"Interdependent people combine their own efforts with the efforts of others to achieve the greatest success." 

—Stephen Covey

In this edition of the blog by TSU Rector Eduard Galazhinskiy, the conversation continues around the vital importance of cooperation between Russian universities and employers. The piece offers a candid analysis of the current situation, identifying the most pressing problems facing this collaboration.

— Professor Galazhinskiy, about six months ago, you touched on the topic of university-employer interaction in your blog. Why did you feel it necessary to return to it now?

— Because this type of collaboration is no longer just important — it has become strategically essential. We live in an era where the pace of change far outstrips the traditional mechanisms for workforce training. Today's labor market demands skills fr om graduates that didn't even exist yesterday. Add to that the country's focus on technological sovereignty, and the conclusion is unavoidable: without close cooperation between universities and the real economy, the gap between what students are taught and what industry actually needs will only widen.

We're seeing an acute shortage of specialists across the board — engineers, IT professionals, chemists, and experts in advanced materials. But the issue isn't just about numbers. It's also about the quality of training. Employers want more than just a diploma; they want graduates who are ready to contribute fr om day one — people who understand the nuances of their industry and possess up-to-date, practical tools. This means universities must do more than offer fundamental academic knowledge — they must be deeply embedded in the economic sectors they're educating for.

I often use this metaphor, but it's worth repeating: the classical university is no longer an ivory tower. Today, it must function as a hub for generating meaning, technology, and human capital that is not only relevant today, but anticipates the needs of tomorrow. A university must get ahead of time — not just as an educational institution, but as an industrial platform wh ere science, business, and students converge. But aspiration alone isn't enough. University-employer interaction needs to move beyond formal agreements on internships or one-off placements. We must shift to formats wh ere business is a full partner in the educational process — co-developing curricula, launching joint projects, and investing in infrastructure.

— Is this a new kind of partnership?

— Yes, it’s a partnership based not on formal obligations but on a shared understanding of goals. Universities and employers must speak the same language and see each other not merely as a "supplier of graduates" and a "consumer," but as equal partners in shaping the future of industries and regions. I’m ready to talk in more detail about the problems currently holding back this cooperation, the solutions researchers are proposing, and what leading universities and companies — including TSU — are already doing.

— Let’s follow your plan then. What do you see as the key problems hindering effective university-employer collaboration?

— There are quite a few, and most are now systemic. These aren’t one-off failures, but entrenched gaps observed in both academic research and real-world university-industry collaborations. One of the most pressing issues is the mismatch between graduate competencies and labor market expectations. Employers frequently note that young professionals graduate with solid theoretical foundations but lack practical skills — especially in technical fields, IT, and engineering. Research shows that over 70% of companies are dissatisfied with how prepared graduates are for real-world work. And the problem isn’t just technical proficiency; it’s also about soft skills — the ability to work in teams, make decisions, and adapt to change. This doesn’t mean universities aren’t doing their job. The question is how well academic programs, teaching methods, and hands-on experiences keep up with industry demands. Without active employer involvement, a university simply can’t respond to change fast enough.

Another major problem is the often superficial nature of the collaboration. In many cases, partnerships are still built around paperwork — agreements signed for the sake of accreditation. Students go on internships that are little more than box-checking: a brief introduction to company documentation, a tour of the facility, and then waiting for a supervisor’s signature. Employers see it as a burden; universities see it as a compliance requirement. Neither side truly benefits.

Related to this is the weak integration of industry into the educational process. Yes, there’s growing talk of industrial partners helping to design curricula, giving guest lectures, or mentoring students. But such involvement remains the exception, not the rule. There’s a widespread shortage of practitioner-lecturers, of joint labs and project-based learning spaces — this is the reality for most Russian universities.

Another critical challenge is the disconnect between academic research and business. University research too often remains confined to academic circles, never reaching implementation. Businesses want ready-made solutions but rarely initiate joint R&D. As a result, the potential of universities as sources of innovation remains underutilized. Technology parks and engineering centers at universities are still far fr om the norm.

