Application of marketing tools in economic-­profile scientific organizations: benchmarking results

Promotion of research results is currently an important component of the interaction between science and society. The success of this work depends on a series of measures undertaken by scientific organizations (SOs) in several areas. This study presents an analysis of benchmarking results of economic-­profile research institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) in the context of their approaches to disseminating information about research results and promoting their brands. The sample included eight economic-­profile institutes. The analysis conducted in two directions. The first was the use of modern marketing tools in promoting the results of the organization’s activities. The second was the identification of structural features in the functioning of the organization within the framework of efforts aimed at exploring opportunities for promoting the organization and the achievements of its employees. As a result, a number of average indicators identified for disseminating information about R&D results and developing the brand, which scientific organizations can use as benchmarks in their activities. These indicators include: the number of conferences held by the organization; publication of scientific literature, including periodicals; the intensity of information dissemination in social networks, and others. The authors of the benchmarking study propose a number of measures that can help develop effective mechanisms for disseminating information about the activities of scientific organizations and their employees. The necessity of transitioning from classical promotion tools to modern ones – ​based on social interactions on the internet, electronic forms of information dissemination, and a broader approach to defining the target audience, among others is highlighted.

1. Artamonova A.S. (2016). Marketing Activities in a Scientific Organization. Territorial Development Issues, no. 4, pp. 1–10 (in Russ.)

2. Volodko V.F. (2020). Innovative Models of Enterprise Marketing Activity. Science and Technique, no. 2, pp. 130–138. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.21122/2227-1031-2020-19-2-130-138

3. Goppe A.A., Panchenko I.A. (2020). Creating a Scientific Brand as an Effective Way to Promote Research Results: The Project “Oral History and Ethnography in Field Studies of the Second Half of the 20th – ​Early 21st Century as a Source and Method for Studying and Preserving the Historical and Cultural Heritage of Rural Territories of Altai Krai”. Ethnography of Altai and Adjacent Territories, no. 10, pp. 258–261. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.37386/2687-0592-2020-10-258-261

4. Grimov O.A. (2022). Scientists in Scientific Social Networks: Communicative Practices, Professional Connections, and Collaborations. Naukovedcheskie Issledovaniya, no. 1, pp. 164–182 (in Russ.)

5. Grishakina E.G. (2015). Problems of Coordinating Interaction between Science, Education, and Business. Institutional Theory and Its Applications: Proceedings of the Scientific Seminar at the Institute of Economics RAS. February 3. (in Russ.) URL: https://inecon.org/docs/Grishakina_paper_20150203.pdf

6. Zamoshchansky I.I., Konashkova A.M., Krasavin I.V., Pyr‘yanova O.A. (2016). Scientific Communication: A Scientist in Modern Society. Izvestia. Ural Federal University Journal. Series 3: Social Sciences, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 30–41 (in Russ.)

7. Kachalov R.M., Sleptsova Yu.A. (2023). Marketing research in the activity of a scientific organization. Economics of Contemporary Russia, no. 2, pp. 83–94. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.33293/1609-1442-2023-2(101)-83-94

8. Kachalov R.M., Sleptsova Yu.A., Klimanova A.R. (2017). Formation of a Positive Image of a Scientific Organization in the Social Space. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, no. 3, pp. 16–29 (in Russ.)

9. Kachalov R.M., Sleptsova Yu.A., Stavchikov A.I. (2019). System Foundations of Marketing for a Humanities Scientific Organization. Vestnik of Chelyabinsk State University. Economic Sciences, no. 9, iss. 66, pp. 151–165. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.24411/1994-2796-2019-10917

10. Kobylko A.A. (2017). On the Development of Commercialization of Scientific Results. Problems and Prospects of Scientific and Technological Space Development: Proceedings of the Scientific Internet Conference, Vologda, June 26–30, 2017. Vologda: VolSC RAS. Pp. 31–40 (in Russ.)

11. Kobylko A.A. (2019). Systemic Approach to the Formation of a Scientific Organization Strategy in the Economic Field. Problems and Prospects of Scientific and Technological Space Development: Proceedings of the II Russian Scientific Internet Conference, Vologda, June 25–29, 2018. Vologda: VolSC RAS. Pp. 23–28 (in Russ.)

