sofs.org.ua › About us › Archive › 2022 › №2(116) › 1.3

1.3

THE FORMATION OF THE CORPORATE SCIENTIFIC ENVIRONMENT

G.YA. SHEVCHENKO 1
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3984-9266
V.S. BILOZUBENKO 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1269-7207
О.А. MARCHENKO 3
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7665-7832
1 Association Noosphere, Ukrainе
2 University of Customs and Finance, Ukrainе
3 Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Ukrainе

Nauka naukozn. 2022, 2(116): 12–23
https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2022.02.012

Section: Vital Problems of Modern Science
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: Science is a driving force of the development of humanity, and, at the same time, it is an important branch of human activity with the key role of generating new knowledge. Historically, the science is divided into three types: academic, sectoral and university science. Given the situation today, the topical issue for discussion is a new subsection — corporate science, because corporations are well aware of the fact that their competitiveness and, respectively, their future fate depends on the generation of new knowledge. Therefore, corporations undertake the processes related to the cultivation of science and creation of the appropriate scientific atmosphere — corporate scientific environment. Any specific approaches or turnkey solutions for the creation of such kind of an environment are unavailable, which makes the research very relevant now.

This paper presents the findings of the research aimed to identify and systematize the components which constitute the landscape of the scientific environment, and to find the determinants or factors which determine the scientific environment based on the general scientific methods of cognition as well as the Hegel’s ascending principle. The scientific papers of the leading domestic and foreign scientists served as an empirical base for the research.

The research enabled to identify and develop the main determinants which have an impact on the generation of a new scientific knowledge: the existence of the environment of being, scientific environment, material covering of scientific environment, common language, scientific communications, motivation and spirit of the organization.

It has been substantiated that the organization of almost any scientific environment should go through the development of the above-mentioned components. It has been proven that the development of scientific environment is able to make the company innovative, and thereby to increase its competitiveness. Such kind of transformation requires a complete picture of the processes which occur in the sphere of corporate innovations. The development of scientific environment is based on thinking, which should be noospheric; and the appropriate way of existence is being, but not possession. It is the only kind of thinking and kind of spirit, capable of creating a synergetic effect in the development of human being and biosphere.

Keywords: science, scientific environment, scientific communication, corporate science, noosphere

