• 中国科学学与科技政策研究会
  • 中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院
  • 清华大学科学技术与社会研究中心
ISSN 1003-2053 CN 11-1805/G3

科学学研究 ›› 2026, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (1): 108-118.

• 理论与方法 • 上一篇    下一篇

战略人才力量的多重素养结构及其演化机制

高中华1,林晨2,赵晨3   

  1. 1. 中国社会科学院工业经济研究所
    2. 北京邮电大学经济管理学院
    3. 北京邮电大学
  • 收稿日期:2024-11-21 修回日期:2025-03-03 出版日期:2026-01-15 发布日期:2026-01-19
  • 通讯作者: 林晨
  • 基金资助:
    研究阐释党的二十大精神国家社科基金重大项目“我国强化产业现代化人才支撑的实现路径与对策研究”

The Competency Configuration and Growth Path of Strategic Talent

  • Received:2024-11-21 Revised:2025-03-03 Online:2026-01-15 Published:2026-01-19

摘要: 建设国家战略人才力量是我国现代化建设的重中之重,然而战略人才力量的素养结构及其演化规律尚有待揭示。本文在厘清人才素养核心特征的基础上,以某央企国资企业的34名拔尖专家为访谈对象,刻画战略科学家和卓越工程师这两类战略人才力量的素养结构及其演化机制。研究发现:(1)战略科学家具备求真科学品质、崇高科学使命、战略科学家定位、超前理论见解、杰出探索能力等服务于科学发现和理论创新的素养;卓越工程师具备务实工程品质、远大工程目标、卓越工程师定位、前瞻工程见解、精湛实践能力等服务于工程实践和产业建设的素养;(2)战略人才力量的素养结构为特质、动机、自我概念、知识及技能五种要素的有机组合,其发展均经历了包括启蒙阶段、教育阶段、职业起步、职业发展和职业涌现五个核心阶段的演化过程;(3)这两类战略人才力量的素养结构的同构性和异构性导致其演化机制同时存在趋同性和差异性;且素养发展呈前后衔接的连续性,以及多重素养要素并行发展的共时性。研究从人才素养视角解析战略人才力量的素养结构及其演化机制,为培育战略人才力量提供实践启示。

Abstract: As the primary resource, talents, especially the strategic talent force, play an increasingly prominent supporting role in enterprise innovation activities. However, despite the remarkable progress made in the construction of talent teams across various industries, the cultivation and utilization of the strategic talent force are still in the long - term exploratory stage. A large number of enterprises still have no understanding of the overall picture of the strategic talent force and lack systematic theoretical guidance on how to cultivate relevant talents. Regrettably, the current theoretical research on the competency structure and development laws of the strategic talent force is still in its infancy. Existing studies have carried out some exploratory work on deconstructing the competency structure of the strategic talent force, but their focus has been on describing the morphological characteristics of talent competency elements. Questions such as what differences exist in the competency structures of different types of strategic talent forces and what development trajectories the elements in a specific competency structure follow still remain to be answered. Therefore, this study, on the basis of clarifying the competency configurations of two types of strategic talents, strategic scientists and outstanding engineers, maps the evolution of their competencies with individual growth, thus providing new insights for cultivating competencies required for strategic talents. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 34 top experts from a central state-owned enterprise. These interviews required respondents to recall 1-3 behavioral events of themselves or high-level talents around them in the process of achieving significant accomplishments, solving major problems, leading major projects, as well as 1-3 typical experiences of their own growth and participation in talent cultivation. Subsequently, adopting the programmatic grounded theory, we refined the typical competencies of strategic scientists and outstanding engineers, and the processes and mechanisms of the competencies’ formation. The study finds that: (1) Strategic scientists possess competencies such as a commitment to scientific truth, a noble scientific mission, a strategic scientist identity, advanced theoretical insights, and exceptional exploration abilities; outstanding engineers possess competencies such as practical engineering qualities, ambitious engineering goals, an outstanding engineer identity, forward-looking engineering insights, and excellent practical skills. The competency configurations of strategic scientists and outstanding engineers exhibit heterogeneity, with the former serving scientific discovery and theoretical innovation, while the latter serves engineering practice and industrial development; (2) The evolution of the competency configurations of strategic scientists and outstanding engineers includes five core stages: enlightenment, education, career initiation, career development, and career emergence. (3) The differences in the competency configurations lead to varying key factors and pathways in their corresponding evolutionary contexts. Moreover, the development of competencies demonstrates dynamic characteristics of sequential integration and presents an evolutionary form of multiple parallel pathways. The theoretical contributions of this study can be summarized in three aspects: First, unlike previous studies that focused on depicting the profile of a single type of strategic talents, this study deconstructs and contrasts the competency configurations of scientists and engineers, by considering the context distinction of talents. Second, differing from studies on talent development, this study goes beyond merely observing the individual development of strategic talents and, by considering the dynamic characteristics of competencies, delves deeply into the underlying trajectory of competency evolution. Third, in terms of theory, this paper combines the longitudinal perspective of career theory with the lateral perspective of competency theory, fostering dialogue between these two talent-focused theories.