Deformation of University Management in Russia in the Context of the Implementation of Managerial Ideology

Over the past 10-15 years, large-scale dissatisfaction with the results of the reforms initiated after joining the Bologna system has gradually been brewing in the Russian academic community. One of the most important aspects of these reforms was the transition to a managerial management model. Managerialism is an ideology of managerial efficiency. Along with it, the assessment of education and science by quantitative indicators, massive layoffs of teachers, the liquidation of “ineffective” universities, the stimulation of competition between employees and the focus on the commercialization of the final results of professional activity have become an organic part of Russian higher education. All these phenomena were absolutely alien to Russian academic traditions, and the teaching community met them with condemnation. However, it is not so much the opportunistic behavior of teachers that should be considered important, but the extremely negative consequences that naturally arose from the incompatibility of the

^ ®     © 2024 by the authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the

Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license .

genuine efficiency of university management with the pseudo-efficiency that was the result of the changes initiated by the managerial management model.

The very appearance of the category of “university management efficiency” in the scientific discourse was based on the assumption that managerialism objectively contributes to the growth of professional performance indicators. Before the era of managerialism, there were no grounds to study this issue. However, its claims to the ability to ensure a revolutionary increase in managerial efficiency stimulated some interest on the part of scientists. At the same time, almost all scientific studies in the designated perspective turned out to be quite similar. They are written either in a purely economic context and are aimed at the successful implementation of business projects by universities ( Asaul and Kaparov, 2007 ; Mamanazarova, 2023 ; Orlova, 2021 ; Pastukhov, 2013 ), or are focused on assessing the adopted scale of target indicators (KPI) for university employees ( Kosintseva, 2011 ; Moskvin, 2016 ).

A relatively recently published article by A. M. Osipov and B. Naran raises the issue that there is currently a need to abandon fragmented assessments of effectiveness, which are reduced to reports on the use of budget funds to finance education ( Osipov and Naran, 2023 ). For an optimal understanding of the stated problem, it is necessary to develop a full-fledged theory. Since effectiveness is currently assessed exclusively within the framework of the managerial model, this article defines the goal of developing a universal concept of university management effectiveness and determining the ability of managerialism to ensure real, not imaginary, effectiveness.

Materials and Methods

Methodologically, the work is based on the theory of efficiency of the Polish economist J. Zeleni-ewski ( Zeleniewski, 1971 ). In his opinion, only the management that ensures the achievement of socially significant goals set for the organization can be effective. At the same time, the scientist does not lose sight of the economic nature of efficiency, since its most important element is the reasonableness of the resources spent on achieving goals. Justifying the possibility of ensuring reasonableness, the scientist introduces the concept of “social value” into the categorical apparatus, which has not been used before in assessments. It is due to the unity of social values that the reasonableness of spending on achieving goals can be confirmed or rejected. Value acts as an integrator, uniting social activity on common axiological grounds. Thus, the professional community is able to develop uniform criteria for assessing managerial efficiency.

We believe that in the management of Russian universities, the achievement of target indicators is carried out with an excess of reasonableness of the resources expended, and the academic community does not have sufficient subjectivity to prevent target deformations of its professional activities.

To test this hypothesis, a mass survey was conducted on the topic “Efficiency of University Management in the Context of Implementing Managerial Ideology”. The object of the study is teachers of universities in the south of Russia. The survey was conducted in six constituent entities of the Russian Federation: Kalmykia, Rostov Region, Krasnodar and Stavropol Krai, Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol. The study involved teachers frjuom Kalmyk State University (133 respondents), Don Technical State University (138 respondents), Rostov State Medical University (59 respondents), North Caucasus Federal University (218 respondents), Pyatigorsk State University (113 respondents), Simferopol University of Economics and Management (40 respondents) and Sevastopol State University (99 respondents). Another university from Krasnodar (49 respondents) participated in the survey on the basis of complete anonymity. The total sample was 849 teachers. Time of the survey: September 2024.

Results and Discussions

Theoretical aspect of the study . First of all, it is necessary to define the author’s categorical apparatus. Almost everything we need is already reflected in the title of the article. We believe that the external organization of terms should be as follows: management → efficiency → effective management → effective university management → managerial effective university management.

