Pattern Establishment of Open Innovation in Education with Meta-Synthesis Approach

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD in Behavioral Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.

2 Associate Professor of Public Administration, Faculty of Management and Economics, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.

3 PhD in Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.

4 PhD Student in Behavioral Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.

Abstract

Abstract
In knowledge-based countries, many governments support innovative educational activities aimed at increasing the power of future national competition, and educational policies and, in the end, schools, in order to innovate and play their efficient role, require the transformation of all aspects and factors of internal organization and outsourcing. The purpose of this research is to design an open innovation innovation model in educational system. Accordingly, the researchers have done a thorough and in-depth review of the subject using the Meta-synthesis method and combined the findings of relevant qualitative research. Therefore, Hence, 197 published researches of internal databases and publications (Noor specialized journals database, University Jihad Scientific Information Center database and comprehensive humanities portal) and foreign (Science Direct, Google Scholar and EBSCO) in the field of open innovation during 1975 - 2019 evaluation and at the end of 95 studies were selected and relevant dimensions and codes were extracted and the importance and priority of each were determined using Shannon entropy. According to the results of the research, the categories of facilitating factors, internal culture, internal structure, curriculum innovation and macro policies were ranked one to five, respectively. In the end, after the research steps, the model of the establishment of open innovation in education was designed in a systematic way (input, change and output) and the importance of open innovation for the educational sector was demonstrated.
Introduction
Today, the open innovation paradigm invites organizations to take advantage of outside ideas and technologies in their activities and allow other organizations to benefit from their innovative ideas. Contrary to the prevailing notion that open innovation is conceived as a one-way flow, the full form of open innovation occurs when the two-way flow of activities occurs simultaneously. From the scientific point of view, open innovation is the field of fledgling research. That research is due to having multiple, very complex odors and, in principle, a multilevel phenomenon consisting of dynamic elements. In the past, the open innovation process has been dependent on intra-organizational intellectual resources and efforts to develop and commercialize them within the organization. The face of today's world implies the need to apply new processes to different systems. The most important system in place to realize the aspirations of each country is the education system, which is seen as an indispensable asset in the pursuit of development goals. So, too, does the system's mirror look at the way its educational systems operate, such as schools? Turning the current education system into an efficient, effective and effective education is just as important, but it also requires a widespread social transformation and indeed a change in the way a society views education. Certainly, education is more than any other organization responsible for fostering creativity, innovation and creativity, as it is the foundation of individuals' personalities and perspectives, and if the education institution in this way carries out the standard effort and expectation, expecting innovation in society will be easier. On the other hand, the education system also has traditional elements and factors that may not be eradicated by stagnation, and has instituted entirely new systems or elements, including entirely new programs and methods. But the system's ability to deploy open innovation can be enhanced. To this end, innovation in education needs to follow the changing world, solve educational problems and continually change its structure. Today, almost everyone who seeks development and reform begins education everywhere in the world. In a knowledge-based country, governments strongly support innovative educational and creative education activities aimed at enhancing the future competitiveness and development of their knowledge economy. One of the problems in the education system in different countries, including our country, is the lack of attention to innovation in the education system. An examination of the evolution of Iran's new education system shows that the social adaptation of innovations in the restructuring and reform of this system has not been taken into account, and most of the innovations have been imposed on the body of the educational system in a circular and grammatical way. As if innovation is a piece of a mechanical device that is easily replaced by a worn-out piece. The over-emphasis on the textbook system of education through the direct relationship between teacher and student has neglected other aspects of education and how to establish innovative plans and open innovation in the body of the education system and their access to schools and classrooms. Lesson, less attention. At the same time, while documenting the fundamental transformation of education in Perspective 1404, it is one of the characteristics of Iranian schools. Therefore, efforts to reform Iran's education and pay particular attention to the factors and dimensions that drive innovation in its structure are essential. Making any changes to the subject requires qualitative and interdisciplinary educational research. In this regard, the present study attempts to present the components and dimensions that influence the successful implementation of open innovation in a coherent model, for use in the country's education system, so that it may be used to paint a more accurate perspective on the future of education and training. The Iranian culture used to. According to the above, in this paper, by choosing the total reward model, we are going to answer the following question: What is the pattern of deploying open innovation in education?
