MAŁGORZATA DĄBROWSKA
UNIVERSITIES IN A KNOWLEDGE-BASED SOCIETY- THEIR ROLE AND CHALLENGES THEY HAVE TO FACE
1. INTRODUCTION
The present world is a very unstable and unpredictable place. A continuous flow of information and technical innovation has become a dominating factor in reaching competitive advantage. Furthermore, knowledge together with education have become major economic resources [Soares, Maral 1999, pp.11-21]. In the 21st century innovation and ideas, combined with skills and knowledge are tools for success and wealth, just like physical labor and natural resources used to be of prior importance in the 19th century [Blackstone 2001, pp.175-184].
In such novel conditions resulting from knowledge-driven society the role of universities occurs to be gargantuan. This thesis is confirmed by Tilak [2002], who argues that “development of strong education systems, including specifically higher education and research systems, is a necessary prerequisite for development of knowledge society”. He also regards education system, mainly higher education system, as the most crucial aspect of knowledge society.
There is nothing surprising in the significance of universities in knowledge society when one takes into account the fact that these are universities which are supposed to create, distribute and implement knowledge. In a society based almost entirely on knowledge and its management, universities regarded as ‘bastions of knowledge’ should contribute to better performance of economy by sustaining and expanding knowledge base.
According to the European Commission Act1, the birth and growth of the knowledge society and economy depend on the combination of four independent elements:
the production of new knowledge;
its diffusion through education and training;
1 The role of universities in the Europe of knowledge,
http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/cha/c11067.htm, accessed: 03.11.2006
its dissemination through the information and communication technologies;
and finally, its use through new services or industrial processes.
As one can easily notice, all the aforementioned elements are closely related to universities and their functions and therefore, the role of universities in a knowledge society is undeniable. The position of university in a knowledge society is depicted below. Since university can be considered as a learning organization2, it contributes to the creation of a learning society, which is further transformed into knowledge society.
Source: Own.
Picture 1. The place of university in a knowledge society.
This article describes the role of higher education institutions in detail, as well as makes the reader acquainted with basic problems and challenges which universities presently have to face.
2. CHANGES IN UNIVERSITY ENVIRONMENT
In a constantly changing world of the 21st century universities have been given a special role. The times when university education was of caste character had gone away. With increasing accessibility to higher education, the attention given to universities has risen. Many societies have become aware of the fact that tertiary education is a source of benefits not only for those gaining it, but also for the whole society. Such awareness is a feature of a knowledge-driven society, which sets education on a pedestal.
The new surrounding in which universities are forced to act sets fresh standards and requirements. As Drucker said, there is nothing constant apart from change. Acting in such an environment, universities have to demonstrate initiative, innovation, and
2 The concept of university as a learning organization is widely discussed (Compare: Jabłecka J.: Uniwersytet jako organizacja ucząca się. Zarządzanie wiedzą w szkolnictwie wyższym, Politechnika Gdańska, Wydział Zarządzania i Ekonomii, Gdańsk 2004, or Friedman H. H., Friedman L.W.: The university as learning organization. Some practical approaches, http://cisnet.baruch.cuny.edu/papers/cis200202.pdf). Even though only few universities deserve to be called learning organizations, the author beliefs that only those universities which will become such have a chance to stay competitive in the future. For that reason, the author treats university as a learning organization.
Knowledge society Learning society
University
knowledge as these are major factors contributing to sustainable competitive advantage [Jabłecka 2004].
Furthermore, as a reaction to surrounding alterations higher education should change its goal from “achieving quantitative improvements while securing the minimum level to promoting diverse development in a competitive environment” [Higher education..., 2004] as only then it can accomplish varied demands of a rapidly changing knowledge society. In addition, universities should respond to new demands of global labor markets requiring advanced human capital, which brings the risk of increased global struggle for skillful professionals and connected with it brain drain [Salmi 2003].
Nowadays to acquire knowledge one needs not only to be able to read and write, but also possess the ability to recognize the need of gaining information, its detection, evaluation, and effective usage [Misiak 2002]. Universities should embrace all the aforementioned changes into their curricula and be ready to reply to new requirements.
Nevertheless, many universities cannot cope with this duty. As Varghese [2004, pp.27-39] noticed, presently a growing criticism of poor performance of universities and other public sector organizations and institutions has been observed. It is caused by the fact that public institutions and organizations are characterized by low efficiency in operation. For that reason, universities are subject to increasing external surveillance [Scott 2002, pp.61-75]. They are particularly criticized for several reasons:
education content and reform methods are unadjusted to changes in student population;
declining quality of education;
unsatisfactory cooperation between universities and industry/business sector;
scattered university structure, together with regulations and customs governing it, disable quick response to dynamic social and economic changes in the society [Higher Education 2004].
Fortunately not all universities are in bad condition, for example a great number of universities in the US have been reaching splendid results. European institutions, on the other hand, are in general considered as less competitive than their equivalents in other developed countries, mainly in the US, due to two reasons. The first reason is that they have less to offer to their candidates, and the second one is that they have lower financial resources. The background of these two reasons is much more complicated since several issues contribute to this state and will be widely discussed in the due course.
