IPP Policy Discussion Paper - HIgher Education On E&I Development in Vietnam - ENG

Ministry
of Science Ministry for Foreign

& Technology of Vietnam Affairs of Finland
POLICY DISCUSSION PAPER
HIGHER EDUCATION FOR

ENTREPRENEURSHIP &
INNOVATION DEVELOPMENT
IN VIETNAM
VIETNAM - FINLAND
INNOVATION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME PHASE 2
Hanoi - 2018
Policy Discussion Paper
HIGHER EDUCATION FOR

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION
DEVELOPMENT IN VIETNAM
Vietnam - Finland Innovation Partnership Programme, Phase 2 (IPP2)

Hanoi, 2018
FOREWORD
Universities around the world are progressively becoming more successful in developing
relationships with the world of business. In the process, they are seeking to contribute
more directly to national economic competitiveness. In Vietnam, universities have not
traditionally engaged much with businesses, and have focused mainly on teaching and, to
an increasing extent, research. The university community in Vietnam is, however,
becoming increasingly aware of the need to become more entrepreneurial and to form
partnerships with business that will provide opportunities for innovation and the
commercialization of research outputs.
1
The Vietnam - Finland Innovation Partnership Program, Phase 2 (IPP2) has been a timely
development in this regard. It is seeking to promote the concept of an entrepreneurship
and innovation (E&I) ecosystem in Vietnam, with specific application to Vietnam’s
university sector. IPP2 has promoted E&I education programs at a selected number of
universities, and it has also provided for an examination of the conditions likely to be
supportive of E&I ecosystem development across the whole of the sector.
This report provides an account of the ways in which the IPP2 has sought to underpin the
development of a ‘third mission’, concerning entrepreneurship and innovation, within
Vietnam’s higher education system. The report also presents a number of policy
recommendations aimed at strengthening E&I ecosystem development across the system.
The views of IPP2 stakeholders and beneficiaries are documented in the report. These
views give expression to the challenges involved in embedding an E&I ecosystem within
higher education in Vietnam. They are of significance because these challenges will need
to be systematically addressed over coming years as Vietnam’s higher education system
becomes more global in its outlook and scholarly attainments.
A feature of the report is the agenda proposed for consideration by policy makers in
Ministry of Education and Training and the Ministry of Science and Technology. A better
legal framework is required to enable universities to engage efficiently and effectively
with the world of business in Vietnam as well as regionally. There is also a pressing need
to seed entrepreneurialism and innovation in Vietnam’s universities. A culture whereby
university presidents are expected to reshape their institutions with a view to better
serving the needs of society through the cultivation of E&I ecosystems is also urgently
required.
1 It is an Official Development Assistance Programme jointly funded by the Governments of Finland and Vietnam from 2014 to
2018 with 11 million EUR budget. The competent authorities of IPP2 are the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland (Embassy of
Finland in Hanoi) and the Ministry of Science and Technology of Vietnam.
3
The research team was led by Dr. Pham Thi Ly, who is a member of Vietnam National
Council for Education & Human Resource Development. Other members of the team were:
Dr. Nguyen Ngoc Anh, Chief Economist of the Development and Policies Research Centre;
Dr. Nguyen Luong Hai Khoi, Lecturer at the Ho Chi Minh City University of Education;
Nguyen Dang Tuan Minh (MSc), Founder of KisStartup; and Dr. Nguyen Van Giap, Lecturer
at the Fulbright University Vietnam.
The final report was prepared by Dr. Pham Thi Ly with advice on international best
practices provided by Prof. Martin Hayden from Southern Cross University, Australia.
Valuable assistance was also provided by IPP2’s Director Ms. Tran Thi Thu Huong, and by
Dr. Chu Van Thang – IPP2’s Coordinator, Prof. Takeru Ohe from Waseda University in
Japan, provided valuable comments on the first draft of the report. Mr. Lauri Laakso -
Chief Technical Advisor of IPP2, and all of the IPP2 staff members, were tremendously
supportive of the research team while undertaking the report.
It is essential to acknowledge the value of the contribution made by all those university
presidents and senior academic managers who kindly made time available to contribute
information and insights which have proven invaluable in enabling the project to achieve
its objectives.
All support, guidance and contributions, especially from the Embassy of Finland in Hanoi,
are gratefully acknowledged.
4
Higher Education for E&I Development in Vietnam
Table of Contents
FOREWORD ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 3
ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 9
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................................................. 12
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 15
1.1 Background and Context ............................................................................................................................................. 15
1.1.1 The Fourth Industrial Revolution and its Implications .......................................................................... 15
1.1.2 Higher Education in Vietnam ............................................................................................................................ 16
1.2 The Innovation Partnership Program Phase 2 (IPP2) .................................................................................... 18
1.3 Analytical Frameworks ................................................................................................................................................ 18
1.3.1 Isenberg’s Model .................................................................................................................................................... 19
1.3.2 Morison’s Model ..................................................................................................................................................... 20
1.4 Purpose and Organization of this Report ............................................................................................................. 21
CHAPTER 2. IPP2 SUPPORTING HIGHER EDUCATION IN VIETNAM .................................................................. 23
2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 23
2.2 Context for IPP2 Implementation ............................................................................................................................ 24
2.2.1 International Context ........................................................................................................................................... 24
2.2.2 National Context ..................................................................................................................................................... 25
2.3 IPP2 ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 25
2.3.1 The IPP2 Initiative ................................................................................................................................................. 26
2.3.2 Training-of-Trainer Activities........................................................................................................................... 27
2.4 Evaluation Findings ....................................................................................................................................................... 27
2.4.1 Current Status of the E&I Ecosystem in Vietnam from the HE perspective .................................. 28
2.4.2 Outcomes Achieved by University Partners with IPP2 Support ........................................................ 31
2.4.3 Challenges ................................................................................................................................................................. 35
2.5 Case studies ...................................................................................................................................................................... 38
2.5.1 FPT University (FPTU)......................................................................................................................................... 39
2.5.2 Foreign Trade University (FTU) ...................................................................................................................... 40
5
2.6 Lessons Learned from IPP2 in Vietnam ................................................................................................................ 42
2.6.1 The Importance of University Leadership’s Strategic Thinking and Vision .................................. 42
2.6.2 The Role of Faculty Members/ University Lecturers .............................................................................. 43
2.6.3 Supporting Model: Provide Leadership but Delegate Responsibility and Ownership .............. 43
2.6.4 Success Factors ....................................................................................................................................................... 44
2.6.5 Motivation of Participants .................................................................................................................................. 44
2.7 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................................................... 45
CHAPTER 3. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 46
3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 46
3.2 To Policy Makers at the System Level .................................................................................................................... 47
3.2.1 Strengthen University Autonomy.................................................................................................................... 47
3.2.2 Grant provision and financing mechanisms ............................................................................................... 48
3.2.3 Recognition for Entrepreneurial Universities............................................................................................ 49
3.2.4 E&I Education: Curriculum Development ................................................................................................... 50
3.2.5 Faculty Development ............................................................................................................................................ 51
3.2.6 Promoting Research on E&I Education and E&I Ecosystem Development ................................... 51
3.2.7 University-Based E&I Ecosystem Development........................................................................................ 52
3.2.8 Issuance of a Guidebook for Universities ..................................................................................................... 53
3.2.9 Stimulating the Partnership between University and Industry ......................................................... 54
3.3 To University Leaders................................................................................................................................................... 54
3.3.1 IP and Ownership Issues to the Venture Business Operating as S&T Enterprises or Start Up
Firms Attached to or Related to University............................................................................................................ 54
3.3.2 Establishment of E&I University Lectures/ Researchers Community and Practitioners

Network for Exchange Knowledge and Sharing Experiences......................................................................... 55
3.3.3 Strengthening University Partnerships with Industries/Business ................................................... 56
3.3.4 Cross-institutional Innovation Hubs/ Incubation Centre ..................................................................... 56
3.4 To the Academics Community for Further Research ...................................................................................... 57
3.4.1 The E&I Landscape of Vietnam’s HE System .............................................................................................. 57
3.4.2 International Experiences in E&I Education and Development ......................................................... 57
3.4.3 Institutional Research Concerning Particular Types of University ................................................... 57
3.4.4 Supporting Policies for Industry and University Collaborations ....................................................... 57
6
3.5 To International Donors .............................................................................................................................................. 58
3.6 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................................................... 59
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................................ 62
ANNEX 1. INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCES IN SUPPORTING UNIVERSITIES FOR E&I ECOSYSTEM

DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................................................................................... 66
A1.1 Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy-Making System and Mechanisms for Funding
Arrangements .......................................................................................................................................................................... 66
A1.2 National strategies for E&I development in higher education ................................................................. 70
A1.3 Supporting policies for E&I in HEIs provided by the governments ....................................................... 72
A1.3.1 National Education Program for promotion of E&I in HEIs .............................................................. 72
A1.3.2 Companies established by universities...................................................................................................... 74
A1.3.3 Programs for Increasing investment on R&D and E&I development in HEIs ............................ 75
A1.3.4 Strengthen R&D and E&I by Private Enterprises and Promoting Cooperation among
Industry, Academia and Government ....................................................................................................................... 76
A1.3.5 Focusing on Selected Research and Innovation Fields........................................................................ 78
A1.3.6 Financial Supports: Tax Incentives and Grants/Funds Provision .................................................. 81
A1.3.7 Industrial Innovation Clusters....................................................................................................................... 82
A1.4 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................................... 84
ANNEX 2. VIETNAM’S STRATEGIES AND REGULATIONS FOR PROMOTING ENTREPRENEURSHIP &

INNOVATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION: A CURRENT POLICY REVIEW ............................................................... 86
A2.1 Higher Education and E&I in Viet Nam .............................................................................................................. 86
A2.1.1 Vietnam HE: Growing Fast and Struggling to Improve the Quality................................................ 86
A2.1.2 Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Capacity of the HE sector...................................... 87
A2.2 Policies for Developing E&I Ecosystem and E&I Education ...................................................................... 88
A2.2.1 Regulatory Environment for E&I Development ..................................................................................... 88
A2.2.2. Policies on E&I Education............................................................................................................................... 90
A2.2.3 Finance Instruments: Accessibility to Resources and Incentives for E&I development ....... 92
A2.2.4 Supporting Mechanisms ................................................................................................................................... 95
A2.3 Governmental Initiatives on Promoting E&I Education and Development ........................................ 98
A2.4 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................................... 99
ANNEX 3. VIETNAM POLICIES FOR SUPPORTING E&I ECOSYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IN HIGHER

EDUCATION: SWOT ANALYSIS & DISCUSSIONS........................................................................................................ 102
7
A3.1 Strengths for E&I Development in Vietnam .................................................................................................. 102
A3.1.1 A Generation of Entrepreneurial, Dynamic, and Motivated Youth .............................................. 102
A3.1.2 The Constant Support and Commitment of Top Leaders ................................................................ 103
A3.2 The Weaknesses of Vietnamese HEIs............................................................................................................... 104
A3.2.1 Teaching Orientation ...................................................................................................................................... 104
A3.2.2 Shortages in University Industries Linkages ........................................................................................ 106
A3.2.3 Financial and Legal Mechanism Constraints ........................................................................................ 107
A3.2.4 Confucian Cultural Influences ..................................................................................................................... 108
A3.2.5 Emphasis on S&T rather than E&I ............................................................................................................ 109
A3.3 Opportunities for HEIs in E&I Education and for Policy Development ............................................. 109
A.3.3.1 Greater Level of Institutional Autonomy Granted to HEIs in Amendment of Higher

Education Law ................................................................................................................................................................. 109
A.3.3.2 International Partnerships in E&I Development ............................................................................... 111
A3.4 Threats, and Possible Risks for E&I Education and Policy Issues ........................................................ 111
A.3.4.1 Global Competition ......................................................................................................................................... 111
A.3.4.2 Creating A Movement That Might Not Lead To Expected Results .............................................. 112
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................................. 113
8
ACRONYMS
AAAS The American Association for the Advancement of Science

AERES Evaluation Agency for Research and Higher Education (AERES)
AI Artificial Intelligence
ANR The French National Research Agency
ANRT The French National Association for Research and Technology
ARPA The Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy
ARRA The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
ASEAN The Association of Southeast Asian Nations
BIS Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
CEA Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission
CGI The General Investment Commission
CNES The National Centre for Space Studies
CNRS National Center for Scientific Research
COC The Council on Competitiveness
CoE Centre of Excellence
DARPA The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
DKTK German Consortium for Translational Cancer Research
DZHK The German Centre for Cardiovascular Research
DZIP German Centre for Infection Research
DZL The German Center for Lung Research
DZN German Center for Diabetes Research
DZNE The German Center for Neurological Disease
E&I Entrepreneurship and Innovation
EIT European Institute of Technology
ERC European Research Council
FINPRO The Finnish Trade Promotion Organization
FTU Foreign Trade University
GDP Gross Domestic Product
HCERES High Council for Evaluation of Research and Higher Education
HE Higher Education
HEIs Higher Education Institutions
HNU Hanoi National University
HSU Hoa Sen University
INRA The French National Institute for Agricultural Research,
INRIA The French Institute for Research in Computer Science and Automation
INSERM The French National Institute of Health and Medical Research
IoT Internet of Things
IPP Vietnam - Finland Innovation Partnerships Program
IRTs Technological Research Institutes (IRTs)
ISI Institute for Scientific Information
9
ITP Information Technology Park, Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City
JSC Joint Stocks Companies
MENESR The Ministry of National Education, Higher Education and Research-
MIGHT Malaysian Industry Government Group
MFA Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland
MOET Ministry of Education and Training
MOF Ministry of Finance
MOST Ministry of Science and Technology
MOSTI The Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation
MPI Ministry of Planning and Investment
MSC Multimedia Super Corridor
MUST Malaysia University of Science and Technology
NAFOSTED National Foundation for Science and Technology Development
NAS The National Academy of Sciences
NATIF National Technology Innovation Fund
NBP National Biotechnology Policy
NCATS National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
NIH National Institutes of Health
NIS National Innovation System
NPSTI National Policy on Science, Technology & Innovation
NSF The National Science Foundation
NSRC National Science and Research Council
OPU Ho Chi Minh City Open University
OSTP The Office of Science and Technology
PCAST President' Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
PORIM Palm Oil Research Institute of Malaysia
PPCs Provincial People’s Committees
R&D Research and Development
S&T Science and Technology
SATT French Technology Transfer Accelerator Network
SBA The U.S. Small Business Administration
SBIR Small Business Innovation Research Program
SCI Science Citation Index
SCIE Science Citation Index Expanded
SHOK Strategy Centre for Science, Technology and Innovation
SHTP Saigon High-Tech Park
SIRIM Standards and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia
SITRA Finnish Innovation Fund
SMEs Small and Medium Enterprises
STDF Science & Technology Development Fund
STEM Science, Technology, Engineering and Math
STI Science, Technology and Innovation
STP National Science and Technology Policy
STTR Small Business Technology Transfer
10
STU Saigon Technology University

TEKES The Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation
TLOs Technology Licensing Offices
ToTs Training of Trainers
TTOs Technology Transfer Offices
UK The United Kingdom
UKM National University of Malaysia
UM University of Malaya
UPM Malaysia Institute of Technology
US The United States
USA The United States of America
USPTO United States Patent and Trademark Office
UTM University of Technology, Malaysia
VIFOTECH Vietnam Foundation for Technology and Innovation
VUSTA Vietnam Union of Science and Technology
WB The World Bank
WEF The World Economic Forum
11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vietnam’s higher education (HE) sector has experienced a surge in growth over the past
three decades. More recently, universities in Vietnam have begun to embrace research as
an important dimension of their public responsibilities. There is now an emerging
realization of the need for them to become more entrepreneurial and more focused on the
task of supporting innovation.
The Vietnam - Finland Innovation Partnership Program, Phase 2 (IPP2) has been timely in
seeking to promote the concept of an entrepreneurship and innovation (E&I) ecosystem
in Vietnam. The concept of an E&I ecosystem is well understood internationally, but the
idea is new to Vietnam, where its development will require a framework that involves
academic staff members, their students and graduates.
This report discusses ways in which the IPP2 has supported Vietnam with the
development of an appreciation of the concept of an E&I ecosystem. The report also
makes policy recommendations aimed at strengthening a commitment within the HE
sector to the attainment of a national E&I ecosystem. The report documents the views of
IPP2 stakeholders and beneficiaries. These views give expression to the challenges
involved in embedding an E&I ecosystem within Vietnam’s HE sector, but they also
provide a foundation for future policy initiatives and policy interventions to support the
role of the HE sector as the co-creator of a national E&I ecosystem.
Ingredients required for the creation of a vibrant national E&I ecosystem include:
 A strong commitment to and support of high quality knowledge creation
(research);
 An equally strong commitment to and support of high quality teaching (human
technology transfer);
 A deep level of engagement between higher education institutions and external
stakeholders (alumni, industry, catalysts and government);
 A culture that views failure as a learning moment, and not as a credibility killer;
 A focus on incentive design to encourage entrepreneurial risk-taking both at the
individual and institutional levels within the HE sector; and
 Networks of entrepreneurial individuals and financial backers to transform ideas
into opportunities.
It is evident from the survey reported in this document that the IPP2 is widely seen to
have made a significant contribution to the development of an entrepreneurial ecosystem
in Vietnam by promoting practical and feasible pathways for universities to follow in
seeking to become more entrepreneurial and more research-focused. In particular, the
IPP2 has been successful in:
12
 Developing within the HE sector an understanding about, and raising an awareness

of, the nature of an E&I ecosystem;
 Building upon the capacity of key personnel within the HE sector regarding the
process of achieving knowledge transfers to society; and
 Providing valuable institutional development opportunities within the HE sector
for specific universities.
The survey reported also points to some challenges yet to be resolved. These include: the
narrowly training-oriented mind set of some university leaders; the limited availability of
resources for research; the extent of restrictive policies and regulations affecting the
conduct of research activities; deficiencies in the research and innovation capacities of
academic staff members; complexities associated with IP ownership; and the
underdeveloped state of university-industry linkages.
Two showcase institutions, that is, the FPT University (FPTU) and the Foreign Trade
University (FTU), show, however, that E&I education for students can be established as a
priority within the higher education curriculum in Vietnam. These institutions also
demonstrate the value of having institutional autonomy and a high level of academic staff
engagement with industry at many levels – institutional, faculty, students and alumni.
Additional important insights to emerge from these case studies include the need for:
 E&I knowledge and capacity to be included in the declared learning outcomes for
university graduates;
 Individual schools to set specific goals for E&I education that relate to their
mission, vision, strategies, resources and commitment to E&I development;
 Public financial support, preferably in the form matched grants that will encourage
institutionally-based initiatives, to provide for E&I curriculum development, the
training of lecturers and researchers, and the establishment of E&I stakeholder
community networks; and
 Industry-integrated E&I training programs, strongly underpinned by professional
coaching and mentoring.
At the national level, the inclusion in university ranking systems of criteria acknowledging
the importance of E&I endeavors would incentivize the HE sector to become more
committed to the co-creation of national E&I ecosystems. Other wide range of incentives
should be in place, including financial allocation schemes, subsidies, competition-based
grants, rewards systems and prestige recognition for entrepreneurial universities. Public
universities also need more access to institutional autonomy as a basis for developing
their capacity for curriculum reform. In this regard, a more supportive regulatory
framework for higher education institutions in Vietnam is possibly even more important
than giving institutions direct subsidies.
13
At an institutional level, the need for strong leadership is emphasized, along with
empowerment and delegation within higher education institutions. University leaders
need to strengthen the commercialization of research by developing better intellectual
property arrangements and by attaching far greater importance to partnerships with
industry. There should, for example, be far more use made of industry expertise by
engaging suitably experienced professionals from industry in the presentation of guest
lectures, the co-supervision of graduate theses, curriculum review and institutional
governance review processes, and the co-creation of E&I ecosystems. There must also be
an openness at an institutional level to the establishment of a hybrid institutional model
which stands apart the formal regulatory environment of a public university model and
which is free to focus solely upon the co-creation with industry and the government of
entrepreneurial opportunities.
To conclude, IPP2 has stimulated widespread interest in discussing the adoption of an

alternative vision for higher education institutions in Vietnam. It has demonstrated that
the HE sector can make a significant contribution to the development of a national culture
of entrepreneurialism through the curriculum delivered and the opportunities created for
closer cooperation with industry. Universities in Vietnam have traditionally been focused
on their ‘first mission’ of teaching. Recently, Vietnam’s leading universities have become
strongly focused on a ‘second mission’ of research. It is now timely to encourage them to
adopt a ‘third mission’ that involves the co-creation with industry, and with the
government, of E&I ecosystems. This ‘third mission’ will require the HE sector at large to
find better ways of preparing their graduates for a future in which technological change
will be rapid and pervasive, and in which society will have a huge need for graduates with
entrepreneurial mindsets and capabilities.
14
CHAPTER 1.
INTRODUCTION
Chapter Summary
The global context of a fourth industrial revolution has made E&I more important than ever to
national development. Universities in OECD member states tend to play a critical role in E&I
development by transforming themselves into entrepreneurial institutions, focusing on their
‘third mission’ of engagement with industry and the community, and making a conscious effort
to contribute to national economic growth. Vietnam’s HE system has been expanding rapidly
over the past three decades, as has Vietnam’s national level of economic production. Higher
education institutions in Vietnam continue mainly, however, to adopt a traditional, teaching-
oriented mission, though with some now also adopting a research-oriented mission. IPP2
activities may be seen as representing the beginning steps towards supporting higher education
institutions in Vietnam to move more confidently in adopting a ‘third mission’. This report aims
at drawing lessons learned from IPP2 implementation at participating universities. An
analytical framework is provided by models developed by Isenberg (2011) and Morison (2013).
1.1 Background and Context
1.1.1 The Fourth Industrial Revolution and its Implications
We are at the beginning of a fourth industrial revolution that is changing fundamentally

the way we live, learn, work, interact and relate to one another, and in which the
boundaries between the physical, digital and biological spheres of our experience are
becoming blurred. New technologies and new knowledge-based business models have
become globally dominant, disrupting existing value chains while also giving rise to new
ways of serving human needs. In this new global setting, talent in the form of
entrepreneurship and innovation (E&I) is becoming of fundamental importance. Indeed,
as Schwab (2015) has claimed: “Talent, more than capital, will represent the [new] critical
factor of production.”
Universities have to evolve if they are to survive. Traditional ways of teaching are under
threat in an environment in which digital technologies are redefining how, when and
where learning takes place. These same technologies are also providing opportunities for
new competitors in the form of global online providers of higher education programs. The
monopoly universities have had with research is being broken because well-funded,
globally based research and development organizations associated with or belonging to
large international corporations are now engaging in fundamental research. Governments
are also shifting ground in their support for public universities. The financial burden of
supporting them is increasingly proving to be burdensome.
15
Many universities within OECD countries are successfully negotiating the necessary
evolution by cultivating closer relationships with the world of business. In the process,
they are acquiring cultural values and management practices from the business world
(Gibb et al., 2015; Graham, 2002; Maskell & Robinson, 2002). They are also playing a more
focused role in contributing to the economic competitiveness of the nations and regions in
which they are located (European Commission, 2005). Some are even carving out national
and global corporate identities intended to add to the prestige associated with their
qualifications. If the first mission of universities is teaching, and their second mission is
research, then a third mission which is rapidly emerging is that of engaging with industry
and the community, and of making a conscious effort to contribute to national economic
growth.
1.1.2 Higher Education in Vietnam
There is in Vietnam a profound belief in the value and importance of education. This belief
has sustained the attainment of exceptionally high national levels of literacy, which in
turn have contributed significantly to Vietnam’s development success story over the past
30 years (Bodewig et al., 2014). The education system in Vietnam continues, however, to
be traditional in outlook.
For much of the past 20 years, the HE sector in Vietnam has been preoccupied with
growth. The gross tertiary education enrollment rate, which was only 2.79% in 1995,
reached 28.84% by 2015 (UNESCO, 2016). Vietnam now has more than 2 million higher
education students who are attending 443 universities and colleges (Ministry of
Education and Training [MOET] 2017).
Public universities and colleges account for 86% of all student enrolments, and so the
Government is largely responsible for funding the HE sector. Though recently there has
been an initiative to encourage leading public universities to become ‘self-financing’ in
exchange for greater institutional autonomy, most public higher education institutions in
Vietnam depend upon the Government for between one-third to three-quarters of their
income (Tran Nam Binh et al, 2012). Revenue generated from research, technology
transfers, and so on, accounts for possibly no more than 4% of their income (Chirot, L. &
Wilkinson B., 2010). Research spending, and hence research performance, in Vietnam’s
2
private higher education sector is negligible.
Vietnam’s HE sector is widely viewed to be underperforming. Employers frequently

complain that new graduates have adequate employability skills (World Bank, 2014, p. 6).
Research productivity, measured as citations per faculty member lags behind seven of the
ten countries in ASEAN (Hien, P.D; 2010; Nguyen, T.V & Pham, L.T, 2011; Ly T Pham,
2014, Tuan V Nguyen et al., 2016). Universities appear generally to be doing little to assist
2
For more details, see Phạm Thị Huyền et al. (2017, p. 25), Nguyen, Thu-Thuy T. (2016).
16
industry to become more innovative. The need for industry in Vietnam to become more
innovative has been clearly outlined by the World Economic Forum (WEF), which in 2017
3
ranked Vietnam 71st out of 137 countries in terms of its capacity to innovate.
Pressure for reform of the HE sector is becoming more intense. Responses to date have
included: strengthening international partnerships; improving quality assurance
processes; providing more support for PhD education; granting more institutional
autonomy; and deregulating university selection and admission procedures. The fact
remains, however, that Vietnam’s universities continue largely to be ‘teaching factories’,
giving insufficient attention to scientific research and even less attention to the cultivation
of linkages with industry. Some universities are experimenting with soft-skills training
programs and industry-based internships, but these are exceptions. The notion of a ‘third
mission’ for universities is largely unheard of in Vietnam. There is also within university
circles little in the way of an appreciation of the role that HE could play in co-creating E&I
ecosystems with industry.
This situation is at odds with the fact that Vietnam has experienced a striking increase in
the establishment of start-up companies over recent years. In 2016, for example,
designated by the Prime Minister as the Year of Startup Nation, there was a surge in the
establishment of co-working spaces, accelerators, incubators, training centers and
investor networks. Start-up investment volume increased from USD 137 million in 2015
to USD 205 million in 2016. By 2018, Vietnam’s Global Entrepreneurship Index Ranking
had lifted substantially, reflecting an improvement in the entrepreneurial attitudes,
abilities and aspirations of the population, weighted against the prevailing social and
economic ‘infrastructure’, including aspects such as broadband connectivity and transport
links to external markets. These developments clearly point to the fact that Vietnam,
outside its higher education sector, is making rapid progress in terms of
entrepreneurialism and innovation.
The Government has strongly supported these developments. Prime Ministerial Decision
844, issued on May 18th, 2016, expressed the need to have a fully functional national
ecosystem for innovative start-ups by 2025. Ministries from within the Government are
collaborating to develop not only the necessary regulations but also a financial
mechanism and education policies to enable the policy to succeed.
To date, however, Vietnamese universities have played no more than a minor role in these
developments. Some universities have established technology transfer centers, incubation
centers, science and technology enterprises, co-working spaces, and so on, but these
bodies tend to be concerned with the administration of consultancies, the provision of
3
In 2017, 1,745 invention patents were granted in Vietnam. Of these, 109 were owned by the Vietnamese and about 15 were
owned by individuals or groups in the HE sector. The total number of patents granted and recorded at WIPO between 2009-2016:
Vietnam (118); Indonesia (440); Thailand (218); Philippines (142); Finland (7,998); USA (276,294) and China (322,484).
17
specialist training programs and the delivery of consultancy support services. They have
not played a significant role in assisting with technology transfers or with the
commercialization of research products. Neither have they invested meaningfully in the
development of expertise in intellectual property matters.
1.2 The Innovation Partnership Program Phase 2 (IPP2)

The IPP2, an Official Development Assistance (ODA) program between Finland and Vietnam,
Phase 2 commenced in 2014 with the general aim of seeking to demonstrate ways in
which a national E&I ecosystem might be developed and supported in Vietnam. The HE
sector was a targeted stakeholder for the initiative because of its strategic relevance to
the future development of a national E&I ecosystem.
The Program had a four-year timeline (up to 2018) and three broad goals: (1) to initiate a
shift in the national business culture from a small to high growth mindset; (2) to build the
capacity of public and private stakeholders to introduce innovative solutions to domestic and
international markets; and (3) to increase sustainability through alignment within and
between key national, regional, and global innovation stakeholders and partners. The
program sought to build upon the success of the Innovation Partnership Program Phase 1
(IPP1), the focus of which was broad in scope of innovation.
Over the period from 2014 to 2018, IPP2 has been responsible for introducing various
strategic interventions that have led to improvements in Vietnam’s innovation and start-up
ecosystem. It has also provided for the testing and piloting of mechanisms for supporting
high-growth entrepreneurship in a manner which has involved different layers of an
emerging E&I ecosystem in Vietnam. It has sought specifically to build the innovation
capacities of higher education providers in Vietnam by piloting support schemes for start-ups
and start-up ecosystem builders, by organizing training courses in capacity building, and by
conducting training-of-trainers (ToT) programs for start-up coaches.
IPP2 has also conducted support activities for policy makers from the Ministry of Science and
Technology (MOST), the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET), other line ministries and
Governmental agencies through four executive training courses in Helsinki and Singapore and
two one-day training courses in Hanoi, involving several distinguished world-class speakers.
Two local teams were established to produce policy discussion papers.
Details from IPP2 practices, including details about challenges facing universities and
college, lessons learned from success stories, and reports of shortcomings of participating
universities, present a valuable basis for policy development in Vietnam.
1.3 Analytical Frameworks

Supporting policies for E&I development should ideally be based on a view of E&I as an
ecosystem in which universities represent an important element. In this report, Isenberg’s
18
(2011) model of an E&I ecosystem is adopted. The role of the university in this ecosystem
is examined using a model proposed by Morison (2013).
1.3.1 Isenberg’s Model
The success of most start-ups has been found to depend heavily upon factors beyond the
control of the actual business itself. These factors constitute an entrepreneur ecosystem
(Fuerlinger et al., 2015). Isenberg identified six domains of this ecosystem (see Figure 1):
“a conducive culture, enabling policies and leadership, availability of appropriate finance,
quality human capital, venture-friendly markets for products, and a range of institutional
and infrastructural supports” (Isenberg, 2011). Higher education institutions play an
4
important role in the domain of quality human capital. By virtue of their influence in this
domain, they then influence many of the other domains in the model.
Figure 1. Isenberg’s model of an entrepreneurship ecosystem
It is widely agreed in the related literature that the sustainability of an entrepreneurship

ecosystem in a specific geographic region is determined by its innovation capacity, which,
in turn, depends upon interactions among different kinds of actors and technology
policies (Freeman, 1978; Lundvall, 1988, 1992; Fischer, 2006). Knowledge exchanges
between industry and the academic community are important here. Wilson (2012) argues
that one of the most important prerequisites for innovation in a geographical area is the
cooperation of four sectors: government, business, civil society, and academia.
4
See https://www.forbes.com/sites/danisenberg/2011/05/25/introducing-the-entrepreneurship-ecosystem-four-
defining-characteristics/ and https://hbr.org/2010/06/the-big-idea-how-to-start-an-entrepreneurial-revolution
19
1.3.2 Morison’s Model
In Isenberg’s model, the role of higher education institutions is confined mainly to the
training of the human capital necessary to sustain an entrepreneurship ecosystem. In
Morison’s (2013) model of an innovative ecosystem, universities are central because of
their ability to recruit and train a skilled talent pool, and because of their ability to
provide ideas and technological support for the acceleration of any new ventures
underpinning the development of start-ups. These start-ups grow into innovation-based
companies, which then become R&D partners to the universities, as well as mentors and
network members. The Morison framework (see Figure 2) is helpful in focusing attention
specifically on the importance of the institutional capacity of stakeholders, especially
universities, within an innovative ecosystem.
Figure 2. Morison: the role of university in innovative ecosystem
Universities operate within two overlapping ecosystems, one focused on generating start-
ups and the other focused on supporting innovation among established firms. Start-up
ecosystems encourage the formation of new firms. These ecosystems typically involve
incubators, accelerators, angel investors/capital networks, and mentoring initiatives.
Innovation ecosystems focus on accelerating the supply of resources to existing firms to
promote more productive innovation. Dynamic regions need both start-up and innovation
ecosystems. Often these ecosystems are anchored by higher education institutions
because these institutions provide a continuous flow of new ideas and brainpower that
can be converted into wealth by new and expanding businesses.
In Morison’s model, higher education institutions are the major source of the talent
needed to power these ecosystems. With students, faculty and alumni, they can assemble
the networks needed to support start-ups and high growth companies. Their campuses,
especially when connected to the surrounding community, provide high-quality physical
infrastructures to make their region “sticky” for both talent and high-growth companies
(Morison, 2013).
20
1.4 Purpose and Organization of this Report