By management we mean purposeful activity carried out in the form of maintaining or changing the established social order (Matrosov, 2023). In the process of management, resources are selected, the optimality of their spending is checked, personnel is monitored, and the most distinguished employees are rewarded. Thus, the management structure includes achieving goals, building the most optimal relationships between employees, finding and distributing resources, monitoring the work process, and evaluating its results.

The definition of the previous term did not cause us much difficulty. Despite the existing disagreements between scientists, it was not difficult to find a consolidated position on non-controversial grounds. The category of “efficiency” is a completely different matter.

The first problem associated with its inclusion in the subject field of our study is that efficiency arose in the semantic coordinates of economic science. In this branch of knowledge, the internal content of this concept is derived through the ratio of income and expenses. The indicator of such a ratio is profit. Therefore, we can say that in the economy, the growth of efficiency is directly proportional to the growth of profit ( Shevtsova and Shumilova, 2023 ). At least, this is true in the short-term measurement model, without taking into account probable changes in the future. However, this understanding of efficiency is hardly applicable to non-profit organizations, which include universities. In any case, according to Russian law, even private educational organizations cannot declare the achievement of profit as the goal of their activities. And since we agreed to consider management as an activity aimed at achieving a goal, then increasing profits cannot be the goal of university management.

Thus, the definition of effective university management depends on the three semantic coordinates presented above. If we integrate them into one definition, it can be as follows. This is the achievement of the goals of the educational organization, provided with a sufficient volume and optimal use of the resources used, and confirmed by the academic community that the achieved results are important for society.

In order to complete the construction of the author’s categorical apparatus, we have to integrate the concept of managerialism into it and define the concept of “managerial effective management of the university”. Here we need to show the managerial features of effective management. In other words, we must answer the question “what, within the boundaries of managerial ideology, is considered effective management of the university as an educational organization and is there a certain degree of probability of failure to achieve this effectiveness?” The answer to this question presupposes an assessment of managerialism itself.

A subject description of managerialism is given in scientific literature quite fully ( Deem, 1998 ). To a certain extent, several generally accepted theses can be considered axioms. First of all, managerialism in university management began to be established as a result of the transplantation of those practices that arose in large corporate business. There, its main function was reduced to increasing the motivation of personnel indifferent to the final results of the company’s work. To solve this problem, strategic goals were fragmented into target indicators (KPI). In this way, the location of personal responsibility was fixed. This technology was transferred to the management practices of higher education. At the same time, with KPI, a focus on commercialization and competition came to universities. These are not so much the principles of managerialism as the transfer of corporate values to the university culture, which previously did not have them. Therefore, in university management, commercialization and competition began to determine the content and volume of KPI for teachers. Thus, competition manifests itself in the desire to do more types of work than was done before, and commercialization in the ability to sell them on the market of goods and services. It is precisely to this manifestation of success that the efficiency of university management is equated in managerialism. In other words, managerial efficiency within the boundaries of managerial ideology is achieved by fulfilling planned development indicators in the field of science, teaching and socialization of students. But to these three goals, a fourth is actually added: monetization of the results of those types of professional activity that can be monetized. Therefore, efficiency is additionally measured by the amount of money earned.

In order to assess the growth of the management efficiency of Russian universities, from the point of view of the formal logic of managerialism, we only need to measure the growth of indicators for science, education, upbringing and profitability. This is usually what the management of Russian educational institutions does. However, not everything is as simple and straightforward as it seems in the plans of the reformers. Such logic works only where the product has a standardized nature, or where there is an external consumer capable of assessing the quality. The university does not have anything like this, and the final result of its activities can only be properly assessed by the teachers themselves, that is, the academic community. Initiating managerial reforms in the field of higher education, the reformers obviously proceeded from the fact that an increase in quantity will not lead to a decrease in quality. It was also assumed that all the prescribed KPI indicators are properly supported by resources. However, neither one nor the other can be considered an axiom. Are teachers ready to reduce the quality of their work due to the pressure to increase the number? Do they have all the necessary resources to meet the development indicators? Does the academic community participate as a free subject in assessing the quality of education and science? All the above questions need to be established empirically. The growth of quantitative indicators in itself does not indicate the growth of management efficiency. Management activity is based on clearly defined goals. If the goals are not achieved, then there is no efficiency for all the parameters defined above, regardless of the quantitative increase.

