• Using the Results

The article “How innovative is your company culture?” translated from English. Its authors are Jay Rao and Joseph Weintraub. The article talks about what is an innovative culture of an organization, what are its main and constituent elements, how to assess the innovativeness of the culture of an enterprise and how to develop it.

Modern leaders want their companies to be more innovative. They dig through piles of books and articles, travel to conferences and seminars on innovation, hoping to discover a formula for success. They are impressed by the ability of relatively young companies like Google and Facebook to create and sell disruptive products and services. They marvel at how some of the older companies - like Apple, IBM, Procter & Gamble, 3M, and General Electric - are constantly innovating, reinventing themselves. And they ask themselves, “How do these great companies do this?”

After studying the approaches to innovation of 759 companies operating in 17 major markets, researchers Gerard Tellis, Jaydeep Prabu and Rajesh Chandi found that corporate culture is a much more important driver of radical innovation than employees, government or national culture. But this conclusion raises two more questions for leaders. First, what is an innovative corporate culture? And the second question: if a company does not have an innovation culture, is there any way to create one? This article answers both of these questions by providing a simple model of the key elements of an innovation culture, as well as a practical, comprehensive assessment tool that leaders can use to understand how their organization's culture is conducive to innovation and identify specific areas where their culture could spur innovation. innovation.

“Our innovation culture model is based on dozens of studies by various authors. We searched the literature on organizational dynamics, leadership, behaviorism, corporate entrepreneurship, and innovation in search of theoretical models and concepts that describe organizational culture and culture of innovation. More specifically, we were looking for tools for evaluation - this is the first thing that leaders who hope to initiate change need. We found a large body of research conducted by academic institutions, consulting companies and corporations themselves over 30 years.

In particular, the work of Clayton Christensen at Harvard Business School showed us the importance of resources, processes, and values ​​for innovation. Edgar Schein, professor at MIT, showed the importance of past successes and their influence on values ​​(norms) and behavior. Geert Hofstede clarified the differences and the relationship between climate and culture. The work of Booz & Company's Katzenbach Center on culture is also well known. The ideas of Charles Oreilly and Daniel Denison also influenced our model. Finally, Tellis, Prabhu, and Chandy conducted a detailed review of the literature on the role of corporate culture and its components in radical innovation.

In our opinion, the basic concept of the survey was strongly influenced by the work of Christensen and Shane. To ensure the statistical validity of the model and its use as a diagnostic and operational tool, we tested 54 components and 18 factors in practice for over two years. The data was collected from 1026 executives of 15 companies from the US, Europe, Latin America and Asia.”

Innovative Development and Innovative Culture: Six Elements

Based on six elements: resources, processes, values, behaviour, climate and success. These elements are interrelated. For example, company values ​​influence how people behave, the climate in the workplace, and how success is defined and measured. The model of culture of innovation proposed by us takes into account the results of research by many authors.

When it comes to facilitating innovation, companies tend to place a lot of emphasis on resources, processes, and measurement of success - the easy-to-measure elements of innovation. Much less attention is given to the hard-to-measure human factors of an innovation culture—values, behavior, and climate. Not surprisingly, most companies are better at managing resources and measurable measures of success in innovation than people-related elements. The intangible elements of an innovation culture (values, people's behavior, climate in the workplace) are, as noted by many researchers, really more difficult to work with. As one CEO so aptly put it, “The unstable aspects are the most difficult aspects.” However, it is these complex “human” aspects that have the greatest impact on the formation of a culture of innovation and the creation of a sustainable competitive advantage.

VALUES. Values ​​underlie priorities, decisions and company positioning which is reflected in how the company spends its time and money. Truly innovative companies spend generously to support entrepreneurial spirit and creativity and encourage continuous learning. A company's values ​​are not what its leaders say or write about in reports, but what they do and invest in. Values ​​are manifested in how people behave and what they spend their resources on, not in how they talk.

BEHAVIOR. This element of the innovation culture of the organization reflects the actions of people in the process of creating innovations. For leaders, these include actions such as the willingness to sacrifice existing products for newer and better products, to inspire employees with a vivid vision of the future, and to overcome bureaucratic hurdles. The actions of employees in support of innovation imply perseverance in overcoming technical difficulties, "extraction" of resources in the conditions of a limited budget, taking into account the opinions of consumers.

CLIMATE. Climate is the mood that is maintained in the working environment. An innovation climate cultivates employee engagement and enthusiasm, and encourages people took the initiative, took risks in a safe environment, learned and thought independently.

RESOURCES. Resources are people, systems and projects. People, especially "innovation enthusiasts", are the most important factor, as they have a strong influence on the values ​​and climate in the organization.

PROCESSES. Processes are the paths that innovation takes as it develops. One of the well-known examples of such processes is the “innovation funnel”, which is used to “catch” and discard ideas.

SUCCESS. In innovation, success can be achieved at three levels - external, corporate and personal. In particular, external recognition shows how innovative customers and competitors consider a company to be, whether innovations give a tangible financial result. Overall, success reinforces company values, behaviors, and processes, which in turn influence certain actions and decisions: who gets rewarded, what people get hired, what projects get the green light.

These six elements may seem abstract, but we have found that truly innovative companies always have at least one of the elements present.

IDEO: Values ​​and behavior. Perhaps one of the best examples of cultivating innovative values ​​and behaviors is IDEO, a multinational design consultancy based in Palo Alto, California. IDEO considers productive creativity to be an important value, which it associates with gameplay. And she supports this element of corporate culture in a very tangible way. The workflow in the company includes elements of children's games: a study that generates new ideas, learning through practice, role-playing games that allow you to develop empathy for users. All workplaces have posters with IDEO principles that allow you to “dive deep” into problems:

• Encourage "wild" ideas.
• Hold off on judgments.
• Develop the ideas of others.
• Stay focused.

This game is just the first stage of IDEO's innovation development process. At the next stage, employees already make decisions about the product.

This wide range of lifestyles (from playful to businesslike) has contributed to the creation of hundreds of IDEO products that combine great design and functionality, from computer mice to medical equipment.

W.L. Gore: Climate. Security is an important component of the innovation climate. A fear-free work environment empowers people to take risks, without which innovation is impossible. The safety standards adopted by W.L. Gore (this Delaware company makes chemicals, Gore-Tex membranes and other high-tech products) is a good example. Mistakes made in the course of finding new solutions are considered an integral part of the creative process in the company. When a project closes, the employees… “wash” the event with beer and champagne. If a project fails, the company brainstorms to identify the reasons for the failure. Wrong concept? Bad implementation? Wrong decisions? The purpose of this analysis is not to punish the guilty, but to acquire new skills and improve product quality.

Rite-Solutions: Processes and success. The founders of Rhode Island-based software company Rite-Solutions, recognizing that they don't have a monopoly on brains or good ideas, implemented a workflow that allowed employees to participate in collaborative creativity.

Dozens of detailed ideas are listed on the internal “stock exchange” of the company. All new ideas are traded at $10 per "share". Each employee receives $10,000 in play money to invest in and decides which idea to invest in. In addition, employees can volunteer to help projects they like. Management takes this "collective wisdom" into account when choosing the projects to be funded. If the idea turns into a commercial product, play money is exchanged for real money.

Whirlpool: Resources. Experts who are well-versed in innovative strategies for the development of the enterprise, teach this and implement innovations in practice - one of the most important innovation resources of the company. For decades, Whirlpool, a major appliance manufacturer, has been engineered with a focus on quality and cost reduction. The company's products mainly belonged to the category of consumer goods and were sold in large retail chains. And so, in 1999, the company set out to become a recognized innovation leader. The first step in this direction was a brainstorming session involving 75 employees from different departments of the company.

The brainstorming participants managed to come up with one hot product, but most of the ideas were deemed too unrealistic or not worthy of attention. Like many aspiring innovators, brainstorming participants found it difficult to understand how big ideas could be turned into real opportunities. And then Whirlpool decided to go the other way.

First, every permanent employee of the company was enrolled in a business innovation course. Second, the company trained some employees, who were called "I-mentors" (in some ways they were akin to six sigma black belts). I-mentors did their usual job, but they also took on the role of teachers helping colleagues with the implementation of their ideas and contributing to the development of innovative projects. The internal corporate portal offered a common platform for all employees to learn the principles of innovation and track the stages of implementation of ideas. The selection of these ideas was carried out by innovative teams made up of employees at all levels.

Two years after the launch of the program, Whirlpool had 100 business ideas, 40 concepts in the pilot stage, 25 product ideas, and business ideas in the prototype stage. By early 2006, Whirlpool had hundreds of ideas in the works. 60 concepts were in the prototype stage, and another 190 products were being prepared for market launch. By 2007, Whirlpool's new innovative products accounted for about $2.5 billion of total annual sales of $19 billion, and about $4 billion in 2008. By this time, Whirlpool had 61,000 employees and about 1,100 volunteer I-mentors in around the world who helped develop an innovative culture. Whirlpool executives see a new company culture as one of the keys to the company's success, shaped by investment in innovation and learning.

Whirlpool's focus on resources shows that building a community of expert innovators is a critical foundation for informed, systematic and comprehensive innovation initiatives.

Most innovations are born within this community, and the foundation of any community is language. All disciplines - management, medicine, jurisprudence have their own language of communication. Innovation in this sense is no exception. To create communities of innovators, you need to have a good understanding of the language of innovation, its concepts and tools.

