CC BY
26
UDC 334.021
T.B. Rusakova, O.S. Saichenko SOCIAL PARTNERSHIP IN EDUCATION
Т.Б. Русакова, О.А. Сайченко СОЦИАЛЬНОЕ ПАРТНЕРСТВО В ОБРАЗОВАНИИ
The paper considers an interaction mechanism between labor and educational markets in the national economy. Weak points of this mechanism in Russia are revealed. It examines essential characteristics of social partnership and the need to use this institution to improve effective interaction of the two markets. Relevant conditions to establish social partnership are looked into. The paper describes macro and micro level factors that restrain interaction among educational institutions, businesses and state in socially important markets. Actions to forge effective social partnership are proposed.
INNOVATIVE ECONOMY; EDUCATIONAL MARKET; LABOUR MARKET; SOCIAL PARTNERSHIP; HUMAN CAPITAL.
Рассматривается механизм взаимодействия рынка труда и рынка образовательных услуг в национальной экономике, выявляются точки разрыва в данном механизме в России. Раскрываются сущностные характеристики социального партнерства и обосновывается необходимость использования данного института для налаживания эффективного взаимодействия двух рынков. Определяются необходимые условия для становления социального партнерства. Приводятся факторы макро- и микроуровня, сдерживающие взаимодействие образовательных учреждений, бизнеса и государства на социально значимых рынках. Предлагаются меры по налаживанию эффективного социального партнерства.
ИННОВАЦИОННАЯ ЭКОНОМИКА; РЫНОК ОБРАЗОВАТЕЛЬНЫХ УСЛУГ; РЫНОК ТРУДА; СОЦИАЛЬНОЕ ПАРТНЕРСТВО; ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСКИЙ КАПИТАЛ.
An innovative character of economic development is based on information and intellectual resources of the society and implies a large differentiation of economic subjects and their interrelations. It entails a growing role and growing requirements for human capital. This is exactly why the most important challenge today is to increase adaptation abilities of human capital.
Effective interaction of the two kinds of market can be provided only on condition that there is a flexible and effective mechanism to accommodate direct and inverse links. Its basic element is mainly economic subjects through which the relevant practical actions are taken to support the interaction mechanism. One of the promising forms to accommodate interests of economic subjects is social partnership. In this respect it looks absolutely timely to do any research of the role and forms of social partnership in terms of the two markets' interaction.
The research area becomes even more relevant due to the fact that subjects of the
markets in Russia are just accumulating experience in accommodating common interests.
This paper is aimed at analyzing the role of social partnership in providing effective interaction of the labor market and educational market in the context of challenges and opportunities.
The following objectives have been set for the current research:
— to look into the problems of the labor market and educational market interaction;
— with the help of theoretical and methodological analysis of social partnership to mark out its essential characteristics as a specific type of social interaction;
— to define and justify conditions contributing to effective interaction of educational institutions, businesses and state in the field of the labor market and educational market interaction;
— to diagnose «sore spots» in establishing social partnership relations and examine the causes constraining new forms of social partnership;
— to propose actions to improve the social partnership mechanism.
^^t^etersburgSate^olytechnica^UniversityJo 5(204) 2014
The labor market, as a system of relations between employees, employers and the state, performs important functions in the national economy. It regulates labor demand and labor supply, stimulates professional, inter-industry, in-process and social mobility, and provides social protection of employment. In its turn, the educational market can be seen as a system of relations between households, employers who make a demand for educational services, educational institutions and the state. Its key role in the turnover of GGP is interaction between demand for educational services and their supply.
Both markets are independent economic systems. However, they are closely interrelated. Speaking about underlying reasons behind this connection, we have to mention the following. First, they function in a single market and are open systems. Their openness is apparent since they experience constant changes in the external environment. Among prerequisites of these changes there are economic ones: need for more active investment in human capital, demand for growing competitiveness at the micro and macro levels, volatility of the economy; social ones: need for fewer high social risks in the markets, provision of successful integration of a person into the society, and European labor and educational space; technological ones: constant and active changes in the structure of the national and world economy, fast-growing information flow, appearance of new forms of employment; institutional ones: need for diminishing high transactional costs of market subjects through creation and consolidation of institutions that help reduce uncertainty of the economic environment and decrease the degree of information asymmetry.
Second, both markets actively participate in the system of human resource reproduction. The educational market enables inclusion of a person into the professional education system, which forms the future structure of labor supply in the labor market. The labor market is a final step in involving population into the system of efficient employment.
