UN Chronicle | DevelopmentWatch: Universities as Agents for Social and Economic Progress

DevelopmentWatch
Universities as Agents for Social and Economic Progress
By Erich E. Kunhardt

Article

There is general recognition that the realization of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is a shared responsibility of both developed and developing countries. Concrete actions under consideration include reassessing financial assistance provided by developed countries, seeking quantitative measures of success, increasing collaborative efforts between and among parties, and promoting home-grown initiatives by developing countries. Noteworthy is the effort to encourage developing countries to tap, as instruments of national transformation, educated and skilled individuals who, all too often, have been drawn to the developed world.

In this essay, I suggest that the university in developing countries can serve a critical function in the realization of MDGs. The mission I am proposing does not derive from the model of the traditional American or European university, with its emphases on undergraduate, graduate and professional education and academic research. These are non-trivial goals that should not be neglected, but they are insufficient to make the university an agent of change in the developing world. Rather, the university I have in mind must span the social and material gaps between creative individuals with innovative ideas, on the one side, and the application of technology for economic progress and social betterment, on the other. The university also will serve as a bridge that carries the traffic of social and economic development. At Stevens Institute of Technology, we label this enhanced mission as "education rooted in Technogenesis". By accepting it, the university takes responsibility for direct involvement in shaping and satisfying the needs of the community.

The arguments in favour of this mission emerge from considering these questions: Why is the university particularly well suited for this more engaged role? How can its traditional functions be enhanced to make it central to the development of a country or, in other words, what is education rooted in Technogenesis? And, finally, can Technogenesis form the basis for taking increased advantage of the financial assistance made available by the developed countries?

At present, the university in developing countries has a unique opportunity to create its own model, not by following others but through guided self-development. This can have a significant impact on the economic and social development of a nation, well beyond the education of its people. Here I provide a general outline of why I believe this to be the case. First, the world climate is right for transforming the role of the university in the developing world. For decades, the ideological posturing and political battles of the cold war significantly consumed the energies of the university. But those battles have been put aside for now and those energies can be refocused on the battle for self-realization. Success can be achieved through self-direction, not by once again blindly following after the "great nations". A nation's greatness entails the integration of many elements, and thus the models from the developed world, in particular that of the university, are not wholly transferable. The traditional university in the developed world is only a part of a more complex socio-political entity, and therefore its preoccupations and priorities are not necessarily congruent with what ought to exist in developing countries. Moreover, the experience of self-development enhances self-esteem and gives greater assurance that the university truly meets the needs of developing countries. I am not suggesting that countries or universities should go at it alone, but in the best tradition of higher education, they should undertake guided self-development. A number of individuals and organizations in the developed world may be willing to participate in joint ventures, and their participation should be welcomed, albeit with a certain caution. Such collaboration is certainly consistent with the tenor of the Millennium Declaration. Secondly, the university in developing countries does not have the burden of tradition. This observation is not meant to imply that tradition is necessarily a bad attribute, but too often it entails institutional inertia, and not having to contend with entrenched vested interests gives greater flexibility to defining new roles for the university. Thus, the university is well positioned to articulate and address the needs of society, create a better world for people and take on the challenges of the Declaration. And, finally, in most if not all developing nations, the university educates the "governing class"—composed mainly of professional people—and professional education has been its principal mission. Thus, getting the university involved in a country's development is a natural extension of its present social function and socio-political connections, which means economic and social development, not simply political maturation. In fact, any explicitly political reforms should evolve out of economic and social developments, and not the other way around.

This is to say that given a sufficient consensus, the general connection between a country's governing-class and its university can facilitate the university's transformation into a powerful instrument for national self-determination and the betterment of a people without prejudice or apologies in the face of globalization or other outside pressures.

What must the university in the developing countries do to become an agent for economic and social development? With the caveat of not cavalierly transferring examples from the developed world, I am suggesting a model that can be used for the guided self-development of the university. This model is called "education rooted in Technogenesis". A name we use to capture the spirit of our educational environment, Technogenesis contains the following elements:

Creative intellectual work, which includes pioneering research, traditional scholarship, literary analysis, social criticism and like activities;

Classical classroom-centred education, interwoven with project-based learning experiences;

The nurturing of creative ideas and their applications from conception to marketplace realization;

Developing relationships with entrepreneurial companies that emerge from the nurturing process (a.k.a. "nurturing companies"), and giving these companies the opportunity to be included in our educational mission; and

Outreach programmes to industry and Government for seeking new opportunities to meet the needs of society.

Individually, none of these elements is unique to Stevens Institute. What is unique is that they are integrated collectively into the mission, goals and vision of our broader university community. They form the policy of the school and embody a firm institutional commitment with broad support throughout our community, from the Board of Trustees down to the President, the faculty, staff and students. As a consequence of this vision and commitment, for example, faculty members need not take a leave of absence from the Institute in order to pursue their entrepreneurial interests, if any. In fact, they are encouraged to be engaged in the nurturing process all the way through to the creation of commercial enterprises. The benefit to the academic environment is that the fruits of these activities can then be plowed back into the educational mission of the institution. Thus, by bringing together these elements, a new feature emerges in our environment, namely the feedback created when students, directly as part of their education, participate in the activities of the nurturing companies. Our approach aims to combine curiosity about nature and technology with a purposeful drive towards innovation. We strive to fashion an environment for creative minds to learn through this unity of "engaged discovery". The complexities of implementing the specific concept and its relevance to developing countries call for briefly elaborating our processes for going from an initial creative insight to the creation of the nurturing company, which is key.

