1

Organization of Master Education in Innovation and Entrepreneurship at UiO

Committee’s Final Report, November 4, 2015

Index 1. Committee’s mandate 2. Rationales for merging TIK’s and SFE’s Master programmes 3. How to merge? Three alternative models 4. A new joint Master programme TIK-SFE 5. Human resources 6. Organizational implications 7. Conclusions 8. References

2

1. Committee’s mandate In April 2015, the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences and the Faculty of Social Sciences appointed a Committee to assess the possibility to establish a Master programme oi innovation and entrepreneurship, combining together the two existing Master programmes in this field at the TIK Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture (TIK) and at the Centre for Entrepreneurship (SFE). The Committee was asked to: • Evaluate the background and rationales for establishing this new Master programme; • Consider whether this should be located at TIK (as suggested in the mandate); • Describe how this Master should be set up and organized; • Suggest how to take into account implications in terms of human resources; • Indicate a time plan for the implementation of the new Master programme. The original mandate is given as an appendix. The Committee is composed of the following members: Nils Damm Christophersen, Professor, IFI (Chair of the Committee) Truls Erikson, Director, SFE Fulvio Castellacci, Director, TIK Cato Alexander Bjørkli, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology Mona Bratlie, Deputy Director, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences The Committee had five meetings at the following dates between May and November 2015: 18 May 15 June 19 August 16 September 4 November The present report summarizes the Committee’s work and overall conclusions. The report will point out the rationales for merging TIK’s and SFE’s Master programmes (sec. 2), discuss three alternative models that could be thought of when merging these Master programmes (sec. 3), describe the structure of the new joint Master programme TIK-SFE (sec. 4), analyze strategic aspects and human resources (sec. 5), as well as some organizational implications that this new Master will have for TIK and SFE (sec. 6), and finally point out the overall conclusions (sec. 7).

3

2. Rationales for merging TIK’s and SFE’s Master programmes Current Master programmes at TIK and SFE The following table presents a summary overview of the main characteristics of the two existing 2-year Master programmes at TIK and SFE. For further information on these Master programmes, see their presentation on UiO webpages: TIK Master; SFE Master.

Master programme

Technology, Innovation and

Knowledge*

Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Hosted at

TIK (SV Faculty) SFE (MATNAT Faculty)

Years and credits

2 years; 120 stp 2 years; 120 stp

Number of new students

per year

20 30

Number of student

applications per year

300 (ca.) 300 (ca.)

Students’ educational

background

Mostly from Social Sciences Mostly from MatNat

Students’ nationality

Mainly Norwegians Mainly international students

Teaching subjects rooted

in scientific fields

Innovation studies; Science and technology studies

Entrepreneurship studies; innovation management

Structure

Semester 1: Introduction Semester 2: Specialization & methods

Semester 3: Master thesis Semester 4: Master thesis

Semester 1: Introduction Semester 2: Gründerskolen, or

Norwegian Internship Semester 3: Internship II Semester 4: Master thesis

Teaching approach

Academic focus, but substantial effort and activities to increase working life

relevance (e.g. group work; study visits)

Academic focus, but emphasis on internships and learning-by-doing in

interaction with private firms

*In addition to the two-year TIK Master noted here, the TIK Centre has also a shorter (1,5 year) Master programme called ESST, which is part of a European network on science, technology and innovation studies, and which enrolls 10 new students per year.