Empirical aspect of the research

We will make the achievement of the university’s goals in the final part of the article. For now, let us outline the goals in question. Three classic goals are still relevant in Russian universities: professional training, scientific innovation, and student socialization. They are clearly stated in all the charters of the educational organizations in which we conducted the study. Additionally, after the change in the management paradigm, the fourth goal became relevant: profit growth from all types of activities. This goal is not stated in the local documents of educational organizations, but it is actually established in the regulatory acts of state governing bodies. These primarily include Order of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation dated 01.11.2021 No. 996 “On approval of the Procedure for holding a competition for the distribution of admission control figures for specialties and areas of training ...” and Order of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation dated 01.02.2022 No. 92 “On approval of performance indicators of federal budgetary and autonomous educational institutions of higher education ...”. In the first document, four of the seven KPIs for the rector directly relate to financial indicators, the achievement of which provides the head of the educational organization with the opportu- nity to receive large financial bonuses from the state. The second defines the terms of financing, among which the leading role is played by the commercial solvency of the university. Refusal of financing is actually equivalent to the closure of the higher educational institution. In this regard, it can be said that the new fourth goal - making a profit, in the conditions of managerial management becomes the leading one.

Let us emphasize once again that the financial activity of Russian universities is derived from three traditional goals. They are not legally allowed to engage in entrepreneurship. In this regard, university administrations began to focus on a sharp increase in scientific research and demonstrate indifference to educational work. This change in priorities is associated with the understanding that financial results can only be achieved through science. This is the source of the focus on grants, government assignments, business contracts, collaborations with commercial organizations, etc. Russian universities were tasked with becoming major scientific centers in their own regions and even on a global scale.

From this position we need to return to our interpretation of the category “the effectiveness of university management” and establish whether the teachers have sufficient resources to be outstanding scientists. As we remember, the goals of any management activity can be achieved only if there are resources that facilitate this process. Let us dwell on three of their varieties: motivational, temporal and intellectual. Let us begin with the assessment of motivation.

Table 1. Do you have an internal and stable need to engage in scientific activity (no more than two answer options) / Your academic degree, %

Do you have an internal and persistent need to engage in scientific activity?	What is your academic degree?
	Doctor of Science	Candidate of Sciences	Without a degree	Total
1. Yes, combining scientific and educational activities improves the quality of my teaching work.	77.2	39.3	37.2	42.4
2. I do science from time to time, mainly to improve my teaching rating	15.2	43.6	37.2	38.5
3. No, I think it is wrong to impose mandatory participation in scientific activities on every teacher.	9.8	25.2	32.7	26.4

Teachers are unconditionally oriented towards science only in the academic group of “Doctors of Science”. Among candidates of science, as well as teachers who do not have an academic degree, the desire for scientific activity is not strongly expressed. This must be taken into account when assessing the ability to achieve high results in this area.

The presented data are consistent with those obtained in the study of the intellectual resource. The management of Russian universities proceeds from the assumption that all teachers are quite capable of being successful in the scientific field, it is enough to organize fair bonuses for the fulfillment of indicators. The study showed that this assumption is erroneous.

Table 2. Are all teachers capable of productively engaging in science (no more than three answer options) / Your academic degree, %

Are all teachers capable of productively engaging in science?	What is your academic degree?
	Doctor of Science	Candidate of Sciences	Without a degree	Total
1. No, most teachers are focused on educational activities.	58.9	49.5	48.8	49.9
2. No, in educational institutions, science that has social utility has always been done by only a few people	31.1	40.8	27.5	35.2
3. No, there have always been few scientists capable of contributing to the development of science.	42.2	40.6	31.1	37.4
4. Yes, following the development of mass education, science also became mass	1.1	2.8	8.7	4.7
5. Yes, for productive scientific work it is necessary to create fair bonuses for performance indicators	12.2	12.1	15.9	13.3
6. Yes, most teachers have sufficient ability to contribute to the development of science	7.8	10.4	17.7	12.9

As you might expect, the teaching corps in the context of mass education was formed precisely as a community for professional training. During the times of the Russian Empire, indeed, every teacher was a scientist. Many became world-famous researchers. But in Tsarist Russia there were only 11 universities. At present, there are 1056. And each one must become a leading scientific center. It is hard to imagine that there would be enough for everyone to have at least one scientist per branch of science.

The overwhelming majority of teachers are so deeply integrated into educational activities that they do not have the time resources for other types of work.

