Pushkinskaya st. 43. office 10
Rostov-on-Don, Russia
e-mail: info@hjournal.ru 
tel. +7(863) 269-88-14

cubsEN (2)

Comparative Analysis of Institutional Innovations in Higher Education: Federal vs Flagship

Comparative Analysis of Institutional Innovations in Higher Education: Federal vs Flagship

Journal of Economic Regulation, , Vol. 8 (no. 4),

The paper deals with the processes related to the federal and flagship universities’ establishment and performance in the Russian regions. The review of the literature on institutional change in higher education has enabled the authors to identify several university models classified depending on the methods of replicating old and creating new managerial hierarchies: collegial, democratic, state and market ones. Specific types of strategies which universities can choose to achieve their goals are specified as follows: institutional strategy, market strategy and resource strategy. It is justified in the article that the dominance of the state model of universities in the Russia imposes restrictions on the simultaneous use of several strategies. An analogy has been drawn between the principles of the federal and flagship universities’ establishment in Russian regions and "forced institutional isomorphism", on the one hand; on the other hand, the features of "mimetic institutional isomorphism" as the characteristics of the imitative practices universities from regions follow are revealed. The historical background of the process of federal and flagship universities’ institutionalization in Russia is examined. The article analyzes strategic documents – development programs of the higher education institutes: two of them located in the Southern Federal District, Rostov Region (Southern Federal University and one of the first flagship universities in Russia – Don State Technical University), and two are from the Siberian Federal District (Siberian Federal University and a flagship one – Siberian State Aerospace University). The following factors are suggested as adversely affecting universities’ performance: loss of autonomy and strengthening of regulations in financial transactions in the newly formed structural divisions of both federal and flagship universities; increased administrative workload on the management of structural subdivisions and scientific and pedagogical staff; prevalence of rationing transactions in the management hierarchies of universities.

Keywords: reforms in higher education; institutional change in higher education; Russia; federal universities; flagship universities; development strategies of the universities

  • Abankina, I., Abankina, T., Nikolayenko, E. and Filatova, L. (2013). Comparative characteristics of higher education systems of foreign countries: competitive funding methods. Economics of Education, 1, 53–73. (In Russian).
  • Arzhanova, I. V., Vorov, A. B., Derman, D. O., Dyachkova, E. A. and Klyagin A. V. (2017). Results of Pillar Universities Development Program Implementation for 2016. Journal University Management: Practice and Analysis, 21(4), 11–21. (In Russian).
  • Carnoy, M. (1999). Globalization and educational reform: what planners need to know (Paris, UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning).
  • Chernysh, A. V. (2017). The Emergence of Organizational Models: New Institutionalism Perspective. Sociological Studies, 4, 140–146. (In Russian).
  • Commons, J. R. (2012). Institutional Economics. Terra Economicus, 10(3), 69–76. (In Russian).
  • Devyatko, I. F. (2010). Institutional evolution and institutional design in the era of globalization: the methodological aspect of research (types of research plans and strategies) / Globalization and social institutions: a sociological approach. Edited by: I. F. Devyatko, V. N. Fomina. M.: Nauka, p. 39–59. (In Russian).
  • DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. Economic Sociology, 11(1), 34–56. (In Russian).
  • Hargrave, T. J. and Van de Ven, A. H. (2006). A collective action model of institutional innovation. Academy of management review, 31(4), 864–888.
  • Holmberg, D. and Hallonsten, O. (2015). Policy reform and academic drift: research mission and institutional legitimacy in the development of the Swedish higher education system 1977–2012. European Journal of Higher Education, 5(2), 181–196.
  • Lapko, A. F. (1972). The development of higher education in the USSR during the first three five-year plans // Uspekhi matematicheskikh nauk, XXVII, 6(168), 5–6. (In Russian).
  • Meyer, J. W. and Rowan B. (2011). Institutionalized Organization: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. Economic Sociology, 12(1), 43–67. (In Russian).
  • Petrova, M. (2016). Creation of “Flagship” universities in Russia: the cause, purpose and technology, participants and their number. Politobrazovaniye. Informatsionno-politicheskiy zhurnal, October 29 (http://lawinrussia.ru/content/sozdanie-opornyh-vuzov-v-rossii-prichina-cel-i-tehnologiya-uchastniki-i-ih-kolichestvo-0 – Access Date: 10.12.2017). (In Russian).
  • Powell, W. W. (1991). Expanding the Scope of Institutional Analysis. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis: Chicago: University of Chicago Press, p. 183.
  • RIA News (2016). Experts: supporting universities will have new opportunities for development. RIA News, May 17 (https://ria.ru/abitura_rus/20160517/1434231787.html – Access Date: 10.12.2017). (In Russian).
  • Surovitskaya, G. V., Semin D. I. and Kochergin A. V. (2016). Role of key regional universities in the development of regional economy. Creative Economy, 10(4), 433–450. (In Russian). doi: 10.18334/ce.10.4.35057.
  • Tambovtsev V. and Rozhdestvenskaya I. (2014). Higher education reform in russia:international experience and economics. Voprosy Ekonomiki, 5, 97–109. (In Russian).
  • Volchik, V. V., Zhuk, A. A. and Korytsev, M. A. (2017). Competitive Enviroment of the Higher Education Market in the Rostov Region. TERRA ECONOMICUS, 15(3), 178–196. (In Russian).
  • Volchik, V. V., Maskaev, A. I. and Savko, P. O. (2017). The Marging of the Higher Educational Institutions: Institutional and Organizational Change. Journal of Institutional Studies, 9(3). (In Russian).
  • Weatherley, R. and Lipsky, M. (1977). Street-level bureaucrats and institutional innovation: Implementing special-education reform. Harvard educational review, 47(2), 171–197.
Publisher: Ltd. "Humanitarian perspectives"
Founder: Ltd. "Humanitarian perspectives"
Online ISSN: 2412-6047
ISSN: 2078-5429