INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURIALISM IN THE UNIVERSITY INOVAÇÃO E EMPREENDEDORISMO NA UNIVERSIDADE

Transcrição

1

2 INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURIALISM IN THE UNIVERSITY INOVAÇÃO E EMPREENDEDORISMO NA UNIVERSIDADE

3 PUCRS Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul Chanceler Dom Dadeus Grings Reitor Joaquim Clotet Vice-Reitor Evilázio Teixeira Conselho Editorial Ana Maria Tramunt Ibaños Beatriz Franciosi Dalcídio Cláudio Draiton Gonzaga de Souza Elvo Clemente Ivan Izquierdo Jacques Wainberg Jerônimo Carlos Santos Braga Jorge Campos da Costa Jorge Luis Nicolas Audy (Presidente) Juremir Machado da Silva Lauro Kopper Filho Luiz Antonio de Assis Brasil Magda Lahorgue Nunes Maria Helena Abrahão Marília Gerhardt de Oliveira Mirian Oliveira Urbano Zilles Vera Lúcia Strube de Lima EDIPUCRS Jerônimo Carlos Santos Braga (Diretor) Jorge Campos da Costa (Editor-chefe)

4 JORGE LUIS NICOLAS AUDY MARÍLIA COSTA MOROSINI (Orgs.) INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURIALISM IN THE UNIVERSITY INOVAÇÃO E EMPREENDEDORISMO NA UNIVERSIDADE EDIPUCRS Porto Alegre 2006

5 EDIPUCRS, 2006 CAPA: AGEXPP PREPARAÇÃO DE ORIGINAIS: Tradutores Ana Maria Tramunt Ibaños Cristina Lopes Perna Karina Veronica Molsing Vera Müller Aureliano Calvo Hernandez Beatriz Viégas-Faria Hedy Hoffmann Equipe Revisora Ana Maria Tramunt Ibaños Cristina Lopes Perna Erica Foerthmann Schultz EDITORAÇÃO: Supernova Editora IMPRESSÃO E ACABAMENTO: Gráfica Epecê Dados Internacionais de Catalogação na Publicação (CIP) I58i Inovação e empreendedorismo na universidade = Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the university / [org. Jorge Luis Nicolas Audy, Marília Costa Morosini]. - Porto Alegre : EDIPUCRS, p. ISBN Universidade. 2. Universidade Empreendedora. 3. Educação Superior. I. Audy, Jorge Luis Nicolas. II. Morosini, Marília Costa. III. Título: Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the university. CDD Ficha catalográfica elaborada pelo Setor de Processamento Técnico da BC-PUCRS. EDIPUCRS Av. Ipiranga, 6681 Prédio 33 Caixa Postal 1429 CEP Porto Alegre, RS BRASIL Fone/Fax: (51) edipucrs@pucrs.br Proibida a reprodução total ou parcial desta obra sem a autorização expressa da Editora.

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Presentation... 9 Joaquim Clotet PART I THE UNIVERSITY AND CONTEMPORARINESS CHAPTER 1 Pursuing the entrepreneurial university Burton Clark CHAPTER 2 Between tradition and renewal: challenges of the entrepreneurial university Jorge Luis Nicolas Audy CHAPTER 3 Principles of the university in the 21 st century: university and knowledge production Juan Jose Moriño Mosquera PART II UNIVERSITIES IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD CHAPTER 4 The modernization process of european universities: the challenge of the society of knowledge and globalization Jose Ginés Mora CHAPTER 5 Entrepreneurship in American Higher Education Robert Chernow PART III CHALLENGES OF THE UNIVERSITY CHAPTER 6 Internationalization of Higher Education: a model under construction. 167 Marília Costa Morosini Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the University / Inovação e empreendedorismo na Universidade 5