Third, the degree of training of a specialist in the educational market is assessed by the environment of labor service consumption rather than by the educational environment itself. So, the labor market, eventually, determines major
education quality standards in terms of change in demand for certain professions and refined competences that applicants for definite jobs should have. Consequently, the existing dynamics of the demand in the labor market represents a non-price factor of supply and demand in the educational service market.
Forth, in the labor market education can be seen as a signal about potential abilities of a candidate for a vacant job. The signal function of education was initially studied in the research of M. Spencer. In his opinion, the role of education is not so much as to develop abilities and skills of those who study, but rather help a person to signal about their abilities and capacities in the labor market [12]. The concept of education as a signal is based on two assumptions. Firstly, the labor market is characterized with information asymmetry. Thus, at the moment of hiring, abilities and skills of a potential worker are unknown to the employer. Moreover, acquiring and cross-checking additional information entails certain transaction costs for a business. Secondly, there is a direct dependence between ability to study and ability to work that the future employee demonstrates. Thus, the obtained education is a signal to the employer about the abilities of the future worker. Consequently, the employer can expect a bigger delivery from a worker with a higher level of education. The level and quality of education is confirmed with a corresponding educational document. So, the signal function of education contributes to a more efficient selection and distribution of labor resources through a lower degree of information asymmetry for the employer. However, significance of the signal function of education constantly changes in the labor market.
Thus, interaction between the labor market and educational service market is objective and represents a space where economic and social interests of all the subjects in both types of the market intermingle. The mechanism of interaction between the markets has a number of direct and inverse links.
When looking into theoretical fundamentals of the interaction between the markets, we have to agree with the authors who say that the interaction is asymmetric from the very beginning and shifted towards the labor market [6, 10, 16]. The labor market is an external
factor for the educational service market. It is the labor market that generated initial impulses to changes in the system of education, since changes that occur dynamically in the structure of production dramatically transform the structure of employment and diversify demands for the professional qualification level of the employed and their mobility.
Therefore, if there is no information about the labor market and its trends, the educational market is unable to define its strategic goals. To transfer external impulses into internal stimuli of its development, it has to know to what extent the personnel training in the current economy corresponds (by its qualities) to the present and future demands of the labor market.
If the labor market delivers initial impulses, then internal factors of the educational market development determine the response: relevant supply of educational services. Through its tools, it helps create a corresponding supply of educational services and satisfy the demand for certain quality of labor services that appears in the market. To adapt education for new labor market conditions some tools can be used, such as change of standards, better quality of education, a bigger variety of educational services, smaller time lag between appearance of the demand for certain specialists and the period, when this demand is met, etc.
Speed and correspondence of reaction depend mainly on such factors as efficiency of educational institutions, quality of the teaching staff, educational market transparency for potential investors, high level of integration between businesses and educational institutions, formation of a single educational space in the country (goals, objectives, standards, accreditation and licensing), etc. As a result, the educational service market plays an important role in accommodating interests of employees and employers and in providing correspondence of the employed population by its quantitative and qualitative parameters to the structure of the demand for labor services in the national economy.
When assessing the mechanism of interaction between the labor market and educational market, it is worth considering two important issues. The first issue is a regional aspect. The matter is that accommodation of qualitative parameters for the two types of market is
impossible in principle as the labor market produces demand for specialists at the regional level in the first place. Economic subjects decide on investment in education considering not only demand for future jobs and competences in a definite regional market but also the demand in other regions' labor markets. Consequently, each educational institution has to understand what labor market it works for: either for this particular regional segment or other segments of national and international markets. The second aspect refers to the presence of time lags. Due to them, the two markets interact discretely. The longer is the period when educational services are provided, the bigger is the time lag within which the two markets adapt to each other and the higher is the probability of structural disproportions in the professional training of human resources. The need to shorten time lags causes the need for improved projections of the demand for the qualified labor force.
Thus, the labor market and the educational service market have to cooperate. The essence of economic activities of the latter one is to assist to all the subjects of the labor market in solving problems.
Labor and educational markets interaction is featured with breakdown of direct and inverse links. Broken coordination in the development of the markets is proved by the deficit in engineering staff in the key sectors of the Russian economy. In 2008, according to the data from human resources services, the deficit in engineers in Russia was 25 % from the existing demand [14]. The deficit has not diminished today. The economy needs twice as many engineers as there are in the labor market now and 4 times as many highly-qualified engineers [14].
