Formation of the identity of a modern university in the logic of the neo-institutional concept of D. Nort

Abstract

Introduction. The change in the general concept of university development in Russia in the context of the University 3.0 model allowed us to consider the university as an independent economic agent on the market. This allowed to apply neo-institutional approach of Douglass C. North.Purpose setting. The process of shaping a new identity of higher education is determined by the ongoing institutional renewal. The article is devoted to identifying and analyzing the conditions that determine the formation of a new university identity in the logic of D. North’s neo-institutional concept.Methodology of the study. The appeal to the neo-institutional approach arose in connection with the need to trace and assess the changes that have occurred and will occur to the university in the context of interaction with society, government and business, as well as to identify the set of conditions that will contribute to the formation of a new identity of the university. The concepts of formal and informal constraints, which determine the possible institutional changes, were considered as methodological concepts of D. North’s theory.Results. An important condition for the functioning of an institution is a set of formal and informal attitudes, to which we respectively refer laws/codes, on the one hand, traditions and customs on the other. These concepts are closely related to the concepts of ideology and the market, which also influence changes in the system of restrictions. According to D. North, institutional changes are possible when formal and informal frameworks are updated. The article shows that with formal changes brought from above, the image of classical university as a social institution is still preserved, the market is also not ready to perceive the university as an independent economic agent, as one of the stakeholders of entrepreneurial and innovative activity.Conclusions. The problem of contradiction between the preferences of subjects of educational, entrepreneurial and innovative activity becomes obvious. Serious restraining factors are the absence of regulatory framework explaining the mechanism of interaction between private business and the state, the preservation of the image of a classical university, the lack of coherence and consistency of institutional changes.