Modernization Of The Flagship University - Contribution To The Region Development

Abstract

Relevance. The relevance of the study is nessecciated by the need to modernize the development model of a flagship university in order to ensure a balanced economy of the region and meet the needs of its promising economic structure, as well as creating a mechanism for the effective use of a flagship university in regional development. Scientific significance of the work. Scientific novelty lies in the development of a concept and justification of the criteria for the modernization of the educational model of a flagship university, which ensure the growth of the university's contribution to regional development. Methodology. System analysis, methodology for assessing the index of happiness, analysis of strengths and weaknesses. Results. The factors and conditions for the modernization of the educational model of the flagship university are identified and systematized, the criteria are defined and the concept of the modernization of the educational model is developed, based, unlike existing ones, on trends and prospects for the development of the labor market, new technologies, digitalization, innovation development trends in the country and the world. Findings. The practical significance of the study lies in the possibility of applying the results of work in the activities of federal authorities in the development of regional policies and programs for the development of flagship universities, as well as in the strategic management of flagship universities.

Keywords: Developmenteducational modelflagship universityregion

Introduction

The demand for modernization of the educational model for the development of universities is due, firstly, to the currently insignificant impact of a formally high level of population education on the socio-economic development of the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation is on the 4th position in the world in terms of human capital (characterized by population coverage at different levels of education), however, it occupies only the 42nd place in terms of the practical application of skills in work (knowhow) and the 89th in terms of “accessibility of skilled workers” of the Russian Federation (The Global Human Capital Report, 2017; Series of collective monographs “Russian Education: Achievements, Challenges, Prospects”, 2019). Secondly, due to the development directions of the Russian Federation, formulated in six of the nine national goals in the Decree of the President of Russia dated May 7, 2018, in particular: ensuring constant growth of citizens' incomes, halving the poverty level, accelerating technological development, increasing the number of organizations, participating in innovative development, including technological, ensuring the introduction of digital technologies in the economy and social sphere, ensuring economic growth rates above world ones. The demand for enhancing economic growth and improving technology is increasing among the challenges facing the system of higher education. However, the strategic guidelines for the change in education in the Russian Federation did not provide for orientation on contributions to the socio-economic development of the country, but primarily based on the concept of education as a sphere of social obligations. It should be borne in mind that the renewal of higher and vocational education will affect the economic results of the Russian Federation by 2022–2023 (Series of collective monographs “Russian Education: Achievements, Challenges, Prospects”, 2019). A special role in this process, in our opinion, is assigned to flagship regional universities. The most important task of the regional economy (Ivanov & Sokol-Nomokonov, 2018) is the reproduction by universities of a part of qualified labor resources, taking into account the demand of existing and future business entities in the region. In this regard, it is relevant to identify and predict the nature of the relationship with the potential labor market. Therefore, regional universities should modernize models of training, improve the content of educational programs to meet the needs of a promising structure of the regional economies. So, the modernization of the educational model at Yaroslav-the-Wise Novgorod State University (NovSU) is in demand. This is due to the fact that the inert management of educational programs that took shape in the 2000s led to the lack of differentiation of educational programs, interdisciplinary educational programs, lack of demand for some of them, excessive financial costs and loss of contingent, including the level of secondary special education.

Problem Statement

Development models, including educational models of flagship universities, have a special impact on the economy, labor markets, intellectual and industrial potential, reputation, institutional environment, technological changes and systemic sustainability in the regions. In turn, the concept of interaction of regional authorities with a supporting university, the structure of the economy and the institutional environment of the region, as well as other factors affect the vector and development prospects of the university on its territory. A synergistic effect from the integration of the "region-flagship university" is possible in the case of scientific justification of their overall development strategy. This requires the selection of criteria and the formation of a concept for the modernization of the educational model of a reference university, which will ensure an increase in the university's contribution to regional development.

Research Questions

The systematic balance and sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region is facilitated by the effective inclusion of a support university in regional processes. However, the definition of the “points” of application of the strengths of a supporting university in regional development depends not only on identifying key problems in the region and analyzing the existing labor market. Despite the availability of studies on the assessment of the contribution of universities to regional processes, there are no works aimed at developing criteria for a development model, including the educational model of flagship universities. Since the flagship universities have special characteristics, development plans, and the program for the creation and development of flagship universities will be continued by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (it is planned to increase the number of flagship universities to 80), the scientific and methodological substantiation of the mechanism of interaction between the flagship university and the region is in demand, in particular formation of a model for the formation of a flagship university that provides innovative socio-economic development of the region.

