The development of society occurs only as a result of creativity that goes beyond established traditions. This kind of creativity is called innovative.
Innovation concept
Cultural innovations are ideas, values, norms, and original products of creative activity that are introduced into culture for the first time, creating the preconditions for progressive sociocultural changes. Such innovations include the cultivation of plants, the domestication of animals, the emergence of metallurgy, the generation of electricity, psychoanalytic theory Z. Freud, computerization and so on.
Innovations in culture arise both as a result of the development of new ideas by members of a given sociocultural formation (scientists, thinkers, artists), and as a result of borrowing the cultural achievements of other human communities.
The influence of new technologies on artistic culture
Dramatic changes as a result of the development of technical means have affected all spheres of human activity, including art. And we are not talking about photography or cinema that have become familiar and are already on par with the oldest species arts: painting, theater, music. During last decades artistic culture is undergoing fundamental changes due to the development of computer and digital technologies. New ones are being formed artistic genres. A phenomenon called digital arts has emerged. Wide creative possibilities opened in such areas as virtual reality, three-dimensional animation, the Internet and interactive systems.
Interactive multimedia technologies changed the relationship with space and time. A powerful platform for artistic expression has emerged.
Virtual reality stimulates the effect of sensory authenticity.
The use of interactive mode allows the viewer to come into contact with the artist and participate in the creation of the work.
Computer games are a striking example of the rapid development of information audiovisual technologies at the beginning of the 21st century. On a par with computer graphics and modern web design computer games claim to be works of art.
Digital technologies have enriched already established areas of art (music, painting, graphics, sculpture) with new artistic means and opportunities. For example, electronic technologies have made it possible to create holographic images that imitate sculpture and architecture, as well as completely new sounds that are far from the sound of real musical instruments.
Assessing the impact of new technologies on artistic culture ambiguous. Art critics were divided into two opposing camps. Some consider the development of media art to be a promising direction, while others perceive it as a path to the cultural degradation of society. Such a contradictory assessment of innovation - typical problem at the first stages of the spread of any innovations.
Mechanism for the dissemination of cultural innovations
Society goes through several stages.
- Selection stage. In a highly developed community with a “fast” economy, new products appear constantly, but many of them are eliminated. Borrowing is also selective. The main selection criterion is practical benefit for a given community from the point of view of people in power, as well as the readiness of ordinary members of society to perceive original ideas and implement them in their daily lives.
- Modification of an innovative idea. Occurs, as a rule, in the sphere of cultural borrowing in order to facilitate the integration of new cultural attitudes by an ethnic group. For example, many Christian holidays and rituals are built on the basis of pre-existing pagan ones.
- Integration into culture. The final stage. The rooting of innovations in the life of society to such an extent that they turn into a traditional phenomenon for a given culture and are perceived by their carriers as a norm, a standard.
Innovation is welcomed in some cultures, while in others it is frowned upon. best case scenario skeptical, if they do not declare war, as something clearly negative. The nature of the attitude towards innovation allows us to differentiate societies of “innovative” and “traditional” types.
When developing a new product on the market, it is necessary to take into account the possibilities of obtaining support at all stages of innovation implementation, which depend on the level of the innovative culture of society.
That is, openness to innovation, readiness to implement an innovative idea on the part of dominant social groups, representatives of different generations. Moreover, attitudes towards the introduction of life can differ significantly. For example, often a positive attitude towards innovative technologies is combined with an ardent adherence to the norms of traditional social institutions.
Formation of an innovative culture
The desire for improvement among progressive members of society often collides with conservatism of thinking and lack of creativity among its representatives who provide decisive influence on social processes. In other words, with conservative views they are perceived as an encroachment on an inherited, familiar and understandable way of life. The need for a sense of security overcomes the craving for change, even if it is positive in the long term. As a result, the process of introducing innovation is greatly delayed, if not completely inhibited, as a result of the use of censorship and legislative obstruction. This phenomenon is referred to as innovative inertia and leads to the incapacity of society in the future.
If there is no favorable climate for innovation, it needs to be created. To do this, the innovative product is first offered to a small experimental group. High evaluation of the product by individual members of society contributes to the trust of the innovative introduction on the part of the wider social community. The product is being implemented at individual sites - schools, hospitals, companies, countries. Depending on whether the innovation was accepted by the control group or not, the product is promoted to wider markets or sent for further development.
Innovation and traditionality must be in a delicate balance. When introducing innovations, anti-progressive policies and a critical attitude towards innovations should be distinguished from constructive criticism when evaluating innovations. Only if the experience of previous generations is assimilated and taken into account are transformations initiated that contribute to real progress in creating a new culture.
A university is a complex organism, the basis of whose life potential is an innovative culture.
Despite the obvious significance of innovation culture for understanding innovation processes in society and education, this concept has not yet received proper understanding in the scientific literature.
In modern humanities, a peculiar paradox has developed: on the one hand, for all sciences the concept of “culture” is key, but on the other, the content of this concept is not certain and unambiguous.
