Learning information technology business in a changing industry landscape. Introducing Team Entrepreneurship in Renewing Bachelor Education in Renewing Bachelor Education in Information

Speed, uncertainty and complexity are increasing in the business world all the time. When knowledge and skills become quickly irrelevant, new challenges are set for information technology (IT) education. Meta-learning skills – learning how to learn rapidly - and innovation skills have become more essential than single technologies or other specific issues. The drastic changes in the information and communications technology (ICT) sector have caused a need to reconsider how IT Bachelor education in Universities of Applied Sciences should be organized and employed to cope with the change. The objective of the study was to evaluate how a new approach to IT Bachelor education, the ICT entrepreneurship study path (ICT-ESP) fits IT Bachelor education in a Finnish University of Applied Sciences. This kind of educational arrangement has not been employed elsewhere in the context of IT Bachelor education. The study presents the results of a four-year period during which IT Bachelor education was renewed in a Finnish University of Applied Sciences. The learning environment was organized into an ICT-ESP based on Nonaka’s knowledge theory and Kolb’s experiental learning. The IT students who studied in the ICT-ESP established a cooperative and learned ICT by running their cooperative at the University of Applied Sciences. The students (called team entrepreneurs) studied by reading theory in books and other sources of explicit information, doing projects for their customers, and reflecting in training sessions on what was learnt by doing and by studying the literature. Action research was used as the research strategy in this study. Empirical data was collected via theme-based interviews, direct observation, and participative observation. Grounded theory method was utilized in the data analysis and the theoretical sampling was used to guide the data collection. The context of the University of Applied Sciences provided a good basis for fostering team entrepreneurship. However, the results showed that the employment of the ICT-ESP did not fit into the IT Bachelor education well enough. The ICT-ESP was cognitively too tough for the team entrepreneurs because they had two different set of rules to follow in their studies. The conventional courses engaged lot of energy which should have been spent for professional development in the ICT-ESP. The amount of competencies needed in the ICT-ESP for professional development was greater than those needed for any other ways of studying. The team entrepreneurs needed to develop skills in ICT, leadership and self-leadership, team development and entrepreneurship skills. The entrepreneurship skills included skills on marketing and sales, brand development, productization, and business administration. Considering the three-year time the team entrepreneurs spent in the ICT-ESP, the challenges were remarkable. Changes to the organization of IT Bachelor education are also suggested in the study. At first, it should be admitted that the ICT-ESP produces IT Bachelors with a different set of competencies compared to the conventional way of educating IT Bachelors. Secondly, the number of courses on general topics in mathematics, physics, and languages for team entrepreneurs studying in the ICTESP should be reconsidered and the conventional course-based teaching of the topics should be reorganized to support the team coaching process of the team entrepreneurs with their practiceoriented projects. Third, the upcoming team entrepreneurs should be equipped with relevant information about the ICT-ESP and what it would require in practice to study as a team entrepreneur. Finally, the upcoming team entrepreneurs should be carefully selected before they start in the ICT-ESP to have a possibility to eliminate solo players and those who have a too romantic view of being a team entrepreneur. The results gained in the study provided answers to the original research questions and the objectives of the study were met. Even though the IT degree programme was terminated during the research process, the amount of qualitative data gathered made it possible to justify the interpretations done.

Microencapsulation and tissue engineering as an alternative treatment of diabetes

In the 70's, pancreatic islet transplantation arose as an attractive alternative to restore normoglycemia; however, the scarcity of donors and difficulties with allotransplants, even under immunosuppressive treatment, greatly hampered the use of this alternative. Several materials and devices have been developed to circumvent the problem of islet rejection by the recipient, but, so far, none has proved to be totally effective. A major barrier to transpose is the highly organized islet architecture and its physical and chemical setting in the pancreatic parenchyma. In order to tackle this problem, we assembled a multidisciplinary team that has been working towards setting up the Human Pancreatic Islets Unit at the Chemistry Institute of the University of São Paulo, to collect and process pancreas from human donors, upon consent, in order to produce purified, viable and functional islets to be used in transplants. Collaboration with the private enterprise has allowed access to the latest developed biomaterials for islet encapsulation and immunoisolation. Reasoning that the natural islet microenvironment should be mimicked for optimum viability and function, we set out to isolate extracellular matrix components from human pancreas, not only for analytical purposes, but also to be used as supplementary components of encapsulating materials. A protocol was designed to routinely culture different pancreatic tissues (islets, parenchyma and ducts) in the presence of several pancreatic extracellular matrix components and peptide growth factors to enrich the beta cell population in vitro before transplantation into patients. In addition to representing a therapeutic promise, this initiative is an example of productive partnership between the medical and scientific sectors of the university and private enterprises.

