In our work as lecturers, teachers, researchers, coaches or managers in a university of applied sciences, we do feel that the amount and variety of societal challenges on higher vocational education (HVE) is growing. Institutions in HE are in a process of transforming from traditional ‘either or’ research or education institutions into more complex hybrid knowledge institutions. Nowadays, universities of applied sciences (as institutions for HVE) in The Netherlands have three main objectives: providing education, conducting practice-oriented research to add to the professional knowledge base, and contributing to innovation in the professional fields of work. Education, research and innovation form the three pillars in the strategy of Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences (Educational Council of The Netherlands, 2015). These changing societal demands form an impetus for educational reform and innovation at both organizational and individual employee levels (Cummings & Shin, 2014). Changes in context and roles lead to questions: As a teacher/lecturer/researcher, how do I relate to the different stakeholders? What is the real meaning of being a ‘good’ lecturer or researcher in creating added values, and for whom? Some propose that the new challenges concern everybody and thus should be everyone’s job. But when everything becomes everyone’s job, how can we really realize the required added values? Others promote a more differentiated approach of accurately fitting talents and tasks to create the flow and employee satisfaction that is needed to realize the desired outcomes. But then how do we work together and cooperate with such an individualistic approach? These opposing positions in the discourse concern the question of how to define the ‘professional me’ amongst the ‘we’. In other words, the challenge is how we define and navigate our professional identities within the context of a dynamic multiple-identity organization with increasing pressures for professional diversity (Foreman & Whetten, 2002; Aangenendt, 2015).
In Amsterdam and Beirut, Abdallah has ethnographically researched interactional dynamics between disadvantaged young people, regarding experiences of success, in settings of education, work, sports, and music. He analyzed how focus, mood, and bodily deployment produced shared symbols, emotional contagions, and situated solidarities and moralities.He came to characterize constructive interactions as a main context for young people to experience three components of success: boosts, elevation, and grounding. Combinations of these experiences have important restorative effects for young people who suffer from an abundance of adversity and discouragement. Tensions arise for young people between, on the one hand, their loyalties toward old settings of belonging with their short-term, at times destructive, tendencies and, on the other hand, their success in new settings which demanded of them new types of discipline and commitments. Continued success depends partly on young people’s abilities, but more so on the availability of constructive interaction rituals helping them manage such tensions, without necessarily committing to one loyalty over the other. Next to young people’ s dynamics and processes, Abdallah has focused on the input of NGO professionals and volunteers in such constructive interactions to learn how their involvement can help young people in their struggles for success.The analysis employs concepts of sociological studies of emotions, such as interaction rituals, emotion management, and embodied dispositions to clarify how emotion, experience and energy act as driving forces in young people’s activities and development.
MULTIFILE
This report contains an analysis of the AMP1’s entrepreneurial ecosystem. It aims to assess the external perceptions about the entrepreneurial ecosystem of the Metropolitan Area of Porto and the key variables to work on. We systematically analyse the perception of Porto as entrepreneurial ecosystem in the AMP itself, based social media analysis and on interviews with entrepreneurs and other stakeholders in the Porto ecosystem. As a reference case, we also conducted a survey and interviews in Amsterdam. This helps to compare the situation in AMP with that in Amsterdam. The analysis helped to understand the current strengths and weaknesses of the AMP’s ecosystem, seen from the eyes of insiders and outsiders. In particular, we focused on two key features: internationalisation and the role of the wider region.
