Коммерческая деятельность университетов взаимодействие со стейкхолдерами
https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2021.19.4.67.1
Аннотация
В работе рассматривается влияние различных стейкхолдеров на формирование приносящей доход деятельности университета. На сегодняшний день способность университета самостоятельно поддерживать своё финансовое благополучие в условиях ограниченной финансовой помощи со стороны государства находится в фокусе внимания как учёных, так и администраций университетов. Профессорско-преподавательский состав является одним из ключевых стейкхолдеров, применяющих различные инструменты для привлечения дохода в вуз, в том числе через взаимодействие с различными субъектами экономической деятельности. В рамках данного исследова- ния были применены количественные методы анализа. На основе вторичных данных о взаимодействии высших школ и предприятий в Великобритании автор провёл оценку воздействия различных стейкхолдеров на доходность вуза. Согласно полученным результатам государство и предприятия являются основными стейкхолдерами, которые оказывают значимое влияние на финансирование университетов, тогда как другие субъекты хотя и важны, но эффективность их воздействия зависит от каждого конкретного вуза. Это исследование может быть полезным для административного аппарата высшей школы, поскольку показывает различные стратегии взаимодействия со стейкхолдерами, что, в свою очередь, может привести к разработке своей стратегии поведения для увеличения доходности вуза.
Об авторе
Н. Радько
Редингский университет; МГИМО МИД России
Великобритания
Великобритания
Наталья Радько
Рединг
Москва
Список литературы
1. Acosta M., Coronado D., Flores E. (2011). University spillovers and new business location in hightechnology sectors: Spanish evidence. Small Business Economics. No. 36 (3). P. 365–376.
2. Alshubiri F.N. (2020). Analysis of financial sustainability indicators of higher education institutions on foreign direct investment: Empirical evidence in OECD countries. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. No. 22 (1). P. 77–99.
3. Alsos G., Carter S., Ljunggren E., Welter F. (2011). Introduction: Researching Entrepreneurship in Agriculture and Rural Development. In: Alsos G.A., Carter S., Ljunggren E. and Welter F. (eds.) The Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurship in Agriculture and Rural Development. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. P. 1–20.
4. Astebro T., Bazzazian N., Braguinsky S. (2012). Start-ups by Recent University Graduates and Their Faculty: Implications for University Entrepreneurship Policy. Research Policy. No 41 (4). P. 663–677.
5. Audretsch D. B., Kuratko D. F., Link A. N. (2016). Dynamic entrepreneurship and technology-based innovation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics. No. 26. P. 603–20.
6. Audretsch D.B. (2014). From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society. The Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 39 (3). P. 313–321.
7. Audretsch D.B., Belitski M. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: establishing the framework conditions. The Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 42 (6). P. 1030–1051. DOI: 10.1007/s10961-016-9473-8.
8. Autio E., Kenney M., Mustar P., Siegel D., Wright M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation ecosystems and context. Research Policy. No. 43 (7). P. 1097–1108.
9. Barbero J.L., Casillas J.C., Ramos A., Guitar S. (2012). Revisiting incubation performance: how incubator typology affects results. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. No. 79 (5). P. 888–902.
10. Bartell M. (2003). Internationalization of Universities: A University Culture-Based Framework. Higher Education. No. 45 (1). P. 43–70.
11. Belitski M., Aginskaja A., Marozau R. (2019). Commercializing university research in transition economies: technology transfer offices or direct industrial funding? Research Policy. No 48 (3). P. 601–615.
12. Belitski M., Heron K. (2017). Expanding entrepreneurship education ecosystems. Journal of Management Development. No. 36 (2). P. 163–177.
13. Bell A., Jones K. (2015). Explaining Fixed Effects: Random Effects Modeling of Time-Series Cross-Sectional and Panel Data. Political Science Research and Methods. No. 3 (1). P. 133–53. DOI: 10.1017/psrm.2014.7
14. Bock C., Huber A., Jarchow S. (2018). Growth factors of research-based spin-offs and the role of venture capital investing. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 43 (5). P. 1375–1409.
15. Bradley S., Hayter C.S., Link A.N. (2013). Models and methods of university technology transfer. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship. No. 9 (6). P. 571–650.
16. Bramwell A., Wolfe D. A. (2008). Universities and regional economic development: The entrepreneurial University of Waterloo. Research Policy. No. 37 (8). P. 1175–1187.
17. Braunerhjelm P., Acs Z.J., Audretsch D.B., Carlsson B. (2010). The missing link: Knowledge diffusion and entrepreneurship in endogenous growth. Small Business Economics. No. 34 (2). P. 105–125.
