科学管理的动员模式:赞成与反对

A. Fonotov
{"title":"科学管理的动员模式:赞成与反对","authors":"A. Fonotov","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2023.5.2.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conditions, prospects and consequences of using the mobilization management model (hereinafter MM) in science are considered. It is shown that the problem of mobilization arises when politics invades the economy in order to force it to switch to achieving goals that are beyond the current and prospective economic environment.\nTo this end, the economic mechanisms that regulate economic activity are replaced by a system of priorities for the concentration of quality resources in the areas of their own reproduction, ensuring the highest possible growth rates of quality resources over a certain period. The change in the direction of resource flows is carried out by discriminating against non-priority industries, giving rise to technological imbalance and qualitative heterogeneity of the production apparatus. The gap between the priority sphere and the rest of the economy under conditions of mobilization can only grow, leading in time to its disorganization.\nThe situation of mobilization creates extremely disastrous conditions for scientific and innovative activity. Within the framework of the administrative-command system, the scientific ethos is destroyed, and the scientist turns from a researcher and creator into an official-manager for access and interpretation of new knowledge, functionally merging with the state bureaucracy.\nThe logic of events arising from the use of the mobilization management model leads to destructive and disorganizing results. Its limited application is possible only within the framework of individual projects, an indispensable condition for the implementation of which is the existence of an independent system of regulation and control and a strict time frame for its work.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mobilization Model of Science Management: Pro et Contra\",\"authors\":\"A. Fonotov\",\"doi\":\"10.19181/smtp.2023.5.2.10\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The conditions, prospects and consequences of using the mobilization management model (hereinafter MM) in science are considered. It is shown that the problem of mobilization arises when politics invades the economy in order to force it to switch to achieving goals that are beyond the current and prospective economic environment.\\nTo this end, the economic mechanisms that regulate economic activity are replaced by a system of priorities for the concentration of quality resources in the areas of their own reproduction, ensuring the highest possible growth rates of quality resources over a certain period. The change in the direction of resource flows is carried out by discriminating against non-priority industries, giving rise to technological imbalance and qualitative heterogeneity of the production apparatus. The gap between the priority sphere and the rest of the economy under conditions of mobilization can only grow, leading in time to its disorganization.\\nThe situation of mobilization creates extremely disastrous conditions for scientific and innovative activity. Within the framework of the administrative-command system, the scientific ethos is destroyed, and the scientist turns from a researcher and creator into an official-manager for access and interpretation of new knowledge, functionally merging with the state bureaucracy.\\nThe logic of events arising from the use of the mobilization management model leads to destructive and disorganizing results. Its limited application is possible only within the framework of individual projects, an indispensable condition for the implementation of which is the existence of an independent system of regulation and control and a strict time frame for its work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":433804,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science Management: Theory and Practice\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science Management: Theory and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2023.5.2.10\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2023.5.2.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

对动员管理模式(以下简称MM)在科学领域应用的条件、前景和后果进行了分析。研究表明,当政治介入经济以迫使经济转向实现超出当前和未来经济环境的目标时,就会出现动员问题。为此目的,调节经济活动的经济机制被一种优先制度所取代,以便把优质资源集中在其自身再生产的领域,确保优质资源在一定时期内尽可能高的增长率。资源流动方向的改变是通过歧视非优先工业来实现的,造成了生产设备的技术不平衡和质量异质性。在动员条件下,优先领域和其他经济领域之间的差距只会扩大,最终导致其解体。动员的情况为科学和创新活动创造了极其灾难性的条件。在行政命令系统的框架内,科学精神被摧毁,科学家从研究者和创造者变成了获取和解释新知识的官方管理者,在功能上与国家官僚机构合并。使用动员管理模式产生的事件逻辑导致破坏性和混乱的结果。它的有限应用只能在个别项目的框架内进行,执行这些项目的一个必不可少的条件是存在一个独立的管制制度和严格的工作时限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mobilization Model of Science Management: Pro et Contra
The conditions, prospects and consequences of using the mobilization management model (hereinafter MM) in science are considered. It is shown that the problem of mobilization arises when politics invades the economy in order to force it to switch to achieving goals that are beyond the current and prospective economic environment. To this end, the economic mechanisms that regulate economic activity are replaced by a system of priorities for the concentration of quality resources in the areas of their own reproduction, ensuring the highest possible growth rates of quality resources over a certain period. The change in the direction of resource flows is carried out by discriminating against non-priority industries, giving rise to technological imbalance and qualitative heterogeneity of the production apparatus. The gap between the priority sphere and the rest of the economy under conditions of mobilization can only grow, leading in time to its disorganization. The situation of mobilization creates extremely disastrous conditions for scientific and innovative activity. Within the framework of the administrative-command system, the scientific ethos is destroyed, and the scientist turns from a researcher and creator into an official-manager for access and interpretation of new knowledge, functionally merging with the state bureaucracy. The logic of events arising from the use of the mobilization management model leads to destructive and disorganizing results. Its limited application is possible only within the framework of individual projects, an indispensable condition for the implementation of which is the existence of an independent system of regulation and control and a strict time frame for its work.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
On the Separation of Scientific Activity and the State-owned Corporate Form of Science Management in Contemporary Russia. Part 1 Jurisprudence for the Development of Science: Ideas that Should Not Be Forgotten (To the 100th Anniversary of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the RF) The State Policy of the USSR in Relation to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR in the Second Half of the 20th Century. The Organizational and Legal Aspect Introduction of Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Russian Economy: A Practitioner’s View Digitalization of Public Administration and Economy: Terminological Clarity as a Factor of Success of Digital Development. Review of the Textbook “Digital State and Economy” Edited by S. E. Prokofiev, O. V. Panina and K. V. Kharchenko
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1