The world of culture is so complex and diverse that sciences - philosophy, cultural studies, pedagogical innovation - find their own special niche in the study of this phenomenon. Innovative pedagogical management is primarily interested in the role of innovative culture in the functioning and development of the education system. Culture subtly responds to all changes occurring in educational institutions and itself has a certain impact on them, forming and determining many innovative processes, including processes of social mobility.
Currently, there is a wide range of opinions and positions in the interpretation of the concept of “culture”: this is understandable, given the complexity and multivariate nature of the problem, the impossibility of reduction to any clearly defined, established phenomenon.
Culture determines, determines, conditions, regulates, influences human activity; culture is the environment for a person’s habitat and professional activity and the reproduction of a specialist. In it a person looks for his reflection, in it he identifies himself with others like himself, defines himself. Being a form of being, innovative culture equally relates to both the essence and existence of a person.
Culture includes a person’s way of life, the structure and level of interests and needs, and the level of professional activity.
The main trends in the development of society's culture are reflected at the level organizational culture. Let us note the following trends: the elimination of the state monopoly on culture, which in terms of content led to great freedom of creativity and to a loss of control over the quality and level of cultural products offered in numerous educational institutions; commercialization of culture - investing in highly profitable areas of the entertainment industry.
Innovative culture is a specific way of organization and development, presented in a system of spiritual values, rules and norms of activity, and a person’s relationship to the new. Culture contains the mechanisms of heredity, variability and selection in the dynamics of social development, and largely determines the ability of a university to master innovation and the ability to adapt to progressive changes.
Culture is the dominant factor in the innovative development of a university. Universities create themselves in accordance with their cultural context. Culture is ambivalent in its essence: on the one hand, it provides opportunities for the development of a university in a sociocultural context, on the other hand, it limits, since it is the standard of spiritual and public life. Innovation culture is aimed at creating an appropriate innovation climate at the university, contributing to increased activity and interest of all subjects of innovation and development.
An innovative culture in an educational institution can be formed as a result of long-term innovative activities.
Innovative culture is a system of socially progressive formal and informal rules and norms of activity, customs and traditions, interests.
Innovative culture is a system of relations and at the same time a process of production and reproduction of its constituent elements. This is a dynamic, developing system, constantly enriching in its content and forms, sensitively responding to changes.
Innovative culture constitutes, in a way, the spiritual basis of the university, which animates its life.
The task of innovative culture is to determine and prescribe the forms and rules of behavior in professional activities; give integrity and integration to the professional sphere; create a special aura in the life of an educational institution.
An innovative culture is based on a culture of power, role, behavior and personality. The innovative culture of power is determined by the professionalism of management and subordinates. An innovative culture of actions is based on the needs and interests of the university and the individual, and the priority of the personal over the social.
In an educational institution where an innovative culture develops and functions, the following faculty management system is built:
– providing the maximum necessary freedom to perform the functions assigned to them, in determining ways to achieve goals, in making appropriate decisions and taking responsibility for their actions to implement them;
– attracting qualified specialists with independent and independent thinking to work;
– creation on the part of the administration of the priority of trust and support of specialists over control of their activities;
– stimulation of personal initiative in decision-making common tasks;
– development of collective ways of solving problems that contribute to the creation of an innovative environment that attracts professionals to a given educational institution;
– formation of an innovative climate through the use of project groups and pedagogical laboratories as the main structural units of the university.
The carriers of innovative culture are the subjects of scientific and pedagogical activity. However, in educational institutions with an established organizational culture, it becomes an attribute of the organization, a part of it that has an active influence on the teaching staff, modifying its behavior in accordance with the norms and values that form its basis.
The relationship between culture and the results of scientific and pedagogical activity largely depends on the content of those values that are affirmed by a specific culture at a university.
Innovation culture has a certain structure, being a set of assumptions, values, beliefs and symbols, adherence to which helps people in an organization cope with their problems.
The very concept of “structure” (from the Latin structure - structure, arrangement, order) means “a set of basic elements, with stable connections between them, ensuring that the structure retains its basic properties during various external and internal changes.
The innovative culture includes the management culture of the university. It is realized in increasing the emotional state of the teaching staff and intensifying their activities.
There is a division of innovation culture into subjective and objective. Subjective culture comes from shared patterns, assumptions, beliefs and expectations, as well as group perceptions of the organizational environment with its values, norms and roles that exist outside of the individual. This includes a number of symbolic elements, especially its spiritual part: heroes of the organization, myths, stories about the organization and its leaders. Subjective culture serves as the basis for the formation of management culture, i.e. leadership styles and problem solving, their behavior in general.