This report addresses IPP2’s practices within higher education institutions in Vietnam. It
provides an assessment and recommendations based on lessons learned from the IPP2
initiative. The report aims specifically to serve:
 Vietnamese university leaders, practitioners and IPP2 stakeholders: by sharing
best practices and experiences that might be adopted for institutional
improvement;
 National policy makers: by providing evidence-based recommendations of policy
interventions for supporting E&I education and development;
 The research community: by contributing to knowledge and by providing a basis
for further possible investigations; and
 International donors: by providing inputs for evaluation of impact and by
identifying implications of development assistance.
Intervention by IPP2 in the HE sector in Vietnam was focused upon strengthening the
capacity of higher education institutions to create institutional E&I ecosystems and to
contribute to a national E&I ecosystem. Therefore, the report will address the ways in
which this goal has been achieved, firstly, at an institutional level, involving an analysis of
the impact of IPP2 interventions on the institutional capacity of IPP2 beneficiaries, and,
secondly, at a national level, by identifying the broader role and likely broader impact of
the IPP2 initiative.
The report also addresses how an E&I ecosystem in Vietnam has been taking shape over
recent years. The impact of determining factors, especially in the form of public policies
and official regulations, evolving entrepreneurship ecosystems, and any changes resulting
from IPP2 interventions, is discussed. To address these matters, existing studies were
reviewed and qualitative interviews conducted. First, data from a meta-analysis of
existing research were analyzed for the purposes of assessing the current situation of E&I
ecosystems in Vietnam, with specific attention given to existing policies for supporting the
HE sector in developing E&I ecosystems. Second, semi-structured interviews were
conducted with investors, policy makers, entrepreneurs and academics in Vietnam,
especially those who have been IPP2 stakeholders, for the purposes of identifying lessons
learned from the IPP2 interventions. The semi-structured interviews were supported
through the use of focus-group discussions and observations.
The report is structured as follows. Chapter 1 has provided background information,

including a general overview of E&I issues in a global context, a brief introduction to E&I
developments of Vietnam’s HE system, and an introduction to the investigation that
resulted in this report. Chapter 2 presents an assessment and analysis of what was
achieved with IPP2 support at selected universities, as well as more broadly. Chapter 2
also addresses international perceptions of E&I and it documents E&I practices reported
21
in the international literature. The challenges facing HEIs in Vietnam in developing

institutional E&I ecosystems are discussed. Chapter 3 presents a review of insights
generated from a review of IPP2’s perceived impact. It proposes recommendations for
consideration by policy makers and other stakeholders.
More details about international practices, and details of a SWOT analysis for E&I
ecosystem development in Vietnam, are presented in Annexes to this report.
22
CHAPTER 2.
IPP2 SUPPORTING HIGHER EDUCATION IN VIETNAM
Chapter Summary
This chapter documents the context and implementation processes for the IPP2 initiative in
Vietnam. It also reports on the methodology for an evaluation of the outcomes achieved by the
IPP2 initiative. The point is made that Vietnam’s HE sector is only beginning to appreciate the
nature of an E&I ecosystem, nationally and institutionally.
The most important contribution made by the IPP2 initiative is reported to be its offer of an
alternative, feasible and practical pathway for the transition of universities in Vietnam from
being inwardly focused on teaching and, though to a lesser extent, research, to being
entrepreneurial and engaged with industry and the community. Capacity development,
including raising the awareness and understanding of E&I ecosystems by university leader, as
well as more generally, is among the significant achievements of IPP2. Two case studies of
universities that have made significant progress in creating institutional E&I ecosystems point
to the importance of engaging with industry and of being able to exercise institutional
autonomy. These case studies also point to the importance of E&I education for students, and to
the extent to which this a curriculum constructed on the basis of E&I concepts can be
constructed and implemented in Vietnam.
2.1 Introduction
This chapter provides an account of the role played by IPP2 in supporting Vietnamese higher
education institutions to develop E&I ecosystems and to contribute to the development of a national
E&I ecosystem in Vietnam. The chapter addresses the following topics:
 The current status of the national E&I ecosystem in Vietnam from the perspective of HE;
 The tangible/intangible outcomes that university partners achieved under the IPP2 initiative;
 The challenges experienced by the university partners, and appropriate supporting
mechanisms and policy interventions for addressing these challenges; and
 Insights from the IPP2 initiative that can inform other institutions in Vietnam.
The chapter also reports on two case studies of the development of university-based E&I
ecosystems. The site institutions for the case studies are the FPT University (FPTU) and the
Foreign Trade University (FTU).
23
2.2 Context for IPP2 Implementation
2.2.1 International Context
The concepts of entrepreneurship and innovation underpin the IPP2 program. Viewed from a
global perspective, these concepts are now also considered to be critical to the role of
higher education institutions. It has, for example, become commonplace to hear references to
the notion of an entrepreneurial university. Etzkowitz et al. (2000) described an entrepreneurial
university as one which is active in the commercialization of knowledge and which contributes
5
significantly to the dynamics of innovation in the economy.
Initially, entrepreneurial universities were thought of as institutions mainly concerned with the
commercialization of research outputs. These were institutions, which hosted academic
entrepreneurs (Hsu et al., 2007; Asterbro et al., 2012), that is, scholars whose research
achievements were able to be licensed to industry through commercial partnerships or
even crystallized through the establishment of university-owned spin-off companies.
Specialist institutional infrastructures developed to support these activities, including
6
Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) and Technology Licensing Offices (TLOs).
Progressively, entrepreneurial universities began to develop training programs for the
7
purposes of educating students about enterprise and innovation. As Hsu et al. (2007)
explained, universities provided “an important social setting for students and faculty to
exchange ideas, including ideas on commercial entrepreneurial opportunities.” A broader
view about the nature of an entrepreneurial university thus began to take shape.
Most recently, according to Wright et al. (2017), the notion of an entrepreneurial

university has become even more inclusive. As well as academic staff members and
students being taken into account, the concept now embraces an engagement with
alumni, incubators, accelerators and public authorities seeking to develop
entrepreneurship at a local level. In aggregate, these various stakeholders are now seen to
form an institutional E&I ecosystem, the defining feature of which is that they are
connected and coordinated by the host university (Isenberg, 2010; Spigel, 2015; Schaeffer
& Matt, 2015). Entrepreneurial universities have, therefore, become entities that provide
environments, cultures, practices, resources and opportunities that are conducive to
5
The capacity to innovate and to bring innovation successfully to market, locally and globally, will be a crucial determinant of
competitiveness of firms and nations in coming decades. It is entrepreneurship that enables advances in science and technology to
be translated into innovative approaches to create and deliver goods and services that result in economic and social progress.
6
Interest in academic entrepreneurship emerged in the mid-1990s, when it was focused mainly on the establishment of spin-off
companies by university faculties (Shane, 2004). In recent studies the effect of the TTOs has been questioned, while individual
traits and abilities in being able to recognize opportunities have been given more attention (Clarysse et al., 2011).
7
Asterbro (2102) argues that research regarding start-ups, commercialization activities and entrepreneurial activities emerging
from university environments had mainly focused on university spin-offs created by faculty and staff, almost completely ignoring
the importance of the role played by students as entrepreneurs. He called for more research on the critical role played by students.
24
entrepreneurship (Gibb, 2017; Salem, 2014). Importantly, they have a training function (Carvalho
8
et al., 2010).
2.2.2 National Context

The idea of an entrepreneurial university is relatively new to Vietnam. The notion of them is
attractive in the HE sector, but progress in establishing universities that are committed to
enterprise and innovation is constrained by deficiencies in institutional capacity, a tendency
to risk-aversion, limited financial resources, and poorly-established linkages with industry
(see Nguyen et al., 2017). Over recent years, the Government has indicated its support for
their establishment as a basis for contributing to the cultivation of a national E&I ecosystem
in Vietnam.9 It is in this context that it has strongly endorsed the IPP2 partnership with the
support of the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs (MFA). It has also approved various legal
reforms aimed explicitly at easing the burden of engaging in entrepreneurial activities in
Vietnam. To date, however, it has not yet achieved its ultimate objective of seeing the
development of a vibrant national E&I ecosystem in Vietnam.
2.3 IPP2
The IPP2 initiative has sought to achieve a lasting impact in Vietnam’s innovation ecosystem by
supporting the scale-up of practices tested on the ground for E&I education in universities,
financing innovative companies, and creating cross-border business. 10 In this regard, the IPP2
initiative is very much in line with the Government’s vision for a national E&I ecosystem.
8
Drucker (1985), Henry, C., Hill, F. & Leitch, C. (2005) argued that entrepreneurship is “a discipline. And, like any discipline, it can
be learned”.
9
These efforts include an introduction of special tax schemes for start-ups (lower corporate income tax rates of 10% for 15 years,
or 17% for 10 years, instead of the normal rate of 20%, to be available to companies working in the hi-tech sector and/or in hi-tech
zones) and a series of specific programs/ interventions, for example: establishing the National Agency for Technology,
Entrepreneurship and Commercialization Development (NATEC) to provide training, mentorship, business incubation and
acceleration to new start-ups; the National Technology Innovation Fund (NATIF) to fund science and technology research carried
out by enterprises; the Mobile Application Laboratory East Asia (mLab East Asia) in Ho Chi Minh City, with funding from Finland’s
Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Nokia Corp., and World Bank, to provide incubation, mentoring, technical assistance and financing to
mobile entrepreneurs and innovators; Hoa Lac Hi-Tech Service Center - a section of the Hoa Lac Hi-Tech Park, which aims at
promoting R&D activities, business incubation, and the training of entrepreneurs in Hi-Tech areas; Fostering Innovation through
Research, Science, and Technology project (FIRST), funded by World Bank to create a scientific and innovation community by
designing and piloting science, technology and innovation (STI) policies; the Mekong Business Initiative (MBI), funded by the ADB
and Australia, to foster private sector development in the region, including Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam; and finally the
Finland-Vietnam Innovation Partnership Program (IPP), an ODA program between the Vietnam Ministry of Science and Technology
(MOST) and the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs (MFA).
10
To achieve its objective, the program targets: (i) innovative high growth Vietnamese start-ups; (ii) start-up ecosystem developers
in Vietnam; and (iii) Vietnamese universities and other educational institutions. See http://ipp.vn/en/about/ and
http://ipp.vn/en/ipp-training-of-trainers-curriculum/
25
2.3.1 The IPP2 Initiative
The IPP2 initiative has given rise to a series of activities, which may be grouped as
follows: (i) innovation funding; (ii) capacity building; and (iii) innovation partnership
11
development. The support portfolio for IPP2 includes 18 start-ups, 14 start-up
ecosystem builders, 12 start-up coaches, and 12 partner universities involving 35 E&I
lecturers from across 6 cities.
The key capacity building activities through which IPP2 has directly supported HE in Vietnam
has included: (i) Training-of-Trainers (ToT) programs, which form part of IPP2’s University
Collaboration Program aimed at strengthening the role of HE in Vietnam’s E&I ecosystem and
focused on providing teaching methodologies and a modern approach to E&I education; and
(ii) ToT replication courses, in which IPP2 has been cooperating with many partners
to implement ToT training courses nationwide, such as the ToT-HCM course conducted in
cooperation with SIHUB for 33 trainees from 6 universities in Ho Chi Minh City, or the T2-
Hanoi cooperation with Hanoi University of Technology and the Foreign Trade University for
27 participants from 13 universities in the North. In due course, IPP2 will also organize
delivery of a ToT replication course in Da Nang (in cooperation with DNES) and Hue (in
cooperation with Hue Industrial College). 12
Depending upon the commitment of each partner organization, IPP2 also discusses
extended partnership activities and the possibility of granting financial support to
promote the implementation of curriculum development, training and networking efforts.
This commitment is made available program to universities, training institutions and
educational institutions, regardless of whether they are public or private.
The universities and institutes selected to participate in the IPP2 initiative were: (1)
Hanoi University of Science & Technology (HUST); (2) the Foreign Trade University
11
For the first component, the IPP2 project has provided support to 18 Vietnamese new innovative companies and 14 consortiums
that are ecosystem developers. Support for these projects includes grants and soft supports as training, coaching and networking.
The third component includes partnership creation among key players of Vietnam’s start-ups and innovation ecosystem
domestically and internationally with strong emphasis on the establishment of a trade-based partnership between Vietnam and
Finland. The second component, which is the focus of this paper, is discussed in detail next.
12
For the capacity building component, there are, broadly speaking, two groups of training activities: (i) non-HE capacity building
and (ii) HE capacity building. The former (which is not the focus of this paper) includes capacity building for policy-makers (on
various issues like management of innovation, science, technology, education and finance for start-ups and innovation).
Knowledge and experience sharing activities and lectures by international experts and consultants have also been organized by
IPP2 to support MOST other ministries and agencies as well as other innovation activities; together with E&I Training for Trainers
(TOT1) and Innovation Accelerator Training Program (IAP). Under the TOT1, 12 Vietnamese business consultants (from diverse
backgrounds including international experience, private sector, entrepreneurship support organizations, governmental agencies
and Vietnamese universities) were trained for 8 months (2 months intensive training and 6 months of coaching practices) by four
international trainers together with a team of local facilitators, and were provided with follow-up activities such as talks and
experience sharing by successful businessmen, angel and venture capitalists, and business consultants. The IAP is a six-month
program for supported projects to accelerate their innovative activities and increase their potential for international growth. This
standardized and tailored training program was based on a comprehensive curriculum, combining with other services as
mentorship, network access, and matching funding for the 22 innovation companies and system projects in Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh
City, and Da Nang/Hue. IAP provided: (1) innovation and entrepreneurship training based on a tailored curriculum and delivered by
experienced international trainers and 12 IPP2 business consultants from ToT1 program; (2) access to local and international
mentors, investors, donors, entrepreneurship supporting programs; and (3) bootcamp, mid-term and final Demo Days with
certificates of completion for teams.
26
(FTU); (3) FPT University (FPTU); (4). HCMC University of Science & Technology (UT-
VNUHCM); (5) HCMC Open University (HCMCOU); (6) the University of Finance –
Marketing (UFM); (7) Saigon Technology University (STU); (8) Da Nang University of
Technology (DUT); (9) Nha Trang University (NTU); (10) Da Lat University (DLU); (11)
Hue Industrial College (HIC); and (12) the MOST Management Training Institute (as an
observer).
In the University Collaboration Program, there were additional participating universities,

including Nong Lam University (NLU) and Nguyen Tat Thanh University (NTTU). These
institutions have been included in the surveys undertake for the purposes of writing the
present report.
2.3.2 Training-of-Trainer Activities

The ToT objectives were: (i) to build the capacity of university lecturers regarding E&I; (ii) to
promote E&I training within universities in Vietnam; and (iii) to promote the formation &
development of an E&I ecosystem at Vietnam’s universities. After a two-week intensive
training ‘bootcamp’, and then 5,5 months spent developing an E&I curriculum, the partner
universities were expected to develop their own training curriculum on E&I for inclusion in
selected undergraduate and postgraduate courses, as well as in ToT courses, executive
training courses and other extra-curricular activities, such as student camps, start-up
contests, and so on. The purpose of these activities was to strengthen E&I education as well as
ecosystem ties between higher education institutions in Vietnam. Participation in the
program was voluntary. The main tool for collaboration was an open-sourced Innovation and
Entrepreneurship Core Curriculum (CC)13 developed by IPP2 for innovation practitioners.14
2.4 Evaluation Findings

It is the broader view of an entrepreneurial university, as described earlier, that is
adopted here. This view is more in line with the principles underpinning the IPP2 project
design. It sought to introduce new concepts and initiatives in E&I education, as currently
practiced in OECD countries, and which go beyond traditional classroom teaching to
include experiential learning that results in improved employment outcomes for
graduates. It also provided a broad definition of university-based innovation would be
more appropriately inclusive.
Two levels of analysis were identified. The first was the institutional level, focusing on the
impact of IPP2’s intervention on the institutional capacity of IPP2 beneficiaries. The
13
IPP2 developed a Core Curriculum on Innovation and Entrepreneurship and tested it through two training programs in 2015: an
intensive Training of Trainers Program for 12 consultants as well as a 6-month Innovation Accelerator Program for 22 innovation
projects.
14
The IAP is a six-month program for supported projects to accelerate their innovative activities and increase their potential for
international growth. See Footnote 13 for more details.
27
second was the systemic level, identifying the role and impact of IPP2 in improving the
national E&I ecosystem through the medium of HE.
In implementing the evaluation, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with

IPP2 stakeholders, including project managers, managers of enterprises, university
leaders, lecturers, and ToT trainers. These interviews, which took place following
intensive desk studies of all relevant documentation, sought to collect information about
the implementation, design, outcomes and impacts of the training programs and other
activities. Given the emerging state of knowledge in Vietnam about university-based innovation, a
qualitative design for the evaluation was considered to be appropriate.
When analyzing the data collected, use was made of the OECD’s DAC evaluative approach.
Reasons for adopting the DAC approach included that, firstly, IPP2 is an ODA project, and so is
well suited to being reviewed using the DAC evaluation approach, and secondly, the DAC
evaluation approach provides general criteria which could be used as a basis for developing
evaluative questions through the full range of evaluation topics, that is, from single interventions
15
through to a thematic level.
2.4.1 Current Status of the E&I Ecosystem in Vietnam from the HE perspective
Assessing the current status of the national E&I ecosystem in Vietnam is not a simple task.
First, the concept of an E&I ecosystem, as commonly used and understood in English, is not
entirely compatible with how the concept is understood when translated into Vietnamese.
There is, in fact, no equivalent Vietnamese term for ‘E&I ecosystem’, the closest being a
national innovation and start-up ecosystem or a national innovative start-ups ecosystem, which
were the terms used in Prime Ministerial Decision No. 844, dated May 18, 2016.16 While the
concept of entrepreneurship is widely understood in Vietnam, concepts relating to innovation,
start-ups and ecosystems are generally not well understood, leading often to some confusion
when these terms are translated from English into Vietnamese. Moreover, because research
about E&I developments in Vietnam is limited in extent, few people realize that an E&I
ecosystem entails consideration of policies, markets, culture, human capital, finance and
15
The Development Assistance Committee (DAC) evaluation framework involves five main questions: Relevance - the extent to
which the objectives of a project or development intervention are consistent with beneficiaries’ requirements, country needs,
global priorities and partners’ and donors’ policies; Efficiency - a measure of how economically resources/inputs (funds, expertise,
time, etc.) are converted to results; Effectiveness - the extent to which the project’s objectives were achieved; Impacts - the
positive and negative, primary and secondary, long-term effects produced by a development intervention, directly or indirectly,
intended or unintended; and Sustainability - the continuation of benefits from a development intervention after major
development assistance has been completed. These five key criteria provide the decision-maker with the essential information and
nuances to understand the situation and determine what should be done next. According to the DAC methodology, depending on
the context specific evaluations may have specific purposes, specific questions may need to be followed up. Further, there is no
unique way to conduct an evaluation and these key five criteria are interdependent and not mutually exclusive. See:
http://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/daccriteriaforevaluatingdevelopmentassistance.htm.
16
In the IPP2 website, the term ‘Vietnamese innovation and entrepreneurship ecosystem’ is translated into ‘hệ sinh thái đổi mới
sáng tạo và khởi nghiệp’, which is equivalent to ‘national innovation and start-ups ecosystem’. In addition, the single term,
“innovation”, itself also creates confusion in Vietnamese. It is translated into ‘inventive (implying technological) innovation’, to
distinguish it from the economic innovation policy (i.e. economic reform to turn Vietnam from a centrally planned economy to a
market-based economy).
28
support, as identified in Isenberg’s (2011) model. In the following account, use is made of the
concept an E&I ecosystem, as commonly understood in OECD countries. This approach assists
with benchmarking Vietnam’s experience with international norms and practices.
Second, assessing the current status of the national E&I ecosystem in Vietnam realistically
requires the assembly of a large volume of data collected from various stakeholders, including
university administrators, students, faculty members and relevant E&I activists from across
the HE system. An effort on this scale would have been well beyond the intended scope of this
evaluation. This evaluation relies instead on secondary data sources and in-depth interviews
conducted with representatives from various universities. Insights emerging from these
sources were triangulated with reports from independent observers.
In addressing the current status of the national E&I ecosystem in Vietnam from the
perspective of those engaged with HE, three levels of analysis were possible: the national, the
institutional and the intra-institutional levels. Each level is now addressed.
a. National level
Vietnam’s HE sector is at an early stage of appreciation of the importance of the concept of a

national E&I ecosystem. The term itself is not well understood because it cannot be directly
translated into Vietnamese. Most interviewees interpreted the term as referring to a start-up
ecosystem. It was reported, however, that there was a developing awareness of the concept of
a national E&I ecosystem in Vietnam. This awareness was attributed to the influence of
reforms introduced by the Government to improve the business environment for enterprises.
Interviewees also reported on the leadership being shown by different levels of government
in seeking to support start-ups in Vietnam.17 It was agreed, therefore, that there was the
embryonic development of a national E&I ecosystem in Vietnam.18
At some universities, especially those linked with the IPP2 initiative, there was, however, a
perception that Vietnam was not advancing fast enough in this regard. These were
universities, which had been proactive in responding to national efforts to develop innovative
start-up ecosystems. Their comments were, however, locally focused. One interviewee from
Nguyen Tat Thanh University (NTTU) stated, for example:
This (IPP2) is a national project or “national entrepreneur” to support universities to develop

curriculum on E&I, [and to] establish incubation HUBs. This program requires proposals.
Submitting schools must have their own human resources working on innovation and
entrepreneurship, and [a] curriculum on E&I. NTTU has submitted a proposal together with BK
Holdings (Hanoi University of Technology) and Hanoi University of National Economy but . . . the
result has not been announced yet. It is difficult to assess this project at this time but it is quite
good in general situation.
17
See more details in Section A2.2.1 of Annex 2.
18
There have been public debates regarding such basic concepts in newspapers, at conferences and even among innovation policy
makers and university researchers. In part, these concepts in English already require explanation and may carry slightly different
meaning depending on the context. When being translated into Vietnamese, they lose the originality and it leads to confusion and
a vague use of these terms.
29
E&I ecosystems have stakeholders. The commercialization of university research outputs is

important, and so too is the provision of relevant training programs for students. Globally,
E&I education has expanded markedly over recent years, with more higher education
institutions offering entrepreneurship courses and other forms of coaching and mentoring for
prospective entrepreneurs. In light of comments made by the interviewees, most universities
in Vietnam would appear to be unaware of this development. Whereas the kinds of teaching
methods being employed internationally include student-centered experiential learning
through the development of business strategies and the use of case studies and interactive
computer technologies, few Vietnamese universities were reported to have yet implemented
these methods in entrepreneurship training. Instead, there was reported to be tendency for
universities to treat E&I education simply as something trendy for as long as the Government
had a policy of encouraging it. Indeed, some universities were reported to treat E&I education
solely as a platform for student competitions to win trophies. Faculty members advising the
students were said to lack a depth of knowledge and skills regarding E&I matters, and the
focus was said to be on winning a trophy and not on producing a viable business proposal.
b. Institutional level
Some important changes at an institutional level are, however, being observed. First, and
most importantly, there has been fundamental shift in Vietnam concerning perceptions about
the role of a university with respect to research and innovation. There has even been the
emergence of tacit forms of competition between universities in terms of achieving research
outputs. Discussion in HE circles in Vietnam is now also shifting to embrace topics related to
research activities, publications, performance ranking, innovation, graduate employment
rates and entrepreneurial achievements.
Second, there is a more receptive attitude at an institutional level to ideas about start-ups,
innovation and entrepreneurship. Although skepticism exists in some corners about the
‘start-ups agenda’, the general attitude across universities in Vietnam is that there is room for
them to play a role in areas relating to entrepreneurship and innovation. This development
can be seen in the large number of start-up and related entrepreneurial competitions being
organized by universities. Some universities have even taken bolder steps by establishing
their own innovation/start-up and entrepreneurship centers.19 All the same, interviewees
from a number of universities expressed caution about the role of universities in contributing
to the development of a national E&I ecosystem, arguing, for example, that buzzwords such as
entrepreneurship, start-ups, ecosystems and innovation were ‘fashionable’ but vaguely
understood. They explained that different people may attach different meanings to these
terms, resulting inevitably in confusion.20
19
Some universities are ambitious. Hoa Sen University (HSU) is an example. It organized an international conference on innovation
and entrepreneurship in 2017 with an expectation that it would start establishing itself as a center of the field. See:
http://iep.hoasen.edu.vn/
20
Literally innovation is translated into Vietnamese as ‘innovative innovation’, or ‘create innovation’ (đổi mới sáng tạo). Note that
the Vietnamese word “đổi mới” may be used for translating the word “innovative”, but this word is also used in Vietnamese to
refer to “reform”, which creates more confusion.
30
c. Intra-institutional level
Within universities, there appears generally to be negligible discussion of the notion of a

university-based E&I ecosystem. Many university stakeholders in Vietnam appear not to have
yet realized that a university can be an E&I ecosystem. Some universities have, however,
embraced the concept, even if not explicitly. The Foreign Trade University has, for example,
taken steps to build its incubator and engage with investors. It is reported that the leaders of
other Vietnamese universities, especially those participating in IPP2, are now also becoming
more receptive of the idea of establishing a start-up mechanism.
Often neglected, though, is that entrepreneurial education involves developing individual

qualities (i.e. behaviors, skills, and attributes) to help individuals and businesses to create,
cope with, and enjoy change and innovation (Seikkula-Leino, 2008). To achieve progress,
Vietnamese universities must include entrepreneurial education in their strategic visions,
plans, policies and other institutional arrangements. At present, they appear not to be ready for this
change, which is to an extent unsurprising, given that the IPP2 project has been implemented in
only a small number of them. There are some universities that provide E&I programs or
have E&I support services, but incubators have been established within only a small
number of universities. There are, however, several technology transfer centers, mainly
located within research institutes.
2.4.2 Outcomes Achieved by University Partners with IPP2 Support
As discussed above, this evaluation was essentially concerned with factors relating to the
effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the IPP2 initiative. Whereas effectiveness
focuses on the intended outcomes of an intervention, impact is a measure of the broader
consequences of the intervention, such as its economic, social, and even political, effects.
Therefore, when seeking to identify the outcomes beyond IPP2, the impact of the initiative
is being addressed.
A related concern is sustainability, which is a measure of the effects of the IPP2

intervention over the longer term. In particular, the question is whether the benefits and
impact of IPP2 support for university E&I ecosystems are likely to continue after the IPP2
support has been withdrawn. Sustainability is in many ways a higher-level test of whether
21
or not the IPP2 project intervention has been a success.
21
These evaluation criteria are very important because far too many donor- or international non-governmental organization-
funded projects and development initiatives tend to fail cease to be operational once the implementation phase is over.
Effectiveness is a measure of the extent to which the intervention’s intended outcomes have been achieved. As such, the IPP2
program is considered effective when its outputs produce the desired outcomes. Evaluating the effectiveness of an intervention
involves measuring for change in the observed outcome, and attributing the change in the observed outcome to the intervention.
An intervention’s effectiveness is driven primarily by two considerations: its design and its implementation (or management). A
broad assessment of impact is essential in a comprehensive evaluation, however there are two central challenges to assessing
impact: boundary judgment (i.e. deciding what effects to select for consideration), and attribution (i.e. deciding what effect is due
to what). Because, on the one hand, effects can be numerous and varied, and on the other they are typically the result of complex
31
Our interviews with relevant stakeholders suggest the following tangible and intangible
outcomes that could be in part (directly or indirectly) be attributed to the IPP2 initiative.
a. An alternative pathway to develop an E&I ecosystem for Vietnam
Perhaps the most important contribution of the IPP2 to partner universities in particular
and the HE sector in general was its offer of an alternative, feasible and practical pathway
for universities to become entrepreneurial and to contribute to the development a
national E&I ecosystem. Universities in Vietnam have been looking for pathways to
develop and strengthen industry-university linkages. The traditional approach of relying
mainly on faculty scientific research and outcomes measured by scientific papers has
proven to be inadequate. The research capacity of Vietnamese universities is generally
weak, hence rendering the traditional model of university-centric commercialization of
research through patenting, licensing and spin-offs is seen not to be relevant to the
circumstances of most universities in Vietnam. Student-centric entrepreneurial education
offers an attractive alternative, given the vibrant and thriving entrepreneurial spirit of a
young generation of Vietnamese students. As illustrated below, a number of education
programs have been taking root in a number of universities.
b. Changes in the perception of leadership regarding E&I
Shifting toward and adopting E&I education often requires a holistic shift in university
policies, systems and frameworks. In this process, the university leadership has major
responsibilities for ensuring that the resources, policies and infrastructure needs
required to support students, staff members and industry partners are in place.
An especially important impact of the IPP2 initiative was the change in perceptions and
levels of awareness of relevant stakeholders that occurred generally as well as within the
IPP2 partner universities. Interviewees indicated clearly that the leadership of HEIs is
very important to developing a university-based E&I ecosystem, as well as to improving
the role of universities within a national/regional E&I ecosystem.
A remarkable outcome of the IPP2 initiative was the change in the perceptions of HE
leaders. At the beginning, university staff members participating in the IPP2 program did
22
so voluntarily, rather than in response to any official expectation that they should. This
way of proceeding was consistent with IPP2’s bottom-up approach. With its direct
activities and spillover effects on the universities, IPP2 brought about a significant and
positive change in the attitude of university leaders, making the work of IPP2 participants
and E&I activists at the universities concerned much easier and more effective. An
interactions, assessing impact is difficult in most circumstances. The assessment of impact poses a particular challenge with regard
to attribution; in most cases, it is difficult to attribute rigorously broad effects on different groups and at different levels over time
to a specific intervention or set of interventions.
22
Typically, when receiving information about the IPP2 program scholarships, participants would prepare the application and ask
for ‘leave permission’ to attend IPP2 training.
32
interviewee from NTTU reported, for example: ‘Thanks to IPP, the Center has been trusted
by the NTTU leaders and other faculties. From early 2018, NTTU will open new courses on
E&I.’
A similar story was reported from other universities, such as from FTU where changes in
the perception of leaders led to the creation of an innovation hub designed to serve not
only students and faculty but also alumni and external businesses. An interviewee from
HCMCOP reported, for example, that:
IPP2 helps changing the understanding of leaders. Before the IPP2

participation, the plan of establishing a course on E&I in the Doctorate in
Business Administration Program (DBA) was just an “idea”, but after
participating in IPP2 the leaders understood more clearly E&I and
approved the suggestion of establishing an E&I educational course in DBA.
Through the IPP2 intervention, significant changes in awareness and perception were
achieved. An interviewee from HCMOU reported, for example, that:
IPP2 also make leaders of HCMOU understand the importance of E&I. They are trying to
adopt the innovation mindset in some activities in the university. They also start to research
some industry linkages that can improve E&I in the university.
Similarly, an interviewee from HSU commented:
IPP2 helps leaders of HSU understand and form the strategy of E&I so that
they decided to establish the Innovation Center. IPP2 also help lecturers on
E&I at HSU to design a better E&I course curriculum.
c. Network of stakeholders, consultants and partners
An almost universal assessment of IPP2’s impact was that it had created a network of
consultants, activists, lecturers, coaches and even investors who were now working on
E&I ecosystem and start-up development. Examples of comments regarding these
networks included:
The most important impact of IPP2 is the creation a network of 500

