Abstract
Introduction. The paper addresses the issue of psychological ensuring of personnel management in Russian scientific organizations. For the first time, the types of scientific organizations in the Russian Federation are analyzed to account for their opportunities and limitations of employing existing international techniques for personnel management under the conditions of growing globalization and informatization in the field of research activities.
Theoretical Basis. When choosing a theoretical approach for psychological ensuring of personnel management, it is important to take into consideration the type of scientific organization in terms of its research activities (theoretical/applied), form of financing (budget/commercial/mixed), and the place the research activities occupy among a researcher’s professional responsibilities (central/peripheral).
Results. The study reviewed the following theories and theoretical models: the model of the peaks of a scientist’s creative productivity (G. J. Feist), the model of gift economy in the field of research activities (K. Vermeir), and various hybrid models. According to the study analyses, the concept of motivation for scientific activity (T. V. Razina) can be instrumental in assessing the role of ten types of motivational subsystems when carrying out research activities and developing the means of stimulating them. The study concentrates on the following theoretical models for establishing creative environments: (a) the dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation (I. Nonaka and colleagues) that is applicable for any organization and (b) the model of creative environments for the research process in academic circles or commercial research laboratories suggested by A. P. Wierzbicki and Y. Nakamori. The paper also analyses certain characteristics of virtual organizations that determine specific aspects of personnel management process and reflects on particular models for its implementation.
Discussion. The theories and theoretical approaches to managing research teams, encompassed in the study were analyzed specifically in application to scientific organizations in Russia. The main obstacles for their ‘direct’ use there lie in ethnic, national, and specific cultural characteristics of Russian research facilities, limited use of information technology, and the lack of socio-economic and political stability in the country.
Highlights
- Cultural and historical specificity, as well as the vast variety of types of scientific organizations in Russia, determine the need for the development and considerable modification of the existing methods and techniques for personnel management.
- Gradually establishing creative environments in Russian research teams that would take into their specific characteristics has a great potential for the practice of personnel management.
- Carrying out empirical studies on creative productivity – its peaks and the factors that determine them (e.g., age, academic degree) is important for psychological ensuring of personnel management in Russian scientific organizations.
References
Mehtap Ö., Kökalan Ö. Prevailing organizational identity strength: The relationship between identity, justice perceptions and organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Studies, 2014, V. 6, Issue 1, pp. 32–46.
Muppidathi P., Krishnan V. R. Effect of transformational leadership on followers’ collective efficacy and group cohesiveness: Social identity as mediator. Humanities and Social Sciences Review, 2015, no. 04 (03), pp. 363–372. Available at: http://www.rkvenkat.org/mythili.pdf (Accessed 11 May 2018).
Gibson D. S., Thompson C. B., Neill U. S. Assessing research productivity. The Scientist, 2015, January 1. Available at: http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleno/41682/title/Assessing-Research-Productivity/ (Accessed 25 January 2018).
Sørensen H. T. I-determinants for a successful PhD or postdoctoral outcome. Clinical Epidemiology, 2016, V. 8, pp. 297–303. DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S110527
van der Lee R., Ellemers N. Gender contributes to personal research funding success in The Netherlands. PNAS, 2015, V. 112, no. 40, pp. 12349–12353. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1510159112
Albert C., Davia M. A., Legazpe N. Determinants of research productivity in Spanish Academia. European Journal of Education, 2016, V. 51, Issue 4, pp. 535–549. DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12142
Antonio-García M. T., López-Navarro I., Rey-Rocha J. Determinants of success for biomedical researchers: A perception-based study in a health science research environment. Scientometrics, 2014, V. 101, Issue 3, pp. 1747–1779. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1376-6
Gaidamashko I. V., Kandybovich S. L., Sekach M. F. Psychology: Theory and practice. Psychological and Pedagogical Search, 2017, no. 4 (44), pp. 65–74. Available at: http://ppsjournal.rsu.edu.ru/wp-content/uploads/%D0%9F%D0%9F%D0%9F-2017-%E2%84%96444.pdf (Accessed 25 January 2018).
Karro I. I., Popova A. A. Innovation management in Russia. Sovremennye naukoemkie tekhnologii – Modern High Technologies, 2013, no. 10–2, pp. 263–264 (in Russian).
Prokhorov A. P. Russkaya model' upravleniya [The Russian model of management]. Moscow, Studiya Artemiya Lebedeva Publ., 2014. 496 p.
