Analysis of statistical parameters of development and introduction of innovative technologies in branches of the Russian economy

: These effects and intensification factors look different in different sectors of the Russian economy. Accordingly, we can distinguish those that have the lowest values of indicators of innovation development. For them, the measures to intensify the innovative activities of its economic agents are most relevant. The article presents the results of statistical analysis of parameters of development and introduction of innovative technologies. The article is based on the analysis of statistical parameters of development and introduction of innovative technologies. Form 1-Technology became the basis for this analysis. It presents data on so-called «advanced production technologies», managed «by computer», based on «microelectronics and /or the use of digital technologies». By a group of selected industries for the period 2020-2021. the authors conducted an analysis of the effects of the introduction of technologies and obstacles to their implementation.


Introduction
The urgency of increasing the pace of innovation development in the Russian economy is now underscored by various legislative, regulatory and organizational and managerial measures being developed and implemented at all levels.
The regression of innovation activity in the Russian Federation underlines the following negative trends.The share of innovative goods, works and services in the total volume of Russian exports was 5.2% in 2019, in the period from 2013 the figure decreased by 8.5%.The share of innovative goods, works and services in their total volume decreased to 6.1%, -by 2.1% in six years.The cost intensity of technological innovation decreased by 0.6%, -to 1.6.Domestic R&D spending remained almost unchanged at 1.03% of GDP.All the above allows us to draw a conclusion about the key relevance of addressing issues of innovative development in our country.
As for the possibilities of realization of the declared directions, they are connected, first of all, with the increase of innovation activity, both at the level of individual economic agents and at the level of individual industries and the economy as a whole.
In order for innovation opportunities to be realized by economic agents, it is necessary to have the positive effects of their introduction.In the domestic economy, however, such effects are not always obvious.
A statistical study was conducted by the authors to determine whether or not such effects existed.

Materials and methods
Table t30 of Statistical Form 1-Technology reflects the various effects of the introduction of technologies: increased production efficiency, reduced costs, etc.Each organization gives its response (in statistical form) depending on the situation in the organization; thus, a low, medium, high or no impact is recorded.By grouping these parameters together, it is possible to obtain a percentage distribution of the respondents' responses regarding the degree of impact of technology deployment on the different areas of activity of the organizations.For comparison, indicators were analysed in the following sectors: health, textiles, energy, oil and gas, mining food industry, chemical industry.Thus, on average, the positive effects of the introduction of technologies were found in the health sector (24 per cent), the chemical industry (20 per cent), the textile industry (19 per cent).
However, for individual factors, the responses of respondents differed [5]: − The effect of increasing the efficiency of the production process (productivity growth) noted: 34 per cent of representatives of chemical organizations; 33 per cent for health care; 32% -oil and gas industry.

−
The effect of improving quality, reducing the proportion of marriage noted: 34 per cent of textile organizations; 30% -health care; 17% -chemical industry.

−
The effect of the production cycle acceleration was noted: 24 per cent of chemical organizations; 24% -textile industry; 20% -oil and gas industry and healthcare.

−
The effect of increased flexibility in production noted: 18 per cent of health organizations; 14% -chemical industry; 14% -textile industry.

−
The effect of reducing the environmental impact noted: 24% of oil and gas organizations; 13% -health care; 11% -chemical industry.

−
The effect of the release of goods, works, services with new consumer properties noted: 22 per cent of health organizations; 13% -chemical industry; 11% -textile industry.

−
The effect of meeting supply chain partners' needs noted: 26 per cent of health organizations; 19% -chemical and textile industry; 17% -food industry.
− The effect of compliance with standards, technical regulations and regulations noted: 48 per cent of health organizations; 37% -oil and gas industry; 34% -chemical industry.

−
The effect of entering foreign markets noted: 16 per cent of health organizations; 8% -chemical industry; 6% -food and textile industry.

