IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/poicbe/v12y2018i1p612-625n55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking the triple helix (university-industry-government) to the quadruple helix of university-industry-government – civil society in the field of international business and economics

Author

Listed:
  • Miron Dumitru

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Gherasim Ioan Alexandru

    (Corvinius University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

Current educational systems and processes need to anticipate the challenges of the new millennium and lay the foundations for the future in the economic, social, technological, cultural and relational context. New educational programs must seriously consider a number of conditions such as: entirely new ways of serving existing needs and significantly disrupt existing industry value chains; growing transparency, consumer engagement, and new patterns of consumer behavior; the development of technology-enabled platforms that combine both demand and supply to disrupt existing industry structures, such as those we see within the “sharing” or “on demand” economy. In this paper I`ve started from the assumption that in the specific conditions of a creativity-based economy is necessary to rethink the components of the matrix partnership crossing from `triple helix` to `quadruple helix` logic. This new model becomes necessary because under current regional and international circumstances Mode 3 of knowledge production has become generalized. In this paper I`ve opted for the concept that adds civil society proposing reformulate the analytical model so as to place in balance integration with differentiation to produce suitability for a societal design defined by the self-organization of the sense communication process with respect to the analytical axes of complex systems. The basic idea of the research is to identify the way in which the challenges of internationalization of education, the transformations required by the emergence of this process, and the most relevant redefining that must take place at the level of curricular architectures and learning methods are understood. Based on the research I have made, I recommended few ways to cope with sensitive challenges educational systems are confronted with such as: better connecting theory and practice, teaching a more useful economics, designing the future based on the understanding of the past, minimizing the rhetorical component and maximizing the factual one, testing conformity of different ideas in advance.

Suggested Citation

  • Miron Dumitru & Gherasim Ioan Alexandru, 2018. "Linking the triple helix (university-industry-government) to the quadruple helix of university-industry-government – civil society in the field of international business and economics," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 612-625, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:poicbe:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:612-625:n:55
    DOI: 10.2478/picbe-2018-0055
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2018-0055
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/picbe-2018-0055?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elias Carayannis & David Campbell, 2011. "Open Innovation Diplomacy and a 21st Century Fractal Research, Education and Innovation (FREIE) Ecosystem: Building on the Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Concepts and the “Mode 3” Knowledge ," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 2(3), pages 327-372, September.
    2. Yawson, Robert M., 2009. "The ecological system of innovation: A new architectural framework for a functional evidence-based platform for science and innovation policy," MPRA Paper 33179, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    4. Dumitru MIRON, 2008. "Linking the double helix of learning and work to the triple helix of university – industry – government in the Europe of knowledge," Management & Marketing, Economic Publishing House, vol. 3(4), Winter.
    5. Craig Boardman & Denis Gray, 2010. "The new science and engineering management: cooperative research centers as government policies, industry strategies, and organizations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 445-459, October.
    6. Lundvall, Bengt-Ake & Johnson, Bjorn & Andersen, Esben Sloth & Dalum, Bent, 2002. "National systems of production, innovation and competence building," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 213-231, February.
    7. Henry Etzkowitz & Chunyan Zhou, 2006. "Triple Helix twins: innovation and sustainability," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 77-83, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Talya Ponchek, 2016. "To Collaborate or Not to Collaborate? A Study of the Value of Innovation from a Sectoral Perspective," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(1), pages 43-79, March.
    2. Hohberger, Jan & Almeida, Paul & Parada, Pedro, 2015. "The direction of firm innovation: The contrasting roles of strategic alliances and individual scientific collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1473-1487.
    3. Christophe CARRINCAZEAUX, 2009. "Spatial dynamics of innovation (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-21, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    4. Pattravadee Ploykitikoon & Charles M. Weber, 2019. "Knowledge Pathways and Performance: An Empirical Study of the National Laboratories in a Technology Latecomer Country," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 1-37, May.
    5. Marvello Yang & Norizan Jaafar & Abdullah Al Mamun & Anas A. Salameh & Noorshella Che Nawi, 2022. "Modelling the significance of strategic orientation for competitive advantage and economic sustainability: the use of hybrid SEM–neural network analysis," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, December.
    6. María-Jesús Luengo-Valderrey & Julián Pando-García & Iñaki Periáñez-Cañadillas & Amparo Cervera-Taulet, 2020. "Analysis of the Impact of the Triple Helix on Sustainable Innovation Targets in Spanish Technology Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, April.
    7. Wang, Yuandi & Sutherland, Dylan & Ning, Lutao & Pan, Xin, 2015. "The evolving nature of China's regional innovation systems: Insights from an exploration–exploitation approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 140-152.
    8. Ardalan Haghighi Talab & Victor Scholten & Cees van Beers, 2020. "The Role of Universities in Inter-organizational Knowledge Collaborations," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(2), pages 458-478, June.
    9. Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Inés Andújar-Nagore & Sandro Giachi & Manuel Fernández-Esquinas, 2016. "New Organizational Arrangements for Public-Private Research Collaboration," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(1), pages 80-103, March.
    10. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua Krieger & Abhishek Nagaraj, 2024. "Old Moats for New Models: Openness, Control, and Competition in Generative AI," NBER Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, volume 4, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Thomas Bolli & Martin Woerter, 2013. "Technological Diversification and Innovation Performance," KOF Working papers 13-336, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    12. Balázs Lengyel & Vladislav Cadil, 2009. "Innovation Policy Challenges in Transition Countries: Foreign Business R&D in the Czech Republic and Hungary," Transition Studies Review, Springer;Central Eastern European University Network (CEEUN), vol. 16(1), pages 174-188, May.
    13. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2013. "Endogeneous matching in university-industry collaboration: Theory and empirical evidence from the UK," Economics Working Papers 1379, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    14. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    15. Mário Franco & Heiko Haase & Sandra Correia, 2018. "Exploring Factors in the Success of Creative Incubators: a Cultural Entrepreneurship Perspective," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(1), pages 239-262, March.
    16. Marte C.W. Solheim & Ron Boschma & Sverre Herstad, 2018. "Related variety, unrelated variety and the novelty content of firm innovation in urban and non-urban locations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1836, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2018.
    17. Tan Yigitcanlar & Ingi Runar Edvardsson & Hjalti Johannesson & Md Kamruzzaman & Giuseppe Ioppolo & Surabhi Pancholi, 2017. "Knowledge-based development dynamics in less favoured regions: insights from Australian and Icelandic university towns," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(12), pages 2272-2292, December.
    18. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2009. "Diversity of science linkages and innovation performance: some empirical evidence from Flemish firms," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-30, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    19. Fay, Scott & Mitra, Deb & Wang, Qiong, 2009. "Ask or infer? Strategic implications of alternative learning approaches in customization," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 136-152.
    20. Véronique Schaeffer & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Julien Pénin, 2020. "The complementarities between formal and informal channels of university–industry knowledge transfer: a longitudinal approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 31-55, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:poicbe:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:612-625:n:55. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.