There are many approaches to identifying various attributes that characterize and identify a particular culture - both at the macro and micro levels:
– awareness of oneself and one’s place in the organization (in some cases, independence and creativity are manifested through cooperation, and in others through individualism);
– relationships between people (by age and gender, status and power, wisdom and intelligence, experience and knowledge, rank and protocol, religion and citizenship, etc.; the degree of formalization of relationships, support received, ways to resolve conflicts);
– belief in something and attitude or disposition towards something (belief in leadership, success, in one’s own strengths, in mutual assistance, in ethical behavior, in justice, etc.; attitude towards colleagues, clients and competitors, etc. evil and violence, aggression, etc.; the influence of religion and morality);
– the process of specialist development and learning (mindless or conscious performance of work; reliance on intelligence or strength; procedures for informing workers; recognition or rejection of the superiority of logic in reasoning and actions; abstraction and conceptualization in thinking or memorization; approaches to explaining reasons);
– work ethics and motivation (attitude to work and responsibility for work results; quality of work; evaluation of work and its remuneration; individual or group (team) work; promotion).
The above characteristics of culture, taken together, reflect and give meaning to the concept of innovation culture.
The essence of innovative culture is its internal content, expressed in the unity of all the diverse and contradictory forms of its existence. In essence, the content is expressed.
The content of innovative culture influences the direction of behavior and is determined by the system of values, traditions, their interrelation and the ability to form certain patterns of behavior. As its constituent elements, innovative culture includes traditions formed over a long period of time, current norms of innovative practice; ideas, concepts and beliefs about relationships, certain orientations and attitudes of a person in relation to the current system, the principle of relationships of an individual. These components, determined by socio-economic, national and cultural long-term factors, are characterized by relative stability, constancy, and are difficult to change.
The system-forming element of innovative culture should be considered a professional worldview, which is part of the general worldview of a person and an organization.
Norms can be defined as standards of activity and behavior that have historically developed in a given innovative environment, through which a person submits to the social whole. Norms serve the purpose of integrating the organization. They include values and forms of human orientation in functional and situational conditions.
Custom is closely related to norms; this ancient form of storage and transmission of socio-cultural experience from generation to generation plays an important role in people’s lives. Custom is an element of the active side of culture, which includes norms of professional activity and relationships between people.
An innovative culture functions if the majority of employees in leading positions share this system of views, which predetermines mutual understanding between them and the external environment.
The set of value orientations and moral standards forms the innovative style of the university. An innovation system becomes a major force if it is consistent with its strategy.
So, culture includes the morals, values, and views that exist in an educational institution, i.e. the entire sphere of human self-understanding. It performs the function of orientation in science. This is a specific way of organizing and developing human life, presented in the products of material and spiritual labor, in spiritual values. Innovative culture is understood as a set of values (spiritual and material) and as human activity for their creation, development, dissemination and storage.
In the system of values, orientations, attitudes, stereotypes that make up the innovative culture, the central place is occupied by elements that contribute to the regulation and preservation of the innovation system.
The features of the innovative culture of each structural unit of the university (department, dean's office, faculty) influence each other and form the general part of the innovative culture of the university.
It is possible to correctly understand innovation culture only if we consider it not as the main determining factor of relations and processes of innovation activity, but as a mediating link between professional interests, basic needs, social status, moral and ethical standards of an individual, a team involved in the innovation process, on the one hand, and their innovative behavior, on the other.
An innovative culture contributes to the formation of a certain type of behavior, gives it a certain direction, but is not the only determining factor.
According to the subject-bearer of culture, organizational culture and personal culture are distinguished. By functional role - universal, national, personal, professional.
When determining the status of innovative culture, we proceed from the fact that it is an element of the general human culture(i.e. relevant), necessary for every person, and an element of professional, personal culture (special), necessary for representatives of a specific profession.
Universal human culture is always variable; its model is set in the system of lifelong education (kindergarten, school, vocational school, college, lyceum, university). Culture appears, first of all, as historically concentrated experience.
Professional culture is not identical to the level of qualification of a specialist; it requires awareness of the ideological foundations of the profession and includes professional ethics.
Each person transforms this experience into personal meaning. Culture always includes the experience of producing innovations. Culture is realized through innovation. Culture always acts as a contradictory unity of culture as an integrity and personal culture. Each person acts as a carrier of personal culture, i.e. cultural wealth of the individual, formed as a result of the previous history of society. Personal culture differs from the entire accumulated wealth of culture, in particular, in that it always carries within itself an idea of the means, goals, motives and needs that are characteristic of a given individual, at a given moment and in a given society.
The most important mechanism of interpenetration and mutual criticism of general and personal culture
ry - interpretation, i.e. the ability to consider the existing wealth of culture through oneself, one’s goals, aspirations, values, etc. The result of such interpretation is a constant flow of innovations in culture. They do not occur automatically, but through the directed creative activity of a person. The only question is the scale, significance, and direction of innovation. Innovation can arise as a result of changes in the environment - both natural and social.
Interaction between culture as a whole and personal culture cannot occur without contradictions, which allow one to rethink phenomena, one’s values and beliefs, and speed up or slow down the decision-making process. As a result of this complex process of rethinking, a certain third is formed, a certain focus of meaning, carrying new measure real cultural innovation.