Assessing the organization's innovation culture

Each of the six elements of the model development of the innovative potential of the enterprise consists of three factors (total 18). In turn, each of these factors includes three components (54 in total). As we move from more abstract elements to more concrete components, innovation culture becomes more measurable and manageable. For example, the abstract element "climate" includes a safety factor, which itself is formed from openness, honesty and trust.

Having thus created a model of "building" elements, based on these 54 components, we compiled a test that allows managers to understand how innovative their organization's culture is.

Those participating in the survey must rate their organization for each of the 54 components on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all, 2 is slightly, 3 is moderate, 4 is more, 5 is not. to the highest degree. The overall average score for the components is then averaged to give the factor score, and the average of the factor is the item score. We call the average score of the six items the "innovation coefficient" of the group. Note that the value of a survey increases with sample size - especially when respondents are at different levels of the corporate hierarchy and in different departments of the company.

VIEW AND DOWNLOAD QUESTIONNAIRE -> TEST: CHECKING THE INNOVATION OF THE ORGANIZATION

The innovation ratio can be useful for comparing the overall level of innovation of companies, departments and teams from different regions. However, the leaders we worked with believed that the main value of the innovation ratio is that it allows you to evaluate the factors and components of the culture that contribute to innovation. This gives leaders an easy-to-understand map that allows them to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of their organizational culture.

Over the past few years, we have offered this test to 1,026 executives from 15 companies operating in various industries and regions. To analyze the results obtained, we calculated the average score for each question (component), the distribution of responses to each question, the average score for each factor (the average of the three questions related to each factor), and finally the average score for each "construction" element (average of three factors related to the "building" element). We call the final average of the six building elements the "innovation coefficient".

Application of the tool for innovative development

A large Latin American family farming business needed to open a new branch overseas. The company had a fairly strong management team, consisting mainly of family members, who jointly made all decisions and managed their implementation. The company was a very successful exporter, but the leaders understood that their managers would not "pull" this new project. They decided to use our assessment tool to understand how they could develop the creative leadership they need to grow the company.

Employees who participated in the survey gave the company high scores on external success (which they rated first out of 18 factors) and enterprise success (6th out of 18 factors), but rated the individual component of success extremely low (16th place). out of 18 factors). Employees gave a low score to management for the degree of involvement of the rest of the staff - this factor was in last, 18th place. Employees did not initiate innovation initiatives (53rd out of 54 components), perhaps in part because managers did not train and provide feedback to employees (50th out of 54 elements). Many employees felt that managers did not provide them with adequate support during the success or failure of projects (46th out of 54 components), and doubted that the company would reward them for participating in potentially risky projects (51st out of 54 elements).

After a sound discussion of the survey results, the management team decided to invest in the development of middle managers by offering them training programs, as well as implementing delegation systems, mentorship, support and feedback. And most importantly, leaders have changed their own behavior.

Everyone's opinion matters. We have found that people at the top of an organization—those who make decisions and control activities—often see innovative culture organizations in more rosy colors than middle managers and ordinary employees. Managers, like everyone else, naturally feel they are doing a good job. In addition, executives often don't have the full picture of corporate realities—they simply can't see much of what's going on.

We also found that when it comes to what constitutes a company's strengths, the opinions of executives are often not aligned with those of employees. Most executives give their companies higher scores on intangible, people-centric elements (values, behavior, and climate) than on tangible elements (resources, processes, success). And employees below the rank often give just the opposite assessment.

If the survey is conducted among a wide enough group of respondents, it can help correct this imbalance by giving executives comprehensive feedback and showing things they can't see.

Removing barriers to change

The larger the organization, the more it resists change. This pattern is most clearly manifested in transnational corporations. Managers often complain that employees have a negative perception of new strategies, that company-wide projects are clumsy, that departments lack standardized processes, and corporate subcultures are divided.

A structured assessment of corporate culture using the Innovation Ratio Questionnaire will determine whether such complaints are justified. For example, one multinational medical device company wanted to build around a coherent international operating strategy. But two years after the launch of the program, the company's leaders began to talk about the big difficulties caused by cultural differences between European and American divisions, as well as between the development department and production groups. To everyone's surprise, the polls showed no difference between departmental responses to any of the six elements - which meant that the problems were due to some other factor.

The news that people across departments thought and acted more alike than previously thought had a profound impact on the company's leadership. Realizing that the problems were not caused by cultural differences, they were able to effectively use the cultural commonality of the groups to establish closer cooperation between them.

Identifying gaps between thinking and acting

Another useful feature of this tool is its ability to detect discontinuities. For example, we found that most senior executives give themselves high marks for wanting to explore new opportunities, but don't always give their employees the time, space, or money to pursue those opportunities. Similarly, executives rate themselves highly for giving employees the freedom they need to develop the enterprise's innovative potential, while their subordinates describe the workplace climate as inflexible and bureaucratic. It turned out that the problem of innovative development of the enterprise, which faced one large American company operating in the entertainment industry, was precisely this. Employees gave high scores to the creativity factor in the “values” element, but the climate in the organization was not at all healthy. The “simplicity” component (lack of bureaucracy and rigidity) was at the very bottom of the rating out of 54 elements.

In addition, people did not receive sufficient resources to implement innovative projects. Resource allocation for projects was at the bottom of the list - 53rd out of 54 items. Not surprisingly, the company had problems with innovation. As mentioned earlier, values ​​are not what leaders think, say, or write about, but their actual actions measured in terms of time, money, or resources.

Strive for change wherever possible

One of the practical values ​​of the assessment tool innovation culture of the organization that it can be used at any level. Even in a company with a toxic culture, departmental leaders can use this tool to build islands of innovative thinking. By asking direct reports to answer 54 questions, the head of any business unit of a subsidiary, division, department or team can determine the innovation ratio of their area of ​​responsibility and begin a campaign for change for the better.

Consider the example of an American subsidiary of a large European bank. The bank had a reputation for being an inflexible, bureaucratic, command-and-control organization. Neither competitors nor customers considered them innovative. However, there were strengths in the culture of the subsidiary. Employees at the subsidiary felt they had a "safe" climate to challenge corporate decisions and actions. And the leaders inspired them with a bold vision of the future. Based on these factors, the leaders of the subsidiary were able to become notable innovation enthusiasts and the division became successful in its market.

Using the Results

The questionnaire does not assume that you will be able to achieve a balance of elements or factors that form them. Companies that score very low on some factors and very high on others may well be successful innovators. For example, one hugely successful American technology company had a very low climate rating, but all the other five elements scored very high. You should also not try to find a balance across the entire company. If, for example, bank employees who enforce the rules are less innovative than marketers, this is even good.

Innovative development of the enterprise: transition from assessment to action

After examining the survey results, leaders can get a clear, data-backed view of where their culture's strengths and weaknesses lie, and then focus on specific areas where improvements are most needed and most likely to pay off. For example, if the survey item "our leaders are a model of good innovative behavior that others can follow" scores low in the IT group, the CIO can be encouraged to change. The results of the survey also help identify learning opportunities. High scores given to one or more departments may indicate that they have best practices that low-scoring department leaders should emulate.

Focus on strengths

Most executives want to fix things right away in areas where the scores were lower, but we've found it's much more effective to focus on building on the organization's strengths. For example, a large European insurance company created a special division to make the organization more innovative, but it soon became clear that the division was not achieving the results that management had hoped for.

After assessing the problems of innovative development of the enterprise, company leaders found that the division did not involve people from different levels of the organization in its innovative initiatives. This led to a climate that lacked cooperation. On the other hand, the same assessment revealed that employees tend to be innovative and creative. They even believed that they had the right enthusiasts and talent within the company to make their innovation initiatives successful. Realizing this, leaders came to the conclusion that they just needed to rally people in the organization to bring ideas to life.

Start small and scale up little by little

Leaders who want to change the corporate culture of their company to be more innovative often try to do many things at once. It is better to focus on a few areas, and then use this success for larger-scale changes. Corporate culture changes very slowly. When people are invited to participate in change, they often resist - some show disdain, while others actively sabotage innovations. In such situations, it is better to show everything, rather than tell, seriously encouraging enthusiasts.

It is very difficult to change deeply ingrained beliefs and behaviors and instantly arrive at a new definition of success (this can only be done quickly in times of external or internal crisis). To get the best results, leaders need to aim for small wins - at least initially. For example, ask one or two departments to work on three of the 54 elements. Their success initiates new improvements. Measurable results are more powerful than calls for improvement: people change when they see their colleagues become more productive, engaged, and successful.

The use of innovation assessment tools - such as the innovation ratio survey - can be the first step to success for companies that intend to improve their innovation culture. When developing a plan that uses survey results to improve an organization's innovation culture, companies should start by focusing on strengths, making small changes, and slowly scaling up.

And be careful about past victories. Over time, a strong culture of a successful organization can become an obstacle, blinding the company to new technologies and business models, blind to the potential competitors already on the horizon. The history of business is full of examples of companies that were innovative market leaders in the next generation turned into unimaginative bureaucrats.

If you find an error, please highlight a piece of text and click Ctrl+Enter.

As some modern economists note, the organization of innovative activity is the creation of an organizational structure of an economic entity that carries out innovative activity. The most important functions of the organization structure include: obtaining and classifying scientific and technical developments; professional development of personnel; obtaining scientific and technical information from external sources; collaboration of employees of the organization with marketing departments; information exchange within the organizational structure; development and stimulation of a creative approach to solving the set goal .

In an organization, it is important to correctly form an innovative organizational culture (Figure 1).

