There Is Sunshine Above the Clouds (Part 8)

Part 8: Making Universities Visibly Relevant To Business.

Simon Marginson, in his article “Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education,” stated that parallel to the organizational internationalization, university competitiveness is defined internationally by research capacity, output and quality. Hugo Horta concurs, claiming in his article “Global and national prominent universities: internationalization, competitiveness and the role of the State” that local rankings are strongly based on research and exposition of institutional insights about international issues. As such, according to Anne Chapman and Davis Pyvis in their article “Quality, identity and practice in offshore university programmes: issues in the internationalization of Australian higher education,” internationalization remains often an instrument of status for both students and faculty.

Nelly P Stromquist wrote in “Internationalization as a response to globalization: Radical shifts in university environments” that given the rising competition emanating from globalization, there is also a growing emphasis on market forces in the process of educational decision-making. It therefore becomes imperative that universities offer content in their research and teaching which provides the kind of knowledge that is attractive to and supported by corporate activity. The work needs to consider the ‘problem hot spots’ of firms and society mentioned earlier, and by explicitly accepting firms as stakeholders who need and deserve the benefit of international networks and multidisciplinarity.

The authors of The Necessary Revolution: How Individuals and Organizations Are Working Together to Create a Sustainable World contend that businesses and universities jointly need to consider the overlaps of system interests and the need to collaborate with the goal of long-term security for their future. Their time horizons differ substantially, where companies are focused on the short term while faculty tends to look far more down the road, according to Ben Schiller’s article “Academia strives for relevance” in the Financial Times, yet there could be a compromise with an emphasis at eventual relevance. Might someday a business executive even participate in the ‘peer review’ of an academic business article?

This post is part of a series by Michael Czinkota of Georgetown University and Andreas Pinkwart of Handelshochschule Leipzig on international business research and the new role of universities. Find Part 7 here.

There Is Sunshine Above the Clouds (Part 7)

Part 7: Grand Solutions – Internationalizing Higher Education.

International partnerships often continue to be intriguing wallpaper for a university president’s office. C.B. Klasek, in a 1992 U.S. Department of Education publication titled Bridges to the Future: Strategies for Internationalizing Higher Education, stated “[the rector of one major university] called a group or representatives from European and U.S. universities attending centenary ceremonies, into his office and would not let them leave until each had signed a linkage agreement. None of the agreements signed was ever implemented”.

International higher education remains mainly confined to analysis within educational research rather than stimulating minds in the fields of economics and business administration. University implementation of international strategy therefore remains typically at the level equivalent to international business activities by smaller and medium sized businesses: limited, ad-hoc, unsystematic and often inconsistent.

This post is part of a series by Michael Czinkota of Georgetown University and Andreas Pinkwart of Handelshochschule Leipzig on international business research and the new role of universities. Find Part 6 here.

There Is Sunshine Above the Clouds (Part 6)

Part 6: Grand Solutions – Embedding Universities Globally.

Historically speaking, university processes have a good international track record. Early on, universities exported and imported by either admitting international students or sending theirs abroad. They attracted international students and faculty members, the latter often permanently. By using Latin as the ‘lingua franca’ outward exchanges of personnel were facilitated. New locations were sought out, sometimes for purposes of expansion, at other times as a means to escape poor and worsening conditions. International partnerships were frequent. For example, Robert E. Curran, in his 1993 exposition of Georgetown University’s history, states that Georgetown University, a Jesuit school in Washington D.C., was left in legal limbo once pope Clement XIV suppressed the Jesuit order. However, due to collaborative work with Jesuits in Byelorussia, the order continued to be recognized by Czarina Katherine the Great. For several decades, the Georgetown staff became members of the Russian Province.

In spite of these manifold international activities, universities have typically not translated their experience into an institutional strategy. Exchange programs often do not outlive their faculty founders and international hiring decisions are mostly made on an ad-hoc basis – though some organizations such as the ETH in Zuerich, according to Hugo Horta in Higher Education, have incorporated international faculty and students into their strategic planning. Research collaborations tend to be temporary and international investments have been very limited – be it due to budget or risk constraints.

