozmozhnosti i opasnosti. SPb., Piter.

12. Makarov A.Yu., Makarov A.A. (2021). Tsifrovaya ekonomika. Tekhnologii menyayut menedzhment. M., SOLON-Press.

13. Professionaly v konkurentsii za budushchee. Operezhayushchee obuchenie dlya liderstva v tsifrovoi industrii (2021). M., SOLON-Press.

14. Senge P.M. (2011). Pyataya distsiplina. Iskusstvo i praktika obuchayushcheisya organizatsii. M., OLIMP-Biznes, 2011.

15. Trachuk A.V., Linder N.V. (2023). Vnedrenie tsifrovykh platform promyshlennymi kompaniyami kak istochnik konkurentnykh preimushchestv. Strategicheskie resheniya i risk-menedzhment, 14(1): 18-32. https://doi.org/10.17747/2618-947X-2023-1-18-32.

16. Andersone N., Nardelli G., Ipsen C., Edwards K. (2023). Exploring managerial job demands and resources in transition to distance management: A qualitative Danish case study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20: 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010069.

17. Bai J.Y., Tian Q., Liu X. (2021). Examining job complexity on job crafting within conservation of resources theory: A dual-path mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 12: 737108. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.737108.

18. Bar-Yam Y. (2005). Making things work: Solving complex problems in a complex world. New England, Knowledge Press.

19. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.01.002.

20. Bledow R., Schmitt A., Frese M., Kühnel J. (2011). The affective shift model of work engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96: 1246-1257. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024532.

21. Calvo‐Amodio J. (2019). Using principles as activity drivers in human activity systems. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 36(5): 678-686. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2625.

22. Crespi F., Caravella S., Menghini M., Salvatori C. (2021). European Technological Sovereignty: An Emerging Framework for Policy Strategy. Intereconomics, 56(6): 348-354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-021-1013-6.

23. Edler J., Blind K., Kroll H., Schubert T. (2023). Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy. Defining rationales, ends and means. Research Policy, 52(6): 104765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104765.

24. 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: 1359-1369. https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP-V12-N8-1359-1369.

25. Gitelman L.D., Gavrilova T.B., Kozhevnikov M.V. (2020). Methodologies for managing complex systems under uncertainty. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 241: 91-103. https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP200081.

26. Gratton G., Gratton L. (2022). Managers can’t do it all. Harvard Business Review, March-April. https://hbr.org/2022/03/managers-cant-do-it-all.

27. Gutiérrez-Iñiguez Á., Collado-Agudo J., Rialp-Criado J. (2023). The role of managers in corporate change management: A bibliometric review. Sustainability, 15: 10811. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410811.

28. Harju L.K., Kaltiainen J., Hakanen J.J. (2021). The double-edged sword of job crafting: The effects of job crafting on changes in job demands and employee well-being. Human Resource Management, 60(6): 953-968. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22054.

29. Hollnagel E., Woods D.D. (2006). Epilogue: Resilience engineering precepts. In: Hollnagel E., Woods D.D., Leveson N. (eds.) Resilience engineering: Concepts and precepts. Aldershot, UK, Ashgate, 21-34.

30. Kearney E., Shemla M., van Knippenberg D., Scholz F.A. (2019). A paradox perspective on the interactive effects of visionary and empowering leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 155: 20-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.01.001.

31. LeSage A., Friedlan J., Tepylo D., Kay R. (2021). Supporting at-Risk University Business Mathematics Students: Shifting the Focus to Pedagogy. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 16(2): em0635. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/10893.

32. Matzembacher D.E., Gonzales R.L., Nascimento L.F.M. (2019). From informing to practicing: Students’ engagement through practice-based learning methodology and community services. The International Journal of Management Education, 17(2): 191-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJME.2019.03.002.

33. Pan W., Sun L.-Y. (2018). A self-regulation model of Zhong Yong thinking and employee adaptive performance. Management and Organization Review, 14: 135-159. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2017.33.

34. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.06.018.

35. 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.

36. Sacramento C.A., Fay D., West M.A. (2013). Workplace duties or opportunities? Challenge stressors, regulatory focus, and creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121: 141-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.01.008.

37. Shalizi C.R. (2006). Methods and techniques of complex systems science: An overview. In: Complex Systems Science in Biomedicine. New York, Springer, 33-114.

38. Shin Y., Hur W.-M., Park K., Hwang H. (2020). How managers’ job crafting reduces turnover intention: The mediating roles of role ambiguity and emotional exhaustion. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17: 3972. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17113972.

39. Stevenson J.R., Kwok A., Skurak H.H., Davies A., Hatton T., Sajoudi M., Codling M., Bowie C. (2015). Multi-capital resilience annotated bibliography. National Sciences Challenges, 6. https://resorgs.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/rnc_annotated_resilience_benchmarking.pdf.

40. Willett K.D., Dove R., Chudnow A., Eckman R., Rosser L., Stevens J.S., Yeman R., Yokell M. (2021). Agility in the future of systems engineering (FuSE) - A roadmap of foundational concepts. Proceedings International Symposium. International Council on Systems Engineering, Honolulu, HI, July 17-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.2021.00831.

41. Zhang F., Parker S.K. (2019). Reorienting job crafting research: A hierarchical structure of job crafting concepts and integrative review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40: 126-146. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2332.