Case study
This research has been carried out in scientific articles and references have been reviewed. Therefore, the statistical population of 197 research published from 1975 to 2019 is from scientific sites Scopus, Elsevier, Taylor Francis, Emerald and SED in the field of innovation, open innovation, entrepreneurship and creativity in education, This was a sample of 95 open innovation research in education using a targeted approach.
Materials and Methods
The method of this research is qualitative using Meta-synthesis. Meta-synthesis e is one of a variety of extracurricular methods. Meta-synthesis, a comprehensive review of qualitative literature is not the subject. Also, it is not the analysis of secondary data and primary data from selected studies, but the analysis of the findings of these studies. In this study, Atlas Tie and SPSS software were used for research and ranking coding. In order to evaluate the validity of the studies used in this study, a critical Glynn instrument was used to evaluate all applied research projects. The reliability of the codes extracted from the findings of the studies was assessed by obtaining the views and approval of a number of educational and entrepreneurial (innovation) experts on the codes. In this study, Sandlowski and Barroso's (2006) seven-step transversal method is used.
Discussion and Results
The proposed research model consists of three levels (input, output and output). The findings of this study, based on the analysis of open innovation research, show that in order to deploy open innovation in the education system, one should pay more attention to the categories of facilitating factors, internal culture, internal structure, innovation and macro policies. Given these results, the management and leadership style of schools and the remuneration system, compensation and productivity of principals and teachers, are the first priority facilitating factors. Because if managers' leadership style does not support open innovation, innovation growth will stop or stop. In this regard, it is important not only to support managers in open innovation, but also to encourage managers and teachers in open innovation. The second priority is internal culture. According to the first priority, managers' support for open innovation leads to internal culture leading to innovation. As such, innovative and creative culture is emerging in the organization and collaboration and communication between teachers and students is changing. In this regard, the organizational structure also changes and becomes a structure supporting open innovation. Programs and policies for deploying open innovation in education can be predicted and implemented through a systematic analysis of open innovation in education. Studies in this area and extraction of 29 codes identified important dimensions of open innovation in education.

Keywords


1-Ahmadi, S, Amini, F. and Zakerian, A.(2016), A Study of Parents 'Relationship with School and Students' Academic Achievement, Quarterly Journal of Research Approaches in Social Sciences, No. 5: 48-55. (In Persian)
2-Ahn, J., Minshall, T., Mortara, L.(2017), Understanding the human side of openness: the fit between open innovation modes and CEO characteristics. R&D Manag, 47: 727–740.
3-Akanji, B., Mordi, T., Ajonbadi, H. & Mojeed-Sanni, B. (2018), Impact of leadership styles on employee engagement and conflict management practices in Nigerian universities, Issues in Educational Research, 28(4):830-848.
4-Amiri,B. (2015). Is the problem of education structure or infrastructure?!, The site of the Higher Education Council at the address: http://www.sce.ir. (In Persian)
5-Ashrafi, S., Zeineabadi, H.R.(2017), Duties of school principals to strengthen and develop teachers' career success: Combined research, bi-quarterly scientific research of school management, fifth year, No. 1: 195-215. (In Persian)
6-Badakhshan Torghi, E. (2009), Barriers to Innovation in Educational Organizations, Quarterly Journal of Entrepreneurship Schools, No. 6: 68-74. (In Persian)
7-Biesta, G., Filippakou, O., Wainwright, E. & Aldridge, D. (2019), Why educational research should not just solve problems, but should cause them as well, British Educational Research Journal, 45(1):1–4.
8-Bogers, M., Zobel, A.-K., Afuah, A., Almirall, E., Brunswicker, S., Dahlander, L., Frederiksen, L., Gawer, A., Gruber, M., Haefliger, S., Hagedoorn, J., Hilgers, D., Laursen, K., Magnusson, M.G., Majchrzak, A., McCarthy, I.P., Moeslein, K.M., Nambisan, S., Piller, F.T., Radziwon, A., Rossi-Lamastra, C., Sims, J., Ter Wal, A.L.J. (2017), The open innovation research landscape: established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis. Ind, Innov, 24, 8–40.
