Strategic analysis of innovation processes in higher education institutions: A mixed-method approach to environmental
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61511/jegeo.v2i1.2025.1793Keywords:
innovation strategy, higher education, Universitas Indonesia, strategic decision-makingAbstract
Background: Innovation is a crucial driver for higher education institutions to enhance competitiveness and academic excellence. Universitas Indonesia (UI) has implemented various innovation strategies, but the effectiveness and challenges of these processes require further investigation. This study aims to analyze the driving and inhibiting factors in UI’s innovation processes and formulate strategic recommendations to optimize institutional innovation. Methods: This study employs a mixed-method approach, combining quantitative and qualitative analyses. The quantitative analysis uses descriptive statistics with Statistical Product and Service Solution (SPSS) to examine data distribution and categorize responses into high, moderate, and low classifications. Meanwhile, the qualitative analysis is based on in-depth interviews, where data is processed using coding techniques (open coding, axial coding, and selective coding) to identify key themes. The analysis follows the structured methodology proposed by Daymon & Holloway (2010), consisting of data reduction, organization, coding, interpretation, and evaluation. Findings: The conclusion of this study shows that innovation at the Universitas Indonesia is influenced by the strategies implemented and various supporting and inhibiting factors. Quantitative analysis reveals that institutional support, academic collaboration, and technology utilization significantly contribute to the success of innovation at UI. The majority of respondents have a positive perception of the innovation strategies implemented, as indicated in the categorization of the average value. Meanwhile, qualitative analysis through in-depth interviews identified major obstacles to innovation, including bureaucratic complexity, limited funding, and resistance to change. Conclusion: Innovation at the University of Indonesia is influenced by institutional and technological support, but faces challenges of bureaucracy, funding, and resistance to change. Novelty/Originality of this article: This study analyzes the innovation process in higher education through mixed methods, revealing the strategic factors that play a role in UI. The results provide new insights and policy recommendations to improve ecosystem innovation.
References
Alrizqi, M. R. (2024, July 5). Mahasiswa sebagai katalisator digitalisasi, memperkuat UMKM melalui inovasi. Kompasiana. https://www.kompasiana.com/rrana02/6686e14bed641513093eeec3/mahasiswa-sebagai-katalisator-digitalisasi-memperkuat-umkm-melalui-inovasi
Arikunto, S. (2006). Prosedur penelitian: Suatu pendekatan praktik (Edisi Revisi VI). Rineka Cipta.
Betaraya, D. M., Nasim, S., & Mukhopadhyay, J. (2018). Subsidiary innovation in a developing economy: Towards a comprehensive model and directions for future research. FIIB Business Review, 7(2), 109–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/2319714518788387
Cai, Y., Ma, J., & Chen, Q. (2020). Higher education in innovation ecosystem. Sustainability, 12(11), 4376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114376
Compagnucci, L., & Spigarelli, F. (2020). The third mission of the university: A systematic literature review on potentials and constraints. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 161, 120284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120284
Crescentini, A. (2014). Mixed Methods for Research in Education: Studying an Innovation. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112, 749–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.123
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.
Daymon, C., & Holloway, I. (2010). Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Desai, A. (2016, April 20). Innovation and the World Bank. World Bank Blogs. https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/innovation-and-world-bank
Ernis, D. (2023, November 13). UI ungkap 3 strategi untuk pacu lahirkan banyak inovasi. Tempo.co. https://tekno.tempo.co/read/1796249/ui-ungkap-3-strategi-untuk-pacu-lahirkan-banyak-inovasi
Exposito, A., & Sanchis-Llopis, J. A. (2018). Innovation and business performance for Spanish SMEs: New evidence from a multi-dimensional approach. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 36(8), 911–931. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242618782596
Farisi, M. I. (2023, April 29). Minimnya hilirisasi hasil riset dan inovasi perguruan tinggi. Kompas.com. https://www.kompas.com/edu/read/2023/04/29/112534671/minimnya-hilirisasi-hasil-riset-dan-inovasi-perguruan-tinggi?page=2
Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia. (2020, October 31). Tantangan perguruan tinggi di 2021 yang penuh dengan ketidakpastian. Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Indonesia. https://feb.ui.ac.id/2020/10/31/tantangan-perguruan-tinggi-di-2021-yang-penuh-dengan-ketidakpastian/
Hanaysha, J. R., Al-Shaikh, M. E., Joghee, S., & Alzoubi, H. M. (2022). Impact of innovation capabilities on business sustainability in small and medium enterprises. FIIB Business Review, 11(1), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/23197145211042232
Herlina, N. (2021, March 10). Inovasi perguruan tinggi kunci kemajuan bangsa. Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Tinggi, Riset, dan Teknologi. https://www.dikti.kemdikbud.go.id/kabar-dikti/kabar/inovasi-perguruan-tinggi-kunci-kemajuan-bangsa/
Hoffecker, E. (2019). Understanding Innovation Ecosystems: A Framework for Joint Analysis and Action. MIT Practical Impact Aliance.
Lee, H. J., Jeong Cho, H., Xu, W., & Fairhurst, A. (2010). The influence of consumer traits and demographics on intention to use retail self-service checkouts. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 28(1), 46–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634501011014606
Lichtenthaler, U. (2016). Toward an innovation-based perspective on company performance. Management Decision, 54(1), 66–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2015-0161
Neuman, W. L. (2019). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Pearson.
Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. (2013). A meta-analysis of the relationships of age and tenure with innovation-related behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86(4), 585–616. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12031
Parsons, R. A. (2015). The impact of age on innovation. Management Research Review, 38(4), 404–420. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-10-2013-0241
Rehman, W. U., Jalil, F., Saltik, O. Degrimen, S., & Bekmezci, M. (2024). Leveraging strategic innovation and process capabilities for intellectual capital initiative performance of higher education institutes (HEIs): A knowledge-based perspective. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15, 4161–4202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01336-3
Roscoe, J. T. (1975). Fundamental research statistics for the behavioral sciences. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Sastre, J. F. (2015). The impact of R&D teams’ gender diversity on innovation outputs. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 24(1), 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2015.066154
Schiuma, G., & Carlucci, D. (2018). Managing strategic partnerships with universities in innovation ecosystems: A research agenda. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market and Complexity, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc4030025
Tassone, V. C., Biemans, H. J. A., den Brok, P., & Runhaar, P. (2022). Mapping course innovation in higher education: a multi-faceted analytical framework. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(7), 2458–2472. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1985089
Xie, L., Zhang, Y., Zhang, X., & Qi, G. (2020). Gender diversity in R&D teams and innovation efficiency: Role of the innovation context. Research Policy, 49(1), 103885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103885
Zhang, T., Ma, Z., & Shang, Y. (2023). Higher Education, Technological Innovation, and Green Development—Analysis Based on China’s Provincial Panel Data. Sustainability, 15(5), 4311. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054311
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Verens Elvira, Retno Kusumastuti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