In a nutshell, there are various changes in university background concerning education and university management. If universities do not adapt to these changes, their authority and prestige may be endangered [Scott 2002, pp.61-75]. Below the main alterations in university environment are described in detail.
CHANGES IN DEMAND FOR EDUCATION
Over the last few decades, in many countries all over the world the number of students enrolled at universities has been raising. This process of making higher education more available to a greater number of 18-year-olds is sometimes called the
“popularization” of higher education. In the US, for example, the participation rate of young people studying by the end of 1970s was about 12 percent, while presently it is almost 35 per cent [Blackstone 2001, pp.175-184].
During the last two decades also in Poland the number of students enrolled at universities has been rising3. It is caused by the fact that since the fall of communism the importance of higher education has been constantly growing and hence people started attending universities on a larger scale. During the communistic period higher education was not highly valued and people preferred to start working in spite of going to the university. As a result, when market economy appeared in Poland, there was a great demand for people with higher education, especially of business character, while the supply was scarce. This caused an enormous growth in the number of students and the emergence of new higher education institutions (HEIs), of private ownership in particular. Such an educational boom coddled HEIs as they have become convinced that their position and funds are unthreatened.
The situation of HEIs, however, is not that advantageous. As it can be observed in many well-developed countries, the reduced number of births a few years ago is now resulting in ageing of society and demographical depression. Therefore, as less high- school graduates undertake studies, universities will be faced with revenues reduction, either by direct fall in revenues from fees or by cut in subsidies from government, which often depend on the number of students.
With changes in the population of students come new challenges and demands. In the past, when higher education was the privilege of country elite, generally only most talented and motivated individuals used to undertake studies. Presently, with easier access to higher education, apart from outstanding individuals, there are many ordinary students, who have no precise life plans or are not strongly motivated. The real task is to educate those ordinary students in such a way as not to lower the level of studies which demands more teaching effort and different attitude towards work from the faculty [Pawłowski 2004].
The novel phenomena taking place in higher education can be a great opportunity for universities as, according to estimations, global market for higher education is worth around £300 billion per year and the demand is growing fast. It is calculated that by 2025 there will be approximately 159 million global enrollments in higher education.
A vast percentage of these will be candidates from Asia – around 87 million. To respond to such a great demand, new strategies and ideas are necessary. Some universities, particularly from the US, have already undertaken actions to meet this demand [Blackstone 2001, pp.175-184].
To conclude, the number of students worldwide will grow even if in some countries, especially well-developed countries it will decrease due to demographical depression.
Taking a variety of other phenomena described below into account, one can consider this situation as a chance for the development and creation of new quality of education.
COOPERATION BETWEEN UNIVERSITIES AND BUSINESS / INDUSTRY Another change which can be observed in the university is the intensification of cooperation between business/industry and universities. The cooperation between industry and HEIs is becoming of greater importance as many companies have noticed that business and economic success depends on the company’s ability to absorb knowledge and gain properly-skilled people [Blackman, Segal 1991, pp.297-303]. HEIs also have become aware of the fact that collaboration with business/industry sector can
3 The number of students in the academic year 1995/1996 was equal to 794 600, while in the academic year 2004/2005 it raised to 1 926 100. Source: www.stat.gov.pl
be beneficial for them due to obtaining financial resources, which they have to search for being faced with reduced governmental subsidies.
However, the cooperation with business/industry is not an easy task for universities as quite often they concentrate on knowledge itself, not on its practical applications.
When academic staff aims at gaining a grant for research from a company, they must obtain results ready to be implemented. Companies are interested in applicable results due to the fact that they can be transformed directly into revenues. This attitude is unfortunately unfamiliar to many faculty members in Europe.
The situation is entirely different in the US, where universities are not only very active in striving for research funds from companies but also oriented towards practical applications of their study. A splendid worldwide-known example is Silicon Valley in California. The success of this original center is based on the flow of people and ideas between industry and universities, mainly the University of Stanford. It is hard to believe that in 1998, before the crisis in IT sector, the gross revenues of Silicon Valley were only four times smaller than the revenues of China [Dębek 2003]. Many countries are trying to repeat the success of Silicon Valley on their territory; nevertheless, none of them have reached comparable results yet.
If European universities desire to be competitive on the global market, they need to change their attitude towards research and cooperation with business/industry as the latter requires intensification by “gearing it more effectively towards innovation, new business start-ups and, more generally, the transfer and dissemination of knowledge”4.
INTERNATIONALIZATION AND GLOBALIZATION OF EDUCATION AND RESEARCH
With the development of various information techniques and technologies, the world has become a borderless place in a virtual sense. No matter whether one lives in Europe or Australia, he can communicate and share information with people all over the world.
World has become a global village, where the flow of information takes place at an enormous pace. In such a world, education and research could not resist long to the processes of globalization and internationalization as “due to the presence of externalities, the knowledge created in one system tends to percolate and interact with systems of knowledge creation in other systems and countries” [Tilak 2002].