Collectiveness within startup teams – Leading the way to initiating and managing collective pursuit of opportunities in organizational contexts

While traditional entrepreneurship literature addresses the pursuit of entrepreneurial opportunities to a solo entrepreneur, scholars increasingly agree that new ventures are often founded and operated by entrepreneurial teams as collective efforts especially in hightechnology industries. Researchers also suggest that team ventures are more likely to survive and succeed than ventures founded by the individual entrepreneur although specific challenges might relate to multiple individuals being involved in joint entrepreneurial action. In addition to new ventures, entrepreneurial teams are seen central for organizing work in established organizations since the teams are able to create major product and service innovations that drive organizational success. Acknowledgement of the entrepreneurial teams in various organizational contexts has challenged the notion on the individual entrepreneur. However, considering that entrepreneurial teams represent a collective-level phenomenon that bases on interactions between organizational members, entrepreneurial teams may not have been studied as indepth as could be expected from the point of view of the team-level, rather than the individual or the individuals in the team. Many entrepreneurial team studies adopt the individualized view of entrepreneurship and examine the team members’ aggregate characteristics or the role of a lead entrepreneur. The previous understandings might not offer a comprehensive and indepth enough understanding of collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams and team venture performance that often relates to the team-level issues in particular. In addition, as the collective-level of entrepreneurial teams has been approached in various ways in the existing literatures, the phenomenon has been difficult to understand in research and practice. Hence, there is a need to understand entrepreneurial teams at the collective-level through a systematic and comprehensive perspective. This study takes part in the discussions on entrepreneurial teams. The overall objective of this study is to offer a description and understanding of collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams beyond individual(s). The research questions of the study are: 1) what collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams stands for, what constitutes the basic elements of it, and who are included in it, 2) why, how, and when collectiveness emerges or reinforces within entrepreneurial teams, and 3) why collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams matters and how it could be developed or supported. In order to answer the above questions, this study bases on three approaches, two set of empirical data, two analysis techniques, and conceptual study. The first data set consists of 12 qualitative semi-structured interviews with business school students who are seen as prospective entrepreneurs. The data is approached through a social constructionist perspective and analyzed through discourse analysis. The second data set bases on a qualitative multiplecase study approach that aims at theory elaboration. The main data consists of 14 individual and four group semi-structured thematic interviews with members of core entrepreneurial teams of four team startups in high-technology industries. The secondary data includes publicly available documents. This data set is approached through a critical realist perspective and analyzed through systematic thematic analysis. The study is completed through a conceptual study that aims at building a theoretical model of collective-level entrepreneurship drawing from existing literatures on organizational theory and social-psychology. The theoretical work applies a positivist perspective. This study consists of two parts. The first part includes an overview that introduces the research background, knowledge gaps and objectives, research strategy, and key concepts. It also outlines the existing knowledge of entrepreneurial team literature, presents and justifies the choices of paradigms and methods, summarizes the publications, and synthesizes the findings through answering the above mentioned research questions. The second part consists of five publications that address independent research questions but all enable to answer the research questions set for this study as a whole. The findings of this study suggest a map of relevant concepts and their relationships that help grasp collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams. The analyses conducted in the publications suggest that collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams stands for cognitive and affective structures in-between team members including elements of collective entity, collective idea of business, collective effort, collective attitudes and motivations, and collective feelings. Collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams also stands for specific joint entrepreneurial action components in which the structures are constructed. The action components reflect equality and democracy, and open and direct communication in particular. Collectiveness emerges because it is a powerful tool for overcoming individualized barriers to entrepreneurship and due to collectively oriented desire for, collective value orientation to, demand for, and encouragement to team entrepreneurship. Collectiveness emerges and reinforces in processes of joint creation and realization of entrepreneurial opportunities including joint analysis and planning of the opportunities and strategies, decision-making and realization of the opportunities, and evaluation, feedback, and sanctions of entrepreneurial action. Collectiveness matters because it is relevant for potential future entrepreneurs and because it affects the ways collective ventures are initiated and managed. Collectiveness also matters because it is a versatile, dynamic, and malleable phenomenon and the ideas of it can be applied across organizational contexts that require team work in discovering or creating and realizing new opportunities. This study further discusses how the findings add to the existing knowledge of entrepreneurial team literature and how the ideas can be applied in educational, managerial, and policy contexts.