brothers across the country that we could tap on . . . it is not just at the
individual level, it is even at the institutional level. This is very useful for
our work. (BK-Holding)
IPP2 also helped us build a network for exchange. (HSU)
IPP2 has created for us a network of people who share the same passion
and vision. I already know some of the people who are working on
33
innovation and start-ups, but by joining the IPP2 program, we feel we are
bonded together for a common cause. (FTU)
d. Capacity development
The capacity development impact of IPP2 could be seen in almost all of the participating
universities. At HCMCOU, for example, IPP2 was reported to have helped strengthen the
knowledge and expertise of faculty members and, interestingly, develop the
entrepreneurial spirit of the participating faculty members, as was noted by Ms. Phuong
Anh:
IPP2 helps trained members at OU systemize their knowledge on E&I. IPP2

made the entrepreneurship of trained members at OU become stronger.
Practical skills in delivering workshops and programs were also improved, as noted by
another interviewee from OU:
IPP2 also helps DBA know how to conduct workshop on E&I for students,
how to develop the educational curriculum. As the result, at the present,
DBA has its own curriculum on ‘Innovation and entrepreneurship’.
At SGU, there were some activities implemented on account of joining IPP2, such as
developing an E&I educational program, developing plans for raising awareness,
promoting E&I through the media, and so on. These activities resulted in workshops on
E&I for lecturers and students. The vast majority of the feedback provided about these
workshops was positive.
One interviewee from HSU reported that IPP2 had helped him to develop his skills to
build the strategy of E&I at his institution. He reported that he now knew how to apply a
strategy of E&I in the world and how to adopt it in the local context of Vietnam.
e. Program and curriculum
It was reported that, because of the IPP2 intervention, the participating universities had
been able to develop E&I curriculum and courses. This outcome was by design as an
intended impact of the IPP2 intervention. In interviews with representatives of
universities, the feedback in this regard was very positive, although the impact may also
have varied depending upon the level of E&I awareness at individual institutions before
they agreed to participate in the IPP2 program.
For some institutions, new courses were being implemented as a consequence of the IPP2
intervention. One interviewee from the NTTU reported, for example: ‘A new training
course on E&I will be conducted by NTTU as a result of the IPP2 program’. Others reported
similarly. An interviewee from the STU commented, for example that:
34
There are a number of activities in the STU being implemented thanks to

our participation in IPP2. We have developed E&I educational program,
and conducted activities for raising awareness, and media. We organized
a number of workshops on E&I for both lecturers and students. The
feedback showing these workshops highly relevant is over 80%.
For others, it is the adoption of materials provided by IPP2 that was most valuable. As
reported by Ms. Phuong Anh from HCMCOU: ‘[The] E&I training is now implemented by the
lecturers who were trained through the IPP2 program. We also used materials and
textbooks that IPP2 provided. Another example was HSU, which had applied knowledge
and skills learnt from IPP2 to conduct E&I contests for its students.
f. Institutional development
An unexpected but welcome development was the fact that the IPP2 program appeared to
have contributed to institutional development at a number of IPP2 partner universities,
which in turn helped develop a university-wide E&I ecosystem. As indicated above, HSU
created a new Innovation Center, as reported by one of the interviewee. NLU also now
had a Center for Technology Business Incubator. UT-VNUHCM had a Centre for
Entrepreneurship.
Those units might not have been established directly as a consequence of the IPP2
initiative, but they all benefitted from the capacity building component of IPP2. Similarly,
rapid progress was reported to have been made at FTU with the establishment of an
innovation hub and incubation space. As reported by the interviewees, the new
innovation unit was now given both operational and financially autonomous. This
achievement was regarded as an acknowledgement by the leadership provided by IPP2 at
FTU regarding the importance of E&I activities and an E&I ecosystem.
2.4.3 Challenges
Two types of challenges arose in the implementation of IPP2. The first concerned system-
wide issues having to be faced by all universities in a developing E&I ecosystem. The
second concerned challenges specifically related to the implementation of IPP2. These
challenges were not major, and their occurrence was to an extent inevitable in the
implementation of a significant initiative such as the IPP2 intervention.
a. System-wide challenges
Researchers have documented the many obstacles to commercializing university-based

research. These include inadequate working conditions and poor incentives for faculty
members, the absence of a commercialization infrastructure within or adjacent to the
university, rigid regulations, the lack of commercialization skills and of entrepreneurial
35
thinking among the faculty, and the lack of interactions with industries (see, for example,
23
Vanderford et al., 2013).
Insufficient faculty research time was referred to by the interviewees as having been a
challenge. Faculty members referred frequently to the fact that their day-today commitments
left them with little time for engagement with research, which meant that it was difficult
producing sufficient research outputs for a model of university-centric commercialization to
work. Although many universities in Vietnam have recently begun to introduce financial
incentives to encourage quality research, the incentives are not widely regarded as being
adequate.24 An aspect of the problem is that universities remain wedded to teaching as being
their major priority, and so faculty members spend long hours in classes. Most of the
participants in innovation and start-up competitions are, therefore, students rather than
faculty members. This situation creates a challenge for student-centric entrepreneurial
education as the mode of teaching because this approach to student learning would require a
high level of faculty engagement with students.
Restrictive regulations and policies were reported to be another challenge. Ten out of twelve
of the participating universities in the IPP2 initiative were public institutions. These
institutions faced two forms of restriction. First, they were required to obtain approval from
government authorities before being able to introduce a new entrepreneurial education
curriculum. Second, the financial regulation system for state-own entities made it difficult for
public higher education institutions to engage in any type of investment that involves the risk
of a financial loss. One example is the case of BK-Holdings (BKH), which was established by
Bach Khoa University (BKU) in 2008 with a VND 2 billion initial investment by BKU, a state-
own entity. These funds are regarded as state-owned capital, and so BKH was required to
preserve the capital. Engaging in E&I initiatives naturally involves risk. For public
universities, it is especially difficult to accept the risk in deciding to support the development
of start-ups.
Issues relating to intellectual property presented a further source of difficulties. Although

the legal framework for doing business in Vietnam has improved significantly, making it
25
much easier to establish enterprises, there are a number of significant weaknesses that
hinder university-based start-up entrepreneurship. The most serious of these is the lack
of concrete guidance of the ownership of inventions, technological know-how and
patents, and the equity contributions to university-based technological start-ups or spin-
off firms. At the moment, it is unclear from the current regulations who would be the
owners of technological know-know or technical solutions developed by faculty members
at a university. This is a topic that IPP2 might usefully explore in the next phase of its
operations.
23
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0072268
24
Financial incentives and bonuses are being given out and there are awards for researchers having papers published in ISI/Scopus-
indexed journals.
25
See Section 3.2.1 in Annex 2.
36
Another challenge concerned research capacity and nature of innovation at Vietnam’s

universities.26 The nature of research and innovation (for services as well as products) in
Vietnamese universities is different from what is perceived as (technological) innovation at
universities in more advanced economies, where innovation tends to be thought of as ‘radical’
and/or ‘new to the market’. In Vietnam, due to the lack of a developed research capacity,
innovation tends to be thought of as ‘new to the firm’. As explained by one interviewee,
technological innovations created by universities in Vietnam tend to be more concerned with
the ‘adaptation’ or ‘customization’ of technology, much more so than with pure technological
innovation. While this kind of innovation is quite appropriate to the context of a developing
economy, the focus for E&I ecosystems is on the development of innovation that would be
globally recognised as such. The potential for universities to scale up to this level of
innovation is currently limited. More resources and better policies are required to enable this
transition to occur. In any event, focussing too much on the commercialization of innovations
may not be advisable for many Vietnamese universities, where the greater need may be to
give more consideration to the potential of a student-centric E&I ecosystem. Asterbro et al.
(2012) suggested that universities have the possibility to influence the start-up rates of
students, recent graduates and alumni. The factors that had a positive impact were the
students themselves, the entrepreneurial orientation of the faculty, and program design,
especially in E&I courses.
Finally, Vietnam continues to experience weak linkages between universities and

industry. This situation has been discussed in detail by MOET (2014), Ly T Pham (2014),
Nguyen et al. (2017). To address this challenge, Mr Mai Thanh Phong, Vice Rector of UT-
VNUHCM, has called for a regulatory corridor for public-private partnerships (PPP) to
enable investment in start-ups generally and technical infrastructure for start-ups in
particular. In the context of adopting E&I education in universities, it is important to
ensure that, as student numbers increase, there are sufficient work-
integrated/experiential education opportunities for students. Given the weak linkages
between universities and industry, the potential success of E&I education is questionable
if there is not a deeper and more collaborative set of university engagements with
industry to meet the increasing demand of E&I education. Interviewees from FTU shared
this view and suggested that the focus should also be on alumni.
b. IPP2-related challenges
The discussion so far has focused on generic challenges that apply across universities in
Vietnam. However, there were also challenges encountered during the implementation of
26
Moving in this direction requires a new mindset from all actors in the ecosystem. The linear model of technology transfer is
inadequate to capture the complexities of an ecosystem. Knowledge from university to industry flows through social networks
(Ostergaard, 2009). That is why understanding how to design and guide the knowledge flows through ecosystems and clusters
becomes important to understand. To answer the questions of policy formulation, we will examine four major instruments
including provision of information, financial incentives (subsidy, tax, grant, etc.), public services (scholarship, training, etc.) and
regulations.
37
IPP2 that related to the nature of the initiative itself. Three of these challenges are
highlighted here.
Design of the IPP2 program. A number of interviewees commented that the ToT1 training
was simply too long, while the ToT2 training was too short. It was suggested that one size
did not fit all, and that, on account of the diverse backgrounds of the participants, some of
the curriculum materials did not meet expectations.
The bottom-up approach. The IPP2 intervention was designed to follow a bottom-up
approach, which is appropriate in circumstances where the focus is on capacity building.
However, to achieve a more enduring systemic change, the intervention might have been
designed to target the leaders of participating universities. Although, as reported above,
the university leaders were generally supportive of E&I activities, in the next phase (if
any) the IPP2 should also introduce top-down approaches focused on strengthening the
university leadership.
The selection of international consultants. While generally appreciating the IPP2’s support,
various interviewees believed that better consultants could have been selected and
mobilized. Ideally, the consultants should have a strong background with E&I start-ups,
and should have more experience of Vietnam.
2.5 Case studies

Two case studies enable the identification of lessons that can be learnt from the
experiences of the participants in the IPP2 initiative. As reported earlier, the site
institutions for the case studies were the FPT University (FPTU) and the Foreign Trade University
(FTU). The first of these institutions is a private and newly established university that is achieving a
measure of success in implementing E&I education and where there is a vibrant E&I culture. The
second site institution is a public university with a strong reputation for the delivery of business
programs and where an E&I ecosystem is emerging, despite various constraints.
Fetters et al. (2010) studied six university-based entrepreneurship ecosystems in four

countries. They identified a list of “Elements of University-Based Entrepreneurship
Ecosystems” that included: (a) senior leadership, sponsorship, strategic vision, (b)
entrepreneurship academic division, (c) entrepreneurship courses and programs, (d)
entrepreneurship research program/center, (e) entrepreneurship center, (f) networking
event, (g) entrepreneurship student club, (h) entrepreneurship competition, (i) student
venture investment fund, (j) links to angel and venture funds, (k) incubator, and (l)
entrepreneurship endowed chairs. They also noted that it was not necessary to address
all elements in the list in order to have an entrepreneurship ecosystem, but rather that it
is a critical mass of these elements that must be achieved to sustain a flow of nascent
entrepreneurs and nascent entrepreneurial ventures.
38
From this analysis, seven factors of success may be identified: (i) Senior Leadership
Vision, Engagement and Sponsorship; (ii) Strong Programmatic and Faculty Leadership;
(iii) Sustained Commitment over a Long Period of Time; (iv) Commitment of Substantial
Financial Resources; (v) Commitment to Continuing Innovation in Curriculum and
Programs; (vi) An Appropriate Organizational Infrastructure; and (vii) Commitment to
Building the Extended Enterprise and Achieving Critical Mass. These success factors are
now addressed with respect to the two selected case studies.
2.5.1 FPT University (FPTU)
a. Background information
Established in 2006 by FPT corporation, the biggest IT and Telecommunications

Corporation in Vietnam, FPTU is a relatively young university. FPTU is unique in being the
first university in Vietnam to have been established by an enterprise. With abundant
resources from the FPT Corporation and a strategy of focusing on business management
and ICT, the University has enjoyed solid annual enrolment growth. The University’s three
campuses host over 18,000 students. Recently, the University has become part of the FPT
Education Group, with a new strategy to enroll 150,000 students by 2025.
The organic linkage with the FPT Corporation helps the FPTU with avoiding the problem
of a weak university-industry linkage, which is faced by many other universities in
Vietnam. The practical orientation of the curriculum also helps to narrow the gap
27
between education and industry demand. Typically, graduates from FPTU have a very
high employment rate, reportedly at 98% within three months of graduation. They also
enjoy a wage premium in starting incomes of 27% when compared with their peers.
b. FPTU Ecosystem and the role of IPP2
Due to its special nature and uniqueness, FPTU has been able to develop a promising
infrastructure for a fully-fledged university-based E&I ecosystem. Element of the this
ecosystem include: (i) that FPTU campuses in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City are in close
28
proximity with the industry, and so FPTU students can access internships more readily;
(ii) the FPTU Technology Research Institute (FTRI) has the technological capacity to
27
FPT students are provided with the best conditions for professional development including languages, personal development,
social awareness, soft skills and on the job training (OJT) to meet the requirements to be qualified experts in a global working
environment.
28
The FPTU campus in HCM city is located within Quang Trung Software City (QTSC), which could accommodate 2,000 students
attending undergraduate programs in the Innovation Building. The FPT Hanoi campus is located next to the Fville in the heart of
Hoa Lac High Tech Park. FVille is set up as the first software village with an ideal working environment for 2000 FPT Software staff.
FVille was constructed in line with development trends of world’s leading software enterprises, such as Infosys (India), Neusoft
(China), TCS (India), Wipro (India), etc. FVille also incorporates a sports complex (including gym, swimming pool, playgrounds and
courts), a childcare center, a cinema and guest rooms for specialists. According to FPT Chairman, Truong Gia Binh, FVille, with
approximately 1,700 programmers, is expected to help raise the status and confidence of FPT Group in Vietnam as well as in the
eyes of international IT professionals.
39
29 30
develop patents and other research—based outputs that could be commercialized;
and (iii) FPTU offers entrepreneurship education in the form of Work Integrated Learning
(also known as cooperative education, work-based learning or experiential learning),
introduced in cooperation with the FPT Corporation.
FPT staff members who participated in IPP2 included one staff member who is responsible
for student affairs and industry placements for students. Since joining the IPP2 initiative, she
has also been tasked with developing a systemic understanding of start-ups and
entrepreneurship. Using knowledge from IPP2 activities, she was able to (i) advise students
who are engaged in start-up activities in their business assignments, and (ii) organize E&I
activities for students as well as other stakeholders in a more systemic way. Her role as
placement coordinator was vital in the effective management of the FPTU placement
programs. She was able to develop and maintain strong links with industry, forge other forms
of collaboration, match students with employers, and ensure that placement projects were
executed to a high standard.
2.5.2 Foreign Trade University (FTU)
a. Background information31
FTU, a public university, was established in 1960 and has been recognized as one of the
most prestigious universities in Vietnam. The University is known for its long tradition of
having a business-oriented and practical curriculum that, in combination with good
student career service and activities, helps FTU graduates to have the highest
employability rates. Another equally important factor is that, thanks to its reputation, the
University has been able to attract talented student intakes.
FTU specialized initially in foreign trade courses only, concerning everything from
contract processing, to logistics, to negotiation, and the like. More recently, it has
expanded its course offerings to include a wide range of majors and specializations in
economics, business, business administration, finance and banking, and foreign languages.
FTU hosts 25,000 students who complete a strong academic curriculum, supplemented by
participation in a wide range of extracurricular activities, from athletics to community
service.
29
The list of patents and pending patents and application could be found here. http://ftri.fpt.edu.vn/?cat=11 . FPTU has reached
out to the wider technology community though FTRI signing collaboration agreements with five local and international institutions,
including IT Research Institute (Vietnam National University Hanoi), The Vietnam Foundation, FPT Software, Asia Petro, and
Mitsubishi Research Institute (Japan).
30
Established in 2010 to focus on the research and development of science and technology applications in such areas as IT
applications, clean energy and energy conservation, biotechnology, and aerospace technology.
31
http://english.ftu.edu.vn/features/message-of-the-president/offices-and-administration/organization-structure.html and
http://english.ftu.edu.vn/features/ftu-introduction-history.html
40
b. FTU Ecosystem and the role of IPP2
Because of its long tradition of focus on business education, elements of a strong E&I
ecosystem already existed before the current wave of interest in start-ups, innovation and
entrepreneurship. Despite regulatory constraints, innovative thinking has helped the
University to develop its own E&I ecosystem with the following characteristics:
Linkages with industry. FTU is one of the few public universities in Vietnam characterized
by extensive linkages with industry. Indeed, connections and linkages with industry in
various forms have been a defining characteristic of FTU from its beginning. FTU has
regularly developed and signed collaboration agreements with businesses and
enterprises. It has signed agreements not only with Vietnamese enterprises but also with
international companies such as Unilever, Ernst and Young, Sumitomo Corporation,
Kumagai Gami Company (Japan), Vina-Debon (Korea) and Hasebe Bank. FTU also actively
organizes activities and develops platforms to foster linkages between FTU and industry
such as through trade fairs, and forums for collaboration between FTU and industry and
the FTU alumni club. University-Industry linkage is a part of FTU policy and culture of
civic engagement. This civic engagement culture emphasizes “community development
programs to serve the needs of communities; organizing outreach programs to raise
awareness and establish networks; and building partnerships with the private sector,
government and civil society organizations”.32
Research and innovation capacity. Generally speaking, research-based innovation and

entrepreneurship are not FTU’s greatest strength. FTU has, however, invested in business
research practices to develop its own strength. In particular, the Vietnam-Japan Institute
of Human Resource Management was established to develop high-quality human
resources in business management and administration and act as the bridge connecting
knowledge, technology and career skills for business and social community. The FTU
Institute of Economics and International Trade focuses on providing business training
and consulting for the business community. More recently FTU established the FTU-
Rangdong Ecommerce Center33 together with the Rangdong corporations. The University
also established its Innovation Hub and Incubation Space in order to nurture the
development of start-ups within university.
Student-led E&I related club. There are numerous student-led clubs that focus on
business-related career development, including the Ecommerce Club (Ecom FTU), the
FTU Human Resource Club (https://hrc.com.vn/), the Future Entrepreneur Club (TEC
FTU), and the Intellectual Property Club (IPC). These clubs are run by students and are
very successful. The FTU Human Resource Club, established in recent years, has been able
32
Approximately 50-70% of students participate in civic engagement activities. Within faculty, nearly 80% incorporate civic
engagement practices into their classroom instruction, while around 50% engage on community-based research.
33
http://www.ftu.edu.vn/chuyen-muc-khac/64-su-kien-tieu-bieu/1627-le-ra-mat-khanh-thanh-trung-tam-tmdt-ftu-rang-dong.html
41
to help connect over 35,000 students with over 3,000 potential employers. This club has
been sponsored by many large corporations such as Nielsen and Pepsi Cola. In contrast,
the Future Entrepreneur Club, established as early as 2002, has been connecting with
leaders of corporations. The Intellectual Property Club was the predecessor of the current
Innovation Hub and Incubation Space. FTU students have been benefiting from these
clubs and they have been very successful in numerous business-innovation-start-up
competition prizes.
Through its activities and engagement with FTU, IPP2 was considered to have contributed to
the development of an FTU-based E&I ecosystem in the following ways:
 By increasing the level of the recognition and acceptance of E&I activities, and by
assisting with the identification of E&I ecosystem development as a priority area
for the University;
 By facilitating the establishment of an Innovation and Incubation Space within FTU
for the purposes of generating activities geared towards the development of a
university-based ecosystem;
 By facilitating the development of a strategic cooperation between FTU and
Vietnam Silicon Valley for the purposes of promoting further start-ups and
entrepreneurship at FTU. Through this partnership, FTU will be able to help
address the inherent shortcomings in the lack of venture capital funding for start-
ups. Typically, even if FTU students (and faculty) win certain prizes at E&I or start-
up competitions for their business ideas and plans, they will not proceed to the
implementation stage due to the lack of venture funding. The University itself, even
if it could afford to invest in seed funding, it is not allowed to do so due to the
regulatory constraints discussed above.
2.6 Lessons Learned from IPP2 in Vietnam

IPP2’s intervention has taken place in a small number of participating universities and in
just a short time, that is, between 2015-18. It would not be realistic to expect
fundamental, comprehensive and systemic changes throughout the HE sector as a direct
impact of IPP2. However, more important are the lessons learned from IPP2
implementation in the local context. There are best practices and experiences that might
be adopted for system management and institutional improvement.
2.6.1 The Importance of University Leadership’s Strategic Thinking and Vision
As noted above, a remarkable outcome of IPP2’s capacity building has been its impact in
raising awareness and achieving changes in the mindsets of university leaders. An
inherent characteristic of Vietnamese HE is its teaching orientation. This orientation
contributes to a view that training activities should be the main task of a university. The
need to invest in E&I activities is, therefore, underestimated. Vietnamese university
42
administrators often perceive expenditure on research, innovation and entrepreneurial

initiatives as merely “spending”, not as “investment”, due to the lower prospect of
financial returns from these activities. The capacity component of IPP2 included training
workshops for university leaders and policy makers in which they were exposed to
international practices. This exposure helped them to realize the potential of E&I
education and of a university-based E&I ecosystem as an alternative pathway for
university development.
At present, the research productivity of universities in Vietnam is modest, if measured by

34
the number of scientific papers. However, it should be noted that the number of Ph.D.
degree holders returning to Vietnam from studying abroad has increased significantly in
35
recent years, suggesting that the success of university-based E&I ecosystems is feasible
through the contributions of these newly-trained researchers. The missing element is the
realization and recognition of this potential by university leaders.
2.6.2 The Role of Faculty Members/ University Lecturers
IPP2 started by selecting a small number of university lecturers for training to become
E&I experts/lecturers/trainers. These people were motivated by the prospect of a new
area of expertise and were eager to learn. Though possibly not representative of faculty
staff members at large, these lecturers represented a positive element in the system and
incentives were needed to encourage them.
University lecturers are the core of a university-based E&I ecosystem, as well as of E&I
education. The quality of E&I education relies on the capacity of lecturers/faculty
members, as they will deliver most of the important tasks: curriculum designs and
development, E&I teaching and research, connecting with industries, implementing
technology transfers, providing consulting services, and so on. The expansion of E&I
education requires a large number of E&I lecturers and a strengthening of knowledge
about E&I by every faculty member. E&I education needs to be embedded in the
university curriculum, rather than being delivered as a stand-alone course/program.
2.6.3 Supporting Model: Provide Leadership but Delegate Responsibility and

Ownership
This is a lesson learned at both the national and institutional levels. It involves adopting
both a ‘top-down’ and a ‘bottom-up’ approach. To date, the E&I support service units in
the universities investigated are autonomous and self-financing to a large degree. Their
34
See more details in Annex 2.
35
There are no data available however the number of grantees in several governmental scholarship programs (322, 911 Projects),
international partnership programs (VEF, Fulbright, DAAD, Endeavors, etc.) and hundred thousands of self-financed individuals
studying abroad would support for this argument. Interviewees in our survey also provided a similar comment about the potential
of existing faculty members. An estimate is that roughly 29% of the university lecturers have studied abroad.
43
empowerment will provide motivation to the relevant organization/individuals for

creating new values. However, financial support may be needed at the beginning stage of
their establishment.36
IPP2’s support stimulates new approaches, resulting in various forms of activities in the
particular context of individual schools. Hue Industrial College, for instance, has become
an E&I lecturers’ training hub - a Start-up Centre regionally connected to businesses and
other training institutions. This is resulted from the combination between innovative
mindset of the local people and the delegation of responsibilities and ownership of IPP2.
2.6.4 Success Factors
The two showcase institutions of FPTU and FTU provide strong evidence regarding the
types of success factors that determine the success of E&I education and development.
These success factors may be identified as including: (i) the vision, engagement and
sponsorship of university leaders; (ii) strong capability at faculty levels, that is, a critical
mass of well-trained faculty members are in place, and appropriate leadership is provided
at a middle level; (iii) sustained commitment to be seen in substantial financial resources
for long term investment; (iv) adequate attention given to curriculum development; (v)
having institutional mechanisms for E&I support; and (vi) being pro-active and
productive in relationship with industries/businesses.
It should also be recognized that it is necessary to avoid turning E&I and start-ups into a
trendy movement. E&I education might involve a lot of activities being implemented
without any concrete results. There are many universities that only treat E&I and start-
ups as an alternative to the student career service. E&I activities are much more than
career services, and they deserve the eyes and ears of leaders, rather than just being
delegated to youth associations. Good models in this regard are FTU and UT-VNUHCM,
where well-designed plans are carefully executed. For the best result, E&I education and
development should be embedded in a university’s philosophy, strategic planning and
operational procedures.
2.6.5 Motivation of Participants
E&I education has been well received by the IPP2 participating universities. The need to
train more lecturers in E&I education has been well recognized. The diversity of E&I
courses/programs/initiatives implemented in the participating universities under the
support of IPP2 has also reflected the importance of university leadership, of contextual
appropriateness, of university commitment and of the availability of adequate resources.
The struggle of HEIs to deliver E&I education in an environment in which the legislative
framework regarding financial expenditures is very restrictive points also to the need for
36
See more details in Chapter 3.
44
public universities to have more resources and more autonomy in terms of their use of
their resources.
IPP2 support for participating universities was based on selecting the active, positive
elements of university systems to invest in, and counted on their strong motivation. Funds
provided were not large amounts. The supporting model of University Collaboration
Programs could be an exemplar for how universities and donors can work together to
achieve significant outcomes.
2.7 Conclusions
The initial assessment of IPP2 implementation in the HE sector presented above has
exposed challenges needing to be addressed and opportunities that higher education
institutions in Vietnam can explore in E&I development. The IPP2 intervention targeted a
relatively small area of E&I education, that is, concerning the preparation of lecturers for
the delivery of E&I courses/programs. These courses/programs were aimed at raising
awareness of E&I development and providing the knowledge needed to develop
innovators/entrepreneurs/talents with an entrepreneurial mindset for the E&I
ecosystem to grow.
In spite of various challenges, the success stories of FPTU and FTU as showcases, along
with abundant achievements of other participating institutions, have shown the
possibilities for higher education institutions in Vietnam in terms of adopting a new
model that is more relevant to the needs of socio-economic development. Policy
interventions in the national HE sector are needed. Success factors can be identified as
strong leadership, intensive collaboration with industry, and more institutional
autonomy.
An awareness of E&I sheds light on university leadership at the right time when most
HEIs are facing the pressure of change against the background of public criticisms, when
employers are becoming more demanding about the qualifications of graduates, when
public financial resources for HE are decreasing, when there is the threat to university
survival in the context of fourth technological revolution, and when there is severe
competition globally for student admissions. Rethinking the mission of the universities
and the ways in which higher education institutions can contribute to society becomes
unavoidable for university leaders everywhere. IPP2 practices and the idea of E&I
development could provide an innovative approach for reshaping university strategic
directions in this regard.
45
CHAPTER 3.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter Summary
This chapter concludes the Report. It discusses issues raised by the IPP2 initiative and
proposes recommendations for E&I education and E&I ecosystem development. The chapter
is based on lessons learned from IPP2 practices.
More institutional autonomy in required to achieving better financing and personnel

monitoring mechanisms. A recognition system is also required for university initiatives and
achievements in the area of E&I, including the creation of relevant assessment criteria to be
embedded in accreditation, rankings and performance evaluation processes. Capacity
building, faculty development and research on E&I education should be priority areas for
grants of public funds. Tax exemption for enterprises/ companies which support E&I within
HEIs will also promote partnerships between universities and industries, which is essential
to E&I ecosystem development. In teaching and learning, E&I teaching programs and
curriculum frameworks will require localization to enable them to support the development
of entrepreneurial mindsets and skills. A guidebook for university leaders and staff should be
developed to provide basic knowledge, useful strategies, and specific instructions related to
existing regulations that might hinder E&I activities. Strategic thinking and a long-term
commitment by leaders are extremely important. Cross-institutional E&I agencies such as
Innovation Hubs or Incubation Centers should be encouraged. Issues about E&I development
that need further investigation by the academic community, include the E&I landscape of
Vietnam, international experiences, and so on. International donors need to focus on the
localization of knowledge transfer, and a focus on areas where access to international
supports might have significant impacts.
3.1 Introduction
Ideally, state interventions for the promotion of E&I will encompass a broad array of policies,
mechanisms and programs and initiatives, including legislative frameworks, financial
incentives (subsidies, grants, rewards etc.), education and training, support agencies, and
information provision. This chapter discusses issues encountered during the implementation
of the IPP2 initiative, which provide a basis for proposing recommendations for policy
makers and other stakeholders. Interventions able to be authorized by the Government that
would assist with institutionalizing the achievements of IPP2 are specifically targeted for
discussion. This discussion is presented according to the stakeholder group to which it is
most relevant, beginning with policy makers at the system level.
46
3.2 To Policy Makers at the System Level

