ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Re isi ing B he sho gun wedding o indus y
and academia^—empi ical e idence om Finland
Ka i Suomi
1
&Päi ikki Kuoppakangas
2
&Ja i S en all
2
&Elias Pekkola
2
&
Jussi Ki is ö
2
Recei ed: 21 Decembe 2018 /Accep ed: 12 Ma ch 2019 /Published online: 5 Ap il 2019
Abs ac
The pu pose o his s udy is o u he ou unde s anding o dilemmas acing he hi d
mission o uni e si ies. Th ough his dilemma- ela ed in o ma ion, we aim o p o ide
pa hs o uni e si ies o econcile hese dilemmas and adop a mo e holis ic app oach o
uni e si y ma ke ing. In so doing, we e isi B he sho gun wedding o indus y and
academia^(Hampden-Tu ne 1990, pp. 201–221). The dilemmas de ec ed in his s udy
e ol e a ound wo pai s, namely: BHighligh ing in insic alue o esea ch s. highligh -
ing ins umen al alue o esea ch^and B ocusing on in e na ional scien i ic publica ions
s. ocusing on popula iza ion o science^. Mo e han 700 e bal answe s gi en by
Finnish doc o a es o one pai o open-ended ques ions we e quali a i ely con en -
analysed. As i s main no el y, he s udy adop s dilemma app oach and ocuses on
pe cep ions o he neglec ed g oup o doc o a es who ha e exi ed academia. The s udy
sugges s ha uni e si ies adop a mo e holis ic ma ke ing app oach by de o ing mo e
e o o s eng hening s akeholde ela ionships and co-p oduc ion and imp o ing science
communica ion and ela ed incen i es.
Keywo ds Dilemma .Knowledge ans e .Thi d mission .Knowledge economy.
Ma ke ing .Highe educa ion .Uni e si ies
1 In oduc ion
Cu en esea ch, inno a ion and highe educa ion policies end o emphasise collabo-
a ion be ween uni e si ies and su ounding socie y as a key policy o os e ing
In e na ional Re iew on Public and Nonp o i Ma ke ing (2019) 16:81–102
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s12208-019-00220-8
*Ka i Suomi
ka i.suomi@u u. i
1
Uni e si y o Tu ku, P.O. Box 170, 28101 Po i, Finland
2
Tampe e Uni e si y, Tampe e, Finland
#The Au ho (s) 2019
inno a ion in he economy. Doc o al-le el educa ion, in pa icula , is seen as p o iding
collabo a i e a angemen s be ween non-uni e si y sec o employe s and uni e si ies
(e.g. Thune 2009;Haapako pi2017; Ki is ö e al. 2017).
P io li e a u e on ma ke ing in he uni e si y con ex has ocused on s uden
ma ke ing and p ospec i e and cu en s uden s’ iews on highe educa ion se ices,
o ganisa ions and b ands (e.g. Bock e al. 2014; Ko is e al. 2015). This is no
su p ising, as uni e si ies na u ally wish o main ain o inc ease en olmen o compe-
en s uden s (e.g. Obe mei 2012). Indeed, while he emphasis in academic li e a u e on
ma ke ing in he uni e si y con ex has been on s uden ma ke ing, in e ac ions wi h
o he s akeholde g oups, such as alumni and he business communi y, ha e a ac ed
less a en ion. Howe e , in addi ion o eaching, uni e si ies ha e wo o he missions:
he gene a ion o knowledge ( esea ch) and he applica ion o knowledge ( he hi d
mission) (e.g. Mugabi 2014). The hi d mission can be de ined as Ball ac i i ies
conce ned wi h he gene a ion, use, applica ion and exploi a ion o knowledge and
o he uni e si y capabili ies ou side academic en i onmen s^(Molas-Galla and Cas-
o-Ma ínez 2007, p. 321). Ye , eaching and esea ch a e mo e es ablished, s udied and
unde s ood han he hi d mission (Mugabi 2014).
Thus, we ques ioned whe he u he unde s anding o he hi d mission and possible
dilemmas ela ed o i s implemen a ion could p o ide answe s o inc easing p essu es o
uni e si ies o con ibu e o he socio-economic de elopmen o socie ies (e.g. Pinhei o e al.
2018). Uni e si ies in Finland a e pa icula ly esponsi e o go e nmen e o ms, as hey a e
publicly owned. All Finnish uni e si ies a e publicly unded hough pe o mance c i e ia
de e mined by he Finnish Minis y o Educa ion and Cul u e (e.g. Kallio e al. 2017).
I is widely belie ed ha doc o al g adua es ep esen a key elemen o inno a ion and
he gene a ion o new knowledge (Haapako pi 2017; Ki is ö e al. 2017). These a gumen s
sugges ha doc o a es may o e indus y ei he he mos up- o-da e scien i ic knowledge
hey ha e p oduced o hei capabili ies in p oducing such knowledge, esul ing in
knowledge spillo e s (Lee e al. 2010). Doc o al g adua es also se e as channels o
knowledge ans e be ween uni e si ies and non-uni e si y employe o ganisa ions.
The e o e, ec ui men o doc o al s uden s and doc o a es is an impo an mo i a ion o
non-academic employe s o in e ac wi h uni e si ies (Thune 2009; Haapako pi 2017).
Agains his backd op, examining uni e si ies’ hi d mission om he pe spec i es
o doc o a es who ha e exi ed academia and, hus, unde s and wo k li e bo h inside and
ou side academia should be use ul. This g oup also ep esen s uni e si ies’alumni, one
o hei key s akeholde g oups (e.g. Ped o e al. 2018). Howe e , achie ing a
uni e si y’s hi d mission is no wi hou i s p oblems. Fo example, Hampden-Tu ne
(1990, pp. 201–221) discussed he gul be ween academia and indus y in his book
chap e BSho gun wedding: indus y and academia^, which iden i ied dilemmas in he
indus y–academia collabo a ion in he Canadian con ex . In his s udy, we e isi
Hampden-Tu ne (1990, pp. 213–215) and he ‘old’co e dilemma: BThe enhancemen
and p o ec ion o uni e si y’sbasic mission o each and de elop ‘pu e’knowledge s.
he need o apply i s knowledge so as o help he whole na ion compe e economically^.
In so doing, we espond o Suomi e al.’s(2014) call o mo e esea ch u ilising he
s a egic dilemma app oach o esol e managemen challenges in highe educa ion (see
also Hampden-Tu ne 1990,2009). We also acknowledge Ge a’s(2012)sugges ion,in
his concep ual s udy, ha mo e esea ch on ba ie s o knowledge ans e be ween
academia and indus y should be acqui ed om di e en cul u es and sys ems.
82 K. Suomi e al.
Gi en he abo e, he pu pose o his s udy is o u he ou unde s anding o he
dilemmas acing uni e si ies’ hi d mission. Th ough his dilemma- ela ed in o ma ion,
we aim o p o ide pa hs o uni e si ies o econcile hese dilemmas and adop a mo e
holis ic app oach o uni e si y ma ke ing. To accomplish his, we quali a i ely con en -
analyse an ex ensi e se o da a ga he ed om Finnish doc o a es who ha e exi ed
academia. In his s udy, we ake a holis ic pe spec i e and examine knowledge ans e
be ween academia and su ounding socie y, including p i a e, public and hi d sec o
o ganisa ions. Acco dingly, we p e e he e m ‘su ounding socie y’ins ead o ‘indus-
y’in ou elabo a ion (c. . Hampden-Tu ne 1990). Finland o e s a bene icial con ex
o he s udy, as he Finnish go e nmen is inc easingly equi ing uni e si ies o engage
in knowledge ans e wi h su ounding socie y (e.g. Nikunen 2012; S en all and
Lai inen 2015). Thus, his s udy con ibu es o he in e sec ion o academic li e a u e
on highe educa ion managemen and uni e si y ma ke ing by e isi ing and de ec ing
dilemmas in ul illing uni e si ies’ hi d mission and discussing ways o adop mo e
holis ic app oaches o uni e si y ma ke ing. As i s main no el y, he s udy adop s
dilemma app oach and ocuses on an unde s udied a ea by ga he ing empi ical da a
om doc o a es who ha e exi ed academia and examining hei pe spec i es on
uni e si ies’ hi d mission and knowledge ans e . Despi e his g oup’s key ole in
knowledge ans e p ocesses h ough hei mo emen s be ween uni e si ies and su -
ounding socie y, li le is known abou hei pe cep ions.