4

Rationales for merging the two Master programmes From a scientific point of view, the fields of science, innovation and entrepreneurship studies are rather close to each other. As described in recent overviews of these fields (Fagerberg and Verspagen, 2009; Landström et al., 2012; Carlsson et al., 2013; Martin et al., 2012), these research traditions share some of their theoretical origins and seminal works, and a common interest around the general question of the production, diffusion and management of advanced knowledge, and how this is shaped by the interlinks between private companies, public organizations and political institutions. However, as pointed out by Bhupatirajua et al. (2012), these fields have in the last few decades developed as different scholarly traditions, and there is currently a great potential to create stronger synergies and more explicit interdisciplinary connections between them. This is the general research background and rationale upon which the collaboration between TIK and SFE is based. The possibility to merge the two Master programmes at TIK and SFE is also supported by three more specific strategic considerations. First, for the University of Oslo as a whole, combining together two educational programmes that are highly complementary and closely related to each other is expected to strengthen interdisciplinarity and inter-Faculty collaboration, thus leading to synergies between the fields of science, innovation and entrepreneurship studies. By combining these fields and co-locating them in the same centre, UiO will establish a stronger and more concentrated research environment as well as an interdisciplinary and attractive Master programme, which will be able to compete with other external organizations providing research and Master-level education in the neighboring field of business and management studies in Norway (e.g. BI, NMBU, NTNU, HiO, NHH, UiT). In particular, some of UiO’s competitors in Norway have already established Master programmes on innovation and entrepreneurship (see links in section 8 of this document). By combining its two teaching programmes in this domain, UiO would aim at becoming one of the strongest national players in this field, and particularly so in the Oslo region (especially considering that BI does not currently have any Master programme on innovation and entrepreneurship). Second, it is reasonable to consider that the field of entrepreneurship is in many respects closer to the domain of social sciences rather than mathematics and natural sciences. This is a point that is clearly made by recent overviews of the scholarly literature in entrepreneurship studies and how this has emerged and evolved in the last few decades (Landström et al., 2012; Carlsson et al., 2013). This is also the approach that is followed with respect to teaching programmes in this field, where most of the existing Master programmes in entrepreneurship and innovation management in Norway and elsewhere in Europe are hosted by social sciences Faculties, or business schools affiliated to these Faculties (see web links in section 8 below). Therefore, there are good reasons to argue that a Master programme in innovation and entrepreneurship studies at UiO should be hosted by the SV Faculty, where it would have natural interactions with other social science disciplines (innovation studies; STS; economics; psychology; sociology).

5

Third, from the point of view of TIK’s and SFE’s Master programmes, the merge is expected to strengthen some of these programmes’ current weaknesses. For TIK’s Master programme, merging with SFE would lead to a more international programme, foster students’ international mobility (which is at present very low), as well their links with private firms though SFE’s extensive network. On the other hand, for SFE’s Master programme, merging with TIK would strengthen the programme’s academic focus and content, and link it up with a strong and well-established PhD programme and research environment in social sciences within TIK and the SV Faculty. In short, we expect the merge between TIK and SFE Master programmes to have mutual benefits and eventually lead to create a high-quality and internationally competitive Master programme. 3. How to merge? Three alternative models The Committee has considered different alternative models that could be followed to combine the two Master programmes at TIK and SFE. Three specific proposals have been made. Model 1 (initially proposed by SFE’s Director) argues that the two Master programmes should continue to be separate and independent, although they could have some courses in common. Model 2 (initially proposed by TIK’s Director) points out that the two Masters should be fully merged and located at TIK. Finally, model 3, which represents an intermediate solution and compromise between the previous two models, recommends that the two Masters should be merged and located at TIK, but that these Masters should have three separate thematic specializations (“studieretninger”). Model 1: SFE’s proposal This first model argues that the SFE Master should not be transferred to TIK, but will continue to be located at SFE and affiliated with the MATNAT Faculty. Hence, there would be no merge between TIK’s and SFE’s Master programmes. However, the two Masters could have some courses in common, e.g. SFE students could take courses in methodology at TIK, as shown in the following table.

6

SFE’s Master programme according to model 1.

This model would be good from SFE’s point of view, because it would make it possible to continue the co-location of Gründerskolen and the SFE’s Master within the same centre, as well as the continuation of the practical-pedagogic internship-based approach, which is central today for both Gründerskolen and the SFE’s Master programme. However, this model would not be attractive for TIK, since there would be in practice no merge and hence it would not lead to any synergy and further interdisciplinary activities between the two centers. Model 2: TIK’s proposal The second model is the one that suggests a full integration of the two Master programmes. According to this, SFE Master would be transferred to TIK at the Faculty of Social Sciences, and become an integrated part of TIK’s Master programme. The main idea would be that all of the Master students would attend the same introductory course during the first semester (i.e. a general introduction to the fields of science, innovation and entrepreneurship studies), as well as a common methodology course in the second semester. However, at the beginning of the second semester, each student would choose her thematic specialization – STS, innovation or entrepreneurship studies – and thereby write her Master thesis on one of these fields during the second year.