Figure 1 - The scheme of formation of innovative organizational culture in the organization

It should be noted that the formation and change of innovative organizational culture occurs under the influence of many factors. According to E. Shein, the following factors are distinguished that determine the process of formation of an innovative organizational culture. Thus, the formation of an innovative organizational culture is associated, first of all, with the development and realization of the creative potential of the employee himself. At the same time, there are many other factors, the consideration and active use of which can significantly improve the efficiency of innovation.

It is the innovative culture that ensures people's receptivity to new ideas, their readiness, ability to support and implement innovations in all spheres of life. Innovative culture, according to A. Nikolaev, reflects the holistic orientation of a person, fixed in motives, knowledge, 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, first of all, 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 the intercorrelation and interdependence of its parts, a change in one component causes a rapid change in others. In the conditions of innovation stagnation, a powerful organizational, managerial and legal impulse is needed for self-regulation mechanisms to work. This requires the transformation of the development of an innovative culture into an organized, orderly process with a certain structure of relations, rules of conduct, and responsibility of participants. We are talking about the necessary measures of consolidation, since it is necessary to resolve major socially significant issues in a short time.

The main aspects of the formation and development of innovative organizational culture in the organization are:

1. The presence of a feedback system that stimulates the creative activity of employees (positive feedback from the consumer).

2. Decentralized management structure, flexibility and quick response to market changes.

3. A clear idea of ​​the management of the development strategy, goals and objectives, bringing them to specific performers.

4. Continuous professional development of employees, training in related professions (expanding the scope of work).

5. Creation of a communication system in the organization, maintaining the establishment of informal connections, if possible - "virtual".

6. Generation of ideas, encouragement of their criticism, atmosphere of rivalry.

7. Formation of a transparent system of motivation, career opportunities.

An essential component of the successful implementation of innovative technologies is the creation of a favorable innovation culture in the team (it is considered as part of the organizational strategy). A supportive innovation culture evokes incredible energy, initiative, and responsibility associated with achieving extremely high goals. However, according to experts, in modern conditions, many firms do not have such a culture. Typically, organizations have a less productive but more comfortable culture of innovation.

In the theory and practice of innovation management, there are several types of organizational cultures presented in Table 1.

Table 1 - Types of organizational cultures depending on the impact on the innovation activity of an economic entity

Analyzing the presented types of innovative organizational cultures, it should be noted that none of the above varieties forms an innovative culture at all levels (leader, individual employee, group). In this regard, in practice, there are often situations in which people, seeking to innovate, take the measures necessary to achieve their goals. However, in the absence of leadership support, everything comes down to a typical hierarchical structure, the imposition from top to bottom of ideas, directions for development and ways to solve them. Employees do not trust management and see that innovation is not only not appreciated, but also suppressed.

So, scientific knowledge, technologies and innovations, despite their importance at all times, in modern conditions turn into critical factors in the economic growth of organizations, and innovative organizational culture serves as a necessary source for creating the above factors. Therefore, the issues of developing an innovative organizational culture, namely, involving employees in the decision-making process, strengthening the creative nature of labor, creating favorable conditions for the labor process, creating a positive image of the organization, meeting the needs of customers, developing relationships with partners, etc., it is necessary pay special attention.

Bibliography:

1. Krasnikova E. O., Evgrafova I. Yu. Innovative management. M.: Publishing house Ok-kniga, 2011. 40 p.

2. Shane E.X. Organizational culture and leadership. St. Petersburg: Piter Publishing House, 2010. 336 p.

3. Nikolaev A.I. Innovative development and innovative culture. Science and science. 2001. No. 2. c. 54–65.

Formation of an innovative educational culture

INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………... .3

SECTION 1. Innovative educational culture as one of the main elements of a successful educational process...……..4

1. The essence of the phenomenon of innovation …...…………………………..………….4

   Cultural interaction of the processes of education and upbringing in the field of innovative technologies…………………………………………….….5

SECTION 2. Innovative activity in the system of scientific and methodological work of a teacher …………………………………………………....6

2.1. Innovative culture of the teacher: the psychological and pedagogical essence of the concept ...…………………………………………………………………….6

2.2. Features of the development of teacher culture in the context of the transition to a new humanistic-innovative paradigm of education ..………….7

2.3. Formation of an innovative culture of a teacher in the system of intra-school methodological work ………….………………………………….9

CONCLUSIONS………………………………………………………………………………9

LIST OF USED LITERATURE ………………...……..11

ADDITIONS ………………………………………………………………..….1

INTRODUCTION

In modern conditions of reforming the educational system, the contradiction between the required and actual level of culture of pedagogical activity, which is necessary for the implementation of the most important functions, is deepening. It is possible to resolve this contradiction if, in the conditions of any educational institution, optimal conditions are created for the manifestation of a high culture of innovative pedagogical activity. Currently topical there are certain problems of training an innovative teacher who has competence, is ready to use and create innovations, the ability to conduct experimental work. Hence, relevant is to identify and overcome the contradiction between updating the paradigm of modern education - the transition to a new type of humanistic-innovative education, which involves the innovative activity of all participants in the educational process, and the unpreparedness of a significant part of teachers for the corresponding changes.

aim research work is to determine the role of innovation in the system of scientific and methodological work of the teacher and the coverage of the process of formation of innovative educational culture at various stages of the educational process.

The goal is to solution such tasks:

consider innovative educational culture as one of the main elements of a successful educational process;

highlight the essence of the phenomenon of innovation and innovation processes;

define innovative technologies as an object of the cultural space of education;

reveal the psychological and pedagogical essence of the concept of a teacher's innovative culture;

to determine the features of the formation of a teacher's innovative culture in the system of intra-school methodological work.

Research material the process of forming a professional culture of a teacher has become, which becomes more effective when creating an innovative environment in an educational institution, i.e. conditions for constant search, updating of techniques and methods of professional activity.

The object of study became the phenomenon of the existence of an innovative educational environment and its influence on the culture of pedagogical activity.

Subject of analysis became professional activity of the teacher, aimed at achieving the highest possible results in the training, education and development of students.

Methodological basis research was the fact that innovative activity is considered not as a teaching method, but as a type of joint activity of a teacher and a student, as well as the theory of personality development (L.S. Vygotsky, O.M. Leontiev) and the theory of pedagogical creativity. This is a dialectical approach to innovation culture as an integral system that is in constant dynamics, an understanding of innovation as a key factor in the development of pedagogical culture, a statement about the relationship between the form and content of innovation processes.

Main research methods are systemic, axiological, descriptive, structural, comparative, as well as methods of systematization, classification, comparison of cultural phenomena.

Materials and results can be found practical use teachers of different profiles at all stages of the educational process.

SECTION 1.

Innovative educational culture as one of the main elements of a successful educational process

1. The essence of the phenomenon of innovation

The basic definition of the concept of "innovation" is the understanding of innovation, established in professional communication, as a realized innovation, regardless of the scope of application.

The innovation itself, i.e. scientific, scientific and technical development, invention, including in the field of education, becomes an innovation, as a rule, in the form of a product, service, method. Therefore, the innovation cycle is preceded by research, development or design work. Their results basically create the groundwork on the basis of which innovation activity begins in a specific area of ​​their application.

Innovation also refers to the process of implementing innovation. In a broad sense, innovation is a synonym for the successful development of social, economic, educational, managerial and other spheres based on various innovations.

So, the phenomenon of innovation is primarily understood as a chain of implemented innovations. It is more successful when it covers more than one narrow area, but also includes areas that affect the overall result. Therefore, innovative development should be complex.

1. Cultural interaction of the processes of education and upbringing in the field of innovative technologies

One cannot but agree with I.F. Isaev, who believes that the subject of innovation, the content and mechanisms of innovation processes should lie in the plane of combining two interrelated processes, i.e. on the one hand, and the study, generalization and dissemination of pedagogical experience, and on the other hand, with the problem of developing and implementing pedagogical innovations.

The innovative orientation of the formation of a professional and pedagogical culture of a teacher of an educational institution involves his inclusion in the activities of creating, mastering and using pedagogical innovations in the practice of teaching and raising children, creating an innovative cultural environment in an educational institution.

The innovation process in the education system is caused by the influence of many factors. The actions of innovators are nothing but the realization of their individual needs to expand their own social space through professional activities. If they meet general pedagogical interests, then the proposed innovations will bring undoubted benefits to educational institutions. However, when individual and social-group needs are absolutized, the result can be directly opposite. The complex structure of needs gives rise to many contradictions between society and the education system, between the subjects of the education system itself. Each innovation finds both support and opposition. This is an objective reality. Therefore, in matters of managing the education system, a clear orientation in the essential nature of innovations is necessary, which is reflected in the principles of state policy, the criteria for selecting knowledge from the sphere of science and production into the education system, taking into account the objective conditions for the transmission of knowledge to students and factors that contribute to and oppose the implementation of this tasks .

SECTION 2

Innovative activity in the system of scientific and methodological work of the teacher

2.1. Innovative culture of the teacher: psychological and pedagogical essence of the concept

The professional activity of a teacher involves a constant change and addition of requirements for it. In the space of innovative educational culture, the teacher must be competent in relation to promising school technologies, develop and use their own creative projects.

The teacher's innovative culture is a component of professional and pedagogical culture. Through participation in it, the teacher has the opportunity for self-realization, the disclosure of creative potential, the use of intellectual abilities and the implementation of innovative ideas into practice.

