Intellectual/Social (I/S) Entrepreneurship in Academia - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 46
About This Presentation
Title:

Intellectual/Social (I/S) Entrepreneurship in Academia

Description:

Creativity and resourcefulness This course is seen as an important part of the ... minorities, remote students world-wide), teaching can involve the exploration of ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:122
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 47
Provided by: LioraB
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Intellectual/Social (I/S) Entrepreneurship in Academia


1
Intellectual/Social (I/S) Entrepreneurship in
Academia
  • Liora Bresler, U of Illinois
  • College of Education, Professor.
  • Academy of Entrepreneurial Leadership, Fellow.
  • School of Music, Fine and Applied Arts,
    Affiliate.
  • Campus Honors Program, Faculty.

2
Two inter-related goals
  • Enculturation of potential faculty, pointing at
    possibilities and re-definition of what a faculty
    can be
  • Case-studies of entrepreneurship in academia,
    focusing on diverse disciplines and areas (e.g.,
    humanities, engineering, sciences, arts).

3
Current enculturation
  • Tends to highlight the production of knowledge.
  • Dichotomy of thinkers versus doers.
  • Job security as a central feature.
  • Scholarship presented as a lone endeavor
    (epitomized in the process of writing a
    dissertation). In some areas, discouraging
    collaborations.

4
Discerning realities from myths
  • Knowledge is key, but it does not have to be of
    the ivory tower kind.
  • Doing in academe is actually rewarded and
    recognized.

5
Unacknowledged aspects
  • Academics are often people of deep commitments
    and passions (Neuman, 2006).
  • Academics aspire to be innovative and cutting
    edge (part of the academic ethos and telos).
  • Academics are self directed.
  • Academics are perseverant.
  • Teaching (essential part of academe) aims at
    social.

6
Potential tensions
  • Security (tenure system) versus risk taking.
  • Tradition versus innovation.
  • Achievement versus social justice.

7
Definitions of Entrepreneur
  • Traditional definitions seizing opportunities,
    generating a valuable product or service.
  • Undertake a venture. Bring to completion.
    Tolerate risks.
  • Innovation as organized, systematic, rationale.

8
New ways of thinking and being
  • Create something new that changes or transmutes
    values, opening a new space for human action.
    (Spinosa, Flores and Dreyfus, 1997).

9
Intellectual/Social entrepreneurship
  • One that highlights intellectual endeavors,
    expanding knowledge (Richard Cherwitz, Thomas
    Darwin).
  • The knowledge benefits society, doing good.
    Social Entrepreneur, started in the 1980s
    promote social good in the communities they
    serve.

10
Intellectual Entrepreneurship ( U of Texas, at
Austen)
  • Intellectual Entrepreneurship is a philosophy and
    vision of education viewing academics as
    "innovators" and "agents of change."
  • Intellectual Entrepreneurship is academic
    engagement for the purpose of changing lives.

11
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • It focuses on creating cross-disciplinary and
    multi-institutional collaborations designed to
    produce intellectual advancements with a capacity
    to provide real solutions to society's problems
    and needs.

12
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • It moves the mission of institutions of higher
    learning from "advancing the frontiers of
    knowledge" and "preparing tomorrow's leaders" to
    also "serving as engines of economic and social
    development."

13
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • It focuses on creating cross-disciplinary and
    multi-institutional collaborations designed to
    produce intellectual advancements with a capacity
    to provide real solutions to society's problems
    and needs.

14
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • In the process, the role of faculty member and
    student evolves from that of "intellectual
    provocateur" to becoming what might be called an
    "intellectual entrepreneur.

15
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • Intellectual Entrepreneurship includes a
    readiness to seek out opportunities, undertake
    the responsibility associated with each and
    tolerate the uncertainty that comes with
    initiating genuine innovation.

16
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • Intellectual Entrepreneurship changes the model
    and metaphor of higher education from one of
    "apprenticeship-certification-entitlement" to one
    of"discovery-ownership-accountability."

17
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • Intellectual Entrepreneurship is premised on the
    belief that intellect is not limited to the
    academy and entrepreneurship is not restricted to
    or synonymous with business. Entrepreneurship is
    a process of cultural innovation.

