NETWORK CREATION FOR DOCTORAL EDUCATION: PRACTICAL CHALLENGES

1. NETWORK CREATION FOR DOCTORAL EDUCATION:PRACTICAL CHALLENGES Marie-Laure DJELIC ESSEC BUSINESS SCHOOL Paris, France djelic@essec.fr

2. djelic@essec.fr NETWORKS – WHY? • For Schools and PhD Programs • Creating synergies and sharing scarcematerial and intellectualresources • Reducingcosts • Wecan all collectivelybenefitwhenweeach do whatwe are best at – classical division of labour argument • For Facultymembers • Discussions and teachingexperience are definitely more satisfactory in groups that are a bit larger • Possiblyassociatedwithsomemobility • Access to a larger and more diverse intellectualcommunity (students and indirectlytheiradvisers) • For Students • Dynamics of learning are better in mid-size than in verysmall-size groups • Gettingaccess to a muchricher pool of Facultymembers • Creating a community of peers – and learning the ropes, early on of network and communityfunctioning • Learning fromdiversity but also meeting studentsworking on parallel issues and overcomingintellectual « loneliness » • Possiblyassociatedwith the benefits of partial mobility

3. djelic@essec.fr NETWORKS IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION – WHAT? • Completelyexternalized – structuredaround hub organizations (EIASM, Edamba), professional associations and theirconferences, researchprojects or funding programs (A) • Adhoc networks of a given program to facilitatemobilityduring the dissertation writingperiodessentially (B) • Structured network to shareteachingresources (C) • Joint PhD programs (D) => Nationallybased, regionallybased, transnational

4. djelic@essec.fr (A) EUROPEAN RESEARCH COLLOQUIUM • Initiative: from the Netherlands, with national money and then EU funding • Objective: goingbeyond a summerschool – creating a spacethrough time for PhDstudentsfrom diverse horizons to worktogether • 15/18 PhDstudents, working on a relatedtopic (Europeanization and Transnationalization), meetapproximatelyevery six months over a two-yearperiod • Selectedat the end of their first year – ratherduring the active phase of dissertation writing • A commontarget – an edited volume • Widediversity of countries (mostlyEuropean, East and West)

5. djelic@essec.fr WHAT WAS GAINED? • Learning by doing • Through confrontation, diversity, debate and discussion • A final process and final product • A communitybetweenstudents but alsobetweenstudents and Facultymembers • The possibility to envision and launch new projects

6. djelic@essec.fr

7. djelic@essec.fr (B) ADHOC NETWORKS FOR MOBILITY • ENTER program in Economics: • UniversitatAutonoma de Barcelona • UniversityCollege London • Universitat Mannheim • Université Libre de Bruxelles • Stockholm Universitet • CentER (Tilburg University) • MPSE (Université des Sciences Sociales de Toulouse • Doctoral students in the program spend one or twosemesters in one or two institutions of the network on the same footing as local students – take courses or pursue dissertation researchunder the additional supervision of facultyat the host institution. Typically first year of courses locally, thenselectioninto the ENTER program on the basis of Academic excellence. • Annual network-wide meetings – « Jamborees ». Presentation of currentresearch by doctoral students and faculty. • Both the exchange of students and the Jamboree have been fundedunder the European Union ERASMUS and TMR programs.

8. djelic@essec.fr (C) STRUCTURED NETWORKS TO SHARE TEACHING • SUBS – Stockholm/Uppsala Business Studies • Bringingtogether the two programs – in 2008 a total of 19 students • Common compulsory and elective courses, sharedbetween Uppsala and Stockholm • The thesisprocessremainsassociatedwitheachDepartment

9. djelic@essec.fr SUBS

10. djelic@essec.fr (D) JOINT PHD PROGRAM • CLEI /IEL– International PhD program (Center for the Comparative Analysis of Law and Economics, Economics of Law, Economics of Institution), founded in 2004 • CRG – Polytechnique, France • CornellUniversity • Law Schoolat the Centre of Advanced Studies in Law and Economics, University of Gent, Belgium • UniversitydegliStudi di Torino • Joinedlater 5 otherEuropean programs • First year – compulsory course work in Turin withprofessorscomingfrom all over the network. Preliminary exams. • Second year – development of the researchat one of the schoolsdepending on the topic/fields of theirproject. Mobility of at least 6 monthswithin the network iscompulsory • Thirdyearwillbedevoted to completion of the doctoral dissertation.PhDdegreeisgrantedformally by the University of Torino afterdecision of the Doctoral Board, whichiscompletely multi-partner

11. djelic@essec.fr CEIL/IEL PhD Program, Collegio Carlo Alberto, Turin University

12. djelic@essec.fr PRACTICAL CHALLENGES (1) • Those networks imply collaboration whenmany of our programs are competing • How do weovercome the sense of proprietythatmany of our institutions have on THEIR PhD program? • How do weconvinceadministrators of the usefulness of a processthatis « costly » in manyways • Agenda and logistics issues • Courses organized over compact periods – conflicts of agenda • Budgetary issues for the travel of students • Spaceavailability • Constraints on mobility • Issues of measurability – how do the programs compare; how do theyevaluatestudents, how do theyrewardFacultymembers?

13. djelic@essec.fr PRACTICAL CHALLENGES (2) • Supervisor « susceptibility » • Student « perplexity » - how do youensure the continuity of supervision togetherwith a diversity of experiences and inputs? • Differences of contextcreatingconstraintsthat an externalteachermay not beaware of • How canthiskind of experiencebecomeformallyrecognized, valuedduring and even more after the PhD? Postdocopportunities, a real transnational job market…. • How do youchooseyour network strategy? Whatshouldbeyourcriteria for choosingyourpartner institutions? • How do yousustainsuch a resourceconsuming construction?