Universities and external engagement activities: Particular profiles for particular universities?

Abstract

Studies of universities' external engagement have found that individual and discipline-level characteristics explain most of the participation in different kinds of external engagement activities, but characteristics at the institutional level are often not studied explicitly. In this paper, we analyze how five different forms of external engagement are influenced by a range of factors, using a multilevel regression approach on a complex combined dataset including a survey to 4400 Norwegian academics and detailed data on the 31 higher education institutions where the academics are employed. The goal is to test whether university-level characteristics matter for participation in different kinds of external engagement, when we also control for the influence of individual and discipline level factors. We find that university-level variables explain few of the differences in external engagement among academic staff in general. Still, there are important nuances, and the multi-level analysis has revealed a complex picture of influences on forms of external engagement among academics. Participation in consultancy and commercialization among academics is in particular influenced by university-level factors.

Collaboration of doctoral researchers with industry: A critical realist theorization

“…A final organizational factor relates to the overall features of the university and the way these might influence the external engagement of academics. Thune et al (2016) study the influence of university-level characteristics on the external engagement of academics, concluding that these characteristics, when controlled for the influence of individual and discipline-level factors, do not explain much about the differences in external engagement among academic staff. According to the authors, only consultancy and commercialization activities are influenced by university-level factors, while dissemination, external training and research collaboration are types of external engagement that are not influenced by institutional-level factors.…”

The two dimensions of Italian academics’ public engagement

“…In order to investigate Italian academics' PE activities, we asked respondents seven questions largely inspired by previous research (Abreu et al 2011;Teichler et al 2013;Thune et al 2016). The first referred to people-based activities.…”

“…Data have also been collected at the individual level, however, mainly through surveys within different types of studies: within international studies on changes in the academic profession (Bentley and Kyvik 2011;Teichler et al 2013); and within national studies on the activities carried out by specific categories of researchers (Davies 2013;Royal Society 2006); on knowledge exchange between academics and the business, public and third sectors (Abreu et al 2011); on researchers' public engagement activities (Hamlyn et al 2015;Jensen 2011;Kreimer et al 2011;Scamuzzi et al 2015); and on university external engagement activities (Thune et al 2016).…”

“…Surveys have investigated the association between involvement in PE activities, and academics' demographic characteristics and other factors, such as professional and attitudinal elements. Most of the studies showed higher levels of PE in the humanities, arts and the social sciences than in the other disciplines (STEM) (Burchell et al 2017;Jensen 2011;Kreimer et al 2011;Kyvik 2005;Rainie et al 2015;Thune et al 2016) and higher levels of PE for senior researchers and for academics who publish more (Bentley and Kyvik 2011;Kyvik 2005;Jensen et al 2008;Jensen 2011;Thune et al 2016). The effect of gender on PE is more controversial: some studies show that women are more involved in PE than men (Jensen 2011;Jensen et al 2008) whereas other studies show that men are more likely to engage in PE activities (Bentley and Kyvik 2011;Kreimer et al 2011).…”

Academics’ Societal Engagement in the Humanities and Social Sciences: A Generational Perspective from Argentina, Germany, Portugal, and Sweden

“…While changes in governance are generally expected to lead to changes in social behavior, there is no consensus in the literature regarding how governance reforms related to KE policies have changed academics' behavior patterns (de Rijcke et al, 2016;Gläser, 2019). In general, studies have shown that ASE is, to a large extent, driven by the motivations of individual academics and their networks of relationships with industry and other sectors of society (e.g., Perkmann et al, 2013;Thune et al, 2016).…”