Articles

Dialectical Conceptual Fusion of the Data-based and Evidence-based Management

Received: 15.02.2026 Published: 15.02.2026

Full text

Abstract

The digital transformation of public authorities and commercial organizations has led to a shift towards data-driven governance. The quality of decision-making is contingent upon the availability of data, analysis, and the swiftness of response to alterations. The primary challenge to the successful implementation of large-scale data processing and analysis systems is to guarantee their adequate scale and precision. Data-based and evidence-based management are explored as dialectically interrelated concepts with significant potential for synergy. The article explores the issue of data maturity and its influence on the effectiveness of managerial decisions. The methodological basis of the research was based on certain provisions of organizational theory. Quantitative and qualitative analysis, case studies, and synthesis were used as research methods to support the findings. The hypotheses of the research state that there is a methodological relationship between data-based and evidence-based management, as well as the potential for convergence between these approaches. In order to validate the proposed hypotheses, the authors utilize a dataset provided by the Federal State Statistics Service, encompassing information on the number of researchers in various scientific fields, age groups, academic qualifications, and regions of the Russian Federation from 2010 to 2023. The research revealed the order in which data-based and evidence-based management should be applied depending on the managerial context as methodologically interconnected concepts. The suggested approach is aimed at guaranteeing the quality and efficiency of managerial decisions in a high-tech management framework and in a dynamic external context.

Keywords

How to cite

Для цитирования:

Камолов С.Г., Алексеев Д.Б., Александров Н.Д. Диалектическое концептуальное единство управления на основе данных и доказательного менеджмента // Власть и управление на Востоке России. 2026. Т. 19, № 2. С. 96–109.

For citation:

Kamоlov S.G., Alekseev D.B., Aleksandrov N.D. Dialectical Conceptual Fusion of the Data-based and Evidence-based Management // Power and Administration in the East of Russia. 2026. Vol. 19, no. 2. P. 96–109.

How to Cite

Kamоlov S.G., Alekseev D.B., Aleksandrov N.D. Dialectical Conceptual Fusion of the Data-based and Evidence-based Management // Power and Administration in the East of Russia. 2026. Vol. 19, no. 2. P. 96–109.