The abovementioned processes of internationalization and globalization of research may be either an opportunity or a threat for universities. As appearance of new technologies and know-how is borderless, higher education institutions may benefit from other units experience. At the same time, it may be a threat for universities where these technologies and know-how were invented. When other institutions adapt their new achievements, they are no longer a source of competitive advantage of places of their origin.
The internationalization and globalization of education can also be regarded as either an opportunity or a threat for universities. On the global market of educational services, there is a growing need for introducing novel and visionary programs of studies. Only such programs can attract foreign students and increase the competitive advantage of universities. Unfortunately, a great number of higher education institutions in Europe are not properly prepared to satisfy this need. They lack in knowledge and experience
4 The role of universities…op. cit.
on changing structure of studies, marketing, new services, gaining new employees or using new technologies [Zasępa 2000].
Furthermore, European universities catch the attention of fewer students and researchers from other countries than their American counterparts. While in 2000 European universities were visited by 450 000 (2.3%) students from other countries, American ones welcomed over 540 000, mostly from Asia5. Therefore it should not be surprising that annual revenues of American universities from educating foreign students amount to 27 milliards of dollars [Mosakowski 1999]. American institutions have become aware that ‘university of the future’ must be internationally-oriented if it aims at winning in the competition for the best students and academic staff and they appear to follow this rule [Mosakowski 1999]. European universities, in contrast, still function on regional and national level and as a result, student mobility is marginal in Europe despite various EU initiatives aiming at promotion of research, education and training6.
American universities magnetize students from other countries at advanced levels in engineering, mathematics, and informatics. Moreover, they manage to keep more people with doctorate qualifications. The innovative and entrepreneurial surrounding which American universities act in contributes to better employment opportunities in innovative sectors. All in all, American scientific environment is more favorable to both students and researchers7.
At this point the question arises: What can European universities do to improve their international status? As an answer the conditions crucial for becoming an international university suggested by Mosakowski [1999] may serve. He defines the following features of an international institution:
multilingual academic staff;
didactic literature in foreign languages;
high scientific level measured by number of publications and the scientific level of magazines;
real achievements in technological development;
broad international cooperation in research;
openness to foreign professors;
conditions of studying and scientific work comparable with the ones at American8 universities.
The base of each international university is its multilingual academic staff eager to offer new courses if required. Students need some literature and magazines in the language in which they study, for example in English. Foreign didactic literature is one of crucial elements influencing the quality of studies and, as such, should be somehow available to all students at the course. The academic staff should possess valuable achievements in the development of discipline of their interest and should cooperate with colleagues from other international institutions in research and publications.
5 Ibidem
6 Ibidem
7 Ibidem
8 Mosakowski proposes these conditions in the context of Polish universities and therefore, he uses the term
‘foreign’ instead of ‘American’, probably assuming that the term “international” in case of Polish universities should be regarded as “European”. The author of this article, however, shares the opinion that these are American universities which should be set as the example of international university.
Finally, universities pretending to be of international character should be open to foreign professors and lecturers, as well as should support financially and by organizational structure their staff in visiting other universities abroad. All the above is supposed to result in creation of international scientific environment similar to that at American universities.
NEW EXPECTATIONS OF UNIVERSITY STAKEHOLDERS
In order to write about new expectations of university stakeholders, one needs to define all the groups which deserve to be valued as university stakeholders.
Undoubtedly students and/or their parents are the first group of university stakeholders as they contribute to university existence either by direct tuition fees or by taxes distributed by the state in due course. By choosing a particular university students endow it with their trust and money and therefore they have the right to expect a favorable offer back. Among other groups of stakeholders are representatives of business community, donors (politicians and clerks deciding about the amount of subsidies, donors and private founders), principals of researches, expert appraisements, etc. [Dominiak 2002]. All these groups have new expectations and requirements which universities have to cope with. Universities have to respond to external pressure from the society, as they are supposed to meet considerable social needs.
Before describing expectations and requirements of all the groups above one has to concentrate on novel features of an individual necessary for active functioning in the present knowledge society. These features are:
openness to the world;
curiosity about world;
innovative attitude;
courage to think and act;
social activity;
broad knowledge and the ability to apply it;
ability to gain education/knowledge life-long;
responsibility for own words and actions [Pawłowski 2004].
These features of an individual are desirable by all the groups of university stakeholders. Wise and devoted politicians and clerks in a market economy9 aim at educating most competitive and open-minded residents due to the fact that as such they can greatly contribute to building a common welfare and creating a competitive advantage of the national economy. Private donors or founders expect university to spend their aids in the most effective and efficient way for the sake of the whole society.
As it is in the society interest to consist of perfectly-educated and well-prepared to live in a community members, private donors or founders assume universities to use their money for this goal. Finally, since the aforementioned features are success factors of an employee, business environment representatives expect university to form and develop them in students in the course of studies.
Furthermore, employers expect a new kind of employee graduating from university.
Presently of greater significance are: practical experience, high standard of possessed skills, interdisciplinary character of education, creative attitude and ability to adjust to changing conditions and market, economy and technical environment [Siciński 2003].
