Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between the participation in commercially- and socially-oriented Academics' Societal Engagement (ASE) activities, partnership choices, and funding preferences of academics working in public and private universities from Chile and Turkey. Chile represents a private-dominant higher education system (HES), while Turkey is public-dominant. This article presents the results of an international survey, the Academic Profession in Knowledge-based Society (APIKS), applied to academics from over 20 countries, including Chile and Turkey.

Through a quantitative analysis the authors analyse how the dominant institutional type influences ASE activities, partnership choices, and funding preferences.

Results from the analysis show that being part of a public or private university does not solely explain the activity type that academics engage with. Moreover, the rate of Chilean academics participating in ASE activities is more than twice that of Turkish academics regardless of the public-private distinction.

Further research about the academic life and ASE activities using a qualitative approach can complement this study. Applying further in-depth interviews to obtain more information from external partners can provide different perspectives and help to better understand the ASE activities. Additional analysis could compare external activities by higher education institution (HEI) type regarding vocational/technical centres since the Chilean and Turkish private HEIs included in this study received a mix of public-private funds and are considered not-for-profit, so extending this research to include for-profit private HEIs may be worthwhile for additional comparison.

More support and funding for the development of commercially-oriented ASE activities is recommended for Chile and Turkey's HES. In Turkey, a law-update in 2017 facilitates the establishment of technology transfer offices (TTOs) as companies within universities (Author, 2019). Though it is too early to know its effects, a positive contribution is anticipated. Centred Chile's private dominant HES, it would be appropriate for this type of system to also create different support structures to incentivise socially-oriented external activities and partnership opportunities. As done in other universities, the establishment of a community engagement office may provide professional guidance for partnership creations. Regardless of a country's HE public/private dominance, diverse sources of funding and support mechanisms can also be created to strengthen organisational and financial autonomy facilitating academics' participation in ASE activities. For example, universities can develop institutional policies to support academic establishment, lead or join in administration of non-governmental organisations, or form institutional media to deliver academics' viewpoints of social issues to the larger and non-academic audience. University managers should also empower the connection between academics and industry and business sector through different organisational structures such as Research Office, Science Park Incubators, Career Centre, while guiding and financially supporting academics' research commercialisation by their TTO experience and sources.

The literature has studied the public-private higher education distinction in vast aspects, however, no empirical studies have explored it concerning ASE. Chile and Turkey propose interesting cases since they represent opposite ends considering the public-private predominance of higher education systems. Turkey exhibits a heavy public predominance, whereas Chile has a significantly strong private system.

This study aims at advancing the understanding of University-Industry Collaboration (UIC) by proposing an adapted conceptual model for comprehensive contextual analysis taking industry perspective and identifying effective mechanisms for stimulating UIC in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

This study was designed as a multicase qualitative study. Data were collected through interviews of focus groups representing 26 agro-processing companies operating in Rwanda. The process consisted of two sessions evaluating the current collaboration patterns, and two sessions identifying the desired future and the mechanisms to realize it. Data were analyzed using ATLAS.ti software with the grounded theory techniques.

Findings indicate that current interactions are unidirectional and focus on educational collaboration. Results are short-term and do not yield sufficient benefit for the companies involved. Industry aspirations for future collaboration were identified, along with linkages between inputs, activities and outcomes.

This study has two noteworthy limitations. First, this study did not consider the capacity of firms to collaborate. Second, for simplification purposes, this study did not integrate other complementary sources of knowledge for firms. To overcome these omissions, a short introduction of University–Industry Collaboration (UIC) was presented to participants highlighting and justifying the scope of the study. As research implications, this paper presents a new integrated conceptual framework, which can be useful for studies focusing on a comprehensive analysis of the UIC context and identifying effective mechanisms for improvement in the future. A construct of policies that stimulate UIC is proposed, thereby facilitating further operationalization and testing of context-specific hypotheses on policy stimuli.

In practice, the identified conceptual framework allows to holistically capture and reflect on the interrelationships between UIC factors and outcomes for a specific context, hence, informing better UIC decision-making. In this way, this paper advances the operationalization of the argument for reconciling organizational theories with their practices.

This paper presents a systemic means for organizational theories to perform their adaptive role in society. Indeed, as demonstrated by the empirical results, the proposed framework is effective not only in systematically assessing the current situation, but also in predicting the desired state in the future. In other words, the proposed framework facilitates prescience theorizing, which is a mechanism for ensuring that organizational theories adapt to future requirements of the society.

