CC BY
14
Т. А. Виноградова Южно-Уральский государственный университет, г. Челябинск,
Российская Федерация М. С. Кувшинов Южно-Уральский государственный университет, г. Челябинск,
Российская Федерация
Исследование инновационной активности персонала промышленных предприятий
Аннотация. Расширение предприятиями масштабов инновационной деятельности обусловлено их заинтересованностью в сохранении и укреплении рыночных позиций. Успешность этой деятельности во многом зависит от степени развития компетенций сотрудников в области создания и внедрения инноваций. Исследование направлено на апробацию методики оценки уровня инновационной активности персонала (УИАП) промышленных предприятий. Методологической основой работы послужили теории инновационного менеджмента и управления персоналом. Для определения УИАП использовалась оригинальная авторская методика, которая предусматривает расчет интегрального показателя на основе 40 индикаторов. Они характеризуют инновационную активность персонала на индивидуальном уровне и на уровне предприятия. Информационная база исследования основана на кейсе компании ООО «Модерн Гласс» и включает документы бухгалтерской и управленческой отчетности, бизнес-планы, прогнозы. Апробация указанной методики выявила низкий уровень инновационной активности персонала. Для корректировки политики управления в сфере инноваций предложен комплекс мер, включающий совершенствование системы оплаты труда и нематериального стимулирования; развитие компетенций в сфере инноваций; проведение мероприятий по повышению осведомленности об инновационной деятельности компании. Согласно прогнозным оценкам, данные меры позволят на 16 % повысить уровень инновационной активности персонала.
Ключевые слова: инновации; инновационная политика; инновационная активность; промышленные предприятия; инновационное развитие.
Для цитирования: Vinogradova T. A., Kuvshinov M. S. (2022). The study of employees' innovative behaviour at industrial enterprises. Journal of New Economy, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 109-126. DOI: 10.29141/2658-5081-2022-23-3-6. EDN: RBPQSY.
Информация о статье: поступила 4 мая 2022 г.; доработана 14 июня 2022 г.; одобрена 17 июня 2022 г.
Introduction
Unprecedented trade restrictions and sanctions against Russia, digitalisation of economic processes, global trends towards the emergence of innovation economy have become the external factors that are leading to an increase in the requirements for the performance of modern enterprises. Moreover, the significance of companies' innovation activity has grown in response to these factors [Voskanov, 2017, p. 114]. Nevertheless, if compared with the global trends in implementing innovations, the ability of Russian enterprises to do so is at a low level
[Baev, Solovyeva, 2014, p. 147; Nguyen, 2021, p. 51]. One of the principal reasons behind this is the lack of employees' innovative behaviour caused by the importance of human capital being underestimated [Ámo, Kolvereid, 2005, p. 10; Akram et al., 2020, p. 120; Yuan, Woodman, 2010, p. 330; Shin, Yuan, Zhou, 2017, p. 81]. However, employees are a crucial component of enterprises' innovative development [Klein, Sorra, 1996, p. 1057; Neganova, Dudnik, 2019, p. 888; West, 2002, p. 120].
Thus, employees' innovative behaviour is one of the conditions for the intensification of companies' innovation activity [Sokerina, 2016, p. 98; Rogers, 2003, p. 210; Shin, Yuan, Zhou, 2017, p. 82] and achieving long-term goals in the field of innovative development [Bani-Melhem, Zef-fane, Albaity, 2018, p. 1611; Odetunde, 2019, p. 20].
There are plenty of international studies demonstrating how important employees' innovation results are and how they serve companies' success. For instance, in Ámo's work [2005, p. 112], the twofold influence of employees' innovative behaviour was revealed. On the one hand, the high level of employees' innovative behaviour contributes to the achievement of companies' innovation results within a short period of time. On the other hand, employees' innovative performance in itself leads to staff development. The above-mentioned facts collectively increase the possibility of innovative advancement of enterprises in the long run.
Therefore, the superiors of enterprises who are focused on creating and consolidating competitive edges should conduct a result-based policy in the area of employees' innovative behaviour management [Lipych et al., 2018, p. 201; Zhou, Shalley, 2003, p. 182]. In accordance with the last statement, the authors' method for analysing and developing the policy is presented in this article.
Referring to the importance of employees' innovative behaviour management system, it is worth mentioning that the majority of modern industrial enterprises do not have one [Zhang, Xi, Xu, 2021, p. 129]. In most cases this is due to the absence of supervisors' understanding how useful the system is [Belkin, Belkina, 2010, p. 208]. The latter is the reason underlying the low level of the system regulation, the lack of activities aimed at stimulating the high level of employees' innovative behaviour, and the low level of funding of enterprises' innovative performance.
The above illustrates the necessity of drafting a comprehensive policy on employees' innovative behaviour management, which represents the purpose of the current article. The policy should cover the method for its assessment and analysis and, therefore, the objectives of the research are as follows:
1) to identify the key aspects of the policy on employees' innovative behaviour management;
2) to justify the method for assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour;
3) to assess the level of employees' innovative behaviour using the case of an industrial enterprise located in the Chelyabinsk oblast;
4) to develop proposals for the superiors of the enterprise in order to enhance the effectiveness of the system of employees' innovative behaviour management.