Sheila Slaughter and Larry Leslie state in Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial University that since the 1980’s globalization has moved university activities towards the market, resulting in academic capitalism. Though universities are the prototype of knowledge institutions, there is only a very limited body of internationalization research. Experience is insufficiently recorded and remembered. Insights tend to be peer reviewed based on academic and methodological criteria, rather than incorporation the view of a constituency. In consequence, according to Nelly P. Stromquist in Higher Education, the knowledge and guideposts on internationalization is thin, and constitutes for many universities a search for student markets or respect among colleagues, rather than positioning their knowledge base as a global service offering.

This post is part of a series by Michael Czinkota of Georgetown University and Andreas Pinkwart of Handelshochschule Leipzig on international business research and the new role of universities. Find Part 5 here.

There Is Sunshine Above the Clouds (Part 5)

Part 5: Grand Solutions – Universities and Internationalization.

Traditionally, internationalization within universities was a bottom-up activity. It occurred due to personal connections by an individual faculty members or by research teams. Increasingly, however, universities grow internationally as part of a strategic approach executed as a top-down activity driven by institutional directives.

Several key reasons account for this shift in internationalization: A scientific approach demands awareness of and interaction with international work in order to benchmark one’s own work as to its competence. Internationalization is also part of becoming a competitive enterprise and ensuring capacity utilization. As part of their mission, universities also need to provide social infrastructure and networks for their graduates.

Universities are pioneers of the information revolution. In the 21st Century, they can assume new roles as incubators and connectivity nodes for new ideas and innovations. They are undergoing fundamental change due to new technologies, tighter budgets, increased complexity and growing global competition.

Yet so far, universities have responded only to a limited extent organizationally in a systematic fashion to globalization opportunities and threats. Firms, for example, have long ago differentiated their activities into investments, imports and exports. Companies, though also slowed down by inertia, shift entry approaches dependent on market needs. To some markets they export. Global sourcing and offshoring is used in others. Firms participate in markets through franchising or licensing and often recruit their staff from around the globe. They make investments, either as sole owners or in joint ventures, and shift venues whenever necessary.

This post is part of a series by Michael Czinkota of Georgetown University and Andreas Pinkwart of Handelshochschule Leipzig on international business research and the new role of universities. Find Part 4 here.

There Is Sunshine Above the Clouds (Part 4)

Part 4: New Challenges for Universities.

In the past thirty years, competition, information technology, and the porousness of barriers to trade and investment around the globe, have significantly changed the transaction costs and spheres of influence by and on individual companies. However, not only the conditions for individual companies have been changed. Universities have also been exposed to profound changes in their constituency, participation in society, and resource requirements.

At first glance, today’s universities differ little from their predecessors. There are still students and professors, reading books and manuscripts, in classrooms designed for frontal communications. Yet, in recent decades, dramatic changes have occurred behind impressive facades. The extent of change is largely underestimated and its future implications are not even remotely known. Today, globalization and the information revolution precipitate profound changes in the structure, capabilities and functions of universities. Just consider the latest innovations in teaching by MIT and other universities which, through massive open online courses (MOOCs) deliver their content around the world, and often do so for free.

Electronic media have shaped education and innovation into pillars of democratization. The third leg of the tripod providing stability consists of the rise of new informal relationships which convert exclusivity into participatory inclusiveness. Wikipedia statements shaped by many eager participants replace the decisions by the greying editors of the Oxford dictionary not necessarily for the worst. Informal learning replaces the uniqueness of institutional learning. Networks substitute for formal classrooms, and external knowledge rivals the importance of internal knowledge. As the Institute for International Education stated in its 2010 Open Doors report, the growing mobility of students and faculty also contributes to increased relationships, knowledge exchange and informality.

Throughout all these shifts, universities continue to rank among the oldest and most successful institutions in human history. Many countries have recognized the key relevance of the education sector for sustainable growth and broad based prosperity, though the transformational role of academic influence is often feared but not yet fully understood. Countries devote financial and political attention to the establishment and development of universities. Traditional knowledge exporters, such as the United States, Germany, France and England, strengthen their efforts to maintain a high share in the dynamically growing international academic market. These traditional exporters, according to a 2007 World Bank report by Sajitha Bashir, also recognize the economic benefits of bestowing internationally recognized qualifications on future decision-makers about infrastructure, engineering and economic acquisitions.

This post is part of a series by Michael Czinkota of Georgetown University and Andreas Pinkwart of Handelshochschule Leipzig on international business research and the new role of universities. Find Part 3 here.