Considering the psychological essence of the concept of innovative activity of a teacher, it should be noted that the concept of activity is generally assessed not as a teaching method, but as a type of joint activity of students and teachers (L.S. Vygotsky, S.L. Rubinshtein, A.R. Luria).

The question of the pedagogical aspect of understanding professional culture by most researchers (V.M. Grineva, N.B. Krylova, I.F. Isaev) is defined as a combination of general cultural, moral, intellectual and physical qualities, professional knowledge and skills necessary for successful educational and educational work .

The specificity of the teacher's professional and pedagogical activity, including innovative, led to the allocation of pedagogical culture as one of the most important components of the culture of society. In the work of V.M. Grineva points out that “teacher’s professional goals, motives, knowledge, skills, qualities, abilities, attitudes are reflected through the teacher’s culture. That is, pedagogical culture is a phenomenon of the teacher's manifestation of his own "I" in professional and pedagogical activity through the unity of his goals, motives, knowledge, skills, qualities, abilities, relationships, united in a certain system of pedagogical values.

1. Peculiarities of the development of the culture of the teacher in the context of the transition to a new humanistic-innovative paradigm of education

In the context of the transition to a new humanistic-innovative paradigm of education, the culture of a teacher can be considered a qualitative pedagogical characteristic of a specialist, which indicates his ability to organize and carry out innovative activities.

The culture of a teacher is an integral qualitative characteristic, the formation of which is due to the interaction of aspects: emotional and value (unity of goals, motives, personal qualities, pedagogical ethics), cognitive (knowledge of the technology of innovative activity) and procedural (skills and skills regarding the organization, management and implementation of innovative activities ) .

Khoruzha L.L. determines that each of the components of a teacher's culture is a derivative of the basic components of education: professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills of a teacher, its spiritual and ethical background.

The definition of spirituality as a basic component is due to the fact that culture is considered as a component of the universal culture and professional culture of the teacher. The Ukrainian Pedagogical Dictionary (Goncharenko S.U.) defines spirituality as “an individual expression in the system of motives of two fundamental needs: the ideal need for knowledge and the social need to live and create for others.”

One of the components of a teacher's spirituality in the process of implementing an innovative culture is professional and pedagogical ethics. It acts as a defining characteristic of the teacher's activity, determines the moral and ethical requirements for him and reflects the degree of their transformation in consciousness and behavior.

The ethics of the teacher's behavior is a projection of his personal attitude to various objects of professional activity: students, himself as a person, the profession of a teacher, the introduction of innovations. It is through the system of relations that the personal-moral and professional readiness of the teacher to understand the features of innovative activity and ways of its implementation is manifested.

Another no less important professional skill of a teacher in the works of scientists is considered a pedagogical tact, "with the help of which he, in each case, applies to students the most effective method of educational influence in certain circumstances" . The way to regulate the pedagogical tact is tolerance, which is characterized by the absence or restraint of the teacher's reaction to any adverse factors of influence, emotional stability.

1. Formation of an innovative culture of a teacher in the system of intra-school methodological work

The model for the formation of a teacher's innovative culture in the system of intra-school methodological work should begin with the creation of a pedagogically expedient organization of a set of incentives that would encourage the development of pedagogical innovative thinking, teachers' interest in innovative activities. Creating an atmosphere of creative interpersonal interaction between the subjects of the educational process is the next step on the way to the development of innovative cultural space. This is followed by familiarization of teachers with the algorithms for the implementation of innovative activities, understanding and participation in it through their own creativity. This model ends with the promotion of the activation of social activity of all participants in innovative activity, the emotional experience of this process itself.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The formation of an innovative educational culture involves identifying and overcoming the contradiction between updating the paradigm of modern education - the transition to a new type of humanistically innovative education - and the unpreparedness of a significant part of teachers for the corresponding changes.

2. The general definition of the concept of "innovation" is the understanding of innovation, established in professional communication, as an implemented innovation, regardless of the scope of application.

3. The teacher's innovative culture as an integral part of professional and pedagogical culture reflects the totality of all methods of innovative transformation of pedagogical reality based on forecasting, planning, managing, designing and modeling educational and educational phenomena, processes and systems.

4. The actions of innovators are nothing but the realization of their individual needs to expand their own social space through professional activities.

5. The specificity of the teacher's professional and pedagogical activity, including innovative, led to the allocation of pedagogical culture as one of the most important components of the culture of society.

LIST OF USED LITERATURE

Bespalko VP Components of pedagogical technology. - M .: Pedagogy, 1990.

Bobrov VV Actual problems of the modern content of education// Philosophy of education. - 2002. - No. 5. - http://www.philosophy.nsc.ru/Obraz.htm.

Vaschenko G. Zagalnі methodi navchannya: Pіdruchnik dlya pedagodiv. – K.: Ukr. Vidavnicha spilka, 1997.

Goncharenko S. U. Ukrainian Pedagogical Dictionary. - K .: Libid, 1997.

Grinyova V. M. Formation of the pedagogical culture of the future teacher. - K., 2001.

Zabrodska L. M., Onoprienko O. V., Khoruzha L. L., Tsimbalaru A. D. Informational and methodological support for the design and technological activity of the teacher. – H.: View. gr. "Osnova", 2007.

Ksenzova G. Yu. Perspective school technologies. - M .: Pedagogical Society of Russia, 2000.

Nikolaev A. Process of innovative development. - http://stra.teg..ru/lentainnovation/1362.

Pedagogical Ethics: Textbook / Ed. E. A. Grishina. - Vladimir, 1975.

Pedagogical glossary / As edited by active member of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine M. D. Yarmachenko. - Pedagogical thought, 2001.

Postalyuk N. Yu. Pedagogy of cooperation. - Kazan: Kazan Publishing House. un-ta, 2000.

Professional ethics of the teacher: hour and time / For the zag. ed. B. M. Zhebrovsky. - K., 2001

Sinitsa I. O. Pedagogical tact and mastery of the teacher. - K .: Radianska school, 1981.

Samorodova A.P. Some aspects of the innovative orientation of the formation of the professional and pedagogical culture of the educator of a preschool educational institution. - http://stra.teg..ru/lentainnovation/1362.

Yasvin V.A. Educational environment: from modeling to design. – M.: Meaning, 2001.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