The es o he a icle is o ganised as ollows. Fi s ly, uni e si ies’ hi d mission and
closely aligned concep s a e discussed. Secondly, he academic li e a u e on ma ke ing
in he con ex o uni e si ies is e iewed. Then, he dilemma app oach is in oduced.
The ea e , he da a ga he ing and me hods o analysis a e desc ibed, and he empi ical
esul s a e epo ed. Finally, he s udy ends wi h a discussion, conclusions, limi a ions
and sugges ions o u u e esea ch.
2 Backg ound
2.1 Uni e si ies’ hi d mission and aligned concep s
Uni e si ies and hei pe sonnel ace majo changes, including new o ms o con ol and
measu emen (Kallio and Kallio 2014;Kallioe al.2016; Ki is ö e al. 2017), inc easing
compe i ion (e.g. Suomi 2014), globalisa ion (Hemsley-B own and Opla ka 2006)and
demands om a wide ange o s akeholde s (Chapleo and Simms 2010; see also Ćulum
e al. 2013). Uni e si y–indus y ela ions ha e also changed signi ican ly. Indeed, he ise
o hi d mission ac i i ies, pa icula ly knowledge ans e , has become an inc easingly
signi ican s a egic issue o uni e si ies, poli icians and policy-make s alike (Sho e and
McLaughlan 2012). Uni e si ies’ hi d mission has been desc ibed as social, en e p ising
and inno a i e ac i i ies ha uni e si ies pe o m in addi ion o eaching and esea ch
asks (Zome and Bennewo h 2011, as ci ed in Loi and Di Gua do 2015). Rela ions
among uni e si ies, indus y and go e nmen ha e been desc ibed by he iple helix
hesis, which sugges s ha uni e si ies can play an enhanced ole in inno a ion in
inc easingly knowledge-based socie ies (E zkowi z and Leydesdo 2000).
New o ms o knowledge p oduc ion ha e been desc ibed wi h he ollowing
simpli ica ion: Mode 1 s. Mode 2, whe e Mode 2 ep esen s new o ms o knowledge
Re isi ing “ he sho gun wedding o indus y and academia”—empi ical... 83
p oduc ion eme ging alongside he adi ional Mode 1 (Gibbons e al. 1994). Wi hin
Mode 1, he pa adigm o scien i ic disco e y, p oblems a e se and sol ed la gely in he
disciplina y con ex by speci ic academic communi ies. Con e sely, in Mode 2, he
new pa adigm o knowledge p oduc ion, knowledge is p oduced in he con ex o
applica ion. Acco ding o Nowo ny e al. (Nowo ny e al. 2003,p.186),B[ ]his is
di e en om he p ocess o applica ion by which ‘pu e’science, gene a ed in
heo e ical/expe imen al en i onmen s, is ‘applied’; any echnology is ‘ ans e ed’;
and knowledge is subsequen ly ‘managed’^. Mode 1 is disciplina y and cha ac e ised
by a hegemony o heo e ical o expe imen al science, an in e nally d i en axonomy o
disciplines and he au onomy o scien is s and hei hos ins i u ions, he uni e si ies.
Mode 2, in con as , is ansdisciplina y, e lec i e and cha ac e ised by he e ogenei y in
e ms o he skills and expe iences people b ing o i . I is socially dis ibu ed and subjec o
mul iple accoun abili ies. Mo eo e , Mode 1 is hie a chical and has a endency o p ese e
i s o m, whe eas Mode 2 is non-hie a chical and ansien (Gibbons e al. 1994; Nowo ny
e al. 2003). Mode 1 and Mode 2 seem o be wo ex emes and, while a ained simul a-
neously, hey gene a e a dilemma ic si ua ion simila o ha desc ibed by Hampden-Tu ne
(1990,pp.213–215): BThe enhancemen and p o ec ion o uni e si y’s basic mission o
each and de elop ‘pu e’knowledge s. he need o apply i s knowledge so as o help he
whole na ion compe e economically^. In addi ion, wi h espec o Mode 2, schola s ha e
a gued ha academics’engagemen wi h non-academic s akeholde s om su ounding
socie y in ol es knowledge co-p oduc ion, a he han simple knowledge ans e om he
o me o he la e (Rossi e al. 2017; see also Hampden-Tu ne 1990; Osbo ne and
S okosch 2013). Acco ding o T an ield e al. (2004), he co-p oduc ion model depends
on he no ion ha bes p ac ice lies in a syn hesis o academic esea ch, p ac i ione
expe ience and p o essional p ac ice (see also Hampden-Tu ne 1990). In addi ion, i
has been sugges ed ha academics and p ac i ione s can begin o co-c ea e managemen
knowledge h ough join Bsys ema ic e iew^(T an ield e al. 2004).
In ela ion o knowledge ans e , Ge a (2012) concluded ha he manage ial
knowledge p oduced in uni e si ies has been c i icised as oo ambiguous, abs ac
and incohe en o help p ac i ione s in decision-making. Resea che s ha e been
c i icised o hei academic w i ing con en ions, abs ac esea ch o ien a ion and
di e en wo ld iews. Ge a (2012) a gued ha success ul applica ion o knowledge
equi es no only he ans e o knowledge, bu also i s e ec i e adop ion and
u ilisa ion. I should be no ed ha alliances be ween esea che s and indus y o
knowledge c ea ion only pa ly answe he p oblem o knowledge ans e , as
adop ion and u ilisa ion o esea ch ou comes equi es u he con ex ualisa ion and
in e nalisa ion ha a e no possible wi hou ac i e p ac i ione expe imen a ion and
adap a ion. Ge a (2012) a gued ha gaps be ween academia and p ac i ione s can be
o e come h ough knowledge managemen , in o ma ion echnology and human e-
sou ce p ac ices aligned wi h o ganisa ion-ini ia ed inno a ion and knowledge ans e
(see also T an ield e al. 2004; Sho e and McLaughlan 2012).
2.2 Uni e si y ma ke ing
Uni e si ies ha e a wide ange o s akeholde g oups and easons o adop ing a ma ke -
ing o ien a ion (Suomi 2015). Fo example, uni e si ies wish o a ac compe en s uden s
(e.g., Sou a and Tu ne 2002; Guilbaul 2016), enhance s uden e en ion and loyal y
84 K. Suomi e al.
(Nguyen and LeBlanc 2001; Ga e mann Pe in e al. 2012) and a ac and e ain
compe en pe sonnel (e.g. Whisman 2009). Ma ke ing esea ch in he uni e si y con ex
has also ocused on co-p oduc ion/co-c ea ion, bu has ypically examined co-p oduc ion
be ween a uni e si y and i s s uden s (e.g. Ng and Fo bes 2009; Dollinge e al. 2018).
Howe e , uni e si ies ha e o he pe inen s akeholde s, such as go e nmen s, ounda-
ions, acc edi a ion o ganisa ions, compe i o s, media, business communi y and local
public, wi h whom o main ain and de elop ela ionships (Ko le and Fox 1995).
Howe e , ou li e a u e e iew e eals ha academic li e a u e on ma ke ing in he
uni e si y con ex has ypically concen a ed on s uden s’beha iou s and choice o
uni e si y, as well as ma ke ing e o s a ge ed owa ds p ospec i e s uden s (e.g.