9 It might not be the case in, for example, communistic countries where politicians prefer their electorate to be poorly-educated, as they can rule in an easy way when people are unaware of many phenomena.
What has become of superior value for employers are competencies, not qualifications, as it used to be in the past. Competencies are regarded as a mixture of skills characteristic for particular individual, consisting of abilities gained via technical and professional education, together with social attitude, ability to work in a team, eagerness to undertake initiatives, etc. [Siciński 2003].
A more detailed characteristic of competencies is provided by Oleksyn [2003].
According to this author, competencies of an individual comprise of:
intellect and significant character features;
predispositions and talents;
education and knowledge;
experience and practical skills;
attitudes and behaviors;
health condition and psychophysical condition;
motivation and values;
formal rules and laws which enable an individual to make decisions and deal with particular cases;
ability and inclination to updating and broadening knowledge and skills.
As one can easily notice, education and knowledge is just one out of nine competencies. It is caused by the fact that nowadays it is not only knowledge that counts, but also, among others, attitudes and behaviors or ability and inclination to updating and broadening knowledge and skills. The role of a university is not restricted to educating students by flooding them with enormous volumes of knowledge. The university should also try to develop in students special attitudes, skills and abilities.
That is why the greatest results are observed at universities where the time of studies is also the period of social and personal development [Pawłowski 2004].
The last but not least group of stakeholders is students and/or their parents. They have become more demanding as they are aware of the fact that only education at one of the best universities with visionary curriculum and attitude can guarantee them the greatest chances for a career after graduating from the university. The other reason for being more demanding is the introduction of tuition fees at many universities. Since one has to pay for education, which can be considered as service, he has the right to demand a given quality. If the university is not able to satisfy candidates’ needs, it will not be chosen by them.
However, regarding education as a service is not only justified in case of students and their parents. All university stakeholders expect higher education to be a customer- oriented service, with its all characteristic features like: delivering service in a particular period of time, adequate and transparent communication, and attention given to an individual, etc. [Zasępa 2000]. All of them assume university to satisfy their particular needs by offering its service. What complicates the matters is that the expectations of students or other university stakeholders do not fall precisely into disciplinary compartments, therefore the main objective for universities should be to structure curriculum within external needs and demands.
BENEFITS OF EDUCATION FOR KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY
In the face of growing importance of knowledge and its management, almost no one doubts that “tertiary education matters to the future of a country” [Salmi 2003].
Nevertheless, it is not only due to better chances for becoming a well-developed and
prosperous society; there is also a variety of social benefits generated by higher education. Social benefits are such benefits which “have an effect on the whole society as they reduce public costs” [Dąbrowska 2004]. Among social benefits are: reduced welfare dependency, lower crime costs, healthier lifestyles, civic contributions and other incalculable benefits as knowledge on Internet [Watts 2001].
Additionally, the role of universities is to serve as “a means to strengthen industry competitiveness and ensure employment”[Higher Education…2004]. Higher education indeed increases the chances of being employed after graduating from the university, for example graduate unemployment stays below half the national average in Britain [Blackstone 2001].
Table 1. Employment rates among individuals aged 15-64 by highest level of education attained in Europe in 2002 (%).
Country Average With higher
education With secondary
education With low education
Belgium 59.7 82.8 65.7 48.0
Denmark 76.4 87.0 86.0 64.0
Germany 65.4 83.0 69.8 43.6
Spain 56.9 82.0 57.2 49.2
Greece 58.4 77.5 58.2 52.8
France 62.9 79.2 69.8 46.6
Ireland 65.0 84.8 71.2 48.1
Italy 55.4 81.8 64.8 45.3
Luxemburg 63.6 83.6 69.1 50.8
the Netherlands 74.5 86.8 79.8 61.7
Austria 68.2 85.0 72.9 48.2
Portugal 68.6 88.6 64.7 67.3
Finland 69.1 85.5 72.8 48.9
Sweden 74.0 86.2 79.6 58.2
Great Britain 71.5 87.3 77.3 50.9
Average in 15 EU
countries 64.2 82.8 75.0 49.4
Average in 25 EU
countries 62.8 82.8 68.7 46.6
Poland 51.7 82.4 57.8 25.0
Source: European Commission 2003 in: Raport o Rozwoju Społecznym Polska 2004, http://www.undp.org.pl/nhdr/nhdr2004.php , accessed: 03.11.2006
As it can be noticed in the table above, the employment rate of educated people is very high in the European Union countries - on average it is equal to more than 80%.
By contrast, the employment rate among people with low qualifications (below secondary school) does not reach 50%. The situation of uneducated women is worse than men. The employment rate of women with low education in the EU equals to 37%, while the rate of men is 62%. In Poland the employment rates for women and men with low education are similar and oscillate around 25-26% [Raport …2004].
To conclude, each society benefits from education in the long run. Open-minded and well-educated inhabitants improve the condition of the whole nation in several ways.
They contribute to faster economic development and at the same time burden the state with smaller costs of medical treatment as they lead healthier lifestyles. All things considered, higher education is advantageous for each knowledge society.