18
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • While the creation of material wealth is one
    expression of entrepreneurship, at a more
    profound level entrepreneurship is an attitude
    for engaging the world.

19
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • Intellectual entrepreneurs, both inside and
    outside universities, take risks and seize
    opportunities, discover and create knowledge,
    innovate, collaborate and solve problems in any
    number of social realms corporate, non-profit,
    government, and education.

20
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • Collaboration demands mutual humility and
    respect, joint ownership of learning and
    co-creation of an unimagined potential for
    innovation--qualities that move universities well
    beyond the typical elitist sense of "service."
    Knowledge, after all, involves the integration of
    theory, practice and production.

21
Intellectual Entrepreneurship (cont)
  • Teachers and students come to accept
    responsibility not only for what is learned and
    how, but are also accountable to the community
    for how they apply that learning. IE are
    encouraged to act as citizen scholars and
    social entrepreneurs with their intellectual
    capital leveraging knowledge for social good.

22
Why the new concept?
  • Academe can easily be seen as an ivory tower,
    detached from the real world.
  • Academics have many qualities that seem to be
    uniquely compatible with entrepreneurship.
  • The new roles of academe and the changing
    realities mean that we have more to gain (and
    more to lose if we dont change).

23
A changing context Interdisciplinarity
  • The crossing of disciplinary boundaries and the
    ensuing cross-fertilization has generated new
    disciplines such as computational neuroscience,
    biophysics, biochemistry, molecular biology,
    psychological economics, cultural anthropology,
    and social psychology.
  • There is increasing recognition of unprecedented
    opportunities to expand the role of academics
    beyond traditional, often self-imposed
    boundaries.

24
Information technologies
  • Not only do contents of academia change, but also
    their formats are being shaped by new information
    technologies, and their audiences expanded. While
    these trends have evolved over a long period of
    time, they have vastly accelerated in the last
    ten years, reinforcing each other.

25
New opportunities
  • The new opportunities created by these trends can
    shape research, teaching, and service. In
    research, we note new questions and directions.
    Responding to the cross-fertilization of
    disciplines, teaching invites the creation of new
    curricula.

26
A doctoral courseFaculty education
  • Case-studies of academics who manifest
    Intellectual/Social Entrepreneurship.
  • An examination of Intrapreneurship.
  • Diversity of disciplines and colleges (e.g.,
    Library Information Science Chemistry
    Engineering Archeology/anthropology Art
    Education Music Performance Human Resource
    Education).
  • Diversity of perspectives (e.g., faculty,
    Associate Dean Director of AEL Vice-Chancellor
    of Research Director of Music Center President)

27
Questions
  • What characterizes intrapreneurs in academia?
  • (What characterizes entrepeneurial action? John
    Gartner, 1988)
  • What facilitates Intrapreneurships?
  • What hinders it?
  • An underlying question What can be done to
    promote Intrapreneurship in academia?

28
Issues
  • Evolving definitions of entrepreneurship.
  • Examining entrepreneurial variants
    (intrapreneurship, focusing on intellectual and
    social aspects). Cross-appropriating intellectual
    and social spaces with entrepreneurship.
  • Negotiating the academic system.

29
Data sources
  • Conversations with Intellectual Entrepreneurs and
    facilitators.
  • Observations of entrepreneurial events (Vivaldi
    Project Black Chorus).
  • Readings of related materials.
  • Discussions of evolving issues and themes.

30
Case-studies (qualitative)
  • Case bounded system.
  • World View Interpretive (Social Sciences).
  • Goal Understanding rather than explanation.
    Meaning rather than prediction.
  • Methods Unstructured interview observations
    analysis of materials. Prolonged engagement,
    depth.
  • Meaning Description, interpretation
    (evaluation).
  • Assumption Contextuallity is essential.
  • Criteria Transferability rather than
    generalizability.

31
From the syllabus
  • The overall goal of the course is to develop an
    entrepreneurial perspective of the role of
    faculty in academe.
  • The three components of the academic
    endeavor--research, teaching, and service--will
    be conceptualized as highly entrepreneurial
    activities.

32
Empowering students
  • Building on their individual passions and
    strengths, the course will empower doctoral
    students (prospective faculty) to experience each
    of these three components of academia along the
    three entrepreneurial axes recognize
    opportunities, acquire resources, and create a
    new entity of value.