Purpose of the Study

The study is devoted to substantiating the criteria and developing the concept of modernizing the educational model of a flagship university, which allows obtaining effects for the region (advanced training, practical orientation of programs, flexibility of graduate competencies, intensification of the knowledge economy) and effects for the university (demand for graduates in the labor market, increased competitiveness of the university, using the potential of the external environment, improving the performance of the university). The objectives of the study were the following: to determine the factors and conditions for the implementation of the new educational model of the university, to determine the role of a flagship university in regional development (by the example of Novgorod State University), to formulate a concept of practice-oriented training for students of a flagship university, which allows obtaining creative and flexible thinking specialists as an educational result owning design technologies, digital skills, teamwork and influence the growth of internal regional product.

Research Methods

Contribution of universities to the development of the region

The role of universities in the socio-economic and innovative development of territories has been the subject of many Russian and foreign studies. The sphere of higher education is considered as the intellectual basis for a breakthrough into the sixth technological order and a system-forming social institution that provides solutions to the problems of developing human capital in Russia, identified in the study of the labor market and human capital “Russia-2025: from talent to talent” (Romanov, 2018). The work (Zborovsky & Ambarova, 2018), notes that the economic, social and cultural trends in the life of regions and cities depend on the development paths of regional universities and the smaller the population in the city is, the more its development prospects depend on the presence of a strong university. It is noted that universities are becoming the economic, social and cultural resource of the city not only due to tax revenues, but also the development of the educational and cultural environment (Balmasova, 2016; Bezgodov & Belyaev, 2016). In addition to education, socialization, vocational training and the development of science and culture, universities play city-forming, city-developing, and city-preserving functions (Vakhshtayn, 2011; Reznik, Ponomarenko, & Kurdova, 2014; Emelyanova, 2016). Researchers note that the contribution of universities to the formation of the socio-economic environment is not limited to scientific research and educational activities, but also includes market initiatives in a geographically limited area (Rücker Schaeffer, Fischer, & Queiroz, 2018). Leshukov et al. propose evaluating the influence of universities through their contribution to economic development, human capital, and innovative development of the region (Leshukov & Lisyutkin, 2015; Leshukov, Evseeva, Gromov, & Platonova, 2017). Kranzeeva (2017) systematizes the mechanisms of the influence of universities on regional development. Universities are considered not only as organizations providing training of qualified personnel, carrying out research activities, generating new knowledge and disseminating it within the framework of socio-economic systems (Clark, 2004), but also making direct and indirect contributions to the activities of production structures (Mowery & Sampat, 2005). The key role of educational institutions in the development of innovative ecosystems (Benneworth & Hospers, 2007), joint research with industry (Cowan & Zinovyeva, 2013) and in the creation of new high-tech enterprises (Agrawal & Cockburn, 2003; WEF, 2013) is emphasized. Universities are seen as key agents of intraregional concentration and dissemination of knowledge, providing communications with external systems to minimize the risks of “self-locking” (Fritsch & Schwirten, 2006). Universities' role in the birth and diffusion of knowledge contributes to the development of the region (Jiao, Zhou, Gao, & Liu, 2016).

The special role of flagship universities (Arzhanova, Vorov, Derman, Dyachkova, & Klyagin, 2017) in the regional socio-economic and innovative environment should be noted. And this role is not limited to the function of the university as a source of high-quality human capital, providing the region with a sustainable shortage of other resources. Not only qualified, innovative and entrepreneurial labor resources, a stable regional innovation system, a developed system of development and research and development can be listed among the factors that allow the region to adapt over time (Clark, Huang, & Walsh, 2010), but also universities with strong relations with the economy of the region. Flagship universities are called upon to implement the declared regional development programs and are considered as one of the tools to accelerate the development of individual sectors of the territorial economy (Ivanov & Sokol-Nomokonov, 2018).

Factors, conditions and criteria for the modernization of the educational model of a flagship university

We analyzed the following university models in defining the criteria for the modernization of the educational model of a flagship university: universities of academic entrepreneurship (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1999), universities of regional development (Goddard & Chatterton, 1999), universities of regional interaction (Holland, 2001), universities in the form of regional innovation the organization (Etzkowitz, Webster, Gebhardt, & Terra, 2000; Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000).

