Search

Higher education institutions - universities, technological universities, and universities of applied sciences - are expected to respond to societal challenges. One mode of response is academic engagement with society, which is captured as ‘the integration of society into the research process’. Academic engagement describes activities such as consulting and joint research, in which academics collaborate with societal stakeholders, for instance, individual citizens or organizations like non-governmental organizations, hospitals, and churches. Academic engagement with society is dependent on academics’ motivation which are studied in this dissertation guided by the research question: ‘How can motivation for academic engagement with society be explained?’ Following an explanatory mixed method approach, four empirical studies are conducted analysing data collected in good practice cases, surveys, and interviews. This dissertation explains motivations and regulations underlying academics’ engagement with society on the organizational and individual level. Theoretically, it contributes by providing insight in how self-determination theory is suited as a research framework for explaining academic engagement with society. Practically, this dissertation offers recommendations on motivational strategies to create an impetus for academics to engagement with society, which are especially relevant to higher education institution managers who are expected to guide academics to engage with society. This dissertation further opens avenues for future research on motivations explaining academic engagement with society.

Experiential and socially-situated learning theories suggest that practice should be introduced in the business curriculum through a pedagogy based on four blocks that closely represent managerial practice. First, managerial learning experiences should be based on (1) ill-defined problems because this is the type of problems that best captures the complexity of managerial practice. Similarly, learners should not only articulate but act in the world. They must (2) execute their business solutions in real life. Additionally, learners must (3) closely interact with an authentic professional environment to absorb the nature of that practice. Last, (4) reflection is necessary to transform experience into learning. As an outcome of this pedagogical design, students shall acquire knowledge, skills, and attitudes. While the relevance of these four blocks as representations of managerial practice is well-grounded in learning theory and managerial practice, three issues require further examination. (1) To what extent are these four blocks present in the business school curriculum? (2) What competencies does a learning environment comprised of these four building blocks promote and are these competencies transferred to professional practice? (3) How precisely do these four building blocks function to promote managerial competencies in students? The first question is addressed in a conceptual paper exploring how the three most popular approaches for introducing practice into the business curriculum—case method, internships and PBL—incorporate the four blocks. Results suggest that none of these three approaches incorporates all of them but PBL provides the most prone environment for adaptation. The retrospective nature of the case method prevents students from executing their solutions or interacting with the environment where the problem originated. Internships deliver action yet relying heavily on the will and the interest of external organisations to be educational. This can result in learning experiences that trap the learner into an employer-driven or instrumental agenda that does not require solving ill-defined problems or performing critical reflection. Differently, in PBL, the real world problems come to the students and not the other way around. This enables the business school to have more control over the learning experience. I can select problems that are relevant and ill-defined; ensure that students work under the supervision of an experienced lecturer and safeguard that action is carefully supported by reflection. The second research question is addressed based on the case of the Management Experience Programme (MEP), in which the design is in line with the four building blocks. MEP alumni were asked open questions that explored what they have learned during MEP and if learning outcomes were transferred to professional practice. Results show that MEP fosters students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes—competencies thoroughly transferred to practice. The third research question was also based on MEP. Students, alumni, lectures and company-representatives were asked to explain how exactly the four blocks operate to promote knowledge, skills and attitudes. Ill-defined problems set the stage, where learners interact with theory and with each other to envisage solutions to problems that are complex and cross-disciplinary. When the solutions are executed, initial propositions do not unfold as expected and conflict arises, forcing students to re-think their theories and surpass the contextual difficulties imposed by the external world. This process catalyses knowledge and skills fostered at the planning stage while developing attitudes like self-knowledge and self-efficacy. Connecting this problem-solving process with a real work environment allows learners to observe and interact with real practitioners, shaping knowledge and skills to meet the reality of organisational life. Last, reflection is necessary to foreground all these competencies. But not just any reflection: one based on open discussion of the experience thorough dialogue among the different parties involved (students, lecturers, organisations).