3. CHALLENGES FOR UNIVERSITIES IN A KNOWLEDGE-BASED SOCIETY
All the changes in the university environment presented above can be summed up with one major conclusion – the situation and position of universities is on the verge of radical alterations. The new era of enormous speed of knowledge creation and propagation has been inducing the need for university transformation. [Blackstone, 2001] suggests five challenges for universities operating in a knowledge-based economy. Amongst them are:
to endow students with skills and knowledge required on the new labor market and make sure that the offered qualifications are suitable;
to promote in the graduates enthusiasm to life-long learning and to provide post experience courses and continuous professional development which are called for by companies;
to engage in scholarship and research;
to encourage innovation and knowledge transfer from university to business and industry contributing to local, national, and global development;
to implement novel information and communication technologies which may contribute to improvements in teaching and learning.
Universities, in order to deal with all the challenges of the new knowledge era have to concentrate on the following issues:
managerial university management;
knowledge management at universities;
creation of value added;
new forms of learning and life-long learning.
These issues will be described in detail in the following part of this subchapter.
MANAGERIAL UNIVERSITY MANAGEMENT
Managerial university management is a novel concept. It is widely used in the US and is characterized by the following features:
separation of managerial and academic functions and creation of a specific group of professionals trained at higher education institutions management;
choice of university president in the course of competition;
presidents of universities hardly ever belong to academic staff of the universities where they serve as presidents;
the tenure is longer and the number of tenures for one president is in most cases unlimited [Pawłowski 2004].
A typical president of an American university is a graduate of a good university with managerial skills who has spent anywhere from ten to twenty years at one or several universities as an academic worker, obtaining university titles and degrees and
performing various administrative and academic functions. He has also undergone a special system of training. In a few words, a perfect president of an American university possesses managerial skills combined with academic experience [Pawłowski 2004].
Managerial university management, though occurred to be extremely successful in the US, meets a lot of barriers at universities in Europe and in Poland. The main obstacle to introducing this kind of management at universities is their structure.
Jabłecka [2004] defines several features of university structure, which influence university management:
a scattered formal structure of faculties and devices, which hinders central university management;
high autonomy of particular university units and academics, which makes preparing one overall strategy a hard task;
the co-existence of various sorts of science, like humanistic, natural, medical, technical, social, rural, theoretical and experimental with differentiated academic cultures and eagerness to cooperate with the environment, moreover, quite often not eager to cooperate with each other;
functioning as a professional bureaucracy and a decentralized institution;
domination of collegiate bodies in structure of power at university;
subjection of university governance to the rule of tenure.
The above characteristics present possible barriers to establishing a managerial university management inside the university. Other barriers originate from the fact that these are frequently politicians who play crucial role in defining strategies and making decisions about universities and higher education. This dependency is disadvantageous to universities as they have to be released from government rules and regulations in order to achieve managerial efficiency. Decision making powers and responsibilities should be transferred from governments to universities [Varghese 2004]. The same opinion shares Zasępa [2000] who considers releasing universities from regulations and financing mechanisms the best strategy for governments. Only freed from bounding sets of rules universities can face new challenges.
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AT UNIVERSITIES
Oosterlinck10 proposes the following definition of knowledge management with regard to universities: “knowledge management embodies organizational processes that seek the synergistic combination of data and information, processing capacities of information technologies, and the creative and innovative capacity of human beings”.
This definition, without any doubt, describes what universities have been performing for centuries with little exception to information technology in case of some sorts of universities. HEIs since being brought into being have been dealing with processes typical of knowledge management, i.e. the creation, collection, preservation and dissemination of knowledge. Reid11 also shares the opinion that universities have always managed knowledge. They have created and disseminated knowledge employing researchers and lecturers, as well as stored and codified knowledge by allocating funds in libraries and so forth.
10 Oosterlinck A., Knowledge management in post-secondary education: universities, source: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/21/2074921.pdf, accessed: 04.11.2006
11 Reid I. C., The web, knowledge management and universities,
http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw2k/papers/reid/paper.html, accessed: 05.11.2006
However, not all share the same opinion. Ratcliffe-Martin et al. [2004] stated that
“universities do not generally manage information [knowledge12] well” since “they tend to lose it, fail to exploit it, duplicate it, do not always share it, do not always know what they know and do not recognize knowledge as an asset”. This unfortunately quite often is the case in universities which do not put enough effort to manage knowledge in a complex and effective way.