33
Teaching, research, and service
  • Specifically, the course will address the
    following
  • Expansion of contents, forms, and audiences in
    teaching
  • Choosing research questions for significance and
    impact, garnering means for effective execution,
    and creating avenues to bring the fruits of
    research to society Refocusing of academic
    service as a vehicle for the building and
    nurturing of intellectual community.

34
New audiences, new intellectual communities
  • In attending to new audiences (e.g., minorities,
    remote students world-wide), teaching can involve
    the exploration of new structures and media.
    Service draws on these to build and nurture new
    intellectual communities.

35
Creativity and resourcefulness
  • This course is seen as an important part of the
    education of doctoral students, in preparing them
    to be resourceful, dynamic faculty, responsive to
    the needs and opportunities in the field, drawing
    on their visions, creativity, and skills, to
    create new endeavors.

36
Emerging issues
  • Issues related to academic Intrapreneurship
    (reduced risks bureaucratic aspects of the
    system).
  • Rich diversity of paths and inside contexts.
  • Characteristics of successful (fulfilled)
    academic Intellectual/social Entrepreneurs.

37
The notion of Intrapreneurship
  • An Intrapreneur is the person who focuses on
    innovation and creativity and who transforms an
    idea into a profitable venture, by operating
    within the organizational environment. Thus,
    Intrapreneurs are Inside entrepreneurs who follow
    their founders example.
    http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrapreneurship

  • The profit can be financial, social, or
    intellectual.

38
Intrapreneurship
  • Intrapreneurship is the practice of
    entrepreneurial skills and approaches by or
    within a company or at home. Employees, perhaps
    engaged in a special project within a larger firm
    are supposed to behave as entrepreneurs, even
    though they have the resources and capabilities
    of the larger firm to draw upon.

39
Intrapreneurship
  • Capturing the dynamic nature of entrepreneurial
    management (trying things until successful,
    learning from failures, attempting to conserve
    resources, etc.) is claimed to be valuable in
    otherwise static organizations.

40
Motivational goals of academic I/S Entrepreneurs
  • Passion for a subject.
  • A sense of mission social justice, commitment to
    educate in its broadest sense.
  • Curiosity, a quest for understanding.
  • Internal locus of control.
  • Carry something to fruition.

41
Characteristics of I/S Intrapreneurs
  • Openness to emergent possibilities, alertness.
  • Attention to opportunities rather than obstacles
    (risks).
  • Need for achievement (not identical to
    recognition).
  • Highly connected to people.
  • Caring for others, ability to listen (humility),
    giving, commitment.
  • Independence and tolerance for disagreement,
    juxtaposed with the ability to negotiate a
    system.

42
Potential (resolved)
tensions
  • Security (tenure system) versus Risk taking
    More Entrepreneurial once tenured.
  • Tradition versus Innovation Possible to combine
    both.
  • Achievement versus social justice Achievement
    and a sense of identity is built on social
    projects.

43
Academic contexts
  • Stage of career (mid-to-later career). Associate
    and Full tended to be more intrapreneurial.
  • Openness of leadership (varies within the same
    university. Department heads have a major role in
    shaping the well-being of I/S intrapreneurs).
  • Nested values Fit of individuals agenda with
    institutional image (visibility valued across
    disciplines social justice). When lack of fit,
    the entrepreneur searches for another setting.

44
Entrepreneurs vs. Administrators
  • Entrepreneurs
  • Creativity
  • Focus on possibility
  • Improvisation, flexibility.
  • Informal networks,
  • Focus on venture.
  • Administrators
  • Analysis
  • Focus on Resources
  • Scripted procedures, bureaucratic
  • Hierarchical
  • Focus on organization.

45
Course goals met
  • Students reported having gained an expanded
    vision of what they could do as entrepreneurs.
  • Overall, positive evaluation of the course (rated
    as excellent).
  • From my perspective, this served as an
    exploratory work. Next stages will include
    in-depth study of 4-5 intellectual/social
    academics, and larger survey information.

46
This is a beginning
  • A future study will involve in-depth interviews
    of faculty, and intensive observations of
    entrepreneurial projects, as well as a survey
    across campus that investigates the
    characteristics across larger populations.
  • Liora_at_uiuc.edu
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com