Al es and Raposo 2010;Ba ku e2017), which ep esen uni e si y’s i s mission
( eaching). The o he wo missions, esea ch and he hi d mission, ha e a ac ed much
less a en ion in he academic ma ke ing li e a u e. The e is a well-es ablished esea ch
a ea called ma ke ing o highe educa ion, and in e na ional academic ma ke ing
associa ions and con e ences ha e special in e es g oups de o ed o he ma ke ing o
highe educa ion (see e.g. Academy o Ma ke ing 2018; Ame ican Ma ke ing
Associa ion 2018). The e is also a jou nal ocusing pa icula ly on his ield: Jou nal
o Ma ke ing o Highe Educa ion. Howe e , as i s name sugges s, his esea ch a ea
has concen a ed on he ma ke ing o highe educa ion o ganisa ions and educa ional
se ices o s uden s (see also e.g. Hemsley-B own and Opla ka 2006). This p o ides a
somewha limi ed iew o ma ke ing in he uni e si y con ex , as he uni e si y
s akeholde en i onmen is pa icula ly complex (e.g. Ko le and Fox 1995;Chapleo
and Simms 2010), as is ha in he wide public sec o (e.g. Wæ aas and By kje lo
2012). A he same ime, ma ke ing o a wide ange o s akeholde s is expec ed o
become inc easingly impo an , as he e is inc easing p essu e on public o ganisa ions
o secu e hei su i al and ensu e he legi imacy o he sec o . Legi imacy and
s akeholde s’ us a e pa icula ly impo an in he public sec o (e.g., Leije hol e al.
2018). Thus, we a gue ha uni e si ies would bene i om a mo e holis ic ma ke ing
app oach a ge ing all ele an s akeholde g oups and iewing uni e si ies no only as
educa o s, bu also as esea ch p oduce s and pa ne s in socie al de elopmen wi h
p i a e, public and hi d sec o o ganisa ions.
One impo an uni e si y s akeholde g oup is alumni. Enhancing he alumni–alma
ma e ela ionship is impo an because alumni may p o ide aluable eedback o he
uni e si y and ac as pa ne s in educa ion ac i i ies. Alumni ypically alue a uni e si y’s
quali y and image and may ac i ely con ibu e o he o ma ion o his image, hus ac ing
as Bb and ambassado s^. They may also con ibu e inancially o hei alma ma e and
employ g adua es, he eby con inuing o ac as consume s o uni e si ies’educa ional
p oduc (Ped o e al. 2018; see also S ephenson and Ye ge 2014). Thus, alumni can be
conside ed impo an pa ne s in implemen ing uni e si ies’ hi d mission.
2.3 Dilemma app oach
Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1970,1981,1990,1999,2009; Hampden-Tu ne and T ompenaa s
2015) ex ensi e wo k on he dilemma app oach o e i e decades illus a es he p e ailing
dilemmas o he Finnish uni e si y sec o in deli e ing i s hi d mission. Wo k by
Kangaslah i (2007); Kuoppakangas e al. (2013); Kuoppakangas (2014); and Hy i e al.
(2015) explo es he use o he dilemma app oach in o ganisa ional changes in he public
Re isi ing “ he sho gun wedding o indus y and academia”—empi ical... 85

sec o . Fu he mo e, Suomi e al. (2014) used Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1970,1981,1990,1999,
2009) dilemma app oach o sc u inise epu a ion managemen in he con ex o highe
educa ion. Howe e , wi h one excep ion (Hampden-Tu ne 1990), p io esea ch has no
ocused on dilemmas in uni e si y–indus y collabo a ion, and no s udies ha e examined
his opic om he pe spec i e o doc o a es who ha e exi ed academia.
Dilemmas a e mo e han policy op ions, as Polli and Bouckae (2011)discussed,
since op ions can be decided based on ac s and may no be subjec o compe ing alues.
Following Smi h and Lewis (2011)andCa lsone al.(2017), we conside dilemmas o
be dis inc om pa adoxes. Dilemmas a e no necessa ily pa adoxical, since a pa adox
assumes ha one choice in alida es he o he , whe eas, in a dilemma, bo h op ions may
be desi able, necessi a ing a econcilia ion o compe ing alues (Hampden-Tu ne
1990). Building on Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1990) de ini ion, dilemmas a e mu ually exclu-
si e hough desi able (and/o undesi able) op ions, which a e o en he esul o con-
lic ing o con adic o y alues held by indi iduals o o ganisa ions, deciding be ween
which may esul in ension and dispu e. Suomi e al. (2014, p. 469) ound Bexcelling as
a eache s. excelling as a esea che ^as a dilemma pai in he uni e si y con ex .
While some esea che s, such as S o ey and Salaman (2009) and Polli and Bouckae
(2011), ha e sugges ed ha a oiding dilemmas is impo an , o he s (e.g. Hampden-Tu ne
1970,1981,1990,2009; Suomi e al. 2014; Kuoppakangas 2014; Hy i e al. 2015)ha e
a gued ha discou se a ound dilemmas p omo es alue cla i ica ion and may esul in hei
econcilia ion: ha is, hei esolu ion. Dilemma econcilia ion is an ongoing s a egic
p ocess among bo h o ganisa ions and indi iduals (Kuoppakangas 2014). We a gue ha
dilemma ic si ua ions a e an oppo uni y o a oid collision, ei he –o solu ions o plain
comp omise, all o which esul in winne s and lose s (see also Ri el and Webbe 1973).
Figu e 1illus a es Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1990,2009) app oach o econciling di-
lemmas by combining compe ing alues o p oduce added alue o alue ede ini ion
a he han collision.
Figu e 1demons a es how he wo opposing alues c ea ing he dilemma pai (i.e.
Bexcelling as a eache s. excelling as a esea che ^Suomi e al. 2014, 469), a e placed
on wo axes ins ead o pola ised on wo di e en ends o line segmen s. The 5/5
comp omise is no he a ge in esol ing he dilemmas. Ins ead, o a oid collusion,
he wo axes wi h a wa ing a ow a e helically d awn owa ds he econcilia ion a ge o
10/10 syne gy, a he han he ei he –o 1/10 o 10/1 op ions (Hampden-Tu ne 1990;
Kuoppakangas 2014;Kuoppakangas2015). The syne gy-zone 10/10, in o he wo ds he
econcilia ion o he dilemma pai Bexcelling as a eache s. excelling as a esea che ^,
is combina ion o bo h alues and called BResea ching in o eaching^as de ec ed by
Suomi e al. (2014 p. 471). This could be done, o example, by applying knowledge and
he indings gained om esea ch p ojec s mo e ully in he eaching o enhance syne gy.
I is impo an o no e ha dilemma a oidance leads o ganisa ions and indi iduals o
choose be ween op ions ei he by no e e encing alues (e.g. Bexcelling as a esea che ^)
o by p i ileging one se o alues o e ano he (e.g. Bexcelling as a eache s. excelling as
a esea che ^; Suomi e al. 2014,p.469).Thepe spec i einFig.1sugges s ha , in he
con ex o demanding change, he wo agen s discussing hei alues may add ess colliding
dilemmas by econciling hese alues and inding syne gy in combining bo h alues, o
example, in o BResea ching in o eaching^ esolu ion (Suomi e al. 2014 p. 471; Hampden-
Tu ne 1990). T anspa ency and seeking unde s anding while lea ning why o he s hold
hei alues a e c ucial in communica ion. Thus, in such a se ing, alues may become bo h
86 K. Suomi e al.
sepa a e and connec ed (Suomi e al. 2014). Making sense o alues and why hey migh
clash aids in ( e)-nego ia ing meanings. Placing he colliding alues in he p ac ical con ex
o p oblem-cen ed and p oblem-sol ing discou se enhances he econcilia ion o
dilemmas.
In Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1990, pp. 201–221) book chap e BSho gun wedding: indus-
y and academia^, he illus a ed a dilemma ic case o B[ ]he uni e si y and i s
pa ne s^in Canada in 1987. He explo ed how go e nmen and business could be e
ela e o uni e si ies and ice e sa in e ms o knowledge ans e . Hampden-Tu ne
(1990, pp. 213–215) ound and labelled he co e dilemma as B[ ]he enhancemen and
p o ec ion o uni e si y’s basic mission o each and de elop ‘pu e’knowledge s. he
need o apply i s knowledge so as o help he whole na ion compe e economically^.The
compa able pai in his co e dilemma, which is e isi ed in he cu en s udy, was la e
named Mode 1 and Mode 2 by Gibbons e al. (1994), as in oduced ea lie in his s udy.
