Research Paper Example on Innovate & Entrepreneur: The Keys To Success In A Competitive Market

Introduction

Innovation is coming up with a new idea or a unique solution to a problem. It means that a new service or product launches in an environment, and implements fully. Innovation, therefore, aims at continually creating new products and services to satisfy the demands of the market. The products and services have to be different from the pre-existing ones to be considered innovations. Entrepreneurship, on the other hand, is coming up with methods to put resources together to increase its market value (Benlamri & Sparer, 2017). It means that it creates more profit if the market value is higher than the original cost.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

In Malaysia and China, higher education is a crucial pillar in the innovation in the political, corporate, and public sectors. The above countries strive to instill innovation as part of the primary values in students as they seek to develop society (Teng et al., 2019). Innovation in China and Malaysia mainly focuses on technology as it is one of the trending issues at the moment. There is a high demand for solutions to different problems, giving the students time constraints, yet it takes a lot to come up with answers. Pressure on the students starts from stakeholders either in the government or in the private sector who expect a lot from them as they do not realize what it takes to come up with innovative solutions (Wu, 2017). However, the pressure is a blessing in disguise as it enables students to be more aggressive in entrepreneurship and innovation. It brings more transformation, and students can understand what it takes to survive outside the school bubble (Xie et al., 2018). Universities in China and Malaysia promote entrepreneurship and innovation in their universities even though there are cultural differences.

Research Questions

1. How does China promote innovation and entrepreneurship education in Universities?
2. What are the similarities in innovation and entrepreneurship education in Chinese and Malaysian Universities?
3. What are the differences in innovation and entrepreneurship education in Chinese and Malaysian Universities?

Research Objectives

1. The research aims to show how Chinese and Malaysian universities promote innovation and entrepreneurship education in their universities.
2. The study aims to reveal the similarities and differences in innovation and entrepreneurship education in Chinese and Malaysian universities.

Statement of Problem

Innovation and entrepreneurship are critical to Chinese and Malaysian economies. It means that the countries are keen to develop graduates to be innovative and be future entrepreneurs. Therefore, higher education in innovation and entrepreneurship is vital in instilling these values in students as there is an increasing demand for solutions in different sectors.

Literature Review

Chine and Malaysian Universities are continually developing ways to improve innovation and entrepreneurship education, and they are significant economic boosts in these countries. The similarities in innovation and entrepreneurship education in Chinese and Malaysian Universities include the community factor and aggression in development. Differences result from differences in administration and teaching methods.

Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education in Chinese and Malaysian Universities

The government of China is keen to develop and reform higher education in the country continually. It aligns with the strategic goals of the country, which mainly lean towards education and science. Training generally is vital for economic development, but higher education provides the necessary resources in science to propel the strategic plans (Yan et al., 2018).

Similarly, Malaysia is keen to develop the scope of its higher education as well. Malaysia gained its independence late in 1957, meaning that it has not yet made the hugest strides in higher education like China (Zheng & Hu, 2018). The country invests heavily in innovation and entrepreneurship education in higher learning institutions so that they can produce graduates who are competitive in the local and in the international markets.

Similarities in Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education in Chinese and Malaysian Universities

Chinese and Malaysian innovation and entrepreneurship education start at the community level. These countries see it as the best way to instill innovation and entrepreneurship values in students before and during their time in universities (Krishna, 2017). Training in innovation and entrepreneurship continues in enterprise centers in the universities. The system has produced many competitive graduates explaining the rise of small and medium enterprises in these countries (Ekpe et al., 2015).

Chinese and Malaysian governments are aggressive in promoting innovation and entrepreneurship education in universities. It has enabled massive economic development and the creation of many jobs. It is part of these governments' policies as they strive to achieve their strategic goals, which are similar in regards to innovation and entrepreneurship education in universities (Muthusamy & Chew, 2020). It has become part and parcel of these countries' policies. It results in healthy ecosystems like in human capital, finance, culture, and leadership. Chinese and Malaysian governments see universities as the main drivers of innovation and entrepreneurship (Din et al., 2016).

Differences in Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education in Chinese and Malaysian Universities

There is a difference in teaching strategies in Chinese and Malaysian Universities in regards to innovation and entrepreneurship education. Malaysian universities utilize case analysis, seminars, and didactics (Pettinger et al., 2016). It means that students and teachers play considerable roles in learning, and it results in more economic innovation. It is because students are allowed to participate more in education, improving the creativity and consciousness in innovation and entrepreneurship. However, in China, there is less aggression in learning activities as the teaching follows systematic theory more (Taharim et al., 2016). It means that students are left a considerable burden to cover up in learning activities, and most innovation and entrepreneurship moves are as a result of a personal push. China, however, is one of the leading countries in innovation and entrepreneurship because teaching starts at the community level (Sajilan, & Tehseen, 2019). However, there is still a deficiency of innovative talents, given the country's enormous potential. The most competitive graduates in innovation and entrepreneurship are more from private universities than public universities where learning is more rigid.