And we can’t ignore the bureaucratic barriers. Universities and businesses operate under very different rulebooks. Excessive regulations in education, coupled with companies’ lack of understanding of academic workflows, only widen the divide. Add to this the absence of unified performance metrics — and you get a situation wh ere both sides claim to collaborate, yet evaluate success on completely different terms. A university may count the number of signed company agreements as an achievement, while businesses focus on how many skilled professionals were actually trained or how many innovations were implemented.

— So, it’s not just about mechanisms, but about differing views of the end goal?

— Exactly. Until universities and employers start speaking the same language and building partnerships based on long-term goals, the situation won’t change. Formal agreements won’t lead to breakthroughs. What’s needed is a shared effort to create an environment where talent development, scientific research, and business objectives become parts of a single, integrated system.

— You’ve already outlined the key issues in university–employer collaboration. But as we know fr om practice, solutions are being explored — and not just in theory. Which trends do you see as the most promising?

— The main thing is this: everyone involved now sees that the old models no longer work. The world has changed. The economy demands flexibility, speed, and specialists ready to meet new challenges. That means the university–business relationship must evolve as well. And I’m not talking about isolated initiatives — what we need are systemic approaches that have already proven their effectiveness.

We’re no longer just talking about management decisions or administrative partnerships. This is now the focus of serious academic research. In recent years, the issue has become central to studies on higher education and labor markets. Russian researchers consistently identify the same pressure points: graduates’ skills not matching industry needs, tokenistic relationships between universities and companies, and weak business participation in education.

Another recurring theme is the absence of a unified strategy and clear metrics for evaluating how effective these partnerships actually are. Most universities still operate with scattered efforts rather than cohesive strategies.

What’s encouraging, though, is that researchers are putting forward concrete ideas. At the forefront are dual education models, project-based learning, modern career centers co-run with industry partners, the development of tech parks, and academic startups. There’s also a growing consensus around embedding employers directly into the educational process — not just as advisors, but as instructors, co-researchers, and strategic partners.

The consensus within the academic community is crystal clear: university–employer collaboration must move beyond symbolic agreements and evolve into strategic alliances—functioning as unified ecosystems that draw on a wide array of tools, methods, and technologies.

— What practical steps are already being taken in this direction? And which solutions do you personally see as the most promising?

One of the key trends is the transition to dual and project-based learning. And let me be clear—this isn’t just another buzzword or something to pad out a presentation. It’s a very real, very concrete answer to the demands of our time. Dual education means that students are learning not just in lecture halls, but also directly on the job, within the ecosystem of a working enterprise. Theoretical learning and practical application happen simultaneously—not sequentially, as they did in the past, wh ere you earned your diploma first and only then stepped into the workforce.

For context:

Dual education is a model that integrates academic and practical learning. It ensures that employers play an active role in shaping the curriculum, organizing internships and project work, evaluating students, and helping graduates transition into the workforce. The model aims to close the gap between education and labor markets by helping students acquire not just professional skills, but also a clear sense of their role within an industry fr om the early stages of their education.

(Source: Z.S. Gelmanova, A.S. Petrovskaia, et al., “Training Personnel for a Labor Market in Transition: European Approaches,” 2025)

Project-based learning amplifies the impact of this model by involving students in real business challenges during their studies. These aren’t hypothetical case studies invented to pass a course—they’re actual problems companies need solved. This format builds not just technical competence, but a sense of responsibility for real-world outcomes.

The second area of progress is the emergence of new-generation career centers. These are no longer back-office units that pin up job postings or host an annual career fair. A modern career center is a bridge between students and employers. It helps students craft their own career trajectories, beginning in the first year and continuing until they graduate. More importantly, it helps them understand which skills their industry values most—and wh ere they should focus their development. Crucially, this work happens in active dialogue with companies that are willing to share their expectations and co-invest in shaping future professionals.

Another major trend is the rise of industry-sponsored departments and the growing involvement of corporate experts in the educational process. When business is no longer just an outside partner but becomes embedded in university life, everyone wins. Students gain access to up-to-date professional practice, faculty gain insight into real-world challenges and tools, and companies help train the very people they hope to hire. But this calls for a mindset shift—on both sides. Universities must be open to incorporating practitioners into their teaching teams, while companies need to see their involvement in education not as charity, but as a strategic investment with long-term returns.

