The study focuses on examining the features of strategic financial leadership as a key mechanism for managing transnational capital-intensive projects in the energy and infrastructure sectors. The relevance of the topic is driven by the deepening global shortfall of infrastructure investment and the persistent tendency of budget overruns in megaprojects, which necessitates a rethinking of the traditional role of the financial function. The scientific novelty consists of the development of an integrated framework model (ISFL Framework) that unites cost optimization, risk management, and value creation through financial management tools. The paper conceptualizes the key roles of financial executives as strategic actors and systematizes advanced approaches to financial modeling and capital configuration. Particular emphasis is placed on interaction with international financial institutions and compliance with Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) standards. The study aims to demonstrate that proactive strategic financial leadership is a determining factor in the success of megaprojects rather than an auxiliary function. The methodological basis includes a systematic review of the scholarly literature, case studies, and comparative analysis drawing on publications from the Scopus/WoS databases, reports of leading consulting companies, and data from international organizations. The conclusion formulates findings on the critical significance of strategic financial leadership and proposes a practice-oriented model for its implementation. The materials of the article are addressed to chief financial officers, project managers, investors, and researchers in the field of project finance.

Credit-modular education and micro-credentials are reshaping higher education through flexibility, mobility and lifelong learning. Despite extensive international policy development, evidence shows persistent gaps between quality assurance policy prescriptions and institutional implementation. This scoping review synthesizes global evidence on the quality indicators used to monitor credit-modular education and micro-credentials. Using a structure–process–outcome framework, more than hundred sources were analyzed. The findings show a strong alignment in basic structural and process indicators but major divergence in outcome and equity indicators. Data silos, regulatory fragmentation, and limited analytical capacity drive this misalignment. This study proposes a harmonized core indicator model to improve policy coherence, institutional monitoring, and learner transparency.