Supervisors: Per Blenker, Claus Thrane and Jesper Garsdal (VIA)
Discussants: Christa Thomsen & Winni Johansen

The presentation will focus on the kappa of the thesis.

Abstract
Despite the long-lasting scholarly attention to the concept of the entrepreneurial university (Etzkowitz, 1983), the concept remains ambiguous and open for interpretation (Guerrero et al., 2016) alike so many concepts within management (Alvesson & Blom, 2021). Entrepreneurial university theory development can be framed as progressing through five distinctive phases addressed as waves of development (Ramsgaard, in-press). However, the ingrained ambiguity adds to the scholarly confusion about becoming an entrepreneurial institution since this was initially driven by arguments on increasing industry collaboration, societal development, start-up accelerators, and incubators (Klofsten et al., 2019). Something which enforced a one-sided perspective mainly focused on societal and regional perspectives indicating a macro- and meso-level focus of the concept. Less attention has been directed to the pedagogical/didactical purposes (micro-level focus) (Ramsgaard & Blenker, 2022), despite the obvious close connections and potential proliferations between educating an entrepreneurial workforce (Lackéus et al., 2020).

The aim of the dissertation is to problematize the inherent ambiguity of the entrepreneurial university concept and advance its relationship with entrepreneurship education. Something that has particular relevance in the setting of universities of applied sciences/polytechnics/vocational colleges. The article-based dissertation suggests that the overlooked aspect of the entrepreneurial university as an ‘emergent pedagogical space’ needs further scholarly attention. Therefore, the dissertation investigates the constituents and prerequisites for positioning an understanding of the entrepreneurial university of applied sciences that focus on pedagogical development to address it as an ‘emergent pedagogical space’ because this can be the vantage point in future development of the concept to encompass and explore new roles for the entrepreneurial university.

References:

• Alvesson, M., & Blom, M. (2022). The hegemonic ambiguity of big concepts in organization studies. Human Relations, 75(1), 58-86.
• Etzkowitz, H. (1983). Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science, Minerva, 21(2-3), 198-233.
• Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., Fayolle, A., Klofsten, M. and Mian, S. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities: emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small Business Economics. 47(3), 551-563.
• Lackéus, M., Lundqvist, M., Williams-Middleton, K. and Inden, J. (2020). The entrepreneurial employee in public and private sector: “What, why, how.”. Joint Research Centre European Commission.
• Klofsten, M., Fayolle, A., Guerrero, M., Mian, S., Urbano, D. and Wright, M. (2019). The entrepreneurial university as driver for economic growth and social change-Key strategic challenges. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 141, 149-158.
• Ramsgaard, M. B. (in-press). Change strategies for the entrepreneurial university – towards a contextualized understanding. In Hyams-Ssekasi, D. (Ed.). Entrepreneurship and Change. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Ramsgaard, M. B., & Blenker, P. (2022). Reinterpreting a signature pedagogy for entrepreneurship education. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 29(2), 182-202. https://10.1108/JSBED-03-2021-0115 

Everyone is welcome!