innovative culture development implementation

• Introduction
• Conclusion
• List of sources used
• Introduction
• The current stage of world development is characterized by the increasing acceleration of technical and technological development, which causes unprecedented transformation processes in the world. Innovative factors have become the fundamental factors in the development of any economic system. The predominant use of a combination of innovative factors in the development of the economy of any economic entity is the essence of its transfer to a qualitatively new type of development, allowing it to acquire the most important property in a market environment - competitiveness.
• The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that Russia found itself in a difficult situation of choosing the path for further economic development and the formation of the country as one of the equal members of the world community. Russian economy in the second half of the 20th century. developed mainly on the basis of extensive factors (due to the exploitation of the raw material base and low-level technologies). The high level of fundamental science was accompanied by insufficient development of its applied aspects. The introduction of new scientific developments was associated with significant difficulties. This was one of the reasons for the formation of a technological gap between Russia and industrialized countries, especially in the information sphere.
• Science cities are called upon to carry out scientific, scientific and technical, innovative activities, experimental developments, tests, as well as to train personnel in accordance with state priorities for the development of science and technology. However, today science cities are facing a number of serious problems that hinder the development and effective functioning of these research centers, and they are called upon to play a significant role in the system of science and education in our country. It is also important to note that the problems of science cities also affect society, as they have a great impact on the districts and regions in which they are located. From all this it follows that the study of the state of science cities and the analysis of their problems is especially relevant today.
• The object of study of this work is the role of innovative culture in the country's economy.
• The purpose of this course work is to analyze the innovation culture and the problems of its formation in Russia.
• To achieve this goal, the following tasks will be solved:
• · Considered the essence and significance of innovation culture;
• · The analysis of problems of formation of innovative culture in Russia is carried out.
• The methodological basis of the study is the structural-functional and comparative-historical approaches.
• 1. Role and importance of innovation culture
• 1.1 Innovation culture: concept and meaning
• The problems of introducing innovations, implementing innovative activities, realizing the innovative potential of society have always been in the focus of attention of states and governments. However, it was in the 80-90s. 20th century the issues of forming an innovative culture came to the fore when the processes taking place in the world community began to require new managerial, legal, organizational and technological approaches. The priority of the formation of professionals of a new formation, members of society - distributors of a new culture, generators of ideas and their embodyers, initiators of innovative processes, was sharply designated.
• The members of the European Union, evaluating the nature and prospects of innovative activities of the leading states, came to the conclusion that it is necessary to create a program document that defines the main directions for the development of innovations. As a result of comprehensive discussions, on December 20, 1995, the Green Paper of Innovation in Europe was signed.
• In June 1996, the European Commission approved The First Action Plan for Innovation in Europe, which established the principles of developing a "true innovation culture" in education, business and government. Analyzing the results of the implementation of the "Action Plan", as well as the recommendations of the "Green Book", it should be noted that not all provisions are reflected in the activities of the countries of the European Union.
• In the Russian Federation, the problems of forming an innovative culture of society at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. determined the creation of the Institute for Strategic Innovations. On the initiative of the Institute in 1999, the first policy document was signed - the Charter of Innovative Culture, which conceptually determined that "the sustainable development of the current civilization is possible only through constant innovations (innovations) in science, education, culture, economics, management ...". Giving strategically decisive importance to the culture of innovation, representatives of science, culture, education, government and public administration, business circles identified the reasons for the lag of innovation processes in society and noted the need for an integrated approach to the problems of forming an innovation culture, developing the innovative potential of an individual, overcoming innovation stagnation in society.
• In 2001, the Committee on Innovative Culture was established as part of the Commission of the Russian Federation for UNESCO. The business meetings, seminars and conferences initiated by him only confirmed the relevance of this issue. Giving priority to the areas of education, science, culture and communications, the activities of the Committee contributed to the dissemination of positive experience in the formation of an innovative culture in various industries and areas of activity.
• At present, interest in an innovative culture is observed not only in the scientific community and specialized structures. The task of forming an innovative culture is a priority for the state and society. An increasing number of government and business representatives are paying close attention to the issues of innovative development, highlighting the problems of forming an innovative culture, since it is the innovative culture that will contribute to the development of an innovative society in Russia.
• According to B. Santo, “an innovative society is a highly intellectual society, moreover, on a global scale, it is the path of those who have chosen the goal and form of their activity to be non-stop intellectual knowledge, the path of those whose existence is characterized by increased intellectual activity and the desire to realize their ideas." Tracing the features of the formation of the concept of "innovation" since the 1950s, the author believes that innovations reflect the essence of human activity. From the position of members of society, this is the ability for self-development and creative participation in the development of this society. This point of view assumes that the main characteristic of an innovative society is its high innovative culture and the developed innovative culture of its members.
• The authors of the monograph “Philosophy of Creativity” present innovative culture as “knowledge, skills and experience of purposeful preparation, integrated implementation and comprehensive development of innovations in various areas of human life while maintaining the dynamic unity of the old, modern and new in the innovative system; in other words, it is the free creation of something new in compliance with the principle of continuity.” Researchers pay special attention to the social task of forming an innovative culture of society and the individual, equating it with the culture of creative activity. A developed innovative culture, in their opinion, is the basis of a modern innovative economy.
• The Russian philosopher B.K. Lisin considers innovative culture as a form of universal culture, defines it as an area of ​​the general cultural process, “characterizing the degree of susceptibility of a person, group, society to various innovations ranging from a tolerant attitude to readiness and ability to turn them into innovations.” An innovative culture characterizes the conscious desire of society for material and spiritual self-renewal, being the initial prerequisite for qualitative changes in people's life and the methodological basis for progress and harmonization of all spheres of society's life. It is the innovative culture that determines the relationship between innovations that have grown from traditions and traditions that serve as the basis for the creative process, which in turn is the source of innovative culture.
• L.A. Kholodkova distinguishes between cultures of "innovative" and "traditional" types. In her opinion, innovative culture can be considered as "a complex social phenomenon that organically combines the issues of science, education, culture with social and, above all, with professional practice in various areas of the community: in management, economics, education, culture." The author considers science and education to be the main determinants of the development of an innovative culture, which provide the definition of goals, objectives, methods and mechanisms for the formation of an innovative culture, as well as an empirical analysis of the components of an innovative culture, their state and interaction.
• VV Zubenko points to the innovative culture of society as a historically established system of ideas, stereotypes, values, norms of behavior and knowledge aimed at improving all spheres of life. Describing innovative culture as an innovative component of the culture of society, he does not single it out as one of the types of culture, but takes the place of a common property that permeates each of the cultures (economic, legal, etc.), “since one of the characteristic features of any culture is its reciprocal influence.
• The “duality” of innovative culture is emphasized in the works of V. I. Dolgova, who distinguishes it, on the one hand, as a special kind of culture, and on the other hand, as an element that is present in every kind of culture. It considers innovation culture as a certain area of ​​intersection of different types of cultures (organizational, legal, political, professional, personal, etc.), reflecting their progressive development, progressive trends, and innovative nature. Innovative culture, from the point of view of Dolgova, determines the entire life of society and man, relying on and developing existing traditions.
• The Chinese philosopher Shang-kang He wrote: “The basis of an innovative culture is an innovative modeling of human life, behavior and thought. In addition, an innovative culture is a kind of innovative spirit, ideology and human environment.” Being a means of personal self-realization, innovation involves the development of a person’s innovative abilities: he can take a fresh look at ordinary, familiar things, independently generate an idea, outline ways to implement it and reach the end in achieving the goal. The development of an innovative culture of a person can be considered as the development of his individual creative abilities and creative potential.
• A.Yu. Eliseev, relying on the semantics of the phrase “innovative culture” of a personality, believes that this is “a culture of life where the motivation for human actions is the thirst for renewal, the birth of ideas and their implementation ...<…>The popularization of an “innovative” approach to life should be inevitable for every member of society, gradually causing a feeling of rejection of the principle “to live as one lives”. Step by step, she will be able to help a person make a choice in favor of “innovation”, that is, “to live thoughtfully, organizedly”, and, finally, creatively.” The author believes that an innovative culture helps to create an atmosphere in society in which a new idea is perceived as a value accepted by this society and supported by it.
• The point of view of V. D. Tsvetkova is noteworthy, according to which the formation of an innovative culture of a personality at a conscious level allows a person “not only to generate external diversity in his activity, but also to acquire internal stability and unity in the face of an endless process of renewal… The humanistic potential of an innovative culture connected with its function of ensuring the unity of human existence in an innovative society. Being an element of the culture of a modern person, an innovative culture allows an individual, supported by the constructive attitude of society towards innovations, to reveal their inner capabilities and self-actualize. Associated with the innovative culture of society, it contributes to the development of the individual.
• Director of the Institute for Strategic Innovations A.I. Nikolaev, discussing the problems of innovative development and the formation of an innovative culture, noted: “Innovative culture reflects a holistic orientation of a person, fixed in motives, knowledge, skills, as well as in patterns and norms of behavior. It shows both the level of activity of the relevant social institutions and the degree of satisfaction of people with their participation in them and the results.” The level of the most innovative culture of an individual directly depends on the attitude of society towards innovations and the work that is carried out in society to form and develop an innovative culture.
• Considers innovation culture as part of the culture of society S. G. Grigorieva. She presents the formation of an innovative culture of the individual as a dynamic process of "transition from ignorance to knowledge, from the improvement of some skills to the emergence of others, from some personal and mental properties and qualities to other neoplasms." In relation to the sphere of professional development of a personality, the author pays attention to the integration of innovative and professional activities, the transformation of the innovative behavior of a future member of the professional community.
• 1.2 Formation of an innovation culture within the framework of the modern economic system
• Intellectual resources are a condition and basis for the development of an enterprise and society as a whole. Intellectual resources are a set of individual intellectual potentials of the enterprise's personnel that can cause a synergistic effect. In turn, the personal intellectual potential of an individual worker is his knowledge, skills, abilities for creativity and self-development.
• If for an enterprise intellectual resources are a potential factor of production that should be used optimally at minimal cost, then for society as a whole it is the potential for economic growth and development, the degree of implementation of which is determined by the level of social and technical development.
• Effective management of intellectual resources, which are further considered in the narrow sense of the word, and their active use, aimed at creating modern goods and services that meet the requirements of the market, provides significant competitive advantages and allows enterprises to realize their strategic goals and objectives. Management of intellectual resources at the level of a single enterprise is associated with the search for ways to effectively create and use knowledge and information to achieve set economic goals - such as profit growth, cost savings, and an increase in sales volumes.
• Modern conditions impose special requirements on the organization of the intellectual resource management process and make it expedient to single out the intellectual resource management subsystem as an independent functional subsystem of a dynamically developing enterprise (see Fig. 1).