In a world of continuous change, companies’ conventional modes of doing business are being disturbed at an ever-increasing pace. Hence, scholars from the innovation and management domains are discussing innovation-induced market changes. The concept of disruptive innovation captures a portion of these changes. Disruptive innovation describes how new entrants gain a foothold in a niche market before moving upmarket and challenging powerful incumbents. From its emergence in the mid-1990s, the concept of disruptive innovation was first theorised with a focus on technology. Since 2006, the debate has shifted focus, and the business model is acknowledged as the decisive vehicle that spurs related market dynamics. Given the complexity of disruptive innovation, this thesis builds on multiple theoretical streams to further extend our understanding of companies’ strategic management choices in the face of disruptive innovation. An integration of elements from business model innovation, strategic alliances, platform development and growth, and dynamic capabilities enables a complementary picture of the levels of disruptive innovation. This research is guided by the following question: ‘how do companies manage business model innovation along the process of disruptive innovation?’ Following a sequential mixed methods approach, this research uses publications, interview data, archival data, and survey data. Chapter 2 presents a consolidation of lessons learned from previous waves of disruption. It furthers understanding of disruptive innovation by reviewing disruptive business models that have been discussed in the academic literature. Based on a qualitative content analysis, a classification framework proposes five archetypes: 1) matchmakers, 2) standardisers, 3) service providers, 4) open collaborators, and 5) performance reducers. Chapter 3 adds to discussions on theorising the entrant as a proactive strategic actor. Drawing on the strategic alliance literature, the chapter explores how entrants strategically configure an alliance portfolio to pursue a disruptive path despite an interplay with incumbents. Based on longitudinal research, the development trajectories of two disruptive entrants in the German fashion retail and insurance industries are studied. The findings demonstrate how entrants engage in early network building by configuring an alliance portfolio with partners unaffected by the disruption. Furthermore, how entrants have used the power of their alliance portfolios to combine social and timing defence mechanisms to manage the interplay with incumbents and guard against dissuading influences is discussed. In Chapter 4, the discussion of the entrant as a strategic actor is extended. Specifically, dynamics involved in developing and growing a multi-sided disruptive platform are investigated. The longitudinal study proposes three mechanisms through which the entrant leverages relationships with its multiple platform sides. 1) ‘Guarded inception’ involves collaboration with a knowledgeable partner unaffected by disruption to overcome the chicken-and-egg problem quickly. 2) ‘Activating force multipliers’ entails the strategic orchestration of complementors contractually tied to the entrant and working to extend the entrant’s value network. Enabled by these two mechanisms, the entrant is 3) ‘building on others’ to develop the platform along a disruptive path while circumventing internal limitations and external resistance. Chapter 5 presents a general model in which relationships are integrated, as has been called for in disruptive innovation debates. According to survey data on German companies, it can be suggested that value proposition innovation activities regarding new offerings and channels fully mediate the relationship between dynamic capabilities and disruptive innovation. This thesis explores under-theorised facets of the disruptive innovation phenomenon while supporting attempts to generalise more established theoretical statements further. In addition to contributing to the construction of a theory of disruptive innovation, the thesis delivers prescriptive guidelines for corporate managers and entrepreneurs on how to manage business model innovation. This work thus paves the way for further studies on disruptive innovation, ultimately fostering this emerging intellectual field.