Wi h ega d o he de ec ed dilemma, Hampden-Tu ne (1990, pp. 201–221) desc ibed
how he wo opposing alues o ‘pu e’and ‘applied’knowledge ha e been placed a
ex eme ends o a pole, c ea ing a dilemma. Hampden-Tu ne (1990)a gued ha he
oo s o he dilemma lie in wo di e en o ganisa ional missions and cul u al eali ies.
In addi ion, he a gued ha knowledge is becoming mo e complex and can g ow u he
when i is sha ed, a he han kep in indi idual academic expe s’Bi o y owe s^.
Fu he mo e, Hampden-Tu ne (1990) sugges ed ha su ounding socie y will B eap
mo e om he uni e si ies i i sows mo e and will sow mo e i i is helped in i s
eaping^(p. 214). He also a gued ha uni e si ies need o e-e alua e he alue o
‘pu e’knowledge and o no o e do i . Fo example, in he ha d sciences, labo a o ies
a e needed o ca e ully con olled expe imen a ion. Howe e , mos o he subjec s
Fig. 1 Dilemma econcilia ion p ocess (adap ed om Hampden-Tu ne 1990,2009, pp. 107–127; see also
Kuoppakangas 2014, p. 141, Kuoppakangas 2015 p. 82)
Re isi ing “ he sho gun wedding o indus y and academia”—empi ical... 87
add essed by he so sciences a e Be en s in he wide wo ld^(Hampden-Tu ne 1990,
p. 215). Such ma e s can be simula ed a uni e si ies, bu he isola ion may esul in
loss o signi icance; hus, hese disciplines may bene i om es ing hei supposi ions
in p ac ice o , especially, om co-p oducing wi h o he sec o s.
A he ime o he de ec ion o a dilemma, B[ ]he enhancemen and p o ec ion o
uni e si y’s basic mission o each and de elop ‘pu e’knowledge s. he need o apply i s
knowledge so as o help he whole na ion compe e economically^(Hampden-Tu ne 1990,
pp. 213–215). Hampden-Tu ne (1990) also discussed how uni e si ies had been caugh
be ween he con lic ing a i udes o policy-make s claiming ha uni e si ies a e B ee^(p.
210) o ha e academic eedom (see also Kallio e al. 2016). Thus, hough go e nmen s
canno in e e e in wha is augh and disco e ed by esea ch a uni e si ies, hey expec o
ecei e alue om hei subsidies. This app oach ca ches uni e si ies in a Bdouble-bind^
si ua ion, leading academics o eel apped (Hampden-Tu ne 1990,p.210).Thus,Mode1
and Mode 2 (Gibbons e al. 1994) esemble he ‘old’co e dilemma de ec ed by Hampden-
Tu ne (1990). In his s udy, we build on Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1970,1981,1990,1999,
2009), and Hampden-Tu ne and T ompenaa ’s(2015) wo k o i e decades o u he
explo e his co e dilemma.
3 Me hodology
The da a o his s udy we e collec ed h ough an online su ey as a pa o a la ge
esea ch p ojec in Finland in 2018. I ocuses on how and why academics exi uni e si ies
in ne wo ked knowledge socie ies. The su ey ques ionnai e was i s es ed and hen
e ised acco ding o eedback. The ea e , an in i a ion o pa icipa e in he su ey was
sen o 4442 esponden s (a e emo ing 189 mis akes). One eminde was sen o a ac
mo e esponden s. Al oge he , 1226 esponden s (28%) answe ed he su ey.
In he cu en s udy, we concen a e on e bal answe s o one pai o open-ended
ques ions: How could he in o ma ion and know-how p oduced in uni e si ies be be e
ans e ed o wo king li e and wide socie y? and How could in o ma ion and
knowhow p oduced ou side uni e si ies be be e ans e ed o uni e si ies? (N=720).
As he pai o ques ions show, we we e in e es ed in knowledge ans e bo h ways:
om academia o su ounding socie y and ice e sa. We did no limi he ques ion o
indus y o business, as we we e in e es ed in knowledge ans e be ween academia
and o he public and hi d sec o s, as well.
The esponden s ep esen ed he ollowing disciplines: na u al sciences, echnology,
medicine and heal h science, ag icul u e and o es y, social sciences and o he s.
The da a analysis began wi h a eading o all he answe s o o m gene al iew o he
da a. Then, he mo e de ailed da a analysis s a ed. The quali a i e con en analysis was
guided by he dilemma app oach (e.g. Elo and Kyngäs 2008) and, pa icula ly, Hamp-
den-Tu ne ’s(1990,p.213–215) dilemma: BThe enhancemen and p o ec ion o
uni e si y’s basic mission o each and de elop ‘pu e’knowledge s. he need o apply
i s knowledge so as o help he whole na ion compe e economically^. Thus, he s udy
adop ed abduc i e logic (e.g. Dubois and Gadde 2002), as i e isi ed and ede ined
exis ing amewo k, while empi ical ma e ial ook mo e cen al ole (e.g. Co ey e al.
1996). The da a analysis e ealed wo hemes (Elo and Kyngäs 2008)assub-dilemmas
o he abo e-men ioned dilemma: 1) in insic alue o esea ch s. ins umen al alue
88 K. Suomi e al.
o esea ch and 2) in e na ional scien i ic publica ions s. popula isa ion o science.I
also iden i ied h ee hemes b idging he gul be ween academia and indus y and, hus,
p o iding pa hs o econciling he de ec ed dilemmas: 1) owa ds s onge s akeholde
ela ionships, 2) owa ds co-p oduc ion wi h and by s akeholde s and 3) owa ds
e ec i e science communica ion and ela ed incen i es.
To alida e he indings, we p esen au hen ic quo a ions om he da a (Sil e man
2001). The quo a ions ha e been ansla ed om Finnish o English. To ensu e he
esponden s’anonymi y, he ex ac s a e labelled wi h numbe unning consecu i ely
om 1 o 26.
4 Re isi ing B[ ]he sho gun wedding: indus y and academia^
Ou s a ing poin was o e isi he co e dilemma B[ ]he enhancemen and p o ec ion o
uni e si y’s basic mission o each and de elop ‘pu e’knowledge s. he need o apply
i s knowledge so as o help he whole na ion compe e economically^discussed by
Hampden-Tu ne (1990) in his book chap e BThe sho gun wedding: indus y and
academia^(pp. 201–221). The wo iden i ied sub-dilemmas connec ed o he co e
dilemma a e p esen ed nex .
4.1 Sub-dilemma 1: Highligh ing he in insic alue o esea ch s. highligh ing
he ins umen al alue o esea ch
Responden s desc ibed he ension be ween he in insic alue o esea ch and he
ins umen al alue o esea ch. They discussed he ension om di e en pe spec i es.
Many unde lined ha academic esea ch has and should con inue o ha e i s own alue:
The knowledge p oduced in academia is no un ese edly p oduced o wo king li e.
I is pa icula ly allacious o hink ha needs o wo k li e could dic a e p ac ices o
uni e si ies. Academia’s mission is al uis ic esea ch: ha is, esea ch o which
di ec bene i canno be add essed in he beginning o a esea ch p ojec . (1)
All academic esea ch DOES NOT HAVE TO se e g oss domes ic p oduc .(2)
Howe e , he esponden s also exp essed mo e c i ical ones owa ds academia, sug-
ges ing ha academics a e ine icien and concen a ing on he w ong hings:
Too much i ele an inke ing is done in uni e si ies, and i leads o a ce ain
kind o epu a ion o uni e si ies and uni e si y esea che s. Uni e si ies should
conside hei esea ch opics mo e c i ically. All basic esea ch is no jus i iable;
mo i a ion is o en an a icle in some ma ginal publica ion only. (3)
The p oblem o a i icially in en ed collabo a ion be ween academia and indus y was
also acknowledged as o ming a gul be ween academia and su ounding socie y:
I don' hink he ans e o uni e si y-p oduced knowledge o economic usage needs
o be en o ced. Any exci ing knowledge will be picked up soone o la e by he
business wo ld. En o cing his ans e (e.g. by a ge ed unding) only leads o
Re isi ing “ he sho gun wedding o indus y and academia”—empi ical... 89
sec o o ganisa ions. I was also acknowledged ha Mode 1 and Mode 2 (Gibbons e al.
