Innovation and Entrepreneurship (I&E) Summit

A Seismic Shift in Promotion & Tenure

Hyatt Regency Crystal City at Reagan National Airport
Arlington, VA

Background & Need

The most important output from a university† is the people it supports. The benefits to this output can be seen in the:

  • Training of its students into graduates who possess the adaptive skills to excel in an ever changing workplace and serve as drivers for a vibrant economy.
  • Development and support of its faculty that fuels both the fundamental expansion of human understanding as well as the world’s economic advancement through innovation.

We are committed to a diverse and inclusive approach to innovation and entrepreneurship (I&E). This commitment extends to both the breadth of universities engaged as well as the people that participate in this effort. I&E is a powerful tool to engage students, and when framed through the lens of societal impact can broaden the level of interest across the entire student population. More and more young faculty are equally interested in this topic as it provides real opportunity for maximizing the impact of their research.

Changing Landscape of Higher Education
The landscape of higher education is rapidly changing.[REF 1-7] Higher education is under pressure from numerous angles that include the following: rising costs coupled with disinvestment in public universities by state governments that drive tuition higher, disruptive technologies providing alternative career preparation tools for the public, shifting priorities for incoming students driven by a rapidly evolving workforce and highly competitive funding landscape for research (“grant”) dollars. Recent articles point to a growing misperception of the diminished importance of universities† in today’s society.[REF 8-9]

Role of Innovation & Entrepreneurship (I&E) in a University†
Despite these headwinds, the US university system is uniquely positioned to adapt to meet the 21st century needs of society. One method that universities are seeking to reinforce their importance to society is through “learning tracks related to innovation, design thinking and entrepreneurship.”[REF 10] This focus is well-aligned with recent data that shows that incoming student populations are increasingly focused on gaining I&E skills. The utility of these skills extends far beyond the young entrepreneur looking to start a business. For example, employers increasingly look for these skills in their new hires and are willing to pay a premium for individuals who possess them.

In order to enable this shift in educational focus, opportunities for university faculty must similarly expand to address this need. Fortunately, the positive impact of industry connections, patents and commercialization activities for university faculty has been demonstrated to:[REF 11]

  • Provide additional funding opportunities for research;
  • Increase research productivity and student success;
  • Expand recognition of faculty member;
  • Provide tangible societal benefit from scientific research.

Increasingly institutions are integrating I&E in combination with economic development as a specific mission within their strategic priorities. As an example of I&E engagement, over 100 institutions of higher learning now engage in the NSF National Innovation Network.

The Gap Between University Priorities and Faculty Evaluation Criterion
Despite these endeavors, the commensurate changes in the P&T guidelines of university faculty for most universities† within the United States (and around the globe) has not occurred in a systematic way nationally to recognize these “non-traditional” I&E components and foci as valued parts of a faculty member’s duties. Consequently, faculty are left in the awkward position of balancing their own interests in commercializing their research with the lack of explicit value assigned to I&E within the criterion for P&T to be utilized during peer review and the perceived conflicting high level I&E priorities presented by their institution’s strategic plans.[Ref 12-20] For the vast majority of universities, a fundamental expansion is needed in the P&T criterion (for teaching, research, advising and service) to inclusively capture the value of I&E endeavors. Any identified I&E criterion is not meant to replace existing paths for faculty promotion; it aims simply to expand the opportunities available for achieving success as an academic.

Possible Solution through a National Conversation on P&T and I&E
One supposition of the PTIE summit is that the gap between university priorities in I&E and the faculty evaluation criterion for P&T cannot be tackled in isolation. Through the support of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Award # CNS-1936073, this summit seeks to develop best practices and road maps for individual universities to augment their individual P&T guidelines to more inclusively support I&E among their faculty. This national conversation (network systems) approach should enable universities to move in concert with one another on this expansion, and to ensure a shared understanding when it comes to faculty hiring and external review during the promotion process. This website is intended to serve as a clearing house for the knowledge gained throughout this process.

References.