7 CHAPTER 7 Strategic innovation in the competitive context of universities Alziro César de Morais Rodrigues CHAPTER 8 Professionalizing management in Higher Education Institutions Barbara Kehm CHAPTER 9 Higher Education in the Bologna process framework Carolina de Sousa CHAPTER 10 Art and techniques: challenges for the innovation of teaching Solange Medina Ketzer CHAPTER 11 Academic technology transfer Terry Young CHAPTER 12 University-Industry relationships in Brazil: diagnosis and perspectives Marli Elizabeth Ritter dos Santos José Luis Solleiro PART IV HIGHER EDUCATION, CHANGE AND THE IMPACTS ON THE UNIVERSITY S MISSION CHAPTER 13 The Bologna process and its implementation in Germany Wolfgang Neuser CHAPTER 14 University under impact: the challenges of change Erico Hammes CHAPTER 15 Entrepreneurial University: a view from PUCRS Jorge Nicolas Audy Gabriela Cardozo Ferreira CHAPTER 16 The Catholic University: between tradition and renewal the challenges of building an Entrepreneurial University Evilazio Teixeira Jorge Nicolas Audy 6 AUDY, J. L. N. & MOROSINI, M. C. (Orgs.)

8 SUMÁRIO Apresentação Joaquim Clotet PARTE I UNIVERSIDADE E CONTEMPORANEIDADE CAPÍTULO 1 Em busca da universidade empreendedora Burton Clark CAPÍTULO 2 Entre a tradição e a renovação: os desafios da Universidade empreendedora Jorge Luis Nicolas Audy CAPÍTULO 3 Princípios da universidade no século XXI: universidade e produção do conhecimento Juan Jose Moriño Mosquera PARTE II AS UNIVERSIDADES NO MUNDO DESENVOLVIDO CAPÍTULO 4 O processo de modernização das universidades européias: o desafio da sociedade do conhecimento e da globalização Jose Ginés Mora CAPÍTULO 5 Empreendedorismo na Educação Superior Americana Robert Chernow PARTE III DESAFIOS DA UNIVERSIDADE CAPÍTULO 6 Internacionalização da Educação Superior: um modelo em construção? Marília Costa Morosini Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the University / Inovação e empreendedorismo na Universidade 7

9 CAPÍTULO 7 A inovação estratégica no contexto competitivo das universidades Alziro César de Morais Rodrigues CAPÍTULO 8 Profissionalizando a gestão nas Instituições de Educação Superior Barbara Kehm CAPÍTULO 9 O Ensino Superior no quadro do processo de Bolonha Carolina de Sousa CAPÍTULO 10 Arte e técnica: desafio para a inovação do ensino Solange Medina Ketzer CAPÍTULO 11 Transferência de tecnologia acadêmica Terry Young CAPÍTULO 12 Relações Universidade-Empresa no Brasil: diagnóstico e perspectivas Marli Elizabeth Ritter dos Santos José Luis Solleiro PARTE IV EDUCAÇÃO SUPERIOR, MUDANÇA E OS IMPACTOS DA MISSÃO DA UNIVERSIDADE CAPÍTULO 13 O processo de Bolonha e sua implantação na Alemanha Wolfgang Neuser CAPÍTULO 14 Universidade sob impacto: desafios da mudança Erico Hammes CAPÍTULO 15 Universidade empreendedora: uma visão da PUCRS Jorge Nicolas Audy Gabriela Cardozo Ferreira CAPÍTULO 16 Universidade Católica: entre a tradição e renovação os desafios da construção de uma universidade empreendedora Evilazio Teixeira Jorge Nicolas Audy 8 AUDY, J. L. N. & MOROSINI, M. C. (Orgs.)

