Foresight and STI Governance, 2017 (2) http://foresight-journal.hse.ru en-us Copyright 2017 Thu, 29 Jun 2017 11:33:20 +0300 The Role of Universities in the Knowledge Triangle https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-11-2/207021366.html The Knowledge Triangle between Research, Education and Innovation – A Conceptual Discussion https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-11-2/207098236.html This paper discusses the concept of the knowledge triangle (hereafter ‘KT’), as it has gained importance in recent years as a framework for innovation policies especially in OECD countries, especially Europe. The concept has gained popularity because it emphasizes an integrated (‘systemic’) approach on the interlinkages between research, education and innovation. In this article, we highlight the key features of this concept and try to contextualize it with other, at times overlapping, at times complementary, concepts, such as the ‘third mission’, ‘triple helix’ (or in an extended understanding, the ‘quadruple helix’), ‘entrepreneurial or civic university’ models and ‘smart specialization’. Against this background we seek to analyze the roles, rationalities and challenges of different actors that are involved in activities relating to each of the three spheres of the triangle. Actors are first and foremost higher education institutions (HEIs), public authorities, research and technology institutes and private sector companies.  Higher Education Institutions in the Knowledge Triangle https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-11-2/207098649.html This paper discusses some of the policy issues and best practices aimed at enhancing HEIs performance and improving their impact on society and the economy within the knowledge triangle. The knowledge triangle concept aims at exploring ways to better align and integrate the research, education and innovation functions of HEIs. The paper describes the contents of the knowledge triangle, HEI performance through the lens of this concept, policies to promote the knowledge triangle in HEIs, as well as potential contradictions in relation to other knowledge producers, such as public research centers and companies.The conclusion is that there is no single model of universities and knowledge triangle. This is due to the country-specific peculiarities of educational systems, diversity within HEIs themselves and the functions they perform, as well as the specifics of regional ecosystems. Accordingly, the key to the efficiency of the knowledge triangle tools is their place-based adjustment. In order to achieve a tangible contribution of universities to the development of regional and local innovation, it is necessary to ensure complementarities and a balance between their missions. How Will Open Science Impact on University-Industry Collaboration? https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-11-2/207100766.html Open science represents a challenge to traditional modes of scientific practice and collaboration.  Knowledge exchange is still heavily influenced by researchers’ ambitions to publish in highly cited journals and within ‘closed partnerships’ where interactions are based upon intellectual property rights.  However, perceived inefficiencies, a desire to make publicly funded research available to all and a crisis of confidence in the quality of research published in top journals all serve to fuel demands for more openness in the conduct of science and the exchange of scientific knowledge.  Whilst there is a strong logic behind the contention that increased openness will promote efficiencies, quality and fairness, there is still considerable uncertainty about the impact on university/industry collaboration and the balance that needs to be struck between open and closed approaches.  Policy obstacles are also likely to impede the pace of change.  Service or Devotion? Motivation Patterns of Russian Researchers https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-11-2/207101250.html Most current studies of high-skilled personnel argue that the intrinsic personal motivation is their main feature and this motivation has a non-linear connection with external management actions. In order to attract scientists to the sector of research and development, as well as to maintain the competitiveness of national science, a special environment must be created, which will encourage a high level of self-motivation among researchers. An analysis of motivation patterns of researchers provided in this paper is based on data from the international project, «Careers of Doctorate Holders», (CDH) and its Russian counterpart, «Monitoring survey of Highly Qualified R&D Personnel». One of the goals was to investigate the stability and variability of researcher’s motivation during the different periods of a career, such as professional choice, current work activity and a hypothetical situation of a job change.The eight most common patterns of motivation were identified and they can be considered as the basic motivational structures of researchers. Most of these patterns include a focus on the creative and innovative nature of scientific work. The second important component is the independence and relative autonomy, which is typical for research activity. Economic motives are rarely important when choosing an academic career; however, they play an important instrumental role in the actual scientific work, since an appropriate material base is required for the successful achievement of a researcher’s professional goals. A hypothetical situation of a job change, including moving abroad (for a long or limited time) also shows the priority of internal personal motives over external ones, which are associated with the material conditions.The opportunity for professional and personal achievements plays the role of a trigger for