Intelektinė ekonomika / Intellectual economics 2026, vol. 20, no. 1

Purpose. The existing international competency indices fail to capture the structural differentiation in AI-driven educational transformation across EU moderate innovator economies, rendering evidence-based policy design inadequate. Author attempted to evaluate it. Methodology. The simplified multiple criteria assessment methodology based on global and regional expert evaluations of education quality determining knowledge and innovation development was employed. Analyzing the Visegrad Group (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia) and the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) over 2022 - 2025, the study produces three original scientific results. Findings. First, it identifies and empirically documents how the AI integration raises measurable technical skill acquisition by 60–80 percent while simultaneously intensifying demand for metacompetencies - creativity, ethical reasoning, adaptability - that current frameworks cannot reliably assess, generating a 34 percent wage premium for workers combining both (Eurostat LFS, 2022–2024). Second, it provides the first systematic empirical documentation of two distinct regional catch-up trajectories - Digital Leapfrogging (Baltic States: R&D efficiency through knowledge-intensive services, return ratio 7.2:1) and Industrial Deepening (Visegrad Group: AI as manufacturing process optimizer, return ratio 3.8:1) - with quantified efficiency differentials. Third, it validates the Creativity Assessment Framework significantly outperforming GPA-based prediction. The Estonia - Hungary differential in AI integration scores illustrates the compounding consequences of coordinated policy versus governance instability. Originality. Revealed the AI Competency Paradox; proposed Multi-Dimensional Creativity Assessment Framework; systematic documentation of regional innovation strategy divergence. Policy implications address national AI-education coordination, culturally calibrated creativity assessment, and digital diaspora engagement mechanisms.

Purpose: The study aims to examine how the structural design of corporate hackathons and teamlevel interaction processes influence innovation outcomes, with a particular focus on prototype quality, originality, and feasibility. The research contributes to the understanding of hackathons as instruments of corporate innovation within an open-in-novation framework. Methodology: An exploratory mixed-method research design was applied, combining qualitative observations and quantitative evaluations of eight interdisciplinary teams participating in a five-day corporate hackathon. Data were analysed to identify relational patterns between hackathon design characteristics, team microdynamics, and innovation outcomes assessed by an expert jury. Findings: The results indicate that innovation performance is systematically associated with two key dimensions: Organizational Clarity and Team Competence. Clear problem formulation and accessible mentorship were identified as critical design factors positively influencing technical feasibility and overall project quality. Teams demonstrating higher levels of complementary expertise and effective collaboration produced more original and implementable solutions. Originality: The study develops a Hackathon Design Framework that integrates structural design elements, team-level processes, and innovation outcomes into a unified conceptual model. By conceptualising corporate hackathons as temporary open-innovation systems, the research advances theoretical understanding of short-term innovation mechanisms and provides practical guidance for organisations seeking to enhance innovation capability and competitive advantage through hackathon-based initiatives.