10 PRESENTATION Contemporary society is living a moment of extraordinary dynamism, which is expressed in the economy, culture and technology. The university of the 21 st century is not made of a refractory, inert institution in relation to this process of constant transformations. The flow and uninterrupted challenges of the knowledge society, of the information world and the era of globalization have an impact in various ways upon the university in its administrative, curricular, financial, research, extension, collaboration and partnership structures, crossing boundaries and hemispheres. Without abandoning its foundational principles, nor its plural historical and social mission, today the university comes to recognize and accept, the innovative and entrepreneurial character, a feature of the society that is organized in large cooperation networks. It is entrepreneurial due to its commitment to the development of the community in which it is inserted; due to the construction of attitudes and skills that it provides to academics; due to the efficient management and the financial sustainability that facilitates institutional consolidation, maintenance and the growth of quality research and, as a consequence, social development. Without a doubt, these are some of the characteristics that identify excellence in higher education these days. This is the important content and relevant message of the following chapters, masterfully exposed by remarkable higher education professionals from various countries and different universities. The Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, continuing a long walk of effort and success, paved by its dedicated initiators, continues committed to the achievement of new goals of efficiency according to the recent development of the humanities, science and technology, in a dialogical attitude with the orientations of the Catholic Church and under a centenary tradition of Marist education. I am deeply thankful to the renowned representative professors of important universities from Germany, the United States of America, Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the University / Inovação e empreendedorismo na Universidade 9

11 Spain, Portugal and our own dear country. Their knowledge, experience and availability are highly enriching for us. To the distinguished professors of our esteemed university, my admiration and appreciation. A special mention of gratitude to Professor Jorge Audy, Provost of the Research and Graduate Program, and to Professor Marília Costa Morosini, Advisor of the mentioned Provost, for her endless efforts in the realization of this event and publication of the present edition. To the translators, proofreaders and other collaborators, my best wishes. The elaboration of the various chapters of this book by the renowned authors and the attentive reading of these pages by the members of our university community are also attitudes that strengthen the innovation and entrepreneurship of PUCRS and which immeasurably benefit our homeland. This is, certainly, a reason for happiness and satisfaction for us all. Joaquim Clotet President of PUCRS 10 AUDY, J. L. N. & MOROSINI, M. C. (Orgs.)

12 APRESENTAÇÃO A sociedade contemporânea vive um momento de extraordinário dinamismo, que se expressa na economia, na cultura, na tecnologia. A universidade do século XXI não se constitui uma instituição refratária e inerte em relação a esse processo de constantes transformações. O fluxo e o desafio ininterruptos da sociedade do conhecimento, do mundo da informação e da era da globalização impactam de modos diversos a universidade na sua estrutura administrativa, curricular, financeira, de pesquisa, de extensão, de colaboração e de convênios, ultrapassando fronteiras e hemisférios. Sem abdicar dos seus princípios fundacionais, nem da sua plural missão histórica e social, a universidade passa a reconhecer e a aceitar, nos dias de hoje, o caráter inovador e empreendedor, próprio da sociedade que se organiza em grandes redes de cooperação. Ela é empreendedora pelo seu compromisso com o desenvolvimento da comunidade na qual está inserida; pela formação de atitudes e habilidades que propicia aos acadêmicos; pelo gerenciamento eficiente e pela sustentabilidade financeira que facilitam a consolidação institucional, a manutenção e o crescimento da pesquisa de qualidade e, consequentemente, pelo desenvolvimento social. Não há dúvida, essas são algumas das características que identificam a excelência da educação superior em nossos dias. Esse é o importante conteúdo e a relevante mensagem dos capítulos a seguir, magistralmente expostos por notáveis profissionais da educação superior de diversos países e de diferentes universidades. A Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, prosseguindo uma longa caminhada de esforço e de sucesso, trilhada pelos seus dedicados iniciadores, continua engajada na consecução de novas metas de eficiência de acordo com o desenvolvimento hodierno das humanidades, da ciência e da tecnologia, numa atitude dialógica com as orientações da Igreja Católica e sob a centenária tradição educativa marista. Os meus sinceros agradecimentos aos ilustres professores representantes de reconhecidas universidades da Alemanha, dos Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the University / Inovação e empreendedorismo na Universidade 11