Malaysian Universities have independent administration, which does not interfere with the educational policies (Binti Shamsudin et al., 2017). It creates a more flexible environment that favors the development of innovation and entrepreneurship education. However, in China, the administration controls most of the education policies meaning that education less flexible as it takes a planned path (Che Embi et al., 2019). The method is successful in its way, but it is not the best one.

Significance of the Study

China and Malaysia are one of the leading countries in innovation and entrepreneurship. The study is essential to show the initiatives that these countries are taking to improve innovation and entrepreneurship education in Universities. The study also reveals the similarities and differences in innovation and entrepreneurship education in Chinese and Malaysian Universities from an international perspective.

Research Methodology

The research uses meta-analysis, which is a qualitative methodology. It involves an analysis of peer-reviewed journals to collect relevant information on the research topic. Peer-reviewed journals are easily accessible online; they are affordable and stable. Stability means that the data is reliable as it is less likely to change.

References

Benlamri, R., & Sparer, M. (2017). Leadership, innovation, and entrepreneurship as driving forces of the global economy. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43434-6

Binti Shamsudin, S. F., Mamun, A. A., Che Nawi, N. B., Md Nasir, N. A., & Bin Zakaria, M. N. (2017). Factors affecting entrepreneurial intention among Malaysian University students. The Journal of Developing Areas, 51(4), 423-431. https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2017.0111

Che Embi, N. A., Jaiyeoba, H. B., & Yussof, S. A. (2019). The effects of students' entrepreneurial characteristics on their propensity to become entrepreneurs in Malaysia. Education + Training, 61(7/8), 1020-1037. https://doi.org/10.1108/et-11-2018-0229

Din, B. H., Anuar, A. R., & Usman, M. (2016). The effectiveness of the entrepreneurship education program in upgrading entrepreneurial skills among public University students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 224, 117-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.413

Ekpe, I., Che Razak, R., Ismail, M., & Abdullah, Z. (2015). Entrepreneurial skill acquisition and youth's self-employment in Malaysia: How far? Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n4p150

Krishna, V. V. (2017). Asia Pacific universities in national innovation systems. Universities in the National Innovation Systems, 401-418. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315111421-15

Muthusamy, K., & Chew, L. (2020). Critical success factors for the implementation of building information modeling (BIM) among construction industry development board (CIDB) G7 contractors in the Klang Valley, Malaysia. 2020 IEEE European Technology and Engineering Management Summit (E-TEMS). https://doi.org/10.1109/e-tems46250.2020.9111716

Pettinger, L., Forkert, K., & Goffey, A. (2016). The promises of creative industry higher education: An analysis of university prospectuses in Malaysia. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 24(4), 466-484. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2016.1223644

Sajilan, S., & Tehseen, S. (2019). Network competence and firm performance: The mediating role of entrepreneurial Innovativeness among Malaysian Chinese entrepreneurs of wholesale businesses. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 24(Supp.1), 187-201. https://doi.org/10.21315/aamj2019.24.s1.13

Taharim, N. F., Lokman, A. M., Hanesh, A., & Aziz, A. A. (2016). Feasibility study on the readiness, suitability, and acceptance of M-learning AR in learning history. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4940257

Teng, W., Ma, C., Pahlevansharif, S., & Turner, J. J. (2019). Graduate readiness for the employment market of the 4th Industrial Revolution. Education + Training, 61(5), 590-604. https://doi.org/10.1108/et-07-2018-0154

Wu, Y. J. (2017). Innovation and entrepreneurship education in Asia-Pacific. Management Decision, 55(7), 1330-1332. https://doi.org/10.1108/md-05-2017-0517

Xie, K., Song, Y., Zhang, W., Hao, J., Liu, Z., & Chen, Y. (2018). Technological entrepreneurship in science parks: A case study of Wuhan Donghu high-tech zone. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 135, 156-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.01.021

Yan, X., Gu, D., Liang, C., Zhao, S., & Lu, W. (2018). Fostering sustainable entrepreneurs: Evidence from China college students' "Internet plus" innovation and entrepreneurship competition (CSIPC). Sustainability, 10(9), 3335. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093335