9-Buekens, W. (2013), Coping with the Innovation Paradoxes: the Challenge for a New Game Leadership, Procedia Economics and Finance, 6, 205 – 212.
10-Call, K. (2018), Professional Teaching Standards: A Comparative Analysis of Their History, Implementation and Efficacy, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3): 93-108.
11-Casanova de Almeida, J. (2017), Teacher Performance Evaluation: The Importance of Performance Standards, International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education (IJCDSE), 8(1): 2973-2981.
12-Chesbrough, H. & Bogers, M.(2014), Explicating open innovation: clarifying an emerging paradigm for understanding innovation. In: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeque, W., West, J. (Eds.), New Frontiers in Open Innovation. Oxford University Press, New York.
13-Coates, J. K & Pimlott-Wilson, H. (2019), Learning while playing: Children’s Forest School experiences in the UK, British Educational Research Journal, 45(1): 21–40.
14-Dehghani, M. and Faraji, M. (2017), A Study of the Application of Social Capital Components in Tehran Schools: A Qualitative Study, Bi-Quarterly Journal of School Management, Fifth Year, No. 2: 277-297. . (In Persian)
15-DiJohn, G. M. (2015), Effective and Efficient Parent-Teacher Communication, Submitted on May 11, 2015 in fulfillment of final requirements for the MAED degree, St. Catherine University SOPHIA.
16-Durisova, M., Kucharcíkova, A. & Tokarcikova, E. (2015), Assessment of higher education teaching outcomes (Quality of higher education), Social and Behavioral Sciences,  174: 2497 – 2502.
17-Durst, S. & Stahle, P. (2013), Success Factors of Open Innovation - A Literature Review, International Journal of Business Research and Management (IJBRM), 4(4): 111-131.
18-Eckel, P., Green, M., Hill, B. & Mallon, W. (1999), On Change III: Taking Charge of Change: A Primer forColleges and Universities. An Occasional Paper Series of theACE Project on Leadership and Institutional Transformation. American Council on Education, Washington, DC. American Council on Education, Publications AD, Department.
19-Ehsani Ghods, H., Seyed Abbaszadeh, M. M. (2012), The Relationship between Learning Organization Components and Creativity and Innovation of High School and Pre-University Teachers, Quarterly Journal of New Approach in Educational Management, Third Year: No. 4: 1-20. (In Persian)
20-Fjortoft, N., Gettig, J & Verdone, M. (2018), Teaching Innovation and Creativity, or Teaching to the Test? American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 82 (10): 7423. 1144-1145.
21-Foster, D. (2018), Teacher recruitment and retention in England, BRIEFING PAPER Number 7222, 10 December 2018: 1-48.
22-Ghaffari-Aqdam, M., Khodaei-Mahmoudi, R. (2015). Investigating the Relationship between Job Security and Teachers' Organizational Commitment in Secondary Schools in Khosrowshah in the 94-93 Academic Year, Fourth National Conference on Management, Economics and Accounting, Tabriz, East Azerbaijan Industrial Management Organization, University of Tabriz. . (In Persian)
23-Gjedia, R. & Gardinier, M. P. (2018), Mentoring and teachers’ professional development in Albania, Gjedia & Gardinier John Wiley & Sons Ltd,  Eur J Educ. 53: 102–117.
24-Haapalainen, P. & Kantola, J. (2015), Taxonomy of Knowledge Management in Open Innovations. Procedia Manufacturing, 3: 688-695.
25-Hagedoorn, J &  Zobel, A. K. (2015), The role of contracts and intellectual property rights in open innovation, Published in Techn. Analysis & Strat. Manag, 27: 1050-1067.
26-Hamiti, M., Reka, B. & Imeri, F. (2015), The Impact Of Computer Components In Enhancing The Quality Of Teaching And Learning Process In Universities, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191: 2422 – 2426.