Researchers of organizational culture are engaged in studying the patterns of cultural development in an organization, the forms of their manifestation in human activity related to the creation, assimilation, preservation and dissemination of ideas, concepts, norms and values, patterns of behavior that regulate relationships in the organization.
When studying innovative culture, its axiological aspect is of particular importance, which makes it possible to combine cultural elements into a system that ensures their interconnection at various levels: organizations, groups, individuals.
It is necessary to study innovative culture in terms of solving the following problems:
a) identify representative innovative ideas;
c) find out the ways and means of their distribution;
d) evaluate the impact of innovative ideas on the formation and disintegration of groups and teams.
The main patterns in the development of an innovative culture:
– the dependence of culture on the external and internal environment and its reverse influence on their change;
– continuity in the development of culture. It can be temporal (vertical) and spatial (horizontal), positive (continuation of cultural tradition) and negative (denial of previous cultural experience of innovative activity).
– uneven development of culture, which is expressed in the fact that the flourishing and decline of culture does not coincide with the flourishing and decline in other spheres of social life.
Qualitative changes in a university are of great importance for the development and functioning of culture, opening up new opportunities for the production and dissemination of cultural values.
Innovative culture, identified as an independent category, functions and self-reproduces in a certain professional environment. At the same time, it is both a condition and a means of reproducing the innovative culture of an organization. By mastering and integrating the innovative culture of the organization, a person becomes involved in a multifaceted and dynamic process of relationships, and performs self-reproduction as a creator. Culture is a potential opportunity for innovation.
The level of cultural development depends on the degree of interest of the university in developing the innovative potential of each member, when individuality is not leveled out, but is actively developed. “There is a crisis of culture,” notes L.N. Kogan, “begins where and when the general norms of culture suppress and limit the development of individuality, turning a person into a “herd” individual, into a conformist.”
The idea of the conditions, means and goals contained in any culture always includes the range of permissible deviations of innovations and their parameters from the measure historically established in the culture. This measure corresponds to the requirement of a certain type of activity, stage of development of a culture (subculture). In this regard, inconsistencies and contradictions may arise. They can give rise to serious negative processes, negative innovations, cultural and psychological barriers, and reactions of rejection of innovations among certain carriers of personal culture. Emotional and intellectual dissonance of an individual may arise as a result of the incompatibility of his personal culture with innovation. This can stimulate the individual to critically reconsider the elements of his culture, or it can arouse the desire to destroy the innovation. The adoption of innovations requires emotional, intellectual, and moral tension from the individual. ... A person must have a certain system of attitudes, the ability to respond to changing situations.
IN modern conditions scientists have developed numerous models of culture. Among the traditional ones, these are currently value-based (axiological), information-sign (semiotic, or hermeneutic, and informational); systemic-historical; phenomenological (phenomenal); activity-based (creative-activity, structural-functional and technological).
In the context of an innovative culture, activity can be considered as an activity aimed at overcoming entropy and maintaining integrity in the surrounding world. The degree of active exploration by a person of his environment characterizes the level of his cultural development.
Innovation always accompanies teaching. The forms, methods and spheres of manifestation of creativity in it are inextricably linked with the formation of an innovative culture. Culture is realized through innovation.
The innovative culture of a university teacher is the basis of his innovative potential, one of the most important factors, defining the style of his personal and professional activities.
Courses a la “draw a picture in 3 hours.” Before a person releases 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 launch innovation processes. It is important that employees actually see their work (writing, photography, LEGO SERIOUS PLAY, sculpting, creative technologies) and that it has value.
Sometimes it’s enough for people to try to do something to convince themselves that they can create, and, accordingly, come up with new business models and products.
Openness and accessibility of any information allows you to remove barriers and make interaction as confidential and fast as possible.
- The ability to choose work, projects and teams gives you the chance to do only what you like and, accordingly, people do not need to be further 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 limitations is used for growth and development; innovative companies use constant exploration of boundaries as an engine for the production of ideas.
- Conscious mistakes allow you to gain experience where, most likely, no one even tried to go.
Structure
How does a 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 often conflict with the way we work, but they create opportunities for creativity and innovation.
Everything for communications
Breakthrough solutions are primarily a matter of communication between employees. And creating the right environment is one of the most accessible and convenient tools.
Random interceptions
Pre-competitive spaces.
Here and now.
.
Leadership
Leadership is not a status, but a process
2) A 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 offices, 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 exactly needs to take control now.
Innovation culture as
core infrastructure component
RGUPS
Improving interconnected segments financial market using systematic approach 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 innovation 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 predominant human factor, the technocratic approach to the innovation process is initially ineffective: if technology is inert to innovations and people are receptive, the innovation process can be initiated, but if people are 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, to cultivate an innovative economic system, it is necessary to develop an innovative culture.
Innovative 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 fields of human activity while maintaining the 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 of business and government, 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 suppressing them. [i] In conditions of such destabilization, the implementation of innovative programs using a technocratic approach seems unrealistic. It is necessary to systematically develop an innovative culture using innovative management tools - innovative management and innovation management.