The implementation of IPP2 has revealed a serious lack of E&I education across the HE
system in Vietnam. As a consequence, universities have not played a critical role in
national E&I ecosystem development, as they should be doing. Given the limited
engagement between universities and other key stakeholders, and that support policies
are only just being developed, it can be said that the E&I ecosystem in Vietnam remains in
a state of underdevelopment.
The success of high-growth start-up firms as key drivers of economic development

requires multiple conditions identified by the combined elements in Isenberg’s (2011)
model of an E&I ecosystem, of which E&I education could well be initially the most
important element. The promotion of a spirit of entrepreneurship is a system-wide need,
requiring that E&I education within HEIs should place emphasis on innovation capacity as
the core of start-up firms. In Vietnamese universities, more effort in this direction has
been evident over recent years, but it remains the case that a teaching orientation
continues to be dominant. In short, innovation is not receiving adequate attention, giving
rise to a big gap between research and its commercialization. In this report we use the
term “E&I” in light of an awareness of the needs for innovation capacity in any
entrepreneurial initiative.
3.2.1 Strengthen University Autonomy
Institutional autonomy is prerequisite for university initiatives. Though more autonomy

has been granted to universities, several obstacles persist. E&I education is unable to
succeed under conditions where universities themselves are not able to be
entrepreneurial. An entrepreneurial university is one that is able to survive and adapt in
highly complex and uncertain environmental conditions (Clark, 2001). This kind of
adaptability depends largely upon an institution’s capacity to respond to changing
environmental circumstances, as well as upon the power a university leader has to make
decisions quickly.
To date, university autonomy in Vietnam has been limited in various ways, not only by
MOET controls but also by general laws and especially by regulations set out by other line
ministries. For instance, investment in public HEIs is regulated by the Law on Public
Investment; financial operations are set by Ministry of Finance; university lecturer
performance assessment criteria are set by Ministry of Internal Affairs; and so on. These
regulations are usually rigid and outdated, giving rise to barriers to institutional
initiatives. These constraints must be identified and then removed if universities are to
function as entrepreneurial organizations.
47
3.2.2 Grant provision and financing mechanisms
As set out in Prime Ministerial Decision 844 and Project 1667, public funds are available
to support the development of an E&I ecosystem and E&I education nationwide. In this
section, we discuss in which areas, and by which means, these funds can be best used.
It is recommended that capacity building should be the first priority. Funds should be
provided for training the trainers, E&I research, and networking, and strengthening
international partnerships, using measurable objectives and outcomes. The second
priority should be the establishment of a university-based E&I ecosystem.
Public funds might be made available in various forms:
(i) Matching grants made directly to a university in the form of a block grant. The idea here
is that public financial support should be made available as seeding grants rather than
simply as a subsidy. Matching grants are important because they provide an incentive for
the institutions concerned to allocate an equal amount of money from their own self-
generated revenue for the purposes of attracting financial support from the Government.
This model is appropriate as a basis for encouraging the establishment of E&I support
service units within universities.
(ii) Performance-based grants to promote specific activities such as social events,

workshops, network establishment, and so on. These are among funding mechanisms that
IPP2 adopted when supporting HEIs during implementation the Program. It is, however,
impermanent support and appropriate only to certain kinds of activities that attract
public attention.
(iii) Scholarships provided competitively on a merit basis for capacity building and train the
trainers programs. This approach is also a financing mechanism adopted by IPP2 when
conducting ToTs. A funding scheme of this nature helped to select the most active and
qualified participants for engagement with the Program. Given the fact that the notion of
an E&I ecosystem is a new concept in Vietnam, the quality of its pioneers is important as a
means of ensuring that knowledge transfer is on the right track.
(iv) Research funding provided on a competitive basis for strengthening E&I knowledge.
Public research funds are already accessible through a variety of channels, but a specific
E&I Research Fund administered by MOST, or MOET would provide better access by the
academic community, and most likely a better use the research outputs.
A significant challenge detected through the IPP2 implementation, however, concerns the
existing public financial grants mechanisms, which require zero tolerance to the risk of
loss. This situation makes investment in any business venture by public higher education
institutions very difficult, and public-private partnerships are also discouraged. There is
also no mechanism to allow for the establishment of a University Investment Fund. New
48
legislation is required to permit universities to move forward in terms of being able to

take calculated investment risks.
3.2.3 Recognition for Entrepreneurial Universities
The current system does not provide any form of recognition for university initiatives to
move forward in terms of connecting with industry and in becoming more
entrepreneurial. Universities need incentives to engage in entrepreneurial activities,
whether in the form of ranking, accreditation, categorization/classification, or additional
funding based on performance. Though rankings should not be a criterion for resource
37
allocation for HEIs, in a more market-oriented environment, a high rank is desirable in
terms of its reputational advantages and subsequent marketing success. Policy makers
can take advantage of this incentive to achieve specific objectives.
There is currently no official university rankings system for HEIs that covers most of the
institutions in Vietnam. An initiative worthy of note is the ranking of 49 universities to be
conducted in 2017 by a group of academics. As set out in Higher Education Law, Vietnam’s
Government encourages ranking as a mechanism for promoting transparency and
accountability across the HE sector. In any future university rankings system for higher
education institutions in Vietnam, explicit consideration should be given to the
importance of institutional contributions made to the establishment of an E&I ecosystem.
Relevant criteria might include: the intensiveness of university-industry collaboration in
terms of the number of contracts/connections with industries; the number of
entrepreneurs among university alumni; the number of patents and technology solutions
attained; the value of revenue obtained from consulting with industry and from the
commercialization of research; the percentage of income derived from non-public
sources; the extent of participation of industry in university governance, curriculum
development and teaching; the number of E&I programs/activities, and the number of
collaborative research projects; the number of co-supervised student projects; the
existence of institutionalized agencies for E&I education; and the extent of the support
provided for innovation, such as through the establishment of innovation incubation
centers. These criteria might also be applied to assessments on university performance,
whether for purposes of accreditation or for resource allocation.
Changes in assessment indicators above will also reduce the pressure on HEIs of chasing
publications, which are currently the only generally accepted indicator of institutional
excellence. Universities have traditionally been attributed prestige on the basis of
research outputs. Not unexpectedly, therefore, Vietnam’s universities have sought to
position themselves as “research universities” at any cost. The practice of using some
productive researchers to add to the reputation of a university, paying the researchers
concerned large sums of money, is potentially dishonest, contributes little to society and
37
See more at http://www.encuentro-rankings.unam.mx/Documentos/Final-declaration-english.pdf
49
38
provides an environment rich in possibilities for fraudulent behavior. The contributions
made by HEIs to E&I ecosystem development should be measured and become an
additional indicator for the quality of university performance, making HEI initiatives
toward E&I development more rewarding.
3.2.4 E&I Education: Curriculum Development

At present, within IPP2 participating universities, E&I courses are designed as an optional
course or a short-term training program. These formats are flexible, but lack quality control.
For an E&I course to become a recognized degree program, approval by MOET is required, as
does an investment in the learning support resources required.
International experience, together with the outcomes of IPP2 activities in terms of raising
awareness of E&I and strengthening E&I capacity, suggest that E&I education should be
embedded in HE training. The purposes of E&I education should be seen in the broader sense
of innovation and should be focused on the development of an entrepreneurial mindset
among students. To make this purpose possible, it is recommended that:
E&I basic knowledge/skills should be required to form part of the learning outcomes of HE
degrees. Given the importance of an E&I mindset and capacity in most careers, it is suggested
that E&I should be included among the required learning outcomes for university graduates.
This requirement would not mean that every university should have E&I courses or
specialized programs, but every curriculum development in every program should have an
integrated E&I component in the expected learning outcomes.
E&I curriculum should be standardized. E&I education could be taken in various forms
depending upon the characteristics and specific needs of each institution, and might include
an elective/required course, a short-term training program for entrepreneurs/ start-ups/
coaches/ mentors, or a degree program for university lecturers/researchers. Which types of
programs to deliver should be decided at an institutional level, consistent with the
institution’s strategy. However, the required learning outcomes, curriculum requirements,
profession profile of entrepreneurs, and teaching/learning approaches should be developed
with support from the Government. A task force comprised of experts of the MOET and MOST
should work on this matter, using ToT inputs as references.
Feedback from beneficiaries of ToT programs should be analyzed to provide input for
curriculum design, paying special attention to the adaption of the contents for context
appropriateness, given cultural influences and characteristics of the socio-economic
development of Vietnam. A core curriculum would be a valuable resource but the extent to
which it is capable of being adapted to meet local needs should be carefully considered. There
is no “one size fit all” curriculum for every university or program, and so standardization and
38
See also: “The abuse of research evaluation”.
http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20140204141307557
50
localization need to go hand in hand for the purposes of strengthening E&I educational
effectiveness.
3.2.5 Faculty Development

For the long-term sustainability of E&I education, a focus on capacity building is needed. First
priority should be given to training university teachers and researchers. When E&I capacity is
embedded in the HE curriculum, there will be great pressure on qualified teacher supply. This
matter will require a strong commitment by ministerial/university leadership, as well as
substantial resources.
E&I as undergraduate and postgraduate degree programs should be in place for preparing
core teaching and research staff who will be expected to deliver E&I courses/programs in
HEIs. The IPP2 approach of selecting participants for ToTs should be adopted here, with
scholarships provided competitively and on merit to ensure the most active and motivated
learners will become the core personnel for E&I education development.
However, a critical mass of E&I lecturers also needed for integration E&I as an element of
other undergraduate programs. ToT replication is an initiative that should be supported by
state grants, as discussed in the sections below regarding funding provision.
International partnerships in faculty development should be emphasized. IPP2 is an initiative

to meet the urgent need for E&I lecturers when E&I education begins. In the long run,
Vietnam needs to have established scholars/experts/ researchers whose expertise includes
the latest global development about E&I ecosystems. Vietnam must invest in international
collaboration to build up such high-profile workforce, as these personnel will have leading
roles in faculty development.
3.2.6 Promoting Research on E&I Education and E&I Ecosystem Development

E&I education needs to develop an E&I research basis. As pointed out in Chapter 2, the
concepts of E&I are new in Vietnam, and understandings of E&I are even different from
original perceptions in international literature.
E&I curriculum development, E&I expertise and teaching methodologies, cultural factor
influences, and so on, are among several issues needing to be studied. The Isenberg (2011)
model of an E&I ecosystem suggests the importance of local context – the local legal
environment, market and human resource conditions need to be understood through
scientific research. Knowledge of how these factors operate and are related to one another in
a local context is fundamental for E&I education and E&I ecosystem development. These were
unanswered questions during implementation of the IPP2.
A typical challenge of E&I development is a poor quality of relationship between universities

and industries. There is a need for more action research on this matter, as well as for taking
51
more action in using this research, for instance, by studying success stories and by sharing
experiences among peers.39
State grants and special mechanisms for access should be in place for the promotion of this
type of research. As suggested by the experiences of IPP2 participating universities, a
guidebook can be the first step to equip university administration and staff members with
basic knowledge and information needed for planning and implementing E&I initiatives.
3.2.7 University-Based E&I Ecosystem Development

E&I education should not be merely lecturing, but rather experiential training, ideally work-
integrated and under guidance by a professional coach/mentor. In that sense, a university-
based E&I ecosystem (consisting of service units, S&T enterprises/firms attached to the
university, start-up firms, university venture capitals, the institutional strategies and policies,
the linkages between university, investors, industries and government)40 will have a big
impact by establishing E&I environment for E&I education within universities.
IPP2 interventions have not included direct supports for participating universities, either for
establishing or operating these interventions, except where funding was provided for some
activities delivered by them. However, international experience provides evidence of the
importance of university-based ecosystem in E&I development,41 and our investigation
reflects a question to be addressed that is funding mechanisms for those units to go vibrant.
The problem for E&I supporting units is their sustainability. Their operational costs are
based on certain grants or projects. Due to operating within a project, they have particular
agendas and sufficient funds for their activities, which mostly are training, coaching,
mentoring, and consulting. They also run social events promoting E&I. These might
include contests, festivals, competitions for the best entrepreneurship ideas, and so on.
When those projects end, and they were not able to generate additional revenues, their
39
One example is the success innovation supported and ordered by a company: https://tuoitre.vn/may-ban-pho-tu-dong-dau-tien-
cua-viet-nam-1285826.htm
40
E&I services within HEIs units can be classified into two major categories: (1) E&I supporting units: These include incubation
centers, innovation hubs, entrepreneur centers/clubs, TTOs, TLOs, etc. operating as an independent entity or attached to
universities. Those entities perform two major functions: (i) E&I education and support; (ii) engaging university research with
government agencies, international donors, industries, investors, and venture capital funds. (2) A venture business operating as
S&T enterprises or start-up firms attached to or related to university: Those entities operate as a business using capital, resources,
personnel, and connections of the university for research commercialization and making profits. They generate extra income for
university staff/faculty members/students, supplementing resources for the university, and providing opportunities for connecting
between university and industry. Per our investigation, all of units above are self-financed in certain extents. The financing model
includes support by a project funded by local government, and/or international donors, and self-generated revenues. Most of
them are provided initial infrastructure/office facilities by the institutions. Many of them are paid for by means of a basic salary.
The extent to which those units are self-supported is varied. E&I supporting units might have operation costs provided annually or
by case, and usually quite modest. An example of this type is the Centre for Entrepreneurship Support of the NTTU. Some entities
in this category have additional financial supplemented by their business, which generate revenues. Examples are Innovation Hub
of the FTU, BK-Holdings of the BKU, ITP of the VNU-HCM, etc. Business models include providing IT infrastructures, renting of co-
working space, and research, consulting, training services. The second category, business ventures attached to a university,
operates like a business and are mostly self-sufficient, even being able to bring income to the university.
41
See the case of Finland, Singapore and Japan, Annex 1.
52
activities will become challenged. It is reported that revenues from technology transfer
services provision other than training is limited at the present.
Given the fact that these units play a vital role in providing a platform for the
implementation of E&I initiatives for faculty members and students, an initial investment
should be provided, as should support for project-based activities, and this support
should be seen as training expenditure. In the long run, public private partnerships
(PPPs) can be considered as a possible financing model for these units.
Another recommendation is to combine units that have a high possibility in generating

revenue with supporting units for which the major function is the provision of E&I
education. This is the model adopted by the VNU-HCM Information Technology Park
(ITP), which also included an Innovation and Entrepreneurship Centre (IEC).
Leadership provision, including the empowerment of authorities to delegate, is also

needed. Tuition fees for most training formats should be applied to ensure sustainability
when the E&I course/programs are seen to be highly helpful to learners. In the long term,
such E&I supporting units within universities, must connect with businesses and
investors for sustainable development.
3.2.8 Issuance of a Guidebook for Universities
Given the reflections of IPP2 participating university leaders that most of them want to
promote E&I education and E&I development within their institutions but they are
confused about what to do and about where to obtain resources and capable personnel,
we recommend that a Guidebook for University in Developing E&I should be prepared as
a form of support.
The Guidebook should at least address the following topics:
Overview on the Entrepreneurial University: Basic concepts, success factors, typical

activities, score card for benchmarking, and so on.
Funding resources for E&I education and development: Specific guidance should be
provided about sources of revenue to be used for E&I activities, including investment into
university’ business ventures/S&T enterprises, etc. This section would need to refer to
related legislative documents, which enable university to use resources. For instance, the
HE Law of 2012 which requires private universities to spend 25% of the annual balance
for investment in development activities (infrastructure improvement, faculty
development, student services, or charity/community services). As for public universities,
guidance should be provided about how they might establish an Innovation Fund, or
invest in public private-partnership partnerships. They might also be advised about how
they may use research funds for innovation or other entrepreneurial investments.
Curriculum development: Details should be provided about E&I curriculum frameworks

for various formats (required/ optional courses/ degree programs/ short-term training),
53
student learning outcome requirements, lecturers’ standards, quality assurance

processes, etc.
Ownership of the IP when research results are commercialized: There should be an

explanation of universities should become involved in commercialization, and which
addresses associate challenges relating to mechanisms for the division of benefits.
Public private partnership: There is a need to address the question of ownership of the
venture businesses when these involve state/public funding, self-funding and external
funding from private sector.
Supporting material: Providing a list of selected references, which can be sources of

experiences and inspiration.
3.2.9 Stimulating the Partnership between University and Industry
The partnership between university and industry is key for E&I education and
development. Tax exemptions should be in place to give incentives for industry/business
expenses for supporting E&I education and development in HEIs.
3.3 To University Leaders

Findings presented in Chapter 2 identify one of the most important success factors in E&I
development within HEIs to be the university leadership. The IPP2 practices and some
success stories in E&I development reveal the importance of this source of leadership. A
strong commitment by the university leadership is a prerequisite of success in E&I
development within HEIs.
E&I education can be taken a various forms. Which type of course/programs to be

delivered should be a decision at the institutional level, so that it can be consistent with
university strategies. Similarly, the financing model for E&I supporting units is also
depending on particular context, resources available and purposes of the schools.
Individual schools need to set their specific goals over E&I education depending on their
mission, resources and commitment to E&I development.
In this section we discuss on some common issues that are identified during our surveys,
which might hinder the development of E&I education and university-based E&I
ecosystem development.
3.3.1 IP and Ownership Issues to the Venture Business Operating as S&T Enterprises
or Start Up Firms Attached to or Related to University
As noted in Chapter 2, high growth start-ups/businesses are based on commercialization

of the advance technology and innovation. At present, on the one hand, the innovation
capacity of faculty staff remains limited. On the other hand, the capacity of TTOs, and
54
TLOs within universities is also limited due to the lack of professional personnel. Most
staff members are co-functional because they are taking other major responsibilities.
There are two problems concerning the issue of ownership issue: first, the origin of
technology and innovation, and second, who owns the IP when the research has been
undertaken place in the university using institutional/state/private funds.
The experiences of the Saigon Innovation Hub (SIHUB) in addressing this matter might be
helpful. SIHUB reported that they rendered this task to a third party with expertise in the
analysis the contributions of each partner and each element (resources, academics labor,
associate contributions, etc.) and in determining the proportion of ownership.
It is recommended that this experience can be applied more widely. International

experience in this matter should also be considered. Aalto University of Finland has a
functional unit, which connects university faculty members with industries for the
purposes of creating new products, as well as providing technical or business solutions.
Experts then assess the possibility of commercialization of the research results, support
patenting, and suggest a division of revenue generated from knowledge transfer or the
grant of licenses. This approach remains unfamiliar in Vietnam, where faculty members
must deal with research commercialization on their own and mostly outside of their
university.
3.3.2 Establishment of E&I University Lectures/ Researchers Community and

Practitioners Network for Exchange Knowledge and Sharing Experiences
Innovation advancement nowadays concerns a wide range of diversified sectors /

stakeholders. It results in a strong need for new approaches, facilitated by partnerships
across various sectors (government, university, industry, and various forms of
institutions related to promoting E&I. More attention needs to be given to fostering
interactions and spillovers at all levels, through the promotion of networking and
clustering. Networks are also needed due to the increasing interdisciplinary of technical
advancement (Mok, 2012).
Networking is perceived as one of the major outcomes of IPP2 that was highly appreciated by
the participating HEIs. Though establishing and maintaining relevant professional
communities may go beyond the scope of responsibilities of individual universities, university
leaders need to actively stimulate those connections.
E&I lecturers/researchers also need an academic environment that supports the exchange
ideas and knowledge, allowing them to learn from one another. This need is especially great
in the context of Vietnam when E&I education has been newly adopted by HEIs.
Even more important is the connection between university lecturers/researchers and the
business community, the entrepreneurs, the investors, the national/local government
officers, and other practitioners in E&I ecosystem, both at home and abroad. Such an
55
engagement triggers collaboration opportunity and enables universities to move forward in

Tripple Helix directions.
University leaders should be providing a platform for the development of these networks,
as well as the conditions to make these networks productive.
3.3.3 Strengthening University Partnerships with Industries/Business
The two showcase institutions of FPTU and FTU indicated clearly that a strong connection
with industries/business is a success factor for E&I development within HEIs. It is
recommended that linkages between universities and business community should be
encouraged. Relevant initiatives here could include:
(i) Increasing business community participation in E&I education, for example through
the use of guest speakers from industry. These guest speakers could be business leaders,
entrepreneurs, innovators, scientists and alumni who are able to inspire people and share
practical knowledge/experience. Guest speakers should include both local/national and
international practitioners with a view to providing students with a wide range of
perspectives and experiences.
(ii) Enabling co-supervision of graduate theses by faculty members and practitioners

from the business world.
(iii) Encouraging faculty members to work closely with industries by various means,
including: participation in industry governing bodies, providing consultancy services, and
collaboration in research. For universities in Vietnam to meet ‘third mission’ expectations,
faculty members need to be actively connected with local firms and the community, and
linked to the external environment by having a strong presence in the business world.
Institutional policies that provide incentives to these activities should be in place, such as
performance assessment/recognition rewards, a scheme for converting teaching hours,
and so on.
(iv) Promoting an E&I culture within universities by rewarding relevant initiatives in

teaching and learning, and by emphasizing the importance of mentoring students and of
encouraging faculty members to become more involved with the business world.
University leaders can also seek out opportunities for public-private partnerships,
especially regarding the establishment of business ventures attached universities and E&I
supporting units.
3.3.4 Cross-institutional Innovation Hubs/ Incubation Centre
University-based start-ups should ideally be cross-institutional endeavors. Innovation

hubs can take full advantage of each institution’s strengths in contributing to an overall
outcome. FTU is a showcase in this regard, having established its own successful
Innovation Hub. Ideally, though, innovation hubs in Vietnam should be cross-institutional
56
and inter-disciplinary, especially as mono-disciplinary higher education institutions

remain relatively common in Vietnam.
3.4 To the Academics Community for Further Research

The following recommendations are based on insights obtained from discussions with
government officers and university leaders during the course of the investigation.
3.4.1 The E&I Landscape of Vietnam’s HE System
For system management in E&I education and development, data must be collected and
analyzed to provide a basis for the comprehensive evaluation of the performance of
universities concerning the development of E&I services. The evaluative data must be
linked to measurable performance criteria.
3.4.2 International Experiences in E&I Education and Development
Because the notion of E&I education and development is new for Vietnamese universities,
exploring experiences and best practices in E&I education and development around the
world would be most helpful for institutional initiatives. The academic community in
Vietnam should be supported to conduct research on those practices, not only concerning
their own initiatives and achievements, but also concerning the philosophical foundations
of E&I education and its relevance to the state of higher education in Vietnam.
3.4.3 Institutional Research Concerning Particular Types of University

Research should explore the potentials and the opportunities for E&I education and
development at specific kinds of universities in Vietnam, such as the University of
Technology, the University of Industry, Nong Lam University, and so on. These are
universities with a high level of potential for developing university-based E&I ecosystems
because of the extent to which they have an intensive concentration of talent in
technology development. E&I development in research institutes is also worthy of close
investigation.
3.4.4 Supporting Policies for Industry and University Collaborations
Cooperation between industries/businesses and universities is at the core of the notion of

an E&I ecosystem, and especially E&I education. The topic attracts general interest in
Vietnam, but actual empirical data related to the factors that underpin successful
42
cooperative ventures is relatively scarce. More research is needed for the purposes of
identifying challenges and mechanisms or platforms for strengthening these linkages.
42
See Annex 2 for more details.
57
3.5 To International Donors

The IPP2 initiative has taken place in light of Vietnam’s recent success in experiencing an
increase in the number of start-ups. The initiative may be seen as representing a further
step towards the development of a sustainable E&I ecosystem in Vietnam. E&I education
is a direct investment E&I capacity improvement as well as long- term investment in the
capacity and capabilities for future generations in Vietnam.
IPP2 has targeted an improvement in E&I capacity, and not in scientific research capacity.
This focus does not mean that scientific research is not important, but it is recognized that
there are other initiatives in Vietnam that are much more focused on developing a
national capacity in the area of scientific research.
E&I education is going to develop best within the context of an E&I ecosystem, and vice
versa. An implication here is that an E&I ecosystem will develop most effectively when
E&I education is at the core. In other words, supporting E&I education is a fundamental
step for emergence of an E&I ecosystem. IPP2 has elected to support both start-ups firms
and HEIs. The outcomes of IPP2 within HEIs in terms of evidence of changing the mindset
to E&I education have shown IPP2’s approaches to be appropriate in the context of
Vietnam.
The inclusion of public and private HEIs in selecting participating universities is one of
the highlights of the IPP2 initiative in Vietnam. The private sector will play a greater role
43
in future landscape of higher education in Vietnam. Private HEIs are much more
autonomous than public HEIs, and are generally flexible in adopting new ideas for
institutional transform. For the moment, though, public HEIs remain the major HE
providers in Vietnam.
The participating universities included HEIs offering a wide range of disciplines:

business/economic/finance, science and technology, and so on. It is expected that
engaging universities offering programs in technology will offer most potential in terms of
E&I education and development because the pursuit of advances in technology is often
the basis for the establishment of high-growth start-ups. The success of technology
firms/start-ups attached to universities participating in the IPP2 initiative is, however,
unclear. This situation needs further investigation as a basis for understanding the
implications.
The sandbox of IPP2 within participating universities, and the extended mechanism of the
University Collaboration Programs, helped not only to test the demands of E&I education
and of training-the-trainers programs, but also to identify the needs for localization of the
curriculum content. Therefore, one important recommendation to donors concerns the
43
See Annex 2 for more details.
58
need to place emphasis upon considerations relating to local expertise and the availability
of national consultants.
There are certain areas where international donors could assist Vietnam most effectively.
These include creating a platform for university and industry/business partnerships,
developing a network for entrepreneurs domestically and abroad, providing specializes
training for TTO and TLO personnel, and contributing to faculty development, especially
for high-profile scholars and researchers. Facilitating exchange and dialogue about
innovation between international and local scholars and practitioners will also provide
greater access to international expertise.
3.6 Conclusions
Over the past three decades, Vietnam has made higher education a priority and has
invested heavily in the sector, financially as well as in terms of policy development.
Having regard to the importance of research, Vietnamese policy makers have set
numerous regulations, policies and programs to promote S&T and to enable research
activity in Vietnamese universities.
As ‘latecomers’ to innovation, many Asia have had to rely heavily upon public policies to
drive innovation promotion (Mok, 2016). In Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Japan,
governments have been active in steering the development of research and development,
as well as in promoting innovation, especially during the inception phase.
In Vietnam, policy developments to date have focused mainly on S&T, rather than E&I.
There has, therefore, been little attention given to technology development, the creation
of new products, the development of markets for new products, and entrepreneurial
education. Elsewhere in the world, E&I development has been seen to a far greater extent
to be critical for socio-economic development. In Vietnam, then, the disconnection
between what universities do and what society needs remains large.
The international partnership with Finland through IPP2 has provided a valuable
opportunity for Vietnam to generate ideas for E&I ecosystem development. It has allowed
E&I education programs for university lecturers to be tested; it has raised awareness of
the notion of E&I among university leaders; and it has contributed to the establishment of
networks with a focus on the transferal of E&I knowledge to lecturers engaged in
delivering E&I courses/programs.
Through the ToTs, the University Collaborations Program, and Innovation Accelerator
Training Program (IAP), IPP2 has attracted the attention of university leaders concerning
the importance of the ‘third mission’ of universities. Lecturers participating IPP2 activities
have been equipped with knowledge, skills, and teaching methodologies for delivering
E&I courses/programs. Middle administrators/managers, including heads of supporting
59
units and of centers for entrepreneurship, have realized new opportunities for adding
value to university services.
The final beneficiaries in E&I education processes are always the students, and it is
expected that students will be inspired by and equipped with E&I knowledge/skills
required to enable them to be entrepreneurial. To date, however, it has not been possible
to assess the impact of E&I developments on students, mainly because E&I education is
relatively new in Vietnam.
The curriculum designs and teaching methodologies for E&I courses/programs that IPP2
has made available have proven to be capable of being contextualized to meet local
conditions and needs. This insight is important because Project 1665 requests E&I
education to be take place in all universities and colleges in Vietnam. The initial IPP2
materials will provide invaluable input for further development in research and teaching
E&I courses or programs across the HE system in Vietnam.
The shortcomings of those ToTs programs remain in the limitation of localization of the
curriculum and course contents. Having adaptive and appropriate programs is extremely
important when developing them based on international experiences merely is
challenged.
E&I education should also not rely solely on taught courses, even where the course
contents are ideal. The quality of E&I education requires not only lecturing but also
immersion in an engaging learning environment that involves academics/ universities
and practitioners/ industries. University-based E&I systems should include: S&T
enterprises attached to universities; co-working spaces; support units (Start-ups Centre,
Incubation or the like); and social events (for example, Techfests, competitions for
entrepreneurship ideas, and so on) are held; and linkages with industries and investors.
The success of E&I units will be impacted upon by the level of autonomy they are able to
exercise, as well as by the level of budget available to them and the E&I capacities of
university personnel. Continuing capacity building endeavors with international
partnerships and better contextualization and localization are necessary. Appropriate
mechanisms in the form of seed grants provided by the State in the form of matching
grants are needed for the initial stages. Engaging with industries for adaption programs
and attracting more resources should be prioritized.
A set of criteria for measuring and recognizing the attributes of entrepreneurial

universities should be included in Vietnam’s university rankings system, when developed,
and in other forms of assessment or accreditation. The criteria should be designed to
measure engagement with industries, E&I course/program initiatives and their outcomes,
and the extent of institutionalization of E&I education commitments.
Finally, attention should be given to avoid promoting E&I simply as a “movement”.

Establishing an E&I culture within HEIs will require effort to minimize cultural resistance
based on E&I education being seen to be ‘different’, or to entail risk and the possibility of
60
failure. A national campaign might support the nurturing of the E&I spirit, but might also
be risky if it if it creates a movement that cannot point to concrete results.
We recommend that Government funding should be provided initially in the form of seed
grants to support E&I initiatives. To this end, the intrinsic motivation of learners and
institutions is important. Appropriate measurements are also important to ensure the
effectiveness of using public funds.
In general, the regulatory framework for HEIs should grant a greater level of autonomy to
universities, in balance with transparency requirements. At an institutional level, strong
leadership and long-term commitment are emphasized, along with recommendations to
develop partnerships with industries in various forms. In addition, governance model
improvement, which emphasizes the empowerment and delegation to the department
level, as well as measurement of staff performance, is recommended.
In the overall picture, it should be emphasized that the success E&I education as well as
the success of entrepreneurial start-ups as high growth enterprises must engage with
innovation, which creates new values. On the other hand, the easy of doing business
environment also have great impacts to E&I ecosystem development of a country. In this
regard, lessons learned from international practices provide valuable suggestions. We
recommend that the importance of policy analysis should be stressed, especially the
systemic links between innovation policy intervention to longer term effects over related-
stakeholders’ behaviors, and to job creation, economic growth, and to addressing societal
challenges.
Innovation policy interventions often distinguish between supply-side instruments

(influencing innovation generation) and demand-side instruments (influencing those
requesting, buying or applying innovations) (Edler et al., 2013). Recommendations in this
report have mostly been supply-side oriented, but the importance of improving
frameworks relating to demand-side considerations must not be overlooked. This task
would, however, go beyond the scope of this report.
There is a long way to go to transform HEIs in such a way as to make them more
entrepreneurially focused. There are many challenges and obstacles to be addressed and
overcome. Ultimately, however, the rewards justify the effort. Universities will be more
relevant to society, and will play a more important role in national socio-economic
development if they engage fully with E&I ecosystem development.
61
REFERENCES
Asterbro, T. B., Bazzazian, N., & Braguinsky, S. (2011). Startups by recent university
graduates versus their faculty–implications for university entrepreneurship policy.
Beck, T. (2006). Evaluating humanitarian action using the OECD-DAC criteria: An

ALNAP guide for humanitarian agencies. London, UK: Overseas Development
Institute.
Bodewig, C., & Badiani-Magnusson, R. (2014). Skilling up Vietnam: Preparing the

workforce for a modern market economy. World Bank Publications.
Carvalho, L. M. C., Costa, T., & Dominguinhos, P. (2010). Creating an

entrepreneurship ecosystem in higher education. I-TECH Education and Publishing.
Chirot, L., & Wilkinson, B. (2010). The intangibles of excellence: governance and the
quest to build a Vietnamese apex research university. Ho Chi Minh City: New School,
the Harvard Kennedy School, and the Fulbright Economics Teaching Program (FETP).
Clark, B. (2001). The entrepreneurial university: New foundations for collegiality,

autonomy, and achievement. Higher Education Management, 13(2).
Clarysse, B., Tartari, V., & Salter, A. (2011). The impact of entrepreneurial capacity,
experience and organizational support on academic entrepreneurship. Research
Policy, 40(8), 1084-1093.
Drucker, P. F. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship practices and principles.

Amacon.
Edler, J., Cunningham, P., Gök, A., & Shapira, P. (2013). Impacts of innovation policy:
Synthesis and conclusion. Compendium of Evidence on the Effectiveness of Innovation
Policy Intervention Project) Manchester.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National
Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government
relations. Research policy, 29(2), 109-123.
Fetters, M., Greene, P. G., & Rice, M. P. (Eds.). (2010). The development of university-
based entrepreneurship ecosystems: Global practices. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Fischer MM (2006) Innovation, networks and knowledge spillovers. Springer, New

York
Freeman LC (1978) Centrality in social networks. Conceptual clarification. Social

Networks 1, pp 215–239 German Federal Government (2013) Coalition agreement
62
between CDU, SPD 2013 - we make the future of Germany.
Fuerlinger G., Ulrich Fandl and Thomas Funke (2015) “The role of the state in the
entrepreneurship ecosystem: insights from Germany.” Triple Helix vol.2(3).
Gibb Allan (2017) Exploring the synergistic potential in entrepreneurial university

development: towards the building of a strategic framework, Annals of Innovation &
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 3(1) https://doi.org/10.3402/aie.v3i0.17211
Henry, C., Hill, F., & Leitch, C. (2005). Entrepreneurship education and training: can
entrepreneurship be taught? Part I. Education+ Training, 47(2), 98-111.
Graham, G. (2002). Universities: The recovery of an idea. Imprint Academic.
Hsu, D. H. (2007). Experienced entrepreneurial founders, organizational capital, and

venture capital funding. Research Policy, 36(5), 722-741.
Hien, P. D. (2010). A comparative study of research capabilities of East Asian

countries and implications for Vietnam. Higher Education, 60(6), 615-625.
Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard business

review, 88(6), 40-50.
Isenberg, Daniel (2011) “The Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Strategy as a New

Paradigm for Economic Policy: Principles for Cultivating Entrepreneurship” The
Babson Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Project.
Lundvall BA (1988) Innovation as an interactive process. From user-producer

interaction to the National System of Innovation
Ly T Pham (2014): Chapter 7, p140-163. Olsson, Å., & Meek, L. (2013). Effectiveness
of research and innovation management at policy and institutional levels in
Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.
Maskell, D., & Robinson, I. (2012). The new idea of a university. Andrews UK Limited.
MOET (2014). University industries collaboration from enterprises perspectives.

