How departmental contexts affect individual academic’s participation in applied research: a case study of a third-tier university in mainland China

• In Event: Educational Policy, Social Change and Equity

Proposal

Introduction
Academic engagement, which refers to knowledge-related collaborations between academics and non-academic organizations formally and informally, has been emphasized as an important tool for the commercialization of research (Perkmanna et al., 2013; Shane, 2004; Wright et al., 2007). Under the context of academic capitalism, public universities have introduced a series of policies to support academic engagement, in the hope of gaining more external funding (Münch, 2014). While these measures are essential for promoting knowledge-related collaborations, the organizational structure of universities can create a schism between policies and their implementations, and effective implementations often require active support and enhancement at the department level.
In mainland China, since the announcement of the 13th five-year plan for developing science and technology in higher education, universities have been adjusting their measures to promote individual teachers’ academic engagement, specifically in the form of applied research collaborations with the industry (Lai & Li, 2020). However, such university-level adjustments were implemented differently among different departments. Applied projects are more encouraged, provided with more resources, and have higher recognition in annual appraisal in departments that are closer to the market, like most technological fields (Yan, 2014; Zhang, 2018); while in most humanistic fields that are far away from the market, applied research was neglected and less encouraged (Qian et al., 2013; Li, 2014). Given these circumstances, this study sought to investigate how different departmental contexts affect individual academic’s participation in applied research in mainland China.

Conceptual Framework
To facilitate a more fine-grained discussion about how different departmental contexts affect individual academic’s participation in applied research, the proposed study will adopt the ‘entrepreneurial competency’ perspective and investigate the distinct set of competencies including opportunity identification and development, championing, and resource acquisition (Rasmussen et. al, 2014).
Specifically, opportunity identification competency refers to the recognition of opportunities in the initiation stage of an applied project (Shane, 2000). Rasmussen believed that departments with strong industrial networks and relationships were better positioned to connect individual academics with potential applied research opportunities.
Championing competency is related to the need for someone to take a championing role and work as a human agency to initiate an applied project (Gupta et al., 2006). At the department level, such competency is rooted in the impact and modeling effect of senior academics (Rasmussen et. al, 2014). Their participation and experience in applied projects can serve as a model for other faculty members, and provide them with valuable connections to industrial partners.
Resource acquisition competency refers to the assembly and organization of resources to exploit entrepreneurial opportunities (Brush et al., 2001). Rasmussen argued that while university-level practices and resources can provide a foundation for collaborations, it was ultimately the responsibility of departments to effectively leverage the provided resources to promote successful partnerships. Therefore, clear and effective regulations and workflows were needed at the department level to effectively manage the allocated resources.
Research Methods
Qualitative methods will be adopted to explore individual academics’ in-depth perceptions on how departmental context affects their applied research participation. Specifically, the research questions are as follows:
1. How do university teachers perceive and interpret departmental support on opportunity identification?
2. How do university teachers perceive and react to the championing role of senior academics within their departments?
3. How do university teachers perceive departmental measures that organize and leverage their applied research-related resources?
Semi-structured interviews will be the main form of data collection for this study. In-depth interviews will be conducted with 20 university teachers from four academic areas: Economics, Philosophy, Engineering, and Physics. Under the context of academic capitalism, the characteristics of different disciplines lead to differences in their access to external funds (Lai&Li, 2020). In this case, the four chosen areas are aligned with the market at different levels. The research will be conducted in a third-tier research university in China, which has been focusing on seeking externally funded research.
Findings
Preliminary findings are as follows:
Firstly, the competency of identifying new opportunities varies between different departments. Departmental leaders from fields like engineering and economics, tend to be more proactive in expanding social networks and providing individual academics with potential collaborative opportunities. For instance, one informant from the engineering department mentioned that their leaders would pay regular visits to top companies in their industry to publicize their new technologies and seek collaborations. Meanwhile, academics from less market-oriented areas, like philosophy and physics, tend to believe that seeking collaborative projects is entirely a personal matter and did not expect any support from their departments. Leaders in these departments were indifferent about expanding their social networks, and the lack of competency in building social connections and identifying new opportunities in these departments limited individual academics' participation in applied projects.
Secondly, the championing competency of the senior academics within a department is twofold. On one hand, these “star scientists”, who are well respected within their departments and more widely within their academic discipline, served as models and motivated individual academics’ entrepreneurial activities. Many informants indicated that they became involved in applied research as a result of the invitations and encouragements from the seniors within their departments. However, on the other hand, these experienced and well-connected senior academics hold more than 90% of the industrial resources in their fields, and monopolized the opportunities for applied research. One informant complained that senior academics merely promoted entrepreneurial participation for academics in their own teams, but squeezed the opportunity for other teams within the department to pursue their research interests and obtain external funding.
Thirdly, departments in mainland China are relatively weak in the competency of resource acquisition and organization, no matter how close they are to the market and external resources. This is mainly reflected in the lack of clear and explicit resource management rules and functional systems. According to most informants, they had to go through complicated procedures for the grant and allocation of applied research-related resources, and such confusion and inefficiencies in resource management seriously discouraged them from participating in applied projects.

Authors

• Jiaying Liu, The Chinese University of Hong Kong

• Manhong Lai, Chinese Univ of Hong Kong