Table 3. Do you have enough working time to combine scientific and educational work (no more than two answer options) / Your academic degree, %

Do you have enough working time to combine scientific and educational work?	Doctor of Science	What is your academic degree? Candidate of Without a Sciences degree		Total
1. Yes, at my work the necessary conditions for this have been created in general	21.1	5.9	9.9	8.8
2. Yes, if you use planning of all types of work wisely	26.7	21.5	27.4	24.1
3. No, if the teaching load is not reduced, then scientific activity will be formal.	55.6	56.8	41.9	51.5
4. No, you need to do one thing at a time, and for me, education is a priority.	12.2	30.2	34.3	29.8

Each of the three identified academic groups has a deficit of time for research. The situation is slightly better for doctors of science. They have a smaller classroom load and no obligations to participate in events to educate students. It is in this group that education is least of all considered a priority compared to science. Nevertheless, the deficit of time is perceived as significant even by doctors of science, which is obviously caused by the obligations to publish in greater volumes than other academic groups. In general, in all categories of respondents, the most popular given value was if the teaching load is not reduced, then scientific activity will be formal (51.5% by median). In essence, this situation leads to a false dilemma: either reduce the amount of time for teaching students and productively engage in science, or do not change the teaching load for teachers and engage in the creation of scientific simulacra. In fact, any of the two choices will have negative values. The choice in favor of science will lead to the degradation of education (while the majority of teachers will not come up with anything socially useful in the field of scientific research); the choice in favor of education will become a source of falsifications in scientific work.

It should be acknowledged that the majority of Russian teachers do not have the necessary resources to create scientific discoveries that are significant for social development. As a rule, they are ordinary teachers of specialized subjects who ended up in higher education due to the high demand for higher education in the late modern era. Their plans at the stage of entering the profession did not extend beyond classroom work with students. The state is trying to make scientists out of them, believing that this is the shortest path to increasing the efficiency of university management.

Based on the above conclusion, it can be assumed that the growth of quantitative indicators objectively leads to a decrease in the quality of scientific research. Consequently, the academic community, through its social practices, should suppress this kind of activity and orient colleagues to refuse to replace science with scientificity. However, this could be possible if professional groups (dissertation councils, editorial boards of journals, experts in assessing grant applications, etc.) filtered out manufacturing defects. To do this, they must have professional subjectivity. Thus, we need to establish the presence of teachers’ ability to act in accordance with the rules of professional ethics and the ability to withstand pressure from university administrations.

Within the academic community, editorial boards of journals have always played a significant role. The possibility of publishing scientific achievements or other significant events in the world of science depended on their professional work. The standard of their activity can be presented as follows: an objective selection of manuscripts received by the journal in the form of scientific correspondence and their timely publication with possible payment of an author’s fee. Since the introduction of managerial management, the situation has changed radically. It has become economically unprofitable to maintain “free” journals. They have become a source of expenses for the university, which turned out to be unacceptable from the point of view of achieving financial performance indicators. First of all, author’s fees were abolished. Currently, most scientific journals, at least in the social and humanitarian sphere, do not provide free publishing services. They either work entirely on a commercial basis, or act in a mixed format, accepting remuneration from authors through payment in “envelopes”. Without a doubt, such a practice shifts the focus of target orientations from science to economics. According to the authors’ personal observations, editorial boards do not meet in almost all the journals from the Higher Attestation Commission list that we know of, and management decisions are made behind the scenes. Is it any wonder that, according to 38.1% of our respondents, quality assessment is not carried out in paid journals? For some of the teaching staff, this is even convenient. More than half of the teachers are quite ready to consciously publish in “junk” journals that do not conduct scientific quality assessment: 20.1% – because high-ranking journals are unavailable; 16.6% – because they see no point in dividing journals into categories; 13.6% – because they are focused on formal rather than academic rating. Such a situation is possible only because university management literally forces its employees to increase publication activity. The practice of qualifying publications for postgraduate and doctoral students also indirectly leads to this. The original logic of the “old” professional culture was that the presence of a large number of publications was an indicator of recognition of the scientific validity of a dissertation. Nowadays, this is largely a reflection of the financial capabilities of the applicant for an academic degree.