An analysis of the trends in the prospects of education and labor (OECD, 2019) indicates that in connection with globalization and international migration, there is a need to create an educational environment for heterogeneous classes. Climatic changes necessitate the inclusion of modules aimed not only at solving environmental and safety problems, but also at creating an understanding of the interconnectedness of today's solutions and their likely long-term consequences in educational programs. The trend of transition to remote work and digitalization requires new forms of training, the development of digital literacy. The use of artificial intelligence technology creates the need for training in technology and mathematics, the formation of creativity as the ability to future innovations. The increase in working age determines the demand for the development of continuing education. Demographic changes and focus on teamwork require collaboration and social skills.

The conclusions contained in the study by McKinsey (Innovation in Russia is an inexhaustible source of growth, 2018) were taken into account, in particular, a list of those competencies that will become in demand in the future in order to ensure the innovative development of companies when forming the concept of modernization of the educational model of the reference university. The ability to navigate in a changing environment, creativity, emotional intelligence and flexibility of thinking are among them. Developing trends (globalization, blurring the boundaries between work and study) determine the conditions for the development of education and the creation of an environment favorable for the emergence of innovations in Russia. This, for example, the emergence of modular courses in certain competencies for accelerated training of specialists, integration into higher education programs of modules aimed at the formation of new competencies of the XXI century: digital skills, critical and flexible thinking, creativity, entrepreneurship.

The creation of conditions for training personnel for the digital economy is of particular importance (Digital Russia: a new reality, 2017), since digitalization not only changes the social paradigm of people's lives, but also creates the conditions for acquiring new knowledge, mastering new professions, and further training. New digitalization-related professions and high-paying jobs appear.

Many assumptions about modern generations of youth should not be taken literally and new educational models should be built with them in mind. Kuzminov et al. (as cited in Bogacheva & Sivak, 2019) give an example that the “myths” about the “Generation Y”, without taking into account the real professional characteristics of the representatives of this stratum, have discriminated against young professionals in the United States (Raymer, Reed, Spiegel, & Purvanova, 2017; Krieger, 2016). In this regard, there is a risk of repeating the same events in relation to the “Generation Z”, since many myths about the “Generation Z” are not only neutral, but also negative. It should be understood that the authors of the predominant part of the lists of “features of the young generation” are older people who relate to another generation.

The methodology for calculating the happiness index was used to identify the problems of the development of the socio-economic environment of the region as “points” for the application of intellectual, creative, and other efforts of the flagship university (in the form of various projects). This methodology is based on the methods of the British Research Center New Economic Foundation, the UN General Assembly, Daniel Kahneman and others. The weaknesses identified by this methodology in the regional socio-economic system are considered as requiring design solutions implemented by the reference university. Thus, in particular, the group of indicators “education and science” is included in the categories of happiness: assessment of the state of the education sector at the regional level, assessment of satisfaction with the education system of the region, a list of urgent problems in the field of education and science. Sociological studies conducted by NovSU scientists in 2019 showed that residents of the Novgorod region call the imperfection of training programs and the quality of educational services among others. Of course, it should be borne in mind that these estimates are given as a whole for educational institutions in the region. However, this should be taken into account when forming a new educational model of NovSU, which, in particular, prepares teachers for the Novgorod region.

We consider the regional socio-economic system from the perspective of systemic economic theory, and the flagship university, together with industrial partners, organizations of the region, as a meso-economic object (Kleyner, 2016).

The model of the flagship university was modernized taking into account the selected performance indicators, in particular, indicators characterizing the success of the higher education system. At the same time, we critically analyzed the existing systems for assessing the effectiveness of universities, in particular (for example, Abankina et al., 2017), recommendations are developed for improving the system of performance indicators for flagship universities, taking into account the contribution to the creation of conditions for sustainable and balanced development of the regional economy. We have included the following in the list of indicators: employment of graduates, international and interregional (national) attractiveness of the university, scientific productivity of the university (income from research in the form of grants, consulting contracts, research contracts with companies and NGOs), sensitivity to changes (speed and effectiveness of transformation ), financial accessibility (in % of the average income of the population), general accessibility, involvement in regional development (benefits for society, results for the labor market, innovation, contribution to social economic development of the region), adult coverage of continuing education in the region. Financial accessibility takes into account not only the cost of training per year, but living expenses, grants, taxes, total availability (%) characterizes youth coverage, the proportion of young people with higher education, and the equality index in education (Usher & Medow, 2010).

Thus, we have identified factors and conditions for the modernization of the educational model of NovSU: trends in the development of education and labor market prospects, in particular, digitalization, transition to remote work, the demand for creativity, skills to navigate in changing environmental conditions, critical and flexible thinking and entrepreneurial ability. The criteria for modernization of the educational model of NovSU are defined: ensuring the growth of the contribution of a supporting university to the growth of the regional gross product of the region, in particular, through the development and implementation of projects aimed at solving the problems of the development of the socio-economic environment of the region; indicators of the effectiveness of the higher education system (employment of graduates, international and interregional (national) attractiveness of a university, scientific productivity of a university, etc.).

