Motivating Workers at Russian Industrial Enterprises in a Time of Reindustrialization

Abstract

This article examines the problem of how subjectively prepared the human capital of modern Russian industrial enterprises is for the technological breakthrough on the threshold of the fourth industrial revolution. It analyzes social types of workers differing in terms of motivator-dominants for labor (motivation models) on the basis of an expert sociological survey of company managers. These types are “lumpen person,” “economic person,” “social person,” “ethical person,” “psychological person,” and “creative person.” The conclusion that the “economic person” dominates in the social structure of enterprises, that the “lumpen person” has a noticeable presence in this structure (10 percent), and, in the context of urgent development tasks, that the “creative person” holds a weak position shows that it is not possible for the human capital of enterprises in its current form to act as a full-fledged catalyst of technological breakthroughs. At the same time, the article finds preliminary confirmation of a hypothesis regarding a regressive trend over time of the structure under examination: a strengthening of the “negative” positions in terms of production output of the “lumpen” group of workers and a weakening of the position of the “positively tinged” (creative) group.

Keywords:

• creative person
• ethical person
• human capital
• industrial enterprise
• motivation models
• motives for labor
• postindustrial society
• psychological person
• social person
• social types of workers

Notes

¹ This term was coined by A. Belousov, an adviser to President Putin.

² The foundation (characterological features) and the specific methods for designing and operationalizing conceptual representations of workers using a motivational component as a base are varied and dynamic and have not yet been reduced to a common denominator in light of difficulties with the methodological plan. This is a matter for coming the coming decades.

³ A technological paradigm is the totality or system of productions that have a single technical level and are developing synchronously. Each technological paradigm is formed (joined, expanded) in closely connected environments that are congruent to it:

1) production—nature (type) of production (conveyor, automated, robotized, and so forth) and people’s place in this production;

2) organizational—managerial–dominating models of power and management;

3) informational—volumes, circulation rate, accessibility of information;

4) social—type of social structure (strict or weak hierarchy, chances and factors of mobility), dominating social relationships (submission–partnership, hostility–solidarity, and so forth);

5) cognitive—level and number of skills and means, depth of knowledge about the surrounding world;

6) sociocultural—cultural codes of consciousness and behavior, values, goals and motivations, items, and things;

7) mental—a way of thinking common to members of a group or organization, a type of world perception and awareness of the surrounding world and of oneself, a uniform world outlook matrix that makes it possible for people to perceive the surrounding reality, evaluate and act in it in a similar way in accordance with certain norms and standards of behavior that have taken root in the community, and accurately apprehend and understand one another.

Each paradigm simultaneously forms these environments.

Today scholars identify seven technological paradigms. Each type of society, both industrial and postindustrial, is characterized by its own sets and combinations of technological paradigms, for which the representation within each type of society changes depending on the stage of development of the specific industrial (or postindustrial) society—early (beginning), mature, or late.

⁴ See [11].

⁵ The function of a normal frequency curve (Gauss function). A normal distribution curve has a “hump,” a “bell,” in the middle and drops sharply on both sides. In other words, the likelihood that an accidental increase will occur near the center is much higher than that it will greatly deviate from the middle.

⁶ Specialists in sociology, economic history, economics, the law, culturology, mathematical modeling of social processes, and technology were engaged as experts (a total of eight people).