Manchester, 16th October, 2015

Further development of a prototype assessement system

INNOVATION FOR EDUCATION. TRANSFERS OF KNOWLEDGE.

Susan Moulding – Manchester Metropolitan University

Federica Montaguti – CISET

Theme: Education

WHAT ARE TRANSFERS OF INNOVATION

Transfers of Knowledge are a critical instrument in fostering innovation in tourism education, particularly between and amongst providers of higher education

WHY DID WE DEVELOP AN ASSESSMENT PROTOTYPE?

Both at MMU & CISET , our experiences informed us

that International T:ransfers of Knowledge & Innovation were: -a positive, rewarding

experience

a difficult /stressful process – often resulting in failure

Distinct lack of development in terms of a

transfer assessment system, particularly for educational institutions

Even more so when transferring the complexity of

experiential learning

HOW OUR RESEARCH BEGAN?

DIRECT OBSERVATION, EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE

more than 7 years transferring innovative teaching approaches to higher education institutions

5 European countries, 1 Global

9 different universities

more than 30 teachers

OUR RESEARCH BEGINNINGS

STUDIES ON INNOVATION TRANSFER, AND THEIR APPLICATION

Causes of “Stickiness” (Szulanski,

1996)

kind of knowledge (Reed&DeFilippi,

1990; Simonin, 1999, etc.)

organisational and cultural distance (Choi&Lee, 1997; Hosftede, 1994, etc.)

Transfer of innovation Between division of the same business

Between academy and business

Within process engineering and technology , services

We developed:

• OUR ASSESSMENT SYSTEM SPECIFIC FOR HIGHER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INSITITUTIONS

OUR INITIAL ADAPTATIONS– THE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

-> The original study (Moulding & Montaguti, 2011) explored both facilitating and hampering factors involved within International Transfers of Knowledge between higher education institutions.

->These transfers within the tourism education field have gained in importance and relevance as levels of competitiveness within European programmes have increased and necessitated the transfer of relevant and up to date teaching and learning methodologies.

-> Indeed the development of an assessment system specifically for such transfers in education was lacking, however, the authors extended the approach as far as possible from frameworks used to assess and support knowledge exchange amongst businesses (Szulanski, 2000; Cornican, et al, 2010; Ekl, 2012; Cummings & Teng, 2003; Goh, 2002).

-> The system developed was applied to 2 transfers of innovation (Moulding & Montaguti, 2014)

WHY IT WORKED?

setting achievable objectives

assessing more efficient management of the transfer

preventing problems, not dealing with them all along the way the number of innovations that can be adapted in a given

time to complete transfer process

effective adaptation

reducing the failure risk complete transfer process

effective adaptation/reducing the failure rate

OUR SUBSEQUENT METHODOLOGY FOR THIS PAPER (FURTHER RESEARCH)

explore and presents further development of the assessment system through the undertaking, response and evaluation of in-

depth research from the view of prospective users.

the development of the prototype takes into account qualitative 1-1 interviews using academics and researchers

with previous experience or who are about to be involved in a transfer.

the research focuses upon the point of view of the potential user of the assessment system.

The final version of the assessment prototype provides support and guidance for higher education institutions

engaging in international transfers of knowledge in order to preliminary evaluate how difficult the transfer is likely to be

and to plan and adjust the transfer accordingly.

OUR RESEARCH – BOTH IN UK AND ITALY

Content analysis of the qualitative feedback was undertaken in order to identify any significant changes or improvements of both a positive

or negative nature and to highlight any likely impacts upon the development process of the assessment system.

The qualitative feedback enabled the authors to observe any emerging issues for future consideration and enabled an enrichment

of the findings with lively and detailed feedback.

In order to disseminate the findings, the grounded theory approach together with emergent themes have been clustered together to enable a greater perspective of shared meanings amongst those

interviewed.

COMMUNICATION (I)

S. Moulding, - F. Montaguti , 16th October, 2015

SPONTANEOUS SUGGESTIONS: LUNCH PROMOTION A MORE USER FRIENDLY ACCESS

INTRODUCTION GRID GUIDELINES

COMMUNICATION (II)

THE REVISED SYSTEM (I)

AC1. Critical knowledge 8 indices

AC2. External communication 8 indices

AC3. Gatekeepers 7 indices

AC4. Expertise differentiation 5 indices

AC - ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY INDEX

A1. Tacitness 5 indices

A2. Complexity 2 indices

A3. Specificity 4 indices

A4. Organisational distance 9 indices

A - CAUSAL AMBIGUITY INDEX

A5. Cultural distance 8 indices

R1. Intimacy 5 indices

R2. Distance 2 indices

R- (ARDUOUS) RELATIONSHIP

INDEX

TOTAL STICKINESS INDEX

Mean of A, R and converse of AC

AC5. Previous experience 2 indices

TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT INDEX →ICT/DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT INDEX (easier to find)

MEASURMENTS AND CALCULATIONS MORE CLEARLY DEFINED

+ USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA WITHIN THE ORGANISATION

THE RIVSIED SYSTEM (II)

EXPERTISE DIFFERENTIATION

General - n. of interdisciplinary schools and /or research centres The higher the number the higher the value to be assigned in the Likert scale

General - professors recruitment criteria: presence and weight of extra- academic activities and contacts e.g. extra academic activities have no weight = 1point on the Likert scale

General - n. of projects funded by external bodies in the last 2 years which included multi disciplinary teams

Specific for the unit involved in the transfer- differentiation of teaching and research staff CVs - origin, study background, specialisation, work experience

Difference of expertise : mean of the previous indices

INTERNAL COMMUNICATION

General - presence and detail of a specific internal communication procedure

General - use of an open extranet or other social software for students and teachers

Specific - n. of team/unit meetings scheduled in 1 month

Internal communication: mean of the previous indices

AC4 - BALANCE BETWEEN DIFF. OF EXPERTISE AND INTERNAL COMMUNICATION

Mean of Diff. of expertise and Internal communication

AC4 BALANCE BETWEEN DIFF. OF EXPERTISE AND INTERNAL COMMUNICATION

General - presence and level of use of policies aimed at rotating employees and teachers among different departments/schools

General - teachers recruitment criteria: presence and weight of extra- academic activities and contacts

General – n. of inter/multi-disciplinary schools or centres

General - n. of projects funded by external bodies which required multi disciplinary teams

Specific for the unit/s involved in the transfer – level of CVs ‘ differentiation (education, work experience)

AC4 Balance between diff. of expertise and internal communication: mean of the previous indices

Tourism innovation –our way forward!

Some pages of the CISET website dedicated to the

assessment system to provide potential users with qanswers to

FAQs, and guidelines on using the system.

To be implemented within a new Erasmus+ bid.

To highlight within Europe and European bids.

s.moulding@mmu.co.uk fedem@unive.it

Thank you!

www.unive.it/ciset www.mmu.co.uk @ilCISET @F07Montaguti @ManMetUni