Findings

The role of the flagship university in the Novgorod region

In 2017, NovSU concentrated efforts in the direction of regulatory, organizational, structural, and partially financial changes to provide opportunities for subsequent sustainable development and transformation of the university into a center of innovative, technological and social development of the Novgorod region for the period 2017-2019. In educational activities, the project implemented jointly with the NTI University – University 2035 has become significant for the Novgorod Region. This project is aimed at the formation of a new personal and project-oriented methodology, as the basis for the formation of educational approaches of a new meaning, focused on the advanced training of specialists of the future. Work with talents at all levels has acquired new meanings for NovSU. The creation of a talent management center is a concentration of efforts in this direction. The integration of secondary and higher levels of education and the introduction of practice-oriented standards for training WorldSkill’s take place. Digitalization of education is carried out through the development of new unique programs and modules for the formation of new digital competencies. Together with industrial partners, conditions are being created for the development of the entrepreneurial ecosystem and a culture of entrepreneurship as a key attribute of tomorrow's professionals. All this, in aggregate, are the growth effects that have already taken place in the new educational system of NovSU.

The basis for the development of innovation is a developed infrastructure and the availability of applied research and development. The university’s network megaprojects realizing the practical interdisciplinary potential of our institutes have become key effects in this direction. o the combined efforts of the university, industrial and innovative enterprises led to the creation of a Center for the integrated development of assistive technologies and technical rehabilitation equipment with an attracted amount of funds of 100 million rubles. Victory in the competition for the creation of engineering centers for 139 million rubles is the basis not only for building up the declared competencies, but also for developing related interdisciplinary areas. Together, this is the key to the development of scientific schools and teams and the formation of a sought-after regional innovative product.

The synergistic effect inherent in the new integrated approaches to the organization and implementation of the innovation cycle in the model of the pilot plant for NTI projects is not only technologies, developments, companies and entrepreneurs who have successfully “started” in the Novgorod region, but are also ready for replication in Russia and the world solutions for the markets of the future.

The key effect inherent in the core university program is the active convergence of the region and the university. The development of local communities of the urban and regional environment as part of the development program is due to the concentration of the intellectual multidisciplinary potential of the university in organizing and conducting foresights and strategic sessions in a wide range of areas of socio-economic development of the territories and the region as a whole.

Modernization of the educational model of a flagship university

The idea of a project-oriented model of training at NovSU is “NOVy (NEW) UNIVERSITY. EVOLUTION” is the focus on future competencies, practical orientation. The purpose of the model is the formation of a personality that can think outside the box and adapt flexibly to the rapidly changing conditions of reality. Educational result is the graduate who can think critically and creatively, solve non-standard tasks, knows how to work in a team, implements effective strategies, adapts and flexibly responds to changes.

Rethinking of the educational process was carried out in the direction of developing a new education strategy, introducing new forms of training and new educational programs. At the same time, the City-University concept developed by NovSU and included for implementation in the development strategy of the Novgorod region guided the process. Among the indicators for the development of a region and a flagship university, this concept provides not only that fact that every second resident of the region is a student or employee of the university, or an innovative enterprise created at the university, but also that the flagship regional university should become a center for the development and implementation of teaching methods contributing to accelerated training in digital technology, a center for training in new professions. The most important landmark for the joint development of the region and the flagship university is that the university’s product should become the main component of the region’s GDP.

When modernizing the educational model of NovSU, the experience of universities of the world and the Russian Federation, already working in project logic, was studied, namely the Higher School of Economics, the Ural Federal University, Nizhny Novgorod Federal University, Southern Federal University, Far Eastern Federal University, Tyumen State University, Moscow Polytechnic University and others. The best practices were systematized and the risks and failures of introducing project-oriented approaches into student learning were taken into account. For example, project-oriented training at NTI University 20.35 includes not only training participants in creating projects for new markets, but also the possibility of implementing personal trajectories, online classes, developing joint projects with universities on personal learning paths and students' project activities, and conducting educational intensives lasting 10-15 days for thousands or more students.

