International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET) Volume 10, Issue 01, January 2019, pp. 1251-1262, Article ID: IJMET_10_01_127 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=01 ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359 © IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed MANAGEMENT OF INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENTS OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN WORLD AND RUSSIAN PRACTICE Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa GlobalLab, Ltd, Moscow, Russian Federation ABSTRACT The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that a higher education institution allows for the implementation of innovative research based on its own development and management of intellectual activity. In order to determine the possibility of managing innovative developments, it is advisable at the university to integrate the system of intelligent control and form an innovation management body. The novelty of the research is determined by the fact that for the first time in the domestic practice a question is being investigated regarding the intellectual management of higher education institutions as well as the forms of integration of innovative activity. Higher education institutions in various countries allow us to determine how innovative forms can be implemented in a managerial aspect, depending on the capabilities of the university and its technological focus. Each of the participants in innovation requires constant monitoring and coordination of various bodies. In this regard, it is necessary to clearly understand how to organize a particular activity in the framework of interuniversity cooperation. Methodologically, the article is based on the study of historical and theoretical experience, as well as a set of parameters, which are determined based on the general conditions for the formation of management decisions. The practical applicability of the article is revealed in the direction of the activity to increase the share of innovative products, both technological and intellectual, in the practical activities of the university. Keywords: Management, Innovative developments, Structure, Promotion, Higher education institutions, Russia. Cite this Article: Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa, Management of Innovative Developments of Educational Institutions in World and Russian Practice, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 10(01), 2019, pp.1251–1262 http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&Type=01 http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1251 editor@iaeme.com Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa 1. INTRODUCTION Today in the Russian Federation there is an imbalance in innovative development, which is characterized, in particular, by the discrepancy between the high innovative potential of higher education institutions and the indicators of its implementation in RIA (results of intellectual activity) commercialization, including small innovative enterprises created at universities [1]. Barriers to effective commercialization of RIA remain at the level of innovative development of social and economic systems: the lack of an integrated innovation chain of RIA transfer with the corresponding effective economic component from the position of the theory of open innovations (universities -transfer of innovative developments created at small innovative enterprises at the University and transformation of RIA into competitive products and services – transfer of innovative developments to commercial organizations of various sectors of the economy); the lack of comprehensive methodological support for the process of activities monitoring aimed at the introduction of innovative developments into practical use; uncertainty in the interaction of scientific, educational and production space; the lack of business administration of the innovative profile of high-tech developments in the relevant areas of commercialization, the system of market niches search through the demanded areas of their use [2]. In this regard, there is a growing need for the development of theoretical and methodological, scientific and practical base in the field of establishment and implementation of the RIA of universities commercialization mechanism, covering its components, tools for implementation in practical use of generated innovative developments, directions of their practical use [3]. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. C. Dahlborg, D. Lewensohn, R. Danell and C. J. Sundberg Universities are structurally included in the research sector of the national innovation system in article by C. Dahlborg, D. Lewensohn, R. Danell and C. J. Sundberg [4] — a subsystem of knowledge generation, interacting with the public, private sector and the service sector. 2.2. C. Zagel, L. Grimm and X. Luo Among the key elements of the national innovation system in article by C. Zagel, L. Grimm and X. Luo [5] it is also necessary to note venture capital, small innovative enterprises, innovation infrastructure, territorial economic clusters, regional innovation systems, public sector. 2.3. M. Lind and K. Barner A distinctive feature of the universities activity in the national innovation system in article by M. Lind and K. Barner [6] is their complex interaction with all the elements outlined above. 2.4. A. Francesconi and C. Dossena Modern practice of implementation of innovative activity by universities in article by 2.4. A. Francesconi and C. Dossena [7] emphasizes multi-level integrative (network) interaction in the national innovation system, ensuring the effectiveness of the innovation process. 