−
The effect of reduced import dependence was noted: 12 per cent of health and chemical organizations; 10% -oil and gas industry; 7% -textile industry.
Further, an analysis of organizations that implement technologies in a group of industries in 2020-2021 was conducted in particular the results of the technology strategy.
Form 1-Technology (Table t40) became the basis for the analysis.The analysis was also carried out for all enterprises that report to the statistical agency on this form.
The table t40 of the presented form reflects the assessment of the results of the strategy implementation («positive» or «negative»).The list of such results, for example, includes cooperation with educational organizations of higher or secondary education, with scientific organizations, with design, design, design or engineering organizations, etc.
Thus, the most positive effects of the implementation of the technology strategy were observed on average in the health sector (54%), the oil and gas industry (49%), the chemical industry (46%).
However, for individual factors the responses varied.− Beginning / deepening of cooperation with higher or secondary education organizations noted: 54 per cent of representatives of health organizations; 52% -chemical industry; 38% -oil and gas industry.
− Development of cooperation with scientific organizations recorded: 57 per cent of representatives of chemical organizations; 48% -health care; 43% -oil and gas industry.
− Development of cooperation with design and design organizations noted: 70% of oil and gas industry representatives; 60% -health care; 53% -chemical industry.− Staff members were remunerated for improving products by: 59% of oil and gas industry representatives; 54% -health care; 48% -chemical industry.
− Competitive technology exploration (LPS), comparative analysis (benchmarking) and analysis of technological trends were carried out by: 33 per cent of representatives of health organizations; 54% -oil and gas industry and chemical industry; 48% in mining.
− Conducted on-the-job training programmes for: 72 per cent of representatives of health organizations; 66% -oil and gas industry; 63% -chemical industry.
− Used knowledge management systems, best practices: 59 per cent of representatives of health organizations; 47% -oil and gas industry; 39% -chemical industry.
− Applied methods of collective planning and decision-making: 52 per cent of representatives of health organizations; 42% -oil and gas industry; 37% -food and chemical industry.
On the basis of the findings presented, it is clear that there is a significant difference in the results of the implementation of technologies by industry in the organizations.To a greater extent it was assessed as positive such introduction of the organization of the healthcare industry, oil and gas industry, chemical industry.
In the context of the formation of additional conclusions, the authors conducted a similar analysis on the materials of the health sector.The effects of technology implementation in this industry are presented below.
Thus, industry organizations have noted and emphasized the lack of impact of technology adoption (more than 30 per cent of respondents), which is alarming.Only 1/5 of the respondents had a high impact and the average was less than 1/3 of the industry.
At the same time, the trend of indicators (2021 in comparison with 2020) suggests that the proportion of organizations with a high degree of impact on technology implementation increased by 3 per cent and the average by 1 per cent.At the same time, the proportion of respondents showing no impact decreased.
In particular, the growth of indicators characterizing each of the factors is shown.The most significant increase was observed in the «Meeting the needs of partners in the supply