The need for the introduction of project-oriented training is due to the following. Organizations seeking to be competitive must be prepared not only to adapt to changing market conditions. It is more important to master the design methods, since it is the toolkit of project activities and project management that makes it possible to carefully control the resources and timing of achieving goals, save the budget and reduce costs. The use of project management techniques can significantly increase the effectiveness of the organization, regardless of the industry in which it operates. What is a project economy? Let us site V. L. Makarov, director of the Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, doctor of physical and mathematical sciences, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences: “Why does it seem that project economics can replace market economies? The main disadvantage of a market economy is one-sided motivation, the absence of a spiritual component and, therefore, the meaning of life. Yes, a market economy gives freedom, gives complete emancipation, scope for creativity. But the question is - why? It brings up the desire to be the first, to seize power, to be better than others only in one thing - in wealth. Project economics, by definition, lack this fundamental flaw. A person can open up, show all the abilities and get satisfaction from life. Life takes on a true meaning” (Makarov, 2013). The application of the project method, that is, the organization of the systematic development and implementation of development projects of the country, which are still based on the lack of new ways of life, material target structures and productive markets around them - a specific leading consumer goods, machinery and infrastructures are the technological basis of the project development economy (Krupnov, 2015). In this regard, the introduction of a project methodology, the transformation of organizations into project-oriented, is becoming an important task both at the state level, in particular, the higher education system, advanced training of employees, and at the level of organizations themselves, aspiring to become or remain competitive in a changing world. The project approach is becoming not only a necessary tool for the survival and development of organizations, and therefore is becoming more widespread in the activities of organizations, but also becoming a new culture, management style in a competitive environment, innovative activity, and a shorter life cycle of goods and services.

Analysis of the prevalence of design methods in the activities of organizations allows us to identify the main factors affecting the increase in project-oriented organizations and the growth in the use of the design approach in the activities of organizations and territories. So, in particular, the shortening of the life cycle of goods determines the relevance of updating the product portfolio of enterprises, and this requires the integration of design approaches in the activities of enterprises. The scientific literature describes two approaches to bringing a new product to market. The first of these is based on the creation of a technologically new product: “New product development” and includes the stages from studying the needs of the consumer, ideas, developing a product with new properties and right up to launching it on the market (Cooper & Kleinschmidt, 1990; Killen, Hunt, & Kleinschmidt, 2008; Pattikawa, Verwaal, & Commandeur, 2006). The second approach focuses more on the commercialization of the idea: “New product introduction” or “New product commercialization”, which means launching the product on the market or commercial launch of the product, while the stage of developing a new technology is beyond the scope, and the main focus is on marketing activities (Aarikka-Stenroos & Sandberg, 2012; Jolly, 1997; Patanakul, Shenhar, & Milosevic, 2012). Moreover, the direct launch of the product on the market (“product launch”) is one of the stages of these approaches. In addition, there is an expert position based on the fact that managing it as a project portfolio should be considered the most effective method for managing the launch of new products (Bode-Greuel & Nickisch, 2008; Cooper, Edgett, & Kleinschmidt, 2002; Cooper, Edgett, & Kleinschmidt, 2001; Dickinson, Thornton, & Graves, 2001; Heising, 2012; Killen, Hunt, & Kleinschmidt, 2008; Morris & Pinto, 2004). It should also be said that there is a constant updating of quality standards and the need to follow them (for example, ISO 9000 standards), changes in organizations are becoming more and more complex. Based on project financing, a huge number of projects are being implemented in the world. According to Dialogic, by the beginning of 2015, over 11 thousand projects worth more than 7.5 trillion USD were implemented on the principles of project financing in the world (Nikonova & Smirnov, 2016). A special role in the development and dissemination of the project design methodology is played by professional associations of specialists, in particular the Russian Project Management Association SOVNET and the Moscow and St. Petersburg branches of the US Project Management Institute. The Russian theoretical base of project management is expanding, new national standards are being created in the GOST system (R 54869-2011, R 54870-2011, R ISO 21500-2014). The Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation leads the way among government departments for the implementation of project management, stimulating the spread of this approach to other government agencies. Order of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia No. 26R-AU dated April 14, 2014 “On approval of the Methodological Recommendations on the implementation of project management in executive bodies” regulates this activity and contains consistent recommendations on the implementation of project management. These methodological recommendations are aimed at providing departments with the tools to more efficiently implement projects, to build interaction among themselves in the implementation of joint activities. Decree of October 15, 2016 No. 1050, Order of October 15, 2016 No. 2165-r establishes the procedure for organizing project activities, which determines the organizational structure of the project management system, the stages of initiation, preparation, implementation, monitoring and completion of priority projects (programs). It is recommended that state authorities of constituent entities of the Federation organize project activities at the regional level, guided by the approved Regulation on the organization of project activities in the Government of Russia.