2.5. K. Gonchar and B. Kuznetsov The essence of the models of universities functioning in the context of integrative interactions is to describe the relationships of participants in innovation processes in article K. Gonchar and B. Kuznetsov [8] including universities, at each stage of creating a knowledge-intensive, high-tech, innovative product. At the same time, economists attach great importance to the interaction of industrial structures and universities engaged in the development of high technologies, the http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1252 editor@iaeme.com Management of Innovative Developments of Educational Institutions in World and Russian Practice introduction of new technologies for production based on the achievements of fundamental and applied science. 2.6. R. Moloney and H. L. Xu. One of the main tasks of universities in this interaction is the generation of new knowledge and the initiation of innovative projects based on them in article by R. Moloney and H. L. Xu [9]. 2.7. Abramov For example, the triple helix model conceptualizes the entrepreneurial and innovative potential of the University and substantiates [10] the possibility of its implementation in the framework of inter-organizational interactions "science-state-business" [11], contributing to the generation of innovative component. In the model the "tetrahedron" University innovation infrastructure is a "laboratory base" [12] for the training of professionals able to participate in innovation activities in their areas of expertise. Empirical and theoretical experience of the scientific community in the field of innovative processes study influenced the further study of the science and practice integration and the creation of theoretical models of universities integration interactions, revealing the features of cooperation of institutions of knowledge economy in innovative ecosystems, leading to the activation of innovation using innovative mechanisms. 2.8. A. N. Khorin, Y. M. Potanina and A. V. Brovkin It should be noted that modern universities are an innovative scientific and entrepreneurial complex, which carries out the following activities and their respective functions [1]: • educational activities – perform training and qualification functions, the additional and continuous education [1]; • R & D implementation (research and development) - research and intellectual function [2]; • business activity - economic function; • innovation activity - the function of innovation; • strategic planning and forecasting is a function of long-term planning. 2.9. Features of the functioning of modern universities Foreign and domestic researchers and economists distinguish the following features of the functioning of modern universities, formed under the mutual influence of the existing conditions and trends in the development of science, technology and innovation [13]: • central participation in the transfer of generated knowledge and technology to production and services; • implementation of business management models that form an open and flexible organizational and management structure and contribute to the strengthening of the University's management core; • regional distribution of educational "campuses" of the University; • increasing importance of the economic function of the University, based on comprehensive entrepreneurial culture development, solving the problems of commercialization of RIA; http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1253 editor@iaeme.com Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa the development of innovative activities of the University with the creation of an appropriate innovation infrastructure, including a belt of small innovative enterprises, which allows us to characterize the University as an innovative and entrepreneurial; • functioning of the University in systems of different levels and nature (regional system of transfer of knowledge and technology, innovation ecosystem, system of scientific and technological complex, socio-economic system of the region and the state as a whole, the system of world economic space, etc.); • close interaction and cooperation of universities with the public sector, production and services; • development of interdisciplinary connections in the implementation of innovation activities which resulted from the need to implement joint innovation projects in different fields of science; • changes in the structure of sources of financing of innovation activities with a predominance of the share of private investors; • focus on fundamental research that are included in the list of promising research areas and allow us to create a scientific and technical reserve, possible for practical use in the future; • high degree of integration in the global scientific, educational and economic system; • making a contribution to regional economic development; • active involvement of young scientists and students from other countries; • positioning and leadership in certain areas of research; • active participation of universities in the formation of independent expert communities. Summing up the above, it should be noted that the presented models refer to the new innovative models of development of universities that use administrative, intellectual, financial, material, labor resources and participate in innovative processes in society [8]. The generalized model of modern universities functioning emphasizes the implementation of their educational, research and economic activities, and also has the objects of innovation infrastructure in its structure [14]. Thus, the University builds models for training specialists, which are aimed, on the one hand, at the preparation and production of generations of innovators, on the other hand, at the production of innovative