Lastly, we must mention the increasing development of joint R&D projects, university tech parks, and academic startups. This trend is still more visible internationally, but promising examples are emerging in Russia too. The university is no longer simply a place for knowledge transmission—it becomes a platform for innovation, where companies can launch and grow new ventures by tapping into academic expertise and involving students in real development work. Several Russian universities are already demonstrating what this model of industry–university collaboration can achieve.

— So, effective models already exist — it's just a matter of scaling them?

— Precisely. Practice shows that when processes are properly designed and both sides are genuinely engaged, collaboration can be built that benefits universities, businesses, and students alike. But to get there, we have to move beyond a box-checking mindset and embrace true partnership — one where each party understands its responsibilities and sees this work as a strategic mission. The goal is to make these models the norm, not the exception. And that depends a lot on universities being proactive and employers seeing participation in education not as an afterthought, but as part of their core HR strategy and long-term business development.

— There's a widely held belief that foreign universities are far ahead of us in this area. Is the gap really that large?

— That notion is quite outdated. There are excellent examples of successful collaboration both abroad and right here in Russia. At this point, the conversation shouldn’t be about a “gap,” but about differences in the scale and consistency of implementation. These differences are driven primarily by levels of investment, the duration of partnerships with industry, and institutional traditions. If we take a step back and look at what defines the best global practices of university–industry cooperation — both international and domestic — here’s what we find:

Strategy and Institutionalization

Leading companies are often represented on the boards of trustees at top universities. They participate in strategic governance and help shape the direction of academic programs. The most advanced campuses are physically integrated with business hubs, startup incubators, and R&D centers, creating seamless collaboration between education and industry.

Interaction Formats

Dual education, career guidance, job fairs, co-op programs (where students alternate between academic study and paid industry placements), long-term research partnerships, and startup accelerators are increasingly standard. Students are involved in real industrial projects as early as their first or second year — not just in theory, but hands-on.

Employer Involvement in the Curriculum

Industry professionals are not just guest lecturers — they serve as full-fledged instructors, course designers, project supervisors, and mentors. Their participation is built into core educational programs, not limited to one-off expert talks or case study presentations.

Funding and Investment
Major companies invest heavily in university infrastructure: co-funding academic departments, building joint labs, and supporting doctoral training programs. This isn't philanthropy — it's a long-term investment in innovation and talent pipelines.

Integration and Innovation Ecosystems
Many campuses are developing full-fledged technology parks and engineering centers, with strong backing fr om the private sector. These become growth points for startups and applied research initiatives, often involving students and early-career scientists. These ecosystems foster innovation in real time, embedded directly in the academic environment.

— But wouldn’t you say that, abroad, this is a more systematic story?

— Yes, that’s true. But I wouldn’t dramatize it. Russia is in the process of finding its own model — one that reflects our economic conditions, national priorities, and the unique nature of science–business relations here. It’s important to understand that simply copying Western practices won’t work. Our task is to draw on successful examples, but adapt them thoughtfully to Russian realities. And we’re already seeing that elements like dual education, industry-based departments, and project-based learning are taking root and delivering results. The next step is a matter of time: to integrate those elements into a coherent system — one wh ere universities become true hubs for business engagement, and employers become full participants in both education and research. That will depend heavily on how proactive the universities themselves are. Are we ready to take initiative, launch new partnerships, and step outside the confines of traditional academic logic? I believe that Tomsk State University — and a number of other leading Russian universities — are already demonstrating that we are.

— And speaking specifically about TSU — how would you assess the university’s current standing when it comes to working with industry partners? What formats are already in place, and where do you see the most potential?

— Tomsk State University has always aimed to be more than just an academic institution. We’ve worked to be an active player in the economic and technological development of both our region and the country as a whole. So, for us, collaboration with employers hasn’t been about ticking boxes — it’s an essential strategy. We understand that without true partnerships with industry, we won’t be able to fulfill our ambitions in either workforce development or scientific and technological advancement.

If we’re talking about specific examples, TSU already has strong and effective working models with key players across various sectors.