Theoretical review
Employees' innovative behaviour is generally considered as performance which has to be managed [Ámo, 2005, p. 112; Matyugina, Emelyanova, Vnukov, 2020, p. 33; Donnik, Pechenaya, Ivanova-Shvets, 2019, p. 9475]. In order to implement the policy on employees' innovative behaviour management effectively, the results of this performance should be measured [Spiege-laere, 2014, p. 120]. However, there is a variety of approaches to be used to assess the effectiveness of the implementation of any activity. For instance, superiors can apply absolute and
relative indicators, calculate and analyse them, and after all they will get data for the decisionmaking process.
Thus, in order to reach informed management decisions in the field of employees' innovative behaviour management, it is crucial to be able to measure and evaluate the results of such performance. The current approaches for assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour represented in the scientific literature are the following.
1. The first approach concerns assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour by analysing the frequency of its characteristic features. According to Sokerina [2016, p. 98], there are four of them, namely: coming up with innovative ideas and projects; striving of the company's staff for professional development and self-development; the level of involvement in ongoing innovation performance; and employees' ability to learn and transfer knowledge. Unfortunately, this approach lacks the specific indicators for assessing the level of the staff innovation activity, which prevents supervisors from using this approach in practice.
2. The second approach applies the similar perspective, but unlike the previous one, it contains characteristics that were divided into two groups: internal and external [Klochkova, Sak-sina, 2013, p. 10]. The external characteristics reveal the results of employees' innovative behaviour noticeable for other participants of companies' innovative performance, e.g. the number of innovative ideas and projects proposed and implemented by staff; the level of employees' initiative; staff involvement in R & D. The internal characteristics, for its part, define employees' inner state, for example, receptivity to new information, self-development, self-expression, self-education, the level of motivation, etc. We should note that both groups need to be taken into account simultaneously. In this case, the results may be achieved in the short term. This approach, as well as the first one, does not include any specific indicators that can be used to evaluate the level of employees' innovative behaviour.
3. The next approach was proposed by Levanova [2011, p. 204]. It is worth mentioning that the author developed the system of indicators for assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour. The indicators are divided into four groups: intellectual resources; innovative receptivity of the staff; organisational and administrative resources; and psychological climate. However, every company should adapt the model and system of indicators to its inner features, external market conditions, etc. This fact greatly increases the complexity of implementing this approach. In addition, using the method of expert assessments decreases the reliability and objectivity of the approach. The mentioned drawbacks heighten the risk of obtaining incorrect results.
4. The method to evaluate the level of employees' innovative behaviour from the viewpoint of the process approach. There are four stages (sub-processes) of innovative performance: generating ideas; preparing for implementing innovative ideas; implementation of the ideas; assessing the effectiveness of the innovative projects [Kharchenko, Volkov, 2019, p. 162]. Several specific indicators were developed for each stage. The peculiarity of this approach lies in evaluating the innovative behaviour's economic benefits while assessing the level of employees' innovative performance.
We should highlight that the above approaches use either companies' summary indicators or abstract parameters. All these downsides of the existing approaches may diminish the effectiveness of human capital management at an enterprise, which in turn will affect the level of innovative development (Figure 1).
The results obtained by conducting the theoretical review reinforce the need for developing a comprehensive method to assess the level of employees' innovative behaviour. The method, moreover, should serve the goals of innovative development. The focus should also be on the policy on employees' innovative behaviour management that must be drafted in the way of
Fig. 1. Drawbacks of employees' innovative behaviour assessment:
the impact on enterprise performance Рис. 1. Недостатки оценки инновационной активности персонала: влияние на результаты деятельности предприятия
minimising the possible future concerns and challenges. Thus, the new method should eliminate the identified drawbacks. Our approach to calculating the level of employees' innovative behaviour is presented further.
Research methods
The company's policy on employees' innovative behaviour management should be based on the priority of innovative development and designed to produce positive social, economic, and market effects. We define the policy as an official document that forms part of the company's strategy of innovative performance. The prime goal of such a policy is to achieve the appropriate level of employees' innovative behaviour, so that the company could gain intended results. In addition, the policy is supposed to reach all employees and departments. Figure 2 shows its seven integral elements required for all types of enterprises and provides their brief description.
When implementing the policy, the major priority should be given to the assessment and analysis of the level of employees' innovative behaviour. As part of these processes, the data for subsequent encouragement of employees to participate in innovation activities will be obtained.
Fig. 2. Core elements of the policy on employees' innovative behaviour management Рис. 2. Ключевые элементы политики управления инновационной активностью персонала предприятия
Thereby, we propose a method for assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour. It builds on several components of employees' innovative behaviour, these are:
• a set of personal qualities of employees that are vital within innovative performance (responsibility, commitment, creativity, mobility, team spirit, etc.);
• ability to come up with innovative ideas, learn and transfer knowledge;
• employees' innovative behaviour aimed at implementing innovations;
• existence and realisation of employees' innovation potential.
The core elements of the policy on employees' innovative behaviour management are examined in detail in Table 1.
