From Individuals to Ecosystems
The need to think in terms of ecosystems and collaboration was a recurring theme in the debate. Connie Svabo stressed:
“Bridging innovation, entrepreneurship, and skills requires a shift in mindset: stop focusing on individuals and start focusing on ecosystems – on collectives and groups – and do so in a way that bridges disciplines, combining deep disciplinary knowledge with transversal skills. This must happen in practice, beginning with education, but also connecting industry and policy, and embracing a culture of lifelong learning.”
SDU has experience with this approach in its centre, where students, industry, and professors work side by side on idea development.
“I think that youth today does not have the same authoritarian attitude that some of us have grown up with. It's really important for them to actually be able to be at the centre of their own learning. So, we need customisation in ways that we probably are not really used to.”
She shared a fresh example: her 14-year-old nephew joined SDU for an informal internship at the centre. One activity he participated in was poster-making – but not in the traditional sense of bringing a polished, pre-prepared poster.
“Instead, we worked hands-on with creative materials in an open process of sharing. The intern and the professor worked side by side, rapidly prototyping and creating together. This tangible, collaborative approach exemplifies open knowledge sharing – and it applies far beyond poster sessions.”
Talent mobility and diversity as strengths
Koray Karakaya then drew the line to Europe’s global competitiveness:
“When it comes to the talents and skills in terms of cultivating the innovation ecosystem in Europe, we are in a talent war. We all know that the rest of the world is absorbing vacuum from other parts of the world, whereas we are. I have the feeling that in Europe we are kind of working for repelling the talent in a way.”
He explained that European universities have programmes that invite people from outside Europe into European institutions.
“But once their education is done, after six months, they are out and then we are leaking a massive amount of talent brain power and investment through these people because we cannot be really well aligned at the policy level. This is a massive problem, that I believe, we all need to address.”
Accept career paths that are not linear
Koray Karakaya also pointed out that we must accept that career paths are not linear. It should be okay to change tracks, try new roles, work in different countries and learn new skills along the way. Diversity and different life choices are a strength – not a barrier.
“All paths are valid, and all paths are welcome,” as he put it.
Europe must embrace flexibility and remove the invisible boundaries that uphold old norms about the “right” career. He also highlighted Europe’s unique advantage:
“The Southern, Northern, Eastern and Western Europe bring different unique dimensions, unique kind of talent into the picture, but how good are we in facilitating the talent mobility across the regions? This is something that we also need to think of.”
These examples underline that the solution is not only about technology, but also about culture, education and, to a large extent, policy.
The need for unity
The need for better collaboration in Europe was also emphasised by Mikkel Næsager:
“We misunderstand and mislabel ourselves. We look at individual countries and how can we not steal from each other instead of understanding that we are a coherent unit in Europe, not just the U27, but also Switzerland, Norway, the UK, etc.”
“We think we are weak, because we are small. We are actually really competitive. We have some of the strongest academic institutions. If we look at the ASPE numbers (Academic Scientific Publication and Excellence), we are very competitive with the US in terms of number of output of papers and the quality of those papers. So, we got the science.”
Mikkel Næsager also pointed out that we talk a lot about tech sovereignty.
“We spent around €260 billion last year on the US cloud and software so we got to use more people to address that. And €340 billion on fossil fuels to literally light them on fire. So, the entrepreneurial opportunity in Europe is huge. The knowledge exists, and the skills exist, so we need to figure out how to activate them faster,” he said and gave a suggestion.
“Resources can turn words into action. We need to give people the ability to act quickly and allow academic careers to also include periods where they work with industry, companies, policy, or start-ups.”
Bridging the speed gap
Closer collaboration between academia and industry could also help reduce the speed gap, Koray Karakaya said, in some sectors.
Due to patient safety, new knowledge in medicine only slowly becomes part of curricula. When development moves fast, education lags behind. For example, AI-driven image analysis is radically changing radiologists’ work.
“So how can we make sure that these things do flow in between [science and technology between academia and industry], and how can we enable people to change tracks rapidly, to adapt to today's speed [when the market, technology, or geopolitical and societal needs change]? So, I believe the biggest gap that we have today is that we have a very large speed mismatch between real life and educational system. And we need to find a way to address this,” he said.
To bridge this gap, Connie Svabo highlighted a concrete tool: the EU’s European Qualifications Framework for Higher Education, which balances deep disciplinary knowledge with agility and the competence to adapt.
“There we have a very concrete tool that we can use and that we should use even more in university education.”
Building new competence profiles
At her own faculty, Connie Svabo has spent five years integrating the so-called T-shape approach into teaching. This means moving from a pure focus on mathematics, computer science, biology and chemistry to a model where deep expertise is combined with broad skills to collaborate and communicate across disciplines. The vertical bar of the T stands for specialist knowledge, while the horizontal bar represents the ability to build bridges between fields.
(Competence profiles: I-shaped = deep specialist; T-shaped = depth + some breadth; π-shaped = two deep specialisations + broad understanding).
“The mathematician has to be able to communicate with the philosopher, or the chemist has to be able to communicate with the designer. And this is something I think that we are really working on. And that is where we should stop thinking about individual people and their individual skills and start thinking about group skills instead. That will actually make a really big difference,” she explained.
Ernestina Menasalvas added an important perspective: universities should work on two tracks – a slow, regulated track with accreditation and curriculum changes, and a fast track where skills are developed more agilely. She emphasised the need for transversal skills such as data literacy and close collaboration between universities and industry to create a dynamic talent pipeline.
“We need co-creation with industry – real data, pilots, and collaboration – to make education faster and relevant.”
Europe’s biggest opportunity
The debate could have continued – there is plenty to address – but Koray Karakaya had the final word:
“I think we have the biggest opportunity ever for Europe. It's never been more present than now that we need to innovate; in the digital space, in the clean, green space, in energy, in every single area. So, whatever your interest is, there is a big opportunity for researchers, for scientists. And, as you say, we still believe in the scientific method and the idea of fact. So, in a global scene, this is a great opportunity, right?"