27-Hashemi Dehghi, Z. (2014), Open Innovation and the Necessity of Its Implementation in Organizations, Journal of Industry and University, Year 7, Numbers 25 and 26: 25-34. (In Persian)
28-Hashemi, S. H. and Yousefi, M. (2017), Explaining the Conceptual Model of Strategic Leadership and Open Innovation in High-Tech Companies, Strategic Management Studies, No. 29: 117-141. (In Persian)
29-Hashemi, S. (2006). The role of individual and collective communication in the dissemination of innovations in education, Quarterly Journal of Educational Innovations, 5 (15): 115-148. (In Persian)
30-Hassani, M. (2006), A Model for Dissemination of Innovation in the Iranian Education System, Quarterly Journal of Educational Innovations, Fifth Year No. 16: 151-176. . (In Persian)
31-Heydarifard, R., Zeineabadi, H. R.a, Behrangi, M.R. (2015), Innovative school culture and atmosphere; A Qualitative Research, Quarterly Journal of New Approach in Educational Management, Year 7, No. 2: 53-74. . (In Persian)
32-Hoy, W. K & Sweetland, S. R. (2002), Designing Better Schools: The Meaning and Measure of Enabling School Structures, Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(3), (August 2001): 296-321.
33-Hubackova, S. (2015), Factors influencing the quality of teaching and the foreign language knowledge, 7th World Conference on Educational Sciences, (WCES-2015), 05-07 February 2015, Novotel Athens Convention Center, Athens, Greece. Social and Behavioral Sciences ,197 : 1952 – 1956.
34-Kamali, F. and Baratali, M. (2017), Investigating the Relationship between Job Security and Organizational Creativity with Organizational Commitment of Primary School Teachers in Bojnourd, 3rd International Conference on Psychology, Sociology, Educational Sciences and Social Studies, Shiraz, August 14, 2017. . (In Persian)
35-Kawai, H. (2017), Open Innovation University-Industry Collaboration: Student Idea Contests and Exit Strategy in Japan, Journal of Japanese Management, 1 (2):  31-48.
36-Kettunen, J. (2016), Open innovation alliances and communities in higher education, Business Education & Accreditation, 8(1): 15-26.
37-Khademian, A. (2016), Creativity and Innovation in Education, Quarterly Journal of Education Culture, Fifth Year, No. 12 and 13: 10-13. . (In Persian)
38-Khadivi, A., Seyed Kalan, S. M., Hassanpour, T., Ahmadi, H. (2015), A Study of Factors Affecting the Quality of Education and Teaching in Farhangian University (Case Study: Ardabil Campuses), Journal of Education and Evaluation, Year 11: 161-185. (In Persian)
39-Khalili Shourini, S. (2003), Principles and essentials of educational planning. Tehran: Yadvareh Ketab. (In Persian).
40-Khosravi, M., Arman, N. (2015), A Model for Implementing Innovation in the Curriculum of the Higher Education System, Bi-Quarterly Journal of Innovation and Value Creation, Third Year. No. 7: 65-84. . (In Persian)
41-Kim, S. a., Ryoo, H. y. & Ahn, H. j. (2017),Student customized creative education model based on open innovation, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity: 2-19.
42-Kohandel, M.; Karami, M. (2016). Reform of regulations and improvement of the structure of in-service training, a solution for the development of teachers' professions, Third National Conference on Training and Development of Human Capital, 3rd and 4th of March 1994, Tehran, Milad Tower. . (In Persian)
43-Lee, S.M., D.L. Olson & Trimi., S.  (2012), Co-innovation:Convergenomics, Collaboration, and Cocreation for Organizational Values, Management Decision, 50(5): 817-831.
44-Lentillon-Kaestner V., Guillet-Descas, E. &  Cece,  V. (2017).  Teacher burnout and professional identity. Well-being in education systems Conference abstract book. Locarno : 303-310.
45-Mantighi, M. (2005). A Study of Educational Innovations in Iranian Schools, Quarterly Journal of Educational Innovations, Fourth Year, No. 12: 35-57. (In Persian)
46-Mantighi, M. (2006). Investigating the Challenges of Educational Innovations, Quarterly Journal of Educational Innovations, 5 (15): 11-45.
47-Mazaheri, Hassan (2018). Key subsystems in education, supplement to the monthly educational, analytical and information teacher monthly (12th grade special issue): 104-107. (In Persian)
48-Mitkova, L. (2014), Implementation of Open Innovation Model: Organizational Approach, Review of Integrative Business & Economics, 3(2): 77-87.