18. Burrows P. (1999). Combining regulation and legal liability for the control of external costs. International Review of Law and Economics. No. 19 (2). P. 227–244.
19. Cronbach L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. No 16. P. 297–334. DOI: 10.1007/BF02310555.
20. D'Este P., Perkmann M. (2011). Why Do Academics Engage with Industry? The Entrepreneurial University and Individual Motivations. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 36 (3). P. 316–339. DOI: 10.1007/s10961-010-9153-z.
21. Deeds D.L., Decarolis D., Coombs J.E. (1997). The impact of firm-specific capabilities on the amount of capital raised in an initial public offering: Evidence from the biotechnology industry. Journal of Business Venturing. No. 12 (1). P. 31–46.
22. Donaldson Th., Preston L. E. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications. The Academy of Management Review. No. 20 (1). P. 65–91.
23. Etzkowitz H. (2003). Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Social Science Information. No. 42 (3). P. 293–337. DOI:10.1177/05390184030423002.
24. Etzkowitz H., Ranga M., Benner M., Guaranys L., Maculan M. & Kneller R. (2008). Pathways to the entrepreneurial university: towards a global convergence. Science and Public Policy. No 35 (9). P. 681–695.
25. Fayolle A., Linan F. (2014). The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Research. No. 67 (5). P. 663–666.
26. Fini R., Grimaldi R., Santoni S., Sobrero M. (2011). Complements or substitutes? The role of universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs. Research Policy. No. 40 (8). P. 1113–1127.
27. Florida R., Adler P., King K., Mellander C. (2020). The City as Startup Machine: The Urban Underpinnings of Modern Entrepreneurship. In Iftikhar M., Justice J., Audretsch D. (eds.) Urban Studies and Entrepreneurship. The Urban Book Series. Springer: Cham. P. 19–30.
28. Foss L., Gibson D. V. (eds.). (2015). The entrepreneurial university: Context and institutional change. Abingdon: Routledge.
29. Freeman R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA: Pitman. Frølich N., Schmidt E. K., Rosa M. J. (2010). Funding systems for higher education and their impacts on institutional strategies and academia: A comparative perspective. International Journal of Educational Management. No. 24 (1). P. 7–21. DOI: 10.1108/09513541011013015.
30. Gray D.O., Boardman C. (2010). Special issue on cooperative research centres: policy, process, and outcome perspectives. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 35(5). P. 445–459.
31. Grimaldi R., Grandi A. (2005). Business incubators and new venture creation: an assessment of incubating models. Technovation. No. 25 (2). P. 111–121.
32. Guerrero M., Cunningham J.A., Urbano D. (2015). Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities' activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom. Research Policy. No. 44 (3). P. 748–764.
33. Guerrero M., Urbano D. (2012). The development of an entrepreneurial university. The Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 37 (1). P. 43–74.
34. Guerrero M., Urbano D. (2014). Academics' start-up intentions and knowledge filters: An individual perspective of the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics. No 43 (1). P. 57–74.
35. Hassan N. A. (2020). University business incubators as a tool for accelerating entrepreneurship: theoretical perspective. Review of Economics and Political Science. DOI: 10.1108/REPS-10-2019-0142.
36. Hayter C. S. (2016). A trajectory of early-stage spin-off success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem. Small Business Economics. No. 47(3). P. 633–656. DOI: 10.1007/s11187-016-9756-3.
37. Hayter C.S., Nelson A.J., Zayed S., O'Connor Alan C. (2018). Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 43. P. 1039–1082. DOI: 10.1007/s10961-018-9657-5.
38. Hayter C.S., Nelson A.J., Zayed S., O'Connor A. C. (2018). Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature. Journal of Technology Transfer. No43. P. 1039–1082.
39. Henrekson M., Rosenberg N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: lessons from the US and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 26. P. 207–231.
40. Hewitt-Dundas N. (2012). Research intensity and knowledge transfer activity in UK universities. Research Policy. No. 41 (2). P. 262–275.
41. Huyghe A., Knockaert M., Piva E., Wright M. (2016). Are researchers deliberately bypassing the technology transfer office? An analysis of TTO awareness. Small Business Economics. No 47 (3). P. 589–607.
42. Jongbloed B., Enders J., Salerno C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education. No. 56. P. 303–324.