References

  1. 1. Акофф, Р. Развитие от данных к мудрости // Проблемы управления в социальных системах. 2011. Т. 2. № 4. С. 82–92. EDN: OFABNB
  2. 2. Кузнецов, C. B., Кознов, Д. B. Управление мастер-данными в рамках итеративного подхода // Онтология проектирования. 2021. Т. 11. № 2. С. 170–184. DOI: 10.18287/2223-9537-2021-11-2-170-184 EDN: BBXMPJ
  3. 3. Макаров, В. В., Волчик, О. В. . Управление данными в системах менеджмента качества. Экономика и качество систем связи. 2024. № 4 (34), с. 4–13. EDN: ODTKQU
  4. 4. Морозов, А. Н. Альтернативные источники статистической информации как основа принятия политических решений // Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления. 2018. № 2. С. 50–70. EDN: UTSSID
  5. 5. Семья, Г. В., Станилевский, В. В., Газарян, А. А., Некрасов, А. С. Доказательный подход в управлении: доказательный менеджмент и доказательная политика // Социальная психология и общество. 2022. Т. 13. №. 1. С. 209–223. DOI: 10.17759/sps.2022000001 EDN: OPCOGH
  6. 6. Стырин Е. М. Барьеры внедрения датацентричного государственного управления: опыт России // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 21. Управление, государство и общество. 2024. № 1. С. 61–81. DOI: 10.55959/MSU2073-2643-21-2024-1-61-81 EDN: KPTQDR
  7. 7. Стырин Е. М., Рыбушкина Я. А., Санина А. Г. Цифровое доверие как ключевой фактор в формировании датацентричного государственного управления // Государство и граждане в электронной среде. 2024. № 7. С. 13–23. DOI: 10.17586/2541-979-X-2024-7-13-23 EDN: GYVIIG
  8. 8. Шевцова И. В., Днепровская Н. В. Специфика производства и использования больших данных в государственном управлении // Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления. 2024. № 1. С. 39–60. DOI: 10.17323/1999-5431-2024-0-1-39-60 EDN: VXRBGM
  9. 9. Abdulkadri, A., Evans, A., Ash, T. (2016) An Assessment of Big Data for Official Statistics in the Caribbean: Challenges and Opportunities Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), no. 48, pp. 1–56.
  10. 10. Agrawal, R., Wankhede, V. A., Kumar, A., Luthra, S. A (2023) systematic and network-based analysis of data-driven quality management in supply chains and proposed future research directions The TQM Journal, no. 1, pp. 73–101. DOI: 10.1108/TQM-12-2020-0285 EDN: DJZDGN
  11. 11. Bousdekis, A., Lepenioti, K., Apostolou, D. & Mentzas, G. (2021). A Review of Data-Driven Decision-Making Methods for Industry 4.0 Maintenance Applications. Electronics, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 828. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10070828 EDN: KBONDU
  12. 12. Buijsse, R., Willemsen, M., Snijders, C. (2023) Data-Driven Decision-Making Data Science for Entrepreneurship: Principles and Methods for Data Engineering, Analytics, Entrepreneurship, and the Society, pp. 239–277. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-19554-9_11
  13. 13. David, G. Wastell (2005) Information systems and evidence-based policy in multi-agency networks: The micro-politics of situated innovation The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, no. 3, pp. 197–217. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsis.2005.11.001
  14. 14. Davies, P., Boruch, R. (2001) The Campbell Collaboration: does for public policy what Cochrane does for health. BMJ, no. 323, pp. 294–295. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7308.294 EDN: DOVIDP
  15. 15. Gorissen, W.H.M., Schulpen, T.W.J., Kerkhoff, A.H.M., van Heffen, O. (2005) Bridging the gap between doctors and policymakers: The use of scientific knowledge in local school health care policy in the Netherlands. Eur J Public Health.. No. 15. Pp. 133-139. DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/cki125 EDN: IOEJQX
  16. 16. Hwang, S., Nam, T., & Ha, H. (2021). From evidence-based policy making to data-driven administration: proposing the data vs. value framework. International Review of Public Administration, no. 26(3), pp. 291–307. DOI: 10.1080/12294659.2021.1974176 EDN: ZBPAJG
  17. 17. Hou, Z. S., Wang, Z. (2013) From model-based control to data-driven control: Survey, classification and perspective. Information Sciences, no. 235, pp. 3–35. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2012.07.014
  18. 18. Johnson, M., Griffths, R. (2001) Developing evidence-based clinicians. International Journal of Nursing Practice, no. 7, pp. 109–118.
  19. 19. Kajerno, K. N., Norstrom, G., Krusebrant, A., Bjorvell, H. (2001) Perceptions of research utilisation between health care professionals, nursing students and a reference group of nurse clinicians. Journal of Advanced Nursing, no. 31, pp. 99–109. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01255.x
  20. 20. Kamolov, S. G., Kim, K. S., Aleksandrov, N. D. (2023) Study of Smart Cities Based on Human Capital (Case of Russian Research-Driven Towns as Proto-Smart Cities). Management Sciences, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 34–46. DOI: 10.26794/2304-022X-2023-13-4-34-46 EDN: GMYDAR
  21. 21. Kamolov, S., Aleksandrov, N. (2023) Algorithmic modeling of public recommender systems: insights from selected cities. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 72–86. DOI: 10.1108/tg-02-2022-0025 EDN: WFWBUX
  22. 22. Lee, M. K., Kusbit, D., Metsky, E., Dabbish, L. (2015) Working with machines: The impact of algorithmic and data-driven management on human workers. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 1603–1612. DOI: 10.1145/2702123.2702548
  23. 23. Malomo, F., Sena, V. (2017) Data Intelligence for Local Government? Assessing the Benefits and Barriers to Use of Big Data in the Public Sector // Policy and Internet, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 7–27. DOI: 10.1002/poi3.141
  24. 24. Markovsky, I., Huang, L., Dörfler, F. (2023) Control Systems and Data-Driven Approaches. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 28–68. DOI: 10.1109/MCS.2023.3291638 EDN: BXPCWF
  25. 25. Miragliotta, G., Sianesi, A., Convertini, E., Distante, R. (2018) Data driven management in Industry 4.0: a method to measure Data Productivity. IFAC-PapersOnLine, no. 51, pp. 19–24. DOI: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.228
  26. 26. Oliver, К. (2014) New directions in evidence-based policy research: a critical analysis of the literature. Health Research Policy and Systems, no. 1, pp. 34–45. DOI: 10.1186/1478-4505-12-34 EDN: UXGEPI
  27. 27. Sanderson, I. (2002) Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making. Public Administration, no. 80, pp. 1–22. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9299.00292
  28. 28. Tamm, T., Hallikainen, P., & Tim, Y. (2022). Creative analytics: Towards data-inspired creative decisions. Information Systems Journal, no. 32(4), pp. 729–753. DOI: 10.1111/isj.12369 EDN: NTVEQU