Emerging Entrepreneurial Universities in University Reforms: The moderating role of personalities and the social/economic environment
Abstract
University education, research and other services are increasingly becoming private goods as opposed to the traditional public goods concept. This trend is a highly debated process, and its consequences for universities are unquestionable. One of the consequences may be the diffusion of entrepreneurship in the higher education sector. The aim of the present paper is to highlight some of the characteristics of this process. Starting with the classics of entrepreneurship literature, Schumpeter defined the entrepreneur as somebody who goes against the stream. A new combination of production factors is the soul of entrepreneurship, and of any changes such as university reforms. Earlier research by Clark shed light on the environment of emerging entrepreneurial universities, which happened to be mainly new, relatively small universities. He found five indicators that are components of entrepreneurial universities. Taking this concept as a point of departure, we extended it in two directions. First, we go back to the economics literature and collect several other indicators/statements about entrepreneurship that are also worth considering in higher education. Second, we present a number of successful entrepreneurial cases of large top universities, looking for other indicators. Summarising these indicators in a table, two reforms of the Corvinus University of Budapest and its predecessors are discussed. Both of the reform processes lasted about five years, and there was a gap of approximately 20 years between the two processes. We would expect this to be successful, as a university needs to be reformed every 20 years, but this was not the case. We
come to the surprising conclusion that, at least in case of the Corvinus University of Budapest, the two reforms in the socialist period were more entrepreneurial than the reforms we are experiencing now in a market economy environment. The explanation for this situation is twofold: the general socioeconomic environment is not really supportive of reform initiatives, and there is a lack of charismatic leadership.
Downloads
References
Clark, B. R. (1983). The Higher Education System. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating Entrepreneurial Universities. Organizational Pathways of Transformation. IAU Press Pergamon.
Coase, R. H. (1937). The Nature of the Firm, Economica, (in Hungarian: A vállalat természete). In A vállalat, a piac és a jog (2004, Volume 4, November, 53-84 old.). Budapest: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó Rt. Csáki C., & Zalai, E. (1987). KépzéskorszerűsÃtési koncepció a Marx Károly Egyetemen (A concept of modernising the training of economists at the Karl Marx University of Economics). Gazdaság, 20(2), 94-108.
Csáki, C. (2013). A modern közgazdászképzés alapjainak megteremtése egyetemünkön (Establishing the fundamentals of modern economic and business education at the Karl Marx University of Economics). In Matematikai Közgazdaságtan,: elmélet, modellezés, oktatás, Tanulmányok Zalai Ernőnek (pp. 417-526). Budapest: Műszaki Könyvkiadó.
Drucker, P. (1985). Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Practice and Principles. London: William Heinemann Ltd.
Ennew, C., & Fujia, Y. (2009). Foreign Universities in China: A Case Study. European Journal of Education, 44(1), 21-36
Fábián, I. (2012). Nemzetközi kihÃvások és lehetÅ‘ségek a magyar felsÅ‘oktatásban (International Challenges and Opportunities in Hungarian Higher Education). In J. Berács, I. Hrubos, & J. Temesi (Eds.), â€Hungarian Higher Education 2011†Domestic discussion questions – international trends, NFKK Füzetek 9, page 151-157.
Gould, E. (2003). The Univer$ity in a Corporate Culture. Yale University Hammond, K. L., Webster, R. L., & Harmon, H. A. (2006). Market Orientation, Top Management Emphasis, End Performance within University Schools of Business: Implications for Universities. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 14(1), 69-85
Hrubos, I. (Ed.) (2004). A gazdálkodó egyetem (The Economic University). Budapest: Új Mandátum Kiadó.
Hrubos, I. (2006). A felsőoktatás intézményrendszerének átalakulása – Válogatott tanulmányok (Transformation of the institutional system of higher education – selected essays). Budapest: Aula.
Kornai, J. (1992). The Socialist System: The Political Economy of Communism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Kornai, J. (2014). Dynamism, Rivalry, and the Surplus Economy. Two Essays on the Nature of Capitalism. Oxford: University Press.
Nagy, G., & Berács, J. (2012). Antecedents to the Export Market Orientation of Hungarian Higher Education Institutions, and their Export Performance Consequences. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 22(2), 231-256.
Nelles, J., & Vorley, T. (2008). Entrepreneurial Architecture in UK Higher Education Institutions: Consolidating the third mission, Paper presented at the 25th Celebration Conference on
Entrepreneurship and Innovation – Organizations, Institutions, Systems and Regions, Copenhagen, CBS, Denmark, June 17-20, 2008.
Pantic, N. (2012). Teacher Education Reforms between Higher Education and General Education Transformations in South-Eastern Europe: Reviewing the Evidence and Scoping the Issues. CEPS Journal, 2(4), 71-90.
Saloner, G. (2013). Reinventing Management Education: A Work in Progress. Stanford Business, Spring 2013, p. 1.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1968, 1926). The Theory of Economic Development, 8th edition. Harvard University. (In Hungarian: A gazdasági fejlődés elmélete, Budapest: KJK, 1980).
Shin, J. C., Toutkoushian, R. K., & Teichler, U. (Eds.) (2011). University Rankings – Theoretical Basis, Methodology and Impacts on Global Higher Education. Springer.
Vlasceanu, L., & Hancean, M.-G. (2012). Policy and Prediction: The Case of Institutional Diversity in Romanian Higher Education. CEPS Journal, 2(4), 53-70.
Zgaga, P. (2003). Reforming the Universities of South-East Europe in View of the Bologna Process. Higher Education in Europe, 28(October), 251-258.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