The demand for the introduction of project activities training at universities is also indicated by the fact that one of the areas of project management in the Russian Federation is the implementation of the concept of “territories of priority development”. In accordance with Federal Law of March 30, 2014 No. 473 – FZ “On Territories of Advancement of Social and Economic Development in the Russian Federation” and Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 22, 2015 No. 614 “On Features of Creating Territories of Advance Social and Economic Development on territories of single-discipline municipalities of the Russian Federation (single-industry towns) ”, the creation of territories of advanced economic development (TOSER) in the territories of a single-industry towns with the most difficult socio-economic situation becomes a tool for solving the socio-economic problems of single-industry towns. The development and implementation of projects within the framework of the creation and development of TOSER in the Russian Federation corresponds to the paradigm of the formation of a project economy. Project economics is a special type of socio-economic system in which economic activity is carried out mainly through projects, programs, portfolios of projects and programs (Yuryeva, 2014).

The implementation of a new educational model based on a project-oriented approach involves the introduction of new roles in the educational process. So, in particular, mentors, tutors, experts, stakeholders and education data engineers appear. Mentor-teacher deals with students in a separate project, includes students in real scientific, technical and project activities, creates an environment for the development of project participants (in constant contact with students), helps to master the basic knowledge and practical skills necessary for inclusion in the project. The tutor-teacher creates the conditions for the individualization of the educational process, conducts a reflective analysis of the activities and results together with the student. A stakeholder (a person or an organization (government, business, schools, universities)) invests resources in education and for the implementation of specific goals (projects). An expert is a specialist who systematically evaluates the results of design work, determines compliance with the standards of design activities, reveals the ability to use various sources of information, identifies the quality of product and educational results. Education Data Engineer (EDE) aggregates data about educational experience or digital traces that allow analyzing the development of students and personalizing the curriculum.

The construction of the educational process is moving away from generally accepted semesters. The concepts of Tacts, project modules (PM) and educational modules (EM) and Equator are introduced. Four cross-cutting disciplines, implemented according to the modular principle, were identified – philosophy (work with thinking), the Russian language and speech culture (rhetoric), psychology (motivation and self-development), and a foreign language. The discipline "Fundamentals of project activities" (FPA) contains theoretical aspects of the implementation of project logic, project management, etc. The project cycle schedule is presented in the Table 01 .

Table 1 -
See Full Size >

Conclusion

The presented concept of modernization of the development model of a flagship university contributes to the creation of a basis for an effective model for managing regional economic, technological and institutional development of the region, the implementation of the vectors “Region-industrial center for export”, “Region-university”, development defined by the development strategy of the Novgorod region smart economy sectors. Thus, a qualitatively new level of solving the economic, technological and institutional development of the socio-economic system of the Novgorod region will be achieved. The practical significance of the study lies in the possibility of applying the results of work in the activities of not only federal authorities in the development of regional policies and programs for the development of core universities, but also for the development of flagship universities.

