Search results

All three Baltic countries – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – share common features, similar history, and took similar steps to establish an external evaluation of their science base. Even though the three countries have similarities in terms of their geography, size, economic structure, development and demography, they demonstrate differences, for example Estonia is often considered to be ahead of Latvia and Lithuania in terms of the economy and development. So, do the Baltic countries share similarities or differences from the point of research management and administration?

This empirical chapter explores the case of Baltic Creative Community Interest Company (BC CIC), a creative hub that enabled and demonstrated intrapersonal entrepreneurial capitals (Pret et al., 2016) to adapt quickly and develop novel offers for their tenants during an unprecedented period of crisis and change in the wider ecosystem. BCCIC is a community-owned property development company established to regenerate an underused post-industrial area in Liverpool and support the Creative and Digital community. Over the past decade, they have become a creative hub where small, unique micro-businesses thrive alongside more established enterprises.

Using an organisational ethnographic approach, the authors highlight the complexity in the conversion of entrepreneurial capitals and how this has demonstrated resilience and adaptability in the CIC during the global coronavirus pandemic in the 2020s. During the first coronavirus lockdown in 2020, The CIC responded swiftly to tenants by providing a wide variety of business support initiatives. Regular communications on sector-specific COVID-19 operational guidance and a support programme to help tenants apply for Liverpool City Council Small Business Support grants.

The establishment of this hub for creative entrepreneurs prior to the recent disruption proved invaluable. Although they were severely tested, emerging behaviours, such as agility, adaptability, and resilience during periods of crisis, were identified. This chapter offers key insights for scholars and those leading on creative hubs and cluster policy development and economic initiatives for creative sector support regionally, nationally, and internationally.

The history of the profession in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries is not a long one; it results from their history, their size, their spending on research and innovation, their position in geopolitics and world economy. Nevertheless, what makes it exciting is the fact that we are just at the birth of the profession in the region. Historically, there have been very few professionals either related to or officially recognised as Research Managers and Administrators (RMAs) in CEE countries, resulting in their limited resources and capabilities. Nevertheless, some RMAs have found the way to start mutually beneficial collaboration for the sake of their own professional development, for their institution’s and country’s competitiveness by launching networks of RMAs or using regional or European funds for capacity building and developing training or educational programmes.

This chapter aims to provide a short summary of the profession in CEE countries while highlighting a few cases which show how the RMA profession is moving forward but still lagging behind.

The chapter presents an overview of the state of Research Management and Administration (RMA) in Belarus. The country enjoys sound traditions in basic and applied research in some areas relevant to its economy, particularly in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The current science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy is focussed on the commercialisation of domestic research and development (R&D) results and the effectiveness of the national STI system.

The majority of competitive budget funds are allocated within different types of programmes that support R&D and innovation. Formal RMA positions exist at the programme level and are based in research centres, universities and companies being grounded on a solid legal basis. Roughly 150–250 people within 50 legal entities are directly involved in RMA. At the project level, the RMA activities are either combined with scientific supervision or informally distributed within the project team.

A possible increase in overall R&D expenditures in the country, the eventual enlargement of the scope of publicly supported STI projects and their collaborative nature, as well as their internationalisation and widening of international cooperation may significantly increase the demand for RMA professionals.

The involvement of stakeholders such as employers, alumni, and students has always been considered a key element in improving the higher education (HE) system. While considering stakeholders as key players in serving the market and in improving HE instruction, a two-sided collaborative involvement should aim at satisfying the mutual interests and overcoming existing barriers. Quality assurance systems have always supported crossing these barriers to link with the external stakeholders. However, many of the external quality assurance agencies (EQA) in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region specify a group of external holders, limiting the various types of key stakeholders needed to enhance the academic programs. On the other hand, there are encountered risks in involving stakeholders if left with no objective guidance, especially that quality agencies are formidably urging the universities to consider the external stakeholders’ inputs to satisfy the quality assurance standards. The main objective of this chapter is to investigate the types of stakeholders’ and their levels of involvement within the local higher education institutions (HEIs). The chapter aims to provide an insight to invest in this involvement and utilize it to further improve the programs and their graduate attributes and suggests actions that would proficiently and truly enhance the involvement of external stakeholders. The outcomes of this chapter are expected to guide the EQAs and the HEIs to develop new practices in involving stakeholders, such as curriculum input, collegiate internships, aligning graduate attributes to market needs, financial support through endowments, professional development, and partnerships in service-level agreements.