IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i18p13470-d1235721.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managing Inter-University Digital Collaboration from a Bottom-Up Approach: Lessons from Organizational, Pedagogical, and Technological Dimensions

Author

Listed:
  • Alvaro Pina Stranger

    (CREM-UMR 6211, University Rennes, 35000 Rennes, France)

  • German Varas

    (ISTIC, University Rennes, 35000 Rennes, France)

  • Gaëlle Mobuchon

    (ISTIC, University Rennes, 35000 Rennes, France)

Abstract

Driven by education policies, digitally enhanced partnerships between higher education institutions (HEIs) have become increasingly important in the pursuit of sustainability in European education. This article emphasizes the necessity of evidence-based policy implementation to prevent tensions between the decision-making layer (the upper level) and the institutional layer adopting the new norms (the bottom level) in the context of digital inter-university collaboration. To address this need, we conducted a comprehensive three-year (2020–2022) research project within the framework of Erasmus+. Our consortium comprises seven renowned European universities. The project’s primary objective was to investigate how digitalization impacts HEI cooperation and joint learning activities both at the intra- and inter-institutional levels. We conducted experiments that accounted for specific challenges or lessons emerging from three perspectives: organization, pedagogy, and technology. In the organizational domain, we identified challenges related to HEI alliance aspects, such as trust, teacher incentives, legal frameworks, operational requirements, external policies, and mobility needs; and information flow, specifically in terms of disseminating local projects, and clarifying local institutional jargon. The pedagogical perspective revealed challenges in pedagogical support, especially in developing teachers’ digital skills; learning assessment, involving agreement among teachers and externals participants; and course design, including a wide variety of aspects, such as course flexibility, different calendars, async/sync balance, mandatory and optional regimes, content creation, and learning validation. Lastly, in the technology dimension, we found challenges related to the relevance of software choices, and centralized digital structures. This research aims to highlight the importance of evidence-based data in shaping education policies. By drawing on real-world experiences from a consortium of universities, we shed light on the intricate dynamics of digital inter-university collaboration.

