However, the IT staff we spoke to are unaware of the arrangements and accreditations to deal with the risks of cyber threat, fraud and other security threats. 6 Part One NHS Prescription Services:
's service delivery manager and Capita, who hold current ISO 20000 accreditation, a recognised service management standard.
However, the IT staff we spoke to were unaware of the arrangements and accreditations to deal with the risks of cyber threat and fraud and other security threats.
Security processes The legacy ICT system meets government security standards (accreditation) in a cost-effective manner
Governments have major roles in providing basic ICT skills in compulsory schooling, and an important role in conjunction with education institutions, business,
and individuals in providing the framework to encourage ICT skill formation at higher levels, in vocational training and in ongoing lifelong learning.
Intangible investments and assets Firms increasingly rely on intangible investments and assets (skills, organisation, software, networks) for competitiveness and growth.
organisational, security, trust and management skills in addition to ICT skills) in conjunction with education institutions, business and individuals.
business consultation services and employee and management training to enhance ICT and managerial skills. Policies have shifted over time as firms
but also make business processes and knowledge accumulation more efficient. All personnel can share valuable business knowledge and experience,
The company was started in 1997 to supply local students with inexpensive but professional violins but this market was saturated soon.
the easkel programme covers 85%of direct consultant fees for SMES participating in management training that allows two to five expert consulting days to develop an e-business action plan.
Commercial training services may be more sensitive to businesses'changing and specific needs and government training programmes need to cooperate fully with commercially available services.
Canada Student Connection Programme It hires and trains university and college students as student business advisors to provide customised Internet
and e-commerce training to SMES. Since its start in 1996 more than 3 000 students have been hired
and more than 64 000 business people have been trained. Greece Go Online The project of the Ministry of Development aims to introduce 50 000 SMES to the digital economy.
One focus is to provide training to a large number of SMES during the period 2000-03.
contributes to building computer and Internet literacy in SMES. United kingdom Learndirect SMES are a priority group for the on-line service.
and employees to tailor their learning according to their immediate needs. Service users can contact the trained staff in local Learndirect centre for consultation.
including health education and government. APEC's focus areas are similar to those of the OECD, with emphasis on the leading role of the business sector.
and sector organisations, training institution and commercial training services. Continue to ensure open, competitive telecommunication markets that offer a range of interoperable technological options and network services (particularly broadband) of appropriate quality and price.
the Case of Brazil, GEC Project, CRITO, Irvine University, www. crito. uci. edu. Wong, P.-K. and Y.-P. Ho (2004), E-commerce in Singapore:
Impetus and Impact of Globalization, GEC Project, CRITO, Irvine University, www. crito. uci. edu. World bank (2003), World Development Indicators Database, August 2003.
Zixiang, A t. and O. Wu (2004), Diffusion and Impacts of the Internet and E-commerce in China, GEC Project, CRITO, Irvine University, www. crito. uci. edu
http://www. iwf. org. uk/members/funding-council/code of practice-practice 41 In The netherlands, ISPS, national enforcement authorities and associations of right holders have subscribed to a notice-and-takedown code of conduct for all content that is punishable or unlawful;
128 In December 2009 several French internet platforms and right holders agreed on a charter for the fight against the sale of counterfeit goods on the Internet. 129 An extension of this charter is currently being discussed. 130 Recently,
http://ec. europa. eu/internal market/iprenforcement/docs/memorandum 04052011 en. pdf 133 The website www. chillingeffects. org, an initiative from several US law faculties and some NGOS
Horizontal issues such the development of broadband and IT infrastructures or IT literacy across the Member States, social groups and generations are also key to the development of online services. 145 This Staff Working Document does not cover infrastructure but deals with regulatory obstacles
Typical trustmark systems consist of an accreditation mechanism with an independent supervisor for an online trader to meet the trustmark's requirements (including creditworthiness, security mechanisms, price transparency, provision of information, customer service, data protection
a study carried out on behalf of the Commission by Réseau Financement Alternatif (Belgium), the University of Bristol (UK), the University of Milan (Italy) and the Warsaw School of economics (Poland).
which include universities, are specialized in online dispute resolution. ECODIR is free of charge for consumers and involves a 3-step process of negotiation, mediation and recommendation.
A case study of buy. com, Green Design Institute at Carnegie mellon University, December 2008, available at:
The USV Annals of Economics and Public Administration Volume 14, Issue 1 (19), 2014 38 OPEN INNOVATION THE GOOD, THE BAD, THE UNCERTAINTIES Phd Student Eliza
Laura CORAS Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania eliza. paicu@yahoo. com Professor Phd Adrian Dumitru TANTAU Bucharest University of Economic Studies
Companies increasingly innovate with the aid of customers, suppliers, universities, competitors (Kruse, 2012), public research centres, competitors, groups of product users (Duarte and Sarkar, 2011), development partners,
and employees driven knowledge but proof of enhancing knowledge raised by universities and research laboratories in the innovation process of business actors is relatively scarce,
26%of innovative firms were engaged in co-operation with other enterprises, universities, public research institutes, suppliers, customers and competitors in the EU-27.
while the least common co-operation occurred with universities and research institutions (9%)(Mention, 2011).
as foundation for organizational learning. Figure no. 1 summarizes the main four drivers for companies to start open partnerships:
the authors Opening the boundaries of a company by incorporating knowledge generated by customers, suppliers, education institutions, consulting agencies leads to intellectual capital development through knowledge sharing.
Knowledge acquisition can also accelerate the organizational learning of a firm, as part of their strategic processes to develop internal capabilities
since learning about the other partner's competitive advantages does entail additional costs. Too much diversity among partners, protecting internal knowledge from spilling over to the partner,
Southwestern Cengage Learning. 2. Brunold, J. and Durst, S. 2012)" Intellectual capital risks and job rotation",Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 13 (2), pp. 178
195 3. Chesbrough, H. 2003) Open Innovation, Harvard Business school Press, Boston, pp. 43-62 4. Collins, L. 2006) Opening up the innovation
Contents FOREWORD 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 CHAPTER I REGIONAL INNOVATION, INNOVATION PLATFORMS AND UNIVERSITY RESEARCH 9 Orchestrating an Entrepreneurial Discovery Process 9 Open
Some Lessons 32 Open Innovation and Its Implication for Universities 41 How to Combine Openness and the Protection of Research Investments in University Inventions US and Nordic 49 CHAPTER II:
Foreword 5 Acknowledgements Last name First name Company/Organisation E-mail Aarts Emile Eindhoven University of Technology, Intelligent Lighting House e. h. l. aarts
Labs Europe & National University of Ireland, Maynooth, Innovation Value Institute martin. g. curley@intel. com den Ouden Elke Eindhoven University of Technology
Holzmann Thomas Strascheg Centre for Entrepreneurship Thomas. Holzmann@sce. de Huuskonen Mikko Lappeenranta University of Technology & the Ministry of Employment and the Economy, Finland Mikko.