Working report under POHE project. (In Vietnamese)
MOET (2017). Higher Education Statistic (accessed May 2018)
Mok, K. H. (2012). The quest for innovation and entrepreneurship: The changing
role of university in East Asia. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 10(3), 317-335.
Mok, K. H. (2016). Withering the developmental state for compressed development?

Adaptive state entrepreneurship and social policy expansion in China. Beyond the
Developmental State: Neoliberalism, New Public Management and Contemporary
Development in Asia, Carroll T, Jarvis D (eds). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
63
Morison, E. (2013) Universities as Anchors for Regional Innovation Ecosystems,

access at http://www.edmorrison.com/universities-as-anchors-for-regional-
innovation-ecosystems/ on Dec 27, 2017.
Nguyen Ngoc Anh et al (2017). The role of universities in Vietnam’s national

innovation system. Chapter 14. Krishna, V. V. (Ed.). (2017). Universities in the
National Innovation Systems: Experiences from the Asia-Pacific. Taylor & Francis.
Nguyen, T. V., & Pham, L. T. (2011). Scientific output and its relationship to
knowledge economy: an analysis of ASEAN countries. Scientometrics, 89(1), 107-
117.
Nguyen, T.V., Ho-Le, T.P. & Le, U.V. Scientometrics (2017) 110: 1035.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2201-1
Nguyen, Thu-Thuy T. (2016) “The Challenge of Science, Technology and Innovation

in Vietnamese Higher Education”. LH Martin Institute for Higher Education
Leadership and Management.
Phạm Thị Huyền et al., 2017, p. 25. Non- public universities in Vietnam. Report to
MOET.
Salem, M. I. (2014). The role of business incubators in the economic development of

Saudi Arabia. The International Business & Economics Research Journal
(Online), 13(4), 853.
Schwab, K., & Sala-i-Martin, X. (2015). World Economic Forum’s Global

Competitiveness Report, 2014-2015.
Shane, S. A. (2004). Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth

creation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Schaeffer, V., & Matt, M. (2016). Development of academic entrepreneurship in a

non-mature context: the role of the university as a hub-
organisation. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 28(9-10), 724-745.
Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial

ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1), 49-72.
Tran Nam Binh et al, 2012. Public expenditure and allocation for higher education
(In Vietnamese). Report under HEP2.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2012) Entrepreneurship

policy framework and implementation guidance. United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development, United Nations, New York.
UNESCO 2016. Education Financing in Viet Nam, 2009-2013.
64
http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/vietnam-nea-report.pdf
Wilson EJ (2012) “How to make a region innovative.” Strategy Business Magazine,

issue 66. Booz & Company Inc. http://www.strategy-
business.com/article/12103?gko=ee74a
World Bank, 2016. Vietnam 2035: Toward Prosperity, Creativity, Equity, And
Democracy. Washington, DC: World Bank
World Bank. 2008. Vietnam - Higher education and skills for growth (English).
Washington, DC: World Bank.
Wright, M., Siegel, D. S., & Mustar, P. (2017). An emerging ecosystem for student
start-ups. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(4), 909-922.
65
ANNEX 1.
INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCES IN SUPPORTING
UNIVERSITIES FOR E&I ECOSYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
In this section we will examine the policies for promotion of E&I related to higher education
(HE) in some selected countries to review relevant international practices and trends in
supporting higher education institutions (HEIs) to develop E&I ecosystem. The cases of
United State, United Kingdom, France, German, Japan, Singapore and Malaysia are reviewed
for this purpose. Among those, United State, United Kingdom, France and German have
constructed the image of the so called “the world” in the field of technology, innovation and
HE. Malaysia is a case in ASEAN that seems close to Vietnamese conditions. Japan and
Singapore are typical successful top-down policy making countries that Vietnam may learn.
We on one hand try to present briefly an overall picture of policies for promotion E&I in these
countries and on other hand focus on practices that Vietnam could adopt in its conditions of
politics, economy, education, finance and workforces.
A1.1 Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy-Making System and

Mechanisms for Funding Arrangements
The US is widely seen as one of the top countries in the world regarding high level of STI. This
achievement is supported by a large amount of R&D investments by the US government and
the private sector44, a unique model of innovation, talents gathered from the world and
multiple systems of making policy.45
Unlike the USA where several agencies representing academic, industries are directly
involved in science and technology (S&T) and innovation and entrepreneurship (E&I) policies
making, France has a fragmented system, where each organization is responsible for certain
fields. The French National Research Agency - ANR is an agency allocating research funds.
44
The USA spends 2.7% GDP for tertiary education, in which approximately 1.9% comes from private sector, a much higher
percentage compared with European countries.
45
The high level of E&I in the US is supported by highly talented people in the world. A quarter of Nobel laureates in the United
States are born outside the US. US-representative IT companies such as Yahoo, Sun Microsystems, eBay, Intel and Google were
founded by immigrants from Taiwan, Germany, India, France, Hungary and Russia. Academic societies, think tanks, professional /
industry associations, nonprofit organizations and labor unions and others form a science and technology community in the US.
Recommendations and reports on science and technology / innovation policies contributed by the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) http://www.nasonline.org/ and the Council on Competitiveness (COC) http://www.compete.org/ are often respected as
representing viewpoint of the academic and industrial worlds. In addition, non-profit organizations such as The American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) https://www.aaas.org/, the Brookings Institution, RAND and other think tanks
are also very active in promotion of R&D policies. The central agents of R&D in the United States are governments, universities,
companies and foundations. The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), a part of the Executive Office of the President, is
responsible for the promotion of science and technology policy. United States President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (PCAST) https://www.nitrd.gov/pcast/Index.aspx is a Presidential advisory agency consisting of 21 representatives
from academia and industries. There are several other ministries and agencies involving R&D funding allocation include The
National Science Foundation (NSF).
66
Under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of National Education, Higher Education and Research, it
allocates competitive funding to all fields. ANR allocates funds to research based on
researcher’s curiosity and mission-based research.46 High Council for Evaluation of Research
and Higher Education (HCERES)47 established in 2014 evaluates various entities working on
research, HE and innovation. Those organizations mentioned above are the key factors
making the French E&I and R&D outputs.48
In Germany49, the power of both federal and local governments is significant. German policies
of R&D and I&E have strong industrial foundation. Major fields are automobile and machine
manufacturing, electrical machinery and chemistry. There are tens of thousands of companies
with 500 or fewer employees and 25 million of the workers are working in SMEs. Such SMEs
include high-tech enterprises have been conducting R&D and I&E in many fields. R&D and
E&I activities in Germany are conducted by universities, national laboratories, research
associations and private enterprises. Max Planck Institute for Science Promotion and the
Fraunhofer Applied Research Promotion Association are those have distinctive features and
have remarkable achievements in promoting R&D and E&I. Max Planck Institute for Academic
Promotion 50 comprises of 80 laboratories conducting fundamental research in
46
The French National Research Agency – ANR
http://www.agence-nationale-recherche.fr/en/about-anr/about-the-french-national-research-agency/
47
High Council for Evaluation of Research and Higher Education (HCERES)
https://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/organisations/high-council-evaluation-research-and-higher-education-hceres
In France, there are about 30 cross – sector research institutions, for example, the National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS,
the Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA), the National Centre for Space Studies (CNES), French National
Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), the French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), The French
Institute for Research in Computer Science and Automation (INRIA) and other field-specific research institutions. The French total
R&D investment in 2013 is 47.2 billion EUR, the fifth largest R&D expenditure in the world after the United States, China, Japan and
Germany. About 45% of this 47.2 billion EUR is government expenditure and 55% is private expenditure.
48
The “Innovation Union Scoreboard 2017” (European Commission, 2017) separates the four groups of countries basing their
innovation abilities. The first group is “Innovation leader”. France is positioned as a “Strong Innovator” belonging to the second
group. According the report, relative strengths of the French innovation system are “Human resources, Attractive research
systems, and Innovation-friendly environment” and “relative weaknesses are in Linkages, Finance, and support and Innovators”.
(See The European Innovation Scoreboard http://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/innovation/facts-figures/scoreboards/) France
shares 6.7% European patent applications in 2013. This is the fourth after the US, Japan and Germany. In 2014, France has 73
national universities, about 200 Grandes Ecole and other higher education institutes. New organizations such as The French
Technology Transfer Accelerator network (SATT) and Technological Research Institutes (IRTs) provide services relating to
technology transfer and development in collaboration with companies. The Strategic Research Council, an advisory body of the
Prime Minister, is responsible for planning the national research strategy. The Ministry of National Education, Higher Education
and Research-MENESR) is the state agency responsible for science, technology and innovation. The General Investment
Commission (CGI), which was established under the Prime Minister in 2010, is an important agency that has jurisdiction over “large
investment policy” in the future.
49
Germany’s GDP is about 3.6 trillion dollars (nominal GDP, converted to PPP) in 2013 and GDP per capita is about 4.5 million
dollars, total GDP is the fourth largest economy in the world, next to the United States, China and Japan.
50
Max Planck is ranked second in the world as the citation number and ranked first or second in fields such as biology, chemistry,
materials science, physics, etc. (ISI Essential Science Indicators). In addition, the Association has produced 17 Nobel laureates.
Besides, the number of patent applications submitted from Germany is 10.11% in 2013, second highest in comparing to 29.55% in
Japan and 27.03% in the United States. (See: The Index “Share of countries in triadic patent families (priority year)” in the Main
Science and Technology Indicator, OECD).
67
interdisciplinary fields such as natural science, life science, social science, humanities as well
as new innovative research fields and applied fields. Max Planck is a huge research institution
with approximately 17,000 staff members and a budget of 2.09 billion Euros (2013).51
Fraunhofer Society for the Advancement of Applied Research mainly conducts applied research
that directly contributes to private and public utilities and benefits the whole society. It has
approximately 80 research units52. Almost two-thirds of Fraunhofer’s research revenue is
from research projects conducted under contracts and public funds with the industry and one
third is allocation funds from federal and state governments. For this reason, Fraunhofer
researchers always keep close ties with the industry. Fraunhofer’ researches are also often
served by professors of universities. This mechanism greatly contributes to industry-
university collaborations.
In the UK, the Ministry of Education only has jurisdiction over primary and secondary
education. Higher education is under the jurisdiction of the Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills (BIS),53 a government organization of scientific innovation and industry
promotion. In other words, in the UK, higher education is not simply considered as the
extension line after primary and secondary education. It is clearly positioned as a place to
lead the future of Britain basing on the combination between “business” and “innovation”
factors.54
Like other countries in developed world state funding arrangement in Finland belongs to key
agencies and mostly is competition-based. For long-term targets, the Centre of Excellence
(CoE), a state research and training network, provides funding for eight-year term so that the
projects can have greater level of risk-tolerance. Such a commitment is important for
51
Max Planck is independent from the government and conducts research basing on its own policies. The laboratories under this
Institution are also autonomous and highly independent from the Headquarter of the Institution.
52
The research units recognized by the headquarters are called the Fraunhofer Institute. About 60 Fraunhofer Institutes are
scattered in over 40 locations throughout Germany. The annual budget of Fraunhofer is about 2.01 billion Euros (2013), and the
number of staff is about 23,000.
53
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-innovation-skills
54
Many universities in the UK are located in the upper rank of world university rankings. This is an important foundation for
development of E&I ecosystem in the UK. Among those universities, Oxford University and Cambridge University are always ranked
in the UK at the first and second position. Both universities produce distinguished historic scientists such as astronomers Edmund
Halley, Edwin Hubble (Oxford University), Isaac Newton and Charles Darwin (Cambridge University). Many other well-known
universities in the UK, such as Imperial College, University College London and Edinburgh University are attracting excellent
international students from all over the world. The traditional autonomy of the university is a strong foundation of the success of
British R&D. Universities are funded by the government however high level of institutional autonomy have been widely accepted.
Academic freedom is well respected. Each university has cultivated culture of freedom, which resulted in the integration of high-
quality talent from both at home and abroad. Besides, support for research development by charity organizations is one of the
54
characteristics of UK science and technology. “Welcome Trust” and “Cancer Research UK” are British charities that are well
known for R&D in medical research. “Welcome Trust” is the UK’s largest non-governmental aid organization in the field of
biomedical research. “Cancer Research UK” has engaged in activities to promote specialized research on cancer research. It has
been using funds from companies and citizens. The research funding exceeds over300 million pounds per year. And more than 90%
of the contribution is a small donation from the general public with donations of 10GBP or less. The size of this annual fund allows
us to understand how fundraising activities by “Cancer Research UK” are effective. We also understand that the culture of
donation for science and innovation development in the UK is widely taken root in society.
68
pursuing research and innovation in long term. A remarkable feature of funding arrangement
in Finland is an agency to provide financial support for start-ups. The Finnish Funding Agency
for Technology and Innovation (TEKES – other names are National Technology Agency or
Technology Development Centre) was founded by the President Mauno Koivisto in 1983.
TEKES provides funding for start-ups, SMEs, large companies, research organizations and
public services. TEKES funding for start-ups has various kinds of funding suitable for each
steps of a start up process, such as the “Tempo Funding” for start-ups less than 5 years old; the
“R&D funding” for start-ups that have a certain development, when those company have a
plan to build new competencies and collaborate with a research units in order to accelerate
product development; the Young Innovative Company funding (YIC) for companies that
already have customers; the Into – Innovation Expertise in Support of International Growth for
companies that have basic finance for its development and its own innovation expertise to
strengthen; the Innovation Voucher program for companies that has a turnover from at least
one fiscal year.
From January 1st, 2018 the TEKES has been united with The Finnish Trade Promotion
Organization (FINPRO) to become the Business Finland,55directed by the Finnish Ministry of
Employment and the Economy. 56 FINPRO is the Finnish public organization conducting
programs such as Export Finland to help Finnish SMEs in international activities, Invest in
Finland to encourage foreign direct investment in Finland and Visit Finland to promote tourist
travel to Finland.57 The united situation between TEKES (an agency for innovation) and
FINPRO (an agency for business) shows us the Finnish way of thinking about I&E mechanism:
agencies for innovation and business should be united to streamline business services, make
sure that the R&D service chain is maintained sustainably to improve the performance of E&I.
Another mechanism that helps long-term vision maintained is funding by the Finnish
Innovation Fund (SITRA), which invests to R&D and I&E in companies or universities without
an explicit profit motive. SITRA is an independent public foundation operating under the
supervision of the Finnish Parliament, founded in 1967 by the Bank of Finland. SITRA invests
approximately 30 million Euros per year.58
In sum, government of most countries recognizes the importance of E&I in strengthen their
competitiveness. The policy making processes at system level can be decentralize (designated
to local government or line ministries such as Germany, UK, France) or mostly rely on the
central government, especially in terms of strategic planning for E&I development (such as
Finland). Major actors participating in E&I policies are the government, academic
associations, foundations/charities, universities and industries. As for funding arrangement,
it can be a dual system: competitive grants or block grants depending on purposes of the
investment. Expenditure for E&I coming from private sector is significant and it can be a
suggestion for Vietnam in seeking more resources for E&I development. In all countries
55
The Business Finland https://www.businessfinland.fi/en/coming-soon/
56
The Finnish Ministry of Employment and the Economyhttps://tem.fi/en/frontpage
57
Finprohttp://www.finpro.fi/web/finpro-eng/finpro
58
SITRA - The future is a team effort https://www.sitra.fi/en/topics/facts-about-sitra/#what-is-it-about
69
mentioned above, universities play a significant role, if not to say, a driving force to the
knowledge/innovation generating and technology transfer that make the prosperity of a
nation.59
A1.2 National strategies for E&I development in higher education

Most countries created their Strategy for E&I development in which the priorities are shaped
based on SWOT analysis (a study to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
of a project). Major actors and goals are also identified for specific agendas to follow. 60
The German Federal Government announced the “High-Tech Strategy”, a comprehensive

strategy for R&D and I&E in August 2006, following by “New High-Tech Strategy” in 2014, in
which six economic areas below are given priority: sustainable energy, health, smart
transportation, safety, consumption digitization and innovation creating labor. This is a cross-
ministerial strategy covering a wide range of measures and strategies funding to R&D and
59
In ASEAN, Malaysia is a case that is quite similar to Vietnam. The Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI)
https://www.mosti.gov.my/en/ is the major agent for making science, technology policy and conducting research. Prominent
research organization includes Standards and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia (SIRIM) http://www.sirim.my/, which was
founded in 1975 as a national research and development organization but in 1996 SIRIM shifted into a corporation. SIRIM’s mission
is to get the world’s highest level of quality and technology of industrial products, improve international competitiveness through
technological innovation. SIRIM has about 2000 workers and 500 researchers. The budget of SIRIM is about 200 million Malaysian
ringgits of which the government subsidy is about 15% and the rest are covered by patent licensing… etc. Malaysian government
designated University of Malaya (UM), Malaysia University of Science and Technology (MUST), National University of Malaysia
(UKM), Putra University (UPM), Malaysia Institute of Technology (UPM), University of Technology, Malaysia (UTM) as five research
centers to focus on S&T and I&E research. Each of these research bases has their own special fields. They are good at
environmental science, pharmaceutical science and civil engineering, computer science and industrial chemistry. Among ASEAN
countries, Malaysia has made impressive improvement in R&D and E&I during last decades. Research and development
expenditure in Malaysia 2014 is about 9.7 billion dollars which is 1.26% GDP, ranked second in the ASEAN countries following
Singapore (2.19%). The number of researchers per 1,000 workers is 6.0 (head count value), 4.3 people (full-time equivalent value).
According to the 2012 patent data, Malaysian patent acquisition number is about. Three organizations are responsible for making
R&D and I&E policies in Malaysia: Science Advisor to the Prime Minister of Malaysia, The Malaysian Industry-Government Group
for High Technology (MIGHT) http://www.might.org.my/ includes representatives from industry and government, and National
Science and Research Council (NSRC). The two previous ones are advisory agencies, while the last has also been in charge of
comprehensive overview of science and technology fields, suggesting important areas to be invested, monitoring and evaluating
R&D in various fields. NSRC’ members are appointed by ministries and agency representatives (bureau director level) and experts
in academic and private sectors.
60
As for Finland, approximately 30% of the government’s R&D and STI expenditure is allocated to universities, and this ratio is the
largest compared to other research entities. The number of universities is 15, a quite small number compared with other countries.
Among them, the University of Helsinki, the highest rank in Finland in QS university rankings, focuses on fundamental research
such as materials and natural resources, environmental problems, brain science… etc. Aalto University, which has been selected as
one of the Center of Excellence bases operated by the Academy of Finland, has 17 researchers receiving grants from the ERC
(European Research Council). It is conducting research in the field of molecular engineering on biosynthetic hybrid materials. In the
field of ICT, as part of the six European Institute of Technology (EIT), which is part of European Horizon 2020 program, Aalto
60
University is participating with VTT Technology Research Center and Nokia. Those universities play key role in E&I ecosystem
development of Finland not just for their research and innovation competences but also nurturing the entrepreneurship mind-set
in society at large.
70
E&I systems. It aims at more efficient use of public funds by promoting employment and
economic growth through the creation and dissemination of knowledge.
“Innovate America: Thriving in a World of Challenge and Change”61 is a report prepared by the
Council on Competitiveness (COC) in 2004 for the purpose of strengthening the US
competitiveness. The Report stated that innovation is the source of US competitiveness and it
is necessary to strengthen the three major fields of human resources, investment funds and
infrastructure to create innovation. The report recommends strategies of promoting service
science that creates the diversity and innovative workforce, promotes entrepreneurship by
increasing risk-taking long-term investment, making a development of institutions for
intellectual property rights and standards. It promoted the discussion aimed at strengthening
the cooperation of industry, universities and government.62
As for France, in National Research and Innovation Strategy published in June 2009, the French
Ministry of Higher Education and Research analyzes specifically the strengths and weaknesses
of French research and innovation, including excellent research fields (agriculture, nuclear
power, mathematics, archeology, etc.). France has strong public support for R&D and E&I
through direct investment and tax deduction; but research and HE system is complicated
therefore collaboration between public academic institutions and the private sector and
organizational/ geographical cooperation are inadequate. R&D and E&I investment by the
private sector in France is also small compared to other countries. “France Europe 2020: A
Strategic Agenda for Research, Technology Transfer and Innovation” was first announced in
May 2013 then revised by “National Research Strategy (SNR) France Europe 2020” in 201563,
which provided foundation for innovation capacity reforms in France recent years.64
61
National Innovation Initiative Summit and Report
http://www.compete.org/component/content/article/11/202
62
In September 2009, the Obama administration announced Strategy for American Innovation
(https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/InnovationStrategy.pdf), which comprehensively compiles
science, technology and innovation policies. This is a strategic target for sustainable growth and high-quality employment creation
basing on investment in the US innovation infrastructure, promotion of market-based innovation, break-through for dealing with
national priority issues. The strategy was revised in February 2011. The importance of the private sector as an engine of innovation
and the role of the government supporting the innovation ecosystem were redefined to strengthen long-term economic growth.
63
“SNR France Europe 2020”
https://www.france-science.org/IMG/pdf/france-europe-
2020_a_strategic_agenda_for_research_technology_transfer_and_innovation.pdf
64
In ASEAN, Malaysian policy of R&D and I&E is reflected on “National Science and Technology Policy (STP)” formulated first in
1986, and the second (STP2) in 2002. STP 2 increased the ratio of R&D expenditure in GDP to 1.5% by 2010 and increased the
number of researchers, scientists and engineers (RSEs) to 50 per 10,000 workers. It focused on several areas of advanced
manufacturing such as advanced materials, electronics, biotechnology, ICT, multimedia technology, energy, space,
nanotechnology, photonics, and pharmaceuticals. In 2013, “National Policy on Science, Technology & Innovation-NPSTI” (STP 3)
was formulated. NPSTI aims to achieve ambitious goals such as the formation of a sustainable nation by transforming the
socioeconomic through science and technology in order to allow Malaysia entry into the group of high income and developed
countries. It has focused on biodiversity, cyber security, energy security, environment and climate change, food security, health,
agriculture, commodities, transportation, urbanization and water security. Basing on these main targets, Malaysia sets target to
increase the ratio of R&D expenditure in GDP to at least 2% by 2020.
71
In those national strategies, what has great implications to Vietnam is that the specific issues
and priorities are identified in particularly, which then translated into policies/ mechanisms/
programs/agendas for delivering.
A1.3 Supporting policies for E&I in HEIs provided by the governments

As discussed in the theoretical framework (Chapter 1), state government could have
important influences on the market and to the development of E&I ecosystem. This section
examines some typical interventions that enable the transition from inventions to
innovations and entrepreneurship.
A1.3.1 National Education Program for promotion of E&I in HEIs

The development of E&I in developed countries is based on the foundation of advanced R&D.
The policies and ecosystem supporting E&I in HEIs therefore should be analyzed in the
context of those of R&D.
In Asia, Japanese E&I policy can provide Vietnam a good lesson. In order to establish and
promote an E&I ecosystem in Japanese HE system, Japanese MEXT (Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology) established the EDGE – NEXT program
(Exploration and Development of Global Entrepreneurship for NEXT generation) 65 on
2014. This program encourages new ventures basing on a combination among R&D
outcomes in universities, E&I education for future business leaders and business ideas.
These are several leading universities in Japan are selected as lead institutes to taking
part in the program. For example, Waseda University constituted an association including
four universities and 31 institutions to join the program from 2017 to 2022.66 On July
2017, in the Kyushu University, the Robert T. Huang Entrepreneurship Center (QREC) has
formed IDEA consortium (Innovation, Diversity, and Entrepreneurship Education
Alliance) as the leading institute and Ritsumeikan University, Nara Institute of Science
and Technology (NAIST) and Osaka Prefecture University (OPU) as partner institutes.
This IDEA consortium was selected to taking part in the EDGE-NEXT Program. At the
same time, the MEXT also selected Tokai – EDGE, the Nagoya University led consortium,
as an EDGE-NEXT program. Generally, EDGE-NEXT program aims to train individuals who
are starting a new business project basing on achievements obtained by systematically
65
MEXT (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology), The EDGE – NEXT program (Exploration and Development
of Global Entrepreneurship for NEXT generation)
http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/jinzai/edge/1346947.htm
66
Waseda-led consortium for next-generation entrepreneurship education
https://www.waseda.jp/top/en-news/53126
72
implement E&I education and R&D activities in university.67 Besides, in order to explore
the MEXT program, the University of Tokyo launched “Educational Programs for Human-
Centered Innovation”, the Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology established the
Innovation Advancement Organization, the Tokyo Institute of Technology established the
Global Entrepreneur Office, the Nara Institute of Science and Technology established the
Global entrepreneurs in Internet of Things Program. These activities aim to foster
innovative leaders, built an innovation and entrepreneurship ecosystem by gathering
other Japanese and international universities, manufacturing and service companies,
talents from overseas, think-tanks and venture capitalists.68
As for Germany, In March 2010, Prime Minister Angela Merkel announced the
“Qualification Initiative”, an effort to increase the investment in education and research
together. This program increases the budget in 2015 by 7% for education and 3% for
research. A high proportion of the government investment in R&D and E&I focusing on
university reform is “the Excellence Initiative” program launched in 2006. The program
has focused investment on selected universities. The government distributes huge
amount of funds totaling EUR 1.9 billion over five years (2006 – 2011) and an additional
2.7 billion Euros for five years from 2012 to improve the performance of several selected
69
HEIs.
67
Tokai – EDGE, the Nagoya University led consortium
http://en.nagoya-u.ac.jp/news/adoption/nagoya_university-led_consortium_selected_for_mexts_edge-next_program.html
Partner Institutions are Gifu University, Nagoya Institute of Technology, Toyohashi University of Technology, and Mie University.
68
Japanese government programs have been helpful for building E&I successful entrepreneurs in HEIs. There are many companies
such as MUJIN, Morpho and PeptiDream which successfully commercialized their innovation. The MUJIN Inc was founded at the
University of Tokyo in 2011 by Dr. Rosen Diankov, a researcher at JSK Laboratory of the University of Tokyo, and Issei Takino, a
businessman. Dr. Diankov has developed the Open Robotics Automation Virtual Environment (OpenRAVE), a robot planning
program now used in many robots around the world. See http://openrave.org/ and http://mujin.co.jp/en#about Morpho, Inc was
founded in 2004 by some scientists and engineers from the University of Tokyo. This company got investment from the fund
operated by The University of Tokyo Edge Capital Co., Ltd. The company focuses on R&D and Licensing of image processing
technologies which has been used by biggest mobile providers in the world. In 2016, the company has over 15 million USD capital.
See: http://www.morphoinc.com/en PeptiDream, Inc is a biopharmaceutical company supported by the University of Tokyo
Technology Licensing Organization (TLO). Its technology was developed in 2006 by Hiroaki Suga, the company cofounder and a
professor at the University of Tokyo. See: http://www.peptidream.com/company/index.html#management
69
As for the US, the United States Competitiveness Act, announced in 2007, stipulates a series of competitive strengthening
strategies such as promotion of investment for innovation and human resource development through reinforcement of R&D and
social infrastructure development. Specifically, it decided to double the budget of NSF, NIST, DOE Science Bureau, basic research
institutes and universities, strengthening mathematical science education etc., and establishing the Advanced Research Projects
Agency – Energy (ARPA - E) at DOE… etc. These initiatives followed by The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, 2009)
and Green New Deal (Green New Deal http://neweconomics.org/2008/07/green-new-deal/), which allocated a total budget of
787.2 billion dollars (about GDP 5.7%) to create employment and demand by investing in diverse fields such as science, medical
care, transportation, environmental protection, social infrastructure… etc. ARRA has also made a long-term economic ripple effect
due to S&T investment by 21.5 billion of R&D budget. R&D budgets are mainly focused on basic research, medical, energy and
climate change. On the basic research, this budget was allocated to NIH ($ 10.4 billion), DOE ($ 5.5 billion), NSF ($ 3 billion), and
ARPA-E ($ 400 million). In addition, it planned to invest 58 billion dollars in the R&D for environment and clean energy. President
73
The United States Competitiveness Act, announced in 2007, stipulates a series of strategies
such as promotion of investment for E&I and human resource development. It decided to
double the budget of several research institutes and universities. These initiatives
followed by The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, 2009) and Green New
70
Deal which allocated a total budget of 787.2 billion dollars (about GDP 5.7%) to create
employment and demand by investing in diverse fields such as medical care,
71
transportation, environmental protection, social infrastructure… etc.
A1.3.2 Companies established by universities