7

The new TIK Master programme according to model 2.

This second model would be appealing for TIK, because it would build upon its existing TIK’s Master programme, and extend it by introducing a new thematic specialization and increasing its number of students per year. As noted above, the merge is expected to lead to synergies and concentration effects both at the teaching and at the research levels. However, this model does not look attractive for SFE, since it would entail quite a substantial change in the current structure and curriculum of SFE’s Master, and entrepreneurship studies would in practice become simply a “thematic specialization” as part of the already existing TIK Master. Model 3: SFE-TIK Joint proposal Finally, the third model represents an intermediate solution and compromise between the previous two models. According to this, the two Masters should be merged and located at TIK, but these programmes should have three distinct thematic specializations (“studieretninger”) already from the first semester, in such a way that the students interested in entrepreneurship would have a pedagogical offer that is comparable to what they have at SFE today. This model would still be appealing for TIK, because it would extend and strengthen its existing Master programme. At the same time, this solution would also be reasonable for SFE, since it would make it possible to preserve largely the structure and curriculum of the existing SFE Master. This third model is therefore the joint proposal to which the Committee has converged, and that it will be briefly described in the following section.

8

4. A new joint Master programme TIK-SFE The new Master programme combining TIK’s and SFE’s current programmes can be summarized by the following points. Name. «Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship (TIE)». The acronym TIE obviously recalls the English term “tie”, which would hint to the fact that the new Master connects and combines together different research traditions (science, innovation and entrepreneurship studies) in an interdisciplinary setting. Timing. The new Master would begin in August 2017. Affiliation and location. The programme would be located at TIK. This means in practice that the existing SFE Master programme would be transferred from MATNAT to SV (including the new students registered every year and some of SFE staff; see more on this in section 5 below). Structure. The new programme would have three thematic specializations (“studieretninger”): (1) Science and Technology Studies (STS); (2) Innovation; (3) Entrepreneurship. The first two of these are the specializations that the TIK Master currently has; whereas the third one would be a new track created for the students interested in entrepreneurship studies. The three thematic specializations would be structured as parallel tracks, i.e. each student will choose one of the three thematic specializations from the very beginning of the programme, and thereby continue on that track until the completion of the Master thesis. At the same time, however, it would be possible to allow for some interactions between the three different specializations, and in particular: (1) all of the students would attend the same methodology courses during the second semester; (2) the students in a given specialization would be able to choose to attend some modules / courses related to the other specializations if this may relevant for the Master thesis topic they will focus on.

9

Structure of the new TIK-SFE Master programme according to model 3.

Recruitment of students. It would be natural to think that: (1) The students choosing the thematic specializations “STS” and “innovation” would be required to have a Bachelor in social sciences or the humanities (as it is currently the case at TIK); (2) The students choosing the thematic specialization “entrepreneurship” could either have a Bachelor in a MATNAT subject (as it is required in SFE’s existing Master) or a Bachelor in social sciences. In fact, as explained above, it is reasonable to consider that the field of entrepreneurship is in many respects close to the domain of social sciences, and it would thus be reasonable to recruit prospective students in entrepreneurship from the social sciences rather than only from mathematics, natural sciences or engineering. Leadership and management. The programme would have the following leadership structure: (1) a coordinator for each of the three thematic specializations; (2) an overall programme coordinator; (3) a Master programme Board, composed of the programme coordinator, TIK’s Director, two scientific employees, two students’ representatives, and one administrative manager. 5. Human resources How much human resources – scientific, teaching and administrative personnel – would be necessary in order to run the new “TIE” Master programme? The Committee has considered it important to discuss this question, since both TIK and SFE are relatively small

10

centres, and it is thus vital for them to ensure that – when the new Master programme will be set up – there will be a sufficient amount of staff devoted to run the programme in an efficient manner and making it into a high-quality programme. Considering all activities related to teaching, supervision, exams’ evaluation and programme coordination, the estimate provided by the two Centres is that the new Master programme will require approximately the following amount of working hours: • 4,500 hours per year for the work in relation to the 30 students enrolled in the thematic

specializations “STS” and “innovation” (this is the yearly amount of work that TIK Master programme requires today).