The competitiveness and profitability of modern network corporate and financial structures is based on a developed corporate culture. What is needed now is a shift in 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 internal and external environment, but also to receive a positive effect from these changes. Thus, entrepreneurs of municipalities among positive traits crisis called the acquisition of competitive advantages at 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 the adoption of an outsider position by national actors. The formation of an innovative culture should become both one of the top priorities of the state and business, and the main tools for modeling a new infrastructure of business-government relations.
For financial institutions, the issue of developing an innovative culture becomes decisive in the context of the 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 financial flows of the corporate sector has not weakened, it is necessary to develop tools for creating an innovative culture in the field of formation and distribution of financial flows. In this case, financial system will serve as a transmitter of innovative culture to all actors in the financial environment.
The modeling of innovative culture itself is largely determined by its factor-component composition:
1. corporate system infrastructure, including:
1.1. level of technology;
1.2. sources and quality of material resources;
1.3. structure and quality of financial resources;
2. the quality of the corporation’s intangible assets, namely:
2.1. quality of management;
2.2. personnel competencies;
2.3. quality human capital;
2.4. quality of process capital;
2.5. loyalty of company personnel.
3. level of innovation potential:
3.1. level of receptivity to innovation
3.2. tools for motivation and development of human potential;
3.3. initiative for development.
Corporations act as concentrators of carriers of innovative potential - a certain type of people called passionaries, who serve as a source of 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 updating 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 managers of the new economy (knowledge economy) - high intellectual potential, which is in unity with innovative loyalty. A 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 a corporation's resources is human capital - this is the employee's stock of knowledge, skills, abilities and aspirations, which determine the effectiveness of his work and thereby can influence the growth of his income. The technocratic approach to management is gradually giving way to a humanitarian one. Management must rely on the personnel value system and form common values of an innovative culture, which will be an internal resource for the development of the corporation. In this case, it is necessary to combine two motivation systems: economic and moral. In an innovative economy, non-material incentives come to the fore, however, insufficient economic interest of personnel will lead to the expansion of opportunism and the development of rent-seeking in relationships.
Stimulating factors that are loyal to the innovative 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, neutralizes the initiative for development. Those employees who create an innovative field around themselves should be encouraged, modeling new standards of activity determined by the goals of the corporation. The innovative charge of such “cores” of corporate subsystems is transmitted via social network and is elevated to the rank of standard.
When assessing the experience of “toxic” or “viral” innovations, it should be noted that self-dissemination of elements of an innovative culture requires high interest. Most innovations during the innovation process lose their effectiveness precisely because they are rejected by management. Only high personal interest can become the basis for cultivating an innovative culture.
The innovation process on a macro scale is implemented 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 the levels of subsectors. (picture 1). For the successful implementation of the policy of forming an innovative culture, a three-way impact on innovation is necessary to find sources of internal development.
https://pandia.ru/text/78/071/images/image002_77.gif" width="444" height="444 src=">
Figure 1. Translation model of innovative 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. Innovation culture should become an immanent property 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, general system values, allowing you 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 transmitted, transforming into an institution.
Effective implementation of innovation strategy national economy assumes, as a social basis, the formation and sustainable reproduction of an innovative public culture. Man, 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 a science about the process of creating new technologies, but also take into account social, economic, psychological and other factors that determine the efficiency and quality of the innovation process.
To preserve the national economy, it is necessary to focus on fundamentally new technologies, not only in production, but also in 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 set goal, but will only create an unnecessary administrative, organizational and financial burden on the economy. New technologies should become “breakthrough” innovations that will bring economic systems and subsystems to a fundamentally new level resistance to destructive virtual processes. Breakthrough innovations can ensure self-sufficiency of the national economy, without 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, i.e. the financial system.
The target environment for introducing innovation can significantly, and sometimes diametrically, change the positive effect of innovation. When innovation is implicated, a conflict occurs between traditional patterns and new, still alien, processes.
The translational function of innovative culture is associated with the temporal and spatial transmission of established types of innovative behavior, which have been tested in the corporate sector and acquired a value connotation within society (Figure 2).
The selection function of an innovative culture is revealed in the process of selecting newly created or borrowed innovative behavioral models, in to the greatest extent meeting the needs of society at a certain stage of its development.
In the process of implementation by an innovative culture of its “core” - innovative - function, the creative possibilities of the socio-cultural mechanism are revealed.
Figure 2. - Translation of innovative culture in the economic system
They manifest themselves in the development of new types of innovative behavior based on patterns of innovative activity that arose within the culture itself or were instilled from the outside. The quality of 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.
Innovative culture, as a special form of human culture, presupposes a close relationship with its other forms, primarily legal, managerial, entrepreneurial, and corporate. Through an innovative culture, it is possible to achieve a significant influence on the entire culture of professional activity and industrial relations. Given the international nature of innovative culture, efforts to develop it should be based on the cultural traditions of the country and field of activity. It can equip practice with methods for assessing and suppressing the use of innovations that can cause harm to humans, society, and nature.
