Global Journal of Management and Business Research, B: Economics and Commerce, Volume 21 Issue 5

framework of the economic and social systems, which destroys the dialectic of their interaction. If this is a legitimate conclusion, then the subject as the center of self-movement of systemic integrities in the economy and society should also be dialectically interpreted as a self-organizing and self- developing system. Moreover the processes of self- organization and self-development of a person predetermine the mechanism of his self-creation, when the goals, intentions and inclinations of individuals influence on the structural ties of the society as well as of the economic system. At the same time, social institutions also have a reverse effect on individuals, adjusting their goals and preferences. According to A. Giddens, a structure is "recursively organized rules and resources" (Giddens, 1982. P. 35). Commenting on the theory of A. Giddens, I. Craib argued that structure and individual activity are thought of as “two sides of the same coin” (Craib, 1992; Hodgson, 1988). According to these scientists, considering social practices it becomes possible to see actors and their actions or it is about the structures they create”. In other words, the constant interactions of individuals form the structure of society, which structures the behavior of individuals through social institutions. The quality of the integrity of the society in which individuals are socialized influences on its stability. The situation was aggravated by the fact that on the eve of the COVID-19 pandemic i.e. at the very end of the period of self-organization of economic systems the disrupted dialectic of economics and society manifested itself in numerous social problems. It is about catastrophic polarization of the population in terms of income and wealth, a growing number of working poor, a shrinking middle class, social inequality in access to education and the health care system, gender inequality, etc. In such conditions, the socialization of subjects definitely ceases to serve as a mechanism for restoring the dialectic of the relationship between the economy and society at the national level. Post-covid reality and the dialectics of self- organization of a human: between the Scylla of education and the Charybdis of socialization Summing up all of the above, it is necessary to highlight the main essential problem of our time, the solution of which should be based on the paramount importance of the subjects with the qualities of intellectual autonomousness. A critical mass of such talented individuals is able to form a new technological base for a self-developing economy and society, restoring, first of all, the dialectical relationships between them. However, the complexity of the formation of such a subject is associated not only with the fact that it must be adequately socialized, embodying the goals and objectives of social progress. This person must first of all be self-organized. And this means the optimal combination (dialectic) of adequate socialization and high-quality education. In other words, education and socialization are dialectically related mechanisms of self-organization of the individuals. Only the optimization of these processes will allow a person to make a dialectical leap towards self-development as an intellectually autonomous person. Only with such a personality is the post-covid future associated. On the eve of the coronavirus pandemic, the quality of socialization of people left much to be desired, but with education the situation was even more deplorable. According to the World Bank (World Bank, 2020) the learning crisis due to the COVID-19 pandemic manifests itself in the following: (1) 258 million children and youth of primary- and secondary-school age are out of school; (2) ... the learning poverty rate in low- and middle-income countries was 53 percent; (3) … the crisis was not equally distributed: the most disadvantaged children and youth had the worst access to schooling, highest dropout rates, and the largest learning deficits; (4) the world was already far off track for meeting Sustainable Development Goal 4 (UNESCO, 2016a, 2016b; UNESCO, UNICEF, the World Bank and OECD, 2021). And at the same time trends in the Global labor market is as follows: (a) 85% of the global workforce are low- and mid-skilled workers; (b) 13% global population growth by 2030 will be accompanied by professions’ changes due to automation and digitalization by 1/3; (c) 27% of new activities will emerge by 2022; (d) the share of Gen Z’ers will be 26% of the total workforce by 2025 (Boston Consulting Group, 2019). In such a situation, education with optimal socialization will play a decisive role in self-organization of a person in order to get the qualities of intellectual autonomy. Only self-developing individual will ensure the formation of a new technological paradigm as the basis for the dynamics of the socio-economic system after COVID-19. In January 2020, CEOs ranked talent risk behind 11 other risks to growth. However, since the start of the pandemic, talent risk has risen to be named as the most significant threat to their businesses ahead of supply chain, the threat of a return to territorialism and environmental risk (Fig. 5). Uncertainty of the Post-Covid Future: How will Humanity Solve this Puzzle? © 2021 Global Journals 54 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXI Issue V Version I Year 2021 ( ) B