To maintain continuity at each individual enterprise or institution, experts believe it is necessary for young people under 35 to make up at least 25-30% of the workforce. In the agro-industrial complex today, employees of this age account for only 16%. Among school teachers and the academic teaching staff of universities, it is 23% (for the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, the comparable threshold for youth is not the generally accepted 35, but 39 years, since the training period includes postgraduate studies).
All three of these fields are at risk in terms of workforce reproduction. The situation in universities is further complicated by a negative dynamic. In 2013, according to monitoring data from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, there were more young people in universities—about a third. Since then, the total number of all academic teaching staff has also significantly decreased (from 319,000 to 217,000 people). Russia is already in its fifth year of the Decade of Science and Technologies—it is impossible to manage without higher education and, consequently, well-staffed universities. Why, then, are young people not rushing to universities?
The average salary of university teaching staff in Russia surpassed 136,000 rubles a month in 2024. The median, of course, is lower, but it still exceeds the national average, which, according to Rosstat, is 73,800 rubles for people with higher education (for academic teaching staff, it is 78,000 rubles according to Rabota-Help). This means the issue is not just about money.
To answer this question, let us consider the behavioral characteristics of the 25-35-year-old generation. First of all, these people are pragmatic: they tend to reject conspicuous consumption, and their motivation is based primarily not on prestige, but on comfort and material benefit. Another characteristic is living in the present day—that is, choosing a bird in the hand over two in the bush. Self-realization is important to young people. They are focused on growing their professionalism in their chosen specialty, but at the same time, they willingly master adjacent fields and diversify their skills. If university human resources departments and departmental mentors build their interactions with young people by taking these listed common traits into account, staff turnover will noticeably decrease.
The IT sector can perhaps be taken as a model of personnel policy attractive to young people. It has the youngest age structure, and it practices clear career tracks methodologically borrowed from the West.
Young people start from the position of trainee and spend approximately six months in it. During this time, under the guidance of a mentor, they must learn to perform basic tasks and work on projects as part of a team.
The next stage is junior. This already involves independently solving standard tasks and understanding the main processes. Mentors are needed only for complex and non-trivial tasks. Depending on ability and enthusiasm, passing through this level takes from six months to two years.
The middle level is completed over two to four years. It implies fully autonomous work and mentorship in relation to juniors. Such people can already be regarded as specialists deeply immersed in the technology; they are entrusted with non-standard tasks.
After middles come seniors. The name speaks for itself: translated from Latin, it means “elder.” As is known, in medieval Western Europe this was the term used for landowners who possessed full authority within their territory. In our case, a senior has the maximum degree of freedom in making strategic technical decisions. They act as mentors for all previous positions and work on projects that bring together representatives of different departments and fields of activity.
In a team of programmers, above the senior there is only the manager or team lead. This person performs more of a managerial function, working on staff development, including soft skills. Many seniors refuse to move up to this level, since working with people here takes much more time than the direct activity of an IT professional. Their development proceeds horizontally: additional profiles are added to the main one, such as machine learning or cybersecurity.
Young people raised on computer games are accustomed to receiving an exact description of their mission before completing each level. They expect the same in professional activity: a clear understanding of what turn, and under what conditions, will lead to an increase in material remuneration and status. When solving professional tasks, they are still ready to “go there, not knowing where, and bring back something, not knowing what,” but in career matters they need clarity.
Formally, the principles for building career-growth trajectories at universities and IT companies have quite a lot in common. For example, both offer the possibility of developing equally successfully along an administrative, that is, vertical trajectory — head of department, dean, vice-rector, rector — and along a horizontal one — department assistant, associate professor, professor, academician. There is also a predetermined and well-known set of criteria for obtaining academic titles and degrees. What, then, is the difference between a career in IT and a career at a university?
In terms of status within a team, the position of senior in the IT sector can perhaps be compared with that of a university professor. However, the stereotypical images are completely different, and the main distinction is age. A professor is associated with noble grey hair and photographs of grandchildren on the desk. There are, of course, exceptions, but overall the stereotype is not misleading. The interest of the millennial generation in the IT sector is connected with the opportunity to become a professor in one’s own field within a relatively short period, with all the accompanying material benefits.
Let us look at the pyramid of needs. The status of a senior in an IT company makes it possible to satisfy not only basic needs for quality food, clothing, and housing, but also several higher layers of the pyramid — a sense of security and confidence in the recognition and respect of colleagues. Above these lie needs that are purely non-material, first and foremost cognitive needs.
The specific feature of the motivational system relevant to the millennial generation is perhaps that the best university graduates can make their way to the status of IT senior within their company, or through freelancing, in three years. After that, without being especially concerned about career advancement or material well-being, they can focus on moving toward the heights of professional mastery.
At a university, of course, one cannot expect such rapid advancement. Postgraduate study alone takes three years. But what matters here is not a direct analogy, but the principle: today’s young people want to feel not like “greenhorns” among venerable sea dogs, but as equals among equals. If they are given this feeling, they will move mountains.