Despite various opinions on knowledge management in universities, one thing is sure – knowledge management should be of uttermost significance in HEIs. It is due to several reasons. The first one is that the character of knowledge in the interest of universities has changed with the development of information and communication technologies and therefore new ways of managing this knowledge should be established. Secondly, the value of intellectual capital gained in universities has magnified as a source of competitive advantage. Thirdly, although in the past knowledge production used to be the privileged activity of universities and similar institutions, nowadays knowledge is produced almost far and wide with no time restrictions. Among places of knowledge creation, apart from universities and research institutes are: research centers of small and giant entrepreneurships, independent research centers, think tanks, scientific circles and professional corporations, a growing number of various social organizations, or finally large international organizations, like UN, UNESCO, OECD or World Bank [Pawłowski 2004]. As Gibbons [1999] stated
“the growth of knowledge production outside universities is causing the development of globalized and distributed knowledge systems”. Hence since the monopolistic position of universities in knowledge creation and management has been endangered, universities have to put a lot of effort to stay competitive on the market. Finally, knowledge management is inseparably bonded with the mission of universities focusing on education, research and service to society. For all these reasons, each university should aim at introducing a suitable and multifaceted approach to knowledge management.
In order to prepare a successful knowledge management strategy, the following questions have to be answered first13:
What knowledge is crucial for my organization?
What kind of knowledge creates value added?
What kind of knowledge the organization needs in order to be successful in its strategy realization?
As the next step key elements and goals of knowledge management should be identified. These elements are depicted in the picture below as a reinforcing loop. They should be constantly analyzed and traced and then the effect of snowball occurs – their value amplifies. As a first step one needs to localize desired knowledge, which is quite a difficult task in the era of enormous and continually growing amount of knowledge.
When knowledge is localized, it has to be gained and further on, developed. It is not of great value if the cycle is stopped at this point as for the sake of the organization the knowledge has to be distributed, shared, used and implemented in organization’s
12 Author’s comment
13 Zarządzanie wiedzą w organizacji – rozmowa z prof. Gilbertem Probstem, e-mentor, nr 3, 2004, Szkoła Główna Handlowa, Warszawa, 18-19, in: Leja K., Identyfikacja elementów zarządzania wiedzą w wyższej uczelni, Zarządzani Wiedzą w Szkolnictwie Wyższym, Wydział Zarządzania i Ekonomii, Politechnika Gdańska, Gdańsk 2004
structures. The whole cycle with knowledge maintenance as the last step is a complete set of knowledge management actions. Continuous performance of these actions may help universities in transformation from rigid and inelastic organizations into flexible services [Leja 2004].
Source: Own, based on: [Probst, Raub., Romhardt [w:] Leja 2004]
Picture 2. Key elements of knowledge management in an organization.
In practice there are several ways to improve university management. The first is to prepare a draft of mission statement which will be thoroughly discussed within the university structures and with various university stakeholders. Secondly, the awareness of the responsibility and accountability towards university stakeholders should be induced in university community. Thirdly, as nowadays most of problems require an interdisciplinary attitude, the system of university division into departments and faculties may qualify for a change. It is justified by the fact that many current scientific breakthroughs take place on the verge of two or even more disciplines. Fourthly, universities need to understand that knowledge management is not entirely based on information technology, which is as a matter of fact only a tool for successful knowledge management. Therefore buying a few new computers is rather not going to solve KM problems at universities. Fifthly, universities should be open to evaluation and critique, regarding them as useful tools pointing direction of changes. Last but not least, universities should strengthen internal cooperation between academic staff and students as this is a vital condition for effective knowledge management14.
14 Oosterlinck A., op. cit.
Localizing Knowledge
Gaining Knowledge
Developing Knowledge
Sharing and Distributing Knowledge
Using and Implementing
Knowledege Maintaining
Knowledge
To sum up, university environment seems to be by its nature particularly appropriate for the application of knowledge management principles and methods and hence knowledge management should be embedded in university structures. It is an interdisciplinary concept which smoothly integrates new needs that have originated from the present economic, social and technological environment into higher education.
CREATION OF VALUE ADDED IN EDUCATION
Nowadays the role of universities is not only hampered to transferring knowledge to students. Universities should aim at forming attitudes and enriching the personality of students with non-material and hard to be described additional values. The goal of the university should be to create such an academic atmosphere where students and the faculty are partners. The relation student-teacher should be personalized with the help of plain organizational structure. What is more, student’s curiosity should be welcomed at the university, not treated like a burden and his entrepreneurial actions should be strongly supported. Only in such an atmosphere of mutual understanding and cooperation value added can be created [Pawłowski 2004].
University structure can either support or discourage building value added. A traditional formula depicted in the picture below does not favor this process. A structure of cooperation forms appropriate environment for generating value added.
Source: Own, on the basis of [Pawłowski 2001].
Picture 3. Traditional and non-traditional structure for higher education.
In a traditional formula, all the parties taking part in the process of education, either directly or indirectly, are superior to students. In such a structure, value added can be hardly ever created. Only when university is cooperation-oriented whereby students and other external stakeholders are given great attention can value added be magnified.
If universities aspire to maximize their value added, they need to perform the following actions:
individualize student-university relation;
establish appropriate set of procedures and behaviors helping to select particularly skilled, talented, creative and innovative students;
create environment in which students could expand their individual skills and obtain new abilities15.
