Search results

The aim of this paper is to examine the emergence of multinational universities through the lens of Dunning’s eclectic paradigm.

An analytical framework combining the eclectic paradigm with the three missions of universities is proposed to explore the motives behind the cross-border activity of universities.

Although the analogy between a university and a multinational enterprise is flawed, this paper shows how the eclectic paradigm can still serve the purpose of better understanding why universities locate fully pledged campuses or research departments in foreign locations. A set of implications for universities and host countries are also discussed.

The internationalization of universities has been widely analyzed in the higher education literature, but few attempts have been made to draw connections with international business research. The originality of this paper lies in addressing this cross-disciplinary gap.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate why entrepreneurial universities choose a particular business strategy focussing on diversification and multi-nationalisation, and the role of intellectual capital (IC) in supporting such strategies.

The research question is answered through an exploratory case study of the University of Bari, Italy. Data were collected from strategic plans, annual reports, national evaluation reports and semi-structured interviews with the university’s board members and analysed using Secundo et al.’s (2016) collective intelligence framework.

The authors show how contingency factors, such as economic and historical reasons, justify both the diversification and internationalisation strategies, and how they both rely on IC.

The results of this study can be used by managers to support the development of entrepreneurial university strategies.

The paper is novel because it provides theoretical justification to strategy development in a university setting. Additionally, the findings contribute to the fourth stage of IC research by showing how IC can be used to support diversification and internationalisation in a university and support third mission goals. Finally, the paper provides an empirical application of the Secundo et al.’s (2016) model for understanding IC in universities.

Although it is widely held that multinational collective bargaining (MCB) may represent the most effective labour response to the multinational enterprise (MNE), its appearance is sporadic and ephemeral. Examples appear to be confined to situations where factors and conditions highly conducive to international union co‐operation exist. The constraints and incentives for the development of MCB are examined in the context of the 1970s and 1980s and their changing economic environments. The analysis uses a framework based on the economic theory of bargaining cartels. It is explained why MCB has occurred in unrepresentative cases and prospects for labour responses to the MNE are examined.

The quality and market viability of international branch campuses (IBCs) depend upon their integration with university headquarters. Recent trends toward localizing branch-campus hiring have raised questions about the extent to which non-parent-campus lecturers will support global integration pursuits. This paper aims to examine IBC lecturers’ orientations towards global integration, exploring how they identify themselves and their campuses as part of their wider universities.

Employing constructivist grounded theory methodology, 37 lecturers and leaders at four Australian branch campuses in Southeast Asia were interviewed, engaging them in semi-structured discussions of their identities and experiences. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using NVivo in an iterative process of theory development.

Branch-campus lecturers interviewed generally construct their individual and campus identities as separate from their wider universities. Barriers to branch campuses’ global integration include low organizational identification of lecturers, challenges in their relationships with headquarters colleagues and perceptions of cross-campus disparities in resources and students. Branch campuses’ organizationally separate identities are enacted in practice, fueling a self-reinforcing “Othering Loop” that could undermine these campuses’ quality and viability.

This research is the first emic exploration of locally-hired branch-campus lecturers’ views toward global integration. These findings provide an important corrective to the existing literature on this topic, challenging assumptions that localizing branch-campus hiring is the primary risk to integration. Multiple points of potential managerial intervention were identified, highlighting opportunities for university leaders to address contextual barriers and improve international branch campuses’ global integration while continuing current trends toward localized hiring.

To succeed in acquiring appropriate resources, socially innovative firms must develop social capital, by making connections with traditional partners, such as universities and multinational corporations, and nontraditional partners, such as nongovernmental organizations and the communities in which they work. This study is designed to show the application of social capital through the pursuit of bilateral relationships. In addition, it shows that collaborations are possible among partners – pertaining to social innovative firms. This study begins with a conceptual foundation that is included to define key constructs and propositions. The methodology is a qualitative case study of socially innovative firms in the agriculture industry in Mexico and Colombia. Both case studies show the creation of bilateral alliances with traditional and nontraditional partners to obtain resources. Moreover, the findings suggest that a social firm can unite its partners’ objectives toward social value creation. Having a common ground could trigger multilateral collaborations among the socially innovative firm’s partners to combine, integrate, and leverage the business ecosystem. This chapter provides evidence that today’s social entrepreneurs are willing to use hybrid structures that include for-profit and nonprofit elements to provide a solution for a social issue.

What are the current trends that mark out the process of internationalization of higher education? In what directions do these trends influence the direction of research and development in African universities? Does internationalization of higher education have the potential to boost knowledge production relevant to Africa’s development needs or it will further hasten the marginalization of both African universities and African development agendas within the global network of scientific knowledge? Internationalization of education is not new. Historically, students have sought better higher education abroad influenced by the desire to benefit from better opportunities provided by universities in the developed countries. The current phase of higher education internationalization has however emerged more vigorously in the 21st century and is associated with the twin trends of globalization and liberalization. Proponents of globalization have argued that higher education is bound to be more strongly affected by worldwide economic developments. They also point out that higher education institutions in developing countries should embrace aspects of internationalization to boost their efforts to be ranked among the best league of universities globally. At the national level, internationalization of higher education is presented as a process that institutions in developing countries must embrace in order to address the persistent challenges of sustainable development. For universities in Africa, the literature argues that internationalization provides them with opportunities that cut across disciplines, institutions, knowledge-systems, and nation-state boundaries thereby exposing the institutions and academics to the world’s best scientific research and infrastructures. In summary, it is contended that internationalization is a strategy to realize success in human-capability and institutional-capacity development in the universities. This chapter revisits these assertions and their tenacity to developing a culture of research and innovation in African universities, and linking the universities to the continent’s development aspirations.

During the 1990s, many schools and universities had begun to phase out traditional forms of educational governance and adopted forms and practices used in private and corporate management. Yet, the meaning (and implementation) of these changes is contested. Proponents of the new managerialism in education argue that managerial methods are necessary to respond to the demands of a changed environment with dramatically increased degrees of uncertainty in a knowledge‐dependent society. Opponents view the new managerialism in the context of capitalist corporatism penetrating heretofore sacrosanct boundaries of non‐market institutions. In this paper, I argue that the ongoing changes in education management are better understood as instances of organizational learning in response to the limits of bureaucratic organization in turbulent environments.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

We examine the determinants of multinational firms’ propensity to conduct R&D activities in host countries, with specific attention to the influence of host countries’ university research. We consider heterogeneous locational drivers related to the type of R&D activity: basic research, applied research, development for local markets, and development for global markets. Drawing on official survey data on R&D activities by 498 Japanese multinational firms in 24 host countries and estimating two-stage models, we find that the likelihood that firms conduct R&D in a host country is generally increasing in the strength of university research. Conditional on a firm’s R&D presence, university research strength is associated with a greater propensity to conduct (basic) research activities rather than (local) development, while the intensity of host country university–industry collaboration is most strongly associated with applied research. Host country experience and the depth of the firm’s manufacturing presence are also associated higher propensities to engage in research.