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

• Rice. 1. Intellectual resource management system in the overall enterprise management system
• The prerequisites for organizing an independent intellectual resource management system as part of an enterprise management system are: a variety of forms and types of intellectual resources; the need to develop a comprehensive strategy in the field of managing the intellectual potential of enterprises; specificity of tools, methods and variety of intellectual resource management functions; a significant number of services and departments involved in the process of generating and converting information about intellectual resources; the need for coordination in the process of managing intellectual resources; high profitability of transactions with objects of intellectual property; high risk of unfair competition.
• Creation and development of an intellectual resource management system, provision of conditions for its effective functioning, performance evaluation and search for ways to further improve the management organization - all these are the most important aspects of enterprise intellectual resource management.
• A feature of the development of innovation processes in Russia is the identification of innovation policy and science and technology policy. With the unity of the strategic goal - a competitive economy, a high quality of life for the population and national security - they should differ in strategic tasks and ways to solve them. If the main task of scientific and technological policy and activity is to create scientific groundwork for the future, then the task of innovation policy and activity is to use science (the accumulated array of knowledge and technology) in the interests of the economy in the present.
• When declaring the “implementation task” as a strategic priority of scientific policy, the scientific and technical sphere is doomed to investment unattractiveness. Science-intensive and high-tech projects may or may not be investment-attractive not because of the novelty and theoretical significance of the super-technologies and scientific achievements used (implemented) in them, but because of the high market potential (public demand) of their final product.
• Thus, the motivation of scientific activity and innovative activity is different. Hence follows the task of correctly formulating the goals, priorities of a particular policy, and even organizing practical actions to ensure them.
• For Russia, integration into the world market of science-intensive technologies is extremely important. At present, there is almost no solvent demand in the country for a significant part of science-intensive products, which leads to stagnation and aging of the most advanced technological base.
• International scientific and technical cooperation is becoming increasingly important for the development of domestic science. In recent years, there has been an intensive involvement of Russian scientists in the global scientific environment.
• New forms of international scientific and technical cooperation in Russia include the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC), which is an intergovernmental organization established in 1992 on the basis of an international agreement between the EU, the USA, Japan and the Russian Federation. The aims of the ICST is to "convert" researchers in the field of military technologies to civilian fields through the support of projects in Russia and other CIS countries. The Partnership Program, administered by the ISTC's Partnership and Sustainability Division, provides an opportunity for private sector enterprises, research institutes, governmental and non-governmental organizations to fund scientific research conducted by institutes from Russia and the CIS through the ISTC. To date, more than 380 government organizations and private companies have joined the ISTC Partnership Program and have funded nearly 700 joint R&D projects totaling $240 million. Participants from around the world hope that the Partnership Program will make it possible to realize the huge scientific and technical potential of the former "weapons" specialists in Russia and the CIS, as well as attract new international investments to further reorient their activities to work in civilian areas.
• The most complete picture of the structure of the country's innovative potential and its place in the global world economy in certain areas of high technology is provided by the analysis of patent statistics. Until 1997, there was a decline in this direction. There were only 1.03 patent applications per 10,000 population. In 2006 this figure was 1.7. A total of 30,651 applications were submitted in 2006, but in 2011, only 27,491 such applications were submitted.
• Unfortunately, in contrast to industrialized countries, inventive activity in Russia falls as it approaches the end of the scientific and technical chain. The number of own patents in Russia is steadily declining, which contains a threat to the scientific and technical independence of the country. If in 2006 24,726 patents were issued, then in 2011 - 23,028. There is every reason to believe that we are becoming not only a source of raw materials, but also an intellectual appendage of the "center" countries.
• According to Rospatent, our country is not very attractive for foreign applicants, so most of the applications were filed by domestic "inventors". For comparison, in 2011 there were 27,491 domestic applicants and 18,431 foreign applicants. The most active applicants in Russia are the USA, Germany and Japan.
• As for the thematic areas in which there is an increased interest of foreign applicants, the most promising among them include:
• · Drugs and preparations, methods of their preparation and use for diagnostics, therapy and research;
• · Chemical and physical processes of general purpose, catalysis, colloid chemistry, organic chemistry, methods for obtaining and chemical processing of macromolecular compounds, compositions based on these compounds.
• The international exchange of objects of intellectual property has now become an independent sphere of economic relations. Hence, the condition for the successful integration of Russia into the international system of economic relations is the expansion and increase in the efficiency of Russian foreign trade in these types of goods and services with the improvement of the national system of legal protection and transfer of intellectual property.
• The structure of exports confirms the low technical and economic level of domestic production, the deepening of the innovative backlog of production from global trends. In many countries, the basis of economic growth is the production and export of high-tech and knowledge-intensive products. An extremely low technical and economic characteristic of the fixed capital of enterprises is characterized by the indicator of the age structure of equipment. The average age of the equipment is 18-20 years. Lack of equipment replacement possibilities inevitably increases the period of its use.
• However, there are absolute advantages to the Russian economy that are not limited to rich natural resources. It should be noted that the general educational level of the population is quite high. Russia occupies a leading position in the international market of nuclear technologies, space technology and services, products of the military-industrial complex.
• There are almost four thousand research and development organizations in Russia today (Table 1). The institutional structure of science has a number of features that distinguish Russia from most of the developed countries of the world.
• The basis of the scientific sector is formed by independent research organizations, isolated from production and education. In 2011, their number was 2036, and their share in the total set of organizations of the scientific and technical complex of the country was about 51.5% (see Table 1).
• Table 1. Organizations performing research and development in Russia

Number of organizations - total
including:
research organizations
design bureaus
design and design and survey organizations
pilot plants
higher education institutions
research and development departments in organizations
other organizations

• Their number for the period 1990-2011. increased by 1.2 times. The marked growth was associated with both the disaggregation of existing and the creation of new scientific organizations. In particular, federal ministries and departments were endowed with such a right.
• At the same time, the total number of organizations performing research and development over the same period decreased by 14.8%, and organizations involved in the design and implementation of production technologies - at times. Thus, the number of design organizations decreased by 12.1 times, design bureaus - by 1.9 times, industrial enterprises engaged in research and development - by 1.7 times.
• The main reason for this disproportion is the sharp decline in effective demand for the results of scientific and technical activities at the beginning of economic reforms. In the 1990s, the situation in almost all sectors of the economy was assessed as critical. As a result, it was precisely those scientific organizations that were directly tied to production that suffered the most. Despite the fact that the economic situation has improved markedly in recent years, the massive demand for scientific results has not yet been restored.
• Research organizations, for various reasons, have proven to be more resilient to market transformations than other types of scientific organizations. They concentrated 59.3% of scientific personnel, design organizations - 22.5%.
• In Russia, corporate science is underdeveloped - scientific divisions at industrial enterprises. In 2011, the share of industrial enterprises performing research and development together with pilot plants in the total number of scientific organizations was approximately 8.2%. As the experience of developed countries shows, it is the scientific and technical laboratories of large industrial companies that have a clear advantage in the markets for innovative products. We are talking about the ability to concentrate resources on the development of scientific and technical products that are in demand, to carry out a wider range of research and selection of promising developments on their basis.
• Analyzing the above points of view regarding the innovation culture, as well as the approaches of various researchers to the issues of its formation and development, we can draw a number of conclusions:
• 1. Within the framework of social philosophy, no common approaches to understanding innovation culture have yet been formed. Researchers consider it as an area of ​​the general cultural process, a special kind of culture, part of the culture of society, a property or element of culture. Therefore, it is necessary to consolidate the efforts of scientists and specialists to improve the conceptual and categorical apparatus of innovation culture.
• 2. Despite different approaches to defining the phenomenon of innovative culture, all researchers consider it as the basis for the innovative development of society. Representatives of the authorities and business circles adhere to the same point of view, paying close attention to the formation and development of an innovative culture of society and the individual. And, therefore, the definition of directions for the development of innovative culture, the identification of factors contributing to or, on the contrary, preventing its formation should be reflected in the works of scientists and researchers.
• 3. The innovative culture of society lies in the fact that all possible types of innovations are implemented and supported in it, and a person is actively involved in the innovative processes taking place in society, which affects his spiritual improvement and the desire for self-realization and self-development.
• 4. Being the subject of an innovative culture, a person is simultaneously a part of society and a product of the innovative culture of this society. The interaction of the innovative culture of the individual and the innovative culture of society is a prerequisite for its formation. There is a so-called interchange or transition of the innovative culture of the individual into the innovative culture of society and vice versa. Contributing to the formation of highly intelligent and creative individuals, society ensures its innovative development and the formation of an innovative culture.
• 2. Problems of innovation culture
• 2.1 Main trends in the formation of an innovative culture and innovative development
• Enterprise management presupposes the existence of certain ideas about the formation, use and features of the reproduction of intellectual resources. All the accumulated knowledge, abilities, skills, creative possibilities, actually included in the production of goods and services, and bringing income to their owner, will act in the form of intellectual capital. The ability to work acquires the properties of intellectual capital when there is a fundamental, qualitative modification of the entire set of properties that make up the quality of the labor force, which makes its owner able to create a stable, excess, surplus product demanded by society, and, accordingly, an excess surplus value, which becomes stable. source of additional capital income.
• The management of intellectual resources involves the performance of a number of functions aimed at the rational formation, use and development of the intellectual resources of an enterprise, which can be systematized in separate areas of activity (see Table 2).
• When evaluating intellectual capital, firms face a lot of problems. These include:
• · limited opportunities for a strictly formal and adequate description and measurement of intellectual resources;
• a high degree of uncertainty (entropy) of the results of scientific research;
• · methodological problems of determining the standards of creative work (or even creativity itself) and their reliability.
• Table 2. Functional subsystems for managing enterprise intellectual resources

Elements of the enterprise intellectual resource management system
1. R&D and technological innovation management subsystem	- planning, organization, control and regulation of the process of development of scientific and technical knowledge of specialists; - formation of an intellectual-information environment conducive to the generation of new ideas, the development of creativity, ingenuity, rationalization; Formation of an intellectual base that allows the enterprise to adapt and maintain its position in a changing external environment;
2. Subsystem for managing innovation potential and employee development	- formation and effective use of knowledge funds; - forecasting the need for intellectual resources; -identification of the emotional, psychological and intellectual potential of employees; -providing conditions for continuous improvement and development of personnel; Development of action programs for the improvement and development of intellectual resources;
3. Subsystem for managing internal and external information and communications	- coordination of actions of specialists involved in the process of managing intellectual resources, through the formalization and regulation of various procedures; Formation of a system for collecting, transmitting, processing, storing and using internal and external information;
4. Subsystem for managing a portfolio of rights to intellectual resources	- optimization of the composition of the portfolio of ownership of intellectual resources in accordance with the development strategy of the enterprise; Development of organizational and technical measures to ensure the protection of intellectual resources;
5. Subsystem for managing the commercialization of intellectual resources	-providing conditions for obtaining the maximum benefit from the use of intellectual resources; Analysis and evaluation of the value of intellectual property rights, monitoring of the commercial potential of intellectual resources.