49-Muthoni Wachira, F., Gitumu, M & Mbugua, Z. (2017), Effect of Principals’ Leadership Styles on Teachers’ Job Performance in Public Secondary Schools in Kieni West Sub-County, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 6( 8): 72-86.
50-Mykhailyshyn, H., Kondur, O & Serman, L. (2018), Innovation of Education and Educational Innovations in Conditions of Modern Higher Education Institution, Journal of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, 5(1), 9-16.
51-Nakano, T.d. C.& Wechsler, S. M. (2018), Creativity and innovation: Skills for the 21st Century Nakano. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 35(3): 237-246.
52-Namamba, A & Rao, C. (2017), Preparation and Professional Development of Teacher Educators in Tanzania: Current Practices and Prospects, Journal of Education and Practice, 8, 8(8): 136-145.
53-Navarro-Giner, R., Estelles-Arolas, E & Gonzalez-Ladron-de-Guevara, F. (2015),  Open Innovation in Spanish Education: the cMOOC case, 1st International Conference on Business Management, 1-4.
54-Nho, H.-J. (2018), Research ethics education in Korea for overcoming culture and value system differences. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2(1): 3–4.
55-Parhizgar, M. M.,(2013), Identifying the Factors Affecting Organizational Innovation Based on the Open Innovation Paradigm Case Study: Country Publishing Industry, Industrial Management Studies, Year 11, No. 311: 1 -125. (In Persian)
56-Rashki, M., Salarzehi, H., Kamalian, A. R., Seyed Naghavi, M.A. and Z., Vazifeh (2017), Presenting a model for determining and establishing effective entrepreneurial talent with a hybrid approach, Entrepreneurship Development, Year 10, No. 2: 259-278. (In Persian)
57-Radulovic, L. & Stancic, M. (2017), What is Needed to Develop Critical Thinking in Schools?, c e p s Journal ,7 (3): 9-25.
58-Roozdar, A. (2015). An Attitude Towards the Quantity and Quality of Continuing Teacher Education, 15th Iranian Mathematics Education Conference, 3-6 February 2017, Bushehr. . (In Persian)
59-Strimel, G. & Grubbs, M. E. (2016), Positioning Technology and Engineering Education as a Key Force in STEM Education, Journal of Technology Education, 27(2): 21-36.
60-Schmaltz, R. M., Jansen, E. & Wenckowski, N. (2017), Redefining Critical Thinking: Teaching Students to Think like Scientists, 8 ( 459): 1-4.
61-Seechaliao, Th. (2017), Instructional Strategies to Support Creativity and Innovation in Education, Journal of Education and Learning, 6(4): 201-208.
62-Serdyukov, P. (2017), Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 10(1): 4-33.
63-Stadler-Altmann, U. (2015), Learning environment: The influence of school and classroom space on education, Chapter 3  January 2015: 547-571.
Swanger, D. (2016), Innovation in Higher Education: Can Colleges Really Change? June.
64-Toorani, H., Aqaei, A. & Manteqi, M. (2012), World experience in educational innovations in terms of innovation generation, acceptance and impelementation in Iranian education, Educational Innovation Journal, 11(43), 7-41.[Persian]
65-Uribe Enciso, O.L., Uribe Enciso, D. S. & del Pilar Vargas Daza, M. (2017), Critical thinking and its importance in education: some reflections, Rastros Rostros , 19(34): 1-17.
66-Viveiro Lopes, A. P.V. B. & De Carvalho, M. (2018), Evolution of the open innovation paradigm: Towards a contingent conceptual model, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 132: 284–298.
67-Wang, Yuandi., Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Roijakker, Nadine (2012), Exploring the impact of open innovation on national systems of innovation — A theoretical analysis, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 79: 419–428.
68-Zanjirchi, S. M., Jalilian, N., Moinzadeh, M. M. (2018), Presenting a comprehensive model of factors affecting the success of open innovation with a structural-interpretive modeling approach (Case study: Yazd University), Letter of Higher Education, Year 11, No. 41: 137 -166. (In Persian).