ideas and products for different sectors of the economy [15]. At the same time, these features of the modern University functioning emphasize the need to solve the problems of generated innovative solutions transfer (technologies) as well as their commercialization [16]. • 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS The theoretical and methodological basis of the study is the scientific works of domestic and foreign scientists on the transfer and implementation in practical use of RIA, in particular, the establishing and implementation of mechanisms of RIA commercialization. The work also used applied developments in the field of innovative activity organization in universities, small innovative enterprises created at universities, departments for the implementation of intellectual activity results. Methodological basis of the study were system, process and integrated approaches to the study and modeling of social economic phenomena. Such methods were used: generalization, analysis and synthesis, schematization, structuring and modeling, comparison and grouping, scientific abstraction, expert assessments. In the study of economic processes and phenomena also methods of financial and economic analysis, statistical methods, functional modeling methodology were used. http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1254 editor@iaeme.com Management of Innovative Developments of Educational Institutions in World and Russian Practice 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS One of the generalizing relative indicators of the commercialization of IPO at the state level is the "Share of cash proceeds from the sale, licensing of IPO in the total amount of trade operations." [17] The dynamics of this indicator in the rating "Global innovation index" for 20142018 is presented in table 1. Table 1. Dynamics of changes in the indicator "Share of cash receipts from sales, IPO licensing in the total amount of trade operations, %" in some countries of the world according to the rating “Global innovation index” Name of the country The rating for considered indicator in 2018 USA Japan Sweden Switzerland Finland Germany Republic of Korea Singapore Israel Russia 1 1 1 1 1 16 5.08 3.31 2.85 4.99 3.51 0.80 5.13 3.53 2.60 7.15 3.55 1.06 5.10 3.98 3.68 4.13 3.16 0.82 5.09 4.71 4.21 3.82 2.9 0.94 5.00 5.00 3.40 4.40 3.20 1.20 Changes compared to 2014, +/– % -1.6 33.8 16.2 -13.4 -9.7 33.3 15 0.54 0.63 0.75 1.04 1.20 55.0 17 19 41 0.31 1.25 0.13 0.38 1.07 0.14 0.58 0.55 0.13 0.69 0.87 0.22 1.10 1.00 0.20 71.8 -25.0 35.0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 A significant impact on the positive results of registration of security documents on the results and their practical use has a qualitatively executed application [16]. The analysis of statistical data in the field of effectiveness of research and development allows to indirectly assess the quality allocated for the consideration of applications through the indicator "Share of patents granted in the total volume of the submitted applications" (table 2). For the period from 2011 to 2017, the average value of the share of granted patents in the total volume of applications filed by Russian applicants was 0.81. The average value of the share of granted patents in the total volume of applications filed by foreign applicants was 0.75. On average, 23% of applications submitted by Russian applicants are returned for revision or rejected. Despite the presence on the Rospatent official website of quite capacious and complete information on the filling of the patent application, for many inventors, including universities, it is difficult to navigate in the field of patent business due to lack of experience and time, especially among young researchers, due to the complexity of the process. http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1255 editor@iaeme.com Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa Table 2. Share of granted patents for inventions in the total volume of applications filed in the Russian Federation Name of indicator Number of applications submitted, total 2011 41 414 2012 44 211 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 44 914 40308 45 517 41 587 53 584 including Russian applicants foreign applicant 26 495 14 919 28 701 15 510 28 765 24 072 29 269 26 795 36 192 16 149 16 236 16 248 14 792 17 392 Patents granted, total including Russian applicants foreign applicant 29 999 20 339 9660 32 880 22 481 10 399 31 638 33 950 34 706 34 283 48 367 21 378 23 065 22 560 21 054 31 607 10 260 10 885 12 146 13 229 16 760 Share of granted patents in total volume of submitted applications 0.72 0.74 0.70 0.84 0.76 0.72 0.90 Share of patents granted in the total amount of applications filed by Russian applicants 0.77 0.78 0.74 0.96 0.77 0.79 0.87 Share of granted patents in total volume of submitted applications by foreign applicants 0.65 0.67 0.64 0.67 0.75 0.89 0.96 The complexity of the application for registration of IPO due to the specifics of the activities for the implementation of R&D (compliance with the sequence of filling in the documents, the implementation of formal requirements, competent preparation of the rationale for the practical applicability of the new development), of course, causes difficulties for the inventor [18]. The existence of problem at the stage of filling in an application for registration of intellectual property is also results from the lack of sufficient information base for the inventor in the field of patents, active promotion and "propaganda" of scientific activity in universities, lack of interest in it from talented young people. In terms of access to international markets, there are also difficulties: financial, legal, organizational. Patent