Factors of innovation creation within functional heterogeneous project teams Case study: ABB Group

The research topic of the work is: “Factors of innovation creation within functionally heterogeneous project teams”. The research question is “What are the factors of innovation creation within functionally heterogeneous project teams?” The subject of this research is to explore the teams of projects, aimed at creating innovations, and understand how innovation is generated through project team work within them in term of factors. In line with the purposes of this study, firstly, it was analyzed what factors of such teams’ work are affecting creating innovation positively and negatively on the base of chosen literature and a preliminary conceptional framework was formulated, and secondly, the research of the work of project teams in one of the divisions of ABB company has been done and other factors and interdependencies between them have been added to the conceptional framework. This final conceptional framework constitutes the essense of the work findings and can be used as a tool to analyze the innovation creation process in functionally heterogeneous project teams

1998 Brock Baseball Team

1998 Brock Badger men's baseball team photo. Front Row (L to R): Bill Gillen, Ryan Villers, Greg Arbour, Mark Cheeseman, Andrew Tinnish, Rick Bottomley, Matt Fletcher, Brad Namtzu, Darryl Presley, Dan Pino, Grant Giffen, Mike Caruso, Mark Reilly Back Row (L to R): Jeff Lounsbury (Head Coach), Jayar Green, Creston Rudolph, Ryan Fisher, Jamie Trull, Stefan Strecker, Andrew Robb, Jeremy Walker, Ryan Johns, Matt Stezycki, Steve Lester, Fabio Del Rio, Jarrod Haase, Jess Dixon, Rick Falconer (Pitching Coach) Absent: Marc Purdy, Ian Bala, Marc LePage (Asst. Coach), Waybe Briggs-Jude (Asst. Coach)

1999 Brock Baseball Team

Men's baseball team after winning the 1999 national championships.

Men's Basketball Team (1970-71)

Front left team member John Corlett is currently (2008) Dean of the Faculty of Applied Health Sciences

Men's Basketball Team (1988-89)

Coach: Garney Henley Team (Alphabetically): Bruce Adams, Frank Capretta, Kevin Farrow, David Dennis, Rob Demott, Brian Hayden, Peter Kaija, Steve Kolenko, Leacoft Panton, Kevin Rome, Kevin Stevinson, Glen Tone, Moe Willoughby

Men's Basketball Team

1981-1982 Men's Basketball Team Front - Doug Fast. John Radaslav, Jim Zareski, Kelly Baker, Jim Baldin, Doug Johnson, Tim Mcalpine Back - Manager Britt Fischer, ??, Bob Blasko, David Hodges, Mark Green, Bob Yuhasz, Paul Treitz, Mike Creighton, Trainer Joe Kenney, Coach Garney Henley

Women's Basketball Team (1981-82)

Back Row: Pat Woodburn (Coach), Rhonda Walcarius, Melanie Brown, Patty Stamps, Lyn Storm, Diane Hilko, Jackie Kuntze, Janice Jockel Front Row: Maureen Kelly, Lena Olszewski, Trudy Montel, Carolyn Foreman, Dawn Dixon, Peggy Stamps

1976 Brock Track Team

Pictured here are Marg Stride, Bryan Stride and Kathy Prosser of the 1976 Brock University Track Team.

1976 Brock Track Team

Pictured here are Marg Stride, Bryan Stide and Kathy Prosser.

Track and Field Team (1981-82)

Back Row: Al Pedler (Coach), Murray McEachern, John Popham, David Heyworth, Colin Harris, George Nixon Middle Row: Renee Traver, Wendy Wells Front Row: Maggie Swan, Debbie Belair, Katherine Coy