THE ROLE OF A STRATEGICALLY ENTREPRENEURIAL PROACH TO MANAGING HUMAN CAPITAL IN ADVANCE IN RANKINGS

This article belongs to a case category. Its aim is to facilitate answering the question why only Federal Polytechnic University of Lausanne managed to achieve significant progress in global rankings and effectively use tenure track system whereas majority of its competitors failed to do so. The first part of the research [1] presented the concept of strategic innovation for latecomer universities that was designed on the basis of strategic entrepreneurship construction, resource base view, dynamic capabilities, strategic innovation and concept of latecomer organization. To verify suggested conceptual model author considers the case of Federal Polytechnic University of Lausanne by means of structuring the materials of its well - documented success story in ranking promotion in terms of strategic entrepreneurship construction components. Case study resulted in identifying such components of strategic entrepreneurship construction as entrepreneurial mentality, strategic innovativeness and strategic management of human resources development. This supports conclusions made in the conceptual part of the research concerning the fact that in order to make progress in global rankings latecomer university management should be based on strategic entrepreneurship and conducting strategic organizational innovation faster than competitors. The main limitations of the presented research are in the fact that author reviewed the case of only one latecomer university moving towards catching up development on the basis of incomplete set of those structural components of strategic entrepreneurship construction information about which could be gathered in the university case. Research can be supplemented by other construction components such as entrepreneurial form of organizational culture and cognitive aspects of university top executives. In order to improve efficacy of university competitiveness development program and implementing tenure track system it is suggested to consider high risk related to the fact that university the leader of which does not possess strategic entrepreneurship qualities is unlikely to make steady progress in global rankings. Originality of the article is related to the fact that case of latecomer university at the stage of catching - up development is for the first time viewed with the use of new conceptual framework based on components of strategic entrepreneurship construction. Results of this work can be useful for top managers, consultants and experts involved in the process of university competitiveness enhancement and design of professional education programs in this field.

tenure track system, strategic entrepreneurship, strategic innovation, university global rankings, university competitiveness, latecomer university

1. Kozlov M. Strategic Entrepreneurship Based Model of Latecomer University, International Journal of Innovation Science, 2018, vol. 10, iss. 1, pp. 108-124.

2. Baker S. Davos 2018: top universities ‘boost innovation more than nations’, available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/davos-2018-top-universities-boost-innovation-more-nations (accessed 02.02.2018).

3. Hazelkorn E. University Research Management: Developing Research in New Institutions. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2005. 244 p.

4. Mathews J. Competitive Advantages of the Latecomer Firm: A Resource-Based Account of Industrial Catch-Up Strategies, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 2002, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 467-488.

5. Altbach P. and Salmi J. (eds). The Road to Academic Excellence: The Making of World-Class Research Universities. Washington: World Bank, 2011. 390 p.

6. Grant R. M. Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration, Organization Science, 1996, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 375-387.

7. Fumasoli T. Strategy as evolutionary path. Five higher education institutions on the move, Ph.D. dissertation, available at: https://edudoc.ch/record/107278/files/zu13046.pdf (accessed 02.02.2018).

8. Noukakis D., Ricci J., Detterli M. Riding the globalization wave: EPFL’s strategy and achievements. In: Liu N. C., Wang Q., & Cheng Y. (eds), Paths to a World-Class University: Lessons from Practices and Experiences, Rotterdam, 2011, pp. 177-193.

9. Aebischer P. Swiss Precision, available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/one-hundred-under-fifty-rankings-2015/swiss-precision (accessed 02.02.2018).

10. Alvarez S. A. and Barney J. B. Entrepreneurial capabilities: A resource-based view. In: Meyer G. D. and Heppard K. A. (eds), Entrepreneurship as Strategy: Competing on the Entrepreneurial Edge, Thousand Oaks -London - New Delhi, 2000, pp. 63-82.

11. Aebischer P. Competition is Inherent to Science, Lab Times, 2014, iss. 4, pp. 26-29.

12. EPFL Plan de developpement 2012-2016, available at: https://developpement-durable.epfl.ch/files/content/sites/direction/files/EPFL%20Plan%20d%C3%A9veloppement%202012-2016%20310811%20fin.pdf (accessed 02.02.2018).

13. Hurley R. andHult T. Innovation, Market Orientation, and Organizational Learning: An Integration and Empirical Examination, Journal of Marketing, 1998, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 42-54.