In 1990, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) founded iRobot, a company working at
robot industry. Aiming to make robot a realistic life, the iRobot has sold more than 20 million
robots around the world. With more than 25 years of leadership in the robot industry, the
iRobot has gotten a lot of achievements in robotic.72 Born in one of the best HEIs in the world,
the IRobot does not only practice E&I in high level of research and innovation but also
promote E&I in lower education (level of secondary school). The iRobot also has participated
into STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) education in the United States by
creating an educational resource for students, parents and teachers. We can say that in the
near future, education on E&I will expand from HEIs to primary and secondary school in
order to cultivate the mindset of E&I for future generations from the early stage of life.
The Japanese National University Reform launched in 2004 under the influence of American
Bayh-Dole Act allowed the state owned HEIs like University of Tokyo to become independent
from the government and be able to commercialize its intellectual property. In 2004, the
University of Tokyo founded its own company, The University of Tokyo Edge Capital, Co. Ltd.
(UTEC) in order to cultivate the best seeds and talents in technology for Japan and Asia. At
present, this company manages two funds with over 150 millions USD and invests in about 50
seed or early stage start-ups. Most of the start-ups that UTEC has invested are born from
talents of technology in the University of Tokyo.
Obama stated that investment in clean energy is “the Apollo Projects of our time”, and Green New Deal was the pillar of
innovation policy in the early days of the administration.
70
Green New Deal http://neweconomics.org/2008/07/green-new-deal/
71
ARRA has also made a long-term economic ripple effect due to S&T investment by 21.5 billion of R&D budget. R&D budgets are
mainly focused on basic research, medical, energy and climate change. On the basic research, this budget was allocated to NIH ($
10.4 billion), DOE ($ 5.5 billion), NSF ($ 3 billion), and ARPA-E ($ 400 million). In addition, it planned to invest 58 billion dollars in
the R&D for environment and clean energy. President Obama stated that investment in clean energy is “the Apollo Projects of our
time”, and Green New Deal was the pillar of innovation policy in the early days of the administration.
72
iRobot company at Massachusetts Institute of Technology http://www.irobot.com/
The iRobot is very famous because of a lot of significant achievements such as discovering mysteries of the Great Pyramid of Giza,
finding “harmful subsea oil in the Gulf of Mexico” and saving “thousands of lives in areas of conflict and crisis around the globe”.
Besides, “iRobot inspired the first Micro Rovers used by NASA, changing space travel forever, deployed the first ground robots used
by U.S. Forces in conflict, brought the first self-navigating FDA-approved remote presence robots to hospitals and introduced the
first practical home robot with Roomba, forging a path for an entirely new category in home cleaning.”
74
A1.3.3 Programs for Increasing investment on R&D and E&I development in HEIs
In Japan, on order to combine academic researches and business opportunities, the Ministry
of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) launched a project called “Hiranuma Plan”73 in 2001
aiming to increase 10 times of number of patents got by Japanese universities within 10 years
and expand 1,000 technological start-up companies originated from universities in 3 years.
This program focuses on four areas including IT, environment, biotechnology and
nanotechnology. METI budgeted 47.6 billion Yen (equal 45 million USD) in 2002, 47.4 billion
Yen (about 45 million USD) in 2003 and ¥61.7 billion in 2004 (about 60 million USD) for the
Hiranuma Plan74. According to METI, from 2001 to 2016, there are 1851 university-oriented
venture companies created in which about 55.7% share of such companies have become
profitable 75. In 2012, the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) has initiated The
Program for Creating Start-ups from Advanced Research and Technology (START Program)76 in
which government funding and commercialization of private companies are combined in
order to encourage start-ups basing on technological innovation and research achievements
of HEIs. This program starts from pre-launched stage of start-ups in HEIs when researching
and seeking opportunities in market, sets up the capitalist venture within one, three or five
years. START program has a unique mechanism in which project promoters and researchers
join together to realize the business plan and manage the project.
In France, President Sarkozy announced the policy “Investment for the future” in June 2009.
The budget of the program is 35 billion EUR in which 22 billion EUR was raised due to
issuance of government bonds and 13 billion EUR was raised through repayment of public
assistance to banks. The policy does not only invest on R&D, E&I but also on an ecosystem in
which R&D, E&I can be born and developed. The program invests on five major fields: 11
billion Euros in higher education and human resource development, 8 billion Euros in R&D,
6.5 billion Euros in industries, small and medium enterprises, 5 billion Euros in sustainable
development and EUR 4.5 billion in the digital economy, which is positioned as “future
priority issues”. Higher education and R&D, E&I related issues are allotted 21.9 billion Euros.
Among this amount of 21.9 billion Euros, 15.35 billion Euros were allocated for higher
education, research bases formation and function improvement, and 6.55 billion Euros were
73
Hiranuma is the name of Minister Takeo Hiranuma, the Minister of MITI at that time.
74
John P. Walsh, Yasunori Baba, Akira Goto & Yoshihito Yasaki, Promoting University–Industry Linkages in Japan: Faculty Responses
to a Changing Policy Environment, Prometheus Vol. 26, No. 1, Georgia Institute of Technology, March 2008.
75
METI on Hiranuma Plan: http://www.meti.go.jp/english/press/2017/0426_001.html
According to METI, approximately 30% (the largest share) of all university-oriented venture companies “engage in the healthcare
related including biotechnology and medical equipment. In the student-based venture business category, approximately 40%
involved in the field of IT, and in the joint research venture business category, approximately 30% are involved in healthcare
related field, including biotechnology and medical equipment, which represents the largest share, with environmental technology-
related ventures representing 23% of that category and the second largest share.”
76
Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), The Program for Creating Start-ups from Advanced Research and Technology (START
Program): https://www.jst.go.jp/start/en/jigyo/index.html
75
allocated for promotion of research projects. In addition, about 17.9 billion Euros was
allocated by the funding agency such as the French National Research Agency (ANR) through
projects open for application.
In UK, government investment of more than 140 million GBP is scheduled for six years from
2011 in the high value manufacturing catapult centers which integrates the existing several
manufacturing related R&D centers such as advanced molding, advanced manufacturing,
process innovation, manufacturing technology, composite materials… to private companies
and universities. The catapult centers additionally support 61 million GBP in the new
innovation strategy announced in December 2014 to develop next-generation technical
products. An additional investment of 28 million GBP was announced to establish the
“National Formulation Center”.77
A1.3.4 Strengthen R&D and E&I by Private Enterprises and Promoting Cooperation
among Industry, Academia and Government
Generally, in France, a variety of research organizations belong to the French (publicly
funded) research landscape can be seen as “big players” to serve the specific research
demand of government departments and public authorities (Frietsch, R et.al, 2008, p.6, p.30),
a very top-down approach, therefore during the last decades it has changed to encourage
more bottom up and competitive procedures, as described below.
Carnot Institution Program was launched in 2006 to give public laboratories and higher
education institutions promoting collaborative research with companies. First, the program
gives the research institution that meets certain requirements to actively promote
collaborative research with the company by certification of Carnot label. Organizations that
have been certified receive funding from ANR but the budget is based on the direct contract
amount with the company in the previous year. In other words, as the scale of collaborative
research with companies is expanded, the budget amount as the Carnot institution of the
following year will be increased. In this way, France can produce results with smaller initial
investment than installing new agencies by giving existing facilities the additional functions.
The upper limit of the amount that can be allocated to the entire Carnot agency actually is
about 60 million Euros per year.
Another initiative for strengthening collaborations between universities and industries is

through Ph.D. education. Promotion of cooperation between industry and university through
PhD Research (CIFRE) is a measure to support doctorate acquisition based on activities with
companies. The French National Association for Research and Technology (ANRT), which
consists of government agencies and private organizations, manages this program. ANRT
pays 14,000 Euros per year to companies that make contract with PhD student for three
years. The companies pay at least 23,484 Euros per year for those PhD students. Companies
that hire PhD students can access university laboratories to which the students belong. The
77
National Formulation Center: http://www.northeasttechnologypark.com/innovation-services/national-formulation-
centre
76
laboratory to which the student belongs also continues to conduct research guidance for PhD
students. As a result, the relationship between enterprises and universities is strengthened
and can develop their own collaborative research. In addition to CIFRE financial aid,
companies can also receive the research cost tax deduction (CIR). According to the data of
2012, there has been 1,350 PhD students were adopted for CIFRE program in which 22% in
the ICT field, 20% in engineering, 13% in chemistry and materials, and 13% in humanities
and social sciences.
As for the UK, Cameron administration in May 2010, announced the “catapult program”78
aiming at building a world-leading technology and innovation program in a specific technical
field, and is managed by Innovate UK79affiliated with BIS. Under this program, 10 center bases
have been currently established. It is intended to promote economic growth by making
innovation creation and practical application of research results by making collaboration
between companies and HE institutes in these centers. In other words, the catapult center is a
place where industries can create the world’s top-level technical ability to solve technical
problems basing on industry and research institutes collaboration to create new products. A
platform that realizes long-term investment so that services has been offered. The ultimate
goal is different for each catapult. For example, Cell and Gene Therapy Catapult80 creates a
massive industry (about 10 billion GBP scale) that contributes to national interest and creates
critical mass of business and research innovation.
A special mechanism for strengthening collaboration between government, university and

industries of the USA, then adopted widely among OECD countries, is Bayh-Dole Act. This
legislation aims at maximizing the effectiveness of government funded research results by
transferring innovation from university to enterprise. The Bayh-Dole Act (Patent and
Trademark Law Amendments Act)81 is a legal framework that permits the universities,
small businesses, and/or non-profit institutions… to use the research results obtained by
the Federal Government’s funding as their own properties. It helps to promote
commercialization of inventions arising from government-funded R&D. The Bayh-Dole
Act plays an important role to commercialize inventions in the US universities. It has also
stimulated active industry – academia collaborations. As the number of patents and
licenses owned by the university has increased, the number of corporations (technology
licensing offices – TLOs) transferring inventions by universities also increased. Japan
Government launched The Act on the Promotion of Technology Transfer from Universities
78
Catapult program https://catapult.org.uk/
79
Innovate UK https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/innovate-uk
80
Cell and Gene Therapy Catapult https://ct.catapult.org.uk/
81
The Bayh-Dole Act (Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act).
See https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2002-title37-vol1/content-detail.html
See also: University of Pittsburgh - Innovation Institute, Bayh-Dole Act at a Glance - What It Means for Technology
Commercialization. Source:
http://www.innovation.pitt.edu/resource/bayh-dole-act-at-a-glance/
77
to Private Industry (the TLO Act, 1998)82 and The Act on Special Measures for Industrial
Revitalization, 1999. These Acts are an applying the American model of the Bayh-Dole Act
to Japan. 83 The TLO Act aims to improve the collaboration between industrial
technologies and research activities in universities by promoting transfers of
technological research results to industrial business.
Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR)84 and Small Business Innovation Research
program (SBIR) is another initiative of the USA, a program to finance collaborative research
among small and medium enterprise (SMEs), nonprofit research institutes and universities.
Both SBIR and STTR are mechanisms that give subsidies through a competitive process. Up to
date, SBIR has produced more than 70,000 patents and invited 41 billion dollars capital
investment. The SBIR program has also already been imitated in many countries such as the
UK, Japan, Sweden and Finland as a successful model of innovation promotion.
Similarly, in Finland, The Academy of Finland operates not only basic research programs but
also an industry – university collaboration program run by Strategy Centers for Science,
Technology and Innovation (SHOK)85. These SHOK Centers have been established as public-
private partnerships for promoting I&E and R&D. These SHOK Centers are funded about 40 –
60 EUR million each year by public organizations together with shareholders investments.
SHOK Centers develop and apply new methods for collaboration and interaction in which
industry and research units work together in close cooperation in long- term projects within
from five to ten-year period. Since 2007, six university-industry collaborative centers have
been supported in the field of ICT, forest, metal products and mechanical engineering, energy
and environment, health and welfare. In 2008−2012, approximate 500 Finnish companies
and about 30 research units taking part in SHOK R&D programs to which they have invested
about 40% the research costs.86
A1.3.5 Focusing on Selected Research and Innovation Fields

Instead of spreading resources equally to all research and innovation fields, several countries
identified major fields for investment. This strategy is proven to bring about remarkable
results. One example is the DARPA Model of the USA. The Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA)87 is a funding allocation organization established in 1958 to respond the
82
The Act on the Promotion of Technology Transfer from Universities to Private Industry (the TLO Act, 1998)
http://www.cas.go.jp/jp/seisaku/hourei/data/APTTUPBO.pdf
83
Japanese Policy and Programs for the Fostering of Global Entrepreneurs
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305637670_Japanese_Policy_and_Programs_for_the_Fostering_of_Global_Entreprene
urs
84
SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research program) and STTR (Small Business Technology Transfer) https://sbir.nih.gov/.
85
SHOK program http://www.shok.fi/en
86
Tekes – the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation, Convincing performance from SHOK Centres https://www.tekes.fi/en/whats-
going-on/news-2013/convincing-performance-from-shok-centres1/
87
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency of the U.S. Department of Defense (DARPA) https://www.darpa.mil/
78
Russian Sputnik achievement and to maintain the technical advantage of the US military. It is
aimed at financing for high risk - high return. DARPA is well known because of the invention
of Internet, computer technologies, technology of precision guided weapons, stealth
technology, global positioning system (GPS), unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and so on.88
In Germany R&D and E&I agenda, Industry 4.0 89 and Digital Agenda 2020 90 are also
highlighted. In 2011 the Federal Government announced the R&D policy “Industrie 4.0” as an
action plan of the high-tech strategy 2020 that can contribute to the advancement and
digitization of the next generation manufacturing industry. Industry 4.0 means the fourth
industrial revolution by utilizing the Internet’s (Internet of Things: IoT) and production
automation (Factory Automation) technology. It is also the concept of next-generation of
manufacturing industry aiming at creating a new business model. This policy of digitization
has a lot of targets such as society, labor, education, science, government and so on. 91
For the UK, strengthening R&D activities not just in the industries but also in universities is
recently one of the important policies from the viewpoint of promoting innovation in the UK.
“Innovation Platform” is an initiative that has been launched by the government in order to
solve social problems, which requires an interdisciplinary approach. This is an attempt to
88
DAPRA inventions: https://www.ranker.com/list/coolest-darpa-projects/mike-rothschild
The DARPA Model has also been applied to non-defense fields and is regarded as a successful case of US innovation policy. In
nature, it is the government support for high risk – high return research. For example, the Obama administration aims to develop
innovative educational and learning technologies that can contribute to strengthening the STEM education, introducing the DARPA
model in the education field and providing twice the budget to the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA-ED), Ministry of
Education (ED). In addition, NIH established “National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences” (NCATS) https://ncats.nih.gov/
aiming to commercialize research results by bridging the results of basic research to the development of pharmaceutical and
therapeutic methods.
89
European Commission - Europa EU, Germany: Industrie 4.0
https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/dem/monitor/sites/default/files/DTM_Industrie%204.0.pdf
90
Digital Agenda 2020 https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/digital-agenda-europe-key-publications
91
As for Germany, according to the Kyoto Protocol, this country has to reduce 21% of greenhouse gas emissions (in comparison
with 1990) but Germany has already reduced 23.3% in 2008. One of the reasons that Germany has promoted green innovation is
that R&D in this field is recognized as a way of benefiting Germany’s economy. In a study conducted by The Fraunhofer Institute for
Systems and Innovation (ISI), the reduction cost per 1 ton of CO2 when reducing 40% of greenhouse gas by 2020 is minus 27 euro.
The Federal Ministry of Education and Research launched the research framework program for Sustainable Development (FONA) in
2004 and has conducted various researches to counter global warming. In 2010 the Ministry of Education and Research announced
a new basic plan on research for sustainable development (FORNE) and announced a policy to introduce funds significantly
exceeding 2 billion Euros by 2015. The new basic plan covers a wide range of research fields focusing mainly on improving energy
efficiency and productivity of raw materials. German federal government has also established six health research centers as the
core of the new health research basic plan. The research objects are diabetes, infectious diseases, cancer, neurodegenerative,
cardiovascular system, and pulmonary diseases, which are considered to be nation-wide diseases in Germany. Instead of creating a
new laboratory, this program organizes research by networking many existing research bases and providing funds. Currently, these
centers have incorporated with more than 120 universities and research institutes and established 39 bases. They aim to
consistently and practically useful research from laboratory to clinical and work closely with companies. The German Center for
Neurological Disease (DZNE) and the German Center for Diabetes Research (DZN) started research in 2009, the German Center for
Lung Research (DZL), the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), German Consortium for Translational Cancer
Research (DKTK) and the German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF) started research activities in 2010. The Federal Ministry of
Education and Research (BMBF) invested about 700 million Euros by 2015 to establish these German centers for health research.
79
cooperate with stakeholders of various sectors related to social issues (government,

university, industry) to create a road map to innovation and entrepreneurship. In addition, in
response to a strong demand from the industrial world, aiming at the establishment of a
science and technology innovation bases that bridges excellent ideas and research results to
practical use, the cooperation among companies has been considered as the main point of the
policy. The policy has been also trying to promote problem-solving R&D that utilizes the
information technology.
One of a remarkable effort of the government for practical application of research results at
the university is the project related to the new material “graphene”92 developed by Professor
Andre Geim at the University of Manchester, who won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2010, and
Dr. Konstantin Novoselov. Graphene is nanotechnology based and consists of a hexagonal
pattern only one atom in thickness. The technology promises superior conductivity of
electricity and potential binary computing power, and attributes of value to battery storage
development. The government invested 50 million GBP in October 2011 to establish
graphene global research technology base to win the development competition for its
commercial use. The building of National Graphene Institute was constructed in 2013. Among
the initial budget for FY 2014, about 14 million Pounds was invested for the establishment of
the Graphene Applications Innovation Center.
In Finland, according to “Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011-2015”93, the
latest policy document published by The Research and Innovation Council of Finland94, the
Finnish priorities in E&I are included software, bio, nano technologies, and the six Strategic
Centers for Science, Technology and Innovation95: energy and the environment; metal products
and mechanical engineering; the forest cluster; information and communication industry and
services; health care and environment innovations.
Malaysia also identified focus fields for their investment. The “National Biotechnology Policy
(NBP)” in 2005, launched the biotechnology industry promotion measures. Malaysia aims to
select the biotechnology development in the three fields of agriculture, medicine and
industry. In order to achieve NBP’s goal, Malaysia established 3 pillars, the Inno Biologics (a
state-owned bio-pharmaceutical company) 96 , “Bionexus” (the Malaysian Biotechnology
Corporation)97 and the Malaysian Life Sciences Capital Fund98 to promote innovation and
92
Graphene is a form of carbon consisting of a single layer of carbon atoms arranged in a hexagonal lattice. See also: National
Graphene Institute http://www.graphene.manchester.ac.uk/collaborate/national-graphene-institute/ and the Graphene
Applications Innovation Center
http://www.graphene.manchester.ac.uk/collaborate/geic/
93
The Research and Innovation Council of Finland, “Research and Innovation Policy Guidelines for 2011-2015”
http://www.rritrends.resagora.eu/uploads/22/Research%20and%20innovation%20policy%20guidelines_Finland.pdf
94
The Research and Innovation Council of Finland http://valtioneuvosto.fi/en/research-and-innovation-council
95
Finnish SHOK program:
https://www.tekes.fi/en/whats-going-on/news-2013/convincing-performance-from-shok-centres1/
96
Inno Biologics http://www.innobiologics.com/
97
The Malaysian Biotechnology Corporation
80
entrepreneur in biotechnology. Promotion of ICT is another focus area of Malaysia. One

remarkable initiative of the Malaysia is the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) 99 with
integrated ICT infrastructure. MSC is a high-technology business district designed as a special
economic zone in southern Selangor, Malaysia. Malaysia aimed at creating industrial clusters
by giving incentives to domestic and overseas companies and research institutions,
promoting the technology transfer and human resource development, nurturing new
industries and creating jobs. The result is that until 2007 the number of MSC companies was
2,170 and the number of employment reached 97,000. During the era of Prime Minister
Abdullah (2003-2009), Malaysia also promoted the R&D in the field of biotechnology by tax
exemption and promotion of foreign employment.
A1.3.6 Financial Supports: Tax Incentives and Grants/Funds Provision

According to a report from Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, Washington
DC, “Almost all scholarly studies conducted since the early 1990s find R&D tax incentives to
be both effective and efficient.” For example, “The US former congressional Office of
Technology Assessment concluded: “For every dollar lost in tax revenue, the R&D tax credit
produces a dollar increase in reported R&D spending, on the margin”100. In France, the France’s
Research Tax Credit – CIR is tax deduction for research cost. It can be considered as the first
measure to support the corporate R&D.
In France, when companies and non-profit enterprises use this system, their certain
percentage of R&D expenditures such as survey costs, research implementation, outsourcing,
patent cost… can be deducted from tax. Tax deduction also applied for companies working
with academia in PhD programs. We can see the same polices in many countries such as
Australia, Hungary, South Korea, etc101.
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)102 was created in 1953 as an independent
agency of the federal government to aid, counsel, assist and protect the interests of small
http://www.bioeconomycorporation.my/national-biotech-policy/overview/
98
The Malaysian Life Sciences Capital Fund http://www.mlscf.com/
99
Malaysian Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) https://www.mdec.my/msc-malaysia/application
100
Joe Kennedy and Robert D. Atkinson, Why Expanding the R&D Tax Credit Is Key to Successful Corporate Tax Reform, Information
Technology & Innovation Foundation, Washington DC, JULY 2017 http://www2.itif.org/2017-rd-tax-credit.pdf
101
OECD, Tax incentives for research and development: trends and issues
http://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/2498389.pdf
102
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/resourceguide_national.pdf
Capital, in the form of debt equity or loans range from 500 USD to 5.5 million USD and are administered through 900 SBA approved
local banks. The most popular lending program is the 7[a] Loan Program (It is named 7(a) Loan Program, due to its base on section
7(a) of the Small Business Act. https://www.sba.gov/blogs/sbas-7a-loan-program-explained), provided either directly from SBA or
regulated lenders. Other loan programs include microloans, up to 50,000 USD and the 504 Loan Program, an economic
development program that supports American small business growth and helps communities through business expansion and job
creation.
81
business concerns. More than half of this organization’s total of funding and educational
assistance is provided directly to entrepreneurs and small business owners but SBA also
support and work with universities. While the SBA’ supports are carried out in the forms of
providing incentives to collaboration with academia, capital loans and entrepreneurship
education/mentoring, the U.S. Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) is a program that
expands funding opportunities in the federal innovation and R&D arena. Central to the
program is expansion of the public/ private sector partnership. The unique feature of the
STTR program is the requirement for the small business to formally collaborate with a
research institution. STTR’s most important role is to bridge the gap between performance of
basic science and commercialization of resulting innovations. 103
In ASEAN, National University of Singapore (NUS) is a unique university that has a structural
system of 15 funds to variety of objects and kinds of E&I for promoting E&I inside and outside
the university. For example, the Lotus-NUS Fund “provides seed funding for social impact-
driven start-ups”; The Start-ups Go Global Programme grants for entrepreneurs who is
incorporated/registered in Singapore for less than 5 years and a part of NUS Enterprise
ecosystem; the Start-up SG Equity provides funds to “Singapore-based company with core
activities carried out” in Singapore; Start-up SG Founder “provides a platform for matching
mentors to start-ups”; The NUS Alumni Start-up Catalyst (NASC) provides funds for “early-
stage start-ups founded by NUS alumni”; the SPRING Start-up SG Tech Grant provides advice
from the NUS mentors; the Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) provides significant tax
deductions for investments in R&D and E&I; the Innovation & Capability Voucher (ICV)
provides voucher “to encourage SMEs to develop their business capabilities”; Venture For
Good (Youth) provides funding support to youths in “developing and implementing their
social enterprise ventures”.104
A1.3.7 Industrial Innovation Clusters

Silicon Valley is a special phenomenon of success innovation endeavor of the USA where the
interventions of US federal government policy are quite limited. Located in the northern part
of California, Silicon Valley is world-renowned innovation base where new technologies and
services are born one after another. A lot of companies that are seen as world leaders in many
103
Government funding can also be investment into promotion of cooperative relationship with emerging countries, as in the case
of the UK. In recent years, the UK Government sees it is important to build research cooperation relationships with emerging
countries in order to grow with them. The Newton Fund was established in 2014 in order to improve the R&D and E&I abilities of
universities in emerging countries and strengthen relations between these countries and the UK. While investing in scientific
research, the Newton Fund is aiming to build long-term cooperative relationships between UK and countries that would be the
main players of E&I in the future. Partner countries include Turkey, South Africa, China, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Egypt, India,
Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam.
104
Furthermore, NUS has Innovation and Entrepreneurship Practicum Award provides fund for NUS students who has an
“innovative idea/product”; MOE Translational R&D and Innovation Fund offers funds for E&I in the polytechnics and ITEs; The
SMART Innovation Centre “enables faculty and their research team to pursue exciting new avenues of market-driven research”; the
Philip Yeo Initiative (PYI) supports persons “who believe in passion and purpose to invest in the next generation of leaders”; the
NRF Central Gap Fund “aims to support the translation of research outcomes into useful products”; the Capability Development
Grant (CDG) belonging to SPRING Intellectual Property Management Program (IPM) is a financial assistance program that helps
entrepreneurs “build capabilities across 10 key business areas”; NUS funding system for E&I http://enterprise.nus.edu.sg/funding
82
areas, such as computers, semiconductors, software, internet and biotechnology… are born in
Silicon Valley, for example, Adobe, AMD, Apple, eBay, Google, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Oracle,
Symantec, Yahoo… etc. Silicon Valley is not an initiative of the state government. The
formation of Silicon Valley is based on Stanford University. It is a common place of knowledge
formed by natural cooperation among companies, research institutes, universities, and local
governments to create an innovation cluster (Castell Manual, 2011). Silicon Valley has been
the leading innovation base in the world in a half of century. The background of this success is
the combination among excellent universities, high-tech enterprises, the financial system
supported by venture capital, and the culture of American entrepreneurship. 105
In the UK, Cambridge is the largest technology cluster in Europe with about 60,000
employees working for more than 4,300 technological companies located around the
University of Cambridge106. E&I ecosystem of Cambridge cluster determining players include
the University of Cambridge, center of the cluster, and a lot of companies and E&I parks.
Among those, Cambridge Science Park, which was established in 1970 by the University of
Cambridge and created more than 130 companies within1970s is the oldest. After 1970s,
other R&D and E&I clusters are followed. The famous ones are Cambridge Business Park,
Cambridge Research Park, Cambridge Science Park, Capital Park, Chesterford Research Park,
IdeaSpace, St John’s Innovation Center, Vision Park, Peterhouse Technology Park, Babraham
Research Campus, University of Cambridge West Cambridge Site… These parks work together
to maintain the ecosystem of E&I (cluster of innovation, commercial companies…)107 Such a
flourishing E&I ecosystem has attracted a lot of international high-tech companies to invest
such as Amazon, Apple, HP, Microsoft, Siemens, Qualcomm, Sanofi… The University of
Cambridge also established many units supporting start-ups, for example, The Centre for
Process Excellence and Innovation108 which is a R&D center that “brings together industry and
academic partners to explore solutions on how to create sustainable competitive advantage”,
The Cambridge Centre for Social Innovation109 which “acts as a platform” for social innovators,
105
The similar attempts were made in various places. For example, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a lot of technology
companies located in the Route 128 in Boston have cooperated to form an innovation cluster in Massachusetts. And then there are
the same models such as the information industry cluster in Austin, Texas, the bio industry cluster in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania…
etc. Outside the US, Bangalore in India’s southern Karnataka state and Zhongguancun in Beijing, China are typical technology hubs
in Asia following the Silicon Valley’s model. Israel and Singapore have promoted industrial cluster formation at national level.
106
The Cambridge Phenomenon
http://www.cambridgeahead.co.uk/about-cambridge/the-cambridge-phenomenon/
107
Some key companies and organizations belonging the cluster are located outside the parks and campuses of the University of
Cambridge but are sited near the railway station in the CB1 District at Cambridge such as Microsoft, Thales, AlertMe, Apple,
AstraZeneca and some legal service and consultancy companies.
108
The Centre for Process Excellence and Innovation
https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/faculty-research/centres/process-excellence-innovation/
109
The Cambridge Centre for Social Innovation
https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/faculty-research/centres/social-innovation/
83
The Entrepreneurship Centre at Cambridge Judge Business School110 which aims to “inspire,
enable and research” E&I.
A1.4 Conclusions
This Annex briefly reviewed the relevant practices of the policy interventions in selected
countries for supporting R&D and E&I development, aimed at seeking for possible lessons
learned for Vietnam.
Increasing Science Technology and Innovation (STI) investment is an irreversible trend

around the world. In terms of STI policy-making decision mechanisms, Advisory councils,
consulting agencies can serve the top- level policy makers by providing white reports and
measurements of the success. Heavily focused in selected research and innovation areas
brought about remarkable success in USA, Germany, Malaysia, etc. Most if not all success
stories in innovation reforms related to emphasizing the importance of universities and
especially promoting cross sectors linkages between universities, industries and government.
All sectors are benefitted from such cooperation due to generating revenue from
technological applications, strengthening research and innovation capacity, improving quality
of higher education, and human resource in general. In addition, promoting contributions
from the private sector by strengthening, enabling the cooperation between government
academia and industries. Good practices like Bayh-Dole Act, Silicon Valley have been adopted
in several countries can also be a suggestion for Vietnam.
There are not many state policy interventions down to institutional levels. In USA, UK,
Germany and western world in general, the tradition of university autonomy is an important
feature that helps those institutions to be more innovative and responsive to a changing
world. Government support is mainly through block grants, specific programs/institutions or
mechanisms that provides incentives for universities/industries rather than regulations or
requirements. There is an evolution in policy approach to E&I development. Those
interventions reviewed above are mostly traditional approaches, which emphasize
“transactional” form of support such as grant, incentives, subsides, and the implementation is
mostly undertaken at national level. In recent years, the growth-oriented approaches have
been paid attention to. Instead of focusing on specific actors such as entrepreneurs,
geographic cluster of firms, policy makers tend to focus more on building networks of
entrepreneurs, to target at connecting components within ecosystem, helping institutional
alignment of priorities, fostering peer-based interactions (Mason, C., & Brown, R. 2014, p. 4).
There is no “one size fits all” policy approach, especially in the specific context of Vietnam
where economy and society has been in transition intensively. However, there are common
principles that are workable in most countries regardless contextual differences. First and
foremost, R&D and E&I develop in an ecosystem, that is to say, a platform in which every
110
The Entrepreneurship Centre at Cambridge Judge Business School
https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/entrepreneurship/
84
element is interactive and influencing one another. E&I education will be ineffective if the
environment for start-ups does not support new ideas/ initiative risk-taking behaviors, or
does not have legislation framework for intellectual properties protection in place. The whole
ecosystem would not be able to grow if the universities do not provide enough talents for E&I
endeavors. Entrepreneurs are central players in the creation of the ecosystem (Erik Stam and
Ben Spigal, 2016, p.8) therefore the importance of universities in the system is undeniable.
Supporting research institutes and universities is important, and the best way is not just
pouring heavy investment but also a holistic approach to the system so that academic
institutions can contribute deservedly to create a better environment for E&I.
Summary of Annex 1
This Annex examines state policies for promotion of E&I in selected countries in order to review
the recent trends and relevant international practices. Through the cases of United State, United
Kingdom, France, German, Japan, Singapore and Malaysia, the chapter shed light to STI policies
making mechanisms, national strategies for STI, and particular supporting policies in those
countries. Some remarkable interventions noted include focused investment in selected areas;
special programs designed for promoting S&T and E&I ecosystem development; strengthening
the cooperation between industry, academia and government by financial incentives and
supporting mechanisms.
Innovation clusters and university-based E&I ecosystem are also important. Companies
established by the university, the university investment funds aimed at supporting start-ups/
entrepreneurs and other supporting agencies within HEIs play a key role in E&I education. A
holistic approach and building networks between entrepreneurs, scientists, investors, policy
makers and so on are highlighted as strategic interventions that can be adopted.
85
ANNEX 2.
VIETNAM’S STRATEGIES AND REGULATIONS FOR
PROMOTING ENTREPRENEURSHIP & INNOVATION IN
HIGHER EDUCATION: A CURRENT POLICY REVIEW
In this section we will review existing legislation & policy for innovation and
entrepreneurship (E&I) education and development in higher education (HE) sector.
Analysis of these strategies and regulations will shed light on the context of IPP
interventions, which is discussed in chapter 2 of the report.
A2.1 Higher Education and E&I in Viet Nam

The contemporary HE system dates from 1904, when the University of Indochina was
established in Hanoi by the French colonial government to prepare local officers. In 1945,
the Viet Nam government announced national independence. Since then the university
system was developed following Soviet style in the North. South Viet Nam had a system
more like American model. Since 1975 Viet Nam has a unified system of HE.
A2.1.1 Vietnam HE: Growing Fast and Struggling to Improve the Quality
Beginning from Open Door policy, in 30 years between 1987 and 2017, the number of
universities and colleges in Viet Nam has increased from 101 to the total of 444 (MOET,
2017). Student enrolments increased 13 folds from 133,136 students in 1987, when Viet
Nam started economic reform, to 1,767,879 students in 2017. A majority student is in
public higher education institutions (HEIs); only approximately 14 per cent of total
students attended private ones.
Over the same period the total number of academic staff increased 3.6 folds while the
student to faculty ratio has increased from 6.6:1 in 1987 to 24.3:1 in 2017. In numerical
terms, the proportion of academic staff holding PhDs increased to 22% in 2017 from the
rate of 14% in 1987. In terms of disciplines, student body in HEIs can be divided into 7
groups in which STEM accounted for 34.9% (See Figure A2.1).
In terms of governance, the HE system in Viet Nam is highly fragmented: among those
HEIs, only 54 institutions (14.5%) are under supervision of the Ministry of Education and
Training (MOET); 116 (31%) HEIs report to other line ministries and sectors; 125
institutions (33%) funded by and report to Provincial People’s Committees (PPCs). There
are 81 private institutions (21.5%), which are under supervision of the MOET in academic
matters and subject to PPCs on senior personnel appointment. Inherited from Soviet
model, Viet Nam still has large proportion of mono-discipline universities.
86
A2.1.2 Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Capacity of the HE sector
Viet Nam currently has approximately 9,000 professors/associate professors, 24,000

doctoral degree holders but only 15,000 of those working for HEIs. The number of
scientific publications of Viet Nam over the past 15 years is less than one fifth of the
publication of the University of Tokyo and a half of the National University of Singapore
(Nguyen Tuan V. et al, 2016). There has been a prominent progress in the number of Viet
Nam’s ISI articles recent years. It increased from 908 in 2008 to 6,200 in 2017.
To date, most of government and university efforts focused on increasing scientific

articles, while E&I have not been adequately emphasized. As a consequence, globally, a
reference data from United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) between 2006-
2010 show that Viet Nam had 5 patens, compared to Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore and
USA were 74; 206; 2,496 and 1,000,900 respectively. Another data source from World
Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) shown a remarkable increase in the period of
2009-2016, with total number of patents granted was 118 for Viet Nam, compared to
Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Finland, USA and China is 440; 218; 142; 7,998; 276,294;
111
322,484 respectively .
A majority of academics in Viet Nam is still not engaged in STI activities, due to heavy
112
teaching workload, having little time and funding allocated to research . This situation is
reflected clearly in the financial structure of Vietnamese HEIs. In public universities, the
institutional revenue from tuition fees accounted for 24.9% - 53.6%, and from state
funding 41.5% - 74.7%. State funding for research accounted for 6.8% of the total funding,
however, spending for research only accounted for 2.7% of the total expenditures at the
institutional level (Tran Nam Binh et al, 2012, p. 35).
Regarding innovation, Viet Nam ranked 45th out of 126 in the Global Innovation Index
2018, 14 ranks higher than it was in 2016. Those achievements were made possible by
strengthening university capacity and reforming research funding schemes recently.
In sum, it can be said that STI performances of Vietnamese HEIs to date still remains
focusing more on creating knowledge measured by scientific papers rather than
application of new knowledge/technology in industry and creating start-ups/businesses.
The expansion of the HE system is largely about to meet the higher demand for HE access.
A number of studies have shown that such expansion has not met the needs of E&I
development and social/ governmental expectations (Marea Fatsea, in Grant Harman
2010, p.88-106; Ly T Pham, 2014).
111
http://www.wipo.int/portal/en/
112
This situation was well documented in scientometrics literature. See Hien, P.D. 2010, Nguyen, T.V., Pham L.T. 2011,
Khanh Dao, Tuan Nguyen, and Ly Pham 2012, Ly T Pham 2014.
87
A2.2 Policies for Developing E&I Ecosystem and E&I Education