43. Jongbloed B. (2004). Funding higher education: Options, trade-offs and dilemmas. Paper for Fulbright Brainstorms 2004 – New trends in Higher Education. URL: https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/6155740/engpap04fundinghe.pdf (accessed: 18.02.2022).
44. Kasim R. S. R. (2011). Malaysian Higher Education Institutions: Shaping an Entrepreneurial Agenda. The International Journal of Information and Education Technology. Vol. 1. No. 2. P. 163–170. DOI: 10.7763/IJIET.2011.V1.27.
45. Klepper S. (2007). Disagreements, spin-offs, and the evolution of Detroit as the capital of the US automobile industry. Management Science. No. 53 (4). P. 616–631.
46. Kortum S., Lerner J. (2001). Does venture capital spur innovation? In: Entrepreneurial inputs and outcomes: New studies of entrepreneurship in the United States. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. P. 1–44.
47. Link A.N., Scott J.T. (2006). US university research parks. Journal of Productivity Analysis. No. 25. P. 43–55.
48. Liu Y., Huang Q. (2018). University capability as a micro-foundation for the Triple Helix model: the case of China. Technovation. No. 76–77. P. 40–50.
49. M'Chirgui Z., Lamine W., Mian S., Fayolle A. (2018). University technology commercialization through new venture projects: an assessment of the French regional incubator program. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 43 (5). P. 1142–1160.
50. Malairaja C., Zawdie G. (2008). Science parks and university–industry collaboration in Malaysia. Technology Analysis and Strategic Managment. No. 20 (6). P. 727–739.
51. Markman G. D., Gianiodis P. T., Phan H. P. (2009). Supply-side innovation and technology commercialization. Journal of Management Studies. No. 46 (4). P. 625–649.
52. Markman G. D., Siegel D. S., Wright M. (2008). Research and technology commercialization. Journal of Management Studies. No. 45 (8). P. 1401–1423.
53. Marzocchi C., Kitagawa F., Sánchez-Barrioluengo M. (2019). Evolving missions and university entrepreneurship: academic spin-offs and graduate start-ups in the entrepreneurial society. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 44. P. 167. DOI: 10.1007/s10961-017-96193.
54. Mccowan T. (2017). Higher education, unbundling, and the end of the university as we know it. Oxford Review of Education. No. 43 (6). P. 733–748.
55. Meoli M., Vismara S. (2016). University support and the creation of technology and nontechnology academic spin-offs. Small Business Economics. No. 47. P. 345–362. DOI: 10.1007/s11187-016-9721-1.
56. Miller D. J., Acs Z. J. (2017). The campus as entrepreneurial ecosystem: the University of Chicago. Small Business Economics. No. 49. P. 75
57. Miller K., McAdam M., McAdam R. (2014). The changing university business model: a stakeholder perspective. R&D Management. No. 44 (3). P. 265–287.
58. Mitchell R. K., Bradley R. A., Wood D. J. (1997). Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What really Counts. The Academy of Management Review. No. 22. P. 853–885.
59. Modugno G., Di Carlo F. (2019). Financial Sustainability of Higher Education Institutions: A Challenge for the Accounting System. Financial Sustainability of Public Sector Entities. No. 2 (6). P. 165–184.
60. Nalwoga M. (2021). Financial Sustainability of Private Universities in Uganda; A Critical Perspective. African Journal of Education,Science and Technology. No. 6 (3). P. 114–125. URL: http://www.ajest.info/index.php/ajest/article/view/537 (accessed: 18.02.2022).
61. Neave G. (2000). The Universities' Responsibilities to Society: International Perspectives. Issues in Higher Education Series. 1st Edition, Elsevier Science, Ltd.
62. O'Gorman, C., Byrne O., Pandya D. (2008). How scientists commercialise new knowledge via entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 33. P. 23–43.
63. O'Kane C., Mangematin V., Geoghegan W., Fitzgerald C. (2015). University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy. Research Policy. No. 44 (2). P. 421–437.
64. Pavone C. (2019). STEM Students and Faculty Can Gain Entrepreneurial Thinking and Skills. Entrepreneur & Innovation Exchange.
65. Perkmann M., Tartari V., McKelvey M., Autio E., Broström A., D'Este P., Fini R., Geunae A., Grimaldi R., Hughes A., Krabel S., Kitson M., Llerena P., Lissoni F., Salter A., Sobrero M. (2013). Academic Engagement and Commercialisation: A Review of the Literature on University-Industry Relations. Research Policy. No. 42 (2). P. 423–442.