Table 1. Description of the core elements of the policy on employees' innovative behaviour management
Таблица 1. Характеристика элементов политики управления инновационной активностью персонала предприятия
No. Elements Description
1 System of employees' innovative behaviour management The system includes goals, tasks, and principles of employees' innovative behaviour management. It also covers the internal document management and information system. All these items should be adopted to the company's human resource management policy
2 Structure of employees' innovative behaviour management A specific department (or employee) should be appointed responsible for implementing the policy. Moreover, the roles, authority, and distribution of the responsibilities among the members should be specified
3 Determining the factors affecting employees' innovative behaviour The element includes identifying both external and internal factors which might influence the level of employees' innovative behaviour for a specific enterprise
Table 1 (concluded)
Окончание таблицы 1
No. Elements Description
4 Assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour The assessment procedure is conducted by calculating and analysing the indicators of employees' innovative behaviour
5 Assessing the influence of employees' innovative behaviour on financial and non-financial indicators of enterprises Superiors need to assess the possible economic losses or gains from the current level of employees' innovative behaviour. Managerial, social, market, and technological effects should also be evaluated
6 Incentive system aimed at elevating the level of employees' innovative behaviour The element includes drafting the comprehensive incentive system that would serve to increase the level of employees' innovative behaviour
7 Monitoring and controlling the level of employees' innovative behaviour The scope of this element depends on numerous internal factors. Nevertheless, it should be implemented on an ongoing basis
Figure 3 presents the elements of our method for assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour.
Fig. 3. Core elements of the method for assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour Рис. 3. Методика оценки уровня инновационной активности персонала предприятия
The system of employees' innovative behaviour indicators should conform to the following criteria: objectivity, credibility, unambiguity, validity, low labour intensity, and practical applicability. Table 2 provides the list of indicators created by the authors based on the specified components of employees' innovative behaviour that are considered from the perspective of external and internal forms of manifestation of the employees' innovative behaviour (both at the individual and company levels).
Table 2. Indicators for assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour
Таблица 2. Показатели для оценки уровня инновационной активности персонала предприятия
Levels Components Level 1: Indicators of employees' innovative behaviour manifested at the individual level Level 2: Indicators of employees' innovative behaviour manifested at the company level
1. Personal qualities of employees that are vital within the innovative behaviour Group 1.1: 1) level of employees' creativity, scores; 2) level of professional competences, scores; 3) intensity of the use of IT-technologies, %; 4) level of executive discipline, %; 5) level of employees' motivation, scores Group 2.1: 21) share of staff members with project skills and experience, %; 22) share of staff members involved in innovation activity, %; 23) turnover rate for the staff participating in innovation activity, %; 24) level of labour discipline, %; 25) efficiency of labour costs, conditional units
Table 2 (concluded)
Окончание таблицы 2
Levels Components Level 1: Indicators of employees' innovative behaviour manifested at the individual level Level 2: Indicators of employees' innovative behaviour manifested at the company level
2. Staff's ability to come up with innovative ideas, learn and transfer knowledge Group 1.2: 6) number of innovative ideas proposed by the staff, items per person; 7) number of patent applications on average per one employee, items per person; 8) share of staff members who transfer knowledge to (or teach) their colleagues, %; 9) number of project teams that develop and implement innovations, units; 10) amount of training hours, manhour Group 2.2: 26) share of project activities for which external expertise was required due to the lack of employees' skills, %; 27) expenditure incurred in attracting external expertise, conditional units; 28) share of training costs within the company's innovation activity, %; 29) share of staff members interested in professional growth and development, %; 30) share of project team members who are employees of the company, %
3. Activities aimed at implementing innovations Group 1.3: 11) number of implemented innovative projects, items per person; 12) number of innovative projects in which project teams failed to meet the deadlines because of employee actions, units; 13) productivity gains, %; 14) share of staff members who participate in innovative projects, %; 15) average development period for a new innovative project, months Group 2.3: 31) average profits on innovative projects, thousand rubles; 32) average payback period of innovative projects, years; 33) average profitability of innovative projects, %; 34) share of innovative projects in which project teams succeeded in meeting the deadlines, %; 35) share of innovation costs that have exceeded the planned limits, %
4. Existence and realisation of innovation potential Group 1.4: 16) loss of working time due to employees' sick leaves, manhour; 17) share of staff members suffering from professional burnout syndrome, %; 18) staff motivation to productive innovation activity, %; 19) share of staff members able to participate in future innovative projects, %; 20) absenteeism rate, % Group 2.4: 36) depreciation of fixed assets, %; 37) compliance of working conditions with law requirements and standards, %; 38) level of financial stability of the enterprise, scores; 39) bankruptcy rate (Beaver model), conditional units; 40) share of innovative projects with timely funding, %
In total, the integrated system includes 40 indicators. Each allocated subgroup contains five indicators. Using these indicators one can obtain data for calculating the summary of composite indicator abbreviated as the LEIB (level of employees' innovative behaviour). The equation for calculating the indicator is as follows:
LEIB = ¿0hsh), h=1
where vh is the importance weight of the h-th indicator of employees' innovative behaviour; sh is the score for the certain amount of the h-th indicator of employees' innovative behaviour; h = l,r, r are the overall number of indicators for assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour (r = 40).
Prior to calculating the LEIB, several preliminary actions should be performed:
• choosing the specific time periods, for which the calculation of indicators will be carried out;
• identifying the number of such periods (t= 1 ,T);
• collecting the data for calculating the indicators of employees' innovative behaviour;
• calculating the indicators of employees' innovative behaviour;
• estimating vh and sh by using such frameworks as the Fishburn method and the method of pairwise comparisons [Vinogradova, Kuvshinov, 2021, p. 133; Postnikov, Spiridonov, 2015, p. 240; Fishburn, 1978, p. 135].
The result of calculating the LEIB is measured in scores. However, it was an indispensable step to use this approach in order to take into account the wide range of different indicators from Table 2. The composite indicator as a basic principle systematises and aggregates individual parameters of analysis, such as the level of employees' creativity, the level of professional competences, intensity of the use of IT-technologies, etc. (the indicators from Table 2). Meanwhile, one can obtain comprehensive results from it. That is why we used this approach as the basis of the method. It differs from the existing methods because includes more complex and important data on company's innovation activity and employees' innovative behaviour.
