On March 27th, the “Technological Leadership: From Expertise to Strategy” symposium was held, focusing on the results of technological expertise and the outcomes of the meeting of the Council of the “Priority 2030” Federal Academic Leadership Program. The event brought together vice-rectors, rectors, heads of strategic technological projects, and industry partners of universities. South Ural State University was represented by the Rector Alexander Wagner, First Vice-Rector, Vice-Rector for Research Anton Korzhov, and Head of the Strategic Development Office (Project Office) Evgeny Belousov.
The symposium was organized by the Technological Leadership Centre with the support of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Russia, Gazprombank, and the Federal State Autonomous Scientific Institution “Sociocentre”.
The plenary session focused on the role of industry partners in university projects and key tools for strategic decision-making. Key speakers included the Minister of Science and Higher Education Valery Falkov, Deputy Chairman of the Management Board of Gazprombank Dmitry Zauers, Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Industry and Trade Vladimir Gutenev, and Director for Innovation at AO “EFKO” Management Company Rostislav Kovalevsky.
Earlier, speaking at the Forum of Future Technologies, Valery Falkov had highlighted a fundamental transformation of the “Priority 2030” program towards achieving the technological leadership and had noted the key changes that would be considered in the forthcoming forum’s agenda. He emphasized that the focus had shifted from traditional performance indicators to an integrated technological leadership index, including R&D volume, income from intellectual property, and funds attracted by universities and small technology enterprises. He also noted a major change in the approach to project evaluation.
“Previously, the evaluation was primarily scientific, often involving the Russian Academy of Sciences. Now it has been supplemented with assessments of market demand and technological feasibility. Expertise is critically important here: declaring intentions is one thing, but actually creating a product and bringing it to practical application is entirely different,” Falkov emphasized.
A key objective of the plenary session was to define the guidelines for implementing university development programs and technological projects in 2026. Participants discussed effective models of interaction between university teams and industry partners, as well as the tools for enhancing knowledge transfer into the economy and requirements for scientific potential and educational models of Russian universities.
The symposium also included a special session for Technological Leadership Offices and sector-specific sessions for project leaders. These discussions involved representatives of the Ministry, specialized agencies, and experts from the “Priority 2030” Council.
Among the key topics was the establishment of Technological Leadership Offices as true competence centres rather than formal structures. Particular attention was given to their functions, responsibilities, role in supporting strategic technological projects, interaction with industry, interpretation of technological expertise results, as well as the work with obtained results.
Participants emphasized the need to treat expertise not as a one-time evaluation but as a continuous support of projects throughout all implementation stages. Potential challenges for universities in 2026 were also discussed.
During the “Cross-Expertise” interactive session, participants compared business and academic approaches to evaluating real strategic technological projects.
“The main challenge for achieving the technological leadership is rethinking the training system. Today we face a paradox: striving for leadership, we train specialists for yesterday’s tasks. It is time to abandon the “train at university, learn on the job” principle,” noted one of the participants of the symposium Sergey Kabyshev, Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Science and Higher Education. “The new model must be proactive rather than reactive. This requires:
– forming the technological expertise already during the educational process by involving students in solving real Russian technological problems, not abstract cases;
– integrating strategies and sharing responsibility between universities and industry for training engineering elites. Companies' participation in training personnel is not a social burden, but an investment in their own competitiveness;
– relying on strong foundational disciplines such as Physics, Mathematics, Materials Science, Nuclear Medicine, and Power Generation, rather than chasing short-term trends. A catch-up education model wastes resources on outdated solutions.”
Technological leadership is not about copying existing models but about setting our own standards in the global market based on our country’s own scientific and educational potential.