In this paper the features of the implementation of the principles of the Bologna system in the Systems of Higher Education (hereinafter Systems of HE) of the post-Soviet countries are analyzed, the problems of the difficulties and consequences of reforming the higher education system in these countries, in particular, in Armenia are discussed.

The research objectives are the identifying the institutional features of the reform of the Systems of HE of the post-Soviet countries, in particular in Armenia, in the context of the implementation of the principles of the Bologna process, economic factors and the possibility of increasing the competitiveness of these systems in the view of institutional transformations.

As the theoretical foundations of the research, studies in the field of entrepreneurial university management (Altbach (2014)), (Mautner (2005)), studies in the field of academic development management (Paradeise et al. (2009)), (Sugrue et al. (2017)), studies in the field of academic managerialism (Davis et al (2016)  are considered. Also, studies of the general trends and features of the modernization of HE in the post-Soviet space were analyzed (Avetisyan et al (2017), Titarenko et al (2019)). In Armenia, earlier than in all countries, the implementation of the reform of the System of HE in the direction of the Bologna principles began, officially since 2005, but experiments have actually been made since 1995.

Analyzing the situation in the countries of the Eurasian space in the field of education at three levels of social relations - macro (societal), meso (institutional) and micro (individual), we can identify a number of general patterns associated with the transformation processes of educational systems in the post-Soviet period. Systems of HE in the post-Soviet space has a number of features, firstly, within the framework of European integration processes, secondly, the problems of financing and managing education, and, finally, in all countries the process of finding ways to establish and preserve the authenticity of their national education systems is relevant.

In the countries of the post-Soviet space, HE is characterized by such processes as internationalization deepening , approaching universal international criteria. However, dynamic changes in the system occur so quickly that systems do not always have time to adapt to past changes, as they have to reorganize activities in accordance with new changes. This is especially relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic. Transformations in the functioning of the System of HE give rise to a number of institutional changes associated with the transformation of values and norms, with the transformation of the status-role hierarchy, with the creation and functioning of informal social institutions aimed at resolving emerging problems.

The problem of the discrepancy between the interests of different subjects of the process of modernization of the HE is multilateral. Firstly, any modernization pursuing the goals of increasing global competitiveness and training personnel for the new economy presupposes the need to introduce institutional changes into the functioning of the System of HE. Secondly, this problem requires a significant strengthening of the material base of universities and renewal of their staff. The solution of this issue in post-Soviet countries largely depends on state funding. Thirdly, goals that seem achievable at the level of the whole system may be unrealistic for universities that are not at the forefront. They are not able to quickly adapt to rapidly changing operating conditions. Therefore, the problems of the general level may differ from the problems of specific institutions.

Such an analysis is relevant from the point of view that it allows revealing at first glance the invisible consequences of certain transformations, and the trends and results of modernizing of Systems of HE are more clearly outlined.

In the study the methodology of institutional analysis of social phenomena in educational research is implemented (Cai et al (2015)). The institutional analysis of social phenomena or processes involves the identification of the following main components: a complex of mechanisms for regulating the behavior of actors, a mechanism for the formation of a hierarchical status-role structure, a structure of social needs that a social institution satisfies, and a symbolic and resource space for the functioning of the social institution. Any formal institutional changes, both in the structure of the social system and in the mechanisms of its management and organization, can create prerequisites for the emergence of a number of informal institutional changes that are aimed at eliminating the problems arising in the formal institutional changes. For the institutional analysis of the problems of HE modernization, a comprehensive sociological research was carried out in Armenia, including the methods of expert survey, focus group interviews of the teaching staff and students, as well as the content analysis of documents related to the higher education reforms in Armenia. The study was conducted in the period 2017-2021. In the expert survey, a typical purposive sampling was implemented in combination with the "snowball" technology, within which more than 20 experts from the following typological groups were interviewed: researchers, administrative workers in the field of education at all levels, representatives of NGOs, representatives of universities, journalists. In the focus group survey for Armenia, 16 focus group interviews of the teaching staff and students in Armenia were implemented. A purposive sampling was implemented according to the following criteria: university, specialization, participation in educational and scientific programs, status and participation in the administration of the university for the teaching staff, as well as academic performance for students. As a result, more than 56 students and 38 teachers were interviewed for metropolitan and regional universities in Armenia.

The research confirmed that the mechanisms of the functioning of formal institutions in the System of HE significantly hinder the modernization processes that could improve the quality of education and increase the contribution of universities to the training of specialists for a competitive economy. Instead, there is an imitation of changes successfully carried out in different contexts. The advent of the entrepreneur universities has led to the fact that the "rules of the game" within the social institution of higher education are beginning to resemble the "rules of the game" of the economic social institution. Meanwhile, the danger of this situation lies in the fact that the mentioned social institutions serve to satisfy completely different social needs, and transformational processes in their functioning can lead to unpredictable consequences for society. The formalization of education modernization processes to the detriment of their real content, their excessive bureaucratization, insufficient adaptation of innovations to the national characteristics of Systems of HE give rise to such consequences as a decrease in the prestige of HE in society and unforeseen distortions in the status-role structure of actors within the institution of HE. As a result, a special model of HE management has developed in Armenia, which can be called “instrumental” or “patching holes” model, when, without a global vision of problems, decisions are made based on the desire to resolve current issues, not correlating them with general problems of higher educational system functioning. The solution of such problems requires comprehensive solutions due to the fact that individual countries of the post-Soviet space, having poor funding for education, and a number of problems in the functioning of Systems of HE, are unlikely to be able to cope with them alone. The development of network educational integration could solve a number of problems of local educational systems.

Altbach P. G. (2014) The Complexity of Higher Education: A Career in Academics and Activism // The Forefront of International Higher Education. Higher Education Dynamics (vol. 42) / A. Maldonado-Maldonado, R. Bassett (eds). Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 1–31. Altbach P. G. (2016) Global Perspectives on Higher Education. Johns Hopkins University Press. Avetisyan P. S., Zaslavskaya M. I. (ed.) (2017) Modernization of the system of higher education in Armenia in the context of integration processes /Yerevan: RAU. Cai Y., Mehari Y. (2015) The Use of Institutional Theory in Higher Education Research // Theory and Method in Higher Education Research (Theory and Method in Higher Education Research, Volume 1). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, P. 1-25. Davis A., van Rensburg M. J., Venter P. (2016) The impact of managerialism on the strategy work of university middle managers // Studies in Higher Education. Vol. 41, No. 8. P. 1480-1494; Mautner G. (2005) The Entrepreneurial University: A Discursive Profile of a Higher Education Buzzword // Critical Discourse Studies. Vol. 2, No. 2. P. 95–120. Paradeise C., Reale E., Goasellec G., Bleiklie I. (2009) Universities Steering between Stories and History // University governance: Western European Comparative Perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media. Sugrue C., Englund T., Fossland T., Solbrekke T. D. (2017) Trends in the practices of academic developers: trajectories of higher education? // Studies in Higher Education. Vol. 43, No. 2. P. 1–18. Titarenko L. G., Zaslavskaya M. I. (ed.) (2019) Modernization of higher education systems in Belarus and Armenia in the context of the processes of Eurasian and European integration: problems and prospects / Minsk: BGU.