Calculating the score for the h-th indicator of employees' innovative behaviour (sh) is possible if the value of each indicator is known. We proposed assessing each indicator on a scale of 1 to 5. This scale was chosen because it will serve two purposes: to distinguish between marks and to eliminate the possibility of artificial increasing the number of calculations. It should be considered that the score of 1 corresponds to the least desirable value of the indicator, and the score of 5 - to the most desirable value. The example of identifying the scores of Group 1.1 indicators is presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Example of identifying the scores for Group 1.1 indicators
Таблица 3. Пример балльной оценки показателей по группе 1.1
Indicators Scores (depend on the value of indicators)
1 2 3 4 5
from to from to from to from to from to
Level of employees' creativity, scores 0 40 40 60 60 65 65 70 70 100
Level of professional competences, scores 0 50 50 60 60 70 70 80 80 100
Intensity of the use of IT-technologies, % 0 50 50 60 60 70 70 80 80 100
Level of executive discipline, % 40 100 25 40 10 25 5 10 0 5
Level of employees' motivation, scores 0 90 90 115 115 130 130 155 155 400
The sequence of implementing the procedure of assessing the level of employees' innovative behaviour in a company is presented in Figure 4.
Fig. 4. Procedure for assessing and analysing the level of employees' innovative behaviour Рис. 4. Процедура оценки и анализа уровня инновационной активности персонала предприятия
The obtained results of calculating the LEIB may be in the range of 8 to 40. There are three possible types of employees' innovative behaviour:
1) passive behaviour - between 8 and 20 points;
2) fragile behaviour - between 20 and 30 points;
3) active behaviour - between 30 and 40 points.
In addition, we recommend to calculate and analyse the composite indicator systematically, which will help collecting required data for subsequent forecasting.
The managerial decision produced as a result of assessing the LEIB can be affected by: the numerical value of the LEIB and its forthcoming dynamics; the numerical values of the subsets of the LEIB indicators; forecast data about possible changes in the LEIB; the company's goals and objectives in the field of innovative development; resource possibilities of an enterprise.
Furthermore, we should specify that enterprises can apply this method only for employees who participate in innovative projects and influence the company's innovative development.
Research results
According to the data obtained by the OECD1 members, the level of employees' innovative behaviour in Russian companies is unsatisfactory. The same is true for enterprises operating in the Chelyabinsk oblast. For instance, only 11.4 % of all Chelyabinsk enterprises were confirmed as innovation-active companies in 2020, whereas in 2018 the numerical value of it was higher. So, when it comes to assessing innovation activity, the Ural Federal District
1 Oslo Manual. (2018). Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation. 4th Edition. 237 p.
took only the fourth place among other regions of the Russian Federation. The aforementioned data confirm the necessity of exploring the level of innovation activity in Chelyabinsk enterprises.
There are several criteria that have been constituted as key parameters for including a company in the short list:
1) physical location and operations in the territory of the Chelyabinsk oblast;
2) attribution to "Manufacturing industries" (Section C in accordance with the Russian Classification of Economic Activities (OKVED);
3) attribution to medium-sized or large-scale companies based on the assessment of the enterprise's staff number (more than 100 employees1). The amount of the company's turnover should also be taken into account (less than 2 billion rubles2);
4) implementing innovation activities regardless of their scope;
5) providing access to internal management accounts and data related to innovative performance;
6) capability and commitment of a company to conduct research and explore the level of employees' innovative behaviour.
As a result of the selection and based on the parameters mentioned above, one company was chosen for testing the developed method. One objective of the present research was to demonstrate the possibility of applying our method in practice. This is the reason why only one company was chosen to present the obtained research results.
OOO Modern Glass is a forward-looking company that produces specialty glass. The company implements innovation activities on a permanent basis. To date, the superiors of the company develop and introduce innovations and inventions and apply them to production technologies of new types of glass products:
1) electrically heated glass;
2) variable transparency glass;
3) radiation-resistant glass.
Furthermore, the company management has adopted the innovative development strategy for the next five years. The most vital aspect of the strategy is the necessity to increase the level of employees' innovative behaviour.
During the research of the enterprise's innovation activity, no crucial problems were found. However, in order to reach the established goals of the innovation policy (for instance, raising the quality of glass products, introducing new IT-technologies, etc.), the enterprise should develop the system of employees' innovative behaviour management. This revealed that there was the need to calculate and assess the LEIB composite indicator. In this regard, the enterprise's performance indicators were explored between January 1, 2019 and January 1, 2022.
With a view of calculating current scores for the certain amount of the h-th indicator of employees' innovative behaviour (sh, h = 1 ,r, r = 40), the forty indicators included in the final system were estimated based on the data retrieved from the enterprise's managerial accounting report. The importance weights (vh) were already identified at the preliminary stages of the research [Vinogradova, Kuvshinov, 2021, p. 135]. Figure 5 shows the results of calculating the LEIB for the company in question. According to the results, the company displays the fragile type of employees' innovative behaviour.
1 On the development of small and medium-sized businesses in the Russian Federation: Federal law of July 24, 2007 no. 209-FL (latest revision). P. 8. (In Russ.)
2 On the marginal values of income received from entrepreneurial activities for each category of small and medium-sized businesses: Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation of April 4, 2016 no. 265. P. 1. (In Russ.)