activity of domestic applicants abroad is extremely low. According to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in 2016, the top three in the number of patent applications PCT (Patent Cooperation Treaty) includes the United States, Japan, China. The list of leading countries in 2016 in terms of indicators "Number of PCT patent applications (Patent Cooperation Treaty)", "Share of patent applications from the global indicator" is in table 3. It should be noted that the patent activity at the international level of some universities in the world is also noted in the WIPO annual report. Table 3. List of leading countries in 2016 by indicators "Number of PCT patent applications (Patent Cooperation Treaty)", "Share of patent applications from the global indicator» № п/п Name of the country Number of patent applications (Patent Cooperation Treaty) Share of patent applications from Universities, % Number of PCT patent applications 1 USA 56 595 7.3 4122 2 Japan 45 239 2.3 1019 3 China 43 168 4.1 1785 4 Germany 18 315 2.3 414 5 Republic of korea 15 601 8.2 1277 6 France 8208 2.9 240 7 Britain 5496 8.6 473 8 Netherlands 4679 2.9 136 9 Switzerland 4365 3.5 154 10 Sweden 3720 0 0 11 Russia 1037 0.3 3 The classical innovation chain, which determines the order of research and implementation of their results on the market, includes the following components: basic research - search and applied research - scientific and technical (developmental-implementational) developments in http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1256 editor@iaeme.com Management of Innovative Developments of Educational Institutions in World and Russian Practice practical use of RIA — production of products and services, cooperation of initiators of commercialization of RIA — distribution to consumers [19]. Despite the apparent linearity of the chain, the sequence of implementation of innovative processes is not linear, since research and development typically are based on the actual technological development, research and production sectors and, therefore, are influenced by the needs of the society's current needs. The source of innovation processes is the "consumer market", which is characterized by the complication of existing products and services, the growth of their knowledge intensity. Therefore, on the one hand, it is very important to conduct high-quality fundamental and subsequent research (exploratory and applied research), as it gives a broader idea of the potential of technology and direct business opportunities for business. On the other hand, the results of R & D should have some potential for demand and competitiveness in the implementation of products and services based on them, to meet the needs of society. The low level of demand and implementation in the practical use of RIA universities of the Russian Federation is justified in tables 4-6. Another important criterion for determining the problem areas of commercialization of RIA universities of the Russian Federation is the presence of factors conducive to the development of innovation. The emergence of competitive technologies and knowledge-intensive products and services is the result of the complex interaction of various actors of innovation in the market. It seems to us that institutional factors (high role of the state, institutions of development (support), investors, including venture capital, in the process of commercialization of RIA), the development of regulatory, information, investment and business environment are the factors conducive to the development of innovation. To determine the state of the factors conducive to the development of innovative activity in the Russian Federation, let us turn to the world practice of measuring and evaluating innovations. As indicators of innovative development, as a rule, a set of indicators is proposed. One example of such measurement is the determination of the implementation of innovation rating (innovation index) for the countries of the world according to the methodology proposed jointly by the World intellectual property organization, Cornell University in the USA, the French research Institute INSEAD (The Global Innovation Index – GII). In general, the dynamics of the complex indicator the "Global innovation index" of the Russian Federation for the period from 2011 to 2018 is positive. However, there is a gap between the groups of indicators "Potential (resources) of innovation", "Development of technologies and knowledge economy" and "Efficiency of innovation" (table 4). Table 4. Dynamics of indicators "Global innovation index" of the Russian Federation (according to the position in the rating) Name of the indicator Potential (resources) of innovation The development of technology and the knowledge economy Innovation efficiency 2011 59 34 75 56 2012 60 32 84 51 2013 52 48 101 62 2014 56 45 69 49 2015 52 49 60 48 2016 44 47 49 43 2017 43 51 75 45 2018 43 56 77 46 –16 –22 –2 –10 The improving of the position The deterioration of the position The deterioration of the position The improving of the position Rating years Absolute change over the period http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1257 Final rating editor@iaeme.com Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa It should be noted that the impact of University activities on the innovative development of countries is indicated in the ranking of "Global innovation index" through indicators such as "Scientific cooperation of universities with industry", "Ranking of the best universities in the world". According to the first indicator, there is no significant improvement (table 5), the final rating on the factor-component "Innovative relations" in 2018 also amounted to a low position of the Russian