• All this not only complicates, but also casts doubt on the correctness of setting the very task of rationing intellectual processes and creative activities. But on the other hand, in the conditions of market pricing, this intellectual potential of the company can be assessed or correlated with cost categories.
• The first (rather controversial, approximate, although not the only) sign of an intellectual company is the level of its market capitalization, which exceeds the book value of fixed assets, tangible and financial assets. The excess of the company's market value over its book value is formed precisely due to intellectual assets: novelty and prospects of the offered products or services, expectations to occupy new market segments, expected profit from patents, trademark (prestige), business control, relationships with consumers, etc. .d. The degree of excess also matters: not every company that is successful in the stock market is intellectual.
• According to experts, the excess should be multiple and stable, not subject to sporadic market fluctuations. Some experts believe that the intellectual capital of a high-tech company is usually 3-4 times higher than the book value of its income; others that the ratio of intellectual capital to the value of tangible means of production and financial capital in such companies should be in the range from 5:1 to 16:1 (Stewart, 1998). The market capitalization of a large corporation like Microsoft is estimated at hundreds of billions of dollars, but the value of the material assets on the company's balance sheet is only a few billion dollars. At the same time, the absence on the balance sheet of a significant amount of material resources in the form of fixed assets and working capital is not fundamental, since a modern intellectual company can attract them from outside, paying as services.
• An important sign of an intellectual company is the amount of investment directed to research and development: if they exceeded the amount of investment in fixed assets, then this indicator can also serve as a defining characteristic of an intellectual company.
• In the context of large-scale economic reforms carried out in Russia in recent decades, one of the important tasks is to create conditions for the preservation and development of the country's scientific and technical potential.
• The prerequisite for the emergence of a movement for the creation of science cities was the uncertain status of a closed administrative-territorial entity (ZATO).
• The term science city was introduced for the first time in the city of Zhukovsky, Moscow Region, by the famous scientists S.P. Nikanorov and N.K. Nikitina in 1991 when creating the movement “Union for the Development of Science Cities” to develop coordinated positions on the most important issues of their life. The movement took the initiative to develop a draft Concept of State Policy for the Preservation and Development of Science Cities. The first versions of the draft law "On the Status of the Science City of the Russian Federation", developed one - in the Federation Council, the other - in the State Duma, appeared in 1995.
• The law on science cities was adopted on April 7, 1999. In accordance with this law, a science city is a municipal formation with the status of an urban district, which has a high scientific and technical potential, with a city-forming scientific and production complex. Legal regulation of the status of a science city is carried out in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws on the general principles of organizing local self-government, on science and state scientific and technical policy, other federal laws, the Federal Law "On the status of a science city of the Russian Federation", constitutions, charters and laws of the subjects Russian Federation.
• The status of a science city is assigned to a municipal formation by the Government of the Russian Federation for a certain period. A municipality applying for the status of a science city must have a research and production complex located on the territory of this municipality. The research and production complex of a science city is understood as a set of organizations engaged in scientific, scientific, technical, innovative activities, experimental development, testing, training in accordance with the state priority areas for the development of science, technology and technology.
• The research and production complex of a municipality applying for the status of a science city must be a city-forming complex and meet the following criteria:
• · the number of employees in organizations of the research and production complex is at least 15% of the total number of employees;
• the volume of scientific and technical products (corresponding to the priority areas of development of science, technology and technology of the Russian Federation) in value terms is at least 50% of the total output of all economic entities located on the territory of this municipality, or the cost of fixed assets of the complex actually used in production scientific and technical products, is not less than 50% of the value of actually used fixed assets of all business entities located on the territory of the municipality, with the exception of the housing and communal and social sphere.
• The research and production complex includes legal entities registered on the territory of this municipality:
• 1. scientific organizations, institutions of higher professional education and other organizations engaged in scientific, scientific, technical and innovative activities, experimental development, testing, training of personnel, if they have, if necessary, state accreditation;
• 2. organizations, regardless of organizational and legal forms, engaged in the production of products, performance of work and provision of services, provided that the share of production of science-intensive products (in value terms) corresponding to the priority areas of development of science, technology and technology of the Russian Federation during the previous three years, is at least 50 percent of their total production.
• The first Russian science city, in 2000, was Obninsk, where developments in the field of peaceful atom were and are being carried out. In this city, testing of the institutional mechanisms for the functioning of science cities in Russia was previously carried out. This event gave impetus to the further development of science cities in Russia.
• When assigning the status of a science city to a municipal formation, the government approves the priority areas for this science city of scientific, scientific, technical, innovative activities, experimental development, testing, and training. In this regard, it is customary to single out seven main specializations of science cities in Russia:
• 1. aviation, rocket science and space research;
• 2. electronics and radio engineering;
• 3. automation, machine and instrument making;
• 4. chemistry, chemical physics and creation of new materials;
• 5. nuclear complex;
• 6. energy;
• 7. biology and biotechnology.
• These science cities are different not only in terms of sectoral focus, but also in terms of population, budget volumes and revenues mobilized to the budget, the volume of innovative products, etc.
• According to the nature and profile of scientific complexes, science cities are divided into single-profile, mono-oriented and complex.
• Mono-oriented science cities have several city-forming enterprises of the same sphere of scientific and technical activity. These are, for example, Zhukovsky, where the largest research and testing complexes of the aviation profile are located; Chernogolovka is a scientific center of the Russian Academy of Sciences with research institutes and laboratories in the field of chemical physics.
• The most characteristic example of a complex science city is Dubna, where, in addition to the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, there are scientific, design and research and production centers for aerospace, instrument-making, shipbuilding, and an international university.
• Today, the status of a science city has been officially assigned to 14 settlements in Russia that specialize in a particular area of ​​science.

At the same time, the status of a science city is claimed by:

· 19 municipalities in the rocket and space industry;

· 14 municipalities in the nuclear industry;

· in the field of biotechnology 4 municipalities;

· in the field of electronics and radio engineering 3 municipalities;

· in the field of mechanical engineering 5 municipalities;

· in the field of chemistry and physical chemistry 5 municipalities.

Another 5 municipalities also claim the status of a science city, the sectoral affiliation of which is difficult to unequivocally assess. Already today these applicants are equated by experts with official science cities.

The analogue of science cities abroad are technopolises, the development of which on a large scale unfolded in the leading countries in the second half of the 20th century, in particular the famous Silicon Valley, a region in the state of California, characterized by a high density of high-tech companies associated with the development and production of computers and their components, especially microprocessors, as well as software, mobile communication devices, biotechnology, etc. The emergence and development of this technological center is associated with the concentration of leading universities, large cities less than an hour away, sources of financing for new companies, and a mild climate. At first glance, the structures of science cities and Silicon Valley are similar, but there is one very significant difference. It consists in the fact that the investment climate in Silicon Valley favors the emergence of new innovative companies. In our country, such infrastructures are very poorly developed.

The state assigns a number of functions to the science cities, the implementation of which is monitored and, if violations are detected, the science city may lose its status ahead of schedule. It also checks the target nature of spending the allocated funds.

Thus, support for science cities specializing in priority areas of development of science, technology and technology is one of the most important conditions for Russia's competitiveness in the global economy.

To date, there are 14 cities in the country that have officially received the status of science cities, and about 70 have declared their desire to receive this status. Science cities were conditionally divided into categories of "status" and "candidates". However, practice shows that many applicants had to refuse to obtain the status of science cities, since the procedure for approving the status turned out to be lengthy and scrupulous, and additional budget funding is not guaranteed and is regulated in detail. Over time, other problems of science cities began to appear - the aging of the research base and personnel, conflicts with the public, corruption scandals, and others.

Individual problems specific to science cities in Russia are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Selected problems specific to science cities in Russia

science cities	Problems
	there is no comprehensive development program, there is no permission to use land, there is no comprehensive nature of the formation of the list of projects (it is formed only at the expense of the federal budget)
	The problems of the science city lie in the inability to use unloaded federal property for commercial orders and in the absence of a regional legislative framework on science cities
	there are no incentives for the development of commercial activities by research and production enterprises
	the problem of science city Reutov lies in the requirement of the law to spend budget subsidies only on infrastructure
	lack of extrabudgetary funding
	In 2010, the mayor of the science city was accused of corruption
Koltsovo	the problem of the outflow of young people from science; conflicting relations with local authorities over land. 3 criminal cases were opened against the head of the science city
Peterhof	the main problem is that Peterhof does not have the status of an urban district

Another key problem that deserves separate detailed consideration is the problem of legislation in the field of creation and development of science cities. According to the Federal Law of April 7, 1999 No. 70-FZ "On the Status of the Science City of the Russian Federation", the status of "Science City" was granted for 25 years. It was assumed that a presidential decree would be issued for each city, defining its specialization - space, nuclear physics, medicine, etc. - and to approve the development program for 5-6 years. And according to the tripartite agreement (government - governor - municipality), each level of government had to assume certain obligations to implement the program.

In 2004, the law was amended, according to which the decision to assign scientific status was taken by the government, and it was granted only for five years. But the main change was the introduction of the per capita support method, instead of the software one. In practice, it looks like this: the money allocated from the federal budget for all science cities is distributed among them depending on the number of inhabitants.

At the end of 2011, the Ministry of Education and Science prepared a bill that could radically change the system of science cities. First of all, the document proposes to change the mechanism for assigning and maintaining the status of a science city. Now the document is being considered by other departments and the heads of regions that have science cities. If it does not fundamentally change, then the status of a science city will be assigned indefinitely, but it will have to be confirmed every ten years.

However, experts, including members of the Russian Science City Development Union, are dissatisfied with the new bill and believe that it contradicts the policy of the President of the Russian Federation in terms of supporting the development of scientific infrastructure in general, and support for science cities in particular. According to Mikhail Korolev, Doctor of Technical Sciences, professor at the National Research University of the Moscow State Institute of Electronic Technology, the Ministry of Education and Science does not fully understand how science cities are organized and what are the main goals of their activities.