1994) closely esemble Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1990) ea lie indings.
The cu en s udy de ec ed wo sub-dilemmas unde nea h he co e dilemma
discussed by Hampden-Tu ne (1990,p.213–215): B[ ]he enhancemen and p o ec ion
o uni e si y’s basic mission o each and de elop ‘pu e’knowledge s. he need o
apply i s knowledge so as o help he whole na ion compe e economically^. The
ollowing b ie ly discusses hese sub-dilemmas and sugges ed econcilia ion p ocesses.
Acco ding o Hampden-Tu ne (1990), econciling sub-dilemmas may aid in esol ing
he co e dilemma, and ice e sa (Kuoppakangas e al. 2013).
Sub-dilemma 1, i led BHighligh ing he in insic alue o esea ch s. highligh ing
he ins umen al alue o esea ch^, is close o wha Hampden-Tu ne (1990) de ec ed.
The leading mission o a uni e si y is o educa e by building on ‘pu e’knowledge om
basic esea ch disco e ies. This is also in line wi h he Humbold ian ideas (Välimaa
2012) o academic eedom and opposing ma ke -d i en objec i es. Applied esea ch
supplies he ma ke -d i en demand; howe e , educa ion is he economy’sBseed-base^
(e.g. Hampden-Tu ne 1990, p. 208; Haapako pi 2017). Indeed, Hampden-Tu ne
(1990,p.209)a gued ha ‘pu e’ esea ch is he sou ce o wha is applied, no ing,
Bblock he sp ing and you will lose e e y hing^. Ou indings imply ha , cu en ly,
c i ics o academics seem ha e same one as c i ics in he 1990s in e ms o eques s o
g ea e e iciency and engagemen in knowledge ans e (Hampden-Tu ne 1990;
Kallio e al. 2016;Haapako pi2017). Ye , academia needs o ha e a clea pu pose: a
mission o i s own; o he wise, i isks being used by o he s as an Bins umen ^
(Hampden-Tu ne 1990, p. 216). Howe e , o e emphasising he alue o ‘pu e’
knowledge se s uni e si ies’basic mission on an opposing ex eme om applied
knowledge, and ice e sa (see also Kallio e al. 2016).
Fu he mo e, al hough he cu en s udy ound uni e si ies’ hi d mission and
collabo a ion wi h o he sec o s o be impo an , esponden s also emphasised e-
sea che s’abili y o conduc au onomous esea ch acco ding o hei academic alues.
The po en ial alue o basic esea ch o su ounding socie y is ha d o p edic in
ad ance (see also Kallio e al. 2016; Ylijoki and Hen iksson 2017). The s udy u he
ound ha he con lic ing idea ha he academic alue o ‘pu e’ esea ch is diminished
when i is applied in he sea ch o c ea ing comme cial weal h s ill p e ails. While
Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1990) indings a e s ill alid, i should be no ed ha uni e si ies’
collabo a ions wi h su ounding socie y can ake many o ms, which may no always
con ibu e o comme ce. Fo example, collabo a ion may in ol e assis ing go e nmen s
wi h social and heal hca e p og ammes (see also Kuoppakangas 2014)o planning
sus ainable p oduc s and se ices. Such collabo a ions may en ail posi i e media
a en ion and, wi h he suppo o e ec i e uni e si y ma ke ing, ha e a posi i e e ec
on pe cep ions o academia and esea che s among employe s ou side academia (see
also Haapako pi 2017).
In addi ion, as de ec ed in his s udy, s onge ela ions wi h alumni can bene i
knowledge ans e be ween uni e si ies and o he sec o s (Ped o e al. 2018; see also
S ephenson and Ye ge 2014). Howe e , a en ion mus be paid o p epa ing doc o al
s uden s o wo k-li e compe encies in addi ion o hei academic subs ance and
me hodological s udies; o he wise, hey may lack he abili y o open up he ans e able
skills gained du ing hei s udies, which may hinde hei employabili y ou side
academia (e.g. Haapako pi 2017; Ki is ö e al. 2017). T aineeships du ing doc o al
96 K. Suomi e al.

s udies and academics’job o a ion o o he sec o s (and ice e sa) would bene i
knowledge ans e , as would in i ing expe s om o he sec o s o se e as isi ing
lec u e s a uni e si ies. Howe e , such job o a ions may in ol e challenges, as
business and indus y pa ne s may alue hei ime ia mone a y incen i es and as
esul s, while academics may ind i di icul o main ain and each academic esul s
measu ed h ough pe o mance e alua ions (Kallio e al. 2016; Ki is ö e al. 2017)i
absen om hei jobs a uni e si ies.
I seems ha Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1990) and, la e , Hampden-Tu ne and
T ompenaa s’(2015) conclusions a e s ill alid: A sha ed iew o wha a close
pa ne ship wi h o he -sec o o ganisa ions could achie e o a uni e si y, o business
and indus y and o na ions can anscend p esen dispu es, esul ing in ui ul and
genuine collabo a ion. BA‘ i uous ci cle’o sowing and eaping, wi h each inc easing
oge he in ag eed p opo ions, could help o de elop bo h he basic mission o uni e -
si ies and he olume o expe applica ions^(Hampden-Tu ne 1990, p. 215). Acco d-
ingly, B owa ds s onge s akeholde ela ionships and co-p oduc ion^could be con-
side ed he econcilia ion p ocess o sub-dilemma 1: Bhighligh ing he in insic alue o
esea ch s. highligh ing he ins umen al alue o esea ch^. Indeed, a ew ecen
s udies ha e examined co-c ea ion/co-p oduc ion in he uni e si y con ex ; howe e ,
hus a , his a ea o s udy has ocused on co-p oduc ion be ween uni e si ies and hei
s uden s (e.g. Ng and Fo bes 2009; Dollinge e al. 2018). The cu en s udy expands he
iew o include co-p oduc ion wi h and by s akeholde s om ou side academia by
epo ing he pe cep ions o doc o a es who ha e exi ed academia. Wi h ega d o
ma ke ing, i would be mo e use ul o adop he concep o uni e si y ma ke ing han
ma ke ing o highe educa ion, as he o me be e conside s a uni e si y’s o he wo
missions beyond eaching (namely, esea ch and he hi d mission) and a uni e si y’s
wide ange o s akeholde g oups (see also Chapleo and Simms 2010).
Wi h ela ion o sub-dilemma 2, B ocusing on in e na ional scien i ic publica ions s.
ocusing on popula isa ion o science^, he indings o his s udy a e in line wi h ea lie
esea ch (Kallio e al. 2016; see also Jauhiainen e al. 2015) in ha hey highligh he
ension be ween publishing esea ch in English in high-quali y in e na ional jou nals
and popula ising esea ch (e.g. by w i ing a icles in ended o he gene al public in
Finnish). Academics a e inc easingly pushed o use he English language in hei
esea ch publica ions, which is educing he ole o he Finnish language in science.
This esul s in less knowledge accessibili y o sec o s ou side academia and hinde s he
uni e si y’s hi d mission in e ms o knowledge ans e . Finnish uni e si ies’cu en
unding model also appea s o hinde knowledge ans e , as popula isa ion o esea ch
is no eally ewa ded by pe o mance measu emen and was desc ibed by he espon-
den s as no ad ancing one’s academic ca ee , bu ac ually hinde ing i (see also Kallio
e al. 2015; Ylijoki and Hen iksson 2017). Ex e nal unding schemes we e desc ibed as
ha ing o e ly sho imelines and oo much compe i ion, which was ela ed o ine ec-
i e communica ion and knowledge ans e (see also Nokkala e al. o hcoming). The
econcilia ion p ocess o sub-dilemma 2 could, hus, be labelled he e as: BImp o ing
science communica ion and ela ed incen i es^.