Federation. Table 5. Ranking of the Russian Federation in terms Of "Scientific cooperation of universities with industry", "Ranking of the best universities in the world" Rating years 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Average value for the period Scientific cooperation between universities and Ranking of the best universities in industry (rating) the world 55 72 83 25 62 25 65 25 65 27 44 25 41 22 60,9 24,8 Institutional factors (political situation, legal framework, business environment) are among the factors proposed in the rating, which have an impact on the implementation of innovation activities of countries. The need to develop technological entrepreneurship and innovative business is also the main criterion for determining the problem areas of commercialization of RIA universities of the Russian Federation. The participation of entrepreneurial initiatives in the process of introducing RIA to the market, the implementation of business processes and the survival of more successful enterprises in the field of high-tech innovations are considered as the main driving forces of economic renewal. Therefore, the development of technological entrepreneurship is recognized as the main aspect of technological progress and effective implementation and commercialization of RIA. The generalized structural and logical model of commercialization of RIA of universities covers not only the initiatives of higher education institutions in terms of introducing RIA to the market, but also entrepreneurial initiatives that Refine the results and organize on their basis knowledge-intensive production [20]. According to the Federal state statistics service of the Russian Federation, the share of innovative entrepreneurship in the structure of small business is extremely small. The share of small enterprises implementing technological innovations in the total number of small enterprises in 2017 amounted to 5.2%, respectively. The same low values are observed in the indicator "Share of innovative goods, works and services in the total volume of shipped goods, performed works and services of small enterprises". In 2017, the value of the indicator was 1.6%. In the practice of foreign countries, the innovative component of small enterprises is much higher. For example, in Germany, the average share of small innovative businesses in the total number of industrial enterprises is 62%, in France – 38%, Norway – 49%, the share of innovative small business structures among EU companies is 38.1%, in OECD countries, the share of business structures engaged in technological innovations, for the entire population of organizations averages 27.7%. http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1258 editor@iaeme.com Management of Innovative Developments of Educational Institutions in World and Russian Practice To date, support for entrepreneurial initiatives in the field of technology introduction to the market, the sector of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), is one of the strategic objectives [21]. The development of technological entrepreneurship is recognized as a major aspect of technological progress. The study showed that the Russian Federation has sufficient potential for the development of high-tech entrepreneurship, as evidenced by the data of Rosstat (table 6). Table 6. Share of high-tech and high-tech industries in the gross domestic product of the Russian Federation Years 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Proportion, % 21.2 21.4 22.5 22.8 24.4 22.8 19.6 20.1 21.0 21.6 21.3 22.0 The average value over the period, 21.8 % Special attention should be paid to such direction of investment activity as venture investment, which has a positive impact on the performance of technological entrepreneurship. Recently, the development of venture capital as a tool for the commercialization of RIA has become widespread [22–24]. According to the annual report "Global innovation index 2017" the number of transactions for venture capital investment in total amounted to 13 703 agreements. Table 7 shows a comparative rating of some countries in the world on the indicator “Number of transactions on venture capital investments per 1 trillion rubles. GDP” The five leaders in the 2018 ranking in terms of the "Number of transactions for venture capital investment, accounting for $ 1 billion. GDP (at purchasing power parity)" was represented by Canada, Israel, USA, France, Finland [25, 26]. Table 7. The Number of deals in venture capital investment per $ 1 billion. GDP (in terms of purchasing power parity) according to the rating “Global innovation index 2018” Name of the country The number of transactions for venture capital investment accounted for $ 1 billion. GDP Canada USA Finland Israel France Britain Sweden Netherlands Switzerland Singapore Germany China Russia 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.01 Rating by indicator "The number of transactions for venture capital investments per 1 trillion rubles. GDP» 1 1 1 1 1 5 8 10 13 14 19 22 71 Taking into account the study, we identify the problem areas of commercialization of RID universities of the Russian Federation and its neutralizing factors. The problem areas of http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1259 editor@iaeme.com Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa development and implementation of innovative potential of universities are caused by the following reasons: • the predominance of government measures to stimulate research activities, rather than innovation and investment; • lack of entrepreneurial initiatives motivation in commercialization of innovative developments of universities; • low participation of industrial enterprises in technological innovation