"Make Universities Source of Game Changing Ideas For Nation Building"

 by Professor Dato Dr Ahmad Ibrahim, Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies UCSI University

ALL great things start with an idea. This applies to national policies, business undertakings, societal projects and many more. They would always begin with ideas coming from someone somewhere. More often than not, tracing back such ideas would would confirm they originate from those with knowledge and experience. People with knowledge and experience constantly think of new ideas to bring to the table.  These people are idea centric. They are seldom stingy with their ideas. They would eagerly share their raw crude unpolished ideas seeking comments to make them better. Over the years, we have seen how great scientists and business icons of the world often share their thoughts before they eventually submit them for the real application.

   Many such great would most likely have their early beginnings in higher learning institutions, the universities to be precise. This is understandable since university academics are the people who are constantly doing research and discovering new things. It is therefore logical that much of the new ideas emerge from the outputs of research undertakings. Some of the new ideas are also accidental outcomes of research. There have been many such cases of accidental patents. The story about the MP3 technology spotted accidentaly from a research project is now quite well known. The Fraunhofer institutes in Germany made that accidental discovery which earned them millions in licensing royalty.

    Here at home, we have also borne witness to the emergence of great ideas coming from university academics. One such idea which has been cited often is the Tabung Haji model introduced by the late Royal Professor Ungku Aziz. He also had a hand in many other ideas such as the business of cooperatives which have now assumed national significance. The establishment of ANGKASA also came from his idea. Admittedly, those days when Ungku Aziz was helming University Malaya, UM, the only university in the country then, discourses and debates among the academics were commonplace. That was how new ideas were born and polished till they became ready for real adoption. All the ideas then started as crude and unproven. But after some research and intellectual bargaining, they became more polished and meaningful. The ecosystem then was very conducive for idea generation and sharing of thoughts.

 

 Thought leadership was then the hallmark of universities. It is unfortunate that such culture of tolerating differences of opinion has seen much erosion in recent years. Whereas, it was such practice of tolerance that has been the single most important factor in churning out new ideas. Often times the crude ideas when first mooted could even be controversial. Sometimes they were toxic to some. But they were debated and argued, thereby further improving their acceptance. Communicating the crude ideas well is also needed if they are to be elevated to be workable. It has become abundantly clear in recent times that many among the new academics are not comfortable with ideas which start as controversial. They are quick to pass judgement and brand them as unacceptable. Some are even saying they should be avoided at all costs. If we continue with such intolerance, universities will one day be no longer the nation’s repository of knowledge and the birthplace of new ideas.

 

 It is still not too late to stop this unfortunate decline in thought leadership. We should take stock of what has actually led to this rampant intolerance of conflicting views. Some say the root cause is the fear of failure among today’s academics. The fear of making mistakes has driven many to hide in their comfort zone. This is unhealthy and will not help give rise to new ideas. They may not realise that without fresh ideas there can be no great innovation which is now recognised as a critical recipe for human development. We will succumb to a state of development paralysis if we continue to deny the need to generate good ideas. This is where the culture of critical thinking needs constant nurturing. Few would deny the need for thought leadership to flourish in universities. The only way to nurture this is to have a healthy ecosystem of agreeing to disagree and inculcating the respect for idea sharing.