Sidorenkov A. V., Koval' E. S. Interrelations between group phenomena and socio-psychological adaptation among employees. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal, 2015, V. 36, no. 1, pp. 34–45 (in Russian).
Arister N. I., Antsupov A. Ya., Gaidamashko I. V. Strategiya i praktika dostizheniya vysshei kvalifikatsii sub"ektom innovatsionnogo truda [The strategy and practice of achieving the highest qualification by the subject of innovative labor]. Moscow, Buki Vedi Publ., 2016. 541 p.
Berestneva E. V. Problems of assessing the research potential. Fundamental'nye issledovaniya – Fundamental Research, 2015, no. 2 (19), pp. 4151–4153 (in Russian).
Voitikova M. A. The impact of emotional intelligence on the success of managing scientific organization. Chelovecheskii kapital – Journal of Human Capital, 2017, no. 12 (108), pp. 36–40 (in Russian).
Gaidamashko I. V., Pugacheva E. V., Tsunikova T. G. The systemic mental activity approach to activity self-organization among subjects of the educational process at a technical university. Chelovecheskii kapital – Journal of Human Capital, 2015, no. 11–12 (83), pp. 20–23 (in Russian).
Gryazeva-Dobshinskaya V. G. Psikhologiya innovatsionnogo menedzhmenta organizatsii [Psychology of the innovative management of organizations]. Chelyabinsk, South Ural State University Publ., 2013. 298 p.
Pugacheva E. V. Psychological determinants of professional reliability in members of institutions of higher professional education. Modern Psychology, 2013, no. 2. Available at: http://modernpsy.org/ru/2013/2/5 (Accessed 25 January 2018).
Yarkova T. A. Scientific foundations for managing students’ research activities in educational institutions of higher education. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical University, 2013, no. 3, pp. 215–228 (in Russian).
Feist G. J. The development of scientific talent in Westinghouse finalists and members of the National Academy of Sciences. Journal of Adult Development, 2006, V. 13, Issue 1, pp. 23–35. DOI: 10.1007/s10804-006-9002-3
Simonton D. K. Age and outstanding achievement: What do we know after a century of research? Psychological Bulletin, 1988, V. 104, no. 2, pp. 251–267.
Vermeir K. Scientific research: Commodities or commons? Science & Education, 2013, V. 22, Issue 10, pp. 2485–2510. DOI: 10.1007/s11191-012-9524-y
Razina T. V. Strukturno-funktsional'naya organizatsiya i genezis motivatsii nauchnoi deyatel'nosti [Structural and functional organization and the genesis of scientific activity motivation]. Diss. Dr. Sci. (Psych.). Yaroslavl, 2016. 612 p.
Nonaka I., von Krogh G., Voelpel S. Organizational knowledge creation theory: Evolutionary paths and future advances. Organization Studies, 2006, V. 27, Issue 8, pp. 1179–1208. DOI: 10.1177/0170840606066312
Nonaka I., Toyama R., Konno N. SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 2000, V. 33, Issue 1, pp. 5–34. DOI: 10.1016/S0024-6301(99)00115-6
Wierzbicki A. P., Nakamori Y. (eds.) Creative environments: Issues of creativity support for the knowledge civilization age. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 2007. 509 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-71562-7
Lee M. R. Leading virtual project teams: Adapting leadership theories and communications techniques to 21st century organizations. Boca Raton, CRC Press, 2013. 217 p.
Magnusson P., Schuster A., Taras V. A process-based explanation of the psychic distance paradox: Evidence from global virtual teams. Management International Review, 2014, V. 54, Issue 3, pp. 283–306. DOI: 10.1007/s11575-014-0208-5
Pangil F., Chan J. M. The mediating effect of knowledge sharing on the relationship between trust and virtual team effectiveness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2014, V. 18, Issue 1, pp. 92–106. DOI: 10.1108/JKM-09-2013-0341
Morley S., Cormican K., Folan P. An analysis of virtual team characteristics: A model for virtual project managers. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 2015, V. 10, no. 1, pp. 188–203. DOI: 10.4067/S0718-27242015000100014
Merkevičius J., Davidavičienė V., Raudeliūnienė J., Buleca J. Virtual organization: Specifics of creation of personnel management system. E&M Economics and Management, 2015, V. 18, Issue 4, pp. 200–211. DOI: 10.15240/tul/001/2015-4-014