27.00 26.50 26.00 25.50 25.00 24.50 24.00
01.01.2019 01.07.2019 01.01.2020 01.07.2020 01.01.2021 01.07.2021 01.01.2022
Fig. 5. Dynamics of the LEIB for OOO Modern Glass Рис. 5. Динамика интегрального показателя УИАП для анализируемого предприятия
During the reporting period, the dynamics of the LEIB was unstable. Table 4 contains the data, which confirm that there was a 5.4 % total reduction in the LEIB. It is worth mentioning that in the last six months of the monitoring period the indicator was characterised by positive changes. This was due to the increase in the innovation activity funding initiated by the company's superiors. In addition, no significant discrepancies are revealed between the values of the LEIB at each level.
Table 4. Results of calculating the LEIB for OOO Modern Glass
Таблица 4. Результаты расчета показателя УИАП для исследуемой организации
Time period LEIB (Level 1) LEIB (Level 2) LEIB (total)
Results, scores Growth, % Results, scores Growth, % Results, scores Growth, %
01.01.2019 13.1б21 - 13.4бб9 - 2б.б29 -
01.07.2019 14.02S7 б.58 12.0б7 -10.40 2б.0957 -2.00
01.01.2020 13.22S7 -5.70 12.4003 2.7б 25.б29 -1.79
01.07.2020 12.5б21 -5.04 12.0б7 -2.б9 24.б291 -3.90
01.01.2021 12.1б21 -3.1S 12.б004 4.42 24.7б25 0.54
01.07.2021 12.124 -0.31 12.3337 -2.12 24.4577 -1.23
01.01.2022 12.0573 -0.55 13.1337 б.49 25.191 3.00
In the last period, the growth of the LEIB resulted from the increase in the indicator for Level 2. It should be remembered that this kind of indicator of employees' innovative behaviour manifests itself on the company (external) level. The total growth rate of the LEIB (Level 2) was 6.49 %. This growth was made possible by enhancing economic efficiency during the implementation of innovative projects.
In the light of the research results obtained, we formulated the following recommendations:
1) to apply the principles of the process approach during employees' innovative behaviour management;
2) to calculate the LEIB on a regular basis and monitor the results;
3) to identify and eliminate the causes of the low level of employees' innovative behaviour;
4) to forecast the dynamics of the LEIB by applying the methods of economic and mathematical modelling [Antokhonova, 2019, p. 160; Mazurov, Padve, 2017, p. 24];
5) to apply the system approach to financial planning;
6) to develop the company's training system and conduct courses aimed at enhancing soft skills;
7) to set or alter the remuneration system in accordance with the key tasks of the enterprise in the field of innovative development.
In order to follow the recommendations mentioned above, the project on improving the innovation policy was proposed. The project will enable the superiors to achieve the numerical value of the LEIB equal to 30 scores, which is the lower level for the active type of innovative behaviour.
As a part of planning the transformational changes in the enterprise's innovative performance, the extensive work was carried out, which included economic assessment of the required financial resources and the calculation of the possible costs. Table 5 contains the results of drafting the budget for implementing the activities that will serve to increase the LEIB.
Table 5. Annual planned budget for activities on increasing the level of employees'
innovative behaviour
Таблица 5. Плановый годовой бюджет на реализацию мероприятий по повышению инновационной активности
персонала предприятия
Activities / costs Total costs, thousand rubles
Increasing the salary level 1,349.92
A growing tax burden (depends on the obligation to pay insurance) 422.52
Drafting the intangible reward system 102.70
Increasing the level of education and qualifications of staff 340.67
Planning and conducting corporate events 107.70
Creating an information system 114.00
Total 2,437.51
Share of costs in the company's net income (for the last year), % 10.58
Expected growth in the LEIB rate, scores (in reaching the maximum at 30 scores) 4.81
Average planned amount of money spent on increasing the LEIB rate by one score, thousand rubles 506.76
The total amount of funds necessary for increasing the LEIB in the planning period is 2,437.51 thousand rubles, which is equivalent to 10.58 % of the company's net profits. The indicator that represents the average amount of costs incurred in increasing the LEIB by one score was also calculated. For the enterprise this indicator equals 506.76 thousand rubles.
Conclusion
Calculating and analysing the level of employees' innovative behaviour are essential for the effective management of innovation in enterprises. Searching for and exploring the current scientific literature in the field of employees' innovative behaviour management produced the following results:
1) employees' innovative behaviour is one of the main factors in successful innovative development of enterprises;
2) the high level of employees' innovative behaviour is the competitive edge of modern enterprises;
3) employees' innovative behaviour, which can be expressed in the form of quantitative evaluation, is a critical indicator measuring the overall state of enterprises' innovative development.
In addition, the core aspect of these issues is the application of the system approach in order to develop the policy on employees' innovative behaviour management. The implementation of the aforementioned procedures based on quantitative and qualitative measurements of the LEIB allows ensuring that the users of this method obtain scientifically valid results and can take sound managerial decisions on their basis.
According to the research results, the level of employees' innovative behaviour at the enterprise under consideration is unsatisfactory. During the whole period, the level fluctuated between the average and lower limits of the fragile type of innovative behaviour. Moreover, in the absence of the administrative influence, the composite indicator is likely to face a negative trend in the future. These arguments justify how significant it is for enterprises to incentivise their staff to participate in innovation activities in an effort to achieve better results of the enterprises' innovative development [Vinogradova, 2021, p. 156]. To this end, we proposed several activities aimed to increase the LEIB and calculated the budget for implementing them.
