Model of distributed management of student research activities

This article aims to analyze and adapt distributed management models within the context of students' research activities. The study explores various management approaches, including binary, subsidiarity, matrix, and participatory management. The main attention is given to the models that promote management decentralization and active student involvement in decision-making process. The research methodology includes an analysis of 38 publications in both Russian and English sourced from scientific databases such as eLibrary.ru, Google Scholar, and JSTOR. The study examines management practices from educational institutions and corporate structures to assess their adaptability within universities. The findings indicate that the implementation of distributed management models aids in developing student scientific societies and enhances the flexibility and efficiency of management processes in universities. Both binary and matrix management models help harmonize vertical and horizontal structures, thereby improving interaction between students and faculty. In conclusion, the article stresses the importance of adapting successful management practices from other sectors of the economy to the educational environment to improve the quality of student research and the effectiveness of scientific research and innovation activities.

1. Radina, N. K., Semyonova, L. E., & Kozlova, A. V. (2022). The Development of Science as a Personal Project: Male and Female Students about the Prospects of the Development of Russian Science. Social Psychology and Society, 13(4), pp. 68–89. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17759/sps.2022130405

2. Moskvina A. V., & Kochemasova, L. A. (2019). Competition of research and creative works as a form of self-realization of students. Vestnik of Samara state technical university. Series: psychological and pedagogical sciences, (2), pp. 119–133. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17673/vsgtu-pps.2019.2.9

3. Robnett, R. D., Nelson, P. A., Zurbriggen, E. L., Crosby, F. J., & Chemers, M. M. (2018). Research mentoring and scientist identity: insights from undergraduates and their mentors. International journal of STEM education, (5), pp. 1-14. (In Russian). DOI: 10.1186/s40594-018-0139-y.

4. Kemmet, E. V. (2023). Organization and self-organization in the management of student science and scientific mentoring. Ural federal university journal. Series 1: issues in education, science and culture, 29(4), pp. 231-247. (In Russian). DOI: 10.15826/izv1.2023.29.4.080

5. Ambarova, P. A., & Shabrova, N. V. (2024). Students as partners of research projects in Russian universities: opportunities and barriers. Sociologicheskaja nauka i social’naja praktika, 12(3), рр. 56-75. (In Russian). DOI: 10.19181/snsp.2024.12.3.3

6. Aksenova, N. A. (2013). Models of organizing the management of scientific and research activities in universities. Infrastructure Sectors of the Economy: Problems and Development Prospects, (3), рр. 168-171. (In Russian).

7. Reznik, S. D., & Sazykina, O. A. (2018). Participation of lecturers in management of the department: analysis of university practices. Journal university Management: Practice and Analysis, 3(115), рр. 100-112. (In Russian). DOI: 10.15826/umpa.2018.03.030

8. Walberg, H. J., Paik, S. J., Komukai, A., & Freeman, K. (2000). Decentralization: An international perspective. Educational Horizons, 78(3), pp. 153-164. (In English).

9. Krutogolov, Yu. V. (2022). The anglo-saxon model of state-public management of vocational education. Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University, (4), pp. 233-238. (In Russian). DOI: 10.37493/2307-907X.2022.4.26

10. Zasypkin, V. P. (2008). Models of state management in education: analysis of foreign experience. Scientific Problems of Humanities Research, (10), pp. 82-91. (In Russian).

11. Mikhailova, V. E. (2024). The system of delegation of authority and distribution of responsibility in an educational organization. Science and Practice in Education: Electronic Scientific Journal, 5(1), рр. 15-21. (In Russian). Available at: https://doi.org/10.54158/27132838_2024_5_1_15

12. Lichtenthaler, U. (2016). Six principles for shared management: a framework for the integrated economy. Journal of Business Strategy, 37(4), рр. 3-11. (In English). DOI: 10.1108/JBS-03-2015-0029

13. Scott-Young, C. M., Maged, G., & Grisinger, A. (2019). Shared leadership in project teams: An integrative multi-level conceptual model and research agenda. International Journal of Project Management, 37(4), pp. 565-581. (In English). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.02.002

14. Nikolskiy, V. S. (2023). Service Learning in Russia: Scoping Review. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia, 32(12), рр. 9-28. (In Russian). DOI: 10.31992/0869-3617-2023-32-12-9-28

15. Peters, M. D., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., ... & Khalil, H. (2021). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Implementation, 19(1), pp. 3-10. (In English). DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167

16. Bychkova, O. V. (2016). What is shared governance? University Management: Practice and Analysis, (5), pp. 110-121. (In Russian). DOI: 10.15826/umj.2016.105.049

17. Kosmarski, A. A., Kartavtsev, V. V., Podorvanyuk, N. Yu., & Bode, M. M. (2019). Tribes and transparency: Prospects for digital governance in Russian science. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 6(154), рр. 65-90. (In Russian). DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2019.6.05

18. Kurmanov, A. T., & Shiryaev, S. I. (2012). The сoncept of distributed control in difficult economic structures. Transport Business of Russia, (6-2), рр. 222-224. (In Russian).

19. Walberg, H. J., Susan, J. P., Atsuko, K., & Karen, F. (2020). Decentralization: An International Perspective. Educational Horizons, 78(3), pp. 153-164. (In English).

20. Vykhodtseva, E. A., Guseva, M. N., & Malyskin, N. G. (2015). Management of research activity in higher education institution. Vestnik Universiteta, (9), pp. 130-136. (In Russian).