Suggested Citation

  • Alvaro Pina Stranger & German Varas & Gaëlle Mobuchon, 2023. "Managing Inter-University Digital Collaboration from a Bottom-Up Approach: Lessons from Organizational, Pedagogical, and Technological Dimensions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:18:p:13470-:d:1235721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/18/13470/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/18/13470/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alvaro Pina Stranger & Germán Varas & Gaelle Mobuchon, 2023. "An Introduction to the Special Issue on Digital and Collaborative Higher Education: The Case of the Erasmus+ OpenU Project," Post-Print hal-04116966, HAL.
    2. Li, Xiaoqing & Roberts, Joanne & Yan, Yanni & Tan, Hui, 2014. "Knowledge sharing in China–UK higher education alliances," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 343-355.
    3. Sabatier, Paul A., 1986. "Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 21-48, January.
    4. Rodrigo Lozano & Maria Barreiro‐Gen & Afnan Zafar, 2021. "Collaboration for organizational sustainability limits to growth: Developing a factors, benefits, and challenges framework," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 728-737, July.
    5. Stephen H. Linder & B. Guy Peters, 1987. "A Design Perspective On Policy Implementation: The Fallacies Of Misplaced Prescription," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 6(3), pages 459-475, February.
    6. Georgeta Ilie, 2014. "The Key Role of Investments in Higher Education," Knowledge Horizons - Economics, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 6(2), pages 119-123, June.
    7. Luis M. Romero-Rodríguez & María Soledad Ramírez-Montoya & Ignacio Aguaded, 2020. "Determining Factors in MOOCs Completion Rates: Application Test in Energy Sustainability Courses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-11, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alvaro Pina Stranger & Germán Varas & Gaelle Mobuchon, 2023. "An Introduction to the Special Issue on Digital and Collaborative Higher Education: The Case of the Erasmus+ OpenU Project," Post-Print hal-04116966, HAL.
    2. Philip Wenzel, 2007. "Public-sector transformation in South Africa," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 7(1), pages 47-64, January.
    3. Daniel Dramani Kipo-Sunyehzi, 2023. "Implementation Research in Developed and Developing Countries: an Analysis of the Trends and Directions," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1259-1273, September.
    4. Van Gossum, Peter & Ledene, Liselot & Arts, Bas & De Vreese, Rik & Verheyen, Kris, 2008. "Implementation failure of the forest expansion policy in Flanders (Northern Belgium) and the policy learning potential," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(7-8), pages 515-522, October.
    5. Henderson, Dylan & Roche, Neil, 2018. "From consensus to conflict in the regional policy mix for broadband deployment: examining the role of informal coordination," 29th European Regional ITS Conference, Trento 2018 184944, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    6. Ogada, Maurice Juma, 2012. "Forest Management Decentralization in Kenya: Effects on Household Farm Forestry Decisions in Kakamega," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126319, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Yi, Fangxin & Deng, Dong & Zhang, Yanjiang, 2020. "Collaboration of top-down and bottom-up approaches in the post-disaster housing reconstruction: Evaluating the cases in Yushu Qinghai-Tibet Plateau of China from resilience perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Van de Graaf, Thijs, 2018. "Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 317-324.
    9. Yaffa Moskovich, 2023. "Communal Organizational Culture as a Source of Business-Success Sustainability in Kibbutz Industry—Two Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-19, July.
    10. repec:ocp:rpaper:pp-1704 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Hildebrand Sean, 2015. "Coerced Confusion? Local Emergency Policy Implementation After September 11," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 273-298, June.
    12. Gakou-Kakeu, Josiane & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni & Sonwa, Denis Jean, 2022. "REDD+ policy implementation and institutional interplay: Evidence from three pilot projects in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    13. Xiaoqing Li & Yu Zheng & Catherine L. Wang, 2016. "Inter-firm collaboration in new product development in Chinese pharmaceutical companies," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 165-193, March.
    14. Spilsbury, Michael J. & Nasi, Robert, 2006. "The interface of policy research and the policy development process: challenges posed to the forestry community," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 193-205, March.
    15. Fleury, Marie-Josée & Grenier, Guy & Vallée, Catherine & Hurtubise, Roch & Lévesque, Paul-André, 2014. "The role of advocacy coalitions in a project implementation process: The example of the planning phase of the At Home/Chez Soi project dealing with homelessness in Montreal," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 42-49.
    16. Xiao Tang & Zhengwen Liu & Hongtao Yi, 2016. "Mandatory Targets and Environmental Performance: An Analysis Based on Regression Discontinuity Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, September.
    17. Menglei Jiang & Caiyun Cui & Bo Xia & Martin Skitmore & Yongjian Ke & Yong Liu, 2025. "Local Government’s Intention to Use Public-Private Partnerships for Infrastructure Projects in China: Antecedents in a Technology Acceptance Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-24, March.
    18. Adam Wellstead, 2017. "Plus ça Change, Plus C’est La Même Chose? A review of Paul Sabatier’s “An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein”," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 549-561, December.
    19. Li Yu & Wei Xu, 2022. "Institutional conformity, entrepreneurial governance and local contingency: Problematizing central-local dynamics in localizing China's low-income housing policy," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 54(3), pages 508-532, May.
    20. Mladen Djuric & Jovan Filipovic & Stefan Komazec, 2020. "Reshaping the Future of Social Metrology: Utilizing Quality Indicators to Develop Complexity-Based Scientific Human and Social Capital Measurement Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 535-567, April.
    21. Pissourios Ioannis A., 2014. "Top-Down and Bottom-Up Urban and Regional Planning: Towards a Framework for The Use of Planning Standards," European Spatial Research and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 21(1), pages 1-17, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:18:p:13470-:d:1235721. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.