Knowledge triangle configurations at three Swedish Universities

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift


The concept of a knowledge triangle, i.e., the principle of strengthening the linkages between research, education and innovation, has emerged as a result of policymakers' expectations that universities assume a broader societal responsibility. Yet, little is known about how these tasks and their interactions are orchestrated at universities. We explore concept of how the knowledge triangle is manifested in the organisation and strategy of three different Swedish universities, and how these manifestations are shaped by the policy landscape. The article highlights the fact that although the knowledge triangle remains a priority, explicit national policies are lacking, with the responsibility of integration falling upon universities themselves. We observe great diversity in how the principles of the knowledge triangle are orchestrated at the universities, e.g., through individuals' interpretations and attitudes, and through management strategies and incentive schemes. However, the three tasks have largely been handled separately, with weak coordination and generally limited ambition demonstrated by university management teams to forge new combinations of remits. At the individual and group levels, we observe weak task articulation, although some role models serve as inspiration. Tensions emerge as the responsibilities of operationalising the knowledge triangle falls on individuals who sometimes lack the appropriate mandate and resources. These findings raise questions for further research and implications for policy and university management.


Enheter & grupper
Externa organisationer
  • Halmstad University
  • Swedish Government Agency for Innovation Systems (Vinnova)
  • KTH Royal Institute of Technology

Ämnesklassifikation (UKÄ) – OBLIGATORISK

  • Ekonomi och näringsliv


Sidor (från-till)68-82
Antal sidor15
TidskriftForesight and STI Governance
Utgåva nummer2
StatusPublished - 2017
Peer review utfördJa