Taking into account the above, it seems that innovative culture has a powerful anti-bureaucratic and creative charge, and in accordance with the current needs of state development. The strategic resource of the new economy is an innovative culture.
List of sources used
[i] Cultural values and social development. M.: Publishing house GU-HSE, 2007. p. 51.54.
Astaltsev relations and the formation of innovative culture // Economic Bulletin of Rostov state university№ 2.
Results of the rating survey of IC FINAM // Business magazine No. 3.
Russian mentality and management // Questions of Economics. 2000. No. 4. With. 41-42.
Scientific basis for the identification and use of social-functional innovations /, etc.; Ed. . - Minsk: Law and Economics, 2004.
In the process of forecasts and debates about what the 21st century should be like, many judgments have been made. Concepts such as sustainable growth and globalization have become widespread in relation to social development. Recognizing their importance for assessing modern trends, one cannot help but see that they cannot serve as universal characteristics of a new stage of social, economic, political and other processes. More precisely, in our opinion, the essence of this stage is reflected by the category “innovative development”, which has been widely covered in the domestic and foreign literature. With regard to Russia, one can agree with the opinion of Professor V. Fedorova about the innovative-mobilization nature of development. It seems advisable to look at this topic from a purely applied perspective. What needs to be done so that innovative development from an attractive idea becomes a reality for Russia?
On the left side there are two main components of the process of innovative development - the implementation of innovative projects and the development of innovative potential. This entails the specific task of measuring the initial parameters of the latter, determining its place in the overall potential of the enterprise, educational institution, governing body, etc.
Underestimation of this approach leads to the fact that indicators related to scientific, technical, production and technological, personnel or other components of the overall potential of an enterprise or organization are often given as characteristics of innovative potential. In such cases, the actual innovative potential of the enterprise is not isolated, not measured and, as a result, is not purposefully developed. As a result, the result is not achieved - the increase in new competitive goods and services. Diagram 2 shows the overall potential of an enterprise or organization and its main components - production and technological, scientific and technical, financial and economic, personnel and innovation potential itself, which represents, as it were, the core of the entire potential, organically entering into each of its parts.
Of course, there are more complex dialectical connections between the parts of the overall potential, but one thing is indisputable: innovative potential determines, as it were, the final part production cycle and its real throughput capabilities, which significantly affects the final result. It is widely believed that the main direction of stimulating innovative development is the renewal of fixed assets and, above all, the machine park. It would seem difficult to argue against this. But having thus strengthened the production and technological potential of the enterprise and not affecting its other parts to the same extent, we, as a rule, end up with a loss of financial resources.
There is a well-known vicious practice of the past, when imported factories, purchased for foreign currency, rusted in boxes for years because they did not think in time about other components of the overall potential of the enterprise. This problem still exists in a slightly different form today. Quite often there is no one to work even on outdated equipment. The reasons are clear - the loss of the necessary production personnel or the loss of their qualifications. Who will use the new generation equipment? Are the technological, repair and other services of enterprises ready for this? Finally, what should the innovation infrastructure of an enterprise, organization, or region itself look like?
Last year, the Institute of Strategic Innovation, together with the Russian Ministry of Industry and Science, conducted two major studies, during which the innovative potential of enterprises and scientific and technical organizations was measured using 36 parameters. Hence a direct step towards monitoring, a kind of map of the state of the innovative potential of Russia, its leading economic regions, including cities and enterprises. This will create conditions for targeted, specific work to solve real innovation problems and manage these processes. The basis for assessing the state of innovation potential was the capabilities that enterprises have for their own innovation activities, mainly related to their innovation infrastructure. The managers of the enterprises themselves acted as experts.
Out of 15 positions, they ranked the technical condition of the equipment in first place (67.3% of managers), followed by the availability of scientific and technical developments for innovation (56%), as well as the possibility of producing a pilot batch and organizing mass production (54.8% each). ). Enterprises are least ready to examine projects (17%), solve problems of protecting intellectual property in Russia (16%) and abroad (11.1%).
4. The level of innovation culture, characterizing the degree of receptivity of innovations by the personnel of the enterprise, organization, its readiness and ability to implement innovations in the form of innovations.
If we evaluate the role of 12 external factors influencing the innovative activities of enterprises, then it is necessary, first of all, to note the demand for products by the domestic market (as indicated by 69.9% of managers) and taxation (64.1%). To a lesser extent, this applies to the influence of infrastructure located outside the enterprise (26% of respondents) and risk insurance (19.9%). Internal factors (there were 9 of them) actually reflected the preparedness of personnel in certain areas of activity. In general, the qualifications of workers were ranked first by 62.3% of respondents, and the preparedness of those employed in the field of marketing – by 59.6%. The last place among internal factors is occupied by the preparedness of personnel for foreign economic activity (44.4% of respondents) and in the field of patent legal issues (39%).
