Designing an intellectual capital management system: evaluation process

through specific quality indicators. 

K. Kalemis D.Ed., M.Sc., M.A.EdInstructor at the National Centre for Public Administration

and Local Government (E.K.D.D.A.) in Adult Education and Lifelong Learning

Scientific Associate at the Department of Primary Education (PTDE) in National and Kapodistrian University

of Athens

Outline of the presentation:Introduction

Main characteristics of Universities

today

Assumptions

Internationalization of Higher Education

Conclusions and Discussion

33

Assumptions

Universities of the 21st century must be

global, egalitarian, democratic, diverse,

productive, sustainable, and accountable.

The major aims of higher education institutions (HEIs) are: (1)

achieving excellence in teaching, research, and community service.

providing solutions for national, regional, and global most important problems.

contributing to the development of the national capital.

The major aims of higher education institutions (HEIs) are: (2)

nurturing intellectual properties and patents.

contributing to the economic and social development of humanity including public health, improvement of crops production, and cross-cultural and religious understanding.

66

Assumptions (Cont.) The 21st century job market requires a

technology literate and competent workforce with the ability to create, innovate, solve problems, and work in teams.

Investment in higher education is most important and valuable as HEIs provide the world's leaders, scientists, businessmen, physicians, thinkers, and visionaries who chart society's cultural, scientific, and technological future.

Assumptions (Cont.)

Not only do HEIs contribute to the nation's human capital and technological transformation but also to its social and cultural identity.

HEIs cooperate with industry and business, enhance innovation, creativity, democracy, and wise governance in economy, politics, entrepreneurship, justice and equity

88

Definition of Internationalization:

"Internationalization of Higher Education is the process of integrating an international and intercultural dimension into the teaching, research and service functions of the institution“.

"(knight and De Wit, 1997). "Internationalization at the national, sector, and institutional

levels is defined as the process of integrating an international, inter- cultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of postsecondary Education“.

(knight, 2003)(Huang & Lin 2007, p 69)

Purpose?

• " … the purpose of internationalization of higher education is to enhance students' ability to engage in job-related problem solving and decision making in ways that reflect knowledge and respect for other cultures".

Refer to : (1)

The above definitions of Internationalization of HE relate to:

• curriculum design and implementation:

1.content, 2.delivery,

3.evaluation & 4. modification.

• research, patents and innovation

• graduate studies, joint degree programmes MA & PhD.

• student and faculty mobility

• faculty hiring and firing• partnerships with

business

Refer to : (2)

• international foundation programme

• cross border education

• open course ware materials

• blended teaching and learning.

• national, regional, continental and global areas of education.

Indicators of Internationalization in HEIndicators of Internationalization are informed by the main features

of international practice in respect of:

– Excellence in teaching and research– Commitment to cultural understanding– Mobility of students and staff– Employability and generic skills.

as expressed in its curriculum, quality assurance, foreign language provision, international programmes, membership in international associations, international agreements and memoranda of understanding, research, student mobility, graduate employability faculty mobility, faculty recruitment and evaluation.

Curriculum innovation and modification

University QualityAssurance Committee

Faculty CouncilFaculty Quality

Assurance Committee

Department Council

Council of Deans

GuidanceWorking

Group

Module Working Groups

Learning Resources

Working Group

Research ProjectsWorking

Group

ExaminationWorking Group

Scientific/Academic

Working Group

CurriculumWorking Group

Department QualityAssurance Committee

General layout of QA committees and councils at the University level

Learning ResourcesCommittee

GuidanceCommittee

ModulesCommittee

Res. ProjectsCommittee

ScientificCommittee

LibraryCommittee

ExamsCommittee

Faculty CouncilFaculty Quality

Assurance Committee

Layout of QA committees and councils at the faculty level

Learning ResourcesCommittee

GuidanceCommittee

ModulesCommittee

Res. ProjectCommittee

ScientificCommittee

LibraryCommittee

ExamCommittee

Department CouncilDepartment Quality

Assurance Committee

Layout of QA committees and councils at the department level

Performance ConsultingPerformance Consulting

Performance Consulting

– A process in which a trainer and the organizational client work together (“bundled solution”) to determine what needs to be done to improve results

– Performance consulting approach:

• Focusing on identifying and addressing root causes of performance problems.

• Recognizing that the interaction of individual and organizational factors influences employee performance.

• Documenting the actions and accomplishments of high performers and comparing them with actions of more typical performers.

Elements of Training DesignElements of Training Design

The Balanced Scorecard

Framework

Balanced scorecard

• This is one of the best-known methodologies. It aligns the evaluation of the people dimension to a company's strategic aims through a balanced scorecard.

• The scorecard originally had four elements:– Financial, – Customer, – Internal business process, – Learning and growth.

• One of the main benefits of the scorecard approach is that it provides a simple communication tool for internal and external stakeholders.

Management of Intangible Assets in Higher Education

Think Academic – Act Business University Structures and Processes

Identification and Controlling of Intangible Assets

I.C. Report: A Measurement and Controlling Tool

Case Study – I.C. Management in Spanish Universities

The Process of Research Commercialization

Human Resource Management Improving IPR Output

University ProcessesS

up

po

rt P

roc.

VisionVision

Teaching

Research and Development

Continuing Education

Goals & Policies

Co

re P

roce

sse

sM

gm

t. P

roc

.

Administratio

n

Controlling

Steering

Quality Mgmt.

HRMFinancing

IntangibleCapital

TangibleCapital

Graduates

IPR

R&D in Particular

VisionVision

Desk Research

PrototypeDevelopment

IP Production / R&D

Idea

TestingAdaptation

IP Valuation

IPProtection

Goals &Policies

IPR & Innovation

Co

re P

roce

sses

Mg

mt.

Pro

ces

ses

Su

pp

ort

P

roce

sses

Admin

istra

tion

Controlling

Steering

Quality Mgmt.

HRM

IP Monito

ring

Fina

ncin

g

IntangibleCapital

TangibleCapital

IPExploitation

Conclusions

Global Financial Crisis has a major affect on the role of Universities today.

Close relation between HEI and MarketProfessionalismNew Subjects (almost 25 % new each

year)Quality assurance in HEI.

Reference List• Altenburger, O., Schaffhauser-Linzatti, M. (2006): Controlling universities’ intellectual

capital: are the recently implemented Austrian instruments adequate?, paper presented at the EIASM Workshop on Visualising, Measuring, and Managing Intangibles and Intellectual Capital, Maastricht, October 25-27.

• Kaplan, R., Norton, D. (2004). Measuring the strategic readiness of intangible assets, Harvard Business Review, February, 52-63.

• Leitner, K-H. (2010): Werkzeugkiste. Wissensbilanz, Organisationsentwicklung, 1/2010, 90-93.

• Leitner K-H. (2004): Intellectual capital reporting for universities: conceptual background and application for Austrian universities, Research Evaluation, 13, 2, 129-140.

• Sanchez, P.M. and Elena, S. (2006): Intellectual capital in universities: improving transparency and internal management, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7, 4, 529-48.

• Sanchez, P.M., Elena, S., Castrillo, R. (2009): Intellectual capital dynamics in universities: a reporting model, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10, 2, 307-24.

• Secundo, G., Margherita, A., Elia, E., Passiante, G. (2010): Intangible assets in higher education and research: mission, performance or both?, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11, 2, 140- 157.

QUESTIONS ?

Thank you