Institutions of catch-up and advanced development: organizational resistance, phases of scientific and technological development, and designing future needs

The article explores the phenomenon of development institutions focused on the scientific and industrial sphere. In different periods of time, they have played a crucial role in the accelerated formation of structures adequate to the challenges of the time.

The purpose of the article is to identify the problems of Russian development institutions and to develop directions for their transformation.

Development institutions are heterogeneous: they can be both formal and informal, as well as aimed at catching up or advancing development. Domestic development institutions are facing the need for a qualitative change in their business model.

The activity of innovation activities is directly dependent on the state of the sales markets: a long-term positive market situation reduces the risks of introducing new products, which activates research and inventive processes. The inventive process is presented in the article in the form of five phases: the actual invention of technology, the assessment of suitability for production, recognition of value by the market and recognition by interest groups. Each subsequent phase is characterized by increasing organizational resistance.

The emergence and rapid development of unmanned aerial vehicles shows that a new product can appear at the intersection of development lines of different-quality products, incorporating their best properties and creating a fundamentally new product.

According to the author, it is necessary to design future needs, taking into account interest groups, but not the interests of consumers. For this purpose, it is necessary to formalize a new type of participant in the scientific and technical sphere –  an innovative designer.

1. Валдайцев, С.В. (2012). Инновации: асимметрия интересов владельцев и менеджмента фирмы. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Экономика, (1), 20–29. EDN: OQSJWZ

2. Grigoriev, O.V. (2014). The Age of Growth: Lectures on Neoconomics: the Rise and Fall of the Global Economic system. Career Press. (in Russian)

3. Grozova, O.S. (2012). To the question of classification of the institutions of development and institutional risks of innovative activity. Modern problems of science and education, (4), 200–210. EDN: PBIRXF (in Russian)

4. Ivanova, L. (2019). Development institutions as an inherent part of economic process management. Society and Economics, (9), 20–31. EDN: AJKJJF, https://doi.org/10.31857/S020736760006401-0 (in Russian)

5. Karmyshev, Yu.A. (2012). System problems of institute interaction functioning of diversification and innovative development in forming national innovation system of Russia. Tambov University Review. Series: Humanities, 8(112), 48–58. EDN: PBXTCT (in Russian)

6. Kuznetsov, S.V. (2021). The Development Institute as a Public Law Entity. Business law, (4), 30–36. EDN: NOQSZE, https://doi.org/10.18572/1999-4788-2021-4-30-36 (in Russian)

7. Lyalkova, E.E., & Izzuka, T.B. (2022). Key performance indicators of the development institutions of the Russian Federation. Scientific Journal Economic Sciences, (214), 169–174. EDN: NIGPYC, https://doi.org/10.14451/1.214.169 (in Russian)

8. Melnikov, R.M. (2012). Effectiveness and efficiency of Russian financial development institutions: assessment approaches and ways to improve. Finance and Credit, 21(501), 2–10. EDN: OXZIIB (in Russian)

9. Sidorova, E.N., & Trynov, A.V. (2019). The role of development institutions in building up investment resources of old industrial territories. News of the Ural State Mining University, 1(53), 162–170. EDN: RSVQCU, https://doi.org/10.21440/2307-2091-2019-1-162-170 (in Russian)

10. Smirnov, S.A. (2021). Science as an institute of development: challenges and new models (a project idea). Philosophy of Science, 1(88), 45–64. EDN: PXYNUQ, https://doi.org/10.15372/PS20210104 (in Russian)

11. Solntsev, O.G., Khromov, M.Yu., & Volkov, R.G. (2009). Development institutions: analysis and assessment of world practices. Studies on Russian Economic Development, 20(2), 117–133. EDN: YLMMDZ

12. Stepanov, N.S. (2021). Development institutions as a factor of improving the quality of the institutional environment. The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, (4), 95–108. EDN: NUSPXQ, https://doi.org/10.52180/2073–6487_2021_4_95_108 (in Russian)

13. Farkhutdinova, A.U. (2020). Institutions of development in the conditions of the crisis economy. Azimuth of Scientific Research: Economics and Administration, 9, 3(32), 381–384. EDN: NFWIBZ, https://doi.org/10.26140/anie-2020-0903-0091 (in Russian)

14. Ayres, R.U. (1989). The Barrier-Breakthrough Model of Innovation and the Life Cycle Model of Industrial Evolution as Applied to the U. S. Electrical Industry. In: Andersson, Å.E., Batten, D.F., Karlsson, C. (eds) Knowledge and Industrial Organization. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-95597-6_9

15. Ernst, H. (1997). The use of patent data for technological forecasting: the diffusion of CNC-technology in the machine tool industry. Small Business Economics, 9(4), 361–381. EDN: AJLQPD, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007921808138

16. Gao, L., Porter, A.L., Wang, J., Fang, S., Zhang, X., Ma, T., Wang, W., & Huang, L. (2013). Technology life cycle analysis modeling based on patent documents. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(3), 398–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.10.003

17. Hughes, T.P. (2012). The Evolution of Large Technological Systems. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems (pp. 45–76). The MIT Press.

18. Little, A.D. (1981). The strategic management of technology. Cambridge, Mass.

19. Lee, T.H., & Nakicenovic, N. (1989). Life cycle of technology and commercial policy. Science & Technology Review, (1), 38–43.

20. NASA System Engineering Handbook (SP-2016–6105 Rev2, Rev2 ed.; D. Hoff pauir, Ed.). (2016). https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20170001761/downloads/20170001761.pdf.