Page 16 - Gričar, Sergej, Barbara Rodica and Štefan Bojnec, 2016. Sandwich Management. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 16
Sandwich Management
tion (Selsky and Parker 2005) should be rewarded as it is stated in Europe-
an Commission (2006). Internal academic and career appraisal systems or
performance indicators are essential to encourage researcher mobility, say
the experts (Mawdsley and Somaya 2016). After all, good marks now mean
better career prospects later. Collaboration can be one of the criteria tak-
en into account when appraising institutions and academicians, too. Prizes
and awards are another way of repaying the more upwardly-mobile scien-
tists for individual excellence (European Commission 2006).
Provide incentives for inter-sectorial (also related to international) mo-
bility through internal academic appraisal systems, or better working and
salary conditions. However, inter-sector mobility shouldn’t be enforced
(Selsky and Parker 2005). Criteria for appraising inter-sectorial mobili-
ty should be linked to the benefit for the host institution, the researchers’
16 group, or the individual academicians. Example of criteria: co-publications
with the business executive partner (publications are important for indus-
try reputation), list of contacts, launching of cooperation projects, com-
mercialisation, and start-up or spin-off experience even for failures (Lee
2014).
Third, academia – industry (management) nexus (McInerney 2015).
The recent literature concerning the aforementioned nexus (Bansal et al.
2012; Bartunek and Rynes 2014; Mendoza 2014) starts with a brief over-
view of the historical developments leading to the knowledge economy.
Subsequently this section offers a critical review of the literature primar-
ily published on academia – industry management nexus. European high-
er education institutions have developed into a complex academic envi-
ronment in which individuals and organisations increasingly compete for
material, human and symbolic resources (Mendoza 2014; Lee 2014).
Further Mendoza (2014) investigate industry – academia linkages
with particular attention to conceptualizations for future investigations.
Higher education struggles to balance its public mission with market pres-
sures to remain competitive, because while competition spurs institutions
towards efficiencies, too much drives mission out of their decision mak-
ing (Bartunek and Rynes 2014; Slaughter, Archerd, and Campbell 2004).
The boosters argue that academia – industry management nexus are
useful to transfer academic research to society and aid academia by hav-
ing social-relevant impact (Roessner et al. 2013; Philips et al. 2015). Boost-
ers worry that these nexus dwindle basic academic work, knowledge for
the purpose of knowledge, and free deliverables of findings (Slaughter,
Archerd, and Campbell 2004). More recently, in our recent study we have
adopted intermediate positions around notations of complementarity
tion (Selsky and Parker 2005) should be rewarded as it is stated in Europe-
an Commission (2006). Internal academic and career appraisal systems or
performance indicators are essential to encourage researcher mobility, say
the experts (Mawdsley and Somaya 2016). After all, good marks now mean
better career prospects later. Collaboration can be one of the criteria tak-
en into account when appraising institutions and academicians, too. Prizes
and awards are another way of repaying the more upwardly-mobile scien-
tists for individual excellence (European Commission 2006).
Provide incentives for inter-sectorial (also related to international) mo-
bility through internal academic appraisal systems, or better working and
salary conditions. However, inter-sector mobility shouldn’t be enforced
(Selsky and Parker 2005). Criteria for appraising inter-sectorial mobili-
ty should be linked to the benefit for the host institution, the researchers’
16 group, or the individual academicians. Example of criteria: co-publications
with the business executive partner (publications are important for indus-
try reputation), list of contacts, launching of cooperation projects, com-
mercialisation, and start-up or spin-off experience even for failures (Lee
2014).
Third, academia – industry (management) nexus (McInerney 2015).
The recent literature concerning the aforementioned nexus (Bansal et al.
2012; Bartunek and Rynes 2014; Mendoza 2014) starts with a brief over-
view of the historical developments leading to the knowledge economy.
Subsequently this section offers a critical review of the literature primar-
ily published on academia – industry management nexus. European high-
er education institutions have developed into a complex academic envi-
ronment in which individuals and organisations increasingly compete for
material, human and symbolic resources (Mendoza 2014; Lee 2014).
Further Mendoza (2014) investigate industry – academia linkages
with particular attention to conceptualizations for future investigations.
Higher education struggles to balance its public mission with market pres-
sures to remain competitive, because while competition spurs institutions
towards efficiencies, too much drives mission out of their decision mak-
ing (Bartunek and Rynes 2014; Slaughter, Archerd, and Campbell 2004).
The boosters argue that academia – industry management nexus are
useful to transfer academic research to society and aid academia by hav-
ing social-relevant impact (Roessner et al. 2013; Philips et al. 2015). Boost-
ers worry that these nexus dwindle basic academic work, knowledge for
the purpose of knowledge, and free deliverables of findings (Slaughter,
Archerd, and Campbell 2004). More recently, in our recent study we have
adopted intermediate positions around notations of complementarity
