SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF THE INNOVATIVE POTENTIAL OF A RESEARCH UNIVERSITY

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Abstract

The purpose of the paper. This paper outlines a comprehensive study of the essence and the essential synthesis elements of a Research University’s innovation capacity. The following tasks were set as the article’s objectives: 1) to analyse the development of scientific thought in the field of innovation potential; 2) to provide the author’s definition of the innovative potential of such a university; 3) to structure the system of evaluation of the university’s innovation potential. This study examines the new realities of needs for universities of the 21st Century to improve their development management through a focus on the concept of “open” innovations. Methodology. This research is based on a careful analysis of the innovation capacity by the evolution of scientific thought. Scientific literature has expressed varying and opposing views as to the nature of the innovation capacity. However, very little has been identified to empirically judge the university’s innovation capacity. Results. The present work suggested definitions of “Research University’s innovation capacity” through the main component based on a novel integration approach. That approach includes the unity of the three types of economic activity. Those three are the provision of educational services, the provision of high-tech business services (carrying out R&D on a commercial basis), and innovative activities through commercialization of intellectual property. That also encompasses the creation of start-ups or spin-off companies, producing high technology products. The paper provides an opportunity to focus on a systemic approach to assessing the university. Proposed systematic evaluation of the university’s innovation potential through its internal and external components: organizational and managerial component; information and methodical component; the intellectual component; the research component; production and technological component; financial component; marketing component; global networks; research laboratories of TNCs; scientific unions and organizations; international consortia. This approach to the assessment provides with a more extensive comprehension of the main fields of activities of the Research University. The interaction of these components gives an opportunity to obtain a synergistic effect that will lead to their mutual reinforcement in the strategic perspective. Practical implications. It can be used by experts to comprehensively assess the potential of a world-class university by training human resources, solving complicated scientific and technological issues in order to obtain the economic outputs. Value. This research highlights the necessity to review the approaches to assessment of the innovative potential in the Research University. The authors presented their own vision of the internal and external components of the innovative potential of the Research University.

How to Cite

Zhylinska, O., Sitnicki, M., & Vikulova, A. (2019). SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF THE INNOVATIVE POTENTIAL OF A RESEARCH UNIVERSITY. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 5(2), 38-44. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2019-5-2-38-44
Article views: 570 | PDF Downloads: 253

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

research university, innovative potential of research university, components of innovation potential of research university, evaluation mechanism

References

Barney, J., Baysinger, B. (1990). The organization of Schumpeterian innovation. Strategic Management in High Technology Firms, 19(2).

Chervanov, D. (2012). The system of innovative management: theory and practice. Kyiv University Publishing Center.

Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.

Čorejová, A., Rostášová, M. & Čorejová, T. (2017). Knowledge transfer model and spin-off company set up in significant academic centers in Taiwan. Procedia engineering, 192. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.06.015

Dobrov, G. (1989). Science about science. Kyiv: Naukova dumka.

Dougherty, D. (1992). Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organization science, 3(2).

Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. London: Routledge.

European Commission (2018). On the management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities and Code of Practice for universities and other public research organizations 2008/416/EC. Retrieved from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Lex UriServ.do?uri=OJ:L: 2008:146:0019:0024:EN:PDF (accessed 3 April 2018).

Florida, R. (2000). The Role of the University: Leveraging Talent, Not Technology. AAS Science and Technology Policy Yearbook 2000. A. Teich, S. Nelson, C. McEnaney, S. Lita (ed.) Wash. (DC): AAAS.

Goodfellow, R., Lea, M. R. (2013). Literacy in the digital university: critical perspectives on learning, scholarship, and technology. London; New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

Heyets, V. (2015). Innovative Ukraine 2020: National Report. Edited by V. Heyets; National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Kyiv.

Ishchenko, A. (2012). Innovative research universities as a factor for the modernization of the educational-scientific sphere and the building of a knowledge society. Analytical note. National Institute for Strategic Studies. Retrieved from: http://www.niss.gov.ua/articles/1427 (accessed 3 April 2018).

Nepelski, D., Piroli, G. (2016). Organizational diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research projects. The Journal of Technology Transfer. doi: 10.1007/s10961-017-9624-6

Nowak, A., Sitnicki, M. (2018). Strategic Flexibility of the Research University's Leadership. Interdisciplinary Journal of Economics and Business Law, 7(3), 101–117.

Projekt polsko-ukraiński (2015). "Analiza współpracy uczelni polskich i ukraińskich na tle porównania systemów szkolnictwa wyższego. Wnioski i rekomendacje” we współdziałaniu m.in. z KRASP/KRPUT i RGNiSW – projekt własny FRP-ISW Prof. Jerzy Woźnicki, Konferencja Rektorów Akademickich Szkół Polskich, Poznań.

Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine (2010). "On Approval of the Provision of a research university" of February 17, 2010 №163. Retrieved from: http://zakon1.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/163-2010-%D0%BF?myid=4%2FUMfPEGznhhm3c.ZiOXhkA6Hdl0QsFggkRbI1c (accessed 5 April 2018)

Salmi, J. (2009). The challenge of establishing world-class universities. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Salmi, J. (2011). Nine Common Errors in Building a New World-Class University. International Higher Education, 62.

Saunila, M., Ukko, J. (2012). A conceptual framework for the measurement of innovation capability and its effects. Baltic Journal of Management, 7(4).

Shumpeter, J. (2011). The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. English trans. V. Stark. Kyiv: "Kyiv-Mohyla Academy" Publishing house.

Sitnicki, M. (2007). The influence of innovation potential on enterprose strategic flexibility. Ukrainian Statistics, 1.

Sitnicki, M. (2018a). Determining the Priorities of the Development of EU Research Universities Based on the Analysis of Rating Indicators of World-Class Universities. Baltic Journal of European Studies Tallinn University of Technology, vol. 8, № 1(24), pp. 76–100. doi: 10.1515/bjes-2018-0006

Sitnicki, M. (2018b). Development of a Model of Digital Research Universities. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(1), 311–318. doi: 10.30525/2256-0742/2018-4-1-311-318

Sitnicki, M. W. (2018с). Strategic Management of the development of Research Universities: monograph. Kyiv: Publishing House Lira-K, 302 p.

Stadnyk, V. (2009). Systemne zabezpechennya motyvatsiyi innovatsiynoho rozvytku pidpryyemnytskykh struktur.KhNU.

Sternberg, R. (2000). Innovation networks and regional development-evidence from the European Regional Innovation Survey (ERIS): theoretical concepts, methodological approach, empirical basis and introduction to the theme issue. European Planning Studies, 8(4).

Zhylinska О., Melnychuk О., Antonyuk L. (2017). Ukraine 2030: Doctrine of sustainable development. Lviv: Kalvaria.

Vedres, A. (2006). Inventions and globalization: Innovation potential by countries. Budapest: International Federation of Inventors' Associations. Retrieved from: https://www.invention-ifia.ch/office/August/Innovation%20potential%20by%20countries.pdf (accessed 7 April 2018).

Wixted, B. (2009). Innovation System Frontiers: Cluster Networks and Global Value (Advances in Spatial Science). Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92786-0_5

Zhylinska O., Sitnitskiy M. (2018). Strategic Analysis and Evaluation of a Research University’s Performance / In: Mărginean S., Ogrean C., Orăștean R. (eds) Emerging Issues in the Global Economy. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham, pp. 407–417. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-71876-7_36

Zizlavsky, O. (2011). Factors of an Innovation Potential Development are Known, but not Always Mastered. Economics and Management, 16.