Thus, the editorial boards of journals not only do not counteract the growth of deformations in the world of Russian science, but directly contribute to it, since they set themselves purely commercial goals that have nothing in common with the interests of science. There is an urgent request from teachers for paid publications. This is due to the fact that most of the manuscripts they create have no scientific value. Consequently, no scientific journal with a high reputation will publish them. It is possible to support intensive pseudo-scientific activity only through publishing houses that do not have proper verification of scientific quality. In such a situation, a ban on the provision of paid publishing services seems logical, but it completely contradicts the guidelines of managerial management for the monetization of science.

The most important place in the structure of academic practices is occupied by expert commissions that determine the winners of competitive applications for grants.

Table 4. How objectively are grant applications selected (no more than two answer options) / Your academic degree, %

How objective is the selection of grant applications?	What is your academic degree?
	Doctor of Science	Candidate of Sciences	Without a degree	Total
1. Experts evaluate applications impartially and select the best ones	15.7	14.1	24.0	17.9
2. Most of the applications are selected in advance by agreement with the management of the funds.	37.1	27.8	16.8	24.8
3. The management of the funds is corrupt, and this prevents a fair selection of applications	13.5	7.8	7.8	8.3
4. It is almost impossible for participants from regional universities to win the competition	44.9	29.5	12.3	24.8
5. I find it difficult to answer	20.2	38.4	47.9	39.9

It is no coincidence that our attention has shifted to the management of foundations and expert committees for evaluating applications. Grants have replaced direct funding of science. They seem to reflect all the signs of commercialization and competitiveness, which are the basis of corporate managerialism. When they were introduced, it was assumed that, on the basis of fair competition, funding would be received by those research teams that develop relevant and scientifically sound applications. However, in real practice, everything turned out somewhat differently than planned. Fair competition did not work out. Most of the financial flows are distributed behind the scenes, through personal or corrupt connections. This can easily be understood from the results obtained in the academic group of “Doctors of Science”, as well as from the most informed part of the candidates of science. As a result, instead of fair funding of science, the principle of shadow distribution of resources was established. Of course, it is extremely difficult to achieve fairness and honesty in this area. But the loss of subjectivity on the part of experts and the management of foundations, in addition to general manifestations, also has purely managerial origins. Universities vitally need to earn money. Their direct funding from the state depends on it. Therefore, most of the illegal manipulations with grant finances are carried out in the form of secret conspiracies, the purpose of which is to identify winning applications by violating the competitive procedure. If there were no administrative pressure from the state, the scale of the problem would be significantly reduced.

When assessing the subjectivity of the academic community, one cannot ignore the commissions responsible for the selection of postgraduate students and control over postgraduate training.

Table 5. Rate the quality of selection of candidates for admission to postgraduate studies in your structural unit (any number of answers) / Your academic degree, %

Assess the quality of selection of candidates for admission to postgraduate studies in your structural unit	What is your academic degree? Doctor of Candidate of Without a Total Science Sciences degree
1. The most deserving students are generally admitted to	16.7	32.5	38.7	33.2
graduate school
2. People go to graduate school to avoid serving in the army	43.3	33.8	32.8	34.3
3. Postgraduate studies are entered through personal connections	18.9	17.3	17.5	17.4
4. It is generally not the best students who enter graduate school	54.4	30.8	26.2	31.5
5. Real talents won’t want to go to graduate school	17.8	12.0	11.5	12.4
6. Real talents won’t be able to get into graduate school	6.7	1.7	5.7	3.6

According to the data obtained through the survey, significant shortcomings in the work of teachers can be seen already at the stage of selection of postgraduate students. Particular attention should be paid to the point of view of doctors of science, since it is this academic group that is mainly engaged in postgraduate training and acts as scientific supervisors of postgraduate students. 54.4% of the surveyed doctors of science are convinced that not the best students enter postgraduate studies. Meanwhile, if we expect scientific discoveries from each teacher, active and meaningful involvement in the life of the scientific community, the best should study in postgraduate studies. The same applies to professional training. It should be carried out in the status of teachers by the most talented graduates. Meanwhile, the strongest motive among those who chose to continue their studies in postgraduate studies is the unwillingness to serve in the army (43.3%). Only 16.7% of doctors of science noted that the best enter postgraduate studies.

If the situation, in general, is assessed correctly by respondents and negative processes have been steadily ongoing for several years, then there is a violation of the historically established order of reproduction of scientific and teaching staff. This means that talented professors and associate professors are being replaced by mediocre ones, lowering the professional level of the academic community.