At first sight, the lack of engineering staff is mainly caused by insufficient scope and quality of training. However, this hypothesis is partly worn down by the survey conducted jointly by the State University — Higher School of Economics and Rosstat. It shows that engineers account for 30 % of all workers with higher education. The total number of students that are trained in engineering is about 23 % of the total number of students [14]. That is why, without denying that there are problems in the field of professional training of engineering staff, let us look at the problem of deficit in engineers in terms of the labor market. The survey has
^^t^eiersburgSate^olytechnicalUniversiiyJournaL^conomicsno' 5(204) 2014
revealed that about 60 % of engineers do not work within their specialty and half of this number occupy the positions of workers that do not require higher education at all [15]. Therefore, deficit in engineers is explained to a large point by the factors of the labor market development, namely: low social status of engineering work, relatively low salaries and limited opportunities for professional and personal growth in the conditions of the raw material vector of the economic development; big proportions of «overtraining» that results in moving people with higher education into positions that do not require such a level of competence.
«Overtraining» means a higher level of education comparing to the level of demands made to the worker on the part of the functions he or she performs. Disproportion between the obtained diplomas and the occupied position means «overinvestment into human resources». For the economy this means worse labor production, for the worker it entails decreased income and growing dissatisfaction with labor. Today, in the Russian labor market, every fourth graduate does a job that does not require higher education. Most of the downshifting highly trained personnel drift to the pool of specialists with secondary level of qualification. To do these jobs one does not have to have education higher than the one provided by secondary technical school. Every tenth university graduate ends up here. Moreover 5.5 % of university graduates occupy front line positions in trade, 6.3 % operate as blue-collar workers [10, p. 21—22].
Appearance of many overtrained workers in the Russian economy is primarily caused by a gap between the two markets. On the one hand, there is still an extensive demand for higher educational services in the educational market. Herewith, it is hard to provide high level of training in the conditions of such a large scale. On the other hand, over the last decade new workplaces have appeared mainly in the field of trade and services which do not demand higher education from the employed. Workplaces in the production sector, in particular in the processing industry, are modernizing very slowly. Employers play a rather important role in the growing number of the «overtrained». Analysis of their requirements reveals that more than 70 % of managers are interested in hiring a worker with a
higher level of education than the job requires [9, p. 25]. This interest can be explained by a bigger creative potential, better ability for innovations and performance of such workers.
According to the Russian monitoring of economic position and health of the population (RMEZ) in 2008, 36 % of respondents worked in exact correspondence with the specialty they had been trained for, 19 % — in approximate correspondence and 45 % people were employed for the jobs that had nothing to do with their education [6, p. 50]. Inconsistency between the qualification and actual employment means that the money invested in education is used inefficiently and the competences obtained in the educational market are not applied. Absence of demand in the labor market for the specialists trained in the educational service market is called «occupation-education mismatch».
We have to say that this mismatch is objective, due to constant structural changes in the economy, time lag in the educational field, etc. Nevertheless, its profoundness in the Russian economy starts causing serious concern. Even today, about every fourth Russian worker has never been employed by their specialty and every third one turned it down when building their career [6, p. 52]. This situation is the result of low quality of education, irrelevant training profiles, relatively low quality of workplaces, living standards, etc. All these causes, taken together, signal about serious unbalance between the two markets.
Decreased relative size of additional income for a higher level of education. The issue about how investment into education helps getting a higher salary is important for any economy. The way it is settled says for the mission and value of education in the society, significance of the human capital in contributing to the increased competitiveness of the national economy.
In the opinion of Professor R. Kapelyushnikov, in Russia the level of education is the most important determinant of the salaries that people earn. Thus, according to the data of 2008, workers with incomplete secondary education made much less money than those with complete secondary education, the gap was about 20 %. At the same time, university graduates earned about 40 % more than those who finished secondary school. This is not that much, if we take into account the fact that in the majority of the developed countries the
premium for higher education varies within the limits of 50 to 100 % [6, p. 65]. Moreover, analysis of the income change in time has shown, that over the last 15 years, the relative increment in earnings from secondary education has fallen a little whereas the increment in earnings from higher professional education has not changed a lot for women and gone down considerably for men. One more worrying symptom is a considerable decrease in premium for higher education for males [6, p. 66]. Thus, connection between the level education and the level of earnings seems to be quite inconsistent, which can entail rather far-reaching consequences: few stimuli to improve professional and qualification level and, as a consequence, appearance of a knowledge irrelevance syndrome.
Thus, all the aforementioned phenomena show that the cooperation between the two markets is rather weak. There are no clear signals from the labor market to the educational service market.
These problems give evidence that the labor market does not sent clear signals to the educational market. So, the educational market is used to doing without external impulses from the labor market. Demand for educational services is determined by quite different things. Actually, today the interconnection between the two types of market is defined by the major consumer of these services — individual consumers. As a result the educational system has to consider these requirements. Nowadays educational institutions prefer to use such strategies of economic behavior which mostly focus on the demand from individuals rather than demand on the part of the labor market.
