DYSFUNCTION OF MODERN RUSSIAN INSTITUTES OF STATE AWARDS IN THE SPHERE OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE

The purpose of the study is to analyze the main dysfunctions of the Russian premium institutes in the field of education and science, and to find out its leveling instruments, by examining the experience of foreign countries; to identify the basic requirements for the novitiate for state awards to employees of education and science in modern Russia in comparison with foreign countries. 

Methods. Neo institutional approach is used by the author. Methods involve comparative analysis, cross-national analysis, and classification. The original solution of tasks associated with the use of a single system-approach to the sociological study of state awards in the sphere of education and science, is extrapolated from institutional economics. 

Results. The basic approaches to the determination of the nature and functions of awards institutions in the field of education and science are considered; its relationship with other social, economic and political trends of contemporary politics in Russia is noted. The basic conditions of non-material motivation of workers of scientifically-educational area in modern Russia in comparison with other countries, including the post-Soviet territory states are defined. Both officially established rules and other requirements to candidates on reception of the state honourable distinctions, observed with the Soviet period are considered. The study identifies the main factors that influence the perception of the role of changes in modern society awards, offers solutions to the identified problems. 

Scientific novelty. The critical analysis of working rules of the Russian legislation regulating an order (procedures) of rewarding has allowed to reveal major disadvantages of the Russian institute of the state awards: opacity of estimated judgements considering the work of the applicant for the award; absence of accurate hierarchy of the state awards and quantity indicators at measurement of merits and results of activity; value of awards loss in the opinion of a society and separate citizens, etc. Ways of the solution of the revealed problems are offered. In particular, the author points out that it is necessary to create an incentive system intended not only for remote prospect (for example, upon reaching a pension age), but also for the current labour period; material remuneration should be a sufficient impulse for professionals and based on a recognition of achievements, first of all, by colleagues (of the same profession), not unauthorized people. It is necessary to work out quantity indicators for an estimation of activity of educators and academics. Introduction of the structured requirements to this activity is to make objective process of representation to the state awards and will generate professional work standards. Moreover, it is necessary to lower qualifications on presence of the certain experience and to remove some other restrictions for the state recognition. 

Practical significance. According to the author’s analysis, the reduction of dysfunctions of the Russian premium institutes will allow to return retention feature in the sphere of education and sciences of the most valuable personnel; to involve «a fresh creative power» in the given field of work; to create reference points of professional growth for working teachers and scientists; to generate the potential workers concepts of high social value and the importance of professional work in an educational sphere and science. 

1. Видт И. Е. Думающий, ответственный, творческий... (к 75-летию академика РАО В. И. Загвязинского) // Образование и наука. 2005. No 1. С. 136–139.

2. Горшков О., Чупрунов Е. Образование на основе исследований и разработок // Высшее образование в России. 2008. No 4. С. 39–42.

3. Иванова О. Праздник для орденов // Российская газета. 2008. 17 нояб.

4. Кокурина О. Ю. Конституционные и административно правовые аспекты наградного законодательства Российской Федерации // Образование и общество. 2011. No 5. С. 103–108.

5. Мирский Э. Наука как социальный институт // Высшее образование в России. 2004. No 8. С. 89–108.

6. Назарова И. Трудовые нагрузки: усилия и результаты (преподаватели вузов) // Социология образования. 2005. No 10. С. 37–41.

7. О государственных наградах Республики Беларусь: Закон Республики Беларусь от 18 мая 2004 г. No 288-З [Электрон. ресурс] // Национальный правовой интернет-портал Республики Беларусь. Режим доступа: http://www.pravo.by/webnpa/text.asp? RN=H10400288.

8. О мерах по совершенствованию государственной наградной системы Российской Федерации: Указ Президента РФ от 07.09.2010 г. No 1099 // Российская газета. 2010. 15 сент.

9. О почетных званиях Республики Армения: Закон Республики Армения HO-105-N от 10.07.2004 [Электрон. ресурс]. Режим доступа: http://www.arlis.am/DocumentView.aspx? DocID=43830.

10. Об учреждении медали Пушкина: Указ Президента РФ от 09.05.1999 г. No 574 [Электрон. ресурс]. Доступ из справ.-правовой системы «КонсультантПлюс».

11. Пестова Г. А., Ручкин А. В. Анализ формальных наградных институтов и неформальных наградных практик в современной России // Вопросы управления. 2013. No 4 (6). С. 48–56.

12. Пестова Г. А., Ручкин А. В. Институциональные и неинституциональные факторы отношения к государственным наградам России // Среднерусский вестник общественных наук. 2012. No 4. С. 45–50.

13. Про державні нагороди України: Закон України вiд 16.03.2000 No 1549-III // Відомості Верховної Ради України (ВВР). 2000. No 21. С. 162.

14. Скоробогацкий В. В. Институциональные ловушки в политике // Вопросы политологии и социологии. 2011. No 1 (1). С. 29–40.

15. Ashrafa N., Bandierab O., Lee S. S. Awards unbundled: Evidence from a natural fieldexperiment // Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 2014. No 100. P. 44–63.

16. Benhtam J. Teorie des peines et des recompenses. Troisieme edition. Tome second. Paris, 1826.

17. Besluit van 10 mei 1995, houdende nadere regels met betrekking tot de Orde van de Nederlandse Leeuw en de Orde van Oranje-Nassau (Reglement op de Orde van de Nederlandse Leeuw en de Orde van Oranje-Nassau): rijkswet van 15 april 1994 tot wijziging van de wet van 4 april 1892, houdende instelling van de Orde van Oranje-Nassau, en van de wet van 29 september 1815, houdende instelling van de Orde van de Nederlandse leeuw, alsmede instelling van het Kapittel voor de civiele orden // Staatsblad is gepubliceerd (Stb. 1994, 350).

18. Dekorationen, Insignien und Hoheitszeichen [Электрон. ресурс] // Österreichischen Bundesheer. Режим доступа: http://www.bmlv.gv.at/abzeichen/dekorationen.shtml.

19. Jon Carlson: Award for Distinguished Career Contributions to Education and Training in Psychology // The American psychologist. Vol. 66. Issue 8. 2011. P. 739–741.

20. Les décorations [Электрон. ресурс] // France phaleristique. Режим доступа: http://www.france-phaleristique.com/accueil.htm.

21. Neckermanna S., Freyc B. S. And the winner is? The motivating power of employee awards // The Journal of Socio-Economics. 2013. No 46. P. 66–77.

22. Ordinamento delle strutture generali della Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri (Testo aggiornato): Decreto del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri del 1 marzo 2011 // Gazzetta Ufficiale del 14 giugno 2011, n. 136 – Suppl. Ordinario n. 145.

23. Queen and Honours [Электрон. ресурс] // The official website of The British Monarchy. Режим доступа: http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Honours/Honours.aspx.

24. Torreon B. S. A Guide to Major Congressional and Presidential Awards. Congressional Research Service, 2004. 6 p.

25. Zákon NR SR o štátnych vyznamenaniach z 2. februára 1994 151/1997 Z.z. [Электрон. ресурс] // Prezident SR. Режим доступа: http://schuster.prezident.sk/?371.