apartado 3 – letra b (nueva)

Many years of research into the problem of business school relevance led Corley and Gioia (2011) to conclude that theoretical contributions borne out of academic research in management must meet two criteria – originality and utility. PPPs produce new social configurations that are unexplored in the traditional management literature and “…traditional management theory offers limited guidance for the rapidly evolving models under which public, private and not-for-profit sectors co-operate in the provision of public services” (Bertels and Vredenburg, 2004, p.34). Further support for the possible emergence of new forms of theories inherent in PPPs is provided by Jones and Bird (2000) who, in their study of theoretical and political presentations of partnership in education in England, admitted that existing theorisations might be inadequate to understand the dynamics of partnerships.

2.1.1 Originality and Contextuality of the Research

Higher education institutions that are responding to changing conditions and paradigms are emerging as “entrepreneurial universities” with changing internal factors and a dynamic relationship with the environment that sustains their entrepreneurial drive (Gibb et al., 2009; Cano and Pulido, 2007; Guerrero and Urbano, 2010). Such universities have been found to be both knowledge producers and disseminators with support measures for entrepreneurship (Kirby, 2005). Further, entrepreneurial universities develop administrative techniques, strategies and competitive postures (Antoncic and Hisrich, 2001). For most universities, the problem of shifting the paradigm still remains and this perhaps warrants a shift in considering the organisational and institutional context in which faculty and researchers undertake their roles – the business school and the university as an institution.

30

2.1.2 Significance and Practical Utility of the Research

Collaborative efforts involve combinations of public, private and not-for-profit agencies and organisations in an effort to harness the benefits, tangible and intangible, that can derive from such partnerships (Ghobadian et al., 2004a). PPPs are deemed to be a panacea for the development challenges of many countries and there is a cry for increased public-private co-operation and partnership, especially in education (Pessoa and Frias, July 2008). Yet, challenges to implementation of PPPs in these contexts diminish the potential value to be derived (Pessoa, 2006). This study contends that small, developing countries require a different model of participation in PPP projects. There is a paucity of research on the relationship between academics in public universities and the private sector in small, developing countries, the empirical context of this study. The way in which they collaborate to derive benefits for each other, and for the purpose of development, must be understood. The role of the university in small, developing societies in the Commonwealth Caribbean is linked to the development purpose and the university is seen to be an instrument of economic readjustment and social and political change (Williams, 1968). Where there is room for only one national university, it is suggested that the ‘Oxbridge’ model may not be best suited as this model is located within a space where other universities adopt the responsibility for responding to the social and technological needs of the modernised society (ibid.). The practical question of what university model is appropriate for small, developing countries and how the university responds to the demands of its environment is central to this study.

Practical utility is seen as the applicability of research to the problems practicing managers face and, as such, theories of practical importance would “…focus on prescriptions for structuring and organising around a phenomenon and less on how science can further delineate or understand the phenomenon” (Corley and Gioia, 2011, p.18). Corley and Gioia suggest that tests of originality often lie in the way researchers integrate, rather than in the way they create new, concepts, and that theories should be opportunity driven (ibid.). This work, while it does not provide a model of how researchers can bridge the academic-practitioner divide to create great research contributions, does provide a lens of “prescience” through which we should examine the world for new insights (Corley and Gioia, 2011).

31

The concern for practical utility and consideration of prescience appear to be relevant to another conception of the gap that contributes to the problem of business school relevance – the distance being created between business and society (Huff and Huff, 2001). There is the recognition that “…we as a field have drawn the boundaries of our intended influence so narrowly that we have unintentionally abdicated our societal leadership responsibilities” (Corley and Gioia, 2011, p.28). This statement however, positions the role of academia and business to respond to societal needs from a motive of personal and professional “responsibility” – a motive that drives the corporate social responsibility movement (Weisband, 2009; Stratling, 2007; Moon, 2002). The realities and problems of developing countries, however, are so exacerbated that business and academia have found it necessary to explore the phenomenon as a strategic consideration in their business models (Prahalad, 2010). From this perspective, poverty and other social realities of the developing world are viewed as a business opportunity with a profit motive linked to social development (Prahalad, 2010) requiring other indicators of business performance such as the “triple bottom line” of business success (Elkington, 1998). This is also consistent with the view that “…both business decisions and social policies must follow the principle of shared value (Porter, 2008, p.487; author's italics).

2.2 PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS