printTransformation of Research Competencies in the Context of Interdisciplinarity:
the Demand for A New Model of Scientific Personnel Training
Nefedova A.I.
Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), Leading Researcher at the Laboratory for Innovation Economics, Associate Prof. Department of Sociology, Assoc. Prof. Department of Educational Programmes, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, HSE University, Moscow, Russia. anefedova@hse.ru
Shmatko N.A.
Cand. Sci. (Philos.), Chief Research Fellow, Head of Department for Human Capital Research, HSE University, Moscow, Russia. nshmatko@hse.ru
Antonova E.A.
PhD student, Research Assistant, Laboratory for Economics of Innovation, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, HSE University, Moscow, Russia eantonova@hse.ru
Nefedova A.I., Shmatko N.A., Antonova E.A. Transformation of Research Competencies in the Context of Interdisciplinarity: the Demand for A New Model of Scientific Personnel Training. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2026. No 9. P. 52-68
This article analyzes the transformation of professional competencies of researchers in the context of growing interdisciplinarity and the digitalization of science. The aim of the study is to identify the structural gap between the normative expectations of the scientific community and the actual outcomes of the research personnel training system in Russia. The theoretical framework draws on the sociology of science and the sociology of professions, treating interdisciplinarity as a social phenomenon that transforms the modes of knowledge production, forms of scientific cooperation, professional roles, and mechanisms of scientific workforce reproduction. The empirical basis consists of two data sources: an online sociological survey of highly cited Russian scientists conducted as part of the “Future of Science” project (ISSEK HSE University, 2022), and a survey of PhD program graduates conducted within the “Education Economy Monitoring” study (HSE University, 2022). Multidimensional scaling was applied to analyze key science development trends as perceived by researchers. Data from the first survey allow to identify leading scientists’ expectations regarding the most significant directions for the development of science and the associated requirements for researchers’ competencies. Data from the second survey are used to analyse the perceived outcomes of doctoral education, as well as graduates’ assessments of the contribution of doctoral studies to the development of professional and transversal skills. The findings show that leading Russian scientists perceive the blurring of disciplinary boundaries, the digitalisation of research, the growth of networked forms of cooperation, and increased demands for the productivity of scientific activity. Under these conditions, the importance of competencies related to working in inter‑ and transdisciplinary teams, proficiency in digital tools, practical application of research findings, networked communication, and project‑based work increases. According to PhD graduates’ assessments, doctoral programmes make the highest contribution to the formation of fundamental theoretical knowledge and academic skills, while making the least significant contribution to the development of the ability to engage in interdisciplinary project work, proficiency in digital tools, and teamwork and managerial competencies. This contradiction is interpreted in the article as a manifestation of institutional inertia and the emergence of a “zone of structural tension”. Training systems for scientific personnel and formal assessments of their performance continue to reproduce disciplinary logic, whereas actual scientific practice is increasingly oriented towards interdisciplinary logic and flexible competency profiles.
Abuzyarova D., Belousova V. et al. (2019) The Role of Human Capital in Science, Technology and innovation. Forsajt [Foresight and STI Governance]. Vol. 13. No. 2: 107–119. DOI: 10.17323/2500-2597.2019.2.107.119.
Arnold E. (2013) Understanding long-term impacts of R&D funding: The EU framework programmes. Research Evaluation. Vol. 22. No. 1: 45–55. DOI: 10.1093/reseval/rvs030.
Auriol L., Misu M., Freeman R. (2013) Careers of Doctorate Holders: Analysis of Labour Market and Mobility Indicators. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers. No. 2013/04. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/5k43nxgs289w-en.
Bonaccorsi A., Dardini G., Rosetti M. (2022) The institutionalization of interdisciplinarity: Patterns, drivers and outcomes. Research Policy. Vol. 51. No. 2: 104–122. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104453.
Carayannis E.G., Campbell D.F.J. (2006) “Mode 3”: Meaning and Implications from a Knowledge Systems Perspective. In: Knowledge Creation, Diffusion, and Use in Innovation Networks and Knowledge
Clusters: A Comparative Systems Approach across the United States, Europe, and Asia. Ed. by E.G. Carayannis, D.F.J. Campbell. Westport: Praeger Publishers: 1–25.
Carayannis E.G., Campbell D.F.J. (2012) Mode 3 Knowledge Production in Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems: 21st-Century Democracy, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship for Development. Minerva. Vol. 50. No. 1: 139–142. DOI: 10.1007/s11024-012-9194-6.
Dezhina I.G. (2025) Scientific cooperation between universities and companies: opinions of faculty. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 5: 139–149. DOI: 10.7868/S3034601025050124; EDN: HEYPQD. (In Russ.)
Dzhoys E.A., Larina I.V. (2025) The role of science and innovation in educational institutions: modern approaches. Obrazovanie. Nauka. Nauchnye kadry [Education. Science. Scientific Personnel]. No. 3: 229–234. DOI: 10.24412/2073-3305-2025-3-229-234; EDN: VXGXWK. (In Russ.)
Gibbons M., Limoges C. et al. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: SAGE. DOI: 10.4135/9781446221853.
Gokhberg L., Shmatko N., Auriol L. (2016) The Science and Technology Labor Force: The Value of Doctorate Holders and Development of Professional Careers. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-27210-8.
Hao Q., Xu F. et al. (2026) Artificial intelligence tools expand scientists’ impact but contract science’s focus. Nature. 2026. Vol. 649: 1237–1243. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-09922-y.
Isaev A.P., Plotnikov L.V. (2021) Soft skills for successful careers of engineering graduates. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii [Higher Education in Russia]. No. 10: 63–77. DOI: 10.31992/0869-3617-2021-30-10-63-77; EDN: GKRTYZ. (In Russ.)
Kirdina-Chandler S.G. (2020) Sociology and interdisciplinary research: in the wake of one section. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 11: 3–15. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250010672-2; EDN: KYOYAY. (In Russ.)
Knorr-Cetina K. (1999) Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press.
Kravchenko S.A. (2024) Contours of an interdisciplinary concept of synergistic complexities. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 2: 3–12. DOI: 10.31857/S0132162524010013; EDN: BSHTUD. (In Russ.)
Kwiek M. (2022) Academic knowledge production in the global context: Interdisciplinarity and inequality. Higher Education. Vol. 84. No. 3: 421–442. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-021-00754-5.
Matveeva N.N. (2020) Bibliometric analysis of scholars’ interaction in Russian universities: cooperation vs individual productivity. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz [University Management: Practice and Analysis]. Vol. 24. No. 2: 26–43. DOI: 10.15826/umpa.2020.02.012; EDN: CINRET. (In Russ.)
Mokhnacheva Yu.V. (2025) Trends in international co-authorship of Russian scientists in 2019–2023 based on OpenAlex data. Bibliosfera [Bibliosphere]. No. 1: 95–113. DOI: 10.20913/1815-3186-2025-1-95-113;EDN: LYRHKQ. (In Russ.)
Mzhelskiy A.A., Moskaleva O.V. (2020) Scientific cooperation as a factor influencing article citation: an analytical review. Upravlenie naukoy: teoriya i praktika [Science Management: Theory and Practice]. Vol. 2. No. 3: 138–164. DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2020.2.3.8; EDN: RENVBL. (In Russ.)
Nefedova A.I., Marinina E.I. et al. (2026) Bridging Academia and Industry: Global Practices of Industrial PhD Programs and Pathways for Russian Adaptation. Forsayt [Foresight and STI Governance]. Vol. 20. No. 1: 85–95. DOI: 10.17323/fstig.2026.30107; EDN: TEIXET. (In Russ.)
Nerad M. (2010) Increase in PhD production and reform of doctoral education worldwide. Higher Education Forum. Vol. 7: 69–84.
Nowotny H., Scott P., Gibbons M. (2001) Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.OECD. (2022) Science in the digital age: Collaboration, access and openness. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/81a9dcf0-en.
OECD. (2023) Artificial Intelligence in Science: Challenges, Opportunities and the Future of Research. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/a8d820bd-en.
Popova I.P. (2020) Career studies: resources of interdisciplinarity in a sociological perspective. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 12: 18–28. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250013019-3; EDN: BGXZHK. (In Russ.)
Shin J.C., Kehm B.M., Jones G.A. (eds) (2018) Doctoral Education for the Knowledge Society: Convergence or Divergence in National Approaches? Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-89713-4.
Shmatko N., Volkova G. (2020) Bridging the skill gap in robotics: Global and national environment. Sage Open. Vol. 10. No. 3: 2158244020958736. DOI: 10.1177/2158244020958736.
Sinche M., Layton R.L. et al. (2017) An Evidence-Based Evaluation of Transferable Skills and Job Satisfaction for Science PhDs. PLOS ONE. Vol. 12. No. 9: e0185023. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185023.
Sorokin P.S., Mal’tseva V.A., Gass P.V. (2022) Professional skills and their assessment in new institutional conditions: debates, problems and prospects. Journal of Institutional Studies. Vol. 14. No. 3: 59–73. DOI: 10.17835/2076-6297.2022.14.3.059-073; EDN: QBJMON. (In Russ.)
Tagunova I.A. (2017) Interdisciplinary research in education: the organizational aspect. Otechestvennaya i zarubezhnaya pedagogika [Domestic and Foreign Pedagogy]. Vol. 1. No. 6: 27–41. EDN: YWZPPI. (In Russ.)
Taylor S., Kiley M., Holley K.A. (eds) (2021) The Making of Doctoral Supervisors: International Case Studies of Practice. London: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780429274831.
Thornhill-Miller B., Camarda A. et al. (2023) Creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration: Assessment, certification, and promotion of 21st century skills for the future of work and education. Journal of Intelligence. Vol. 11. No. 3: 54. DOI: 10.3390/jintelligence11030054.
UNESCO. (2021) UNESCO science report: The race against time for smarter development. UNESCO Publishing. DOI: 10.18356/9789210058575.
Wang H., Fu T. et al. (2023) Scientific discovery in the age of artificial intelligence. Nature. Vol. 620. No. 7972: 47–60. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06221-2.
Wang H., Zhou Q. et al. (2026) Research Fronts 2025: Mapping the evolving landscape of global science and technology. The Innovation. DOI: 10.1016/j.xinn.2026.101427.
Yurevich M.A. (2022) University-business cooperation as a factor in the formation of technological sovereignty. Problemy razvitiya territorii [Problems of Territory’s Development]. Vol. 26. No. 4: 47–60. DOI: 10.15838/ptd.2022.4.120.4; EDN: BYNWWN. (In Russ.)
Ziman J. (2009) Real Science: What It Is and What It Means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511541391.