The report introduces the concept of innovation in a broader sense, emphasizing the
entrepreneurship rather than R&D and S&T. Major focus of the report is E&I education.
For the purpose of proposing recommendation for E&I education, it is necessary to
examine the policies for E&I ecosystem of the country and for university-based E&I
ecosystem.
A2.2.1 Regulatory Environment for E&I Development
a. Formation of SMEs start-ups
Costs and time required of starting business in Viet Nam are reported in the World Bank’s
rankings. A high ease of doing business ranking from 1-190 means the regulatory
environment is more conducive to the starting and operation of a firm. The rankings for
all economies are benchmarked to June 2017. The ranking of ease of doing business is
68th for Viet Nam, compared to Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Finland, and USA is 72th;
26th; 113rd; 13th; 6th respectively. As for the ease of starting business, ranking is 128th
for Viet Nam, compared to Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Finland, and USA is 144th;
113
36th; 173rd; 26th; 49th respectively .
Regarding legislation for business development, Viet Nam Enterprise Law first issued in
2005 and amended in 2014, which released the burden of enterprise formation
significantly. Recently, in June 2017 Viet Nam Congress passed the Law on Supporting
SMEs, which is important to start-ups and entrepreneurs. This legislation provides
financial access as loans, funding, as well as tax exemptions, land use, etc. In terms of
technological innovation businesses, Decree 80/2007/NĐ-CP and Decree 96/2010/NĐ-
CP provide favorable conditions for the so-called “science and technological (S&T)
enterprise”, which is defined by using research results to create its products. Favors given
include tax exemptions, capital loans, training and consulting services. However,
formation of this type of enterprise is quite challenging. As a result, by 2017 only 303 S&T
114
businesses are established in Viet Nam .
In 2017, the legislative corridor for innovative start-up support has been significantly
improved after the law-making National Assembly adopted the Law on Technology
Transfer of 2017 and the Law on SME Support, with many contents wherein specifying
supports for innovative start-ups. However, obstacles to start-ups have not been
completely cleared.
113
http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings
114
http://enternews.vn/den-nam-2020-viet-nam-se-co-5-000-doanh-nghiep-khoa-hoc-cong-nghe-93601.html. There are several
legislation obstacles for science-based innovation SMEs will be addressed in case study of BK Holding, Chapter 3.
88
115
Higher Education Law, Article 14 , also allows formation of enterprise within
universities, which aimed at promoting commercialization of research outputs. Decree
115/2005/NĐ-CP and Decree 54/2016/NĐ-CP, regarding autonomy granted to public
S&T organizations, also enables commercialization of scientific research and innovations
and maximize public investments for S&TI. Those self-financed public organizations could
also be transformed into joint stocks companies (JSC) under certain requirements.
b. Strategic Planning and Directions
E&I are new concepts, which have known in public space of Viet Nam just recently. There
is no surprise to see most of policy documents referring to S&T rather than E&I. However,
the policy for S&T development influences on E&I capacity in HE sector so we will review
it briefly.
Being consistent with Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) and Government Resolutions, as
for HEIs, the Circular 22/2011/TT-BGDĐT issued by MOET dated 30 May 2011
emphasizes the role of research, science and technology development as one of the main
tasks of HEIs in Viet Nam. The Circular laid out major points to foster S&T activities in
HEIs such as: providing research fund, allocating time for research, installing research
facilities, establishing research groups, and supporting conference/publications. This
direction was followed up by Circular 16/2012/TT-BGDĐT of the MOET on 9 May 2012,
which describes the requirements and process to formulate S&T programs. However,
those mentioned policies are generally lacking specific S&T objectives, measurements,
supportive mechanisms and resources to S&T development in HEIs, as well as S&T
prioritized fields and implementation plan for HEIs.
Recent policies are seen to be more specific. The Decree 99/2014/NĐ-CP on 25 October
2014 provides guidance to investments on capacity building for S&T among HEIs in Viet
Nam. The decree focus on (i) to develop human capacity on S&T through advanced
training, to establish research groups, to support leading experts and junior excellent
researchers; (ii) to enhance research facilities, such as advance labs, library, academic
journals, accessing to scientific databases, and to adopt advanced technologies; (iii) to
provide financial supports to academic activities, such as research projects, scientific
conferences, publication, commercialization of research results. Investments priorities
will be given to universities, which have high quality research outcomes; or those located
in disadvantage areas. Universities with good industrial connections and/or international
academic reputation will be given priority. Implementation procedure is, however,
complicated involving different ministries, such as Ministry of Planning and Investment
(MPI), Ministry of Finance (MOF), and Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST).
115
http://www.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/portal/chinhphu/hethongvanban?mode=detail&document_id=16305
89
c. Intellectual Properties, Patents and Licensing
In 2005 Viet Nam issued Intellectual Property Law, which is especially important to
innovation and commercialization of research results. The Law regulates patent
application procedure, technology transfer, and innovation protection. As a consequence,
the total number of patents granted in Viet Nam between 1981 and 2011 has increased
116 117
from 81 to 985 . During only last 5 years, it increased by 20% .
However, ownership of STI outcomes remains an issue for technology transfer or

commercialization, especially when research taken place within university using state
resources.
d. University Autonomy and Research Evaluation
A greater institutional autonomy will help universities to take charge and be innovative in
creating STI evaluation practices that is more effective. University autonomy has been a
central issue in HEI reform agenda during last decade, but still an obstacle for
institutional reforms.
Policies towards STI evaluation are important for funding allocation. The Circular
11/2016/TT-BGDĐT by MOET on 11 April 2016 regulates the criteria and procedures for
granting approval and final evaluations of research projects under MOET funding. The
criteria are (i) the extend of importance to the development of education, improving
quality of education and for socio-economic development; (ii) improving knowledge and
research capacity to university lecturers and administrators; and (iii) combination
education with technology transfer. The regulation has multiple objectives for a research
project, but vague on quality assessment regulations.
A2.2.2. Policies on E&I Education
a. Building Research Capacity through Ph.D. Training
The well-known project for PhDs training abroad is the 322 Program. It was established
by the Decision 322/2000/QĐ-TTG on “Training scientific human resource at HEIs and
research institutes abroad" on 19 April 2000. The 322 Program provides scholarship for
excellent students to study abroad. It was followed by 911 Program established by the
decision 911/QĐ-TTg on 17/6/2010 to prepare human resource at PhD level for HEIs in
Viet Nam during 2010-2020. The 322 Program has sent to abroad 4,600 people with the
total budget VND 2,500 billions (approximately USD 150 millions). Around 3,000 people
returned with PhD degrees and have contributed greatly to improve the quality of Viet
Nam HEIs. While the 322 and 911 Program can be seen an extensive investment of the
116
Source: http://baohothuonghieu.com/banquyen/tin-chi-tiet/viet-nam-ngay-cang-co-nhieu-phat-minh-sang-che/1311.html
117
The Intellectual Property Law covers a wide range of scientific research and technological innovations. There is no data available
on the total number of patents granted for specific kinds of products.
90
government for HEIs in Viet Nam, there are concerns about utilize the potentials of those
118
well-trained people when they return . Recently, there is a remarkable effort to improve
the quality of PhD training inside Viet Nam. The Circular 08/2017/TT-BGDĐT dated
04.04.2017 regarding Regulations for Admission and Training of doctoral degrees,
require supervisors must have at least one ISI indexed article, and doctoral students must
have proven capacity of foreign language.
b. New Model Universities and International Partners
One of government initiative is to invest on excellent research-oriented universities. The

MOET has planned to establish three to five universities of international standards in
Hanoi, and Ho Chi Minh cities with strategic partners from Japan, French and German. The
government will spend $400 million from World Bank and Asia Development Bank loans
to build up four universities. At this time, Viet Nam German University, Hanoi Science &
Technology University, and Viet Nam Japan University have been established. These
universities are new and not yet proved to be successful. However, these universities all
commit to provide high quality education and research at international standards.
c. E&I Education within HEIs
Most of initiatives mentioned above are capacity building for research rather than
innovations and technological development. Even though research capacity is a
foundation for innovation and entrepreneurship it does not automatically lead to E&I
development. Nurturing E&I mind set and skills requires long-term commitments to
curriculum improvements. E&I education requires particular approaches such as
experience-based course designs, consulting, coaching, mentoring, etc. Those are still
119
almost missing in education landscape of E&I in Viet Nam . To date, establishing a new
degree program requires permission from MOET, and it is a complicated procedure that
might take year to complete.
d. E&I Awareness and Entrepreneurship Culture
Entrepreneurship culture plays an important role in E&I ecosystem. The rate for the fear
of failure in Viet Nam is still high, ranking the 8th out of 60 countries in 2015 (GEM Viet
Nam, 2015/2016). Generally, people tend to fear the most is not financial loss or wasted
time; rather it is the risk to their pride, status, and prestige; for example, what their peers
will think of them if they fail (Bernstein 1996). Hence, there is a link between a society's
stigma of failure and the amount of entrepreneurial activity within it (Johansson 2006).
Those who fail and go bankrupt tend to be considered as ‘losers’ by their peers, and
furthermore, it is a great challenge to obtaining financing for a new venture, since
investors might be reluctant to invest in ‘failed entrepreneurs’. Researchers who develop
118
https://tuoitre.vn/doan-ket-buon-cua-de-an-322-492506.htm
119
IPP interventions are included these activities in selected participating institutions which is addressed in Chapter 2.
91
advanced technologies tend to be not interested in starting a company or joining a start-

up, because they feel more comfortable with a permanent position. Therefore, the
approach of fostering an entrepreneurial culture among young and highly educated
people and shift their attention towards entrepreneurship is crucial (Lüthje and Franke
2002).
The evolvement of university's role from “research-oriented”, “teaching-focused” into an

‘entrepreneurial university’ to emphasize its ‘third mission’ of supporting economic and
social development has been taken slowly in Viet Nam. At individual HEIs, the extent to
which efforts given to rising awareness depends on the perception of the leader, which
can be seen through encouraging extracurricular activities for E&I. Saigon Technology
University, Foreign Trade University, National Economics University, etc, can be
examples.
At national level, the issue of cultural resistant has been addressed in the two National
Projects (844 and 1667) discussed below.
A2.2.3 Finance Instruments: Accessibility to Resources and Incentives for E&I

development
a. Research and Innovation Funding Mechanism
At the systematic level, the research funding mechanism is quite complex and
bureaucratic. Although the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) is designated as
the governmental agency responsible for research and innovation, the Ministry of
Planning and Investment (MPI) and the Ministry of Finance (MOF) both play additional
important roles because of their shared responsibilities for allocating a national budget to
scientific and technological research. Two other ministries, the Ministry of Education and
Training (MOET) and the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MOIA), also play a role, as do the 58
provincial and five municipal governments across Viet Nam. Currently, about 2% of the
State budget is allocated to S&T – about US$850 million. MOST manages 57 to 60% of this
budget. MOST’s share of the budget is heavily committed by the agreement with MOF; it
must allocate funds to other ministries for expenditure on salaries for research staff as
well as for support ministry research institutes and centers. MOET, for example, which
has funding responsibility for 54 universities, receives its research budget in this way.
Though MOST is held accountable for expenditure of State budget on S&T, it is left with
only about 10% of that budget to allocate in support of national research and innovation
initiatives.
Public HEIs in Viet Nam receive block grants from their line ministries or provincial
people committees. The size of grants is determined by the number of student enrolments
and staff. Only about 2% of the funds for public universities are used for research. The
block grants are made on a rolling three-year basis, with public HEIs are able to carry
forward any unallocated funds for up to three years. Public HEIs also receive income from
92
tuition fees, which generally account for about one-half of their revenue (Le & Hayden,
2017). Research-oriented universities may also generate revenue from research and
technology transfer contracts, but it usually relatively small. As reported by the MOST,
there are 36 STI fund/foundations in Viet Nam including one national S&T foundation
namely National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED), 16
local STI foundations, one university S&T foundation, and 18 STI development
foundations within the business sector.
120
NAFOSTED supports young scientists to pursue research careers. Moreover, the
Foundation aims to create a stimulating academic environment in Viet Nam by
commitment to: (i) build up a durable, innovative and conductive environment to
research; (ii) improving research capacity of young scientists and to establish research
centers with international standards; (iii) enhancing the quality of scientific research and
the number of publications in ISI-indexed journals; (iv) encouraging international
cooperation for Vietnamese scientists; (v) promoting research endeavors in corporates
sector focusing on technologies development for national economic growth and
competitiveness.
Another scheme is Viet Nam Foundation for Technology and Innovation (VIFOTEC), which
was established by the Viet Nam Union of Science and Technology (VUSTA) in 1992. The
VIFOTEC provides funding for scientific research and technological innovations, for
instance, organizing national STI prizes, STI exhibitions, and scholarship to excellent
students, etc. The foundation actually helped some outstanding researchers and research
project in receiving supports and disseminating research results.
The Fostering Innovation through Research, Science and Technology (FIRST) Project is to
be implemented from 2013 to 2019 by MOST with an aim to improve productivity,
competitiveness, and quality of Viet Nam's economic growth through improving scientific
research performance, developing and applying technologies, and promoting innovations
in enterprises. The FIRST project seeks to support STI by (i) designing and piloting new
policies to improve the national policy framework on STI; (ii) building capacity for
Government Research Institutes towards further linkages with enterprises and market
demands; (iii) promoting technological innovations in enterprises, and encouraging the
establishment of STI enterprises. FIRST’s objectives are ambitious but their impacts seem
still to be ahead. Most of the products supported by the project are basically the
commercialization of indigenous products.
Government policies also regulate HEIs to develop their own research findings. The
Decree 99/2014/NĐ-CP regulated those HEIs, who received research funding from the
government, have to allocate a certain percentage of their budget, at least 5% of revenue,
120
NAFOSTED was operated on March 2008 based on the Government’s Decree 122/2003/NĐ-CP, and later replaced
by the Decree 23/2014/NĐ-CP.
93
for STI activities. In the same direction, HEIs also have to allocate at least 3% of its tuition
fee revenue to students’ research projects. Some HEIs have developed their own STI
funds. For example, Hanoi National University (HNU) has established its own Science &
Technology Development Fund (STDF) on 23 June 2008 under the Decision 3042/KHCN.
In a survey conducted in Saigon Technology University (STU), the respondent claims that
STU has a budget for lecturers and student’s research. However, budget size is small and
granted on basis project rather a permanent source of expenditure. The situation is
similar to Ho Chi Minh City Open University (OPU) as the respondent certified that OPU
has research budget for lecturers and students, but the amount of grants given to each
project is quite small. University leaders often recognize that research is an important
mission, but most of them do not see direct benefits in term of revenue to their
institutions. Instead, research is just seen as long-term investments for university
branding. Therefore, universities are unwilling to spend heavily for research activities.
The option of increasing tuition fees has been explored and recommended in a review by
the World Bank concerning the HEI system’s governance and regulation (Master Plan for
Viet Nam’s Higher Education System 2012, p.57). The funding mechanisms for public HEIs
are slowly evolving, with more encouragement now being given to individual institutions
to manage their own budgets. Public HEIs are now also free to set tuition fee on their
deliveries of ‘non-regular’ training programs.
At institutional level, lecturers are required to spend at least one third of their working
time to do research. This regulation reduce probability that lecturers spending all their
working time on teaching to increase their income. The Circular 47/2014/TT-BGDĐT
required lecturers to work 40 hours per week throughout the academic year for teaching,
research, capacity building and community services. At national level, there are no
specific economic incentives to lecturers to do research. Some but not all the universities
provide financial rewarding to academic publication on international peer reviewed
journals. The Decree 99/2014/NĐ-CP regulates that research will get a bonus not higher
than 30 times of their monthly salary, for one article published on ISI, SCI or SCIE
journals. Lecturers will get a waiver of 20 hours of teaching if they published an academic
article at similar recognition.
It should be emphasized that, financial access above is merely research funding

mechanisms. Those findings are given base on screening procedures for research, which
aimed at generating new knowledge and measured by scientific papers. They are not open
for E&I activities. State funding for E&I are provided within national projects like 844
Project or 1667 Project, and for promotion E&I awareness or capacity building, rather
than providing grants for start-ups or innovations.
b. Loan and Venture Capital
Law on Supporting SMEs, issued in 2017 provides financial access supports such as
capital loans/funding from state budget or sponsored by the state (Article 6, 8 and 9). The
94
Decree 40/2014/NĐ-CP on utilization high profile individuals in S&T and the Decree
121
99/2014/NĐ-CP on development investment and encouraging S&T activities in HEIs
provides a wide range of financial incentives and supports to S&T activities to university
lecturers. For instance, Article 18 of the Decree 40 directs that high-profile scientists are
to be provided financial supports for attending conference abroad, for publication, for
research projects, for favorable extra income equivalent to 100% current salary.
The Law provides not just loans/funding but also other favorable conditions for SMEs
such as tax exemptions, land use allocation, and so on. Decree 80/2007/NĐ-CP and
Decree 96/2010/NĐ-CP of the Government provide financial favors for “science and
technological enterprise”, which is defined by the fact that its products are developed
from research results. Favors given include tax exemptions, capital loans, training and
consulting services. The Decree 99/2014/NĐ-CP (Article 11) gives tax exempts to
individual and companies on the amount of money spent as donation to universities, for
import technological facilities for S&T activities, and for transferring technologies from
universities.
c. Contributions from Private Sector
Enterprises are encouraged to establish S&T funds to invest in scientific research and
technology development. HEIs will have more chance to get research funding by applying
to these S&T funds and signing S&T contracts with enterprises. Legal documents related
to this issue include the Decision 36/2007/QĐ-BTC of the MOF on regulations and
operation of enterprises’ S&T funds; the Decree 95/2014/NĐ-CP of the Viet Nam
Government regulates investment and financial regulations of S&T activities. The Circular
12/2016/TTLT-BKHCN-BTC directs on how to manage research fund by the enterprise.
STI funds established by enterprises/industries mostly serve R&D activities related to the
fields of expertise, while private foundation as an independent agency might also serve
other long term and not-for-profit research projects by attracting social capitals. In Viet
Nam however, there is no legislation framework for establishing private foundations
other than the ones within enterprises mentioned above.
A2.2.4 Supporting Mechanisms
Government can play a key role in connecting universities to industries and investment
funds to develop S&T clusters infrastructure. In the Vietnamese government views, the
establishment of high tech parks is among key strategy for encouraging university–
industry interactions, technology transfer and commercialization (Marea Fatseas, in Grant
Harman eds, p.104).
121
Nghị định 99/2014/NĐ-CP and Nghị định 40/2014/NĐ-CP
95
a. Science parks and clusters of E&I stakeholders
One of government initiatives is Saigon High-Tech Park (SHTP), which was established on
October 24, 2002. The Park is developed in a strategic location near to the downtown,
airport and seaports of HCM city. It offers "one-stop-shop" application service and highest
legitimate tax incentives to investors. It has been considered a place of foreign investment
attraction in high tech, such as Intel, Nidec (Japan), Sanofi (France), Datalogic (Italia),
Microchip (the U.S), Sonion (Denmark), etc., as well as from leading domestic educational
institutions and companies such as FPT Corp., Hutech, Nanogen, etc. As of May 2014, there
are 77 projects of manufacturing, research, training and services in SHTP with the total
investment of $US 2.4 billions. More than 18.000 employees have been working at the
Park, including hi-tech manufacturing, hi-tech and commercial services, research and
development (R&D), training and incubation, and in four sectors of priority: (i)
Microelectronics, IT and Telecommunication, (ii) Precision Mechanics & Automation, (iii)
New, advanced materials, new energy, (iv) Biotechnology applied in pharmaceuticals and
environment.
Similar to SHTP, Hoa Lac Hi-tech Park is a national cluster established by the Government
in northern Viet Nam, which aims to become a city of science to attract investors in
research & development; to develop manufacturing for hi-tech products in the fields of
Biotechnology, IT, new material technology and Automation technology. Investors in Hoa
Lac Hi-tech Park enjoy the highest incentives according to the regulation of Hi-tech Law
and the regulation on "one door, on site". These science parks are also the venues for
high-quality universities project such as Hanoi Science and Technology University in Hoa
Lac Hi-tech Park, and Fulbright University Viet Nam in Saigon High-Tech Park (SHTP). In
the near future, these universities are expected to be the hubs for E&I ecosystems
development, that is generating new knowledge, ideas and bringing them into business
world.
At institutional level, Information Technology Park (ITP) established by Viet Nam

National University Ho Chi Minh City (VNU-HCM)122 provides favorable environment for
education, research and technology development in the field of information technology
(IT). ITP aims at developing a start-up ecosystem to support start-up companies; training
high quality human resources in IT and software engineering for the HEIs and start-up
communities; and developing IT products for HEIs and industries.
b. Promoting Connections between Industries and HEIs
A skilled workforce is crucial to Viet Nam’s modernization, as pointed out in the Viet Nam
Development Report (World Bank, 2015). A challenge is the mismatch in the labor
market, where there is a desperate shortage of adequate skills workers. The report shows
122
ITP establishment is under the Decision 157/QĐ/ĐHQG/TCCB on 02 May 2003.
96
that most employers attribute difficulties in hiring new workers to inadequate skills of
applicants, and to a scarcity of workers in some occupations, which to be seen
consequences of the disconnection between HEIs and industries.
S&T Law 29/2013/QH13 (Article 32) states that Government will encourage and create
favorable conditions for collaborations between HEIs and enterprises by providing 30%
of matching fund for developing new technology, new products, or improving
123
productivity . In our field study, respondents from HSU stated that the university has a
plan for collaboration with enterprises but this plan is not yet in operation, and HSU has
not possessed scientific and technological research results that are significant enough to
be transferred to industries, or can be commercialized. STU has some linkages with
enterprises but a permanent mechanism to support lecturers maintaining the connections
with enterprises has not in place yet. A policy initiative for strengthening connections
between universities and industries is granting permission to HEIs to establish business
entities attached to the school. Company owners, business people and practitioners
invited to be guest lecturers are now becoming normal practice. It helps change the
mindset of lecturers and students on entrepreneurship and start-up culture, providing
124
more internship opportunities. In public HEIs, by Public Servant Law , lecturers are not
allowed to establish their own private business; however, they can contribute capitals and
work for private business per contract if approved by employers.
c. Other institutional supports
Technology infrastructure such as laboratories, libraries can be very expensive and this is
where government supports are needed. It is common practices in developed countries
that there are agencies to assist scientists in transferring knowledge, ideas, inventions,
discoveries, research results into commercialized products. Those bodies can be
established within universities or as independent bodies. There are some similar
organizations in Viet Nam, however they are private businesses. One example is SB
Law125, a company providing patent registration and brand name protection services,
operating as a service company in the market without state grants. Those businesses
enable legal protections for technology transfer and commercialization of new
ideas/products. Therefore, it helps to promote innovation in general. However, within
universities, respondents from our field studies reported that their universities have paid
no attention to patenting/licensing issues or to establishing Technology Transfer Office
(TTOs) or Technology Licensing Office (TLOs) to support scientists.
123
http://www.moj.gov.vn/vbpq/lists/vn%20bn%20php%20lut/view_detail.aspx?itemid=28730
124
http://www.moj.gov.vn/vbpq/lists/vn%20bn%20php%20lut/view_detail.aspx?itemid=26495
125
http://baohothuonghieu.com/banquyen/tin-chi-tiet/gioi-thieu-cong-ty-sb-law/507.html
97
A2.3 Governmental Initiatives on Promoting E&I Education and

Development
Two significant national projects should be mentioned are the Project entitled “National
126
Innovative Start-up Ecosystem Support Project to 2025” approved by the Prime Minister
(Decision 844/QĐ-TTg dated May 18, 2016 – in short, Project 844) and the Project
entitled “Supporting Students to be Entrepreneurs to 2025” approved by the Prime
Minister (Decision 1665/QĐ-TTg dated Oct 30, 2017 – in short, Project 1667). Both are to
be implemented nation wide.
The Project 844 can be seen a comprehensive planning for E&I development which
includes various aspects and policy instruments, aimed at supporting innovation start-ups
127
by various activities, including education, incubation and networking . This project
provides supports for individual/organizations who start a new business based on new
technology or business model. It includes providing information, infrastructures, training
/coaching /mentoring for entrepreneurs, promoting entrepreneurship in media, and
administration & financial support.
Specifically, it aimed to support 800 projects and 200 start-ups, of which 50 companies
will successfully pool capital from venture capitalists and perform mergers and
acquisitions with a combined value of VND 1,000 billion. By 2025, the project will support
developing 2,000 innovative start-ups and 600 innovative enterprises. As many as 100
enterprises benefited from the project will successfully pool capital from venture
capitalists and perform mergers and acquisitions with a combined value of VND2 trillion.
There is also a high expectation that the Project 844 to develop and support the national
ecosystem till 2025 for innovative start-ups would help create an ecosystem that is more
conducive for innovation, entrepreneurship and start-ups. Eligible for support are
individuals and groups of individuals having start-up projects or start-up enterprises
which can grow rapidly on the basis of intellectual property, technologies and new
business models and have operated for up to five years from the date of being granted the
business registration certificates; and organizations providing services, physical and
technical facilities, carrying out communication campaigns for innovative start-ups, or
investing in these enterprises, with at least one year of operation in the field or providing
supports for at least 10 start-up enterprises. Under the scheme, by 2020 the legal system
and a national e-portal for start-ups will be developed to provide support to 200 start-up
126
http://www.vnu-itp.edu.vn/vi/tin-tuc/hoat-dong-itp/443-ha-tra-ha-sinh-tha-i-kha-i-nghia-p-a-i-ma-i-sa-ng-ta-o-
qua-i-c-gia.html
127
See section 5 of this policy document:
http://vanban.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/portal/chinhphu/hethongvanban?class_id=2&mode=detail&document_id=1
84702
98
enterprises, 50 of which will be able to lure investment from venture investors or get
involved in merger and acquisition deals of a gross value of around VND 1 trillion.
The Project 1665 is focused in promoting entrepreneurship in HEIs and supporting

students to be entrepreneur. The objectives of the project are to equip students with
knowledge and skills on entrepreneurship and connecting them with venture
capitol/investment funds. Activities identified include promoting entrepreneurship using
media, conferences, festival events, forum, websites, and so on; establishing and training
E&I supporting staffs (E&I lecturers, coaches, mentors, etc); increasing publishing books,
references materials; encouraging HEIs to have E&I elective/required courses and
programs in their curriculum. More institutionalized is the establishment of Centres for
Entrepreneur Support, Student Clubs on E&I or Entrepreneurs Support Fund to help
students to be entrepreneurs.
Under such a context, IPP2 for supporting HEIs has been implemented, being consistent
with the two remarkable initiatives of the government mentioned above.
A2.4 Conclusions
Existing policies on E&I reflect the fact that Viet Nam have been providing some policy
supports to E&I development, in terms of regulatory framework, education, finance, and
supporting mechanisms. Those policies are in place throughout three stages of the
research-based innovation process and entrepreneurship. This can be described as a
linear process: discovery/generating new knowledge; translating new knowledge into
technical development; and bringing products/services into market. However, there are
concerns about systemic coordination among existing policies, as well as their
effectiveness in implementation.
It should be emphasized that, there is lack of supporting policies for E&I education, and
particularly the university-based E&I ecosystem. Under such a context IPP2 has been
implemented as a testing instrument through which university leaders and policy makers
are able to identify what work or doesn’t work and how to achieve their goals.
Viet Nam is in transition context. It is expected that HEIs will be granted greater extent of
institutional autonomy. HEI financing models are changing and this will impact HEIs
behaviors to be more market-oriented. The existing policies have included finance
instruments although the implementation of those policies depends on the availability of
the public resources granted to individual schools. Most of policy documents are seen a
guidance direction rather than a mechanisms having particular measurements of
achievement.
HEIs do not stand alone but to perform their missions as a part of a complex and
interactive environment. Enabling the contributions of HEIs requires holistic approaches
since all factors of the E&I ecosystem affect one another, including policy, market, human
99
capital, culture, and support mechanisms. Policy interventions are needed to help
systemized their endeavors and creating a supportive environment in which HEIs can
transform their mission and strategies toward entrepreneurial university, instead
emphasizing heavily in their traditional “ivory tower” characteristic.
Summary of Annex 2
This section provides brief review on Viet Nam policies for E&I education and development. It
presents the overview on HE landscape, and major policy instruments including regulatory
environment, education, finance, and supporting mechanisms. In sum, legislative instruments
and governmental initiatives (law, regulations, national projects, foundations, programs, etc)
mostly focused on building research capacity and S&T development. Only recently the emphasis
of policy agenda has shifted more on E&I development. Basic laws such as Law on Intellectual
Properties, Law on Technology Transfer, etc. have been in place, as well as national programs on
promoting E&I (Project 844 to be implemented through cross sectors and Project 1665 for HEIs)
have been started. However, there is lack of supporting policy and mechanisms for E&I
education within HEIs, and especially for university-based E&I ecosystem. University autonomy
and governance remains obstacles for institutional initiatives and transforming into a new
model of university, which is more entrepreneurial and better meet the need of the society.
Figure A2.1 HE’s Graduation by subjects in Viet Nam (%)