So, most educational institutions have only limited information about what employers want, how important they find the quality of education, certain degree level, status of the educational institution, etc. In this relation educational institutions adapt slowly to the requirements of employers, they are inflexible to the changes in the labor market in terms of correspondence of the structure of volumes and profiles of professional training, levels of necessary competences. The situation is getting even worse due to the fact that the educational system is, in principle, a system «with delay».
Thus, internal factors of the educational market development generate unbalance between the structure of demand for personnel in the
labor market and that of supply of competences in the educational market.
Considering all the above-mentioned, a reasonable question about efficiency of educational signals in the labor market may appear. In the conditions when educational institutions demonstrate low adaptability towards current demands of the labor market, value of education as an information signal is becoming insignificant. Apart from this, a weaker signal function of education in the labor market is also caused by devaluation of diplomas due to the large scale of higher education. Extension of access to higher education results in the situation when the degrees of a Bachelor or Master stop being a rare thing. So, one can agree with S. Roschin that today education in the labor market is rather a background than a signal system that reveals information about an applicant for a position [16].
As a rule, educational signal is taken by a Russian employer as a guarantee of development of personality and individual qualities at a certain level rather than professional competences. At the same time, the signal unit is most frequently the quality of a degree and the name of an educational unit, which comes out as a kind of brand in the labor market.
The existing breakdown of direct and inverse links, which is the consequence of inefficient performance of the two types of market, can inhibit creation of innovative Russian economy in future. That is why it is so important to coordinate all subjects in the educational and labor markets.
One of the most promising forms of collaborative activities of the state, business and educational institutions in the field of education is social partnership, which implies the practice of joint decision-making and balanced, shared responsibility.
The category of «social partnership» in scientific literature, legal documents, scientific and methodological papers has a variety of definitions, which is conditioned by different fields of science. With respect to interaction of the two types of market, social partnership can be seen as:
— an interaction mechanism of educational institutions with different structures, subjects for the purpose of self-development, self-organization;
— a form of interaction of educational institutions with external environment;
^st_Petersbuigstatejpoiytechnicai^niveisjtyJouinai-Econom^no. 5(204) 2014
— a «transparent» translator of social services commissioning to the educational system.
Thus, essence of the notion that is being examined comes down to its representation as a specific activity, an interaction system, relationship between different subjects to obtain a common effect.
There have to be certain pre-requisites so that an institution of social partnership could appear. In the paper by I. Osadchaya, who was one of the first to touch on this theme, the following conditions are marked:
— democracy and civil society;
— an objective need for interaction;
— tested mechanisms and procedures of social dialogue;
— institutional representation of group interests, legal and political establishments of government in respect of regulating the interests of participants in such relationship [7, p. 148].
In our opinion, the most important conditions are the latter two. Let us look into them in more detail. All subjects of social partnership have their own interests, their own ideas about objectives and role of professional education in the modern society. So, getting involved in partnership relations, the state has to regulate the labor market and the educational market, but it also has to contribute to the interest of business in establishing long-term relationship with educational institutions. As for educational institutions, they need to learn how to estimate potential benefits of future partners and substantiate prospects of collaborative activities for them rather than just ask them for money. In other words, social partnership as a system of long-term relationship between the state, business and educational institutions for the purpose of increasing adaptation abilities of the educational system, getting flexibility and social security system in the labor market [7, 11] is only possible when:
— each interacting party is interested in collaborative activities and search for ways to ease social problems;
— there is mutually acceptable control and consideration of all participating partners' interests;
— responsibility is balanced and shared by partners.
Thus, the problem of benefit which each economic subject can obtain from social partnership is one of the major ones in this field.
The main momentum that drives collaboration is mutual interest of the state, professional education and business in training professionals whose knowledge, skills and professional competences comply with requirements of modern innovative economy.
Social partnership is good for professional educational institutions as it would help them consider demands of employers in a better way, react to changes in the labor market more promptly, increase quality of educational services and, eventually, it would let institutions perform their main function — provide high quality training of specialists that are in demand in the market. As a result, there is lower quantitative and qualitative unbalance in the labor market which is very good for business. Business will be able, on the basis of university education and at a charge, to have highly qualified staff trained to the level and by profile that correspond to its requirements, including prospective lines of business development. In addition, employers will have an opportunity to diminish transactional costs when searching for a suitable employee, expenses on their retraining as well as costs related with measuring the quality of education an employee has received.