Diagram 3 shows the structure of innovation potential. It is based on the innovative infrastructure of the enterprise together with innovative capabilities that are created through other components of potential. Internal factors prevail over external ones and, when an enterprise moves from the survival stage to the development stage, significantly increase their weight. The relatively low significance of many external factors is explained not by their uselessness, but by the actual collapse of sectoral and regional management systems. When using sociological indicators, it becomes possible to determine the real impact of each of them on innovation activity, and this is extremely important, since even more “favorable” indicators (the state of equipment or the qualifications of workers) do not give grounds for optimism (every third enterprise, either in terms of the state of equipment or due to the qualifications of workers cannot carry out innovative activities).
On the other hand, it becomes possible to fill each factor with specific content and develop standard models of organizational, legal, and technological formation of the innovative potential of an enterprise, taking into account industry and regional characteristics. We can talk, for example, about the tasks, structure and organization of activities of examination or patenting services. Considering the huge role of the innovation factor for the activities of enterprises and the insufficient preparedness of many specialists in managing the innovation sphere, it is advisable to develop the foundations of these models under government orders and provide them to enterprises as a real form of their state support.
Of course, we are talking about recommendations, but the need for them is so great that some directors of enterprises, lacking modern developments, are literally “unearthing” and resuscitating elements of the innovation support infrastructure remaining from Soviet times (BRIZ, VOIR, NTO, etc.). A clear understanding of where, in what form and in what sequence to apply efforts will make it possible to combine the capabilities of enterprises, regional and federal bodies in the innovation field. Finally, there will be a chance to eliminate the existing bottleneck in the use of existing scientific and technical developments, inventions, and know-how. Otherwise, not only individual developments will be irretrievably lost, but also the very chance of independent restructuring of all social production.
The solution to these issues is possible both organizationally, technologically and economically. Without large expenses, we are putting into operation a huge resource of innovation infrastructure, which is now in a virtually abandoned state. Meanwhile, he regularly serves in industrialized countries. However, the problem of developing innovative potential does not end there.
World experience shows that it is impossible to overcome innovation stagnation only through investment. Thus, according to the opinion of a commission of Western European experts, set out in 1995 in the “Green Book”, the state of innovation in the European Union could be assessed as unsatisfactory. This is largely due to the tendency of enterprises to avoid risk, as well as the numerous obstacles to the creativity of innovators, bureaucracy, and red tape. Such interference negatively impacts coordination, human resources and the legal environment, ultimately limiting the ability to turn scientific breakthroughs and technological advances into commercial success. Many problems, therefore, lie on a plane other than financial. Well-known manager, President of the Fraunhofer Society of Germany, Professor H.-J. Warnecke believes that virtually all end goals, such as increasing market share and improving product quality, are best achieved through strategies that impact the social system. Engineering and technology play a much smaller role in this process. The disunity of culture and art, on the one hand, and natural science and technology, on the other, he argues, threatens to turn into a disaster.
This is confirmed by our research. Of the enterprises whose managers assessed the level of their innovation culture as very low, 71.4% were at the survival stage, while all enterprises that considered the level of their innovation culture to be very high were at the stage of medium or rapid development.
The process of creating an innovation-receptive environment is extremely complex. According to K. Tsiolkovsky, set out in his article “Engines of Progress,” where he specifically examines the problem of using innovations, the reason for the wrong attitude towards discoveries and inventions lies in human weaknesses. He brought out a whole system of factors that stand in the way of the implementation of innovations: inertia, rigidity, conservatism; distrust of unknown names, selfishness, narrow egoism, lack of understanding of universal and personal good; temporary losses, resistance to the unusual on the part of employees, reluctance to retrain, corporate interests, professional envy. It seems that Tsiolkovsky’s conclusion, made more than 70 years ago, is the first attempt to pose this problem.
It is significant that these days it echoes the opinion of EU experts, who note that due to a number of reasons “...an idea, even the most fruitful one, mostly perishes. At best, a good thought is inhibited and delayed for tens and hundreds of years... Humanity remains at a terrible loss...”
The authors of the Green Book proceed from the fact that the concepts opposite to innovation are archaism and routine. The struggle between them is, in principle, necessary, since the new is not always better than the old. Healthy conservatism, for example, could warn Russian reformers against many hasty and easy decisions, the consequences of which are costly to society. Let us add that some of them did not suffer from excess general culture. Suffice it to recall how the works of R. Aron, J. Galbraith, W. Rostow, J. Tinbergen and other Western scientists who tried to find a model for the convergence of socialism and capitalism were subjected to criticism in the 70s. While showing the advantages of the Western model of civilization, they at the same time revealed its shortcomings, trying to find a solution that would make it possible to use certain advantages of socialism.
