The Assessment of Russian Scientific Institutions’ Intellectual Capital

At present, the role and importance of science is increasing significantly, more and more attention is being paid to scientometric indicators in assessing scientific activity at all stages of the science management process, and the cost of scientific activity is increasing. The problems of assessing intellectual capital have always been in the area of special attention in Russian scientific and other organizations, including universities engaged in scientific activities — scientific institutions. The decree of the President of the Russian Federation from 07.05.2018 No. 204 “National goals and strategic objectives of the development of the Russian Federation for the period until 2024” approves these trends at the state level. Therefore, the task arose of developing a system of quantitative and qualitative indicators for assessing the effectiveness of scientific organizations in order to organize their productive work, increase their contribution to the development of the state, and increase the prestige of science. The external and internal factors determining the need for an objective assessment of intellectual capital are identified using the methods of comparative analysis, empirical research; the main indicators, the sources of information and their features have been analyzed. The proposed system of universal criteria, objective and subjective indicators for assessing the activities of scientific institutions, is becoming the foundation for both a comprehensive assessment and the basis for industry criteria.

intellectual capital, scientific institutions, assessment of scientific activity, rating, university, national rating, international rating

1. Luzin N.A. Evolution and theory of intellectual capital. Chelyabinskii gumanitarii = Chelyabinsk Humanities. 2013;23(2):21–29. (In Russ.).

2. Glaser J., Laudel G. Governing science. European Journal of Sociology. 2016; 57(01):117–168. DOI: 10.1017/S 0003975616000047

3. Miltiadis L., Edvinsson L., Ordóñez P.The intellectual capital statements: Evolution and how to get started. Knowledge management strategies. A Handbook of Applied Technologies. 2018;(Jan.):1–34. DOI: 10.4018/978–1–59904–603–7.ch002

4. Seliverstova O.V., Frolova N.S. The intellectual capital of the university as one of the components of educational services: international experience in financing and developing the scientific potential of higher education. Vestnik evraziiskoi nauki = The Eurasian Scientific Journal. 2014;22(3):1–16. (In Russ.).

5. Polikhina N.A., Trostyanskaya I.B.University ratings: Development trends, methodology, changes. Moscow: FGANU “Sotsiotsentr”; 2018. 189 p. (In Russ.). ISBN 978–5–9500528–4–2

6. Jonkers K. et al. Research performance based funding systems: A comparative assessment. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Joint Research Centre. 2016. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303488024_ Research_Performance_Based_Funding_Systems_a_Comparative_Assessment (accessed on 02.09.2019).

7. Eskindarov M.A., Bulyga R.P., Barilenko V.I., Vetrova I.F., Mel’nik M.V., Efimova O.V. Assessment, control and management of the intellectual potential of a research university. Yoshkar-Ola: STRING; 2011. 220 p. (In Russ.). ISBN 978–5–91716–128–0

8. Gusev A.B., Doronina E.G., Vershinin I.V., MalakhovV.A. Monitoring and evaluation of the results of scientific and technical activities: Foreign experience and Russian practice. Nauka. Innovatsii. Obrazovanie = Science. Innovation Education. 2018;(27):65–91. (In Russ.).

9. Shakhovskii R.A.Actual issues of innovative development of Russian enterprises on the modern development of economic relations. Vestnik SamGUPS = Bulletin of SSTU. 2014;4(26):120–126 (In Russ.).

10. Strongin R.G. Features of the new. Nizhny Novgorod: NNSU Publ.; 2006. 190 p. (In Russ.).

11. Hicks D. Performance-based university research funding systems. Research policy. 2012;41(2):251–261.

12. Tsyganov A.V. A brief description of citation based scientometric indicators. Upravlenie bol’shimi sistemami = Management of large systems. 2013;(44):248–261. (In Russ.).

13. KulaginA.S.Assessment and self-assessment of a scientific organization. Innovacii = Innovation. 2011;10(156):20–25. (In Russ.).

14. Eskindarov M.A., Smitienko B.M., Ermakova S.M. The teacher is the main figure in the implementation of the innovative education system. Moscow: Financial University; 2011. 280 p. (In Russ.). ISBN 978–5–7942–0779–8