First of all, as every student is different, has varied expectations, abilities and interests, he should be treated in an individual way. This is certainly a great challenge for universities as with “popularization” of higher education more and more students attend classes; however, differentiated attitude towards students is of utmost importance in creation of value added. Such an attitude may help to develop a set of procedures enabling to select students with extraordinary features and to direct them towards social activities serving for the whole academic community. As an example can serve various students’ organizations, which were established by visionary and entrepreneurial students and have remained in university structure since then even if founders had already graduated. Finally, universities should construct such an environment which will promote students’ self-development. In order to do that, they should offer students a great variety of additional activities helping them to gain new skills and abilities. All these actions should result in creation of value added at universities.
LIFE-LONG LEARNING
No matter how wonderful university one graduates from, he should not finish gaining knowledge at this point as he is supposed to constantly restore his skills and abilities.
All knowledge workers should refresh their knowledge during all their life. According to Dylus [in Pawłowski 2002], these are “unready people” who have the greatest chances for success, where the term “unready people” denotes those who are prepared for further development and lifelong learning.
The European Commission has defined the term ‘lifelong learning’ as "all purposeful learning activity, undertaken on an ongoing basis with the aim of improving knowledge, skills and competence."16 The concept of lifelong learning is not only education and training after formal school time. A lifelong learning lasts from childhood to retirement and takes place in different learning conditions. This form of learning is becoming of vital importance for countries which want to be competitive in the knowledge-driven economy since only residents constantly eager to improve and strengthen their qualifications, skills, and abilities are able to create innovative and prosperous society.
The need for lifelong learning is a chance for universities. They may serve as places of lifelong education for various groups of people by preparation of an integrated learning system. As Drucker [in Pawłowski 2002] stated, the most dynamic market of education in the US is presently the market of courses and trainings for 40-year-old people, which might be a source of revenues for elastic universities ready to adjust their offer to this new kind of customer.
NEW FORMS OF LEARNING
In the last two decades people have been flooded with an increasing amount of information and impulses. Young people very early get used to flashy, surprising, astonishing and fun pictures. Therefore nowadays disseminating and promoting knowledge requires using various techniques and presentation tricks to attract and amuse the spectator in order to teach him at the same time [Niedzielski 1998].
15 Ibidem
16 Welsh Assembly Government, http://www.elwa.ac.uk/elwaweb/elwa.aspx?pageid=445, accessed:
04.11.2006
However, new techniques are not only used in that way. Internet and intranet technologies offer novel opportunities for universities and their students as ‘web-based materials can be delivered worldwide at the click of a mouse’ [Blackstone 2001].
Special educational programs based on interactive learning (e.g. by question-answer pairs) allow to teach various disciplines, e.g. languages. The great advantage of this form of learning is its accessibility 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Moreover, there is no need to leave home and lose time for getting to the university – one can study at home, in comfortable conditions, making breaks when he feels like. One can also have the feeling of being unique, as there is a place for adjusting program and time of studies to individual needs and preferences. The above pros of Internet-based education will definitely contribute to its quick propagation.
There are, of course, some skeptics convinced that the influence of information technology on education will be insignificant as it happened with other brilliant technological inventions, like television, radio, satellite broadcast, video cassettes or personal computing and that “universities in traditional settings will continue to play an indispensable role” [Croxford, 2001]. However, they seem not to be aware of the fact that none of the abovementioned tools has been as interactive as Internet, where the speed of information flow or obtaining feedback is extremely fast. That is why information technology “will continue to reshape the educational landscape in coming years” [Coaldrake, Stedman 1999].
4. CONCLUSIONS
This article has presented various changes in university environment and the challenges which universities have to face. A general remark derived from all these phenomena may be such that universities cannot remain closed bastions of inapplicable knowledge with guards of the faculty concentrating on science for itself. Universities have to become open to all their stakeholders and they have to involve outer demands and needs into their strategy and studies curricula. In order to educate skilled and information literate future employees, universities need to transform their curricula and forms of learning from out-of-date into future-oriented one, which should be ahead of changes, not follow them with delay. The emergence of knowledge society might be either an opportunity or a threat to universities, depending on the university attitude and ability to adapt. In the long run, only the best universities will survive.
RESOURCES
[1] Blackman C., Segal N., Access to skills and knowledge: managing the
relationships with higher education institutions, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 3, No. 3, 1991, 297-303.
[2] Blackstone T., Why learn? Higher education in a learning society, Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 2, April 2001, 175-184.
[3] Chevaillier T., Eicher J.C., Higher education funding: a decade of changes, Higher Education in Europe, Vol. XXVII, Nos. 1-2, 2002, 89-98.
[4] Coaldrake P., Stedman L., Academic Work in the Twenty-first Century. Changing roles and policies, Higher Education Division, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, September 1999.
[5] Croxford L., Global university education: some cultural considerations, Higher Education In Europe, Vol. XXVI, No. 1, 2001.
[6] Dąbrowska M., The concept of entrepreneurial university as an answer to the challenges of the 21st century, Zarządzanie wiedzą w szkolnictwie wyższym, Politechnika Gdańska, Wydział Zarządzania i Ekonomii, Gdańsk 2004.
[7] Dębek P., Krzemowe kotlinki, CHIP, nr 10/2003.