References

  1. Aarikka-Stenroos, L., & Sandberg, B. (2012). From new-product development to commercialization through networks. Journal of Business Research, 65, 198-206.
  2. Abankina, I. V., Belikov, A. A., Gaponova, O. S., Dudyrev, F. F., Koreshnikova, Yu. N., Korshunov, I. A., …, & Frumin, I. D. (2017). Global competitiveness of Russian education. Discussion materials. Moscow: National Research University Higher School of Economics, Institute of Education.
  3. Agrawal, A., & Cockburn, I. (2003). The anchor tenant hypothesis: Exploring the role of large, local, R&D-intensive firms in regional innovation systems. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1227-1253.
  4. Arzhanova, I. V., Vorov, A. B., Derman, D. O., Dyachkova, E. A., & Klyagin, A. V. (2017). Results of pillar universities development program implementation for 2016. University Management: Practice and Analysis, 21(4), 11-21. [in Russ.]. DOI:
  5. Balmasova, T. A. (2016). «Tret'ya missiya» universiteta – novyy vektor razvitiya? [Is the “third mission” of the university a new development vector?] Vyssheye obrazovaniye v Rossii. [Higher education in Russia], 8-9, 48-55.
  6. Benneworth, P., & Hospers, G. J. (2007). The new economic geography of old industrial regions: Universities as global-local pipelines. Environment and Planning, 25(6), 779-802.
  7. Bezgodov, D. N., & Belyaev, O. I. (2016). Sotsiokul'turnaya missiya universiteta v kontekste razvitiya regiona. [Socio-cultural mission of the university in the context of the development of the region]. Vyssheye obrazovaniye v Rossii [Higher education in Russia], 6, 128-134.
  8. Bode-Greuel, K. M., & Nickisch, K. J. (2008). Value-driven project and portfolio management in the pharmaceutical industry: Drug discovery versus drug development - Commonalities and differences in portfolio management practice. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 14(4), 307-325.
  9. Bogacheva, N. V., & Sivak, E. V. (2019). Myths about the “generation”. Moscow: HSE.
  10. Clark, B. (2004). Creating Entrepreneurial Universities. Oxford: IAU Press-Elsevier.
  11. Clark, J., Huang, H.-I., & Walsh, J. A. (2010). Typology of ‘Innovation Districts’: What It Means for Regional Resilience. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 3, 121-137.
  12. Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1990). New Products: the key factors in success. USA, Chicago: American Marketing Association.
  13. Cooper, R., Edgett, S., & Kleinschmidt, E. (2001). Portfolio management for new product development: results of an industry practices study. R&D Management, 31(4), 361-380.
  14. Cooper, R. G., Edgett, S. J., and Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2002). Portfolio Management: Fundamental for New Product Success. The PDMA Tool Book for New Product Development. USA, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
  15. Cowan, R., & Zinovyeva, N. (2013). University effects on regional innovation. Research Policy, 42(3), 788-800.
  16. Dickinson, M. W., Thornton, A. C., & Graves, S. (2001). Technology portfolio management: Optimizing interdependent projects over multiple time periods. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 48, 518-527.
  17. Digital Russia: a new reality. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/ru/~/media/ McKinsey/Locations/Europe%20and%20Middle%20East/Russia/Our%20Insights/Digital%20Russia/Digital-Russia-report.ashx
  18. Emelyanova, I. N. (2016). Strategicheskie prioritety klassicheskogo universiteta. Kontent-analiz missiy [Strategic priorities of a classical university: mission content analysis]. University Management: Practice and Analysis, 5(105), 4-14.
  19. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1999). The Future Location of Research and Technology Transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 24, 111-123.
  20. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and ‘‘Mode 2’’ to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123.
  21. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). Тhe Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm, Research Policy, 29, 313-330.
  22. Fritsch, M., & Schwirten, C. (2006). Enterprise-University co-operation and the role of public research institutions in regional innovation systems. Industry and Innovation, 6(1), 69-83.
  23. Goddard, J., & Chatterton, P. (1999). Regional Development Agencies and the Knowledge Economy: Harnessing the Potential of Universities. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 17(6), 685-699.
  24. Heising, W. (2012). The integration of ideation and project portfolio management – A key factor for sustainable success. International Journal of Project Management, 30(5), 582-595.
  25. Holland, B. A. (2001). Toward a definition and characterization of the engaged campus: Six cases. Metropolitan Universities: An International Forum, 12, 20-29.
  26. Innovation in Russia is an inexhaustible source of growth. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/ru/~/media/McKinsey/Locations/Europe%20and%20Middle%20East/Russia/Our%20Insights/Digital%20Russia/Innovations-in-Russia.ashx
  27. Ivanov, S. A., & Sokol-Nomokonov, E. N. (2018). The Phenomenon of Flagship Universities of Regional Economy in Modern Russia. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii [Higher Education in Russia], 1(219), 19-30. [In Russ.].
  28. Jiao, H., Zhou, J., Gao, T., & Liu, X. (2016). The more interactions the better? The moderating effect of the interaction between local producers and users of knowledge on the relationship between R&D investment and regional innovation systems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 110, 13-20.
  29. Jolly, V. K. (1997). Commercializing New Technologies: Getting from Mind to Market. Harvard: Harvard Business School Press.