A well developed system of social partnership contributes to better innovative activities of an educational institution. Partners can be seen both as co-authors of innovative development of educational institutions and as partners in implementing innovative processes, producing innovative products and promoting them in the market.
Moreover, the system of social partnership can be used for mutual services. Thanks to joint efforts in socially significant directions, business gets support and trust of the government, forms positive image of companies and create conditions to lobby its own interests. If an educational institution participates in social partnership it can result in a bigger value of its own brand.
Interaction of educational institutions and business has to be built as an inter-sector partnership. As for certain forms of interaction between educational institutions and business, there are quite many of them and they are well covered in scientific literature. Domestic experience in development and interactions of
business and educational institutions has been deeply analyzed in the paper by N. Kelchevskaya and M. Srogovich «Developing a Mechanism for Interaction of a University and an Enterprise is an Objective Need of the 21 Century» [5, p. 112]. The paper reveals more than 10 forms of practical interaction between interested parties. The authors emphasize that the same forms of interaction between higher school and business are applied both in Russia and abroad: internships of students at an enterprise, programs of joint training of specialists. Employers can also have an impact on reforming the educational system as a whole if they lobby their interests in governmental bodies, participate in developing professional standards, qualification requirements and educational programs. Even today, associations of employers (for example, Delovaya Rossiya) take an active part in elaborating rankings of higher and secondary educational institutions. Their assessments influence image, reputation and, consequently, competitiveness of educational institutions. In a number of regions economic clusters having educational institutions as their members start being created. Moreover, for the time being the state has the leading positions in this cooperation. The major fields of interaction between businesses and professional education are defined by governmental documents and documents issued by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia and by regional programs of professional education development at the regional level.
Monitoring of employers that was done in 2013 by the National Research University «Higher School of Economics» showed that the basic forms of interaction were still, first, practical training and internship programs for students, second, open days and job fairs, and, third, joint training programs customized for companies. Thus, in comparison with the previous year the share of companies that organized practical training for university students grew from 24 % to 31 %. This number increased from 21 % to 30 % for those who trained college students and the number of companies who participated in practical training for vocational schools rose from 15 % to 23 % [8, p. 56]. Up to 30 % of companies took part in open days and job fairs that were organized by
universities, colleges or vocational schools. The number of companies that came into agreement for training specialists and workers in professional education institutions of different levels grew by 1.5—2 times [8, p. 57]. As for the new forms of cooperation, only less than 8 % of enterprises have had experience in joint projects with universities and colleges such as, for example, applied Bachelor's programs. So far not more than 10 % of employers have been involved in one more form of networking for companies and professional education institutions — development of professional standards. Less than 10 % of the organizations that took part in the survey have participated in managing educational institutions through representation in collegial boards [8, p. 51—52].
The following forms can be mentioned as an example of effective initiatives in business and professional education interaction:
— support given by business to continuous education programs, for example, Presidential Program of Training Managers for Enterprises of National Economy of Russia;
— participation of business in the guardianship boards of universities for the purpose of implementing its own requirements for contents of education and its results. Such an opportunity has been given to business with a recently passed law on autonomous institutions [4];
— creation of endowment funds in education in order to establish a new structure in universities that are able to integrate innovative projects of business and education interaction, strengthening material and scientific basis of universities, etc. [2—3]. There are already endowment funds in MGIMO-University, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Skolkovo School of Management, European University in St. Petersburg, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg University, Siberian Federal University, Southern Federal University;
— organization of network forms of interaction between universities and enterprises, including working out and implementing joint educational programs, based on new technologies of knowledge translation and development of practical skills. We have to say, that although there are not so many examples of such contacts, but still some of them are there. For example, the governmental
^st_Petersbuigstatejpoiytechnicai^niveisjtyJouinai-Econom^no- 5(204) 2014
corporation «Rosatom» has been interacting with
15 universities headed by the National Research Nuclear University «MEPhI» to train specialists for atomic industry [17]. Recently the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia has signed an agreement with Roscosmos about setting up a consortium consisting of 38 universities and
16 biggest enterprises in space industry [17].
St. Petersburg has positive experience of social partnership, for example, in setting up technological parks. One of them operates on the basis of St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University (first stage). New technologies are applied there by medium-sized businesses. Thus, a certain industrial scientific environment is being created around the university.
Foreign companies, working in the Russian market demonstrate their understanding of the necessity for active participation of employers in the professional education system. Schneider Electric, a big international corporation and leader in its field, interacts with more than 30 universities all over Russia. They include Moscow Power Engineering Institute, Bauman Moscow State Technical University, St. Petersburg Polytechnical University, National Kazan State Power Engineering University, etc. There are quite a number of forms for cooperation. They include joint educational centers where modern technologies of electric power management are studied in terms of the company's equipment, Schneider Electric scholarships, international competitions «Go Green in the City», that help students get advanced experience in practical application of energy efficient solutions directly from the specialist of the leading world company in this industry, international internship programs, etc. [13].