Hampden-Tu ne ’s(
1990)examina ion o R&D p ojec s and unding p ocesses
de ec ed p oblems simila o hose ound in he cu en s udy (see also Ylijoki and
Hen iksson 2017). Funding bodies in Finland and a he Eu opean Union (EU) le el
ha e a emp ed o educe bu eauc acy’s hinde ing o unding ins umen s in R&D
Re isi ing “ he sho gun wedding o indus y and academia”—empi ical... 97
p ojec s be ween uni e si ies and o he sec o s (Eu opean Commission 2017;Ki is ö
e al. 2017; Ylijoki and Hen iksson 2017). Howe e , as anspa ency, legi imacy and
eliabili y emain key o ganisa ional alues o he public sec o , o which uni e si ies
belong, bu eauc acy is s ill ali e (e.g. Kuoppakangas e al. 2013). Mo e a en ion
should be paid o he usabili y o esea ch esul s when making unding decisions. In
his ein, Finnish doc o a es’pe cep ions in ou da a a e in line wi h Ge a’s(2012)
no ion ha scien i ic esea ch needs no able ansla ion and abso p ion o p ac i ione
use and is, hus, o limi ed p ac ical u ili y. Ou esul s suppo p io s udies sugges ing
ha Bknowledge ans e ^(e.g. Ge a 2012) is oo na ow a e m o desc ibing a
uni e si y’s expec ed con ibu ion o wide socie y. Ins ead, i is mo e use ul o speak
abou Bknowledge co-p oduc ion^(e.g. Osbo ne and S okosch 2013; Rossi e al.
2017) be ween academia and indus y, as co-p oduc ion encompasses wo-way com-
munica ion and he join p oduc ion o a mu ually alued ou come. This no ion comes
close o one o he cen al ideas in Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1990) co e dilemma econcil-
ia ion p ocess: B he en i onmen will eap mo e om he uni e si ies i i sows mo e,
and will sow mo e i i is helped in i s eaping^(p. 214).
6Conclusions
6.1 Theo e ical conclusions
This s udy con ibu es o he in e sec ion o academic li e a u e on highe educa ion
managemen and uni e si y ma ke ing by adop ing a dilemma app oach and collec ing
empi ical da a om a neglec ed g oup: doc o a es who ha e exi ed academia (see also
Haapako pi 2017). Al hough he p io academic li e a u e appea s o ha e omi ed his
exi g oup, doc o a es who ha e exi ed academia play a key ole in examining
knowledge ans e p ocesses h ough hei mo emen s be ween uni e si ies and su -
ounding socie y.
In he cu en s udy, he da a analysis e ealed ha he co e dilemma de ec ed by
Hampden-Tu ne (1990, pp. 213–215), B[ ]he enhancemen and p o ec ion o uni e si y’s
basic mission o each and de elop ‘pu e’knowledge s. he need o apply i s knowledge so
as o help he whole na ion compe e economically^, is s ill ele an . Mo eo e , he da a
analysis e ealed wo sub-dilemmas wi hin he co e dilemma, which allowed us o d aw a
pic u e o he phenomenon in con empo a y highe educa ion. I should be no ed ha he
co e dilemma (Hampden-Tu ne 1990) and he wo sub-dilemmas a e no sepa a e om one
ano he ; ins ead, hey a e o e lapping. Thus, hei econcilia ion p ocesses ound empi i-
cally in his s udy a e also o e lapping. This is in line wi h Hampden-Tu ne ’s(1981,1990,
1999,2009) dilemma app oach, in which one success ul econcilia ion p ocess may sol e
o he dilemmas and possibly e en c ea e new dilemmas equi ing econcilia ion. An
unsuccess ul econcilia ion p ocess may also c ea e new dilemmas. Thus, econciling
dilemmas is an on-going s a egic managemen p ocess (Suomi e al. 2014).
Thus, his s udy inds ha de ec ing and econciling dilemmas is a con inuous s a egic
manage ial endea ou . The e is no one single de ini e solu ion o a dilemma; ins ead,
B esol e means o sol e again and again^(Hampden-Tu ne 1990,p.20).Dilemmasdo
no disappea by econcilia ion; ins ead, hey may ep esen hemsel es in di e en o ms
and a ie ies, as highligh ed in he cu en s udy. Howe e , success ul econcilia ions o
98 K. Suomi e al.
dilemmas may esul in new inno a i e ou comes (Hampden-Tu ne 1990,p.20;seealso
Kangaslah i 2007; Kuoppakangas 2014;Suomie al.2014;Laine2018).
6.2 Manage ial implica ions
This s udy has illumina ed he manage ial dilemmas connec ed o uni e si ies’ hi d
mission and sugges ed ela ed dilemma econcilia ion p ocesses (see also Hampden-
Tu ne 1990). Business and indus y ha e in-house educa ion and hands-on knowledge
ha a e aluable and can be u ilised in uni e si y eaching. Con e sely, he esea ch and
knowledge p oduced by uni e si ies can be applied o p i a e, public and hi d sec o
needs. S uden s should be augh and should lea n du ing hei s udies how o u ilise
esea ch esul s in p o essional asks when hey wo k ou side academia a e g adua-
ion. Uni e si ies should ac i ely main ain and de elop uni e si y–alumni ela ion-
ships. They should ca e ully de ine hei key s akeholde s, de elop ela ions wi h hem
and enhance co-p oduc ion wi h and by hem. A mo e holis ic ma ke ing app oach
includes di ec and ailo ed science communica ion and ma ke ing o o he sec o s.
6.3 Limi a ions and u u e esea ch
This s udy was conduc ed in one Eu opean coun y, Finland, whe e uni e si ies a e
publicly managed and s a e- unded. Thus, he esul s o he s udy a e bes applicable in
o he No dic coun ies. One should also no e ha answe s om di e en disciplines
canno be s a is ically gene alized. Fu u e s udies could expand he iew p o ided in
his s udy by examining dilemmas acing uni e si ies hi d mission in he con ex o
o he uni e si y sys ems and unding schemes.
Acknowledgemen s The au ho s wish o hank BExi ing academics in ne wo ked knowledge-socie ies -
esea ch p ojec and Academy o Finland o unding his s udy.
Funding In o ma ion Open access unding p o ided by Uni e si y o Tu ku (UTU) including Tu ku
Uni e si y Cen al Hospi al.
Open Access This a icle is dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0 In e na ional
License (h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/), which pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and ep o-
duc ion in any medium, p o ided you gi e app op ia e c edi o he o iginal au ho (s) and he sou ce, p o ide a
link o he C ea i e Commons license, and indica e i changes we e made.
Re e ences
Academy o Ma ke ing (2018). Ma ke ing o highe educa ion SIG. Re ie ed om h ps://www.
academyo ma ke ing.o g/sigs/ma ke ing-highe -educa ion-sig/.
Al es, H., & Raposo, M. (2010). The in luence o uni e si y image on s uden beha iou . In e na ional
Jou nal o Educa ional Managemen , 24(1), 73–85.
Ame ican Ma ke ing Associa ion (2018). Ma ke ing o highe educa ion SIG. Re ie ed om h ps://www.
ama.o g/academics/Pages/HIghe Educa ionSIGGene alIn o ma ion.aspx.
Ba ku e, D. (2017). Li huanian s uden s’choice o uni e si y: A consume alue app oach. Eu opean Jou nal
o Highe Educa ion, 7(2), 173–187.
Bock, D. E., Poole, S. M., & Joseph, M. (2014). Does b anding impac s uden ec ui men : A c i ical
e alua ion. Jou nal o Ma ke ing o Highe Educa ion, 24(1), 11–21.
Re isi ing “ he sho gun wedding o indus y and academia”—empi ical... 99
Ca lson, E., Poole, M., Lambe , N., & Lamme s, J. (2017). A s udy o o ganiza ional esponses o dilemmas
in in e o ganiza ional eme gency managemen . Communica ion Resea ch, 44(2), 287–315.