Huuskonen@tem. fi Jussila Jari Tampere University of Technology jari. j. jussila@tut. fi Kärkkäinen Hannu Tampere University of Technology hannu. karkkainen
@tut. fi Kleibrink Alexander European commission (Joint Research Centre IPTS) alexander. kleibrink@ec. europa. eu Krawczyk Piotr JAMK University of Applied sciences Piotr.
KRAWCZYK@jamk. fi Kune Hank EDUCORE hankkune@educore. nl Lynn Carol National Chengchi University, New Club of Paris yehyunln@nccu. edu
. tw Markkula Markku EU Committee of the Regions, Aalto University markku. markkula@aalto. fi Pallot Marc MP CONEX
Nottingham University Business school, Presence & Innovation Lab Arts et Métiers Paristech marc. pallot@9online. fr Roos Jaspar Future Ideas EU & Chief
. sargsyan@cgi. com Schaffers Hans Aalto University School of business, Centre of Knowledge and Innovation Research (CKIR) hans. schaffers@aalto. fi Schmidt Suntje Leibniz
City of Eindhoven m. schreurs@eindhoven. nl Turkama Petra Aalto University Centre for Knowledge and innovation research (CKIR) petra. turkama@aalto. fi Valkenburg Rianne Eindhoven University of Technology, Intelligent Lighting Institute a c. valkenburg@tue
. nl 6 O P E N I N N O V A t I O N y E A r B o O k 2 0 1
In Schofield's article, open innovation and implications for universities are discussed. The drivers for practising open innovation need to change universities'behaviour and repositioning of their work in open innovation ecosystems.
The new role of universities also leads to new approaches in Intellectual Property (IP) management, interlinking universities to joint actions with other stakeholders and developing new operating modes for academic institutions
in the open innovation processes, beyond being only the scientific knowledge provider. Huuskonen elaborates the Intellectual Property rights (IPR) and intellectual capital in open ecosystems from a sharing and collaborative ecosystem perspective.
Innovation Platforms and University Research Orchestrating an Entrepreneurial Discovery Process The flow of targeted activities as parallel processes In this article we review the entrepreneurial discovery process as an active driver of open innovation ecosystems,
innovation camps and conferences are discovery learning processes not simply events and should be orchestrated as many parallel interactive processes extending well beyond the duration of the events themselves.
the 8th ACSI societal learning camp and the 3rd EU Open Innovation 2. 0 Conference.
and learning to other regions throughout the world involved in similar processes. Figure 1: Parallel 6-9 Month Entrepreneurial Discovery, Learning and Prototyping Processes R E g I O N A l I N N O V A t I O N,
I N N O V A t I O N P L a T F O R M S A n D U n i v e r s i t y R E s
discovery and learning have become essential societal processes. Europe and the entire world are facing great challenges
and talking to discovering, doing and learning. This is the practice we call entrepreneurial discovery. It is the key mindset defining the new knowledge economy.
Demographics, digital literacy and generational values influence jobs and work, and software substitution may soon make more than 50%of current jobs obsolete.
experimenting and learning what should be done in the relevant industry or sub-system in terms of research, development and innovation to improve its situation.
Develop widespread innovation literacy in Europe. Vision: Open Innovation 2. 0 The next new Official Language of the European union.
discovery learning, accepting the uncertain and willingness to embrace change are essential. The High Level Group's final report, Inspiring and Completing European Innovation Ecosystems (2014), strongly emphasises this.
The Declaration calls for stimulating collaboration between citizens, businesses, universities and governments and for moving from the ERA towards European innovation ecosystems.'
In addition, a systemic learning infrastructure is needed to ensure effective learning, and to facilitate entrepreneurial learning the rapid application of lessons learned within the ecosystem
so that projects and players can systematically benefit from each other's experience and expertise. Processes for benchmarking (accessing
symmetric learning process based on peerto-peer exchange) are also essential. In practice, this refers to diverse skill-sets, mentality issues, methodologies and tools,
conditions and capabilities from‘reflective practitioner'to U-process to creative dialogue can be used to support learning between organisations.
Learning in networks and‘networked learning'are relevant concepts here. A second danger is demanding that the ecosystem be purely self-organising.
or ICT-intensive services sectors. 5 000 researchers and 16 000 students can also be found in the area. 200 of the local companies are foreign. 110 nationalities mix in the area.
universities, research institutions and enterprises. Operating since 2012, the EUE programme has brought together a broad group of researchers, innovators,
It is framed as a six-month discovery learning, entrepreneurial prototyping process, in which good ideas and project proposals arising at the conference
individual and group learning is enhanced by learning together. Running the OI2 Conference jointly with ACSI as parallel and interrelated prototyping processes for discovery learning is itself an experiment,
and promises to be an enriching a learning experience. ACSI as a rapid realisation process ACSI the Aalto Camp for Societal Innovation is an international instrument for addressing societal challenges in a powerful and effective way.
2 0 1 5 ACSI was developed co by the New Club of Paris and Finland's Aalto University.
and perspectives on real-world challenges brought to the camp by cities, regions, business organisations, universities and NGOS.
where for many people learning stops when the conference does, and entrepreneurial practice is limited to the examples provided by works-in progress and presented by speakers.
and the OI 2. 0 Conference framed as a process of hands-on discovery learning and entrepreneurial prototyping.
