Intrapreneurship and Innovation in Engineering Education

Authors

  • V. Thanikachalam Chennai-600041

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2016/v30i2/105435

Keywords:

Intrapreneurship–Development Policies-Internal Revenue Generation and Utilization.

Abstract

It is observed that around 1- 2 % of the faculty members in autonomous institutes usually take a risk in developing many innovative projects and programs for corporate and International Development Agencies (IDAs) by responding to letters of invitation or advertisements through abiding process. They utilize their talents, expertise and prepare high quality and cost effective projects which meet the stringent terms of references (TORs). These faculties needs empowerment and a delegation of administrators of the institutes but they are usually neglected in many institutes. Usually, there is an inordinate delay in forwarding the bid documents and providing with sufficient technical staff even though the revenue generated would meet all expenditures. Most of the innovations are due to Intrapreneurship who are risk-taking faculty members, and also think out of the box and provide creative solutions. There is a need for supporting policy from the Chief Executing Officers (CEOs),Board of Governors, and government to encourage such outstanding ventures. Even though these institutes enjoy all types of autonomy but it is not passed on to the departments and to the faculty members. Institutes have to plan project specific policies, maintain separate accounts and distribute the gains as per the approved norms. Also,the fear of failing has to be removed from other faculty members besides giving the needed resources. Such initiatives would encourage more risk takers to undertake development activities, outreach programs and sponsored projects. Since the institutes have to contribute to the economy through providing a conducive environment for creating new and innovative products; the management has to take a lead.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2016-10-01

How to Cite

Thanikachalam, V. (2016). Intrapreneurship and Innovation in Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 36–43. https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2016/v30i2/105435

Issue

Section

Articles

References

Bergquist and Pawlak (2006) Engaging the Six Cultures of the Academy: Revised and Expanded Edition of the four Cultures of the Academy, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

EmilyAbbott et al (2011).“Five Essential Elements of a Successful Twenty-First Century University Corporate Relation Programâ€, Network of Academic Corporate Relations Officers Bench marking Committee, USA.

Hower A. Mark (2012). Faculty Work: Moving Beyond the Paradox of Autonomy and Collaboration, Ph.D. Thesis in Leadership and Change, Aura Antioch University, http://aura.antioch.edu/etds/117

The institution of Engineers Australia (1996).“Changing the Culture: Engineering Education into the Futureâ€,Report of the Review of Engineering Education, p 16.

Dr.James Gover and Dr. PaulHurvay. “Educating 21st Century Engineersâ€, IEEE-USA E-BOOKS, Washington DC, www.ieeeusa.org

Julio A.Pertuze et al. (2010). “Best Practices for Industry- University Collaborationâ€, MIT Sloan ManagementReview,Summer-2010, 51(4), 82-90.

Katherine Chudoba, Mary Beth Watson and Kevin Crowston (2012). “Innovation inAcademic- Industry Partnerships: Measuring Challenges to Effective Performanceâ€, TIM Submission-ID 17445, Boston, MA: Technology and Innovation Management Division, Annual Meeting of Academy of Management.

Kezaral and Lester(2009). “Organizing Higher Education for Collaboration: A Guide for Campus Leadersâ€, San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass

Mark L. Gorden. University Controlled or Owned Technology: “The State of Commercialization and Recommendationsâ€, http://www.gbkecbaiigmenfmgj fcdgdpimamgkj/views/app.html

Merrill Schwartz,Richard Skinner and Zeddie Bowen (2009)“ Faculty, Governing Boards, and Institutional Governanceâ€, TIAA-CREF Institute

Paul Lingenfelter, Richard Novak, and Richard Legon (2008).“Excellence at Scale- What is required of public leadership and governance in higher education?â€Virginia, Charlottesville: Miller Center of Public Affairs, Association of Governing Boards of Universities andColleges.

Pierre Gurdjian, Thomas Halbeisen and Kevin Lane (2014)“Why leadership-development programs fail ?â€McKinseyQuarterly, www.mckinsey.com/insights/ leding- in_the21s t_century/why_leadershipdevelopment_ programs-fail

Randy L Conyers. “A Review of Leadership Theories and Possible Changes to Police Leadershipâ€, http://www.chroome-extension//gbkeegbaigmenfmjfeledpimmgkj/views/app.html

Renu Khater (2013). “Forging Strategic Business Partnership to Develop the 21st Century Workforce,A Case Study of the University of Houston's Undergraduate Petroleum Engineering Programâ€, The Business-Higher Education Forum. www.bhef.com

Roger L.Geiger. “Corporate Sponsored Research at Penn State: Report to the Office of the Vice President for Researchâ€, Center for the Study of Higher Education, the Pennsylvania State University. http://www.edpsu/eshe/working- papers/wp-1

Senate Task Force on University-Industry Partnerships.“Principles and guidelines for Large –Scale Collaborations between the University and Industry,Government and Foundations,†USA.

Stephanie Bertels, James Gray, Omar Romoero Hemandez and Stave Hahn. “Six Challenges to Collaborative Research and Solutions for Addressing themâ€. Network for Business sustainability,Ontario,Canada:Western University

UIDP Projects (2013) “10 Case Studies of High Return University-Industry Collaborationsâ€, USA

University of Newcastle (2004). “Bench Marks in Cultural Change in Engineering Educationâ€

U.S Department of Commerce (2013) “The Innovative and Entrepreneurial University, Higher Education, Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Focusâ€, Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Development , Off ice of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Development.