of 1 14 The Entrepreneurial Mindset in Higher Education Paul Coyle Entrepreneurial Mindset Network Abstract A comparison of the concept and practice of the Entrepreneurial University reveals the highly aspirational nature of the concept. Analysis has identified a gap in the evidence of universities’ ability to satisfy key characteristics of the entrepreneurial university e.g. diversification of income sources. A further comparison of entrepreneurship in business and in HE, concludes that current definitions of the Entrepreneurial University give insufficient emphasis to risk taking. To support the transformation to the entrepreneurial university, there is a need to understand how leadership in HE could be characterised as entrepreneurial and how HE leaders impact on the entrepreneurial behaviour of other individuals. A significant barrier to transformational change is individuals “having the wrong mindset”. A model is presented of the Entrepreneurial Mindset, which translates key issues from the organisational to the individual perspective. Examples of behaviours have been identified for each of the mindset characteristics. A significant finding is the description of why people do or don’t take risks. HE leaders could reflect on these findings so as to engage people in more innovation and risk-taking, and potentially improve the general level of success in change management initiatives. 1 The concept and practice of the entrepreneurial university In Clark’s study of five European universities, one of his key premises is that “the university- environment relationship is characterised by a deepening asymmetry between environmental demand and the institutional capacity to respond” (p.xvi). Clark argues that “universities need to develop an entrepreneurial response” (p.8), one that sees them making deliberate effort to transform themselves into organisations that are biased towards adaptive change. The "deepening asymmetry” can be seen as a statement of a problem i.e. an inability to cope with increasing external demands. Alternatively, it can be characterised as requiring strategic choices to be made from a wide range of opportunities. How might a university seek out strategic opportunities? Clark states that “enterprising universities exhibit a growth of units that, more readily than traditional academic departments, reach across old university boundaries to link up with outside organisations and groups” (p.6). Etzkowitz takes this idea further, arguing that the entrepreneurial university “has the capacity to take in and address problems and needs from the larger society” (2008, p.28). Etzkowitz’s concept of the Triple Helix imagines an “interaction among university, industry, and government (which) is the key to innovation and growth in a knowledge based economy” (2008, p.1). Thorp shares Etzkowitz’s ambition, seeing universities as “attacking the worlds biggest problems” (2008, p.2). Here the university is not pursuing its strategy in isolation but is collaborating with others to produce a shared value, not necessarily limited to economic impacts but also the generation of social and cultural benefits. It is becoming more common to find commitments in university strategic plans to addressing global challenges. The ambitions declared in strategic plans, and the terminology in which they are expressed, sometimes make it difficult to distinguish between the goals of different universities. One university strategic plan can read very much like another’s. However, the implementation of strategy, the plans and the actions taken on the path to transformation, can vary significantly between institutions. Action plans must be suited to the local context, need to take account of history and traditions, are dependent on organisational culture and decision-making process, must be within Coyle, P. (2017). The Entrepreneurial Mindset in Higher Education. Paper presented at the Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research and Exchange (ACERE) conference, Melbourne, Australia.