the high-level motivation of R&D personnel. The main drivers of research motivation are self-realization, improvement of skills and competences, therefore the professional environment must be organized properly to promote the advancement of intellectual workers. Management based primarily on the external rewards may even reduce personal motivation, since it transforms people’s natural enthusiasm and interest to only material goods. The obtained research results give us reason to argue that the Russian scientific policy agenda must include the creation and maintenance of adequate conditions in which research potential can be fully realized and where the personal reputation of the scientist will be recognized. Knowledge Triangle Configurations at Three Swedish Universities https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-11-2/207102341.html The concept of a knowledge triangle, i.e., the principle of strengthening the linkages between research, education and innovation, has emerged as a result of policymakers’ expectations that universities to assume broader social responsibility. Yet, little is known about how these tasks and their interactions are orchestrated at universities. We explore how they are manifested in the organisation and strategy of three different Swedish universities, and how these manifestations are shaped by the policy landscape. The article highlights that although the knowledge triangle remains a priority, explicit national policies are lacking, with the responsibility of integration falling upon universities themselves. We observe great diversity in how the principles of knowledge production are implemented at the universities, e.g., through individuals’ interpretations and attitudes, and through management strategies and incentive schemes. The three tasks have largely been handled separately, with weak coordination and generally limited ambition demonstrated by university management teams to forge new combinations of remits. At the individual and group levels, we observe weak task articulation, although some role models serve as inspiration. Tensions emerge as the responsibilities of operationalising the knowledge triangle falls on individuals who sometimes lack the appropriate mandate and resources. These findings raise questions for further research and implications for policy and university management. The Effect of Talent Management Process on the Research Performance of Faculty Members with the Mediating Role of Organizational Justice https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-11-2/207123066.html The research performance of faculty members is one of the main criteria for measuring university performance, and universities and higher education centers seek to improve it because of their purpose and the commitment that they feel towards various parts of society. The present research aims at determining the effects of the components of perceived talent management on the research performance of faculty members with the mediating role of perceived organizational justice. The research is a correlational-descriptive study based on structural equations and its statistical population consists of the faculty members at the University of Isfahan, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences and Isfahan University of Technology.For the sample size, using the SPSS Sample Power software, out of 562 individuals, 130 were selected using stratified random sampling proportional to sample size. For data collection, faculty members’ research performance record, a talent management questionnaire and a perceived organizational justice questionnaire were used. Convergent validity for both questionnaires (AVE) was calculated to be more than 0.5 and the reliability of both questionnaires using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated to be more than 0.75. Data analysis was performed using the Smart PLS 3.2.6 statistical software.Findings indicated that the components of the variables of perceived talent management and perceived organizational justice constitute a total of 61% of the variance of the variable of research performance and the mediating role of the variable of perceived organizational justice was calculated to be insignificant. As a result, it can be said that improvement of talent management process components can lead to increased faculty members’ perceived organizational justice and ultimately improved research performance. Relationships between Lecturer Performance, Organizational Culture, Leadership, and Achievement Motivation https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2017-11-2/207124613.html This research is aimed at finding the effects of:1) organizational culture on performance, 2) leadership on performance; 3) achievement motivation on performance; 4) organizational culture on achievement motivation; 5) leadership on achievement motivation. This research used a survey method with a causal approach. There were 255 lecturers selected from initial population of 706 individuals based on a simple random technique as the sample. This research was conducted using lecturers in Jambi University. The data were collected using a questionnaire as the research instrument. The validity test was conducted using the Cronbach’s alpha. The results showed that: first, there was a direct effect of organizational culture on performance; second, there was a direct effect of leadership on performance; third, there was a direct effect of achievement motivation on performance; fourth, there was a direct effect of organizational culture on achievement motivation; fifth, there was a direct effect of leadership on achievement motivation. The implication of this research is that the effort to improve lecturer performance can be made through improving the organizational culture, leadership, and achievement motivation.