13 Estados Unidos da América, da Espanha, de Portugal e do nosso querido país. Seu saber, experiência e disposição nos enriquecem enormemente. Aos distintos professores da nossa estimada universidade a minha admiração e o meu reconhecimento. Uma menção especial de gratidão ao Professor Jorge Audy, Pró-Reitor de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação, e à Professora Marília Costa Morosini, Assessora da mesma Pró-Reitoria, pelo seu denodado esforço na realização do evento e na publicação da presente edição. Aos tradutores, revisores e demais colaboradores os meus sinceros cumprimentos. A elaboração dos diversos capítulos desse livro pelos reconhecidos autores e a leitura atenta dessas páginas pelos integrantes da nossa comunidade universitária são, também, atitudes que fortalecem a inovação e o empreendedorismo da PUCRS e que beneficiam incomensuravelmente nossa pátria. Este é, com certeza, um motivo de alegria e de satisfação para todos nós. Joaquim Clotet Reitor da PUCRS 12 AUDY, J. L. N. & MOROSINI, M. C. (Orgs.)

14 PART I / PARTE I THE UNIVERSITY AND CONTEMPORARINESS UNIVERSIDADE E CONTEMPORANEIDADE

15 CHAPTER 1 PURSUING THE ENTREPRENEURIAL UNIVERSITY* Burton R. Clark ** What is the problem? I want begin by circling in on a basic problem faced many modern universities, as specified by leading university administrators, and then proceed in the heart of the paper to a body of research that offers some answers. Clark Kerr, in the early 1990s, defined the basic problem in five crisp sentences 1 : For the first time a really international world of learning, highly competitive, is emerging. If you want to get that orbit, you have to do so on merit. You cannot rely on politics or anything else. You have to give a great deal of autonomy to institutions for them to be dynamic and to move fast in international competition. You have to develop entrepreneurial leadership to go along with institutional autonomy. Contrary to the conventional top-down view of those responsible for whole systems of higher education, the Kerr perspective stresses that only autonomous universities are positioned to move fast enough in fast-changing times and to match up against increased competition. And passive autonomy will not do. Active autonomy led by an entrepreneurial point of views is needed. *My comments draw upon an unpublished address to the opening plenary session of the 2005 annual meeting of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC), Quebec, April, **Professor Emeritus of Higher-Education, Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles. 1 Clark Kerr (1993). Universal issues in the development of Higher Education. In Judith B. Balderston and Frederick E. Balderston (Eds.). Higher Education in Indonesia: evolution and reform. Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education, university of California, pp Quotation, p. 33. Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the University / Inovação e empreendedorismo na Universidade 15

16 What is needed is one thing: what we get is often something quite different. Traditional collegiality may stand in the way. Bernard and Harold Shapiro (president of McGill and Princeton respectively, at the time) cogently argued in the mid-1990s that collegiality is normally biased in favor of the status quo not to mention the status quo ante. The challenge becomes to redefine our understandings and commitments so that, in empirical terms, collegiality and difficult choices are not mutuality exclusive 2. The need here becomes more specific: to unhook collegiality from fulltime service to the status quo and put I t to work in the service of decision-making that promotes change. Again, easy to say, hard to do. Structures have to be put into place and cultures need to evolve which promote new understandings and commitments. Weighing in on the mid-1990s conversation, Donald Kennedy, formerly president of Stanford and currently editor of Science, argued for a new collegial approach. The questions to be asked in reform efforts will not be answered by academic fiat from the center, nor will they yield to the embedded mechanisms of faculty decision-making. They require a new coalition 3. Traditional faculty and new managers need to be brought together at multiple levels of organization, particularly at the all-university center, if adaptive reform is to be effectively pursued. A research exercise The concerns of such leading university administrators as Kerr, the Shapiro brothers, and Kennedy can be taken up as a matter of empirical research. In undertaking, the question is always how. How do universities move from a traditional posture wedded to the status quo to a new posture that in change oriented? That posture can be variously named the innovative university, they proactive university, the entrepreneurial university. Call it what you will, the key point is how is it accomplished. I have been engaged in an effort that started in 1994 and has continued for a decade to find out how that transformation is 2 Bernard J. Shapiro and Harold T. Shapiro (1995). Universities in Higher Education: Some Problems and Challenges in a Changing World. Quebec: McGill University (Office of the President, unpublished paper. 3 Donald Kennedy (1993). Making Choices in the University. In Jonathan R. Cole, Elinor G. Barber, and Stephen R. Graubard (Eds.), The university in a time of discontent. Pp Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. 16 AUDY, J. L. N. & MOROSINI, M. C. (Orgs.)