It is logical to ask about the reasons for this state of affairs. It is difficult to estimate the scale, but managerial management makes a significant contribution to the development of this negative trend. Russian postgraduate studies are replenished through state and commercial funding. There are many more postgraduate students of the latter type. As a rule, they all just imitate their studies and work on their PhD dissertations. But they cannot be expelled, since this step will lead to a decrease in the financial indicators of the educational organization. As a result, the administration puts pressure on everyone who certifies their work. A postgraduate student who pays for his education is not expelled even if he has academic debts in all subjects, and professors are forced to give them clearly undeserved grades.

Even dissertation councils are under pressure. 24% of respondents noted that deans of Russian universities are forcing professors to lower the quality requirements for postgraduate dissertations, since the previous quality standards are too complex for new generations of postgraduate students. The number of postgraduate students receiving an academic degree is steadily falling. Currently, only 11% of all those admitted to postgraduate studies become candidates of science. This is sharply worsening the KPI results of university management. In order to somehow save the situation with falling indicators, postgraduate students are allowed to defend dissertations based on scientific reports.

In an interim conclusion, it can be noted that the process of reducing the subjectivity of the aca- demic community in Russian universities is currently underway. Managerial management, turning science and education into a quasi-market institution, is if not the only, then a very important factor in the deformation of professional culture. This raises the question of the ability of academic councils, editorial boards of journals, dissertation councils, expert commissions and other forms of the academic community to counteract manipulations with indicators for scientific work.

Some of the results of our survey indicate that the Russian academic community has distanced itself from quality control of its activities. This statement can be verified by turning to the analysis of the goals of the functioning of universities. Earlier in the article, we pointed out four target benchmarks. Let us dwell in more detail on scientific work, since changes in the educational process and socialization are extremely difficult to assess.

Table 6. Does stimulating the growth of quantitative indicators for scientific work lead to a decrease in its quality (one answer option) / Your academic degree, %

Does stimulating the growth of quantitative indicators for scientific work lead to a decrease in its quality?	What is your academic degree?
	Doctor of Science	Candidate of Sciences	Without a degree	Total
1. Yes, real science is disappearing and being filled with imitation	52.2	54.5	42.6	50.2
2. No, the number of scientific papers is growing, and their quality, in general, remains high	10.0	12.7	23.0	16.0
3. Quantitative indicators can reflect an improvement in the quality of scientific work if they are not used as a tool for external incentives	37.8	32.8	34.4	33.8

The results of managerial management are assessed by respondents mainly in negative tones. This is especially noticeable in the academic group of “Doctors of Science”, from whom the maximum increase in scientific knowledge is expected. In such a status, their opinions should be considered as expert. And if this is so, then it must be recognized that the increase in the intensity of scientific activity has led to the creation of a product that does not have social utility. This is evidenced by a number of other survey results. More than half of Doctors of Science (50.3%) and over a third of Candidates of Science (34.4%) believe that the quality of educational literature has significantly decreased after points began to be awarded to teachers for its publication. In addition, 27.8% of Doctors of Science and 21.8% of Candidates of Science are convinced that it has significant shortcomings. On another issue, 37.2% of respondents believe that the increase in publication activity is only an imitation of scientific activity. 31.2% also do not see a positive meaning in the gross production of science, but are forced to follow the “rules of the game”. It is significant that only 9% of respondents expect to earn money from publications, the vast majority of whom are young teachers without an academic degree (24–30 years old).

A paradoxical situation is developing. Being a community capable of assessing the scientific work of their colleagues, Russian scientists express negative judgments, but only in a sociological survey, when they are guaranteed the safety of anonymity of statements. However, in their professional activities, they do not prevent the publication of low-quality manuscripts, vote for dissertations that have no scientific value, accept mediocre students into postgraduate studies, etc. In other words, they have a dual subjectivity. Professionalism has not yet been completely lost, but there is no longer any political will to demonstrate it. Therefore, the leading strategy of behavior is demonstrating loyalty to the administration, even when this administration forces them to make decisions that contradict professional ethics. As a result, Russian universities mostly produce scientific products that have no social utility.