  1. Kuratko, Donald F. “The Emergence of Entrepreneurship Education: Development, Trends, and Challenges.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice (2005) 29, 577-597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00099.x
  2. George Solomon, (2007) “An examination of entrepreneurship education in the United States”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 14 Issue: 2, pp.168-182.https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000710746637  
  3. Gibb A., Haskins G., Robertson I. (2013) Leading the Entrepreneurial University: Meeting the Entrepreneurial Development Needs of Higher Education Institutions. In: Altmann A., Ebersberger B. (eds) Universities in Change. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer, New York, NY. http://eureka.sbs.ox.ac.uk/id/eprint/4861
  4.  Kuckertz, Andreas, Entrepreneurship Education – Status Quo and Prospective Developments (April 30, 2011). Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, Vol. 16, pp. 59-71, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1862295  
  5. Charney, Alberta and Libecap, Gary D. “Impact of Entrepreneurship Education” in Insights: A Kauffman Research Series.” https://www.unm.edu/~asalazar/Kauffman/Entrep_research/e_ed_grow.pdf
  6. Ghulam Nabi, Francisco Liñán, Alain Fayolle, Norris Krueger, and Andreas Walmsley. “The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education in Higher Education: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda.” Academy of Management Learning & Education (2017) 16:2, 277-299, https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2015.0026  
  7. Badariah Hj Din, Abdul Rahim Anuar, and Mariana Usman. “The Effectiveness of the Entrepreneurship Education Program in Upgrading Entrepreneurial Skills among Public University Students.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. Volume 224, 15 June 2016, Pages 117-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.413
  8. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Becky Frankiewicz. “Does Higher Education Still Prepare People for Jobs?” Harvard Business Review. 7 Jan 2019 (Updated 14 Jan 2019) https://hbr.org/2019/01/does-higher-education-still-prepare-people-for-jobs 
  9. Oren Cass “ The Misguided Priorities of Our Educational System.” New York Times. 10 Dec 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/opinion/college-vocational-education-students.html?searchResultPosition=6
  10. 2018 Career Interest Survey NSHSS. www.nshss.org › media › nshss-2018-careersurveyv6b
  11. P. Sanberg, M. Gharib, P. Harker, E. Kaler, R. Marchase, T. Sands, N. Arshadi, S. Sarkara, Changing the academic culture: Valuing patents and commercialization toward tenure and career advancement. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A. 18, 6542-6547 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1404094111
  12. APLU Office of Research & Policy Analysis. “APLU Task Force on Tenure, Promotion, and Technology Transfer Survey Results and Next Steps” 1/26/15. https://www.aplu.org/projects-and-initiatives/research-science-and-technology/task-force-tenure-promotion-technology-transfer/TPTTSurvey.pdf  
  13. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Policy and Global Affairs; Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable. “The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine; Adapting to the 21st Century Innovation Environment – Proceedings of a Workshop – in Brief.” (2019) https://doi.org/10.17226/25384   
  14. Office of Innovation & Entrepreneurship Economic Development Administration, US Department of Commerce (2013) “The Innovative and Entrepreneurial University: Higher Education, Innovation & Entrepreneurship in Focus.” https://www.eda.gov/pdf/The_Innovative_and_Entrepreneurial_University_Report.pdf
  15. Siegel, Donald & Wright, Mike. (2015). “Academic Entrepreneurship: Time for a Rethink?” British Journal of Management. 2015, 26 (4), pp 582-595. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.1211  
  16. Martin, B. (2012) “Are universities and university research under threat? Towards an evolutionary model of university speciation.” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36, 543-565. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bes006
  17. Kevin R. McClure (2016) Building the Innovative and Entrepreneurial University: An Institutional Case Study of Administrative Academic Capitalism, The Journal of Higher Education, 87:4, 516-543, https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2016.11777412  
  18. Arthur Rubens, Francesca Spigarelli, Alessio Cavicchi, Chiara Rinaldi, (2017) “Universities’ third mission and the entrepreneurial university and the challenges they bring to higher education institutions”, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 11 Issue: 3, pp.354-372, https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-01-2017-0006
  19. McClure, K.R. “Exploring Curricular Transformation to Promote Innovation and Entrepreneurship: An Institutional Case Study.” Innov High Educ (2015) 40: 429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-015-9325-8  
  20. Abdullahi Nasiru, Ooi Yeng Keat, and Muhammad Awais Bhatti. “Influence of Perceived University Support, Perceived Effective Entrepreneurship Education, Perceived Creativity Disposition, Entrepreneurial Passion for Inventing and Founding on Entrepreneurial Intention.” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. Vol 6, No 3 (2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3p88