Alexander Kashirin, Deputy Chairman of the Scientific and Technical Council of Rostec State Corporation, on the key challenges to achieve technological sovereignty
On the sidelines of the Frontiers of Progress conference, Science Mail spoke with those who today play key roles in the innovative and technological development of our country. Our first interlocutor, Alexander Kashirin, Deputy Chairman of the Scientific and Technical Council of Rostec State Corporation, spoke about the formula that would allow Russia to be competitive in the global innovation race and why Russian venture capital has not yet reached its potential.
Technological sovereignty vs leadership: what is the difference?
Before we talk about the key areas that Russia needs to rely on in order to achieve real technological sovereignty, let's look at the terms. There are new terms — technological leadership and technological sovereignty. As part of Rostec, we have adopted the concept of advanced innovative development and technological excellence. Technological leadership is technological superiority. And technological sovereignty is technological global competitiveness. Sovereignty is achieved only through leadership.
Our promising technological directions are determined by what Rostec's holding companies and organizations are currently doing. If we are talking about the country as a whole, now, within the framework of the technological development of the Russian Federation, in 2024 alone, 7 federal regulatory documents have been adopted affecting scientific, technological and innovative development.
Special attention is paid to artificial intelligence. When we asked the AI what it was like, it gave us 20 major directions, each of which has more subdirectories. These are about 100 areas of artificial intelligence development. Just imagine the amount of work!
Other promising areas include big data, quantum technologies, new materials, additive technologies, green energy, biotechnology, personalized medicine, space technology, nuclear energy, and cybersecurity. I would also like to mention defense and dual-use technologies.
Every organization that has some competencies and expertise should focus its efforts on developing new technologies and products primarily in these areas.
There are two fundamental approaches here.
The first is the development of existing competencies, especially unique technological ones. By this, we mean the ability of teams to create, manufacture, and commercialize world—class products and technologies that are either superior to their counterparts or competitive in the global market.
The second is the formation of missing competencies. This requires a clear statement of objectives within the framework of scientific and technological development strategies or responses to global challenges. A striking example is the COVID—19 pandemic, which required Russia to accelerate the development and market of its own vaccine.
The formula of Russia's competitiveness
Russia is already demonstrating that it has its own formula for achieving success in the global market. We are actively selling our weapons, and we are a leader in the nuclear energy industry. Some of our companies successfully sell their products on international markets, including Asia and Africa. At the same time, we successfully set and solve the tasks of increasing the volume of exports for domestic enterprises.
Where we are lagging behind, we need to either buy technologies or acquire enterprises that will create them. If we start from research and development, it will require a lot of resources and time from us. At the same time, it is difficult to predict at the start what result will eventually be achieved.
It is important to understand that there are proven approaches to technology development.:
1. Attracting ready—made teams - as practice shows (for example, China's experience with luring hundreds of specialists from Google), sometimes it is more effective to acquire an already formed team with the necessary competencies and equipment. There are historical precedents in our country — let's recall the German specialists who worked in the Soviet space program.
2. Strategic selection of areas — for critically important industries, it is necessary to apply any available development methods. At the same time, outdated technologies that have no strategic importance can be naturally replaced by promising areas. For example, instead of catching up with global manufacturers in improving quartz chips, it is more reasonable to focus on breakthrough quantum technologies, where we are in an equal position with foreign competitors.
Barriers to innovative development
At the current stage, Russia's technological development is facing a set of interrelated problems. Their solution requires a systematic approach from us.
First, we need to find ways to overcome the acute shortage of personnel. It is due to both the low attractiveness of a scientific career in terms of prestige and remuneration, and the significant gap between academic education and the real needs of industry.
Secondly, universities need to bring their developments at least to the level of technological readiness, while strengthening ties with industrial partners.
Also, along with government support measures, small innovative businesses in the formative stages should have special tax regimes in order to grow.
Another question is how to sell a product to this small business, if there is now an approach: the cheaper the purchase, the better. And purchases of innovative products are still expensive. Although in the long run it provides the greatest economic effect.
The experience of the IT sector has clearly demonstrated to us the effectiveness of targeted support measures. The tax incentives and development programs provided to the industry allowed not only to preserve, but also to increase human resources potential. This successful experience needs to be scaled up to other promising technological areas.
A very significant problem is the slow pace of development of Russian venture capital. Meanwhile, it is venture capital investors who assume the main risks of financing innovative business projects at an early stage.
Legislative issues also need to be addressed. To do this, it is necessary to harmonize the legislative framework with the requirements of innovative development.
Technology leaders are changing the rules of the game
There is indeed a risk of a gap between technology leaders and other companies. But large technology companies, by definition, cannot afford a narrow specialization — their survival depends on constant diversification. This is their natural defense against market fluctuations. They are constantly redistributing resources between directions, creating new growth points.
Take, for example, digital twins — today, no complex product is created without them, from aircraft engines to industrial lines. Or robotics: where dozens of employees were previously needed — in accounting, logistics, and procurement — software robots are now working around the clock without interruptions.