Discussing
Studies on technology implementation practices and industry comparisons have resulted in a number of policy recommendations for the organization of work on the search, peer review and commercialization of innovative technologies [2, pp.23-29].
In particular, it is thought that it is necessary to divide all technologies and inventions into two large groups on the level of complexity.
The first group can consider relatively simple and complete ideas, techniques, materials and technical devices that can be easily reproduced in enterprises producing similar products with the necessary documentation.When introducing this kind of technology into production, the inventor's involvement is limited to the preparation and transfer of documentation, the assignment of copyrights on patents, participation in training of specialists and assistance in the adjustment and production of the first batch of products.Thereafter, participation is minimal or non-existent.
The second group should represent complex technologies that require the participation of developers not only in the initial transaction, but also in the subsequent process of technology improvement and product modification so as not to lose the competitive advantage [2, p.45].This means that developers are left with the knowledge and experience they have gained through multi-year studies that cannot be expressed in physical form and contracted.
Second-tier technologies give the owner a long-term competitive advantage.In this case, the essence of the commercialization transaction is not so much the fact of the transfer of technology in the form of available documentation as the legal setting of conditions for the production and introduction of new knowledge and further improvements.This may be in the form of a contract for long-term technical cooperation with developers.
Second-level technologies also differ from simpler ones in that they are the result of many years of research by a team of scientists or a whole scientific school and are therefore much more difficult to replicate by other groups of developers.
The following principles should therefore be followed.1. Search for groups of scientists who have been working in the selected field of knowledge for a long time [2, pp.56].As already noted, it is much easier to identify the technological benefits of development than its cost advantages.Circumstantial evidence of this priority can be found in the degree of acceptance of the scientific work by the world community, participation in international conferences, publications in authoritative journals, etc.
New technological developments should first of all be sought in the environment of the currently active and internationally recognized Russian scientific schools.Accordingly, it is necessary to be cautious about «single geniuses», which made their inventions on a doubtful scientific and material basis.Such cases are common.Inventors may lose an adequate sense of the degree of priority given to their designs and lose track of publications in their field of knowledge.
The above in no way negates the possible value of inventions made by loners.It is just a matter of the fact that this category of persons is unlikely to be suitable for the organization of mass and systematic work on the search for technologies.
2. Pay special attention to the availability of patents and other security documents.The availability of patents or applications, useful models and other results of intellectual activity is not always mandatory, but desirable, as it confirms the priority and novelty of developments [6, pp.28-29].It is particularly important that this validation is made by independent experts in the course of the work on patents and is not merely the opinion of the authors.The patent grants exclusive use of the development, which is also a competitive advantage.
3. Take into account the degree of completion of research and readiness for implementation in production.The degree of development completion strongly influences their attractiveness as an object of technology transfer.There are several levels of development completion and readiness for implementation: R&D at the theoretical and experimental research stage, R&D at the final stage, finished technological documentation, experimental sample, prototype, pilot batch, small-scale production, etc.The closer the development to the stage of serial production, the higher its value.
4. Presence of an organisational entrepreneur in the group of scientists.An additional argument in favor of the choice of a specific development for the launch of a project on commercialization of technology is the presence in the author's team of a person who has organizational skills and performs the job of manager.Such a person, formally being a scientist, does not really conduct scientific work, but deals mainly with current organizational and financial issues.Having such a person among the developers greatly facilitates negotiations on technology transfer.In addition, private technical cooperation arrangements, including the preparation of reports, the organization of production, the purchase of equipment, travel arrangements, payment of salaries and other matters, are much easier to manage with the participation of such a person.
5. Experience in commercialization.Another argument for choosing a particular development is that developers have past experience in commercializing technology.This is not a case of past technology transfer contracts to other firms, but rather of some orders for prototypes, experiments, research reports and similar activities.
6. Subjective factors also play an important role in the selection of a suitable object for commercialization.Of great importance is the activity of scientists in promoting their development and willingness to cooperate.Subjective factors of this type are easily tested in the first stage of interaction with authors, when they are instructed to prepare a small prospectus on the proposed technology.If such assignments are carried out quickly and according to the requirements, it indicates the presence of strong motivation of the team of developers, which facilitates the work [2, p.199].

Conclusions
For the most part, those involved in the commercialization of research are not sufficiently aware of their role, interests and place.Therefore it is very difficult to find a balance of interests of participants of innovative business process.It should be stressed that the main problem of the innovative development of the economy is cultural; it is necessary to change stereotypes.Technology commercialization is not the introduction at all, that new products are not yet a new commodity, that without an effective infrastructure (organizational, legal, financial, information) nothing innovative in most cases can be done in principle.Despite all the difficulties and lag from the world trend, the process of commercialization of technologies in the Russian Federation has certain prospects.
The following conclusions can be drawn from the above material: Table 1.Conclusions on article.

Section Conclusion
Industries where positive effects are most visible On average, the positive effects of technology were more pronounced in the health (24 per cent), chemical (20 per cent), textile (19 per cent).

Technology strategy implementation
The positive effects of the implementation of the technology strategy were observed on average in the health sector (54 per cent), the oil and gas industry (49 per cent), and the chemical industry (46 per cent).

Dynamics of indicators
The proportion of organizations with a high degree of technology impact increased by 3 per cent and the average by 1 per cent.At the same time, the proportion of respondents showing no impact decreased.Recommendations on the organization of work on the search, expert evaluation and commercialization of innovative technologies It is necessary to divide all technologies and inventions into two large groups on the level of complexity.The main problem of innovative development of the economy -cultural; it is necessary to change the stereotypes.