Thereby, the testing of the developed method has notable practical importance. The method can be used by an enterprise with a view to enhance its innovative development and competitiveness. The directions for future research include:
• assessing the effectiveness of the company's remuneration system and improving it in order to boost employees' innovative behaviour;
• forecasting the future profits from increasing the level of employees' innovative behaviour;
• assessing how the indicators of employees' innovative behaviour may influence the growth rate of the company's revenue;
• estimating the economic efficiency of the proposed recommendations considering discounted cash flows.
References
Antokhonova I. V. (2019). Methods for forecasting socioeconomic processes. Moscow: Yurayt Publ., 213 p. (In Russ.)
Baev I. A., Solovyeva I. A. (2014). Empirical analysis of the relationship of investment and innovative activity of regions of Russia. Ekonomika regiona = Economy of Region, no. 1, pp. 147-155. (In Russ.)
Belkin V. N., Belkina N. A. (2010). Innovative activity of the personnel in organisations. Ekonomika regiona = Economy of Region, no. 3, pp. 203-210. (In Russ.)
Vinogradova T. A. (2021). The choice of technologies for stimulating the innovative activity of personnel. Proc. of 7th Int. Sci. Conf. "Innovative Technologies, Economics and Management in Industry" (pp. 154-158). Volgograd: OOO "KONVERT" Publ. (In Russ.)
Vinogradova T. A., Kuvshinov M. S. (2021). Implementation of the assessment and analysis of the level of employees' innovation behavior. Vestnik Yuzhno-Uralskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. Ekonomika i menedzhment = Bulletin of South Ural State University. Ser. Economics and Management, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 132-139. DOI: 10.14529/ em210215. (In Russ.)
Voskanov M. E. (2017). Formation and development of the innovative type economy in Russia: Institutional aspect. KANT, no. 2 (23), pp. 111-116. (In Russ.)
Klochkova N. V., Saksina N. N. (2013). Increasing the innovative activity of personnel in the interests of enterprise development. Vestnik OrelGIET = OrelSIETBulletin, no. 4 (26), pp. 7-13. (In Russ.)
Levanova N. E. (2011). Development of a method for assessing the innovative activity of the organisation's personnel. Molodoy uchenyy = Young Scientist, no. 5 (1), pp. 203-206. (In Russ.)
Mazurov B. T., Padve V. A. (2017). The method of least squares (statics, dynamics, and models with updated structure). Vestnik SGUGiT = Bulletin of the Siberian State University of Geosystems and Technologies, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 22-31. (In Russ.)
Matyugina E. G., Emelyanova N. V., Vnukov G. S. (2020). Innovative activity of personnel: Conditions of formation, features, component relationship. Vestnik ekonomiki, prava i sotsiologii = The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology, no. 1, pp. 31-36. (In Russ.)
Neganova V. P., Dudnik A. V. (2019). Openness to innovations of the regional agro-industry as a subjective factor of innovative activity. Ekonomika regiona = Economy of Region, vol. 15, issue 3, pp. 880-892. DOI: 10.17059/2019-3-19. (In Russ.)
Postnikov V. M., Spiridonov S. B. (2015). Selecting methods of weighting factors of local criteria. Nauka i Obrazovanie. MGTU im. N.E. Baumana = Science and Education of the Bauman MSTU, no. 06, pp. 267-287. DOI: 10.7463/0615.0780334. (In Russ.)
Sokerina S. V. (2016). Formation of active innovative activity of the personnel of the enterprise. Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika i upravlenie = Proceedings of Voronezh State University Series: Economics and Management, no. 2, pp. 96-100. (In Russ.)
Fishburn P. (1978). Utility theory for decision making. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 352 p. (In Russ.)
Kharchenko E. V., Volkov S. A. (2019). A methodological approach to assessing the innovative activity of the coal company personnel. Izvestiya Yugo-Zapadnogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika. Sotsiologiya. Menedzhment = Bulletin of the South-Western State University. Series: Economy. Sociology. Management, no. 3 (32), pp. 158-167. (In Russ.)
Akram T., Lei S., Haider M. J., Hussain S. T. (2020). The impact of organizational justice on employee innovative work behavior: Mediating role of knowledge sharing. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, vol. 5, issue 2, pp. 117-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.10.001.
Ámo B. W. (2005). Employee innovation behavior. Thesis for the Degree of Doctor Oeconomia. Bod0 Regional University (Norway). 214 p.
Ámo B. W., Kolvereid L. (2005). Organizational strategy, individual personality and innovation behavior. Journal of Enterprising Culture, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 7-19. DOI: 10.1142/S0218495805000033.
Bani-Melhem S., Zeffane R., Albaity M. (2018). Determinants of employees' innovative behavior. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1601-1620. DOI:10.1108/ IJCHM-02-2017-0079.
Donnik L., Pechenaya L., Ivanova-Shvets L. (2019). Identification of readiness for innovative activities of employees of modern organizations. Proc. 13th Int. Technology, Education and Development Conference (pp. 9473-9479). Valencia, Spain: IATED.
Klein K. J., Sorra J. S. (1996). The challenge of innovation implementation. The Academy of Management Review, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 1055-1080. https://doi.org/10.2307/259164.
Lipych L., Volynets I., Khilukha O., Matviichuk I., Semchuk Z. (2018). Model of management of the employees' innovative behavior at the industrial enterprises. Problems and Perspectives in Management, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 197-206. DOI: 10.21511/ppm.16(3).2018.16.