This study develops a new integrative conceptual framework to accommodate the interaction between UIC’s institutional decision-making and existing macrolevel frameworks of innovation ecosystems. In terms of methodology, the value of this study lies in its adoption of an ex ante approach to the development of mechanisms to stimulate UIC. This use of prescience theory (Corley and Gioia, 2011) constitutes an important – but long-neglected – approach to UIC and its adaptive role in society.

Several frameworks have been developed to map and document scientific societal interaction and impact, each reflecting the specific forms of impact and interaction that characterize different academic fields. The ReAct taxonomy was developed to register data about “productive interactions” and provide an overview of research activities within the social sciences and humanities (SSH). The purpose of the present research is to examine whether the SSH-oriented taxonomy is relevant to the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines when clarifying societal interactions and impact, and whether the taxonomy adds value to the traditional STEM impact indicators such as citation scores and H-index.

The research question was investigated through qualitative interviews with nine STEM researchers. During the interviews, the ReAct taxonomy and visual research profiles based on the ReAct categories were used to encourage and ensure in-depth discussions. The visual research profiles were based on publicly available material on the research activities of the interviewees.

The study provided an insight into how STEM researchers assessed the importance of mapping societal interactions as a background for describing research impact, including which indicators are useful for expressing societal relevance and impact. With regard to the differences between STEM and SSH, the study identified a high degree of cohesion and uniformity in the importance of indicators. Differences were more closely related to the purpose of mapping and impact assessment than between scientific fields. The importance of amalgamation and synergy between academic and societal activities was also emphasised and clarified.

The findings highlight the importance of mapping societal activities and impact, and that societal indicators should be seen as inspiring guidelines depending on purpose and use. A significant contribution is the identification of both uniformity and diversity between the main fields of SSH and STEM, as well as the connection between the choice of indicators and the purpose of mapping, e.g. for impact measurement, profiling, or career development.

The work sheds light on STEM researchers' views on research mapping, visualisation and impact assessment, including similarities and differences between STEM and SSH research.

This paper aims to examine the development and piloting of a novel European framework for community engagement (CE) in higher education, which has been purposefully designed to progress the CE agenda in a European context.

The proposed framework was co-created through the European Union (EU)-funded project towards a European framework for community engagement in higher education (TEFCE). The TEFCE Toolbox is an institutional self-reflection framework that centres on seven thematic dimensions of CE. This paper follows the development of the TEFCE Toolbox through empirical case study analysis of four European universities and their local communities.

The findings in this paper indicate that the TEFCE Toolbox facilitates context-specific applications in different types of universities and socioeconomic environments. Incorporating insights from engagement practitioners, students and community representatives the TEFCE Toolbox was successfully applied in universities with diverse profiles and missions. The process facilitated the recognition of CE achievements and the identification of potential areas for improvement.

Despite a range of international initiatives, there remains an absence of initiatives within the European higher education area that focus on developing tools to comprehensively support CE. The TEFCE Toolbox and case-study analysis presented in this paper address this gap in knowledge. The broader societal contribution and social responsibility of higher education have become increasingly prominent on the European agenda. The TEFCE Toolbox represents an innovative, robust and holistic European framework with the potential to support universities in reflecting upon their pursuit of addressing grand societal challenges, whilst promoting CE.

Many early-career researchers (ECR) are motivated by the prospect of creating knowledge that is useful, not just within but also beyond the academic community. Although research facilities, funders and academic journals praise this eagerness for societal impact, the path toward such contributions is by no means straightforward. In this essay, we address five common concerns faced by ECRs when they strive for societal impact. We discuss the opportunity costs associated with impact work, the fuzziness of current impact measurement, the challenge of incremental results, the actionability of research findings, and the risk of saying something wrong in public. We reflect on these concerns in light of our own experience with impact work and conclude by suggesting a “post-heroic” perspective on impact, whereby seemingly mundane activities are linked in a meaningful way.

Despite a surge in public and academic interest in the social sustainability conduct of firms, only few firms have taken responsibility for the social issues in their supply chains. This study seeks to extend our theoretical understanding of why some firms grow toward accepting this type of responsibility while others do not.

