Analyzing the environment in which logistics is taught at technical universities, i.e., organizational structures, fields of study, and curricula, it must be stated that this environment is characterized by strong dynamics and is subject to constant change. This dynamic results mainly from the fact that technical universities, like the rest of the country, have faced the task of adapting their operations to the conditions of a market economy and the changes taking place in the functioning of the economy.
The primary task of technical universities in the area of education is the economically efficient preparation of highly qualified personnel for the needs of the domestic (and in the near future, European) industry. Until the beginning of the systemic changes, this task was somewhat different. It was implemented in a way that was a derivative of the industrial organization of that time. This organization was characterized by the sectoral division of areas of economic activity and the creation of structures in which the principle of autarky dominated over technical and organizational criteria. This was particularly visible in the case of many typical machine-building plants, which, as a result of adopting the discussed model of industrial organization, found themselves in such sectors as mining, energy, or transport.
The organization of education at technical universities was subordinated to the industrial organization described above. Fields of study and curricula were created with the aim of training a specialist for a specific industry, with the focus on the basic processes carried out in its area. In such a structure, disciplines and subjects of a cross-sectional (process) nature, concerning the entirety of production activity and offering knowledge applicable in various areas of enterprise activity and in many industries, struggled to find a place (unless they were fortunate enough to be classified as basic disciplines and included in so-called “minimum curriculum requirements”). The practice of these disciplines within the framework of research conducted by academic teachers was limited by barriers related to obtaining academic degrees. The research and development facilities of the industry (with few exceptions) were also organized in a sectoral layout. Cross-sectional disciplines were practiced there to a modest extent.
Systemic changes forced a shift in the focus of education at technical universities. The place of the previous provision of a constant influx of specialists to individual industries had to be taken by the concern for preparing a comprehensively educated engineer capable of coping with the modern labor market based on the principles of competition. Young people were faced with the offer of free choice of fields of study. Guided by a subjective assessment of career prospects, they rated the offer of technical universities low. Many fields of study at these universities began to struggle with the problem of a lack of applicants. This also posed difficult problems for the industry. It was never adequately saturated with specialists with higher technical education. In many cases, engineers were replaced by a substitute, which was represented by graduates of secondary technical schools. The natural outflow of staff, low labor mobility, and limited influx of new engineering staff led to a situation where, in many production plants, typically “engineering” jobs are currently filled out of necessity by graduates of economic or even humanities fields. Maintaining such a state for a longer period is not only a threat to the functioning of technical universities but, above all, leads to a reduction in the innovative potential of the domestic industry and a limitation of its development opportunities.
The situation described above became the cause of changes. These changes manifested themselves in two forms. The modernization form, characterized by a narrower scope of changes, consists of introducing new subjects into curricula. The innovation form, introducing changes on a wider scale, consists of creating new fields of study. In both of these forms, the role of logistics is significant.