Innovators Are Invited to Come Together in Project Consortia

On 29 January the NRU HSE’s ISSEK hosted a round table “Implementing State-Owned Companies’ innovation development programmes — preliminary results and best practices”, to discuss new interaction formats adopted by participants of the Russian innovation system.

Innovation development programmes (IDPs) for major state-owned companies were approved almost three years ago, so it’s time to analyse the preliminary results of their implementation, noted the First Vice-Rector of the NRU HSE Leonid Gokhberg opening the strategic session of the round table. The section was organised by the Higher School of Economics jointly with the Ministry of Economic Development and Russian Venture Company (RVC).

The HSE participated in developing methodology for IDPs, and helped to prepare such programmes for a number of major companies (including Rusneft, Aeroflot, RAO Energy System of the East, Gazprom, etc.).

Russian S&T Foresight 2030 commissioned by the Russian Ministry of Education and Science and coordinated by the NRU HSE’s Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge (ISSEK), is becoming an important factor affecting adjustment of the largest Russian companies’ development strategies and innovation programmes. In January, 2014 this document was approved by Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev, who subsequently discussed it with deputy prime ministers. The attention commanded by the foresight made the round table session even more relevant.

The foresight also has a more broad mission: it sets vectors for interaction between the innovation system’s participants when they develop their long-term innovation policies. Obviously these players — including state-owned companies, public authorities, technology platforms,territorial clusters, universities, small and medium enterprises, development institutes — have different “weight” and different opportunities, play different roles on the innovation activities field, and enter into different relations with each other — sometimes situational, and sometimes longer-term.

Project consortia would allow innovators to concentrate on specific, frequently utilitarian projects, involving into them people with relevant skills and competencies.

In addition to establishing sustainable relations (which is supported by such institutes as technology platforms and clusters), the Ministry of Economic Development is considering another way of promoting cooperation between participants of the innovation system — creating project consortia. Artem Shadrin, Head of the ministry’s Innovation-Based Development Department, spoke about them among other things. Such consortia’s activities wouldn’t be hindered either by territorial limitations (as in the case of clusters), or by the scale of goals and objectives (which is the case with technology platforms). Project consortia would allow innovators to concentrate on specific, frequently utilitarian projects, involving into them people possessing relevant skills and competencies. Such consortia were also mentioned by Dmitri Sanatov, representative of the Centre for Strategic Research “North-West” Foundation, and by Igor Kozhukhovsky, General Director of the Electric Energy Balance Forecasting Agency.

Participants of the strategic session discussed the new format in the context of analysing innovation development programmes, since it was believed that state-owned companies implementing IDPs may serve as «cores» of such temporary associations of interested parties.

Accordingly, it would be important to analyse relevant best practices and the obvious barriers hindering innovation-based development of state-owned companies. The participating expert were more or less unanimous regarding possible problems. E.g. according to Igor Agamirzian, General Director and founder of RVC, the main problem is that in the framework of IDPs, innovation activities are not among the companies’ mainline ones. Probably the only exception is Rusatom which is successfully promoting its high-tech products on international markets.

Mikhail Goland, Head of the NRU HSE ISSEK’s Private-Public Partnership in Innovation Activities section, presented results of the study commissioned by RVC. In terms of IDP-related expenditures, the following companies were among the leaders in 2012: Russian Railways, Rustechnologies, Gazprom, and Almaz-Antei. In terms of overall R&D expenditures the highest results were achieved by Rustechnologies, M.F. Reshetnev Information Satellite Systems, Rusatom, Progress Space-Rocket Centre, and Oboronprom United Industrial Corporation.

State-owned companies implementing innovation development programmes may serve as «cores» of project consortia

It turned out that defence industry and space-rocket companies had the highest R&D expenditures. 60% of R&D conducted in the framework of innovation development programmes are funded from the government budget. The amount of venture funding provided for R&D in the framework of innovation development programmes is negligibly small compared with the total expenditures.

Among their main objectives regarding implementation of innovation development programmes, the respondents noted upgrading production facilities (85%) and staff training (71%), while breakthrough R&D were named as a priority objective only by 32% of the surveyed.

The session participants also noted the human resources and management-related problems in the R&D sphere. Several speakers outlined a number of relevant issues. Firstly, the position of Innovations Director at many state-owned companies is frequently just a formality, and the relevant executive’s decisions often have little effect on the company’s innovation strategy. Secondly, innovations directors must meet certain professional standards which should be developed by the business community, not by educational institutions. Finally, universities cannot supply «ready-made» professionals to fill these positions since one can learn the art of managing the company’s innovation activities only in a «real combat situation» (as if to meet this request, in the new academic year the ISSEK is launching a master’s programme in science, technology and innovation activities management, which among other things includes long fellowships at large companies).

As to major faults of the government policy to promote innovation activities, the surveyed innovation managers noted excessive regulation, and orientation exclusively towards quantitative indicators. According to their estimates, tangible effect of «enforced innovation activities» policy wouldn’t be felt for at least five years.

Maybe these processes would accelerate emergence of project consortia? Even a temporary association of truly interested players could have a profound (and lasting) effect on the whole innovation environment.

By Maxim Kotsemir

Photographs by Nikita Benzoruk

 

Event Programme