17 negotiated. The research effort centers on institutional case studies reported in narrative from, in which I looked for what asset of universities have in common and at the same time tried to grasp their uniquenesses, their singularities. Narratives bout each institution allow for this combinations. My efforts over a decade two main parts, the second building upon the first. The earlier one, a mid-1990s burst of field research led to my 1998 book Cresting Entrepreneurial Universities subtitled Organizational Pathways of Transformations was followed by a 2000-second book, Sustaining Change in Universities, subtitle Continuities in Case Studies and Concepts, published in late I want to tell you what I was after in each of these studies and what I found out. Looking back now, it all seems relatively clear. But it was not clear at the time. Tracking the actions of complex universities, especially those undergoing significant change, is a muddy business. Broad theories are too remote and inexact. One has to stay close to actual practice and reason inductively from the ground up. Such research contains a fair amount of muddling-through and risk-taking. The earlier mid-1990s research effort I discovered in the early 1990s, after formal retirement, that I wanted to do one more research project I could pursue on my own. I would go to Europe on frequent trips and there study a small set of universities recommended to me as being uncommonly pro-active in attempting to reform their character. The institutions became five in number: Warwick University in the English Midlands, the University of Twente in eastern Holland, Strathclyde in Glasgow, Scotland, the University of Joensuu in rural Finland, and Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden. To summarize quickly, I saw five common elements as pathways of transformation: first, diversified university income; second, strengthened steering capacity; third, an extended developmental periphery consisting of non-departmental research centers and outreach 4 Burton R. Clark (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: organizational pathways of transformation. Oxford: Pergamon-Elsevier Science. Sustaining change in universities: continuities in case studies and concepts. Maidenhead, Berkshire, England: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open university Press. Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the University / Inovação e empreendedorismo na Universidade 17

18 programs; fourth, a stimulated academic heartland old departments newly activated; and, finally, an embracing entrepreneurial culture the build-up of a system of beliefs that wrapped around the more material features identified in the first four pathways. In the 1998 book, these derived concepts, were stated first, to be as clear as possible, and then were woven into five institutional stories, in no particular order, as an explanatory framework. Upon publication, the book immediately had a good hearing. The problem of much needed university reform was rapidly deepening around the world, giving credence to what I claimed was a growing demand-response imbalance, in which demands made upon universities were outstripping their inherited capacity to respond. The growing interest in reform naturally led to the question of how to go about doing it, and my book, serving somewhat as a practical manual, went directly to that question by specifying some pathways an depicting their play in five different institutional and national contexts. Central in the good hearing was a OECD international conference held in Paris in 2000 that was organized around the categories highlighted in the book. The rectors, vice-chancellors, and presidents of the five universities attended and made lead-off presentations and much fun was had by all discussing the pro and cons of the emerging entrepreneurial university. The book soon received Spanish, Japanese, and Chinese translations, and the latter was used in a 2001 international conference held in China. The book has been kept in circulation by four printings. The mid-1990s research and the intense follow-on discussions were enormously educational for me, I had in effect turned away from scholarly theorizing and gone directly to observed practice. By doing so, I had moved to research that was for use as well as for understanding. The round of research Now let s fast forward to more recent times. Beginning in 2000, I did an article a year taken from material out of the book to reach different audiences. Why not leave it at that? I could not because the topic had grabbed me anew in two ways. First, I became increasingly impressed by case studies done by others that could be related to my framework. (More about that in a moment.) Additionally, I was annoyed by easy criticisms of my work: that I failed to understand that 18 AUDY, J. L. N. & MOROSINI, M. C. (Orgs.)