  30. Killen, C. P., Hunt, R. A., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2008). Project portfolio management for product innovation. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 25(1), 24-38.
  31. Kleyner, G. B. (2016). Economy. Modeling. Mathematics. Selected works. Moscow: Central Economic-Mathematical Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences.
  32. Kranzeeva, E. A. (2017). New models of universities: contribution to regional development. University Management: Practice and Analysis, 21(5), 64-73.
  33. Krieger, J. (2016). Unfairly Labeled: How Your Workplace Can Benefit From Ditching Generational Stereotypes. USA, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
  34. Krupnov, Y. (2015). Project development economics is a new model of economics for Russia and the Eurasian Union. Design and analytical report. Retrieved from http://kroupnov.ru/files/doklad-Proektnaya-economika-razvitija.pdf
  35. Leshukov, О. V., Evseeva, D. G., Gromov, А. D., & Platonova, D. P. (2017). Otsenka vklada regional’nyk h sistem v ysshego obrazovaniya v sotsial’no-ekonomicheskoe razvitie regionov Rossii [Evaluation of the Contribution of Regional Systems of Higher Education in Socio-Economic Development of Regions of Russia]. Moscow: HSE.
  36. Leshukov, O. V., & Lisyutkin, M. A. (2015). Upravlenie regional’nymi sistemami vysshego obrazovaniya v Rossii: vozmozhnye podkhody [Governance of the Regional Higher Education Systems in Russia: Possible Approaches]. University Management: Practice and Analysis, 6(100), 29-40.
  37. Makarov, V. L. (2013). On the issue of project economics. The economic science of modern Russia, 3(62), 8-14.
  38. Morris, P. W. G., & Pinto, J. K. (Eds.) (2004). The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects. Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  39. Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. N. (2005). Universities in National Systems. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation (pp. 209-239). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  40. Nikonova, I. A., & Smirnov, A. L. (2016). Proyektnoye finansirovaniye v Rossii. Problemy i napravleniya razvitiya [Project financing in Russia. Problems and directions of development]. M.: Izdatel'stvo “Konsaltbankir” [Publishing house “Consultbank”].
  41. OECD. (2019). Envisioning the future of education and jobs: Trends, data and drawings. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/education/Envisioning-the-future-of-education-and-jobs.pdf.
  42. Patanakul, P., Shenhar, A. J., & Milosevic, D. Z. (2012). How project strategy is used in project management: Cases of new product development and software development projects. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 29, 391-414.
  43. Pattikawa, L. H., Verwaal, E., & Commandeur, H. R. (2006). Understanding new product project performance. European Journal of Marketing, 40(11/12), 1178-1193.
  44. Raymer, M., Reed, M., Spiegel, M., & Purvanova, R. (2017). An examination of generational stereotypes as a path towards reverse ageism. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 20, 148-175.
  45. Reznik, G. A., Ponomarenko, Yu. S., & Kurdova, M. A. (2014). Funktsii vuza: novye vozmozhnosti razvitiya [Functions of the university: new development opportunities]. Mir nauki [World of Science], 4, 1-11. Retrieved from: https://mir-nauki.com/PDF/30PMN414.pdf
  46. Romanov, E. (2018). Higher education: status and prospects. Economic policy, 13(3), 182-205. DOI:
  47. Rücker Schaeffer, P., Fischer, B., & Queiroz, S. (2018). Beyond Education: The Role of Research Universities in Innovation Ecosystems. Foresight and STI Governance, 12(2), 50-61. DOI:
  48. Series of collective monographs “Russian Education: Achievements, Challenges, Prospects”. (2019). Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics.
  49. The Global Human Capital Report. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-human-capital-report-2017
  50. Usher, A., & Medow, J. (2010). Global Higher Education Rankings 2010: Affordability and Accessibility in Comparative Perspective. Toronto: Higher Education Strategy Associates.
  51. Vakhshtayn, V. (2011). Metafory i metamorfozy universiteta [Metaphors and metamorphoses of the university]. Kultivator/Cultivator, 3, 20-30. Retrieved from http://www.intelros.ru/ pdf/Kultivator/3/2.pdf
  52. WEF. (2013). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems around the Globe and Company Growth Dynamics. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
  53. Yuryeva, T. V. (2014). Proyektnyy podkhod kak instrument realizatsii strategicheskikh tseley [The project approach as a tool for implementing strategic goals]. Ekonomicheskiye nauki [Economics], 120, 7-10.
  54. Zborovsky, G. E., & Ambarova, P. A. (2018). Vyssheye obrazovaniye kak faktor sokhraneniya gorodov v Ural'skom makroregione [Higher education as a factor in the conservation of cities in the Ural microregion]. Ekonomika regiona [Economy of Region], 14(3), 914-926.

Copyright information

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

About this article

Publication Date

23 January 2020

eBook ISBN

978-1-80296-076-1

Publisher

Future Academy

Volume

77

Print ISBN (optional)

-

Edition Number

1st Edition

Pages

1-1056

Subjects

Industry, industrial studies, project management, sustainability, business, innovation

Cite this article as:

Yerznkyan, B., Bagiev, G. L., Daneykin, Y. V., Ivanova*, O. P., Trifonov, V. A., & Vladimirov, D. (2020). Modernization Of The Flagship University - Contribution To The Region Development. In & I. O. Petrovna (Ed.), Project Management in the Regions of Russia, vol 77. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 835-848). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.12.05.102