It would seem that history provided an excellent opportunity in the 90s to test in practice the truth of such constructions. However, the recommendations were implemented exactly the opposite - the shortcomings of capitalism in an exaggerated form migrated to Russian soil, and the advantages of socialism were destroyed. Explaining what happened only due to the lack of erudition of the fathers of the reform is clearly a simplified approach. The reason is much deeper - the innovative culture of society, its ability to separate the “wheat from the chaff” turned out to be unacceptably low. Over the past 10 years Negative consequences these problems were not eliminated; moreover, they were intensively aggravated. A striking example is the bureaucracy of officials, which was and remains a force for the total rejection of everything new, both in the sphere of public administration and in many corporations. Promoting not only new, but also ordinary routine solutions requires enormous effort. Essentially, we are dealing with the manifestation of an anti-innovation culture, if the term culture is applicable here at all. Therefore, the problem under consideration is not only and not so much the fate of technical innovations, but also the fate of the entire state.
We are ready to offer the country’s leadership our program for creating an innovative culture in general and in various fields activities. Obviously, educational and educational resources alone will not be enough for this. To radically change the situation, it will be necessary to support initiative initiatives and use legal acts, sanctions, control, and the entire arsenal of personnel policy and management tools of a democratic state.
There is an unlimited range of manifestations of innovative culture - from creating conditions effective use innovative potential (individuals, enterprises, organizations) in the interests of the development of society to ensure maximum balance in its reform. With the participation of an innovative culture, it is possible to really achieve in the sphere of a specific economy - accelerating and increasing the efficiency of the introduction of new technologies and inventions, in the field of management - real counteraction to bureaucratic tendencies, in the field of education - promoting the disclosure of the innovative potential of the individual and its implementation, in the field of culture - optimizing the ratio between tradition and renewal, different types and types of cultures.
At the same time, all these processes cannot be reduced only to the influence of innovative culture; along with it, there are powerful political, economic, social and other factors. However, they are determined by the state of culture as a whole and, above all, by its innovative component.
It is the development of the motivational sphere, the formation of a new social system of values that becomes a necessary condition for the sociocultural and economic revival of the country.
Without touching on the controversy surrounding the definition of “culture,” we note that there is no doubt about the organic connection between innovative culture and its other areas. It is the innovative culture that ensures people's receptivity to new ideas, their readiness and ability to support and implement innovations in all spheres of life.
Innovative culture reflects a person’s holistic orientation, enshrined in motives, knowledge, abilities and skills, as well as in images and norms of behavior. It shows both the level of activity of the relevant social institutions and the degree of satisfaction of people with participation in them and its results.
The phenomenon of the so-called cultural lag should also play a stimulating role, when a contradiction arises due to the lag of changes outside the material sphere (innovations and innovations in management, law, organization) from the transformation in material culture(innovations and innovations in science and technology).
The formation of an innovative culture is associated primarily with the development of creative abilities and the realization of the creative potential of the person himself - its subject. At the same time, there are many other factors and conditions, the consideration and active use of which can significantly contribute to the effectiveness of innovation.
With a high level of innovative culture of society, due to mutual correlation and interdependence of its parts, a change in one component causes a rapid change in others. In conditions of innovation stagnation, a powerful organizational, managerial and legal impulse is needed for self-regulation mechanisms to work. This requires the institutionalization of an innovative culture, i.e. turning its development into an organized, orderly process with a certain structure of relationships, rules of behavior, and responsibility of participants. This is not about bureaucratizing activities, but about necessary consolidation measures, since it is necessary to short time solve major socially significant issues.
How do we see the tasks of the scientific component of innovative culture? First of all, we need to deepen our theoretical understanding of innovative culture and identify factors that promote its development and inhibit it.
Sociological and socio-psychological studies of different social groups are especially important. The Institute for Strategic Innovation conducted the first such study last year. It confirmed that innovative culture is perceived by them quite specifically, as objective reality, affecting production and economic indicators. Similar studies will continue and may become international this year.
The educational component seems to us to be key, and it is closely related to scientific research. It is necessary to develop a mechanism for forming a constructive attitude in society towards innovations as a particularly significant personal and social value, to lay the foundations for healthy competition in various fields of activity. Funds could play an important role here mass media. The education system has excellent experience of innovation in content, teaching and educational methods. Based on it as a basis, we can set the task of developing innovative tolerance and sensitivity among schoolchildren and students. A special task is to recognize innovatively gifted children, develop their activity, and the ability to adapt to possible difficulties along this path. Russian and foreign practice in developing creativity could be useful here.
Naturally, one cannot rely only on preschool and school age. The fundamentals of innovative culture should be mastered to the maximum extent in university and postgraduate education. We need a solid educational and methodological product, taking into account the capabilities of technical means, foreign and domestic experience. We are working on it now. Innovative culture as a special form of human culture presupposes a close relationship with its other forms, primarily legal, managerial, entrepreneurial, and corporate. Through an innovative culture, it is possible to achieve a significant influence on the entire culture of professional activity and industrial relations of people. Given the international nature of innovative culture, efforts to develop it should be based on the cultural traditions of the country and field of activity. It is able to equip practice with methods for assessing and suppressing the use of innovations that can cause harm to humans, society, and nature.
In conclusion, I would like to emphasize once again that innovative culture has a powerful anti-bureaucratic and creative charge. In accordance with the current development needs of the state, it is in our common interests to use its capabilities to the fullest.