Chapleo, C., & Simms, C. (2010). S akeholde analysis in highe educa ion: A case s udy o he Uni e si y o
Po smou h. Pe spec i es: Policy and P ac ice in Highe Educa ion, 14(1), 12–20.
Co ey, A., Holb ook, B., & A kinson, P. (1996). Quali a i e da a analysis: Technologies and ep esen a ions.
Sociological Resea ch Online, 1(1) h ps://jou nals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5153/s o.1.
Ćulum, B., Ronče ić,N.,&Ledić, J. (2013). Facing new expec a ions—In eg a ing hi d mission ac i i ies
in o he uni e si y. In B. M. Kehm & U. Teichle (Eds.), The academic p o ession in Eu ope: New asks
and new challenges (pp. 163–195). Ne he lands: Sp inge .
Dollinge , M., Lodge, J., & Coa es, H. (2018). Co-c ea ion in highe educa ion: Towa ds a concep ual model.
Jou nal o Ma ke ing o Highe Educa ion, 28(2), 210–231.
Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. (2002). Sys ema ic combining. An abduc i e app oach o case esea ch. Jou nal
o Business Resea ch, 55(7), 553–560.
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The quali a i e con en analysis p ocess. Jou nal o Ad anced Nu sing, 62(1),
107–155.
E zkowi z, H., & Leydesdo , L. (2000). The dynamics o inno a ion: F om Na ional Sys ems and Bmode 2^
o a iple helix o uni e si y–indus y–go e nmen ela ions. Resea ch Policy, 29, 109–123.
Eu opean Commission (2017). Commission simpli ies Ho izon 2020. Re ie ed om h ps://ec.eu opa.
eu/ esea ch/index.c m?pg=newsale &yea =2017&na=na-280217
Ga e mann Pe in, M., Ho mann Sampaio, C., Simões, C., & Pól o a de Pól o a, R. (2012). Modeling
an eceden s o s uden loyal y in highe educa ion. Jou nal o Ma ke ing o Highe Educa ion, 22(1),
101–116.
Ge a, R. (2012). B idging he gap in knowledge ans e be ween academia and p ac i ione s. In e na ional
Jou nal o Educa ional Managemen , 26(3), 252–273.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowo ny, H., Schwa zman, S., Sco , P., & T ow, M. (1994). The new p oduc ion
o knowledge: The dynamics o science and esea ch in con empo a y socie ies. Sage Publica ions.
Guilbaul , M. (2016). S uden s as cus ome s in highe educa ion: Re aming he deba e. Jou nal o Ma ke ing
o Highe Educa ion, 26(2), 132–142.
Haapako pi, A. (2017). Doc o a e holde s ou side he academy in Finland: Academic engagemen and
indus y-speci ic compe ence. Jou nal o Educa ion and Wo k, 30(1), 53–68.
Hampden-Tu ne , C. (1970). Radical man. Camb idge, MA: Schenkman Publishing Company, Inc..
Hampden-Tu ne , C. (1981). Maps o he mind. New Yo k, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Hampden-Tu ne , C. (1990). Cha ing he co po a e mind: F om dilemma o s a egy. Ox o d: Blackwell
Publishe s.
Hampden-Tu ne , C. (1999). Is he e a new pa adigm? The ee in he ga den. Business E hics: A Eu opean
Re iew, 8(3), 177–185.
Hampden-Tu ne ,C.(2009).Teaching inno a ion and en ep eneu ship: Building on he Singapo e expe i-
men .NewYo k,NY:Camb idgeUni e si yP ess.
Hampden-Tu ne , C., & T ompenaa s, F. (2015). Nine isions o capi alism. Unlocking he meanings o weal h
c ea ion. Ox o d: In ini e Ideas Limi ed.
Hemsley-B own, J., & Opla ka, I. (2006). Uni e si ies in a compe i i e global ma ke place. A sys ema ic
e iew o he li e a u e on highe educa ion ma ke ing. In e na ional Jou nal o Public Sec o
Managemen , 19(4), 316–338.
Hy i, U., Kuoppakangas, P., Suomi, K., Chapleo, C., & Gio ana di, M. (2015). Challenges in deli e ing
b and p omise—Focusing on municipal heal hca e o ganisa ions. In e na ional Jou nal o Public Sec o
Managemen , 28(3), 254–272.
Jauhiainen, A., Jauhiainen, A., Laiho, A., & Leh o, R. (2015). Fab ica ion, ime-consuming bu eauc acy and
mo al dilemmas—Finnish uni e si y employees’expe iences on he go e nance o uni e si y wo k.
Highe Educa ion Policy, 28(3), 393–410.
Kallio, K.-M., & Kallio, T. (2014). Managemen -by- esul s and pe o mance managemen in uni e si ies—
Implica ion o wo k mo i a ion. S udies in Highe Educa ion, 39(4), 574–589.
Kallio, K.-M., Kallio, T. J., Tiena i, J., & Hy önen, T. (2016). E hos a s ake: Pe o mance managemen and
academic wo k in uni e si ies. Human Rela ions, 69(3), 685–709. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177
/0018726715596802
Kallio, K.-M., Kallio, T. J., & G ossi, G. (2017). Pe o mance measu emen in uni e si ies: Ambigui ies in he
use o quali y e sus quan i y in pe o mance indica o s. Public Money & Managemen , 37(4), 293–300.
Kangaslah i, J. (2007). Mapping he s a egic leade ship p ac ices and dilemmas o a municipal educa ional
o ganiza ion (Unpublished doc o al disse a ion). Tu ku, Finland: Uni e si y o Tu ku, Depa men o
Educa ion.
100 K. Suomi e al.
Ki is ö, J., Pekkola, E., & Siekkinen, T. (2017). La es e o ms in Finnish doc o al educa ion in ligh o ecen
Eu opean de elopmen s. Eu opean Jou nal o Highe Educa ion, 7(2), 291–308.
Ko is, R., Ö enblad, A., Ke em, K., & Ojala, T. (2015). S uden -cus ome o ien a ion a a highe educa ion
ins i u ion: The pe spec i e o unde g adua e business s uden s. Jou nal o Ma ke ing o Highe
Educa ion, 25(1), 29–44.
Ko le ,P.,&Fox,K.F.A.(1995).S a egic ma ke ing o educa ional ins i u ions (2nd ed.). Uppe Saddle
Ri e , NJ: P en ice Hall.
Kuoppakangas, P. (2014). Adop ing a municipal en e p ise o m: Expec a ions and ou comes—Th ee cases
and dilemmas. Jou nal o Change Managemen , 14(1), 126–145.
Kuoppakangas, Päi ikki (2015). Decision-making and choice in he adop ion o a municipal en e p ise o m in
public heal hca e o ganisa ions - easoning, goals, legi imacy and co e dilemmas. Tu ku School o
Economics, Tu ku, Finland: Ju enes P in . ISBN 978-952-249-448-1.
Kuoppakangas, P., Suomi, K., & Ho on, K. (2013). Repu a ion and legi imacy: A compa a i e iew o h ee
municipal en e p ises in Finland. In e na ional Jou nal o Public and P i a e Heal hca e Managemen
and Economics, 3(2), 1–17.
Laine, P. (2018). HR as a change agen ? HR in he implemen a ion o s a egic and e e yday change
(Unpublished doc o al disse a ion). Finland Tampe e: Uni e si y o Tampe e, Facul y o Managemen ,
Tampe e Uni e si y P ess.
Lee, H., Miozzo, M., & La edo, P. (2010). Ca ee pa e ns and compe ences o PhDs in science and
enginee ing in he knowledge economy: The case o g adua es om a UK esea ch-based uni e si y.
Resea ch Policy, 39(7), 869–881.
Leije hol , U., Biedenbach, G., & Hul én, P. (2018). B anding in he public sec o : A sys ema ic li e a u e
e iew and di ec ions o u u e esea ch. Jou nal o B and Managemen ., 26,126–140. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1057/s41262-018-0116-2.
Loi, M., & Di Gua do, M. C. (2015). The hi d mission o uni e si ies: An in es iga ion o he espoused
alues. Science and Public Policy, 42(6), 855–870.