19 the government remains the university s best friend and, for another, that I was tampering with the soul of university s. The first, a common point of view in Europe enunciated at the Paris meeting by a minister of education, was immediately taken care of by the Warwick vice-chancellor Sir Brian Follett as he walked the audience through twenty years of crackdown and underfunding by the government in Britain. No best friend there! The soul talking has proven to be a hardier phenomenon, serving as a defense of the status quo ante. Its idealization of some vague essence of traditional universities avoids such well-known weaknesses as their historic discrimination against women, lower-class students, and minorities, their opposition to new fields of study as a supposed dilution of university character, and their tendency to become out-of-touch with important societal needs. And the soul-talkers tend to avoid the empirical reality of what universities, past and present, actually do. Ambition and annoyance led me to pursue more case studies and expand on the initial conceptual framework. My new book offers 14 case studies. In it I first pursue the documented record of my original 5 European case during the years to see if they had make a transformation stick, with litter or no sliding back, and to see if perhaps they had acquired a capacity to go on changing. I then added 3 cases from the work of other scholars that took me out of Europe to exemplary cases of university reform in Africa (University of Makerene in Uganda), in Latin America (Catholic University of Chile), and in Australia (Monash University). Then, in a final push to find the gold of the entrepreneurial university its critical infrastructures and beliefs I took up 6 U.S. universities, 2 private (Stanford and MIT), and public (Michigan, UCLA, North Carolina State University, Georgia Institute of Technology) that led to a depiction of genetic entrepreneurialism in a huge decentralized, differentiated, and intensely competitive system of universities. In this second book, I did make my conclusions clear at the outset. No executive summary here. No Big Bang discovery. No easy skimming of general points off the top. I wanted to emphasize that change in universities typically proceeds in a cumulative incremental fashion. I imitate the logic of that process in the book by gradually unfolding results, case by case. Emergent finding in later cases lend weight to previous findings and add new life to them. The case studies are thereby emphasized as sources od insight both into amplifying Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the University / Inovação e empreendedorismo na Universidade 19

20 variations of common features and the thousand-and-one singularities of historical development, geographic location, successive presidents that finally make each university unique, one of a kind. In two conceptual chapters I sought to re-analyze the five pathways of transformation, o specify them better, and to push on to the question of sustained change. Some key points were highlighted in a final chapter entitled The Entrepreneurial Road to University Self- Reliance, where I fully moved from description to advocacy. Here I converged considerably whit the work of Michael Shattock who published a book, Managing Successful Universities, based on UK experience, a few months before mine 5. Mike s empirically derived understanding of why most universities will not become seriously entrepreneurial set the stage for me in the final chapter to assert, as strongly as I could, what sustained effort and collective willpower are exhibited in universities that made a major movement down the road of sturdy self-reliance and self-assertion. We want to do it ourselves led in time to we have done it ourselves and here is our distinctive story, our saga. The build-up of a steady stage of change Beyond transformation we find the possibilities of sustained change. In the most successful cases of entrepreneurialism in universities, what is sustained is a capacity to go on changing. That capacity can be seen organizationally as a steady state of change. In an early dim sensing of this type of steady state in contrast to the ordinary steady state that exists when a university is married to the status quo I concluded in the earlier book that the five elements of transformation become just that by means of their interaction. Each by itself cannot make a significant difference. Those who see universities from the top-down might readily assume that the strengthened steering core is the leading element. But a newly constituted management group, for example, is soon without teeth if discretionary funds are not available, if new outreach units spanning the periphery cannot be constructed, if heartland departments fall into apposition, and if the group s idea of a transformed institution gains no cultural footing 6. 5 Michael Shattock (2003). Managing successful universities. Maidenhead, Berkshire, England: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. 6 Clark (1998), op. cit., p AUDY, J. L. N. & MOROSINI, M. C. (Orgs.)