[8] Dominiak P., Zarządzanie szkołą wyższą w warunkach konkurencji, Zarządzanie Edukacją a Kreowanie Społeczeństwa Wiedzy, Politechnika Gdańska, Wydział Zarządzania i Ekonomii, Gdańsk 2002.
[9] Dylus A., Komercjalizacja nauki. Implikacje etyczne, in: Pawłowski K., Polska Liga Bluszczowa, Forum Akademickie 2/2002, www.forumakad.pl, accessed:
04.11.2006.
[10] Gibbons M., Changing research practices in Brennan et al (eds), What kind of university? Society for Research in Higher Education and Open University Press, 1999, in: Coaldrake P., Stedman L.: Academic Work in the Twenty-first Century.
Changing roles and policies, Higher Education Division, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, September 1999.
[11] Higher Education to Support a Knowledge-Based Society Full of Creative Vitality - New Developments in Higher Education Reform,
http://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/2004/05/04052401.htm, accessed:
04.11.2006.
[12] Jabłecka J., Uniwersytet jako organizacja ucząca się, Zarządzanie wiedzą w szkolnictwie wyższym, Politechnika Gdańska, Wydział Zarządzania i Ekonomii, Gdańsk 2004.
[13] Johnstone D.B., The economics and politics of cost sharing in higher education:
comparative perspectives, Economics of Education Review 23 (2004) 403-410 [14] Leja K., Identyfikacja elementów zarządzania wiedzą w wyższej uczelni,
Zarządzani Wiedzą w Szkolnictwie Wyższym, Wydział Zarządzania i Ekonomii, Politechnika Gdańska, Gdańsk 2004.
[15] Misiak P., Klikać, uczyć, myśleć, Forum Akademickie 3/2002, www.forumakad.pl.
[16] Mosakowski R., Źródła finansowania nauki polskiej, Forum Akademickie 6/1999, www.forumakad.pl, accessed: 04.11.2006.
[17] Niedzicki W., Czy sprzedawać naukę?, Forum Akademickie 1/1998, www.forumakad.pl, accessed: 04.11.2006.
[18] Oleksyn T., Systemy zarządzania kompetencjami, Zarządzanie Wiedzą w przedsiębiorstwie, WSPiZ, Warszawa 2003, in: Jabłecka J.: Uniwersytet jako organizacja ucząca się, Zarządzanie wiedzą w szkolnictwie wyższym, Politechnika Gdańska, Wydział Zarządzania i Ekonomii, Gdańsk 2004.
[19] Oosterlinck A., Knowledge management in post-secondary education: universities, source: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/21/2074921.pdf, accessed: 04.11.2006.
[20] Pawłowski K., Społeczeństwo wiedzy szansa dla Polski, Znak, Kraków 2004.
[21] Pawłowski K., Wartość dodana w szkole wyższej, Forum Akademickie, 2004, www.forumakad.pl
[22] Pawłowski K., Towards the Entrepreneurial University, Higher Education In Europe, vol. XXVI, 2001.
[23] Raport o Rozwoju Społecznym Polska 2004, p.28, Source:
http://www.undp.org.pl/nhdr/nhdr2004.php, accessed: 04.11.2006.
[24] Ratcliffe-Martin V., Coakes E., Sugden S.: Enhancing knowledge acquisition and transfer in the university sector, in: Maponya P.M., Knowledge management practices in academic libraries: a case study of the University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg Libraries, 2004,
http://www.ukzn.ac.za/department/data/leap_scecsalpaper.pdf accessed:
05.11.2006.
[25] Reid I. C., The web, knowledge management and universities,
http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw2k/papers/reid/paper.html, accessed: 05.11.2006.
[26] Salmi J., Constructing knowledge societies: New challenges for tertiary education, Higher Education in Europe, Vol. XXVIII, No. 1, 2003.
[27] Scott P., The future of general education in mass higher education systems, Higher Education Policy 15 (2002) 61-75.
[28] Siciński M., Kwalifikacje czy kompetencje?, Edukacja i Dialog, 2003, nr 9.
[29] Soares V.A.M., Amaral Maral. M.S.C., The entrepreneurial university: a fine answer to a difficult problem?, Higher Education in Europe, Vol. XXIV, No. 1, 1999, 11-21.
[30] The role of universities in the Europe of knowledge,
http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/cha/c11067.htm, accessed: 04.11.2006 [31] Tilak J.B.G., Knowledge Society. Education and Aid, Compare, Vol. 32, No. 3,
2002, 297-310.
[32] Varghese N.V., Incentives and institutional changes in higher education, Higher Education and Management Policy, Vol. 16, No. 1, OECD 2004, 27-39.
[33] Watts A.L., Education and the common good. Social benefits of higher education in Kentucky, Kentucky Long Term Policy Research Center, 2001.
[34] Welsh Assembly Government. http://www.elwa.ac.uk/elwaweb/elwa.aspx?
pageid=445, accessed: 04.11.2006.
[35] Zasępa T., Uwolnić uniwersytety, Forum Akademickie 03/2000, www.forumakad.pl, accessed: 05.11.2006.