Sources: MOET, 2016
100
Table A2.2 Specific domains that policy instruments impact to the E&I ecosystem
development in HEIs.
101
ANNEX 3.
VIETNAM POLICIES FOR SUPPORTING E&I
ECOSYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION:
SWOT ANALYSIS & DISCUSSIONS
In this section, we will first analyze the current situation of Vietnam HE sector with
respect to E&I by looking at the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (SWOT -
analysis) and the challenges that Vietnamese higher education institutions (HEIs) are
facing in introducing and developing E&I education. We then discuss policy development
options and alternatives to address those challenges in light of its existing situation and in
comparisons of international practices.
The introduction of E&I activities and curriculum for a number of Vietnamese universities
within the IPP2 provides us with a valuable opportunity to explore the challenges and
opportunities for HEIs to adopt and develop E&I ecosystem in general and E&I education
in particular and its relations with current policy development. In what follows, we
discuss the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the HE sector.
A3.1 Strengths for E&I Development in Vietnam
A3.1.1 A Generation of Entrepreneurial, Dynamic, and Motivated Youth
By July 2017, Vietnam’ population is 96.16 mil, in which 15-54 years old people accounted
128
for 61.79% (GSOV) . In a comparative study between Vietnam and Japan on
Enterprising Tendency & Entrepreneurship Awareness, Takeru Ohe (2018) pointed out
129
that in spite of traditional Confucian cultural influences , a high proportion of
130
Vietnamese youth is very active and motivated in entrepreneurship . It is possibly that
open door policy of Vietnam and the exposure to the global world these days have shaped
a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship within young generations of Vietnam.
128
General Statistics Office of Vietnam.
129
See section A3.2. below.
130
In this study, 42.8% respondents of Vietnam students are (i) ready to be entrepreneur (“I am willing to be and
being confident that am able to”); (ii) 15% are potential (I want to be an entrepreneur, however; it seems hard to
me”); (iii) 21% are in “sleeping mode” (“I can be an entrepreneur if I try. I do not want to be one, though”); and (iv)
21% have “no” attitude (“I do not want to be an entrepreneur. I am incapable of being one, either”). The percentage
of highly entrepreneurial students is very high compared to Japan, (i) 22.8%, (ii) 12.5%, (iii) 5.8%, and (iv) 58.9%
respectively (Ohe, 2018)
102
A3.1.2 The Constant Support and Commitment of Top Leaders
The Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) is constitutionally “the force leading the State and
Society”. The Resolutions of CPV issues every five-years congress make explicit reference
to the development of S&T as “a primary national policy”, playing “a key role in the
country’s socio-economic development”. The Resolutions of the Vietnamese government,
Law of Science and Technology, Law of Technology Transfer, Law of Intellectual
Properties, and so on, also show the constant supports of top level policy makers in
Vietnam towards STI development. It is consistent during last decades. There are Decrees
131
and Decisions to specified the above supports .
131
The Law of Science and Technology was first issued in 2000, amended in 2013, which provides a legislative foundation for the
public support of scientific research, technology development and innovation in Vietnam. It sets forth the particular tasks and
general principles of STI performance. More specifically, it affirms that “The state gives priority and focus national resources to the
development of S&T, especially the research infrastructure; promoting applied research, encouraging private investment in S&T
and the participation of the professional associations” (Article 6). It also provides a legal regulation framework on what
individuals/organizations allowed or prohibited to do related to STI activities (Article 8, 13, 14, 20). The Law also encourages and
sets the rule for establishment S&T Foundations, including national state foundations (such as NAFOSTED), other state foundations
under supervision of the local government, private foundations established by individual/ organizations/ enterprises (Article 60,
61,62, 63). Favorable incentives are provided in the forms of tax exemption, loan schemes (Article 64, 65). The Decree
95/2014/NĐ-CP (Article 20) and the Decree 118/2015/NĐ-CP (Article 16) provides specific favorable tax rate for S&T enterprises/
organizations. Another important legislation in STI is the Law of Technology Transfer, which was first issued in 2006 and revised in
June 2017. It is a comprehensive regulation for almost every aspect of technology transfer, including 60 articles, addressing a wide
range of issues (principles for identifying particular technologies are encouraged, limited, and prohibited for transferring; auditing
processes; technology transfer contracts, incentives for technology market access, etc.
Law of Intellectual Property (IP) was first issued in 2005, revised in 2009, identifying state policy in protection of IP. It provides a
necessary legal framework for commercialization of IP, which includes scientific research outputs and technology development. As
for HEIs, Higher Education Law 2012 has a chapter addressing the issue of S&T activities. However, this chapter includes only 691
words out of 16,915 words of the Law, which indicates the fact that STI was not seen an area of priority in HE legislation.
In order to implement the directions for national development in STI as stated in policy documents above, the Strategic Plan for
the Development of S&T 2011-2020 was approved by the Prime Minister in April 11, 2012. This document sets goals and specific
directions for S&T development, including priority fields of research. More importantly, it provides major solutions, emphasizing on
financing mechanisms reforms; strengthening private sector’s investment and contributions; promoting training for talents and
attracting high profile scientists from overseas, etc.
131
Most recently are the Proposal of Restructuring S&T organizations to 2010 and vision to 2030 which was approved by the Prime
131
Minister and the Directions, Goals, Major S&T Tasks between 2016-2020 , which was approved by the Minister of MOST. These
documents set specific goals and indicators for measurement the implementation success.
The latest proposal provides various solutions to achieve these goals. Related to HE system, it is worthy of note that the priorities
are identified as investment into national key laboratories (rather than universities); 30% of S&T state budget is for S&T
infrastructure development (rather than research projects), and especially, promoting the linkages between research institute,
universities and industries for commercialization of research outputs. However, the proposal focuses on governing reforms,
establishment of advance research center in collaborations with international partners, piloting state investment for non-public
S&T organizations, etc. One direction that related particularly to universities is the selection of potential institutions for intensive
investment to become research universities. Others can be listed as follow: (i) promoting network of research institute, universities
and industries; (ii) piloting establishment of S&T investment fund, with participation of the universities, research institutes,
individual scientists, government and enterprises.
These documents strongly indicated the constant support of Vietnam government in STI development. More important, they
103
In particular regarding E&I development, as indicated in Chapter 1, the 844 Proposal to

support the national ecosystem for innovative start-ups to 2025 demonstrated fully
awareness of the policy makers towards the importance of E&I development. The goals of
the Proposal are to create a favorable environment to support the establishment of a new
type of businesses, which has potentials growing fast due to exploring intellectual
properties, technology advantages and innovative business models. The Proposal includes
a wide range of solutions: information provision; establishing a cluster for E&I support
services; organizing TECHFEST (National Technological Entrepreneurship Festival) as an
annual international event; providing funding for incubators infrastructure improvement;
promoting entrepreneurship in social media; enabling networking and partnerships,
reforming legislation for E&I businesses, etc. Following this direction, Project 1665, which
132
is the Proposal of Supporting Students in Entrepreneurship , determines the request of
E&I education in HEIs and to provide specific guidance on implementation.
Proposal 1665 sets goals for HEIs to 2020, that at least 90% of the total number of
students is equipped with entrepreneurship knowledge and skills by the time graduation.
100% universities and 50% of two years colleges that have at least two entrepreneurship
proposals supported by appropriate funds or engaged with venture capital or businesses.
The Proposal also requires supporting for E&I education by training lecturers/mentors;
developing course contents/guide books that help the trainers; organizing
events/exchange activities/workshops on entrepreneurship; encouraging the universities
to develop required/election courses on entrepreneurship; and strengthening student
internship.
These initiatives prove the commitment of the government towards E&I development
within HE sector, and it implies greatly to the transforming of universities towards E&I
directions.
A3.2 The Weaknesses of Vietnamese HEIs

This section identifies the challenges that HEIs are facing in contributing to E&I ecosystem
development in general, and in E&I education in particular, as well as the challenging for
policy makers.
A3.2.1 Teaching Orientation
The most serious and inherent problem facing Vietnamese HEIs in S&T and E&I is the
teaching orientation. The two reasons leading to this situation are (i) system structure
emphasized the commitment of the government by guarantee 2% of the state budget investment for S&T development. There is
consistent between various levels of policy- making processes in supporting statement to the STI development. That can be seen
the greatest strength of the STI policy-making practices of Vietnam.
132
Decision 1665/QĐ-Ttg by the Prime Minister on Oct 2017.
104
inherited from Soviet model that separates universities and research institutes; and (ii)
the serious lack of resources causing low investment on research and training services are
to be seen the major sources of revenue.
Teaching orientation is a situation inherited from Soviet model’s legacy, where there is
separation between university and research institutes. The former focuses heavily on
training while the latter is on research. The collaboration between research institutes and
universities to date is quite limited, usually in the form of invited scholars only. There
were also attempts to merge some research institutes into universities. It has not
succeeded however due to the resistances of the research institutes. Such division does
not fit with the requirements of strengthening STI, the foundation of E&I ecosystem
development, due to E&I is naturally being a combination between generating new
knowledge, applying it by technology development, and bringing them into the market. To
date, such a separation still exists in HE and S&T landscape of Vietnam.
The separation between research and training is taken in various forms. Institutionally,
HEIs accounted for one third of S&T organizations in Vietnam, and there is little evidence
showing the close connections between HEIs and those S&T organizations. Ph.D.
133
education takes place mostly in research institutes rather than in universities .
Moreover, within HEIs, the number of faculty members engaging intensively in research
134
activities is small . Most productive in terms of research outputs are the very few
research institutes, such as Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology (VAST), the
Agriculture Academy and a number of research institutes under line ministries rather
135
than universities .
More importantly, at institutional level, the student/faculty member ratio is relatively

136
high (24.2:1) . Salary of faculty members is low, which leads to the fact that the majority
of faculty members spend most of their time for teaching tasks, including teaching in non-
regular programs, which is seen the “rice bowl” of the universities. The total number of
teaching hours reaching as high as 1000 per year, or even 2000 as high, is not rare
anymore.
133
There are 160 institutions offering Ph.D. education in which universities accounted for only 50.
134
Total of research articles from Vietnam in international peer review journals indexed by ISI in 2015 is 3,137 (Web of Science,
accessed 31.03.2016). Compared to 24,000 doctoral degree holders or over 70,000 faculty members within HE system, the
percentage of academics engaged in research and their productivity is very humble.
135
Research outputs of the VAST is equivalent to the total research outputs of the four major universities in Vietnam (see Hien P.
D., 2010).
136
This ratio was (30:1) (Harman G, 2009, p.78). See also Dao Van Khanh, Pham Thi Ly, Nguyen Van Tuan, 2012. “Scientific
Research in Vietnam: Contemporary Issues and proposal Strategic Solutions”. This article can be accessed at
http://www.lypham.net/?p=699 (In Vietnamese). Compared to Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia the ratio is 23:1; 20:1; 15:1
respectively.
105
Research activities, the fundamental for E&I capacity, in Vietnamese universities have also
been discouraged by the existing funding mechanisms for HEIs. This situation has been
well documented in several studies by the WB, OECD, and others. Only 10% of the total
137
S&T national budget is allocated for research projects national wide , let alone the
research funding for HEIs. Moreover, a part of research funds must returned to the
138
government due to the complexity of procedures, as reported in 2012 .
The strong emphasis on teaching in Vietnam HEIs and the rigid mechanisms for research
funding obviously undermines university research capacity, and remains the obstacle for
E&I development.
A3.2.2 Shortages in University Industries Linkages
A study (based on 300 companies survey) conducted by T&C Consulting pointed out that
Vietnamese enterprises do not trust that relationship with HEIs will bring them benefits.
Most of cooperation between universities and industries are in the forms of providing
internship and employment opportunities (T&C Consulting, report to POHE, 2014). There
is little evidence of effective collaborations between HEIs and industries/businesses in
Vietnam beyond the training purposes (internship, placement). In other words, HEIs and
research institutions in Vietnam are seen as a minor source of innovation for industries,
139
especially to the local businesses .
Lack of collaborations with industries is the significant barrier that limits Vietnamese
HEIs from moving forward to E&I development. Case studies of FPTU and FTU reported in
Chapter 2 pointed out the fact that the success of those both universities based on very
strong linkages with industries/businesses, which set them apart from other HEIs in the
system.
Lessons from Finland pointed that the participation of practitioners in curriculum

development, lecturing, coaching, mentoring is extremely important to E&I education. The
Silicon Valley in the USA also demonstrates the importance of university - industry
140
linkages . Collaboration between academia and industries is increasingly a critical
component of E&I ecosystem. It is critical for skill development (education and training),
the generation, acquisition, and adoption of knowledge (innovation and technology
transfer), and the promotion of entrepreneurship (start-ups and spin-off) (José Guimón,
137
See also Dao Van Khanh, Pham Thi Ly, Nguyen Van Tuan, 2012. “Scientific Research in Vietnam: Contemporary Issues and
proposal Strategic Solutions”. This article can be accessed at http://www.lypham.net/?p=699 (In Vietnamese).
138
https://www.tienphong.vn/cong-nghe-khoa-hoc/tra-lai-ngan-sach-125-ty-dong-khong-hieu-qua-khong-chi-96161.tpo
139
Data indicated that, in 2005, revenue from activities related to S&T accounted for only 0.5% of the total revenue of public HEIs
(WB 2007, p.83). There is no more updated data available regarding HEIs revenue generating from research performance, which
suggests a low level of engaging with industries and commercialization of research, and no significant progress has been made
recently.
140
See more details in Annex 1, Section A1.3.7.
106
2013). Weaknesses in connections with industries are long standing challenges for
Vietnam HEIs in E&I education and E&I ecosystem development, and a reality widely
perceived.
A3.2.3 Financial and Legal Mechanism Constraints
The third serious issue that universities in Vietnam need to face is the fact that most of
universities are state-owned, that means they are subject to stringent financial and capital
management requirements/regulations. The nature of state-own entities makes it difficult
for universities to engage in E&I activities.
As universities belong to the state, it is difficult for them to engage in venture-type

investment. Typically, state-owned entities are required to preserve the state capital
(investment) hence venture-type investment does not lend itself readily to this
requirement. As explained by a senior representative from FTU, “by nature when we are
investing in venture-capital business initiative, it is very likely that nine out of ten
investments will go bust but the remaining one may be more than enough to compensate
the nine loss-making ventures. However, the current regulations do not allow you to
engage in these venture investments”. This is exactly the problem that BK-Holdings (BKH)
is facing, as noted in Chapter 2. Such constrains are legal barriers that discouraged HEIs to
move toward an entrepreneurial university.
This regulation creates a mindset and practice - that in order to disburse funding from
universities, it would require something touchable and concrete. Innovative ideas and
business plans are not good enough for disbursement. To deal with this problem, there
are a few solutions. First, in the longer run, universities themselves must develop their
own university-based E&I ecosystem. Secondly, in the short-term universities might want
to collaborate with angel investors like Vietnam Silicon Valley so that funding could be
make available to promising start-ups in universities.
Generally, legal framework constraints for HEIs are mainly the issues of institutional
autonomy. At the present, by law HEIs can make decisions on their own on numerous
issues. However, those decisions must follow regulations set forth by the MOET. This
mechanism is better than the previous “asking-giving”, but still limit the potential of the
HEIs due to the strictness and rigidity of those regulations, which make every initiative of
the HEIs to be quite risky.
Particularly, the financial regulation system of state-own entities makes it difficult for
public HEIs to engage in any type of investment involving risks of loss. One example is the
case of BK-Holdings (BKH). BKH was established by Bach Khoa University (BKU) in 2008
with VND 2 billion the initial investment of BKU, a state-own entity, which is considered
state-capital. As a consequence, BHK is required to preserve that capital although
engaging E&I initiatives has risks naturally. Therefore, the invested equity in BKH is
107
considered state-capital and BHK is required to preserve that capital, hence making it
difficult to invest in promising start-ups.
A3.2.4 Confucian Cultural Influences
Vietnam society is deeply rooted in tradition ideologies of Confucianism, which do not

encourage E&I values. The long standing of Confucian cultural has profound impact on the
mentality, teaching modality and methodologies in Vietnam. Since the elementary school,
Vietnamese students are taught to see teacher as an idol. Thinking differently than
teacher, parents or other senior people and voicing up might be accused as “bad person”,
if not punished. The learning assessment, testing, and granting degrees system add more
nutrition to maintain such situation by requesting students to repeat what they have
learned. Such a situation deeply contrasts to the mindset of an innovator or entrepreneur.
The perception of society (from parents, professors, and friends) over success and failures
has created unnecessary pressures on potential start-ups entrepreneurs, due to the fact
that the mindset of “save-face” is still dominant. It should be mentioned that, although
Vietnamese young people seem to have a high entrepreneurship the country has not yet
developed a culture that is more tolerable toward failures. As indicated by a veteran
business lecturer at FTU, “In contrast to business culture in other countries that accept
failures as something valuable as people is expected to learn from their mistake. In Vietnam
if you fail, you are done”.
There are many cases where winners of start-ups/innovation competition competed only
to get the prizes rather than getting their ideas into real business. Therefore, there are
universities that consider E&I and start-ups just as an alternatives that may complement
141
the job placement for students.
In a study over the influence of cultural and socioeconomic factors on the growth of
entrepreneurship in Vietnam, Vuong, Q.H &Tran, T.D (2009) argue that traditional
cultural values continue to have a strong impact on the Vietnamese society, and to a large
extent adversely affect its entrepreneurial spirit. According to Vuong, though enjoying a
lawful status and increasing visibility in society, private entrepreneurs continue to occupy
the lower rank and dignity. Low quality business education is both a victim and culprit of
the long-standing tradition that looks down on the role of private entrepreneurship in the
country.
The implication is that, improving curriculum, teaching methodologies and testing modes
are important but not enough if we did not target the deeper layer, that is the culture
141
In a workshop opened to seek solutions to promote start-ups in Vietnam by the Ministry of Planning and Investment in October,
Mr Meir Dardashti, a specialist in developing innovative ecosystems from Ideality Roads Incubator (Israel), advised Vietnam to
build a culture of accepting start-up failures to restart a new business if they have good initiatives and integrity.
108
142
embedded into every element of educational system and the society . Without taking
into consideration the cultural constraints, policy development might be creating
“movement” rather than making real changes in E&I ecosystem.
A3.2.5 Emphasis on S&T rather than E&I
Interviewees from our survey reported that, almost all regulatory documents providing
instruction/funding on S&T development rather E&I. More importantly, S&T activities
might lead to tangible and measurable outputs; such as research articles in international
peer review journals or patents, while E&I outcomes are deeply rooted in socio-economic
development but less measurable to the universities - at least at the present.
Traditionally, the number of research publications is the major indicator of research
capacity of HEIs. It influences greatly to the ranking position of the university therefore it
has significant impacts to the reputation of HEIs, meaning the attractions to students and
resources.
A3.3 Opportunities for HEIs in E&I Education and for Policy Development
Along with economic globalization including cross-border education, Vietnam HE system
has been increasingly integrated into the world and adopted more and more international
norms and practices.
A.3.3.1 Greater Level of Institutional Autonomy Granted to HEIs in Amendment of

Higher Education Law143
144
Being consistent with top leaders’ statements , there is a constant and persistent trend
towards increasing university autonomy in Vietnam during last decades. The Decree
43/2006/NĐ-CP and the Decree 77/NQ-CP issued by the Government dated April 25,
2006 and Oct 24, 2014 respectively, which regulates the financial autonomy of HEIs,
reflects the fact that the government is committed to increase the level of autonomy for
HEIs so that they can improve their performance and survive in the global competition.
The Draft of Amendment shows that both public and private sector will be granted
greater level of autonomy regarding finance, personnel, academic matters and
international cooperation.
Additional to that, Resolution 14/NQ-TW of the Vietnam Communist Party emphasized a

greater role for private universities with plan to increase the number of student enrolled
in private universities to 40% of the total student population by 2020. This goal may or
may not be possible to achieve in time, but the resolution points out the direction of a
142
See also Section A2.2.2. Annex 2.
143
See also Section A2.2.1. Annex 2.
144
http://vietnamnet.vn/vn/giao-duc/tuyen-sinh/pho-thu-tuong-vu-duc-dam-tu-chu-dai-hoc-la-duong-mot-chieu-405958.html
109
greater role for private sector in HE, and it seems an irreversible trend. The nature of
private HEIs is to be driven by market needs, therefore E&I education possibly would
become their focus when graduates realize that innovation capacity and entrepreneur’
characteristics, attributes and values are among the most important factors for their
success. This in turn strengthening university prestige, which is greatly desirable for
Vietnamese universities in the context of severe competition. The maturity of the private
sector in HE will help HEIs to be able to focus more on long- term vision, as well having
flexibility to create a new road. In the specific context of Vietnam, the privatization of HE
can be a factor influencing the movement towards entrepreneurial universities. Through
implementation of IPP2, FPTU can be a showcase for this argument. Other private
universities participating IPP2 in various forms, such as STU, NTTU are also
demonstration for the motivation of private sector towards E&I development.
Similarly, and at the same time, greater autonomy is also granted for public institutions
and self-financed ones in particular. Public HEIs have been, and will be in long time,
played major role in the system. Greater institutional autonomy will stimulate and enable
public HEIs being active in entrepreneurship activities, connections with industries,
working with private sectors, and transforming governance for greater effectiveness.
Competition for survival will also strengthen motivations of public institutions reform, in
which transforming to be entrepreneurial is a promising alternative.
Vietnam Higher Education Law issued in 2012 is revised in 2018. The revision of HE Law
is easing the government controls toward institutional governance structures of the HEIs,
which is expected that it will help them to be more flexible and innovative.
As a reference, universities in Finland, like others in the majority of European countries,

are free to develop their own institutional strategy, academic profile, degree programs,
student admission, and so on. Funding is received by block grants. Staffing autonomy is
protected. Those are key features that help Finland HEIs remain to be flexible and
innovative. Institutional autonomy is a must for improving its responsiveness and
achieving excellence. Greater level of autonomy stimulates the entrepreneurial mindset of
the university administrators and provides them internal motivations for changes. Market
forces are important factors shaping HEIs behaviors, but government policy also plays in
key role in cross sector initiatives.
The revision of the Higher Education Law will provide a great opportunity for HEIs in
transforming their missions, creating their own positions in a new HE landscape - which
is more market-oriented and more competitive. Under this context, HEIs are encouraged
and enable to better respond to the needs of the society.
110
A.3.3.2 International Partnerships in E&I Development
Lessons learned from international practices and especially the partnerships with
experienced partners like Finland are important opportunity for Vietnam to build up E&I
ecosystem.
Globalization has increased the interactions between people across nations more than
ever. The growth of individual countries affects one another therefore there have been
several governmental endeavors helping developing countries to overcome obstacles and
achieve their full potentials.
IPP2, an initiative of Finland and Vietnam government, is such an endeavor. IPP2

practices, as reported in Chapter 2, are invaluable experiences for Vietnam in reforming
HE towards better contribution for E&I ecosystem development. Through implementation
of ToTs in selected universities, policy interventions have been tested in the context of
Vietnam. It is a great opportunity for identifying institutional challenges and
institutionalized the interventions for E&I development in the Vietnamese HEIs.
A3.4 Threats, and Possible Risks for E&I Education and Policy Issues
A.3.4.1 Global Competition

Under globalization economy and cross-border education, Vietnamese universities are
competing not just in domestic playground but the global. By 2016, approximately 120
thousands of Vietnamese students are studying abroad, accounted for almost 10% of the
total student population. Foreign investment institutions established in Vietnam also
attract students from the middle-class.
Such a situation places a pressure for Vietnamese HEIs in revision their missions and
strategies. The pressure is even more intensive under the decreasing of public financing
for HEIs, and the increasing of skill requirements for graduates in a global labor market.
Universities are no longer the unique source of knowledge. E&I education therefore
would not be success if it were provided in theoretical manner only. It requests university
to transform itself into new directions. Failures to reforming might put individual school
in decay.
At the same time, the issues of IP Law in a global world are also threats for developing
countries like Vietnam. Though Vietnam already had the Law on Intellectual Properties
available, the cost of patenting and limited awareness of IP has made the number of
patents granted in Vietnam by Vietnamese authorities is quite small. Given the numerous
patents and trademarks granted elsewhere, it would be a critical problems for Vietnam in
commercialization of technology developments in future.
111
In a wider context, the competitive advantage of Vietnam that is low cost labors will
145
end . Investment into high skilled labor workforces with E&I capacity is a must for
Vietnamese HEIs. Unsuccessful in transforming HE system would place the huge risk for
national competitiveness in the global world.
A.3.4.2 Creating A Movement That Might Not Lead To Expected Results
E&I capacity development requires investment in every aspect of the E&I ecosystem, as
indicated in Isenberg’ model. The core of entrepreneurship is innovation. Without strong
innovation capacity as a foundation for E&I education, there is a risk of creating a
“movement” of entrepreneurship, which is being seen a temporary solution for graduates’
employment rather than aiming at high growth start-ups.
Hence research and innovation capacity is key for entrepreneurship initiatives. However,
from the success stories of FPTU and FTU mentioned in Chapter 2, it is argued that, in the
specific current context of Vietnam, university-based E&I ecosystem and E&I education
are not necessarily derived directly from a research-oriented university.
The nature of research and innovation (products and services) at Vietnam HEIs requires
special attention in our discussion. Different from what is perceived as (technological)
innovation at universities in more advanced countries where innovation tends to be
thought of as ‘radical’ and/or ‘new to the market’, in contrast due to the lack of good
research capacity (i.e. in the role of a knowledge house of an E&I ecosystem), innovation
in Vietnam tends to be ‘incremental’ (if any) and maybe ‘new to the firm’. In the words of
an interviewed respondent, innovation created by universities is more of ‘adaptation’ and
customization of technology, rather than high-end technological innovation. In the context
of a developing country like Vietnam, there is nothing wrong with this type of adaption
and customization innovation. In certain situation, it should be even encouraged as it
helps solving practical problems that enterprises and/or society are facing. However, with
the recent hype of E&I and start-ups, it is better to revisit the innovation at universities to
have more realistic expectation.
First, given the nature of incremental innovation in the form of adaptation and
customization, the potential for scale-up innovation coming from universities and faculty
is limited. The implication is not to give up on university innovation. On the contrary it
implies that even more resources to be given and better policies to be designed for
universities to improve their research capacity in parallel with E&I training and
education.
Second, the emphasis on E&I education and the student focus, as discussed in Chapter 2
shall be more realistic and adaptive to the local context of Vietnam where teaching
orientation is still dominated.
145
http://bdg-vietnam.com/en/about/news/details/items/aseans-delusion-of-cheap-labor-advantage-to-be-ended/
112
Those analysis are foundation for recommendations presenting in Chapter 3. Given the
beginning situation of E&I education in Vietnam, it is important that developing a range of
entrepreneurial abilities and skills, the inspiration and motivation amongst staff and
students is critical as much as the provision of opportunities and facilities that is
necessary for individuals to move from ideas to action and become entrepreneurs. These
attributes can also support employability and career development for learners, which are
also urgent needs for improvement of Vietnamese HEIs.
REFERENCES
Bernstein, P. L., & Bernstein, P. L. (1996). Against the gods: The remarkable story of
risk (pp. 1269-1275). New York: Wiley.
EM Viet Nam (2015/2016) Report Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Viet Nam

2015/2016) Hanoi, p17
Hien, P. D. (2010). A comparative study of research capabilities of East Asian

countries and implications for Vietnam. Higher Education, 60(6), 615-625.
Lüthje, C., & Franke, N. (2003). The ‘making’of an entrepreneur: testing a model of
entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT. R&d
Management, 33(2), 135-147.
Ly T Pham (2014): Chapter 7, p140-163. Olsson, Å., & Meek, L. (2013).

Effectiveness of research and innovation management at policy and institutional
levels in Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.
Nguyen, T. V., & Pham, L. T. (2011). Scientific output and its relationship to
knowledge economy: an analysis of ASEAN countries. Scientometrics, 89(1), 107-
117.
Takeru Ohe (2018). Enterprising Tendency& Entrepreneurship Awareness in Japan

and Vietnam. Paper presented in Ha Noi, April 2018.
Vuong, Q. H., & Tran, T. D. (2009). The cultural dimensions of the Vietnamese
private entrepreneurship.
113
THE VIETNAM - FINLAND
INNOVATION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME, PHASE 2 (IPP2)
The Vietnam - Finland Innovation Partnership Programme, Phase 2 (IPP2) is an Official

Development Assistance Programme financed jointly by the Governments of Finland and
Vietnam from 2014 to 2018 with 11 million EUR budget. The Competent Authorities of
IPP2 are the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland and the Ministry of Science and
Technology of Vietnam. IPP2 is a flagship ODA programme in Vietnam that actively
enables the development of a strong and healthy E&I ecosystem that supports the
generation of high growth innovative companies, promotes collaboration with foreign and
Finnish partners, and contributes to innovation-led economic development in Vietnam.
114

IPP Policy Discussion Paper - HIgher Education On E&I Development in Vietnam - ENG

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IPP Policy Discussion Paper - HIgher Education On E&I Development in Vietnam - ENG

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IPP Policy Discussion Paper - HIgher Education On E&I Development in Vietnam - ENG

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ministry

of Science Ministry for Foreign

POLICY DISCUSSION PAPER

HIGHER EDUCATION FOR

HIGHER EDUCATION FOR

Vietnam - Finland Innovation Partnership Programme, Phase 2 (IPP2)

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 15

1.1 Background and Context ............................................................................................................................................. 15

1.1.1 The Fourth Industrial Revolution and its Implications .......................................................................... 15

1.1.2 Higher Education in Vietnam ............................................................................................................................ 16

1.2 The Innovation Partnership Program Phase 2 (IPP2) .................................................................................... 18

1.3 Analytical Frameworks ................................................................................................................................................ 18

1.3.1 Isenberg’s Model .................................................................................................................................................... 19

1.3.2 Morison’s Model ..................................................................................................................................................... 20

1.4 Purpose and Organization of this Report ............................................................................................................. 21

CHAPTER 2. IPP2 SUPPORTING HIGHER EDUCATION IN VIETNAM .................................................................. 23

2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 23

2.2 Context for IPP2 Implementation ............................................................................................................................ 24

2.2.1 International Context ........................................................................................................................................... 24

2.2.2 National Context ..................................................................................................................................................... 25

2.3 IPP2 ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 25

2.3.1 The IPP2 Initiative ................................................................................................................................................. 26

2.3.2 Training-of-Trainer Activities........................................................................................................................... 27

2.4 Evaluation Findings ....................................................................................................................................................... 27

2.4.2 Outcomes Achieved by University Partners with IPP2 Support ........................................................ 31

2.4.3 Challenges ................................................................................................................................................................. 35

2.5 Case studies ...................................................................................................................................................................... 38

2.5.1 FPT University (FPTU)......................................................................................................................................... 39

2.5.2 Foreign Trade University (FTU) ...................................................................................................................... 40

2.6.2 The Role of Faculty Members/ University Lecturers .............................................................................. 43

2.6.4 Success Factors ....................................................................................................................................................... 44

2.6.5 Motivation of Participants .................................................................................................................................. 44

2.7 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................................................... 45

CHAPTER 3. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 46

3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 46

3.2 To Policy Makers at the System Level .................................................................................................................... 47

3.2.1 Strengthen University Autonomy.................................................................................................................... 47

3.2.2 Grant provision and financing mechanisms ............................................................................................... 48

3.2.3 Recognition for Entrepreneurial Universities............................................................................................ 49

3.2.4 E&I Education: Curriculum Development ................................................................................................... 50

3.2.5 Faculty Development ............................................................................................................................................ 51

3.2.7 University-Based E&I Ecosystem Development........................................................................................ 52

3.2.8 Issuance of a Guidebook for Universities ..................................................................................................... 53

3.2.9 Stimulating the Partnership between University and Industry ......................................................... 54

3.3 To University Leaders................................................................................................................................................... 54

3.3.2 Establishment of E&I University Lectures/ Researchers Community and Practitioners

3.3.3 Strengthening University Partnerships with Industries/Business ................................................... 56

3.3.4 Cross-institutional Innovation Hubs/ Incubation Centre ..................................................................... 56

3.4 To the Academics Community for Further Research ...................................................................................... 57

3.4.1 The E&I Landscape of Vietnam’s HE System .............................................................................................. 57

3.4.2 International Experiences in E&I Education and Development ......................................................... 57

3.4.3 Institutional Research Concerning Particular Types of University ................................................... 57

3.4.4 Supporting Policies for Industry and University Collaborations ....................................................... 57

3.6 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................................................... 59

ANNEX 1. INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCES IN SUPPORTING UNIVERSITIES FOR E&I ECOSYSTEM

A1.2 National strategies for E&I development in higher education ................................................................. 70

A1.3.1 National Education Program for promotion of E&I in HEIs .............................................................. 72

A1.3.2 Companies established by universities...................................................................................................... 74

A1.3.5 Focusing on Selected Research and Innovation Fields........................................................................ 78