and commercialization of RIA; • lack of a stable framework environment that provides space and incentives for the development of innovative high-tech entrepreneurship to facilitate the bilateral exchange of knowledge between the research and practical solutions sector (manufacturing sector); • the focus of the patent and legal system of the Russian Federation only on accounting and registration of IPO; • at the stage of filling the application for the IPO registration there is no assessment of its commercial potential; • barriers to entry into international markets due to lack of financial resources; • low competitiveness of the received innovative developments in terms of substantiation of commercial application of the future technology due to the lack of business administration of the innovation profile of RIA; • lack of interest in practice-oriented inventive activity on the part of researchers. 5. CONCLUSION The basis of economic relations, which determines their character, is constituted by property relations, which are social relations concerning the appropriation and use of economic goods. The economic content of the institution of property is revealed through subject-subject relations about the appropriation-alienation of resources. Such assignment-alienation occurs in the process of their production, distribution (redistribution), exchange and consumption not only by the subjects of the right of ownership (legal entities and individuals). We are talking about all the subjects of social relations (economic, legal, political, social and others). This is due to the fact that a prerequisite for economic activity is the consolidation of the factors of production and the products of labor for a certain, separate economic entity. Therefore, as an object of economic relations, the RIA must first of all be the object of property relations. Traditionally, property relations are usually distributed only to objects of the material world. From a practical point of view, this is explained by the natural, historically established understanding that connects the concept of ownership with a thing, and a material thing. However, as the above analysis of the RIA shows, acting both as a factor of production and as a commodity, intangible goods are also objects of economic relations, and they perform the same functions as material goods in production and exchange. In this regard, it should be noted that, as for the material, for non-material benefits, there must objectively be economic relations, the essence and content of which are very similar to the relations of ownership of tangible objects. However, the intangible nature of the RIA has some influence on the nature of these relations, affecting both their content and, accordingly, the form. In the practical activities of universities this theoretical conclusion has gained a particular importance relatively recently, with the entry into force in 2009 of Federal Law No 217. This law http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1260 editor@iaeme.com Management of Innovative Developments of Educational Institutions in World and Russian Practice is often, but not quite correctly, called an analogue of the American law of Bay-Dole. Federal Law No 217 does not oblige, but only gives higher education institutions of the Russian Federation the opportunity to use the results of RIA by contributing to the authorized capital of a commercial organization (economic company), the purpose of which is the practical application (introduction) of these RIAs. • limiting the size of the share (and, accordingly, the contribution) of the university in the authorized capital (more than 25% for a joint stock company and more than 1/3 for a limited liability company); • the ability to transfer a limited set of rights to the RID to the created society: only the right to use is transferred; • conclusion of a sublicensing agreement is impossible; • the exclusive right to the RID remains for the university-founder. FUNDING STATEMENT Applied research described in this paper is carried out with financial support of the state represented by the Russian Federation Ministry for Education and Science under the Agreement #14.576.21.0100 of 26 September 2017 (unique identifier of applied research RFMEFI57617X0100). REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] Khorin, A. N., Potanina, Y. M., Brovkin, A. V. Sector non-profit organizations in the management of socio-economic systems. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 20(Special issue 1), 2017. Khorin A. N., Potanina Y. M., Brovkin A. V. Management Economic Environment of Nonprofit Organizations. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 9(2(32)), 2018. Bresinsky, M. and von Reusner, F. GLOBE — Learn and Innovate Digitization by a Virtual Collaboration Exercise and Living Lab. In: A. L. Brooks, E. Brooks, & N. Vidakis, Eds., Interactivity, Game Creation, Design, Learning, and Innovation Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 273–281. Dahlborg, C., Lewensohn, D., Danell, R. and Sundberg, C. J. To invent and let others innovate: a framework of academic patent transfer modes. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(3), 2017, pp. 538–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9490-7 Zagel, C., Grimm, L. and Luo, X. Method Cards -- A New Concept for Teaching in Academia and to Innovate in SMEs. In: T. Z. Ahram, Ed., Advances in Artificial Intelligence, Software and Systems Engineering. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 230–241. Lind, M. and Barner, K. Allow the Whole Supply Chain to Innovate. In Finance Unleashed: Leveraging the CFO for Innovation Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 17– 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66370-8_4 Francesconi, A. and Dossena, C. Intersecting Technical Knowledge, Marketing Experience and Customer Activities to Innovate. In: M. Snene, Ed., Exploring Services Science Berlin. Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012, pp. 350–360. Gonchar, K. and Kuznetsov, B. How import integration changes firms’ decisions to innovate. The Annals of Regional Science, 60(3), 2018, pp. 501–528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168015-0697-6 Moloney, R. and Xu, H. L. Taking the Initiative to Innovate: Pedagogies for Chinese as a Foreign Language. In: R. Moloney & H. L. Xu, Eds., Exploring Innovative Pedagogy in the Teaching and Learning of Chinese as a Foreign Language Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2016, pp. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-772-7_1 Abramov, R., Sokolov, M., Surilov, M. and Morozov, I. The simulation of the development of innovation systems in the countries-participants of the union state. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 9(7), 2018, pp. 1112-1119. http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1261 editor@iaeme.com Tatiana Viktorovna Krupa [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] Abramov, R. A. and Sokolov, M. S. Current challenges and competitive advantages of national innovation systems (NIS) of the countries-participants of the union state up to 2030. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 8(4), 2017, pp. 1031-1039. doi:10.14505/jarle.v8.4(26).01 Abramov R. A. Regional economic policy based on industrial sector clustering in the context of sustainable development. Research Journal of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences, 2, 2016; pp. 2100-2106. Khorin A. N., Potanina Y. M., Brovkin A. V. Legal Regulation of Socially-Oriented Legal Technique. Utopía y praxis latinoamericana, 23(82), 2018, pp. 423–431. Cui, L. Research on Cultivating Innovate Thinking of Environment Art Students. In: C. Liu, J. Chang and A. Yang, Eds., Information Computing and Applications Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 332–337. Kroeber, A. China’s Push to Innovate in Information Technology. In: L. Jakobson Ed., Innovation with Chinese Characteristics: High-Tech Research in China London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2007, pp. 37–70. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230591929_2 den Bergh, J., Thijs, S. and Viaene, S. Using New Digital Technologies to Innovate Business Processes and Create Customer Value: An Interview with Prof. Stijn Viaene. In: Transforming Through Processes: Leading Voices on BPM, People and Technology Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2014, pp. 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-039374_1 Innes, J. Why Enterprises Can’t Innovate: Helping Companies Learn Design Thinking. In: A. Marcus, Ed., Design, User Experience, and Usability. Theory, Methods, Tools and Practice Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 442–448. McCuddy, M. K. and Pirie, W. L. Willingness to innovate. In: M. K. McCuddy, H. van den Bosch, W. B. Martz, A. V Matveev and K. O. Morse, Eds., The Challenges of Educating People to Lead in a Challenging World Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2007, pp. 149–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5612-3_8 Eckartz, S., van den Broek, T. and Ooms, M. Open Data Innovation Capabilities: Towards a Framework of How to Innovate with Open Data. In: H. J. Scholl, O. Glassey, M. Janssen, B. Klievink, I. Lindgren, P. Parycek, … D. Sá Soares, Eds., Electronic Government Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 47–60. García-Fontes, W. Incentives to innovate: A survey. In: Incentives for Research, Development, and Innovation in Pharmaceuticals Madrid: Springer Healthcare Iberica, 2011, pp. 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-84-938062-7-9_2 Hirosue, S., Kera, D. and Huang, H. Promises and Perils of Open Source Technologies for Development: Can the ``Subaltern’’ Research and Innovate? In: S. Hostettler, E. Hazboun and J.-C. Bolay, Eds., Technologies for Development Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 73–80. Klein, A. S. and Chapekar, M. S. Innovate America: The Technology Innovation Program at NIST. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 15(4), 2009, pp. 293–300. https://doi.org/10.1057/jcb.2009.11 Lenger, A. and Taymaz, E. To innovate or to transfer? In U. Cantner & F. Malerba, Eds., Innovation, Industrial Dynamics and Structural Transformation: Schumpeterian Legacies Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007, pp. 303–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-49465-2_16 Plantes, M. K. To Stop Sales from Selling on Price, Innovate Your Business Model. In: C. L. Campbell, Ed., Marketing in Transition: Scarcity, Globalism, & Sustainability Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 38. Wambugu, F. M. Africa’s Fight for Freedom to Innovate and the Early Signs of Embracing Biotechnology Especially Genetically Modified (GM) Foods. In: L. S. Privalle, Ed., Women in Sustainable Agriculture and Food Biotechnology: Key Advances and Perspectives on Emerging Topics Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52201-2_8 http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1262 editor@iaeme.com Management of Innovative Developments of Educational Institutions in World and Russian Practice [26] Somboonsong, J. P. How to Innovate in Knowledge Management. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 10(4), 2017, pp. 573–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647017-0187-6 http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1263 editor@iaeme.com