In fact, these companies represent a form of educational enlightment. However, because in the Technogenesis environment the process maintains a seamless relationship between companies and educational activities, we highlight this subtlety by not labelling it technology transfer or development, and concomitantly by not calling university-initiated commercial enterprises "spin-offs".

Of course, one of the key elements in United States economic development and competitiveness is technological research and development—the classic R&D. Federal and state Governments and industry, as well as universities, have implemented programmes to stimulate, assist and facilitate the commercialization of ideas generated in the national, industrial or university laboratories. These programmes have had mixed results, and the bottom line is that we are still searching for more enlightened practices of technology transfer. While we strive to perfect the process, we are aware that there is a limited body of organized knowledge to call upon. Our experience at Stevens Institute suggests that the bottleneck in best effecting a transfer from laboratory to commercial realization is not investment capital but continuity in the process; that is, most often lacking is the continuous nurturing and sustaining of ideas and organizations from the lab to the marketplace. More in particular, we have found that the most deficient aspect of even a continuous nurturing process is the initial step of going from concept to feasibility demonstration.

To illustrate this point, consider the differences between the way parents pass on their values and experiences to their offspring, and the way workers pass a product down an assembly line. In the parental case, ideas, skills, goals and so forth are inculcated and repeatedly refined over a long period of time before children become adults themselves—learning by repetition and example. This transfer process involves great continuity and feedback in the transmission and, indeed, the transformation of concepts from one generation to another. In contrast, the stereotypical assembly line lacks this type of continuity. Workers simply pass on a product at one stage to the next member of the line without sharing information. This "linear", factory approach is at best minimally effective if the process involves routine product development that can therefore be laid out a priori. The lack of nurturing in this scenario does not permit any flexibility or feedback to the process.

Obviously, technology transfer should be a continuous nurturing process, more akin to parenting than to manufacturing. Product development should be relabelled "technology nurturing"; however, few educational or business environments support this kind of nurturing. Of course, there are countless examples of spin-off companies started by university professors or students. In the majority of cases, the process works more like an assembly line: someone makes a discovery or brings forth an invention; another team is assembled for the purposes of prototyping the invention; others are involved in capital formation and creating and incubating companies, and yet others in scaling up to manufacturing, not to mention sales and marketing.

‘The Technogenesis approach aims to combine curiosity about nature and technology with a purposeful drive towards innovation.’

In the Technogenesis environment, we introduce into technology development the continuity and commitment ascribed to the family by developing not spin-off companies (with the implication of breaking away from the environment) but "nurturing companies"—a company that will allow and encourage faculty and students to participate in the development of concepts created within the Institute. Not everyone has to be involved in every aspect of marketplace realization, but in Technogenesis the process occurs under one educational umbrella that allows everyone's skills, talent and input to best serve the nurturing process.

Thus, using incentives, faculty and students are encouraged to come forward with concepts that grow out of their creative activities. We then recruit others who can move these concepts toward commercialization, keeping the originators involved while minimizing the burden on their activities. Having provided clarity and incentives on issues involving intellectual property, we find it possible to engage the Stevens community. At an appropriate time, capital investment is sought (typically not venture capital) and a management team is put in place. Through the formation of the company, equity is used to reward everyone's contributions, as well as maintaining their interest in the enterprise. Several approaches for implementing this model have been explored and a number of business enterprises/ventures have been successfully launched. In general, there are huge gaps between academic research, technology and a commercial product; for us, the nurturing companies fill these gaps. Stevens Institute neither competes with the company nor encourages it to "spin-off". Rather, it actively participates in helping promote the development process and reaps both educational and financial rewards.

Educationally, the nurturing company is integrated into the educational environment, whereas financially the Institute benefits from shared equities in the companies, not the monopoly of or trading in patent rights. In fact, such possessiveness would be the antithesis of nurturing. Rather, in the Technogenesis environment, intellectual property forms part of the educational environment, engaging both faculty and students.

An example of a nurturing company is Plasmasol. Although primarily a vehicle for the commercialization of a technology developed through the nurturing process mentioned earlier, Plasmasol also participates in the educational mission of Stevens Institute. The company's management team had its origin in a course taken by a group of students pursuing a Master's degree in technology management. As part of their course, they took on the assignment of developing a business plan for the technology that had been recently created at the Institute. Their enthusiasm for this assignment and the technology involved ultimately led them to take the reins of the company! The complete story of these developments, as well as the accomplishments of the company, can be found at www.Plasmasol.com. Accounts of other such successes can be found at www.stevens-tech.edu. The process of technology nurturing enriches the creative expressions of the university faculty, unleashes the entrepreneurial spirit of those participating in the commercial enterprise, and spurs the financial backing of investment capital. Success requires political stability and the assurance that the process will be allowed to run its course without being subject to arbitrary interference.

The educational model embodied in Technogenesis can be used as a guide for reorienting the university in developing countries. With consensus and political will, the mission of the university is vitalized by becoming an agent for creating value from the creative expressions of the academic community while taking advantage of the educational value of nurturing companies. The university then becomes a valued driver of the economic growth and prosperity of a community. In developing countries, capital can be obtained through the international community's assistance, and a small fraction of this assistance can be used to set up a challenge fund for promoting nurturing companies and their further elaboration. The place to start is through the establishment of a pilot Technogenesis programme.

Biography

Erich E. Kunhardt is Chair of the Deans Council and Dean of the School of Sciences and Arts, as well as George Meade Bond Professor of Physics at Stevens Institute of Technology, New Jersey. From 1985 to 1992, he served as Director of the Weber Research Institute at the Polytechnic Institute of New York.

Go Back Top