References

  1. Buhayeva, О.О., and Sirazitdinova, Y.S. (2016). Assessment and analysis of research environment of university. University Management: Practice and Analysis, (5), 90–99 [in Russian]. https://doi.org/10.15826/umj.2016.103.047
  2. Pliskevich, N.M. (1997). Non-governmental fundamental science. “Round table” of scientists. Social sciences and the present, 4, 25–36 [in Russian].
  3. Crew, B. (2019). Top 5 corporate institutions for scientific research in 2018. URL: https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/top-five-corporate-institutions-scientific-researchtwenty-eighteen (last accessed: 12.11.2021).
  4. Rybnikov, K.A. (1982). Essays on the methodology of mathematics. Moscow: Znaniye [in Russian].
  5. Rozhdestvensky, I.V., and Rozhdestvensky, O.I. (2015). Development of the innovative ecosystems of higher educational institutions and scientific centers. Saint Petersburg: OJSC [in Russian].
  6. Nelson, D. (1987). Corporate Science. Reviews in American History, 15(1), 105–108. https://doi.org/10.2307/2702227
  7. Ryzhkova, M.V. (2017). Possibilities of organizing virtual scientific laboratories in the network space. Creative Economy, 11(3), 315–324 [in Russian]. https://doi.org/10.18334/ce.11.3.37698
  8. Losev, A.F. (2015). On the edge of epochs: Works of 1910’s — beginning of 1920’s. Moscow: Progress-Traditsia [in Russian].
  9. Moiseev, E.I., Muromskiy, A.A., and Tuchkova, N.P. (2014). Ontology of scientific space or how to find the genius. Ontology of designing, 4(14), 18–33 [in Russian].
  10. Vernadsky, V.I. (1988). Collected works on the history of science in Russia. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
  11. Khanin, I.G. (2018) The issues of the paradigm development of economy and cognition. Dnipro: New ideology [in Russian].
  12. Alferov, Z.I. (2016). Albert Einstein, socialism and the present. Soviet Russia, 55 (1462), 1–2 [in Russian].
  13. Shevchenko, G.Y., Bilozubenko, V.S., and Marchenko, О.А. (2020). Identification and Mechanisms for Bridging the Divide in Different types of Scientific Communications. Science and Science of Science, 110(4), 44–62. https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2020.04.044
  14. Shapiro, D.I. (1977). Towards human-machine methods for solving one class of problems. Problems in cybernetics. Theory and practice of situational management, 18, 82–88 [in Russian].
  15. Chorayan, O.G. (1987). Concept of probability and fuzziness in brain activities. Rostov-on-Don: Rostov State University Press [in Russian].
  16. Ustyuzhanina, E.V., Yevsyukov, S.G., Petrov, A.G., Kazankin, R.V., & Dmitriyeva, M.B. (2011). Scientific school as a structural unit of scientific activities. Moscow: CEMI RAS [in Russian].
  17. Grezneva, O.Y. (2003). Scientific schools (pedagogical aspect). Moscow: Institute of Educational Theory and Pedagogy of the Russian Academy of Education [in Russian].
  18. Belkin, P.G., Emeliyanov, B.H., and Ivanov, M.A. (1987). Social psychology of scientific team. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
  19. Krivoruchenko, V.K. (2011). Scientific schools. Knowledge. Understanding. Skills, 2, URL: http://www.zpu-journal.ru/e-zpu/2011/2/Krivoruchenko_Scholar_Schools/ (last accessed: 22.01.2022).
  20. Mirskij, E.M., & Sadovskij, V.N. (Ed.) (1976). Communication in modern science. Price D.J. Trends in the development of scientific communication — past, present, future, 93–109. Moscow: Progress [in Russian].
  21. Fromm, E. (2012). To have or to be? Zaporizhzhia: Big-Press [in Russian].
  22. Krylova, S.A. (2020). Human beauty in the life practices of culture. Kyiv: KNT [in Ukrainian].
  23. Ryazanova, A.A. (2016). Virtual Scientific Communications as a promising tool for scientific activities. Technical sciences: Scientific priorities of scientists, 1, 96–99 [in Russian].
  24. Automatic Processing and Analysis of Digital Images of Different Types of Human Cells: Web-site of the journal. URL: https://www.sciencehunter.net/Blog/story/automaticprocessing-and-analysis-of-digital-images-of-different-types-of-human-cells (last accessed: 20.02.2022) [in Russian].
  25. Shyrokanova, А.А. (2013). New role and forms of scientific communications in the information epoch. Sociology, 1, 103–116 [in Russian].
  26. Pugach, B.Y. (2013). Scientific inquiries and discoveries of Nobel scale. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 2(1029), 275–298 [in Russian].
  27. Fromm, E. (2013). A man for himself. Perm: Big-Press [in Russian]. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315009827
  28. Khamitov, N.V. (2020). Philosophy: being, man, world: from metaphysics to metaanthropology. Kyiv: KNT [in Ukrainian].
  29. Khamіtov, N.V. (2019). Philosophical anthropology: current issues. From theoretical to practical turn. Kyiv: KNT [in Ukrainian].
  30. Bohr, N. (1963). Rutherford – the founder of science of nucleus. Advances in Physical Sciences, 80, 215–250. https://doi.org/10.3367/UFNr.0080.196306e.0215
  31. Kedrov, F.B. (1985). Chain reaction of ideas. 2nd edition. Moscow: Znaniye [in Russian].
  32. Ishikawa diagram: why to use and how to build: Web-site of the journal. URL: https://pmclub.pro/articles/diagramma-isikavy-zachem-primenyat-i-kak-postroit (last accessed: 16.01.2022).
  33. Pyrozhkov, S., and Khamitov, N. (2020). Civilizational subjectivity of Ukraine: from potentials to a new worldview and human existence. Kyiv: Naukova dumka [in Ukrainian].
  34. Sсhumpeter, J. (1982). The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle. Trans. from English. Moscow: Progress [in Russian].
  35. Gore, A. (2008). Attack on the mind. Trans. from English. Moscow: Amfora [in Russian].

Full Text (PDF)