21. Efanov, A. V., Fedorov, V. A., Prikhod'ko, L. S., Zueva, A. S., & Komarova, K. V. (2009). Organizatsiya nauchno-issledovatel'skoy raboty studentov v vuze. Yekaterinburg. Rossiyskiy gosudarstvennyy professional'no-pedagogicheskiy universitet Publ., 144 p. (In Russian).

22. Stromov, V. Yu., & Sysoyev, P. V. (2017). Model of organizing of students' scientific and research activity. Higher Education in Russia, 10(216), pp. 75-82. (In Russian).

23. Woelert, P., & Stensaker, B. (2024). Strategic Bureaucracy: The Convergence of Bureaucratic and Strategic Management Logics in the Organizational Restructuring of Universities. Minerva. (In English). DOI: 10.1007/s11024-024-09535-1

24. Svitkevich, Yu. V. (2021). Modern academic advising in universities: interaction of process subjects, determinants of results efficiency. North-Caucasus Psychological Bulletin, 19(3), рр. 44-61. (In Russian). DOI: 10.21702/ncpb.2021.3.3

25. Vershitskaya, E. R., Mikhaylova, A. V., Gilmanshina, S. I., Dorozhkin, E. M., & Epaneshnikov, V. V. (2020). Present-day management of universities in Russia: Prospects and challenges of elearning. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), pp. 611-621. (In English). DOI: 10.1007/s10639-019-09978-0

26. Tsvetkov, V. Ya. (2017). Subsidiary management. Modern Management Technologies, 1(73), Article 7302. (In Russian). Available at: https://sovman.ru/article/7302/

27. Paterson, S. L., & Brock, D. M. (2002). The development of subsidiary-management research: Review and theoretical analysis. International Business Review, 11(2), pp. 139-163. (In English). DOI: 10.1016/S0969-5931(01)00053-1

28. Li, X., Wang, J., & Liu, X. (2013). Can locally-recruited R&D personnel significantly contribute to multinational subsidiary innovation in an emerging economy? International Business Review, 22(4), pp. 639-651. (In English). DOI: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2012.12.002

29. Irkhin, I. V. (2020). Subsidiarity Principle: In Search of a Balance between Centralization and Decentralization (State Legal Aspect). Actual Problems of Russian Law, 15(11), pp. 160-171. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17803/1994-1471.2020.120.11.160-171

30. Iwuagwu, E. (2016). The Socio-Ethical Principle of Subsidiarity: A Philosophical Appraisal of Its Relevance in the Contemporary World. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(12), pp. 174-183. (In English).

31. Apugu, S. G. B. C. (2016). Matrix Structure and Its Contributions to a Company’s Operational Flow Pattern. European Journal of Business and Management, 8(22), pp.119-125. (In English).

32. Makarkin, N. P., Tomilin, O. B., & Fadeeva, I. M. (2004). Matrix management in higher education institutions. University Management: Practice and Analysis, 1(29), рр. 43-47. (In Russian).

33. Rees, W. D., & Porter, C. (2004). Matrix structures and the training implications. Industrial and Commercial Training, 36(5), рр. 189-193. (In English). DOI: 10.1108/00197850410548567

34. Belousov, V. L. (2008). Formation of matrix management infrastructure in a research organization. Innovatics and Expertise: Scientific Papers, 1 (2), pp. 54-62. (In Russian).

35. Belousov, V. L., & Inozemtseva, E. A. (2007). Information-procedural model for forming matrix structures of scientific research management. Innovatics and Expertise: Scientific Papers, (1), pp. 184-197. (In Russian).

36. Yelunin, M. N., & Piyavsky, S. A. (2013). Matrix structure for management of the activities of students’ research groups. Higher Education in Russia, (11), pp. 148-152. (In Russian).

37. Wagner, J. A., & Gooding, R. Z. (1987). Shared influence and organizational behavior: A meta-analysis of situational variables expected to moderate participation-outcome relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 30(3), рр. 524-541. (In English).

38. Omorobi, G. O., Mbon, U. F., Owan, V. J., & Ekpenyong, J. A. (2020). Participative management practices and institutional goal attainment in Nigerian universities. American Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(1), рр. 169-177. (In English). DOI: 10.20448/801.51.169.177

39. Tsvetkov, V. Ya. (2012). Application of the principle of subsidiarity in the information economy. Financial Business, (6), рр. 40-43. (In Russian).

40. Mishra, A., Kar, S., & Singh, V. P. (2007). Prioritizing structural management by quantifying the effect of land use and land cover on watershed runoff and sediment yield. Water Resources Management, 21(11), pp.1899-1913. (In English).

41. Schmidt, E., & Rosenberg, J. (2014). How Google Works. Grand Central Publishing, 320 р. (In English).

42. Meyer, K. E., Li, C., & Schotter, A. P. J. (2020). Managing the MNE subsidiary: Advancing a multi-level and dynamic research agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 51(4), pp. 538-576. (In English). DOI: 10.1057/s41267-020-00318-w

43. Rohmanue, A., & Jacobi, E. S. (2024). The influence of marketing communications agencies on activist brands’ moral competency development and ability to engage in authentic brand activism: Wieden+ Kennedy ‘Just Does It.’ Journal of Brand Management, 31(2), pp. 126-139. (In English).