• 4,500 hours per year for the work in relation to the 30 students enrolled in the thematic specializations “entrepreneurship” (this is the yearly amount of work that SFE Master programme requires today).

The amount of work indicated in the first bullet point above will continue to be carried out by the existing staff at TIK. However, the additional amount of work indicated in the second bullet point cannot be carried out by existing staff at TIK, because of capacity constraints, and it would thus require a transfer of resources from SFE to TIK. Specifically, in order to run the thematic specializations “entrepreneurship”, TIK would necessitate the following additional staff: • One administrative consultant. TIK has currently only one administrative consultant

that manages the Centre’s Master programme, and it would thus need one additional employee to administer the new larger Master. This administrative consultant could be one of the employees that are now at SFE’s administration (to be transferred from SFE to TIK), or alternatively a newly recruited consultant.

• Five full-time scientific positions (Associate Professors and/or Professors). Each of these new positions would have an annual “pliktarbeid” amounting to 900 hours (i.e. 50% of the annual working time as usual). Hence, the total amount of working time devoted to the Master programme would sum up to 4,500 hours per year). It would be reasonable to think that two of these positions will be the two permanently employed scientific employees at SFE (Professor Truls Erikson and Associate Professor Birthe Soppe, which would move to TIK on a permanent basis). The three other scientific positions would instead be newly recruited staff in innovation and entrepreneurship that would be recruited during the course of 2016 and 2017.

In relation to this point, the Committee has also discussed the fact that SFE’s Master currently involves 15 Professors II in its teaching and supervision activities. For TIK, however, this type of organizational model with a large number of part-time Prof II that have their main position elsewhere in Norway is not appealing, and it was thus suggested that in the future these part-time affiliations would gradually be discontinued, and the

11

corresponding amount of resources would instead be used to finance the new full-time scientific positions noted above. In summary, the main idea is that the merge of TIK’s and SFE’s Master programmes would not require additional resources from UiO, but it could be done with the same amount of resources that are spent today to run the two separate Master programmes at TIK and SFE respectively. However, the Committee has also suggested that it would be worthwhile to invest a limited amount of additional resources in the initial phase of establishing, planning and implementing the new Master programme, since these activities will admittedly require systematic and thorough planning work during the years 2016 and 2017, both to design the new programme and to manage the related organizational implications. 6. Organizational implications The establishment of the new Master would not only have consequences with respect to teaching activities at TIK and SFE, but will also have some more general organizational implications. Although the present Committee does not have a mandate to consider these issues, it is important to note them, since they were discussed and came to light during the Committee’s work and will certainly show up again in the phase of establishment and initial implementation of the new Master. Before considering TIK and SFE separately, we note that a reorganization like this one will in itself carry certain costs. For instance, it is important to smooth the transition to TIK by allowing for a gradual termination of the duties of the current SFE staff, both academic, administrative, and adjunct. Also one or two new PhD positions in areas covering both entrepreneurship, innovation, and STS at TIK would be desirable to stimulate collaboration between the research groups. Organizational issues at TIK As suggested in the previous section, we envisage that, to support the creation of the new Master some human resources would be permanently transferred from SFE to TIK (administrative and scientific employees). In order to take into due account these employees’ interests in the transfer from a center to another, it was suggested that TIK may adjust its organizational structure by establishing a new research group in “entrepreneurship”, in addition to the two existing research groups in “innovation” and “science and technology studies”. This new research group would initially consist of the five scientific employees in the field of entrepreneurship (see previous section), and later add other researchers and PhD students when these will be recruited by means of new external projects in the future. The full-time senior researchers in the entrepreneurship group