Another significant problem that can be attributed to the sphere of legislation is the problem of taxation. As stated in the explanatory note to the bill discussed above, "it is aimed at stimulating scientific and innovative activities in science cities." However, according to experts, science cities need more a law on tax incentives, similar to those established in Skolkovo. Recall that according to the law recently signed by the president, Skolkovo is exempt from almost all taxes. All profits will go to the developers.

2.2 Prospects for the implementation of an innovation culture

Insufficiency of budget funding, an ill-conceived mechanism for its distribution and problems in legislative support are not the only problems of science cities. The largest and “richest” problem in 2011 for all cities of science, which calls into question the possibility and necessity of their existence, was the innovation city of Skolkovo.

In fact, Skolkovo is the same science city, which differs from the traditional ones in that it is not officially called a city. This is an innovative center, within which, however, it is planned to build a very real urban infrastructure suitable for both work and residence.

At the same time, the concept of a new science city from scratch did not win immediately. At first, it was proposed to create a center on the basis of existing scientific centers, for example, on the basis of Obninsk, where the first Russian nuclear reactor was made, or in Tomsk, which is the largest university city in Siberia. The name "Skolkovo" was officially announced in March. Until now, this small village near Moscow was known only for the business school of the same name. It was decided to build a full-fledged city in its place for the development of innovations. The name "science city" was replaced by "innovation city".

In March, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev named five areas of priority for this center - telecommunications, IT, energy, biomedical and nuclear technologies. Here it is worth noting that only the first two directions can be considered completely new for traditional Russian research centers. For example, there are about a dozen different science cities and ZATOs dealing with nuclear issues in Russia; from biomedical centers we can mention Pushchino or Koltsovo in the Novosibirsk region. The science cities did not deal with energy in its pure form (excluding the nuclear industry), but it is also impossible to say that this industry is new for domestic science and engineering.

Telecommunications and IT are the areas that developed most actively after the departure from the Soviet model of science development. Most modern technologies were created at the end of the last century and in this decade, domestic research centers, for various reasons, could no longer keep up with the current global scientific trends. Catch up in these areas of science, according to the ideas of the creators, should innograd Skolkovo.

Innovative activity in Russia now has many problems. An attempt to restore the traditional model for the development of science through state funding (in which, by the way, science cities received their status) has shown that significant breakthroughs in this area are not yet to be expected. Innograd should work differently, integrating the Western venture capital model of innovation financing into Russian reality.

However, independent experts are confident that even if individual projects are successful, the experience of Skolkovo will not bring Russia any closer to building an innovative economy. “The innovative economy is being created in countries with a high level of competition, where innovation becomes an urgent need for business, because without it, enterprises are simply doomed to defeat in the competitive struggle. With us, the guarantee of success is friendship with the governor, and not at all the introduction of any technology. Therefore, the current Russian economy does not create market demand for innovation. And without market demand, the Skolkovo project will have practically no effect on the development of the domestic economy,” says Igor Nikolaev, director of the FBK strategic analysis department. Thus, the main obstacles on the way to an innovative economy are not mutual misunderstandings between scientists and businessmen, but more important reasons. Experts are sure that even if the projects developed in Skolkovo are commercially successful, Russia will receive no more than one more science city patronized by the state, “and far from being the best.”

Similar Documents

Problems of formation of corporate culture, typology and description of effective and ineffective corporate cultures. Key indicators of internal corporate behavior. The system of motivation, student training and staff development.

abstract, added 02/07/2010


The concept of innovation as a competitive resource in the activities of companies. Values ​​of innovative activity in the process of formation of goals and strategy of the company. Analysis of methods for assessing innovative potential and evaluating the effectiveness of innovation.

term paper, added 03.10.2011


Innovative strategy of the Republic of Bashkortostan. Branch priorities of innovative development. Formation of favorable conditions for innovation activity. Increasing the innovative activity of the population. Investment support for innovative projects.

abstract, added 05/06/2011


Tasks of innovative activity of the enterprise. Basic principles, goals and objectives of innovation policy in St. Petersburg, features of the creation of innovation infrastructure. Studying the prospects for the development of innovative activity in enterprises.

abstract, added 11/16/2009


Characteristics of innovation activity: the concept and types of innovation, stages of the innovation process and organizational forms. Market factors affecting the nature of innovation. The main trends in the development of the domestic innovation system.

term paper, added 11/13/2009


Successful business. Internal integration. Concept and essence of corporate management culture. A corporate culture focused on profit, on the task, on the person, on power (strength). Concept and essence of innovative management culture.

term paper, added 02/19/2009


Theoretical foundations of innovation activity. Analysis of the theory and practice of innovative development of regions. The main directions of regional innovation policy. Management of the creation and improvement of the regional innovation system.

master's thesis, added 09/24/2009


The current state of the innovation process and development prospects. Comparison of Russian technologies with the world level. Instruments of state innovation policy and targeted programs in this area. Creation of a national innovation system.

term paper, added 10/31/2007


The study of the main elements of the personnel management system of an innovative organization. Consideration of various forms and methods of stimulating and motivating the labor activity of employees. Characteristics of the development of a culture of continuous learning and change.

abstract, added 01/17/2012


The mechanism of formation of the innovation policy of the state. features of the formation of state innovation policy in foreign countries: Western Europe, USA, Japan. Methods of state influence in the field of innovation.

Innovative culture of society

It is not enough to talk about the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary for innovation, but it is also important to understand how an individual, group, organization and society as a whole interact with this knowledge, how ready and able they are to turn this knowledge into innovations. This side of innovation is characterized by innovation culture. Innovation culture characterizes the degree of susceptibility of an individual, organization and society as a whole to various innovations ranging from a tolerant attitude to readiness and ability to turn them into innovations. An innovative culture also acts as an indicator of the innovative activity of social subjects (from the individual to society).

The innovative culture of a person is a side of his spiritual life, which reflects the value orientation fixed in knowledge, skills, patterns and norms of behavior and ensures his receptivity to new ideas, readiness and ability to turn them into innovations.

The formation of an innovative culture in society begins with the education of each young person in the perception of innovation, orientation towards the innovative development of society, all spheres of public life. Unlike a traditional society, an innovative society subordinates the entire system of upbringing and education not only to the assimilation of traditions, but also to the formation of an innovative culture. Modern society cannot exist without changing constantly, without developing. At the same time, it should not lose its traditions, its historical memory, and the connection between generations. Otherwise, all changes will only worsen the state of the changing spheres and phenomena of social life. The reforms in education, healthcare and science carried out by the Russian authorities in recent years clearly demonstrate this.

The unity of the opposites of innovation and tradition, which is fixed in the general cultural principle of continuity, is the most important prerequisite for social progress. Each achievement of culture elevates a person to a new height, revealing inexhaustible human possibilities, and opens up new horizons for creative growth. Culture forms a person as a bearer of traditions, language, spirituality, worldview. Innovations in the field of culture enrich the mind, humanize feelings, develop constructive and creative forces and aspirations, awaken in a person a thirst for creativity and self-realization. Thus, in the conditions of modern society, an innovative culture seems to be an objective necessity, since it is the innovative culture that is the engine and determinant of the direction, level and quality of development of both the individual and society.

The innovative culture of society is the willingness and ability of society to innovate in all their manifestations and in all spheres of public life (in management, education, industry, agriculture, service, etc.).

The innovation culture shows both the level of innovativeness of the activities of the relevant social institutions, and the degree of satisfaction of people with their participation in them and its results.

Given the international nature of innovation culture, efforts to develop it should be based primarily on the cultural traditions of each individual country and field of activity, since these traditions determine innovation culture in different ways.

The innovation culture is closely connected with the knowledge society that is taking shape in the advanced countries of the world. They form a kind of system. This is evidenced by:

• 1. Close relationship between innovation and knowledge. Innovation is based on knowledge; knowledge, in turn, can only be realized through innovation as a process and as its result.
• 2. The complexity of the formation of an innovative culture and knowledge society.
• 3. A person acts as an object and subject of an innovative culture and a knowledge society, and a person is the main one in this process as the creator and bearer of all elements of both an innovative culture and knowledge.
• 4. Long-term perspective - a condition for the most complete realization of the possibilities of an innovative culture and knowledge society. The task of forming an innovative culture and building a knowledge society with its help belongs to the range of strategic tasks.
• 5. New requirements for partnership in terms of innovation culture and knowledge society.
• 6. Knowledge production and innovation culture is the key to development.
• 7. Education is the main way to unite and realize the possibilities of an innovative culture and a knowledge society.

The formation of an innovative culture is the creation of an innovative space as part of the social space. The main characteristic of the innovation-cultural space is its globality and the importance of the basic characteristics, regardless of the country, economic system, sphere of life, etc.

Questions for self-control

• 1. What features are inherent in the modern personality (A. Inkeles model)?
• 2. What three types of qualities does the innovative potential of a person include?
• 3. What is the essence of a systematic approach to the innovative potential of the individual and what does it give?
• 4. In what directions should the innovative potential of the individual be developed?
• 5. What does the innovative activity of a group, organization express?
• 6. What are the ways to stimulate the innovative activity of a group, organization?
• 7. How is the innovation game played?
• 8. What is the scheme for assessing the innovative potential of the organization?
• 9. What indicators are used to determine the level of development of the organization's innovative potential?
• 10. What is an innovative human culture?
• 11. What is the innovative culture of society?
• 12. How are the innovative culture of society and knowledge related?
• 13. What is a knowledge society?