12. Kobylko A.A. (2023). Information Interaction Strategy of Scientific Organization with the Environment. Economics of Contemporary Russia, no. 4 (103), pp. 51–66. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.33293/1609-1442-2023-3(102)-51-66

13. Koshlakov D.M. (2024). Visualization of Social and Humanitarian Knowledge as A Way of Presenting It: Approaches to the Problem. Bulletin of the South-­Russian State Technical University (NPI). Series: Socio-­Economic Sciences, no. 6 (17), pp. 233–243. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.17213/2075-2067-2024-6-233-243

14. Kuzmenko A.A., Pestrakova K.A., Sinyukova K.A. (2023). Analysis of the Ergodesign of a Scientific and Educational Organization Logo. Ergodesign, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 393–404. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.30987/2658-4026-2023-4-393-404

15. Kurmysheva L.K. (2022). Interaction of Science and Society: Modern Russian sociological Studies. Proceedings of SPSTL SB RAS, no. 4, pp. 100–105. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.20913/2618-7515-2022-4-100-105

16. Kusraeva O.A. (2017). Contemporary branding theory: Division of approaches according to functional perspective. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Management, vol. 16, issue 1, pp. 69–91. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu08.2017.103

17. Marketing in the activities of a scientific organization (2023). Marketing in the activities of a scientific organization: functions and main areas of work. Monograph. Moscow: CEMI RAS. 152 p. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.33276/978-5-8211-0820-3

18. Matveev N.V., Lazareva E.I. (2022). Features of the University Marketing System as a Management Object in Modern Conditions. THEORIA: Pedagogy, Economics, Law, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 27–36. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.51635/27129926_2022_2_27

19. Neustroeva S.L. (2019). Forms and Methods of Interaction between Scientific Institutions and Their Press Services with Mass Media: The Case of Vologda Scientific Center RAS. Territorial Development Issues, issue 1, no. 5, pp. 1–10. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.15838/tdi.2019.5.50.10

20. Neustroeva S.L. (2018). Scientific Communication: Global Trend or New Academic Discipline? Social Area, vol. 17, no. 5. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.15838/sa.2018.5.17.12

21. Osadchuk E.V. (2014). Model of Interaction between Scientific Organizations and the Entrepreneurial Sector. Science Governance and Scientometrics, no. 16, pp. 139–156 (in Russ.)

22. Petrovskiy V.P. (2011). Brand of a Scientific Institution as a Measure of the Value of Scientific and Technical Products. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice, no. 36, pp. 41–51 (in Russ.)

23. Pogozhina N.N. (2023). Modern Trends in Communicative Interaction between Science and Society. Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science, no. 76, pp. 141–152. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/1998863X/76/14

24. Popov E.V., Komarova O.V., Simonova V.L. (2020). Using Social Media and Messengers for Social Interactions. Economics and Management, vol. 26, no. 12, pp. 1284–1296. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.35854/1998-1627-2020-12-1284-1296

25. Development of Science and Technology (2015). Development of Science and Technology: Opportunities and Risks for Society. Monograph. Ed. by D.R. Belousov, A.Yu. Apokin, E.A. Penuhin et al. Moscow: MGIU. 156 p.

26. (in Russ.)

27. Rysakova P.I. (2022). Strategies of Scientific Popularization in the Digital Media Environment. Media Linguistics, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 309–329. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.21638/spbu22.2022.402

28. Salitskaya E.A. (2018). Approaches to the Formation of Technology Transfer System in Russia. Science Governance and Scientometrics, no. 4, pp. 6–23 (in Russ.)

29. Stefanova N.A., Shmatok K.O. (2019). Digital Marketing of a University. Azimuth of Scientific Research: Economics and Administration, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 381–384. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.26140/amie-2019-0802-0098

30. Sysoeva O.V., Vasina A.V., Kiseleva O.N. (2023). Development of Open Innovation Model: Focus on Intellectual Property Pledge Lending. Moscow University Economic Bulletin. Series 6. Economics, no. 3, pp. 193–216. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.55959/MSU0130-0105-6-58-3-10

31. Sharabchiev Yu.T. (2017). Open Science and the Open Innovation System. Message 1. Open Science and Open Information Resources. Medical News, no. 4, pp. 48–56 (in Russ.)

