Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Essay on the way academics must get used to friends moving elsewhere Inside Higher Ed There is comfort in the gossip of the familiar, and people who might never have otherwise sought out one another's company are bonded together by the difficulty...
Valorization of research results is becoming increasingly important today. Since academic research should not only contribute to our “quest for fundamental understanding,” but it also needs to “consider use” (Stokes, 1997); these dual goals give rise to tension in academic institutes that need to carefully balance research and its exploitation. Nevertheless, valorization, commercialization, technology transfer, knowledge exploitation or exploitation of research are different labels for a similar activity and have become part and parcel of academic life. Most universities own the intellectual property rights of their research, meaning they have the legal rights (in some countries the legal obligation) to exploit it in a way they see fit. Research shows that universities have different objectives (e.g. regional development, spin-off creation) for engaging in this process and every university has developed its own approach to deal with this in the sense of funding and support. On an abstract level, there are two scenarios for commercialization. In the first scenario the university takes the role of “entrepreneur” and in the second scenario it is the researcher (or the research group) who is involved in research that takes this role with the university being the context in which entrepreneurship takes place. In this contribution our focus is on the university as entrepreneur and we regard valorization as an entrepreneurial process. In order to visualize how the activities of different actors associated with the university contribute to the entrepreneurial process of a university, we will build on ideas postulated by Wakkee and Van der Sijde (2010) regarding the fluid and moldable nature of opportunities. We conceptually elaborate the consequences of their approach for bringing knowledge (and technology) from university to the market.
The authors:" In this paper we have considered the university as the entrepreneur rather than as a context in which entrepreneurship takes place. This does not mean, however, that individual members cannot be simultaneously involved this entrepreneurial processes. If managed intelligently by the university, a considerable part of the entrepreneurial activities of staff members may fall under the ‘‘umbrella’’ created by the university’s opportunity scenario, although there will always be individual
Peter van der Sijde, Ingrid Wakkee, Eveline Stam, Mirjam Leloux (2013), The University as an Entrepreneur: The Ingredients for Valorization and Valorization Strategies, in Ray Oakey, Aard Groen, Gary Cook, Peter Van Der Sijde (ed.) New Technology-Based Firms in the New Millennium (New Technology-Based Firms in the New Millenium, Volume 10), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.213-224
This is the first of two volumes written to celebrate the 40th Anniversary of EFMD. Through an open-ended interview research process, it seeks to explore the perspectives and views of a wide range of experts drawn not only from the European environment but also from the United States and other global players in the management education field. Understanding the relations and interactions between the various actors in management education is fundamental to any rich analysis of the roles, value and purposes of management education as well as the unfulfilled promises in its evolution. The focus in this first volume is on the challenges, issues, themes and lessons learned in the 40 years of EFMD's evolution. The second volume will concentrate on the future of management education.
1 EFMDs Journey in Management Education
2 A Brief Overview of the Emergence and Evolution of Management Education and the Business School
3 EFMDs Role in the Growth of Management Education
4 The Key Stakeholders in Management Education
5 What Have Been the Key Events and Innovations in the Evolution of Management Education?
6 Opinion Leaders Distinctly Different Schools and Innovations in Management Education
7 What Are the Lessons Learned and Not Learned from the Past?
8 What Are the Barriers to Change in Management Education and Triggers for Change in the Future?
9 The Past and Changes Needed in the Future
Promises Fulfilled and Unfulfilled in Management EducationReflections on the Role, Impact and Future of Management Education: EFMD
Contributor(s): B.L. Thomas (author), Lynn Thomas (author),Alexander Wilson (author), Howard Thomas (author),
The presentation by Bill Russell (Emerald Group Publishing Ltd) reports on a major international survey, covering 2,000 researchers, which investigated the use of social media in the research workflow. Working with CIBER at UCL, the research process revealed that social media have found serious application at all points of the research lifecycle.
Via antonella esposito
Organizational and behavioral factors that influence knowledge retention
Document Information:Title: Organizational and behavioral factors that influence knowledge retention
Design/methodology/approach – A multidisciplinary approach focusing on knowledge management and organizational behavior was followed to develop a theoretical model that identifies the organizational and behavioral factors to be considered when addressing the issues relating to knowledge loss. A quantitative empirical research paradigm using the survey method was adopted to determine the organizational and behavioral factors that impact on knowledge retention. The survey was conducted electronically and on paper in the water supply industry. The exploratory principal component factor analysis technique (PCFA technique) was used to explore the factor structure underlying the variables. The theoretical model was compared with the newly proposed factor model to determine similarities and differences.
Findings – Nine key factors were identified through the factor analysis, of which knowledge behaviors, strategy implementation, leadership and people knowledge loss risks proved to be the most important. In comparing the factor structure of the theoretically derived model and the PCFA-composed factor structure, some factors essentially remained the same with few changes, and a number of new factors emerged.
Research limitations/implications – The literature study reveals that little research has been conducted in the field of knowledge retention with a behavioral focus. However, a vast amount of literature is found on knowledge, knowledge management, knowledge retention with a focus on organizational challenges and solution driven knowledge retention initiatives, and the organizational behavior discipline as such, thus facilitating the application of the relevant concepts to knowledge retention from an organizational and behavioral perspective.
Practical implications – This study encourages practitioners to take cognizance of the fact that organizations are different and that enhancing and impeding organizational factors as well as behavioral factors of knowledge retention are to be considered.
Originality/value – The findings should provide insight into the organizational and behavioral factors that should be considered in implementing a knowledge retention strategy to retain critical tacit knowledge, thus ensuring organizational effectiveness and competitive advantage.
Via Nader Ale Ebrahim