TOWARDS ENTREPRENEURIAL UNIVERSITY?
Professor Allan Gibb and Professor Paul Hannon
SUMMARY
LINKING HIGHER EDUCATION WITH ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND GROWTH IN COMPETITIVENESS
Contribution of entrepreneurship to growth and competitiveness
The international evidence as to the contribution of small businesses and others as as a key component of the entrepreneurial economy to employment growth in the US and Europe over the past to two decades is substantial but rather uneven in different parts of Europe (EC 2005). There is a case that the “new” industry/service structures created by the substantial downsizing and restructuring activity in the 1980s and 1990s mean that the role of entrepreneurship has become paramount in managing restructured larger firms and their value chain interdependency on smaller organisations, along with new forms of inter-firm relationships in cluster (Ashkenas 1990).
The influence of education on aspirations to entrepreneurship
The evidence concerning the contribution of education and in particular higher education as a whole to entrepreneurship is soft. There is some evidence to indicate an association between education and economic growth but the direction of causality is obscure. There is evidence from GEM reports (London Business School 2004) that better educated persons are more likely to establish ‘opportunity’ as opposed to ‘necessity’ businesses, and that the former are more likely to grow. While there is evidence to indicate that the impact of university experience upon student aspirations towards self employment in the UK is currently negative (a much higher proportion of students in the first year aspire to entrepreneurship than in final year, see the Barclay Banks survey data in the Student Debt study published by NCGE 2006). However, evidence from school level education provision suggests that those exposed to enterprise are more likely to engage in entrepreneurial activity later in life.
Evidence as to impact of policy interventions
Entrepreneurship policies in the HE sector can broadly be divided into those that seek to build links between the HE sector and its stakeholders and those that are more focused upon entrepreneurship education of students. In respect of the former there is evidence to suggest that the impact of HE technology transfer programmes on overall productivity in the US and indeed in Europe is somewhat less than might be inferred from the rhetoric. It is technology use that is important (Hughes 2003). This lends strength to the argument that breaking down somewhat artificial barriers between applied and discovery research and encouragement of interdisciplinary research and partnership with external stakeholders are more important in terms of their contribution than patents, licensing and spin-off activity.THE PRESSURES FOR CHANGE IN HE
There has been a great deal of philosophical reflection revisiting the ‘Idea’ of a university (Graham 2002, Smith and Langslow 1988, Maskell and Robinson 2002) and also more pointed debate as to the role of universities in delivering professional and vocational education and the notion of the utility of university research (Hager and Hyland 2003).
There is, however, a broad consensus as to the nature of the pressures on higher education throughout the world to become more entrepreneurial or enterprising. There are pressures to play an enhanced role in contributing to the international competitiveness of economies particularly via a process of commercialisation of research. There are increasing demands made on the sector to contribute more substantially to local economic and social development.
There is also pressure to prepare students for a life world of much greater uncertainty and complexity involving : frequent occupational, job and contract status change; global mobility; adaptation to different cultures; working in world of fluid organisational structures (Ghoshal and gratton 2002, Westwood 2000, Worrel et al. 2000); greater probability of self employment; and wider responsibilities in family and social life (IPPR 1998, Rajan et al. 1997). this is associated with a need to prepare students for a world a life long learning (EC 1996).
It has been argued by one of the authors (www.ncge.org and Gibb 2006) that this scenario of entrepreneurship is the key to facilitating a response to uncertainty and complexity at the societal, organisational and individual level and demands rethink of the present business school and business-context paradigm of entrepreneurship in favour of a broader societal model. It is argued that this will not only better fit emerging needs but will be far more appropriate to a the traditional notion of university being at the centre of the imaginative use of knowledge (Newman 1852).
ENTREPRENEURIAL UNIVERSITY
Best Practice Model?
Drawing from the US and European literature and experience (Burton Clark 2004) it can be argued that Universities are entrepreneurial when they are unafraid to maximise the potential for commercialisation of their ideas and create value in society and do not see this as a significant threat to academic values. Behind this lies recognition of the need for a diversified funding base involving raising a high percentage of their income from non-public sources (Burton Clark 2004). It also means that there is an accepted responsibility for local development.
It has been argued that, in terms of organisation, entrepreneurial universities are managed in such a way that they become capable of responding flexibly, strategically and yet coherently to opportunities in the environment. In theory, by commitment to the above, entrepreneurship becomes part of the university’s core strategy. The ultimate outcome is the creation of an ‘enterpriser culture’ defined particularly as one open to change and to the search for, and exploitation of, opportunities for innovation and development.
How might it be achieved
It is evidence from the work of Burton Clark and others that successful progress requires incremental change over a considerable period of time. Change might be facilitated by the appointment of entrepreneurial academic leaders. It is argued that the process of transition will be smoothed by the attraction of entrepreneurial staff and those who share the vision of a wider role for the university in society. Champions will need to be identified and provided with support.
In this model, recognition of the need to actively seek external funding not by pursuit of philanthropy but by building credibility with key stakeholders in the environment underpins a process of active engagement. By such engagement it can be argued that the university becomes more of a learning organisation. It implies that university must be open to learn from all stakeholders at all levels.
ENTREPRENEURIAL CONCEPT
What should be taught?
The process of refining the entrepreneurship concept has been driven one step further by the development of the notion of Intellectual Entrepreneurship (Cherwitz 2002). He argues that: ‘Creating material wealth is only one expression of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship isn’t business. It is an attitude engaging the world-a process of cultural innovation’. The emphasis in this concept, which seems to have growing influence in the USA (visit website http://webspace.utexas.edu/cherwitz), is upon: forming partnerships with the community to solve problems and identify opportunities; cross disciplinary interaction in recognition that ‘a university’s collective wisdom is its most precious asset’; and academics as change agents embodying notions of breaking down barriers between research and development focused upon making contributions to the community as opposed purely to the discipline.
There is a common belief that the essence of entrepreneurship lies in creating and exploiting opportunities and pursuing innovation in practice. It is, however, the opportunity-seeking core of entrepreneurship, not the business plan concept .These are, importantly, not business school or externally provided ‘add-ons’ to the curriculum, but place the ownership of entrepreneurial paradigm across the university and become instruments for change in organisation and culture.
How is this concept best introduced?
International experience indicates that there are two critical steps.
- There needs to be clarity about the concept, although this can emerge over time via a process of engagement.
An approach that emphasises ‘opportunity identification’ for contributing to society, involving interdisciplinary and community engagement has a wider intellectual appeal particularly when combined with notion of developing the personal capacities of students-adding skills on top of disciplinary credentials and vision as to the future life and career possibilities for themselves (Cherwitz, op.cit.).
- Identification of champions across the university who will develop and buy into this model.
The university-wide audit approach (as in the University of Illinois process) is an attractive concept.
Finally there remains the issue of staff development for delivery. The intellectual Entrepreneurship programme in Texas has a built-in faculty development component. Arguably, this development process would need to be supported by an reward system. One approach taken by the US foundations is to offer financial incentives to staff across the university to develop programmes and materials within the context of their own department’s curriculum.
Change agents-a US perspective
The Kauffman and Coleman Foundation play a lead role in entrepreneurship education in the US. Both foundations were established by entrepreneurs and reflect their philosophies. Their mission are not focused upon business development per se but on the role that education and entrepreneurship can play in sustainable community development through the efforts of independent individuals. Interestingly they both have a strong local area commitment although they engage in national activity. The emphasis in their sponsorship of HE is now substantially upon encouragement of entrepreneurship across the campus. Kauffman in particular is shifting away from support of business school-led initiatives to wider university based programmes.