66. Perkmann M, Salandra R, Tartari V, et al. (2021). Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011-2019. Research Policy. No. 50 (1). P. 1–20.
67. Phan P.H., Siegel D.S., Wright M. (2005). Science parks and incubators: observations, synthesis and future research. Journal of Business Venturing. No. 20. P. 165–182.
68. Powers J. B., McDougall P. P. (2005). University Start-Up Formation and Technology Licensing with Firms that go Public: a Resource-Based View of Academic Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing. No. 20 (3). P. 291–311.
69. Rasmussen E., Mosey S., Wright M. (2011). The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: A longitudinal study of university spin-off venture emergence. Journal of Management Studies. No 48 (6). P. 1314–1345.
70. Robles N. (2017). Development of university's business incubators in Panama. Master Thesis, Faculty of Engineering Economics and Management, Institute of Business, Riga Technical University Roura J.C. (2015). Business incubation: innovative services in an entrepreneurship ecosystem. Service Industries Journal. No. 35 (14). P. 1–18.
71. Sazonov S.P., Kharlamova, E.E., Chekhovskaya I.A., Polyanskya E.A. (2015). Evaluating Financial Sustainability of Higher Education Institutions. Asian Social Science. No. 11 (20). P. 34–40.
72. Sengupta A., Ray A. (2017). University Research and Knowledge Transfer: A Dynamic View of Ambidexterity in British Universities. Research Policy. No. 46 (5). P. 881–897.
73. Sideri K., Panagopoulos A. (2018). Setting up a technology commercialization office at a nonentrepreneurial university: an insider's look at practices and culture. The Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 43 (4). P. 953–965.
74. Siegel D. S., Wright M. (2015). Academic Entrepreneurship: Time for a Rethink? British Journal of Management. No. 26. P. 582–595.
75. Siegel D.S. (2018). Academic Entrepreneurship: Lessons Learned for Technology Transfer Personnel and University Administrators. World Scientific Reference on Innovation. P. 1–21.
76. Siegel D.S., Waldman D. (2019). Organizational and Psychological Issues in the Commercialization of Research at Universities and Federal Labs. Les Nouvelles-Journal of the Licensing Executives Society. No. 54 (2).
77. Siegel D.S., Waldman D., Link A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy. No. 32. P. 27–48.
78. Siswanto E., Djumahir Ahmad-Sonhadji K. H., Idrus M. S. (2013). Good University Income Generating Governance in Indonesia: Agency Theory Perspective. International Journal of Learning & Development. No. 3 (1). P. 67–78. DOI: 10.5296/ijld.v3i1.3134.
79. Somers P., Davis C., Fry J., Jasinski L., Lee E. (2018). Academic capitalism and the entrepreneurial university: some perspectives from the Americas. Roteiro. No. 43. P. 21–42.
80. Van Looy B., Landoni P., Callaert J., Van Pottelsberghe B., Sapsalis E., Debackere K. (2011). Entrepreneurial Effectiveness of European Universities: An Empirical Assessment of Antecedents and Trade-Offs. Research Policy. No. 40 (4). P. 553–564.
81. Vohora A., Wright M. and Lockett A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy. No. 33 (1). P. 147–175.
82. Wächter B. et al. (2012). Trying it all together. Excellence, mobility, funding and the social dimension in higher education. Bonn: Lemmens.
83. Wooldridge J. (2012). Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, South Western, Cengage Learning. URL: https://economics.ut.ac.ir/documents/3030266/14100645/Jeffrey_M._Wooldridge_Introductory_Econometrics_A_Modern_Approach__2012.pdf (accessed: 18.02.2022).
84. Wooldridge J.M. (2010). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. The MIT Press. Wright M., Siegel D.S., Mustar P. (2017). An emerging ecosystem for student start-ups. Journal of Technology Transfer. No. 42 (4). P. 909–922.
85. Xu L. (2009). Business incubation in China: effectiveness and perceived contributions to tenant enterprises. Management Research Review. Vol. 33. No. 1. P. 90–99.
86. Yusef S. (2008). Intermediating knowledge exchange between universities and businesses. Research Policy. No. 37. P. 1167–1174.
Рецензия
Для цитирования:
Радько Н. Коммерческая деятельность университетов взаимодействие со стейкхолдерами. Международные процессы. 2021;19(4):123-150. https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2021.19.4.67.1
For citation:
Radko N. Income generation activities from academics at universities and engagement with stakeholders. International Trends / Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. 2021;19(4):123-150. https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2021.19.4.67.1
Просмотров:
258
Послать статью по эл. почте 