More than 200 people from across Europe used interactive work forms bench-learning, purposeful conversations and working with virtual worlds to explore what RIS3 collaboration could mean for their regions, the importance of Open Innovation 2. 0, the role of universities in entrepreneurial discovery,
and issues like low carbon economy in urban planning, Europe's industrial renaissance and e-health.
and process labs planned to enhance the co-learning part of the discovery processes. Diverse EU organisations have expressed interest in processes like these
The learning will belong to both the individuals involved and to their organisations. The city, region and commission will be richer for it.
and Europe will be several steps closer to developing widespread innovation literacy. The thinking renaissance will have begun.
learning constantly and scaling broadly when they have something that works. These processes are powerful mechanisms to drive innovation, turning demand into supply and knowledge into value.
as governments, businesses, universities and individuals learn to drive their own open entrepreneurial discovery processes.
Markku Markkula Advisor to the Aalto Presidents Aalto University President of the EU Committee of the Regions markku. markkula@cor. europa. eu Hank Kune Director, Innovation
because valuable innovation-related knowledge is being increasingly widely distributed to different actors, organisations (e g. companies, customers, suppliers, universities etc.)
In comparison to GBP 84 million of equity funding in UK according to the UK Alternative Finance Industry Report 2014 by Nesta and the University of Cambridge 14.
Lappeenranta University of Technology Press; 2013.9) Kärkkäinen H, Jussila J, Erkinheimo P, Hallikas J, Isokangas A, Jalonen H. Joukkoistamisen uusi aalto:
Hannu Kärkkäinen Professor Tampere University of Technology hannu. karkkainen@tut. fi Jari Jussila Researcher Tampere University of Technology jari. j. jussila@tut
and infrastructures 12, is failing to appreciate the underlying institutional, capability and learning-related aspects.
Testbed facilities responding to evolving academic and industry needs, experimentation tools and methodologies, European-wide federation of testbed facilities Educational programs, research projects, portfolio of business acceleration services, like accelerator,
Strong links with universities and academic experimenters, and education. Increasingly linkages established with related Future Internet initiatives.
Intertwined with universities educational programs, local innovation communities, living labs and SMES. Program and ecosystem creation Ecosystem building via use cases in thematic domains and in ICT domain.
The co-location centres are affiliated with universities. Different actor profiles result from the different positioning of the programmes in the innovation value chain.
learning and experimentation platforms, demand articulation and other conditions related to knowledge exploration and exploitation. Second, the literature on platforms provides important concepts and findings such as the role of platform orchestrator, correlation between the frequency of interactions and results,
From National Systems and Mode 2 to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations'.
Toward a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning',Anthem Press. 8) Chesbrough, H.,O. Gassmann, E. Enkel,‘The future of open innovation'.
. pdf Contact Dr Hans Schaffers Research director Aalto University School of business, Centre of Knowledge and Innovation Research (CKIR) hans. schaffers@aalto. fi Dr Petra
Turkama Director Aalto University School of business, Centre of Knowledge and Innovation Research (CKIR) petra. turkama@aalto. fi R E g I O N A l I N N
E A r C H 41 Open Innovation and Its Implication for Universities Abstract The article analyses open innovation trends and drivers affecting universities.
Driven by open innovation universities are placed in the centre of innovation ecosystems and are playing an ever-active role in knowledge creation, exchange and transfer.
universities have to consider specific factors in adapting to the open innovation paradigm. Such factors include a specific focus on knowledge co-creation and use-inspired research
the need to review their curriculum to respond to new skills and market demands, the rise of open education platforms and social media, community engagement and crowdsourcing.
There is also a strong interest from an academic community studying open innovation. A research led by Professor Gann demonstrated a growing interest in the open innovation phenomenon over the last 10 years 4. As a result we are observing a trend
which is reshaping the R & D process from in-house R & D to an open model where ideas flow in
These changes affect all organisations and institutions including government, public institutions and universities. Therefore it is important to understand the implication of open innovation on organisational development
1 5 Open innovation drivers affecting universities While companies are reshaping their organisational boundaries, universities are playing an everincreasing role in contributing to knowledge-based economies.
The Knowledge Economy Index developed by the World bank 5 considers education and innovation factors in measuring national effectiveness in developing knowledge-based economies.
Universities are not the exceptions and are affected by similar trends including: information, capital, people are becoming global assets The mobility
In addition there is an increasing trend of employees moving between industry and universities or keeping dual appointments.
This results in knowledge flows between universities, companies and external stakeholders; knowledge is becoming a source of competitive advantage This trend positions universities as key partners for industrial companies and places them in the epicentre of regional and national innovation ecosystems;
technology pace is increasing This drives universities to transform from classic academic institutions with an ivory tower mentality to entrepreneurial institutions proactively managing their knowledge.
Universities are building and managing strategic partnership and alliances with industry and technology companies; IP management is becoming a vital component of universities'strategies Universities are becoming more business savvy
in order to protect, manage and profit from their proprietary knowledge; innovation across the entire value chain This process positions universities as a key contributor to regional innovation and competitiveness.
In the era of open innovation universities play a more strategic and wider role as suppliers of an educated work force, knowledge, expertise and emerging technology.
At the same time universities act as partners and customers of regional services, SMES and large companies; growth of venture capital markets This trend makes it possible for promising ideas
and technologies to be developed further outside universities thus allowing universities to profit from their knowledge and research outputs;
customer expectations are increasing Universities are affected also by increasing customer sophistication, increased transparency and digitisation.
Such trends force universities to adapt innovative marketing strategies embracing social networks, interactive websites, intranet and content marketing techniques
in order to enhance their conversation with potential students, staff and public; pressure on universities to demonstrate impact from their research All economic players experience a growing economic and fiscal pressure.
As publically funded institutions, universities are required to demonstrate impact from their research. There is a growing public scrutiny of government funding,
which places additional pressure on universities to carry out cutting-edge research balancing between pure academic curiosity and translational outcome.
For example, research impact has been included in the new REF (Research Excellence Framework) assessment, which is the system for evaluating the quality of research in UK higher education institutions 7. Open innovation university To respond to global open innovation challenges universities need to open up their business models
and review their processes in order to facilitate open innovation interactions. There is a global rise of innovative and entrepreneurial universities
which are opening their organisational boundaries to play an active role in regional and national development.
We will define such universities as Open Innovation Universities. A typical open innovation university infrastructure includes the following functions:
strategy office to monitor international trends and benchmarking; marketing and communication department to interact with stakeholders and public;
alumni relationship office; research office to monitor and develop funding opportunities; technology and knowledge transfer offices;
education technology structures to develop education and learning products; industry liaison office for developing partnership with R E g I O N A l I N N O V A t I O N,
I N N O V A t I O N P L a T F O R M S A n D U n i v e r s i t y R E s
E A r C H 43 commercial companies; enterprise infrastructure focusing on entrepreneurship agenda within the university and professional and executive education units offering commercial programmes.
An open innovation university infrastructure is connected closely to government innovation initiatives, policies and research assessment strategies.
Figure 1 depicts an organisational structure of an open innovation university. To respond to an Open Innovation agenda,
universities are further adapting their strategies, processes and policies in order to develop innovative and sustainable business models.
Key trends in universities'open innovation practices include: knowledge co-creation and use-inspired research;
developing value networks and ecosystems; need for stronger IP management; need for developing new skills and capabilities in students;
open education programmes, e g. MOOCS, SPOCS; increasing use of social media; community engagement and crowdsourcing. We will now consider these trends in further details.
Knowledge co-creation and use-inspired research In its Global Information technology Report 2010-11,8 the World Economic Forum provides ranking of university-industry R & D collaboration based on
a survey of senior leaders from the industry. According to the survey the top five countries ranked by executives include the USA, Switzerland, Finland, UK and Sweden.
The ease of doing business between universities and industry is a key factor in pursuing an open innovation agenda.
Both university and industry represent inherent differences in their goals and organisational cultures which can affect the effectiveness of knowledge
and technology transfer between partners. Such differences include: differences in time horizon (long term vs short term; differences in confidentiality (open source publications vs competitive nature;
Table 2 depicts the key differences affecting university-industry partnerships. Figure 1: Open Innovation University organisational structure 44 O P E N I N N O V A t I O N y E A r B o
O k 2 0 1 5 Table 2: Cultural differences between academia and industry Parameter Academia Industry Responsibility Social responsibilities Shareholders responsibilities Research type Basic research Applied research Output New
Research strategy Scientific freedom Technology roadmaps Time horizon Long-term Short-term A traditional role of university research is to conduct fundamental pre-competitive research
university and industry with overlapping interaction mechanism and a free circulation of elite between these areas.
income leveraging government funds access to facilities case studies source of funding demonstrating impact competitiveness knowledge based economy innovation national growth Examples of successful university
Royal dutch shell and Imperial College London), shorter idea labs programmes (e g. HP Laboratories'Innovation Research Programme) 13.
Catapults network 16, Small Business Research Initiative (SBRI) 17 are specifically aiming at universities and developing value networks and partnership with large businesses and SMES.
Figure 3 shows the position of a university within an open innovation value network as a hub of innovation dialogue and activities.
Universities are playing a critical role as a key source of technology landscape mapping trends and technology scouting 18.
In parallel, companies are increasingly adapting a systematic technology scouting process building strategic partnership with universities.
The position of a university within an open innovation value network Need for stronger IP management Open innovation imposes new challenges on universities.
According to the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) universities provide a significant economic impact from their research 19.
According to the AUTM reports university licensing increased the USA's gross industry output by USD 836 billion (1996-2010),
university technologies supported an estimated three million jobs in the economy (1996-2010) and technology transfer contributed to creation of 671 new companies and 591 new products in 2011 alone.
There is an observable trend within universities to review their research strategies focusing on developing core expertise
Most successful universities run their own Technology Transfer Offices (TTO) and have strong teams of technology managers.
One of the UK's leading companies in technology transfer Imperial Innovations grew from the TTO to become the first UK university commercialisation company to complete the IPO.
E A r B o O k 2 0 1 5 broker between Imperial College, researchers, external companies and wider market communities.
University approaches to managing their IP portfolio range from open access initiatives to technology commercialisation programmes.
The Easy Access IP 22 is a growing initiative of more than 20 universities worldwide to offer free licences for their technologies to industry.
At the other end of the continuum are university funds 23, which act as venture capital to spur innovation, entrepreneurship and economic growth.
According to the Thomson One database there were 26 university funds established between 1973 and 2010 24.
The main objective of such funds is to invest equity capital to university technology companies and speedup commercialisation processes within universities.
Another development in university innovation management and enterprise are collaborations between universities to expand the pool of technologies, expertise and capacity.
which recently named the top university business incubator in Europe. CETSQUARED is the enterprise collaboration between University of Bath, University of Bristol, University of Exeter, University of Southampton and University of Surrey 25.
New skills, programmes and learning technologies The spread of open innovation and a greater permeability of organisational boundaries place new demands on skills and capabilities of employees.
Universities need to respond to new requirements and prepare students who are market ready to embrace open innovation.
There is a growing trend to develop T-shaped people with a core expertise and the ability to collaborate across disciplines.
A further emphasis is placed on incorporating entrepreneurship creativity and innovation management subjects into university curriculum across subject areas.
For example, the University of Sidney 26 has been reviewing its curriculum, placing the emphasis on integration of education
and research, developing creative and flexible thinkers, fostering enquiring minds, developing leadership and communication skills. LSE100 27 is an innovative course offered by the London School of economics and Political science (UK)
which is teaching students to explore social science thinking from different perspectives, e g. economics, law, politics,
The University of Aberdeen has introduced Sixth Century Courses 28, a range of innovative courses introducing students to the breath of disciplines and developing flexibility,
versatility, multidisciplinary thinking, critical thinking and effective communication. Similar trends are observed in business education. The HBR Blog Network 29 has argued recently for revisiting business education placing emphasis on holistic thinking, global perspectives, technology, entrepreneurship,
creativity and the ability to make decisions affected by complexity and chaos. A greater openness of university education programmes is manifested further through a rising choice of courses on MOOCS platforms (e g.
Coursera 30, edx 31, Udacity 32, Khan academy 33 and Iggy 34. One of the ways that universities transfer their knowledge to public
and business sectors is their continuing professional development courses and executive education programmes. Open Innovation places additional challenge on the content, design, marketing and delivery methods of CPD and Execed programmes.
University marketing in the age of open innovation Open Innovation brings new opportunities and new challenges to universities in promoting their education programmes,
research outcomes and engaging with students, researchers, industry and wider community. The use of social media by universities is on the rise with many leading universities having hundreds of thousands followers on their social network pages.
For example the Massachusetts institute of technology has 170 000+followers on its Twitter page 35, more than 600 000+likes on its news page on Facebook 36 and 650 000+subscribers on its Open Course Ware page on Youtube with millions of views 37.
A greater transparency and openness in communication approaches results in new technology and trends in developing universities websites.
Universities are reshaping and restructuring their websites R E g I O N A l I N N O V A t I O N,
I N N O V A t I O N P L a T F O R M S A n D U n i v e r s i t y R E s
E A r C H 47 around end users and communities (e g. students, staff, alumni, industry, media, etc.)
as well as key activities and features (e g. innovation, fund-raising, campus life. Innovative marketing campaigns and tools are following industry trends shifting from service
and expertise marketing to content marketing featuring video, podcasts, blogs, elements of gamification and community events.
For example, Imperial College London holds an annual Imperial Festival to show case its cuttingedge research,
community, staff students and alumni 38. The event gathers thousands of visitors and is becoming a prominent feature in the university diary.
Universities are gradually exploring crowdsourcing and crowdfunding opportunities. While there is a need to pay some scrutiny to funding sources there are new crowdfunding platforms
which are dedicated to education and research, e g. the Hubbub platform 39. We estimate that community engagement
while universities build experience and confidence in using new tools and solutions. External channels for knowledge transfer have been embraced already by researchers.
According to the study consulting and conversation channels resulted in staggering cumulative 44%(Figure 4). Conclusion Open innovation is affecting the way universities operate,
It is fundamental for universities to find the right balance between openness and knowledge commercialisation in order to perform their mission,
Harvard Business school Press. 3) http://www. google. com/trends/explore#q=open%20 innovation (as of 14.1.15)( 4) Linus Dahlander, David M. Gann,(2010),
Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 20, No 6, pp. 653-666.12) http://www. research. ibm. com/university/collaborativeresearch/ocr. shtml (13
) Perkmann M.,Salter A.,How to Create Productive Partnerships with Universities, MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer 2012 (14) Improving knowledge transfer between research institutions and industry across Europe:
Research Technology Management, Jul-Aug 2013.19) Association of University Technology Managers. 20) Imperial Innovations Annual report, 2013.21) Making Industry-University partnerships work, Science Business Innovation Board (2012).(22) http://easyaccessip. com
(23) Croce A.,Grilli L.,Murtinu S.,Venture capital Enters Academia: An Analysis of University-Managed Funds, Journal of Technology Transfer, 2013.24) Thomson One database.
25) http://www. setsquared. co. uk (26) http://sydney. edu. au/(27) http://www. lse. ac. uk/intranet/students/LSE100
/Home. aspx (28) http://www. abdn. ac. uk/study/about/sixth-centurycourses-348. php (29) Roos J.,The Renaissance We Need in Business education, HBR
Blog Network, July 2014.30) https://www. coursera. org/(31) https://www. edx. org/(32) https://www. udacity. com/nanodegree (33
) https://www. khanacademy. org (34) https://www. iggy. net (35) https://twitter. com/mit (36) https://www. facebook. com/MITNEWS
E A r C H 49 How to Combine Openness and the Protection of Research Investments in University Inventions US and Nordic Views Who owns the rights to university inventions and under which terms?
as the US system is based university and the Swedish system is based researcher. However, both systems seem to produce successful outcomes.
ownership of university patents is regulated as well as copyrighted in relation to computer programming. Regarding the other types of rights (e g. artistic copyright, design rights), the system relies on contractual freedom.
In universities, the issue is subject to rather sensitive debate on the balance of interests between the researcher,
the university and the societal interests, including also the interests of the surrounding business community and companies.
The university as a stakeholder has a mission to maintain a high level of research and education,
The university also has the duty to disseminate knowledge and make sure that the new knowledge is used widely.
The societal interests may include a high level of education, benefits of the newest technology to the society and a general high level of well-being.
Depending on the background philosophical motivations behind the university IPR system this is sometimes seen as contrary to the basic tasks of the university the greater the university's freedom
and distance from business companies is, the better the overall system. In the classic university philosophy of e g.
Robert K. Merton, the independency of the university is among the highest values of the university system 1. The business interests of companies may be seen as contradictory to this.
Yet, especially in the US system, the dissemination of knowledge does not only mean publishing articles in scientific journals,
Patenting may also be seen as contradictory to the universities'basic mission to encourage the free flow of new information on the other hand,
the US system being concentrated heavily around university ownership of IP, and the Swedish system representing a researchercentred system.
Finland basic principles of university IP Universities'duties According to the Finnish Universities Act (para. 2, 558/2009, unofficial translation), the mission of the university shall be to promote free research and scientific
to provide higher education based on research, and to educate students to serve their country and humanity
(I shall later refer to this definition as‘the core mission').'In carrying out their mission, the universities must promote lifelong learning,
interact with the surrounding society and promote the impact of research findings and artistic activities on society.
The issue of university inventions is particularly relevant regarding the last part, i e. promoting the impact of research findings and artistic activities on society.
According to Section 3 of the Act, the universities shall have autonomy with a view to securing the 50 O P E N I N N O V A t I O N y E A r
B o O k 2 0 1 5 freedom of higher academic and art education. Autonomy entails the right to decision-making in matters belonging to internal administration.
The universities are given an opportunity to express their opinion on proposed legislation concerning their issues.
The universities are divided into two main categories (Section 5 of the Act), the foundations (Aalto University, Tampere University of Technology),
which are governed also by the Finnish Foundations Act (109/1930) and corporations under public law (public universities).
The public universities are independent legal persons. The public universities may undertake commitments, obtain rights in their own name
and possess movable and immovable property. A university may pursue business activities which support the performance of their core mission (as in Section 2 of the Act).
In the following I shall concentrate into the main elements of the Act on the University Inventions 2 made at Higher education institutions (369/2006)
and the Act on the Right in Employee Inventions (656/1967). Basic principles of the Act on the Right to University Inventions (369/2006) The Act on the Right to University Inventions regulates the protection
and rights of patentable inventions created by employees of the Finnish universities. The allocation of rights regarding the research-initiated IPR depends on the nature of the research.
The main categories are‘open research'(the‘business as usual'type of research carried out in universities)
and‘sponsored research'3, which refers to outside financing of the research. Open research is done (Act, Sec. 3) under employment in the university, without outside financing or contractual partners.
Contract research is a research service carried out for remuneration. Contract research may involve partners outside the university either as researchers or financiers.
The main principle is stated, unless otherwise in the law, that the creator has the same right to the invention as any other (stand-alone) inventor.
The inventor must inform the university about the invention. The inventor has a right to equitable remuneration regarding the rights that are transferred to the university.
In the Finnish system, the essential criterion is whether the invention or research result was produced in open
Open research The university can (the Act on University Inventions, Section 6) take the rights to an invention created in open research under certain conditions.
or informed the university in writing of the intent to utilise the invention, the university can take the rights to the invention.
Before taking the rights, the university must enquire whether the inventor intends to utilise the invention himself.
If the university misses the six-month deadline after being informed of the invention, the university is deemed to have waived its right to the invention.
Despite the expression‘university can take the rights, 'the procedure in all its complexity is in practice a voluntary affair to the researcher.
The researcher has no reason not to proceed with patenting by himself if there is any hope of having the invention commercialised.
The researcher's own activity and actions in exploiting the invention rule out the legal rights of the university.
In comparison to the US and Swedish systems (see later in more detail) the Finnish system in this sense is some kind of hybrid of the university-centred model (US)
and the researcher-centred model (Sweden), leaving however room for speculation, the Finnish model is designed to be clear enough to support quick transaction processes and efficient utilisation of the invention.
Sponsored research The university has the right to redeem the rights relating to sponsored research within a period of six months from the invention disclosure by the inventor.
If the university does not claim the right within this timeframe in a written manner,
the university is deemed to have waived its rights to the invention. After the university has made the claim to the invention,
the researcher is obliged to sign the transfer agreement. Inventions in employment The law on Inventions in Employment (656/1967) concerns the allocation and protection of rights to inventions made under conditions of employment
Comparing legal principles inventions in employment vs university inventions The acts described above have common features
it can be said that the University Inventions Act leaves it essentially for the university and the inventor to agree who will be the owner of IP and the primary responsible for the utilisation of the invention.
The second feature drawing attention is that the university gets the rights primarily in sponsored research,
A researcher, who is employed by the university, is working under conditions of open research. He has the privilege of exploiting his inventions and gain the rights for himself.
Passivity during the process intentional or not may lead to the rights being transferred to the university.
The notion that the universities would be investing into research is not common to the Finnish higher education ideology.
State funding has the intention to enhance high-level research and education. Even the researcher is seen not as an employee,
The idea of an independent university in the sense described in e g. Robert K. Merton's philosophy is very close to home in the Finnish value system 4. The idea more common in both the US and Swedish systems
that commercial dissemination of inventions counts as duties of universities, seems remote to the Finnish ideology at least on the level of jurisdiction and administration.
and therefore an important part of the tasks of universities. If we think of the universities as independent and autonomous units,
it would be relatively easy to change the argument towards the idea of research funding as investment;
the university makes an investment into intangible assets, namely research results and findings. Like any investment, this could be successful or lead to failure.
This could make the universities more free to judge where to invest, but at the same time, the ultimate financier would set targets not necessarily scientific but economic.
This position would also mean greater independency and responsibility for the university as rights holder, rights owner, licensor and start-up/incubator.
The other issue regarding the University Inventions Act regards the position of sponsored research. The idea of strengthening the university's position in this area seems rather peculiar,
as this most certainly should reflect on the interest of the investor to participate if the result is awarded to the university,
why should a private company invest into such results? This is, in my understanding, not the case, however.
there are in fact two kinds of sponsored research one sponsored by state research institutes other than universities,
should not the law better reflect the actual practices in use in universities which it does not seem to be doing at the moment.
USA the university-centred system In this section, I shall make some observations regarding the US system.
OTD operates under Harvard university's supervision 5. The starting point of the policy of OTD is that all stakeholders, the university,
the publication must be carried out in agreement with the university. The invention must remain patentable; too early publication may jeopardise patentability,
The general principle is that the legal position of the university is stronger than in Finland.
The university owns the results created with research utilising the university's resources. It is the university that has the right to agree on the rights and the use of the IP.
In the case of OTD, the Harvard university has authorised the OTD to use some of the university's powers.
The inventions in the Harvard system are divided into two categories‘‘supported inventions'and‘incidental inventions'.
'The inventor has an obligation to inform the university about the invention. OTD defines the category in which the invention will be positioned.
Regarding incidental inventions, the university will have a right to use the invention for research and educational purposes,
As Harvard university tops all listings of the world's most prestigious universities, it is safe to conclude that
the system is most likely supportive to the international success of the university. Elements of US debate Bayh-Dole criticism In the US the debate on university inventions has continued for decades.
The starting point was the passing of the so-called Bayh-Dole Act in 1980, which re-organised the use of university inventions and related patents.
The university inventions were regarded as under-used as they were technically federal property. This was basically sound from the point of view of the federation's tactical interest,
but meant also that there was little incentive and thus use of the resource. There seems to be no real controversy regarding the views on Bayh-Dole's efficiency in this respect 7. In the US,
universities are considered to have an important role in disseminating inventions in society's interest. What is interesting from a European point of view
the case seems to be quite the opposite it is justified perfectly to consider a successful commercial adaptation to be part of the university's task
IP-based technology transfer is part of the universities'core missions, along with research, education and enhancing well-being 9. The universities should create a clear mission for their technology transfer,
which takes into account the principle of dissemination of inventions for societal benefit 10. Technology transfer is seen as a very practical line of operation, where skills,
which places the university inventions in the university's ownership, has been criticised e g. on creating a double incentive:
Sweden researcher in the centre Swedish universities do well in international rankings. In the Shanghai ranking 2014 Karolinska Institutet scores highest of the Swedish universities at rank 47, Uppsala 60 and Stockholm 78 19.
Swedish University Law (Högskolelagen 2 sect. amended 119/2013) defines education and research as the core missions of universities,
but in addition are the interaction with and giving information about research to society, as well as making efforts in order to have the research result used for a‘beneficial'purpose 20.
The definition of utilisation uses the Swedish word‘nyttan, 'which can be translated as‘benefit 'or‘gain'for the society.
the development in Europe is likely to have moved towards university-centrism during the past decades.
Karolinska Institutet 24 In Sweden universities are a part of public administration. The laws governing public institutions cover also universities,
like e g. the law on public information. As a starting point, the universities cannot operate in the market or foster business activities due to their nature as part of the State's administration.
For this reason, in the year 1995 Karolinska Institutet (KI) founded a separate holding-company (KI Holding AB) to take care of commercialisationrelated activities.
who seeks investable projects from universities not only from KI. The State owns all these companies,
Scilife Lab is owned co by four Swedish universities. 54 O P E N I N N O V A t
The KI model resembles the recent Danish‘node'strategy suggested for universities 25. In the‘node',the main target is not exactly legislative development but rather developing efficient commercial practices, deepening know-how of TT and developing deeper relationships with related businesses.
This is due to the fact that the researcher seems less dependent on the‘mother-university 'but has the legal position,
the Swedish universities however do not seem satisfied with their system but see that enhancing the universities'legal position in IP would be desired a direction in the future regarding university inventions.
Grace periods Would they allow a combination of openness and patenting? The US patenting system (as well as Canada,
The role of universities is probably changing slowly due to economic and technological development. It would make sense to see the universities'main task as investment to research,
the protection and utilisation of which are important parts of the universities'societal functions. This would enhance independency
and create a need for long-term planning of research activities from scientific and societal aspects.
The relationship between the researcher and the university needs a closer look. As the researcher is employed by the university,
it could be questioned, what is the reason and incentive for having the researcher make inventions on public funding that will become his or her personal assets.
It would clearly make more sense to have the rights being agreed on a contractual basis rather than have the legal disincentive to make all thus-produced IP automatically the property of the university.
Debate and legislation on university inventions tends to concentrate on patents. However, this is not the whole picture of IP created in universities there are copyrightable computer programs, content,
literal and artistic material and design to look after, too. In Finland, there is an exception regarding computer programming the IP of computer programming belongs to the employer,
unless it is a university, in which case the rights belong to the programmer. The direction of the incentive should be looked better at in this case.
and evaluate the role of universities in changing technological and economic circumstances. References (1) Merton R.,‘The key elements of university ideals:
communalism, universalism, disinterestedness, organised skepticism'(source: Wikipedia).()( 2) Translations available in English are unofficial. There are several unofficial translations available on the Internet with certain differences.
One is titled‘Act on the Right in Inventions made at Higher education institutions'and uses slightly different translations in comparison to this text.
‘Managing University Intellectual Property in the Public interest',Washington. 8) This is compatible with the terms of the world's most prestigious science awards, the Nobel prize.
9) ibid. s. 2. 10) ibid. s. 4. N. B.,in the Finnish university debate it is claimed often that IPR privatises information
'16) ibid. s. 448.17) ibid. s. 445.18) ibid. s. 447.19) Of Nordic universities, the additional top 100 universities are Copenhagen (39), Oslo (69) and Helsinki (73).(20
‘The US model is focused very much on creating (economic) incentives for universities to commercialize their research output,
25)‘ Tech Transfer in Danish Universities what have learned we from ten years of trying to make money on research?'
D. Adjunct Professor, Lappeenranta University of Technology mikko. huuskonen@tem. fi 57 CHAPTER II: Open Innovation 2. 0:
Harvard Business school Press. 2) Ramaswamy, V. & Gouillart, F.,(2010), The Power of Co-Creation:
Dr Marc Pallot Senior Research Associate Nottingham University Business school Marc. Pallot@nottingham. ac. uk Dr Thomas Holzmann Scientific Project Manager and Research Associate Strascheg Centre for Entrepreneurship Thomas. Holzmann@sce. de Piotr
Krawczyk Senior Lecturer JAMK University of Applied sciences Piotr. krawczyk@jamk. fi 64 O P E N I N N O V A t
and provide open and creative learning platforms for experimenting with solutions. Governments still have to learn how to deal with these new developments
Studies on learning in project contexts show that learning and innovation are more likely to occur in projects that are embedded in wider ecologies,
or at universities and government institutions. Often, these organisations are based inside ministries and other public administrations.
but also to other groups, such as school and university students, tech-enthusiasts and tinkerers. The lab provider acts as a node that creates
research and development institutions and universities into internal innovation processes in the firms. The labs'operators thus offer cost intensive equipment to users who otherwise would have no resources to set up comparable technology intensive environments.
Therefore, the lab's user community comprises the UFA company, technology firms, research and development facilities, media enterprises, students,
graduates and freelancers involved in sectors such as new media, film, camera, film editing, scripts, graphic design, programming, game design and data visualisation.
academic-driven innovation labs are an instrument to open the organisational and institutional boundaries of higher education and research institutions to more complex and interdisciplinary actor constellations in innovation processes.
The hosting academic institution is, however, the one operating and managing the lab. The strict project
and participants including industrial and other academic entities, research centres, students, companies, start-up firms, entrepreneurs, end-users and consumers in these facilities.
Design Research Lab, Udk Berlin The Design Research Lab belongs to the University of the Arts in Berlin (Udk.
The Technical University of Berlin and the Deutsche telekom Laboratories (T-Labs) founded the lab in 2005.
Usually, these learning platforms are based on peer learning that don't just foster interaction; they can lead to a continuation of that interaction through other forms of collaboration.
Learning also takes place in highly competitive environments like in investor-driven innovation labs. Fourth, labs offer creative freedom,
Enterprises and academic institutions exploit labs to create a community that supports their open innovation strategy
citizens, users, bureaucrats, interest groups, experts, partners, financiers, economic and academic stakeholder and students etc. This diversity facilitates avoiding blind spots in innovation processes.
Harvard Business school Press, p. 4 (5) Grabher, G. 2004),‘Learning in Projects, Remembering in Networks?
Learning, Tacit Knowledge and Regional Innovative Capacity',Regional Studies 33 (4), 312.8) Müller, F. C. and Ibert, O. forthcoming),‘Resources of Innovation:
or overworked secondary school pupil to connect to his/her classroom and keep up with the classes,
are performed both at home and in the classroom. Feedback from both the pupil and teacher provides the developer with the necessary information to effectively
and accurately amend it in accordance with market demands. The first Living Lab of Turkey opened its LEED Gold certified doors in 2014 in the Basaksehir Municipality of Istanbul.
technical universities, research centres and techno-parks; O P E N I N N O V A t I O N 2. 0:
There are two technical secondary schools that are considered to be two of the best in their fields in Turkey;
Providing all public services, especially security, health education and economic services through web portals and applications; Becoming a pilot area for new technologies such as 4g and 5g, Wimax, IPTV, Wi-fi points and Basaksehir mobile applications;
and secondary schools as well as university students with TIM and IOSB (Ikitelli Organised Industrial District) for the Innovation Week. 200 innovative projects were submitted
and people will be educated about different methods of effective and healthy fasting 7. Education The public education programmes for 2015 were planned with all age groups in mind.
all five pilot areas differ in functionality (a busy area near a railway station, a school area, a park in the city, a university campus and a historic city centre.
A r B o O k 2 0 1 5 pilot area, e g. for the university campus area in Espoo this translates into‘offering guidance between the public traffic lines (e g. transition from metro to bus station,
An example of a project that aims for a continuous learning environment to find ways to influence mood
The resulting integrated sensor system allows for continuous monitoring and learning. And as it is built on the open source principle it also allows for the integration of new sensors as they become available on the market
either by small (student) start-ups, in SMES or even integrated in the platform by multinationals.
and learning, dealing with the impact of the services on the quality of life in cities. As stated earlier
A changing role for knowledge organisations Many relevant aspects in the relationship between open innovation and academia can be found in the context provided by the concept of 3rd Generation Universities.
The framework of 3rd Generation Universities, as proposed by Wissema 6, describes the transition of Western (European) universities over the past millennium.
He distinguished three generations of universities that are markedly different with respect to their positioning in society and their working approach.
The first generation starting with the universities of Bologna and Paris in the middle Ages, was aimed at providing a kind of universal knowledge,
defending the truth through education in Latin, provided by professionals in colleges that used methods from scholastics and arts.
The second generation, starting at around 1700 and often referred to as Humboldtian universities, were aimed at exploring nature through research,
conducted by mono-disciplinary professionals who applied scientific methods and were organised in faculties. For the last thirty years we have had now the concept of third-generation universities,
which aim to generate value from knowledge by supporting multi-disciplinary academic entrepreneurs in turning knowledge into services and products that impact society.
The transition from one generation to the next can be described in terms of how knowledge is handled.
Third-generation universities combine education, research and value creation. However, the way they are organised and their positioning in society are markedly different.
These universities consequently need to build on the insights gained from their target group, and in addition they need to understand how the academic knowledge can be transferred effectively to those who can create value from it.
Many universities still operate at the level of the second generation. A true third-generation university applies a different approach to the working methods used by the previous generation.
Exploitation of knowledge should be a core business, and should become a third objective in addition to education and scientific research. 92 O P E N I N N O V A t
I O N y E A r B o O k 2 0 1 5 Universities should be eager to operate in an international and competitive market.
As an example, Eindhoven University of Technology has expressed the wish to become a third-generation university.
'and its strong record in working together with industry provide the university with the knowledge
the university is exploring ways to get more deeply involved in activities that take place at the level of the municipality of Eindhoven.
but also citizens and students) to develop applications that can be plugged into the system. This will allow a wide range of solutions to use the system and available open data:
. and Valkenburg, R.,Vision and roadmap urban lighting Eindhoven 2030 Research results, Eindhoven University of Technology, ISBN 978-90-386-3225-4 july 2012.4
) www. enigma-project. eu (5) www. eindhoven. nl/smartlight (6) Wissema, J. G.,(2009), Towards the Third Generation University, Edward Elgar Publishing
Elke den Ouden TU/e Fellow New Business Development In public-Private Value Networks Strategic Director Lighthouse Intelligent Lighting Institute@Eindhoven University
Rianne Valkenburg Value Producer Lighthouse & Professor of Design Innovation at The hague University of Applied sciences Intelligent Lighting Institute@Eindhoven University of Technology a c. valkenburg@tue
Scientific director Intelligent Lighting Institute@Eindhoven University of Technology e. h. l. aarts@tue. nl 2015 EU Yearbook O P E
learning, instrumenting and experimenting.''It is an attempt to tackle persistent problems by steering them in a more sustainable direction, through clever, subtle changes and adjustments at several levels concurrently.
During the Edo Period (1603-1868), the Maeda Clan abandoned military confrontation with the Edo in favour of civil administration, promoting and popularising scholarship, craftwork and the arts.
Various partners including businessmen, city government, associations, artists, art colleges, universities, training centres and philanthropists all became active partners in Kanazawa city's efforts in preserving traditional Japanese crafts and folk art.
Its multi-constituent execution resulted in the city artisans mastering in 22 kinds of traditional crafts.
In addition, the city supports study abroad for the acquisition of knowledge and technology related to craftwork. Philanthropic organisations also donated money for this endeavour.
universities and research institutes were provided with resources to advance the relevant technologies (execution and resources).
As the second-largest University City in France, Lyon has sufficient supply of talent in the creative industries.
universities and research centers to achieve fields of excellence through offering high-quality business support services Fia's restaurant used 80%organic food.
Partners (initial) Craftsmen, artisans, Kanazawa College of Art and Kanazawa Institute of technology Technological researchers, academia and artists,
Art colleges Training centers Philanthropies""City government Event planners and entrepreneurs R&d centers Software developer Game designers Fashion designers Image sector Animation sector Audio-video
The City of Kanazawa also supports study abroad for the acquisition of advanced knowledge and technology related to craftwork.
Close to the city center, Midsweden University has over 7000 students doing research in environmental sciences tourism, sports and event technology."
Between dream and reality lies complexity. inaugural address delivered by Jan Rotmans on assuming office as a professor of‘Sustainable System Innovations and Transitions'at the Erasmus University Rotterdam on Friday, 3 june 2005.
Carol Yeh-Yun Lin, Professor National Chengchi University, Taiwan New Club of Paris, board member yehyunln@nccu. edu. tw 104 O P
Dr Gohar Sargsyan, MBA Partner, ICT Innovation Lead EU, CGI Group Inc. gohar. sargsyan@cgi. com 108 O P E
This means an infinite decision speed and increased accumulation of knowledge by applying technology. At least, that's the technology church preaching to the choir.
Jaspar Roos Chief Humour Officer, Future Ideas jaspar@futureideas. eu Dr Gohar Sargsyan, MBA Partner, ICT Innovation Lead EU, CGI
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011