12

would have the same working tasks and conditions as other senior researchers at TIK (i.e. a combination of 50% research and 50% teaching and other admin duties). The overall idea and objective of this organizational adjustment at TIK would be to create a working and social environment that will facilitate the integration of the new employees coming from SFE into TIK’s framework. Organizational issues at SFE At SFE, the current master programme is practice-oriented with a large number of adjunct Prof II involved in teaching and supervision. It should be stressed that most of these scholars are outstanding academics and practitioners, and bring in the practical insights and reflection needed in order to run a good practice-based programme. Hence, it will be difficult to maintain such an approach as part of the new model. The mandate (see Appendix) states that Gründerskolen should not be transferred to the SV faculty but remain at MN. During the Committee’s work it has become clear how closely connected the SFE master is to Gründerskolen, both in academic and administrative terms. Transferring the master programme to TIK may thus have unintended consequences for Gründerskolen which one should be aware of. As a first point, it should be noted that SFE’s Master programme is implemented at Høgskolen i Bergen (HiB), the largest engineering school in Norway besides NTNU. The master programme at HiB rests formally on SFE’s science-based master (realfags master) with a joint admission of students. Since the new master will be hosted at SV, this collaboration will most likely have to be discontinued. HiB may then either seek its own master accreditation from NOKUT or instead collaborate with NTNU. If the collaboration with HiB is terminated, SFE might have to close down its involvement in the Gründerskolen Houston destination. The course here covers a spring semester in contrast to the other destinations covering the summer. HiB has traditionally provided half of the Houston contingent with the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU) providing the other half. As HiB, NMBU also has this spring destination as a mandatory and integral part of their Master of Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Without HiB as a partner, the role of SFE will be uncertain and NMBU may itself want to take over this destination. Another concern relates to the academic backing SFE now provides for Gründerskolen as a master level course. The academic faculty at SFE not only legitimizes Gründerskolen, but also provides future direction for a domain in fast change. As an example, the curriculum for Gründerskolen is today completely changed from what it was 5 years ago, and this change will continue. Without the academic backing for Gründerskolen at SFE, NTNU and NHH in particular, might reconsider their future involvement. These partners are continuously considering why they should let UiO run their international entrepreneurship programmes, as most of them now not only desire, but also are competent enough to offer similar programmes on their own. As an example, NTNU has already made special

13

arrangements with Boston University for their Gründerskolen students, and NHH has made separate arrangements with Berkeley at the University of California. Possibly these issues could be resolved in acceptable ways allowing UiO still to have the lead in organizing Gründerskolen. However, the transfer of the SFE master programme to TIK will, unfortunately, create uncertainty in this regard. A last issue relates to the emphasis now put on making the students and PhDs at the MN faculty more innovative and entrepreneurial, for example participating to a larger degree in patent applications and startups. SFE is currently, with its large staff of adjunct employees, well placed to take a more active role here. If the master programme is moved, one will have to find the expertise elsewhere. 7. Conclusions Following the mandate, the committee with one exception (the SFE director) concludes that a merge of TIK’s and SFE’s Master programmes, and hence the establishment of a new joint Master programme, would be beneficial for UiO. Specifically, responding to the five questions outlined in the mandate letter (see section 1 of this document), the Committee makes the following recommendations. 1. Rationales. The rationale for establishing the new Master is well-grounded in scientific

motivations (thematic proximity and potential synergies between the fields of science, innovation and entrepreneurship) as well as strategic and organizational considerations that are relevant for UiO (i.e. expected benefits induced by concentration effects, interdisciplinary activities and increased quality of Master level education in these fields; see section 2 of this document).

2. Affiliation and location. In line with what was suggested in the mandate letter, the new Master should be located at TIK, Faculty of Social Sciences.

3. Structure and organization. The new Master programme would be on “Technology,

Innovation and Entrepreneurship (TIE)”, it would consist of three distinct thematic specializations (“studieretninger”), and have some common courses for all of the students. Its thematic content and management structure should seek to have a balanced representation of the relevant fields (science, innovation and entrepreneurship studies). For further details on this point, see section 4 of this document.

4. Human resources. The working load that will be required to manage and run the new

programme should be financed by combining existing staff and resources at TIK, on the one hand, with staff and resources available at SFE, on the other. The Master would therefore necessitate a transfer of resources from SFE to TIK. In this process, it will be

14

important to take care of the interests of the employees that will be transferred from SFE to TIK, as well as the related organizational implications in the two centres.