Take our partnership with SIBUR, for instance. It goes far beyond internships. We jointly design educational programs, implement dual education tracks, and involve the company in the supervision of final qualification projects. Our students don’t just do internships — they solve real production challenges as part of their coursework.

With Gazprom Neft, we’re building out cooperation in engineering and project-based learning. This includes investments in lab infrastructure, mentorship opportunities, and direct participation of company experts in reviewing student projects and master's defenses. It’s not just about preparing graduates — it’s about building a talent pipeline that aligns directly with industry needs.

Our collaboration with Rostelecom shows how IT companies can meaningfully embed themselves in academic processes. TSU’s Digital Technology Academy was created with input fr om industry partners who organize case championships, webinars, internships, and even co-develop modules on cybersecurity and data analytics.

Another noteworthy partnership is with MIKRAN, a national telecom and radio engineering company. Here, TSU students are not just interns—they’re full participants in real R&D projects that have commercial outcomes. This is a model wh ere scientific research becomes a collaborative process between students and industry.

A major recent milestone has been the launch of the Advanced Workforce Training Center  in the field of new materials and chemistry, with TSU as the lead operator. This represents a shift toward systemic cooperation with industry. The center brings together universities, colleges, and businesses to train professionals critically needed in the chemical sector.

The goals of this center include modernizing curricula, developing networked educational formats, upskilling teaching staff, and quickly addressing the talent demands of businesses. In effect, it’s a new model of partnership, where the university is not just a site of learning but also a coordination hub for industry needs — fully aligned with national projects and the agenda of technological sovereignty.

Of course, these are only a few highlights. Our Career Center coordinates collaboration with a wide range of companies — varying in size and sector — including major players like Rosatom and MTS. We’re advancing targeted training programs and co-developing initiatives within the framework of national and federal development agendas.

If we apply the classic SWOT analysis method, TSU’s collaboration with employers can be broadly characterized as follows.

Among the strengths, I would highlight, first and foremost, the strong ties we’ve already established with key industrial partners in the region, which I mentioned earlier. These are not just agreements on paper — they’re living partnerships that take shape through dual education models, joint projects, and master's programs developed in direct response to business demands. This is bolstered by the active work of our Career Center. We have solid experience with project-based learning, business-led case sessions, and modules on the digital economy developed jointly with our local IT cluster. Equally important is our university’s ability to respond flexibly to industry needs by offering tailor-made master’s programs — like those developed for engineering specialists at Gazprom Neft.

But as an honest analysis shows, there are also weaknesses that we must acknowledge if we’re talking about meaningful development. For now, the involvement of employers in the design and delivery of academic programs remains limited. Yes, partners are willing to host interns and give feedback on graduates, but we haven’t yet achieved full integration of industry into the educational process. We’re also seeing a lack of long-term investment models fr om the industrial sector. Most often, the funding we receive is tied to specific projects rather than broader investments into university infrastructure or R&D capabilities.

Another issue is the limited internationalization of our partnerships — our focus has largely remained on domestic companies. We currently have only a small number of joint labs with industrial partners, and this is an area that needs development, especially if we’re serious about building a full-fledged innovation ecosystem. It’s also worth noting the uneven distribution of employer engagement across disciplines: technical fields have naturally seen stronger partnerships, while the humanities and social sciences still need more targeted integration into the real economy.

As for our opportunities, TSU has strong potential to expand international industrial partnerships and attract more major corporations to collaborate with us—including multinational companies. We also see room for growth in industrial PhD models and scientific consortia that bring together universities and businesses. Participation in national projects and federal programs aimed at university–industry collaboration (such as the “University Technology Entrepreneurship Platform”) is another clear avenue for expansion.

The threats and risks we face include intense competition fr om top-tier universities in Moscow and other major cities for corporate partnerships, as well as regional brain drain, limited public funding for infrastructure upgrades, and the relatively low level of digital maturity in some regional industries—which presents a challenge for forming robust IT-sector partnerships.

— What could serve as a catalyst for truly strong and effective partnerships between TSU and leading industry employers?

— An honest assessment of our strengths and weaknesses is precisely the starting point for moving forward. We see wh ere our growth points are, we know wh ere our partnerships need to deepen and, most importantly, we already have successful case studies on which we can build a sustainable model of collaboration. And here, as I’ve said before, it’s essential to understand that industry partnerships are not just about engineers or IT specialists. It’s about the ability to operate at the intersection of disciplines, where humanities-based competencies are becoming just as critical.