Molas-Galla , J., & Cas o-Ma ínez, E. (2007). Ambigui y and con lic in he de elopmen o ‘ hi d Mission’
indica o s. Resea ch E alua ion, 16(4), 321–330.
Mugabi, H. (2014). Ins i u ionalisa ion o he ‘ hi d Mission’o he uni e si y. The case o Make e e uni e si y
(unpublished doc o al disse a ion). Tampe e, Finland: Tampe e Uni e si y P ess.
Ng, I. C. L., & Fo bes, J. (2009). Educa ion as se ice: The unde s anding o a uni e si y expe ience h ough
he se ice logic. Jou nal o Ma ke ing o Highe Educa ion, 19(1), 38–64.
Nguyen, N., & LeBlanc, G. (2001). Image and epu a ion o highe educa ion ins i u ions in s uden s’ e en ion
decisions. In e na ional Jou nal o Educa ional Managemen , 15(6), 303–311.
Nikunen, M. (2012). P eca ious wo k a he ‘en ep eneu ial uni e si y’: Adap a ion e sus ‘abandon ship’.In
S. Ahola & D. Ho man (Eds.), Highe educa ion esea ch in Finland (pp. 271–290). Jy äskylä: Finnish
Ins i u e o Educa ional Resea ch.
Nokkala, T., Siekkinen, T., Kuoppala, K., & Pekkola, E. ( o hcoming). Wo king ou side academia?
Pe cep ions o ea ly-ca ee , ixed- e m esea che s on changing ca ee s. Eu opean Jou nal o Highe
Educa ion. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/21568235.2018.1548941.
Nowo ny, H., Sco , P., & Gibbons, M. (2003). In oduc ion: ‘Mode 2’ e isi ed: The new p oduc ion o
knowledge. Mine a, 41(3), 179–194.
Obe mei , K. (2012). S uden s' choice o uni e si ies in Ge many: S uc u e, ac o s and in o ma ion sou ces
used. Jou nal o Ma ke ing o Highe Educa ion, 22(2), 206–230.
Osbo ne, S. P., & S okosch, K. (2013). I akes wo o ango? Unde s anding he co-p oduc ion o public
se ices by in eg a ing he se ices managemen and public adminis a ion pe spec i e. B i ish Jou nal o
Managemen , 24,31–47.
Ped o, I. M., Pe ei a, L. N., & Ca asquei a, H. B. (2018). De e minan s o he commi men ela ionship
main enance be ween he alumni and he alma ma e . Jou nal o Ma ke ing o Highe Educa ion, 28(1),
128–152.
Pinhei o, R., Šima, K., Young, M., & Kohou ek, J. (2018). Uni e si y complexi y and egional de elopmen in
he pe iphe y. In R. Pinhei o, M. Young, & K. Šima (Eds.), Highe educa ion and egional de elopmen :
Tales om no he n and Cen al Eu ope (pp. 1–20). Cham: Palg a e MacMillan.
Podoco (2018). Pos docs in companies. Re ie ed om h ps://www.podoco. i/abou /.
Polli , C., & Bouckae , G. (2011). Public managemen e o m: A compa a i e analysis—New public
managemen , go e nance, and he neo-Webe ian s a e. New Yo k, NY: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Publica ion Fo um (2018). Publica ion o um. Re ie ed om h p://www.julkaisu oo umi. i/en/publica ion- o um.
Ri el, H. W. J., & Webbe , M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a gene al heo y o planning. Policy Sciences, 4,155–169.
Re isi ing “ he sho gun wedding o indus y and academia”—empi ical... 101

Rossi, F., Rosli, A., & Yip, N. (2017). Academic engagemen as knowledge co-p oduc ion and implica ions
o impac : E idence om knowledge ans e pa ne ships. Jou nal o Business Resea ch, 80,1–9.
Sho e, C., & McLaughlan, L. (2012). Thi d mission’ac i i ies, comme cialisa ion and academic en ep e-
neu s. Social An h opology, 20(3), 267–286.
Sil e man, D. (2001). In e p e ing quali a i e da a. Me hods o analyzing alk, ex and in e ac ion (2nd ed.).
London: Sage Publica ions.
Smi h, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Towa d a heo y o pa adox: A dynamic equilib ium model o
o ganizing. Academy o Managemen Re iew, 36(2), 381–403.
Sou a , G. N., & Tu ne , J. P. (2002). S uden s’p e e ences o uni e si y: A conjoin analysis. In e na ional
Jou nal o Educa ional Managemen , 16(1), 40–45.
S en all, J., & Lai inen, I. (2015). Highe educa ion engagemen and inno a ion dynamics—Compa a i e
s udy o egional inno a i e ne wo ks o he ci y o Helsinki and he ci y o Chicago. In C. Ca lo (Ed.),
The ole o highe educa ion in egional and communi y de elopmen and in he ime o economic c isis
Na ional Ins i u e o Adul Con inuing Educa ion.
S ephenson, A. L., & Ye ge , D. B. (2014). Does b and iden i ica ion ans o m alumni in o uni e si y
ad oca es? In e na ional Re iew on Public and Nonp o i Ma ke ing, 11(3), 243–262.
S o ey,J.,&Salaman,G.(2009).Manage ial dilemmas: Exploi ing pa adox o s a egic leade ship. Ox o d:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Suomi, K. (2014). Explo ing he dimensions o b and epu a ionin highe educa ion—A case s udy o a Finnish
mas e ’s deg ee p og amme. Jou nal o Highe Educa ion Policy and Managemen , 36(6), 646–660.
Suomi, K. (2015). Managing b and iden i y and epu a ion—A case s udy om Finnish highe educa ion.
Tu ku School o Economics, Tu ku, Finland: Ju enes P in . ISBN 978-952-249-430-6.
Suomi, K., Kuoppakangas, P., Hy i, U., Hampden-Tu ne , C., & Kangaslah i, J. (2014). Focusing on
dilemmas challenging epu a ion managemen in highe educa ion. In e na ional Jou nal o
Educa ional Managemen , 28(4), 461–478.
Thune, T. (2009). Doc o al s uden s on he uni e si y–in e ace: A e iew o he li e a u e. Highe Educa ion,
58,637–651.
T an ield, D., Denye , D., Ma cos, J., & Bu , M. (2004). Co-p oducing managemen knowledge.
Managemen Decision, 42(3–4), 375–386.
T enche , G., Nagao, M., Chen, C., Ichiki, K., Sadayoshi, T., Kinai, M., e al. (2017). Implemen ing
sus ainabili y co-c ea ion be ween uni e si ies and socie y: A ypology-based unde s anding.
Sus ainabili y, 9, 594.
Välimaa, J. (2012). The co po a iza ion o na ional uni e si ies in Finland. In B. Pusse , K. Kempne , S.
Ma ginson, & I. Odo ika (Eds.), Uni e si ies and he public sphe e. Knowledge c ea ion and s a e
building in he e a o globaliza ion (pp. 101–119). London: Rou ledge.
Wæ aas, A., & By kje lo , H. (2012). Public sec o o ganiza ions and epu a ion managemen : Fi e p oblems.
In e na ional Public Managemen Jou nal, 15(2), 186–206.
Whisman, R. (2009). In e nal b anding: A uni e si y’s mos aluable in angible asse . Jou nal o P oduc &
B and Managemen , 18(5), 367–370.
Ylijoki, O.-H., & Hen iksson, L. (2017). T ibal, p ole a ian and en ep eneu ial ca ee s o ies: Junio aca-
demics as a case in poin . S udies in Highe Educa ion, 42(7), 1292–1308.
Zome A., Bennewo h P. (2011) The ise o he Uni e si y’s hi d mission. In J. Ende s, H. F. de Boe , D. F.
Wes e heijden (Eds.), Re o m o Highe Educa ion in Eu ope (pp. 81–101). SensePublishe s. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1007/978-94-6091-555-0_6.
Publishe ’s no e Sp inge Na u e emains neu al wi h ega d o ju isdic ional claims in published maps and
ins i u ional a ilia ions.
102 K. Suomi e al.