Nguyen P. (2021). Employee' innovativeness: A conceptual framework. Journal of Science and Technology. Issue on Information and Communications Technology, vol. 19, no. 6.1, pp. 48-53. https://doi. org/10.31130/jst-ud2021-445.
Odetunde O. J. (2019). Employee innovation process: An integrative model. Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 15-40. https://doi.org/10.24840/2183-0606_007.003_0003.
Rogers E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press. 576 p.
Shin S. J., Yuan F., Zhou J. (2017). When perceived innovation job requirement increases employee innovative behavior: A sensemaking perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 38, issue 1, pp. 68-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2111.
Spiegelaere S. D. (2014). The employment relationship and innovative work behaviour: Thesis for the Degree of Doctor of Social Sciences. KU Leuven University (Belgium). 277 p.
West M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 355-424. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00951.
Yuan F., Woodman R. W. (2010). Innovative behavior in the workplace: The role of performance and image outcome expectations. The Academy of Management Journal, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 323-342.
Zhang Y., Xi W., Xu F. Z. (2021). Determinants of employee innovation: An open innovation perspective. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, vol. 31, issue 1, pp. 97-124. https://doi.org/10.108 0/19368623.2021.1934933.
Zhou J., Shalley C. E. (2003). Research on employee creativity: A critical review and directions for future research. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, vol. 22, pp. 165-217. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(03)22004-1.
Information about the authors
Tatyana A. Vinogradova, Applicant for Candidate Degree of Economics and Finance Dept., Sr. Lecturer of Management Dept. at Higher School of Economics and Management. South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk, Russia. E-mail: shishkinata@susu.ru
Mikhail S. Kuvshinov, Dr. Sc. (Econ.), Prof. of Economics and Finance Dept. at Higher School of Economics and Management. South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk, Russia. E-mail: msk1954@mail.ru
■ ■ ■
Источники
Антохонова И. В. (2019). Методы прогнозирования социально-экономических процессов. Москва: Юрайт, 213 с.
Баев И. А., Соловьева И. А. (2014). Эмпирический анализ взаимосвязи инвестиционной и инновационной активности регионов России // Экономика региона. № 1. С. 147-155.
Белкин В. Н., Белкина Н. А. (2010). Инновационная активность персонала организации // Экономика региона. № 3. С. 203-210.
Виноградова Т. А. (2021). Выбор технологий стимулирования инновационной активности персонала // Инновационные технологии, экономика и менеджмент в промышленности: сборник научных статей VII международной научной конференции. Волгоград: Общество с ограниченной ответственностью «КОНВЕРТ». С. 154-158.
Виноградова Т. А., Кувшинов М. С. (2021). Реализация оценки и анализа уровня инновационной активности персонала предприятия // Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия «Экономика и менеджмент». Т. 15, № 2. С. 132-139. Б01: 10.14529/ ет210215.
Восканов М. Э. (2017). Формирование и развитие экономики инновационного типа в России: институциональный аспект // КАШ". № 2(23). С. 111-116.
Клочкова Н. В., Саксина Н. Н. (2013). Повышение инновационной активности персонала в интересах развития предприятия // Вестник ОрелГИЭТ. № 4(26). С. 7-13.
Леванова Н. Е. (2011). Разработка методики оценки инновационной активности персонала организации // Молодой ученый. № 5(1). С. 203-206.
Мазуров Б. Т., Падве В. А. (2017). Метод наименьших квадратов (статика, динамика, модели с уточняемой структурой) // Вестник СГУГиТ. Т. 22, № 2. С. 22-31.
Матюгина Э. Г., Емельянова Н. В., Внуков Г. С. (2020). Инновационная активность персонала: условия формирования, признаки, взаимосвязь компонентов // Вестник экономики, права и социологии. № 1. С. 31-36.
Неганова В. П., Дудник А. В. (2019). Готовность к инновациям в АПК региона как субъективный фактор инновационной активности // Экономика региона. Т. 15, вып. 3. С. 880-892. D0I: 10.17059/2019-3-19.
Постников В. М., Спиридонов С. Б. (2015). Методы выбора весовых коэффициентов локальных критериев // Наука и образование. МГТУ им. Н.Э. Баумана. № 06. С. 267-287. DOI: 10.7463/0615.0780334.
Сокерина С. В. (2016). Формирование активной инновационной деятельности персонала предприятия // Вестник Воронежского государственного университета. Серия: Экономика и управление. № 2. С. 96-100.
Фишберн П. (1978). Теория полезности для принятия решений. Москва: Наука. 352 с.
Харченко Е. В., Волков С. А. (2019). Методический подход к оценке инновационной деятельности персонала угольной компании // Известия Юго-Западного государственного университета. Серия: Экономика. Социология. Менеджмент. № 3 (32). С. 158-167.
Akram Т., Lei S., Haider M. J., Hussain S. T. (2020). The impact of organizational justice on employee innovative work behavior: Mediating role of knowledge sharing. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, vol. 5, issue 2, pp. 117-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjik.2019.10.001.
Ámo B. W. (2005). Employee innovation behavior. Thesis for the Degree of Doctor Oeconomia. Bodo Regional University (Norway). 214 p.
Ámo B. W., Kolvereid L. (2005). Organizational strategy, individual personality and innovation behavior. Journal of Enterprising Culture, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 7-19. DOI: 10.1142/S0218495805000033.
Bani-Melhem S., Zeffane R., Albaity M. (2018). Determinants of employees' innovative behavior. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1601-1620. D0I:10.1108/ IJCHM-02-2017-0079.