Today’s business landscape needs professionals who can not only develop technologies, but also understand people, society, communication processes, cultural codes, and systems of values. In this context, our goal is to learn how to offer employers integrated solutions — solutions that bring together engineers, IT specialists, economists, lawyers, sociologists, linguists, and psychologists. I firmly believe the future of university–industry collaboration lies in these interdisciplinary formats. This is a conversation we’re already having with our regional partners, including the Tomsk Electromechanical Plant. But that’s a topic for another day.

— So, you’re saying that collaboration with business is no longer just about engineers and technologies?

— Absolutely. It’s time to break the stereotype that partnerships with the real sector are only for technical fields. Today, the demand for specialists in the humanities and social sciences is growing rapidly. Just look at how the expectations for graduates in philology, sociology, psychology, and law are changing. Companies are looking for talent who can work with big data, use digital analytics tools, understand communication dynamics in digital environments, and solve tasks related to profiling, marketing, and community management.

We’re already seeing examples of how our humanities students and researchers are actively contributing to business projects, whether it’s in the development of educational platforms, research in cognitive technologies, or initiatives in social engineering. As you may know, our Siberian Center for Artificial Intelligence and the Center for Cognitive Research are working right at the crossroads of technology and human sciences.

The university’s task is not to divide disciplines into “technological” and “non-technological,” but to find points of convergence. Wherever there are complex interdisciplinary projects, there is always room for both engineers and humanists.

— Eduard Vladimirovich, to wrap up our conversation: would it be fair to say that the task facing universities and businesses today goes beyond simply establishing cooperation?

— Absolutely. The challenges of our time no longer allow for episodic internships, one-off training programs, or formal partnership agreements. Technological sovereignty, the acute shortage of skilled talent, and the rapid transformation of entire industries require something more — the formation of long-term strategic alliances between universities and employers.

Today, the university is not only the key provider of skilled graduates. It is a center for knowledge generation, a platform for innovation, a magnet for talent, and — most importantly — a partner for business in driving sectoral development. Employers, in turn, are no longer standing passively at the end of the pipeline waiting for a “finished product.” They become co-authors of the educational process: helping shape academic programs, investing in infrastructure, mentoring students, and engaging in research. This kind of partnership isn’t built on bureaucratic obligation, but on shared purpose — to prepare not just degree-holders, but individuals ready for real-world challenges, equipped with relevant competencies, and capable of growing alongside the business.

In this regard, we as a classical university carry a unique mission. We’ve never simply trained people for narrow job descriptions. We’ve always educated for change: for industries that are constantly evolving, for businesses that demand both critical thinking and creativity. That’s why we place so much emphasis on cultivating deep intellectual capacities and creative potential. And it’s precisely those qualities that make TSU graduates stand out as many employers have noted.

Of course, no strategy can succeed without dialogue. That’s why I believe open forums are essential. They are spaces where students can directly question employers, and businesses can listen to the aspirations and concerns of young professionals. A recent example was our career talk show “Career Bridge,” where I sat down with Ivan Pushkaryov, Director of the Tomsk Electromechanical Plant. We spoke candidly about the future of engineering and STEM education. The event drew 230 participants — students, prospective applicants, parents, and teachers — all seeking honest answers about what lies ahead, what today’s industries truly value, and how to align careers with personal goals and passions.

I’ll be sharing more reflections on that event in my next blog post, including what concrete steps industry is offering today’s engineers and professionals across disciplines.

But for now, I want to draw readers’ attention to a key event that took place in Tomsk last week — the U-NOVUS Forum. This year’s event places strong emphasis on career guidance for youth and on fostering meaningful cooperation between universities and employers. I encourage everyone to explore its materials and stay tuned to the trends shaping the future of workforce development in our region and across the country.

Eduard Galazhinskiy
Rector, Tomsk State University
Member of the Presidential Council for Science and Education
Vice President, Russian Union of Rectors

Interview and supporting materials prepared by Irina Kuzheleva-Sagan