Conclusions

In conclusion, in accordance with the stated goal, we need to answer the question of whether managerialism ensures real, and not imaginary, efficiency of university management in Russia. To do this, let us once again turn to the model of effective management that we have developed. It includes several components: 1) clear articulation of goals; 2) provision of sufficient resources to achieve goals; 3) a reliable system of control over the use of resources; 4) the social significance of the product produced. If we look at how effective managers from science and education integrate their management into the listed elements, the results will be somewhat discouraging.

• 1.    Managerialism defines goals for teachers that are exogenous to education and science. And the issue is not only in managerialism itself, but also in its Russian features. Universities in Russia are almost entirely financed by the state. Therefore, in real management practices, the term “effective manager” is identified with the word “bureaucrat”. The only difference is that officials have effective contracts. Fulfillment of contractual KPIs becomes a condition for maintaining a position or even career growth in the event of significant overfulfillment of target indicators. Therefore, teachers are under enormous administrative pressure to achieve the development targets set by the state at any cost. Particular emphasis has been placed on meeting financial indicators, since they are more difficult to falsify than indicators for science. As a result, universities are gradually turning into quasi-commercial corporations fighting with each other for state money.

• 2.    The study showed that failure to achieve goals is predetermined by a lack of resources. The state sets tasks for university management that cannot be solved under the current resource conditions. But due to the fact that ineffective universities cease to be funded, the administration and teachers adapt to the given rules, sharply reducing the quality of their work in favor of increasing the quantity. Paid publications, correspondence conferences, “junk” journals (including in the Scopus and Web of Science databases), inflated grades for students, false authorship, falsification of empirical data, plagiarism, etc. have become the norm. Honest scientists and teachers are at great risk of ending up in the cohort of the ineffective - and therefore dismissed.

• 3.    In Russian universities, managerialism has broken the system of control over the resources used, which is also used to assess the quality of science and education. In management practices, such forms of the academic community as academic councils, departments, educational and methodological councils, editorial boards of journals, dissertation councils, examination committees, etc. continue to exist. However, the survey showed that teachers have lost their subjectivity under managerial management. All of the above structures have little say. This is directly related to the change in the status of a teacher. Under the new conditions, he or she is required to contribute to the effectiveness of the entire university. And if this contribution is insignificant in terms of measurable quantitative indicators, then the management is effectively obliged not to renew contractual relations with him or her. Not only can a university be closed for inefficiency, but an employee is also subject to dismissal for the same reason. The fear of being ineffective is transmitted along all levels of the management chain, reaching the teacher as an ordinary executor of a “state assignment”. In the managerial management model, competitive elections have turned from a simple formality into an instrument for forcing employees to commit actions that contradict professional ethics. It is this instrument that, on the one hand, ensures loyalty to the management, and on the other hand, turns the work of departments, editorial boards, and dissertation councils into imitation. Due to the insufficient volume of resources, teachers have no other way to adapt to the management situation.

• 4.    And finally, the result of such activity is the release of a “product” that does not have the properties of social utility. The quality of education, scientific work, and educational efforts has sharply decreased. But, most importantly, in most cases the management is satisfied with such a result. Reports are made up of quantitative units. And the university administration can bear some responsibility for quality only on formal grounds. In reality, quality has always been assessed by the teachers themselves, since only they, and not officials, are able to establish it. Fearing being fired, teachers have removed themselves from quality control. At present, all those who previously assessed the results of the scientific or educational process in a collegial form have turned into a resource for the reproduction of reporting units.

In conclusion of our analysis, we note that due to the policy of state managerialism, the real efficiency of management of Russian universities has been completely replaced by pseudo-efficient management practices. It is impossible to establish exactly what the real efficiency is now, since it is hidden by false reports and the career ambitions of the bureaucracy. But there is no doubt that under the conditions of managerial management, the goals of universities have ceased to be achieved. Consequently, from an economic point of view, state financing of the overwhelming majority of such universities seems to be an unprofitable and unpromising undertaking.

Acknowledgements

We thank the director of the Kalmyk Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Victoria Vasilievna Kukanova, for her assistance in conducting a sociological survey in Kalmykia and the Astrakhan region.

Conflict of interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author Contributions

A. V. Dyatlov and V. V. Kovalev – GED; A. V. Dyatlov – software, SEG; A. V. Dyatlov and V. V. Kovalev – original draft preparation, GED and SECG; A. V. Dyatlov – review and editing, TEC and SEG All authors have read and agreed with the published version of the manuscript.