Thus, in recent years interest of business to educational practice has grown, the same as an ambition to play a growing role in it. This trend corresponds to the general world practice. However, this interaction has not got a stable basis so far, it does not focus on the long-term prospective and is often based on personal contacts and connections [9]. According to the data of monitoring employers in 2013, employers choose practical training and internship programs for students as the most promising form of cooperation for their companies: for 46 % of the surveyed companies this type of cooperation is interesting.
Almost one fourth of managers find it helpful to have a chance and organize programs of applied training in their company jointly with an educational institution. However, the employers are still minimally interested in direct management and direct intrusion into the policies of educational institutions: only 6 % of managers would like their companies' representative to take part in the work of college boards of educational institutions. A rather limited number of employers are ready to participate in development of professional standards [8, p. 51—52]. Thus, it is obvious that in future businesses will keep interest towards less expensive and risky forms of interaction.
In this paper we are going to analyze and reveal the points where interests of business and educational institutions go apart at macro and micro levels.
The macro level has been chosen due to the fact that the labor market and educational market actively participate in GDP circulation. We are attributing causes of the macro level as follows:
— turbulence of the microeconomic environment. Many companies in these conditions have a narrow horizon of planning. So it is difficult to expect from an employer a request both for specializations and competences and relevant number of workers that will be in demand in five years;
— lack of regulatory and legal framework. In these days there is no law which would clearly regulate long-term relationship between educational institutions and employers. For instance, the legislation administering contract relations in the educational field is poorly developed;
— absence of tax concessions and other incentives at the federal and regional levels for businesses and enterprises that invest material and technical and financial resources in development of universities;
— slow process of establishing modern institutions of the labor market and educational market and low level of the state support in interaction of professional education and business, etc.
At the micro level, creation of an effective mechanism of social partnership is being slowed down by such factors as:
— detachment of university science from advanced practices and innovative technologies, including pedagogical ones;
— lack of trust between parties and tendency to shift responsibility for possible failures on the potential partner;
— excess regulation — insufficient flexibility, low adaptability of curriculums, unwillingness of many professional education institutions to mold new competences of their graduates that would help them adapt, be mobile and socially secure;
— differences in approaches towards management of production processes in the system of professional education and in business;
— heterogeneity of such a social group as employers. Small and mid-sized business is not ready yet to build up long-term relationship with educational institutions.
In order to get over the abovementioned problems it is possible to suggest a number of solutions that can be implemented within a relatively short period of time.
First, it is reasonable to set up a system of concessional taxation for companies that assist educational institutions. Goal-oriented state support of employers' initiatives aimed at building up mechanisms of social-state governance of the professional education system and assessment of its performance. Second, setting up an integral national system of competences and specializations, including professional standards, in line with current international trends as a substantive basis for interaction of professional education and business. Third, presence of microeconomic projections for the amount and structure of the labor market, employment by jobs and specializations with their further converting into employment projections by level of education and qualification. It is principally important that such projections should be well-founded, available for all interested parties and constantly up-to-date. Forth, provision of channeling for funding educational programs and extension of rights and responsibilities of educational process participants. Fifth, development of innovative and technological potential of educational institutions, including development of technological marketing, long-term forecasting of technology, elaboration of new approaches to assessment of universities depending on their role in the innovative and technological complex of the country.
Finally, an important role is allocated to further development of the legal framework for
interaction of professional education and business, its concrete definition, creation of stable partnership procedures. For example, for further stimulation of legislation of regional three-party committees it would be reasonable to take the following steps:
speed up passing through the State Duma the Code of Labor of the Russian Federation, laws «On Social Partnership in the Russian Federation» and «On Associations of Employers» for further improvement of social and labor relations and social partnership.
define at the federal level the degree of responsibility of employers for non-compliance with the terms of agreement;
initiate, according to the procedures established by law, introduction of additions into the article «Terms of Reference of Local Government» of the Federal law «On General Principles of Local Government in the Russian Federation» of the following content: «local government bodies create conditions to develop social partnership and they are participants in the territorial agreements» [1].
Thus, when tackling the existing problem concerning the breakdown of direct and inverse links between the labor and educational markets it is essential that not only the state but also business should participate which can be achieved in terms of interaction based on social partnership.
The analysis done in the paper allows us to make four conclusions.
First, today there is breakdown of direct and reverse links between the labor market and educational market which is confirmed with low quality of educational services unbalance between supply and demand for competences in the labor market, decreased motivation to improve mobility and a weakening signal function of education in the labor market.
Second, even though there are problems of interaction, social dialogue of higher professional education and business is beneficial for both parties and contributes to development of human capital. Moreover, today's quality of interaction and partnership of business and educational institutions has become one of the conditions for successful promotion of a company, region and country to economic stability, social wealth, and mature civil society.
St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Economics no. 5(204) 2014
Third, to develop social partnership in the field of the labor and educational markets' interaction, it is important to pay special attention to maintaining permanent interest and motivation of social partnership participants by increasingly diversifying forms of interaction.
Forth, the degree of integration of social partners can be different. It is crucially important that this interaction is not a common
one, but interaction of partners to get the effect for the sake of which they have joined together in partnership. Only in this case social partnership will stand, on the one hand, as a tool of control and, on the other hand, as a means of diagnostics and problem-solving for effective interaction of the two markets and, as a result, increased adaptive capabilities of human capital.
REFERENCES
1. Ob obshchikh printsipakh organizatsii mestnogo samoupravleniia v Rossiiskoi Federatsii (zakon o MSU) : Feder. zakon № 131-FZ ot 06.10.2003 g. Rossiiskaia gazeta. 2003. 8 okt. Dop. vypusk № 3316. (rus)
2. O poriadke formirovaniia i ispol'zovaniia tselevogo kapitala nekommercheskikh organizatsii : Feder. zakon № 275-FZ ot 30.12.2006 g. Rossiiskaia gazeta. 2006. 11 ianv. Feder. vypusk № 4265. (rus)
3. O vnesenii izmenenii v otdel'nye zakonodatel'nye akty RF v sviazi s priniatiem zakona «O poriadke formirovaniia i ispol'zovaniia tselevogo kapitala nekommercheskikh organizatsii»: Feder. zakon № 276-FZ ot 30.12.2006 g. Rossiiskaia gazeta. 2006. 11 ianv. Feder. vypusk № 4265. (rus)
4. Ob avtonomnykh uchrezhdeniiakh : Feder. zakon № 174-FZ ot 03.11.2006 g. Rossiiskaia gazeta. 2006. 8 noiabria. Feder. vypusk № 4216. (rus)
5. Kelchevskaya N., Srogovich M. Razrabotka mekhanizma vzaimosvyazi vuza i predpriyatiya — obyektivnaya neobkhodimost XXI veka: uchebnoye posobiye. Ekaterinburg: GOU UGTU-UPI, 2002. 112 s. (rus)
6. Kapelyushnikov R.I., Lukyanova A.L. Transformatsiya chelovecheskogo kapitala v rossiyskom obshchestve (na baze «Rossiyskogo monitoringa ekonomicheskogo polozheniya i zdorovya naseleniya»). M.: Fond «Liberalnaya missiya», 2010. 196 s. (rus)
7. Osadchaya G.I. Sotsiologiya sotsialnoy sfery. Uchebnoye posobiye. M.: Akademicheskiy Proyekt, 2009. 336 s. (rus)
8. Trebovaniya rabotodateley k tekushchim i perspektivnym professionalnym kompetentsiyam personala.
Informatsionnyy byulleten. Monitoring ekonomiki obrazovaniya. № 1 (75)). (rus)
9. Spros na rabochuyu silu — mneniye rabotodateley. Informatsionnyy byulleten. Monitoring ekonomiki obrazovaniya. 2005/ № 1 (19). (rus)
10. Gimpel'son V.E., Kapeliushnikov R.I., Luk'ianova A.L. Uroven' obrazovaniia rossiiskikh rabotnikov: optimal'nyi, izbytochnyi, nedosta-tochnyi?: Preprint WP3/2010/09. Gos. un-t — Vysshaia shkola ekonomiki. M.: Izd. dom Gos. un-ta — Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki, 2010. 64 s. (rus)
11. Kovtsev K.V. Sotsialnoye partnerstvo kak faktor razvitiya vysshego obrazovaniya. Rossiyskoye predprinimatelstvo. 2012. № 19. S. 119—124. (rus)