But it is important to understand that these technologies do not create a gap, but rather set a new standard of efficiency, to which all other players are gradually pulling themselves up.
New standards of engineering education
How to prepare personnel for new realities? We are already implementing new training standards at Rostec. Knowing full well that we need not just human resources, but better trained personnel than universities have trained so far. The fact is that traditional university education often provides a good theoretical basis, but leaves graduates without practical skills that are really in demand in modern industries.
Together with universities, we have developed a number of programs that are called "Wings of Rostec", "Rostec Code", "Rostec. Biotechmed" and others. There are six educational programs in total. This is a specialty. Students have been studying for six years, for example, under the Wings of Rostec program, and at the same time they work every week as factory workers. That is, students who study in their first year work as milling machines, turners, etc. They do not just practice, but fully master the working professions in order to understand production. There is a complete immersion in the real production process.
This approach is very important in order to form a future specialist who will come to the enterprise not with abstract theoretical knowledge, but with a clear understanding of production processes and real work skills.
Artificial intelligence: where is the red line?
Returning to AI, the main question today is how to find a balance between the enormous opportunities and the real risks of this technology. If we look at the rest of the world, we will see that different peoples have different values. Therefore, we need to integrate our values into the regulation of the development of artificial intelligence.
An ethical framework is not a luxury, but a necessity. It is enough to recall the incident in China with an out-of-control robot that raged on its own. Therefore, we must define boundaries in advance so that AI does not harm people, businesses, or society as a whole.
This is an iterative process. First we encounter a problem, then we adjust the algorithms and remove dangerous functions. But it is important not just to react, but to anticipate the risks. There is no perfect recipe, but without clear ethical principles, we risk creating problems that will then be impossible to fix.
Bureaucracy and fear are killing Russian venture capital
To the question of why Russia has not yet developed its own strong venture culture. Let's get this straight. Let me give you an example: about 20 years ago, I was in the Shenzhen Technology Zone and asked the local administration how to get there and what kind of support they offer.
The answer struck me then.: "Submit the application form and we will consider it in five days." Imagine: China, 20 years ago — and only five days to make a decision! In comparison, the Innovation Promotion Foundation in those days held contests only twice a year.
The first is the speed of decision—making, especially when it comes to government money. The second point is the risks associated with law enforcement officers.
Venture capital is always a high percentage of failures. Out of ten projects, one can "shoot", three will show an average result, and the rest simply "will not take off." And when public money goes into such projects, sooner or later law enforcement agencies have questions that can lead to real criminal cases.
So it turns out that even with funds and initiatives, the venture ecosystem cannot develop freely — there is too much bureaucracy and the risks for those involved are too high. In fact, the very foundation of venture capital is being lost, where there cannot and should not be unacceptable risks for technology entrepreneurs.
From the "innovation window" to the "docking sessions"
Rostec's work with startups and small innovative enterprises begins with the open Innovation window on the official website. Those who want to work with us can send us information about themselves in a specific format. Relatively speaking, we select 10-15 out of 200 projects and send them to our relevant company.
It's been a very slow process so far. But now we are switching to new formats that work more efficiently. We have compiled into a single database the requests of our enterprises — what external innovations and competencies they need. As well as the competencies of startups and universities — what they can really offer.
The first attempt to automatically match supply and demand did not work — there were almost no ready-made matches. Then we went the other way: we sent the collected data to all participants and organized face—to-face meetings - "docking sessions". Enterprises formulate specific tasks on them, and startups and universities present their solutions.
Our aircraft manufacturing companies are particularly actively involved in this process. For them, the search for new technologies is critically important, because they work at the forefront of engineering.
Now we want to do this on an ongoing basis and hold such sessions 1-2 times a month, reviewing 3-4 projects at a time in order to find "connections" between startups and our enterprises.
The Secret of success for Tech Entrepreneurs
To succeed and realize their ideas, young technology entrepreneurs need to learn how to look at their project through the eyes of an investor. We business angels call this the "10 Natural Investor Questions." When a startup answers them, you can immediately see how viable the project is.
Many of our entrepreneurs have a common problem — they don't know their competitors, their market, their customers, and they build broken business models.
How can I fix this? Learn! For example, we have launched a practical course on creating a small innovative business (I teach it at the basic department of Rostec at RUDN University). All those who have passed it are now either successfully working in consulting, or in venture funds or Russian venture capital companies.
The intensive course is 40 hours in 5 days. As part of the SBARA, we conducted it in 80 regions, and it has always been in demand. It's nice when graduates come up to me years later and say, "And now I have a turnover of 500 million, largely because of what you taught me."
Advice to young entrepreneurs: don't reinvent the wheel. Master the basic principles of running an innovative business — it will save you years of trial and error. On this foundation, the probability of doing something truly innovative and breakthrough increases significantly.
Source: Nauka Mail