Donnik L., Pechenaya L., Ivanova-Shvets L. (2019). Identification of readiness for innovative activities of employees of modern organizations. Proc. 13th Int. Technology, Education and Development Conference (pp. 9473-9479). Valencia, Spain: IATED.
Klein K. J., Sorra J. S. (1996). The challenge of innovation implementation. The Academy of Management Review, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 1055-1080. https://doi.org/10.2307/259164.
Lipych L., Volynets I., Khilukha O., Matviichuk I., Semchuk Z. (2018). Model of management of the employees' innovative behavior at the industrial enterprises. Problems and Perspectives in Management, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 197-206. DOI: 10.21511/ppm.16(3).2018.16.
Nguyen P. (2021). Employee' innovativeness: A conceptual framework. Journal of Science and Technology. Issue on Information and Communications Technology, vol. 19, no. 6.1, pp. 48-53. https://doi. org/10.31130/jst-ud2021-445.
Odetunde O. J. (2019). Employee innovation process: An integrative model. Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 15-40. https://doi.org/10.24840/2183-0606_007.003_0003.
Rogers E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press. 576 р.
Shin S. J., Yuan F., Zhou J. (2017). When perceived innovation job requirement increases employee innovative behavior: A sensemaking perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 38, issue 1, pp. 68-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2111.
Spiegelaere S. D. (2014). The employment relationship and innovative work behaviour: Thesis for the Degree of Doctor of Social Sciences. KU Leuven University (Belgium). 277 p.
West M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 355-424. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00951.
Yuan F., Woodman R. W. (2010). Innovative behavior in the workplace: The role of performance and image outcome expectations. The Academy of Management Journal, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 323-342.
Zhang Y., Xi W., Xu F. Z. (2021). Determinants of employee innovation: An open innovation perspective. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, vol. 31, issue 1, pp. 97-124. https://doi.org/10.108 0/19368623.2021.1934933.
Zhou J., Shalley C. E. (2003). Research on employee creativity: A critical review and directions for future research. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, vol. 22, pp. 165-217. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(03)22004-1.
Информация об авторах Виноградова Татьяна Александровна - шискатель кафедры экономики и финансов, старший преподаватель кафедры менеджмента Высшей школы экономики и управления. Южно-Уральский государственный университет, г. Челябинск, РФ. E-mail: shishkinata@susu.ru Кувшинов Михаил Сергеевич - доктор экономических наук, профессор кафедры экономики и финансов Высшей школы экономики и управления. Южно-Уральский государственный университет, г. Челябинск, РФ. E-mail: msk1954@mail.ru
© Vinogradova T. A., Kuvshinov M. S., 2022
ТРЕБОВАНИЯ К МАТЕРИАЛАМ, ПРЕДСТАВЛЯЕМЫМ В ЖУРНАЛ «Journal of New Economy»
Общие положения
Для публикации принимаются статьи, соответствующие тематике журнала и настоящим требованиям. Представляемые материалы должны быть актуальными, обладать научно-практической значимостью и новизной.
Статьи, направляемые в редакцию, рецензируются и в случае положительного заключения редактируются. Редакция не согласовывает с авторами изменения и сокращения рукописи, не затрагивающие принципиальных вопросов.
Статья, отправленная автору на доработку, должна быть возвращена в исправленном виде в максимально короткие сроки с ответами автора на замечания рецензента, а также пояснениями всех изменений, сделанных автором.
Статьи аспирантов и соискателей могут приниматься к публикации без соавторства с доктором или кандидатом наук. Статьи, в число авторов которых входят студенты и магистранты, не принимаются к публикации.
Общее количество авторов статьи - не более трех (для международных коллективов - не более пяти).
Материалы, представляемые авторами в редакцию:
Материалы пересылаются в редакцию по электронной почте.
Заявка на публикацию включает следующие файлы:
1. Файл, озаглавленный фамилиями авторов на русском языке и содержащий:
1) 1-3 кода по классификации JEL;
2) сведения об авторах на русском языке*;
3) ключевые слова на русском языке (5-8 слов);
4) аннотацию на русском языке (150-200 слов);
5) название статьи на русском языке;
6) текст статьи;
7) библиографический список на русском языке.
2. Файл, озаглавленный фамилиями авторов на английском языке и содержащий:
1) перевод сведений об авторах на английский язык;
2) перевод названия статьи на английский язык;
3) перевод ключевых слов на английский язык;
4) перевод аннотации на английский язык;
5) перевод библиографического списка на английский язык.
* Фамилия, имя, отчество автора; ученая степень; ученое звание; должность; организация, которую представляет
автор; адрес организации; контактный телефон (с указанием кода города); e-mail. Адрес организации указывается
в последовательности: почтовый индекс, страна, город, улица, дом.
Вся указанная информация подлежит публикации.
Требования к оформлению рукописи
Объем статьи - от 35 000 до 50 000 знаков с пробелами, не включая список литературы.
Текст набирается через полтора интервала, кегль - 14 пт, гарнитура - Times New Roman на листе формата А4 с полями 2 см.
Все страницы рукописи нумеруются.
Каждая таблица должна иметь название, рисунки - подрисуночную подпись на русском и английском языках.
Формулы, рисунки и таблицы нумеруются в порядке их упоминания в тексте.
Графические элементы (рисунки, схемы) должны быть рассчитаны на черно-белое воспроизведение и предоставлены в редактируемом виде.