21 In the 14 case studies written up cumulatively over a three year period, I gained one hint after another about the central importance of interaction among the structures of transformation. The continuous diversification of income think development officers freed up discretion in the steering capacity that stretched from basic departments to mid-level schools and colleges to the university s top offices, groups, and committees. The stronger steering capacity think entrepreneurial groups worked to spread and energize the search for income, to develop productive multidisciplinary outreach and teaching, and to make more creditable the claim of distinctive culture. The continuous reworking of the periphery fed back upon income diversification and the distribution of authority, including challenging the primary of traditional departments. Round and round it goes. You can enter the cycle of interaction at one point and you are soon in the company of the other basic features. Thus, transforming elements have to be seen as ongoing processes and not as endpoints. They co-evolve. We stay away from idealization of any one feature of organizational change, especially from the depiction, borrowed from business, of a strong CEO who would put the university on his or her back, overcome all obstacles if not part the waves, and carry the institution to the promised land. Rather, we learn, if we did not know it before, that change is piecemeal, experimental, and adaptive on a number of ongoing, interacting fronts. In an effort to clarify a very complicated flow of change. I set forth in the new book three dynamics of change : the dynamic of reinforcing interaction, the dynamic of perpetual momentum; and, most powerful, the dynamic of ambitions collegial volition, the intensifying of collective willpower. The dynamic of reinforcing interaction Sustained change in universities is rooted in changes on many fronts that lead to a combined infrastructure in which the substantial alterations are interlocked and mutually supportive. There is an emergent organizational foundation that we can appropriately understand as the steady state of change. Traditional universities have a steady state oriented toward inertia: the status quo has the upper hand. The universities that transform themselves on a number of fronts develop a steady state too one also full of vested interests, standard operating procedures, and, sunk costs which is oriented Innovation and entrepreneurialism in the University / Inovação e empreendedorismo na Universidade 21

22 toward change. The new status quo is development oriented. Out of interaction with one another and now linked together, the newly institutionalized elements resist a sliding back to the old status quo. The first new principle, then, is that elements of transformation become elements of sustainability as they become interlocked and reinforcing in a new basic organizational character. The dynamic of perpetual momentum The steady state of change itself changes incrementally. As stepby-step adjustments are made to changing demands and newly appearing opportunities, cumulative change rolls a university forward. The institution acquires a steady momentum that need not have a particular stopping point. Depending upon small incremental gains, fashioned essentially out of learning-by-experimenting, such forward movement does not depend on lucky throws of the dice in selecting one major investment. Rather, momentum is acquired from the cumulative thrust of small steps. Our second new principle then is that elements of transformation become elements of sustainability as their cumulative incrementalism produces a perpetual momentum. The interlocking composite acquires a forward impetus. The university leans toward the future. Think Warwick on the European stage. Think University of Michigan in the U.S. system since the early 1980s. The dynamic of ambitions collegial volition Is there any doubt that some universities try much harder than others to improve their performance, especially when that improvement means much hard work to effect long-term change in character? The play of sheer will repeatedly come to the surface. Behind the interlocking interaction and the perpetual momentum, something like institutional will play a basic role. In understanding what is at work, the concept of volition. Borrowed from political economy, is helpful. In the framework developed by Charles E. Lindblom, democracy (or polyarchy rule by many) not only follows from the will of the people but also induces and shapes that will. Polyarchy is a process that forms volitions as well as a process for making policy respond to them. A volition is an emergent act of will, in the form of a decision to pursue a certain 22 AUDY, J. L. N. & MOROSINI, M. C. (Orgs.)