The authors conduct a systematic literature review for the purpose of theory building. Building on Gao and Bansal's distinction of instrumental and integrative views on business sustainability (2013, DOI 10.1007/s10551-012-1245-2) as well as corporate social responsibility development research, the authors review socially sustainable supply chain management (social SSCM) literature to theorize the interplay of driving factors that underly firms' choice to refrain from, start or deepen their engagement in social SSCM.

The authors propose an overview of the presumed mechanisms underlying the development of a reluctant, a purely instrumental or an integrative view on social SSCM. Among other things, the authors propose that it seems highly unlikely for conventional, profit-oriented firms to develop beyond an instrumental view on social SSCM.

This study conceptually extends current research on social SSCM by offering insights on how firms are driven to engage in it. This study offers first thoughts that should help managers and other stakeholders better understand the social SSCM potential of firms and how to realize this potential effectively.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the dynamic and power-laden nature of university–society collaboration from the individual academic's point of view.

This paper applies an autoethnographic approach in following a specific collaboration process through detailed fieldnotes and continuous reflections.

This research presents university–society collaboration as an emergent, volatile and fairly unpredictable process, involving a multitude of actors on both sides. The interactions among actors shape the emerging process and power relationships. The academic's situation could be understood in terms of multiple and shifting subject positions that could be embraced, accepted, resisted or surrendered to by the academic.

These findings may help academics with own experiences of collaboration to shed light on their observations. Novice academics, interested in collaborating with society, should be aware of the possibility of tensions and exercise of power in interactions with societal actors. When setting up collaboration agreements, academic and societal actors are advised to openly discuss potential problems and how to handle those.

This unique, in-depth testimony of a single collaboration process from the individual academic's point of view uncovers previously unobserved dynamic and political attributes of the process.

Citizen engagement is key to the success of many Open Government Data (OGD) initiatives. However, not much is known regarding how this type of engagement emerges. This study aims to investigate the necessary conditions for the emergence of citizen-led engagement with OGD and to identify which factors stimulate this type of engagement.

First, the authors created a systematic overview of the literature to develop a conceptual model of conditions and factors of OGD citizen engagement at the societal, organizational and individual level. Second, the authors used the conceptual model to systematically study citizens’ engagement in the case of a particular OGD initiative, namely, the digitization of presidential election results data in Indonesia in 2014. The authors used multiple information sources, including interviews and documents, to explore the conditions and factors of OGD citizen-led engagement in this case.

From the literature the authors identified five conditions for the emergence of OGD citizen-led engagement as follows: the availability of a legal and political framework that grants a mandate to open up government data, sufficient budgetary resources allocated for OGD provision, the availability of OGD feedback mechanisms, citizens’ perceived ease of engagement and motivated citizens. In the literature, the authors found six factors contributing to OGD engagement as follows: democratic culture, the availability of supporting institutional arrangements, the technical factors of OGD provision, the availability of citizens’ resources, the influence of social relationships and citizens’ perceived data quality. Some of these conditions and factors were found to be less important in the studied case, namely, citizens’ perceived ease of engagement and citizens’ perceived data quality. Moreover, the authors found several new conditions that were not mentioned in the studied literature, namely, citizens’ sense of urgency, competition among citizen-led OGD engagement initiatives, the diversity of citizens’ skills and capabilities and the intensive use of social media. The difference between the conditions and factors that played an important role in the case and those derived from the literature review might be because of the type of OGD engagement that the authors studied, namely, citizen-led engagement, without any government involvement.

The findings are derived using a single case study approach. Future research can investigate multiple cases and compare the conditions and factors for citizen-led engagement with OGD in different contexts.

The conditions and factors for citizen-led engagement with OGD have been evaluated in practice and discussed with public managers and practitioners through interviews. Governmental organizations should prioritize and stimulate those conditions and factors that enhance OGD citizen engagement to create more value with OGD.

While some research on government-led engagement with OGD exists, there is hardly any research on citizen-led engagement with OGD. This study is the first to develop a conceptual model of necessary conditions and factors for citizen engagement with OGD. Furthermore, the authors applied the developed multilevel conceptual model to a case study and gathered empirical evidence of OGD engagement and its contributions to solving societal problems, rather than staying at the conceptual level. This research can be used to investigate citizen engagement with OGD in other cases and offers possibilities for systematic cross-case lesson-drawing.