5. Timing. The new Master programme should begin in August 2017. 8. References Scientific references Bhupatirajua, S. Nomalerb, O., Triulzi, G. and Verspagen, B. (2012): “Knowledge flows –

Analyzing the core literature of innovation, entrepreneurship and science and technology studies”, Research Policy, 41: 1205– 1218. [Link]

Carlsson, B., Braunerhjelm, P., McKelvey, M., Olofsson, C., Persson, L., Ylinenpää, H. (2013): “The evolving domain of entrepreneurship research”, Small Business Economics, 41: 913–930. [Link]

Fagerberg, J. and Verspagen, B. (2009): “Innovation studies: The emerging structure of a new scientific field”, Research Policy, 38: 218–233. [Link]

Landström, H., Harirchic, G., and Åströmd, F. (2012): “Entrepreneurship: Exploring the knowledge base”, Research Policy ,41: 1154– 1181. [Link]

Martin, B., Nightingale, P. and Yegros-Yegrosc, A. (2012): “Science and technology studies: Exploring the knowledge base”, Research Policy ,41: 1182-1204. [Link]

Web links: Some Master programmes in Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Chalmers: “Chalmers School of Entrepreneurship”: http://www.entrepreneur.chalmers.se/ NTNU (teoribaserte): “Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Society”: http://www.ntnu.no/studier/mentresam NTNU (praksisbaserte): “NTNU School of Entrepreneurship:” https://www.ntnu.edu/studies/mientre Høyskolen i Bergen: “Innovation and Entrepreneurship”: http://www.hib.no/studietilbud/studieprogram/inv-ma/ NMBU: “Entrepreneurship and Innovation” http://www.nmbu.no/studier/studietilbud/master-to-arige/entrepren_rskap_og_innovasjon/node/1922 Imperial College, UK: “Innovation, Entrepreneurship & Management”:

15

http://wwwf.imperial.ac.uk/business-school/programmes/msc-innovation-entrepreneurship-management/ Copenhagen Business School: “Organisational Innovation and Entrepreneurship”: http://www.cbs.dk/en/study/graduate/candsoc-msc-in-social-science/msc-in-social-science-organisational-innovation-and-entrepreneurship Manchester Business School: “Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship”: http://www.mbs.ac.uk/masters/courses/inno-manage-entrepreneurship/ The Committee, Oslo, 4 November 2015 …………………………………………………………… Nils Damn Christophersen, Professor, IFI ……………………………………………………………. Truls Erikson, Director, SFE ……………………………………………………………. Fulvio Castellacci, Director, TIK …………………………………………………………….. Cato Alexander Bjørkli, Associate Professor, Psykologisk institutt …………………………………………………………….. Mona Bratlie, Deputy Director, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences

16

Appendix: Organisering av masterutdanningen i innovasjon og entreprenørskap ved UiO

Mandat for arbeidsgruppe:

Arbeidsgruppen bes om å vurdere mulighetene for å tilby én mastergrad innen innovasjon og entreprenørskap ved UiO, herunder hvordan denne eventuelt best kan bygges opp. Under dette bes det om en vurdering av hvilke typer grunnlag en felles master kan bygge på. Hensett til de to fakultetenes faglige profil, er det mest hensiktsmessig at mastertilbudet legges til TIK. Det forutsettes at en slik overføring ikke medfører økt behov for ressurser.

Gründerskolen er den eldste av aktivitetene ved SFE, og har sitt utspring ved Institutt for informatikk. Det legges ikke opp til flytting av Gründerskolen.

Arbeidsgruppen bes utarbeide et notat som beskriver en god prosess for delingen av senterets aktiviteter, herunder:

- ivaretagelse av de ansatte i prosessen - beskrivelse av en felles mastergrad og grunnlaget for opptak til denne - tidsplan for implementering av ny organisering og masterstudium

Følgende oppnevnes som medlemmer i arbeidsgruppen:

Professor Nils Damm Christophersen, Ifi

Senterleder Truls Erikson, SFE

Senterleder Fulvio Castellacci, TIK

Førsteamenuensis Cato Alexander Bjørkli, Psykologisk institutt

Sekretær ass. fakultetsdirektør Mona Bratlie

Arbeidsgruppens notat bes ferdigstilt innen 1.9.15.