This dissertation studies the responses of Portuguese polytechnics and Dutch hogescholen to new policy demands. These non-university higher education organizations focus on training professionals through practical learning approaches in close collaboration with regional/local industries and communities. In the past decade, such organizations have been undergoing changes related to their governance and educational provisions. National governments demanded them to focus on a research mandate and innovate educational provisions and training to be more responsive to the needs of local labor markets, industries, and communities. Through a qualitative comparative analysis and utilizing several conceptual streams from the new institutional theory, the dissertation shows that non-university higher education organizations in the two countries are responding differently to the new policy demands challenging the expectations of convergence and uniformity of higher education systems in Europe. These different responses are a result of organizational and individual experiences of the national higher education field, leading to the argument that organizational and individual action in response to new policy demands is defined within the context of the boundaries of the experienced higher education field. This is a novel contribution to the scientific field of higher education adding to previous studies on either intra-organizational processes in responses to new policy or field dynamics. The dissertation focuses on explicating the interdependencies between the two in influencing specific policy outcomes. The results of this dissertation have significant implications for national and European policymaking initiatives. They suggest that policymakers should consider promoting coherent policy frameworks organized in negotiation with national and local institutions with vested interest in non-university education when designing a new policy demand, while promoting European collaborative trends within the non-university higher education sector. At the same time, the results contribute to specifying mechanism for the development of non-university higher education while encouraging efforts to diversify higher education systems and research activities. Esta dissertação estuda as respostas de institutos politécnicos portugueses e holandeses (em holandês designados como universidades de ciências aplicadas: hogescholen), instituições de ensino superior não universitário focados essencialmente na formação profissional através de abordagens de ensino prático com a colaboração de indústrias regionais/locais e comunidades, a novas políticas públicas. Estas novas políticas públicas introduziram elementos novos nos mandatos, modelos de governação e oferta formativa dos politécnicos, e têm vindo a alterar o ambiente institucional em que eles operam. Uma alteração substancial foi a exigência de que os politécnicos tivessem um mandato de investigação e de inovação dos serviços educativos e formação, de forma a atender às necessidades do mercado de trabalho local, industrial e comunitário. A introdução da vertente de investigação – ainda que em espírito diferente da missão das universidades e que continua a visar uma separação institucional entre o ensino superior universitário e politécnico – introduz uma nova dimensão com potencial para transformar os politécnicos como organização. Através de uma análise comparativa baseada em quadros conceptuais inscritos na nova teoria institucional (New Institutional Theory), é demonstrado que os politécnicos, em ambos os países, reagem de forma distinta às novas políticas públicas, desafiando assim as expectativas de convergência e uniformidade dos sistemas de ensino superior Europeus. Estas respostas distintas são resultado de experiências organizacionais e individuais de académicos destas organizações no domínio do ensino superior nacional dos dois países, sendo de salientar o argumento de que a ação organizacional e individual, em resposta às novas políticas publicas, é definida no contexto de experiência do domínio do ensino superior envolvente. Esta é uma contribuição inovadora no contexto dos estudos de ensino superior, uma vez que analisa processos intra-organizacionais em resposta a uma nova política e considerando dinâmicas encontradas no domínio de ensino superior, considerando ambos como interdependentes nas respostas dadas pelos atores individuais e organizacionais a estas mesmas políticas. Os resultados desta dissertação têm implicações significativas para políticas nacionais e europeias de investigação e ensino superior. Estas sugerem que os governos deveriam considerar a criação de politicas publicas para o sector politécnico de uma forma estruturada, abrangente e integrada, envolvendo negociações que promovam a participação eresponsabilização das partes interessadas, por forma a tentar garantir estabilidade do sistema de ensino superior. Com isto pretende-se não criar homogeneização, mas sim um quadro institucional que permita respostas organizacionais num enquadramento de regras bem definidas. Este quadro também pode funcionar como um garante que visa salvaguardar as características próprias das organizações e a sua atuação em contextos nacionais e locais, simultaneamente promovendo as tendências europeias colaborativas no setor do ensino politécnico.

10870

12032

10873

The focus of this chapter is assessment of effectiveness of support infrastructure for technology-based businesses. The chapter aims to examine the effects of physical infrastructure including incubators and science parks on the level of innovation activity and performance of new technology-based firms. It reviews evidence from Western countries comparing various assessments of the impact of science parks on the firms. The chapter is set to examine the development of the science park movement in Russia; it explores the empirical evidence from a case-study university in an attempt to analyse the shortcomings in present state of the support infrastructure in Russia from point of view of technology-based companies.