12. Spence M. Job market signaling. Quarterly. Journal of Economics, 1973, no. 87, pp. 355—374.
13. Kompaniya SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC aktivno razvivayet obrazovatelnyye programmy. URL: https://schneiderele.taleo.net/careersection/2/jobsearc h.ftl?lang=ru&location=175170031531 (rus)
14. Medovnikov D.S. Preodoleniye defitsita kadrov dlya innovatsionnoy ekonomiki (rukopisi na sayte Instituta menedzhmenta innovatsiy NIU VShE). URL: www.imi.hse.ru
15. Nikolayev Ia. Professii inzhenera povysyat status. URL: http://www.rg.ru/2014/06/18/inzener-site. html (rus)
16. Roshchin S.Iu. Spros na obrazovaniye kak signal na rynke truda. URL: http://www.labourmarket.ru/ Pages/conf1/book2_html/23_roschin.htm (rus)
17. Sotrudnichestvo s vuzami. URL: http://www. rosatom.ru/employee/students/not/ (rus)
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ
1. Об общих принципах организации местного самоуправления в Российской Федерации (закон о МСУ) : Федер. закон № 131-ФЗ от 06.10.2003 г. // Российская газета. 2003. 8 окт. Доп. выпуск № 3316.
2. О порядке формирования и использования целевого капитала некоммерческих организаций : Федер. закон № 275-ФЗ от 30.12.2006 г. // Российская газета. 2006. 11 янв. Федер. выпуск № 4265.
3. О внесении изменений в отдельные законодательные акты РФ в связи с принятием закона «О порядке формирования и использования целевого капитала некоммерческих организаций»: Федер. закон № 276-ФЗ от 30.12.2006 г. // Российская газета. 2006. 11 янв. Федер. выпуск № 4265.
4. Об автономных учреждениях : Федер. закон № 174-ФЗ от 03.11.2006 г. // Российская газета. 2006. 8 ноября. Федер. выпуск № 4216.
5. Кельчевская Н., Срогович М. Разработка механизма взаимосвязи вуза и предприятия — объективная необходимость XXI века: учебное пособие. Екатеринбург: ГОУ УГТУ-УПИ, 2002. 112 с.
6. Капелюшников Р.И.. Лукьянова А.Л. Трансформация человеческого капитала в российском обществе (на базе «Российского мониторинга экономического положения и здоровья населения»). М.: Фонд «Либеральная миссия», 2010. 196 с.
7. Осадчая Г.И. Социология социальной сферы: учеб. пособие. М.: Академический Проект, 2009. 336 с.
8. Требования работодателей к текущим и перспективным профессиональным компетенциям персонала: информационный бюл. // Мониторинг экономики образования. 2014/ № 1 (75).
9. Спрос на рабочую силу — мнение работодателей: Информационный бюл. // Мониторинг экономики образования. 2005/ № 1 (19).
10. Гимпельсон В.Е., Капелюшников Р.И., Лукьянова А.Л. Уровень образования российских работников: оптимальный, избыточный, недостаточный?: Препринт WP3/2010/09 / Гос. ун-т —
Высшая школа экономики. М.: Изд. дом Гос. унта — Высшей школы экономики, 2010. 64 с.
11. Ковцев К.В. Социальное партнерство как фактор развития высшего образования // Российское предпринимательство. 2012. № 19. С. 119—124.
12. Spence M. Job market signaling. Quarterly // Journal of Economics, 1973, no. 87, pp. 355—374.
13. Компания SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC активно развивает образовательные программы. URL: https://schneiderele.taleo.net/careersection/2/job search.ftl?lang=ru&location=175170031531
14. Медовников Д.С. Преодоление дефицита кадров для инновационной экономики (рукописи на сайте Ин-та менеджмента инноваций НИУ ВШЭ). URL: www.imi.hse.ru
15. Николаев Я. Профессии инженера повысят статус. URL: http://www.rg.ru/2014/06/18/inzener-site.html
16. Рощин С.Ю. Спрос на образование как сигнал на рынке труда. URL: http://www.labourmarket. ru/Pages/conf1/book2_html/23_roschin.htm
17. Сотрудничество с вузами. URL: http://www. rosatom.ru/employee/students/not/
RUSAKOVA Tat'iana B. — St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University.
195251. Politechnicheskaya str. 29. St. Petersburg. Russia. E-mail: [email protected]
РУСАКОВА Татьяна Борисовна — доцент Санкт-Петербургского государственного политехнического университета, кандидат экономических наук.
195251, Политехническая ул., д. 29, Санкт-Петербург, Россия. E-mail: [email protected]
SAICHENKO Ol'ga А. — St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University.
195251. Politechnicheskaya str. 29. St. Petersburg. Russia. E-mail: [email protected]
САЙЧЕНКО Ольга Анатольевна — доцент Санкт-Петербургского государственного политехнического университета, кандидат экономических наук.
195251, Политехническая ул., д. 29, Санкт-Петербург, Россия. E-mail: [email protected]
© St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, 2014
