A model for innovation in higher education

Jakovljević, Maria

doi:10.20853/32-4-2432

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…be entrepreneurial), in order to achieve more with less" (Chantson and Urban 2018, 115). Jakovljevic (2018) proposes a model that presents the "flow of an innovation process that is based on the foundations of a well-being society. In summary the model presents • There is a convincing need for universities to modify "promotion and tenure and remuneration systems" for academic staff so that commercialisation behaviours are appreciated;…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some researchers propose that academics seldom understand the "flow between innovation and invention and the process how to develop innovative and inventive skills" (Jakovljevic 2013, 69), while others have identified "multiple reasons why university research in South Africa does not generally result in IP registration". These reasons include, "unfavourable ownership provisions of the IP Act and the university's IP policy, IP registration and commercialisation is not viewed as a primary goal of research, novelty is destroyed by publication, and supervisors and researchers are unable to identify the potential intellectual property rights arising from students' or their own research" (Jakovljevic 2018;Pouris 2007;Sibanda 2017). Moreover, it has been suggested that TTOs at HEIs in South Africa tend to concentrate more on the identification and protection of IP, and devote less attention on start-ups (Pouris 2007;2012), and subsequently low levels of academic entrepreneurship at HEIs are due to a weak set of institutional and organisational factors which inhibit the commercialisation and technology innovation process (Boshoff et al 2018;Chantson and Urban 2018).…”

Section: Similarly In South Africa the "Intellectual Property Rights mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Academic enrepreneurship and organisational support factors

Urban

Gamata

2020

SAJHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academic entrepreneurship has gained popularity in recent decades as a critical element for the advancement of commercialisation and innovation. Research shows that the organisational context can facilitate or impede academic entrepreneurship. However, academics are often faced with a weak set of institutional and organisational factors which inhibit the commercialisation and technology innovation process. This article builds in the direction of an emerging stream of research and empirically investigates the relationship between various factors such as management support, rewards, and time allocation in relation to measurable academic entrepreneurship outputs. Following a survey of academics, the results reveal several positive relationships between the hypothesised study variables. In particular, rewards were found to have a significant impact on academic entrepreneurship outputs. Implications relate to management interventions to design and implement harmonised academic entrepreneurship support mechanisms which focus on organisational rewards and incentives.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Similarly In South Africa the "Intellectual Property Rights mentioning

confidence: 99%

Academic enrepreneurship and organisational support factors

Urban

Gamata

2020

SAJHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Seldom, does literature think of universities as a system of innovation in their own right. A system of innovation is a governance arrangement in which different players -researchers, governors, managers, teachers, and departments interact to produce new products, create new productive processes as well as new arrangements that lower transaction costs of innovating (Albuquerque, Suzigan, Kruss, & Lee, 2015;Jakovljevic, 2018;Lundvall, 2007). Technical change, by its nature, is a process driven by innovation and this speaks to the need for an institutional system of innovation (Kaplan, 1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Technical change occurs because of innovation (Kaplan, 1999). An innovative organisation experiences cycles of technical change persistently (Jakovljevic, 2018).…”

Section: Production Theory and Total Factor Productivity Change Measumentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Changes in Total Factor Productivity for Academic Departments of Historically Privileged Small University in South Africa

2020

EJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an environment of rising levels of student debt and falling government financial support to universities, the problem of lack of financial sustainability is becoming endemic, especially among small universities. This calls for universities to identify new sources of income growth. Using a case study of a small historically privileged South African university, we examined the change in total factor productivity for the period 2004-2015. We adopted an intra-institutional departmental efficiency comparison using the Malmquist Total Factor Productivity Index under an output-oriented data envelopment analytic framework and assuming variable returns to scale. The index was decomposed into technical efficiency change, technical change, pure efficiency change, and scale efficiency change. We found that total factor productivity growth was driven by technical progress, scale efficiency improvements and to some extent technical efficiency improvements. Departments in the Faculty of Science mostly seem to have experienced greatest levels of technical change although they lagged the Department of Accounting. Because of the dominance of technical change in driving total factor productivity growth, an important source of income growth, our findings imply that universities should design institutional systems of innovation that can engender financial sustainability through increased innovation and total factor productivity growth.

show abstract

“…Academics also face challenges that impede their work in general and university community engagement specifically. According to Jakovlejevic (2018: 110), ‘in spite of possessing creative knowledge, skills and a desire to produce original ideas and initiatives, academics are constrained with work overload, insufficient modelling of innovative behaviour and inadequate funding supports’. Existential challenges present academics an opportunity to show and provide effective transformative leadership which ‘is about enabling others to achieve purpose in the face of uncertainty’ (Ganz, 2009: 2).…”

Section: Foundations Of Engaged Creative-placemakingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing the Exploration of Engaged Creative-Placemaking Amongst Universities and Communities for Social Cohesion in South Africa

Mutero

Govender

2019

Journal of Asian and African Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article frames a discussion on how South African universities and communities can co-create university spaces that facilitate repairing the country’s dented social, economic and political infrastructure through engaged creative-placemaking. The first section further explores the concept followed by a discussion of historical issues which have a material bearing on how universities can and should frame community engagement in South Africa. It pays close attention to how post-apartheid nation building is hindered by the remnants from the past and is dislocated to both the present and the future. The article also brings into question the type and role of leadership, in both universities and communities. The final section of the article presents a framework for engaged creative-placemaking delineating the antecedents that are needed by the key stakeholders, namely, public and private enterprises, university and the community to successfully work together in achieving a just society through creative-placemaking. Improving place liveability through engaged creative-placemaking has the potential to stimulate local economies and leads to cultural diversity, civic engagement and increased innovation.

show abstract

A model for innovation in higher education

Cited by 21 publications

References 53 publications

Academic enrepreneurship and organisational support factors

Academic enrepreneurship and organisational support factors

Analysis of Changes in Total Factor Productivity for Academic Departments of Historically Privileged Small University in South Africa

Advancing the Exploration of Engaged Creative-Placemaking Amongst Universities and Communities for Social Cohesion in South Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About