32. Shibarshina S.V. (2019). Social Networks for Scientists: A New Form of Sociality? // Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 21–28. (in Russ.) DOI: 10.5840/eps201956463

33. Yudin B.G. (2010). Science in the Knowledge Society. Voprosy Filosofii, no. 8, pp. 45–57 (in Russ.)

34. Aguinis H., O’Boyle E. (2014). Star performers in twenty-­first century organizations. Personnel Psychology, vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 313–350. DOI: 10.5465/AMBPP.2013.35

35. Bieger T., Sonderegger P. (2017). Getting University Brand Management Right. Global Focus: the EFMD business magazine, vol. 11, no. 1. pp. 52–55.

36. Call M., Nyberg A., Thatcher S. (2015). Stargazing: an integrative conceptual review, theoretical reconciliation, and extension for star employee research. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 623–640. DOI: 10.1037/a0039100

37. Cardona E.A. (2021). Marketing científico: investigadores y prosumidores en la ciencia. Poiésis, no. 41, pp. 14–18.DOI: 10.21501/16920945.4188.

38. Chapleo C. (2011). Exploring rationales for branding a university: Should we be seeking to measure branding in UK universities? Journal of Brand Management, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 411–422. DOI: 10.1057/bm.2010.53

39. Fenner M. (2012). One-click science marketing. Nature Materials, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 261–263.

40. Judson K.M., Aurand T.W., Gorchels L. et al. (2008). Building a university brand from within: university administrators’ perspectives of internal branding. Services Marketing Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 54–68. DOI: 10.1080/15332960802467722

41. Kehoe R., Tzabbar D. (2015). Lighting the way or stealing the shine? An examination of the duality in star scientists’ effects on firm innovative performance. Strategic Management Journal, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 709–727. DOI: 10.1002/smj.2240

42. Kolesnikova K., Lukianov D. et al. (2017). Communication Management in Social Networks for the Actualization of Publications in the World Scientific Community on the Example of the Network ResearchGate. Eastern-­European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 27–35. DOI: 10.15587/1729-4061.2017.108589

43. Konstantinos G., Rothaermel F. (2014). Structural microfoundations of innovation: The role of relational stars. Journal of Management, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 586–615. DOI: 10.1177/0149206313513612

44. Li Y., Li N., Li C. et al. (2020). The boon and bane of creative “stars”: A social network exploration of how and when team creativity is (and is not) driven by a star teammate. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 613–635. DOI: 10.5465/amj.2018.0283

45. Newman T.P., Beets B. (2023). Exploring the brand of science: implications for science communication research and practice. JCOM, vol. 22, no. 2, A05. DOI: 10.22323/2.2202020

46. Oldroyd J., Morris S. (2012). Catching falling stars: A human resource response to social capital’s detrimental effect of information overload on star employees. Academy of Management Review, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 396–418. DOI: 10.5465/amr.2010.0403

47. Perkmann M., Salandra R. et al. (2021). Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011–2019. Research Policy, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 104–114. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.104114

48. Sepúlveda-­Cardona E., Suárez Quiceno C. (2020). Ecosistemas digitales para la formación: Redes sociales, ebooks y ciencia 2.0. Piedra, papel y pixel: el texto digital en juego. Fondo Editorial Universidad Católica Luis Amigó, pp. 51–64.

49. Sojkin B. (2015). Determinant factors of the marketing activity of scientific and research institutions. Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, 2015, no. 1, pp. 19–32. DOI: 10.14611/minib.15.01.2015.02

50. Vlasova V., Roud V. (2020) Cooperative Strategies in the Age of Open Innovation: Choice of Partners, Geography and Duration. Foresight and STI Governance, vol. 14, no 4, pp. 80–94. DOI: 10.17323/2500-2597.2020.4.80.94