Business, Social Innovation and Higher Education
16:05 - 17:25 | Lecture Room 202 (Level 2)
Chair: Dr Marie-Louise Mangion
Prof. Leonie Baldacchino
The Edward de Bono Institute for Creative Thinking and Innovation
This study mapped Malta’s social innovation (SI) ecosystem with the aim of identifying key stakeholders, documenting examples of best practice, and laying the groundwork for forthcoming capacity-building SI workshops and the establishment of a National Competence Centre (NCC) for SI. The study was underpinned by the Quadruple Helix (QH), which conceptualises SI as an outcome of interactions among Government, Academia, Civil Society, and Industry. Data were collected through desk research, an online survey, and semi-structured interviews with representatives from all four QH categories. Desk research revealed a small but active SI ecosystem, with all QH categories represented and supported by a range of funding and policy instruments. Survey findings indicated that stakeholders tend to prioritise the social rather than the innovative dimension of SI. Respondents broadly agreed that SI is relevant to all thematic priorities in Malta’s Social Vision 2035. Voluntary and Non-Governmental Organisations (VOs/NGOs) were perceived as both the main contributors to and beneficiaries of SI, while the private sector was ranked lowest on both dimensions. The most frequently reported barriers to SI were inadequate funding, complex application processes, and regulatory or policy constraints. Interviews corroborated these findings and highlighted additional, deeper insights. Participants noted the absence of a coherent national SI strategy, partly linked to delays in the Social Enterprise Act. The SI ecosystem is dominated by VOs and NGOs, with limited entrepreneurial SI and a tendency for organisations to duplicate activities rather than collaborate. A lack of a shared definition of SI further constrains visibility and recognition, leaving many SI practices undocumented. Despite these challenges, several examples of best practice were identified and will be showcased during the UMRE26 presentation.
Dr Jirka Konietzny
Department of Marketing, Faculty of Economics, Management and Accountancy
This conceptual paper examines how endorsements from prominent, high-status ‘celebrity organisations’ influence organisational buying behaviour in Business-to-Business (B2B) markets, with particular attention to the multi-person Decision-Making Unit (DMU). Existing endorsement theories are largely grounded in Business-to-Consumer (B2C) contexts and focus on individual celebrities and consumer attitudes, offering limited explanatory power for high-stakes organisational decisions characterised by extensive information processing and career-related risk. Addressing this gap, the paper pursues four objectives: to conceptualise B2B endorsement centred on celebrity organisations, to adapt established B2C endorsement mechanisms to the B2B context, to identify B2B-specific mechanisms, and to develop an integrated conceptual framework with a future research agenda.
The proposed framework identifies three key mechanisms through which celebrity organisation endorsements influence B2B buyers. First, status-based endorsement signals act as informational shortcuts that reduce perceived financial, performance, and career risk, thereby supporting internal justification by DMU champions. Second, cognitive fit – defined as the congruence between the endorser’s domain expertise and the vendor’s offering – enhances perceptions of vendor competence through central-route, evidence-based processing. Third, B2B parasocial relationships formed with visible organisational leaders via professional media channels foster relational trust, strengthening DMU champion confidence. The framework further proposes that Power Distance Belief moderates the effect of status-based signals, amplifying their impact among buyers with higher power distance orientations.
Prof. Tanya Sammut Bonnici
Department of Marketing, Faculty of Economics, Management and Accountancy
This integrative literature review addresses the conceptual fragmentation of organisational coevolution, transitioning it from an abstract metaphor into a rigorous, hypothesis-generating architecture. Using a cross-disciplinary relational mapping protocol, this research develops a functional toolkit for analysing complex business ecosystems.
First, the Selection-Stochasticity-Complexity (SSC) Framework is introduced to map macro-level regimes of deterministic filtering, probabilistic events, and emergent interactions. Second, the Action-Rule-Consequence (ARC) Causal Model operationalises these dynamics. Integrating these structures produces the SSC-ARC Matrix, a multi-dimensional tool mapping environmental interactions against causal progression.
Ultimately, this architecture transforms coevolution into a functional research engine, enabling scholars to establish empirical causal pathways and empowering practitioners to diagnose conditions and actively steer ecosystem evolution through strategic action.
Dr Luca Di Gennaro Splendore
Department of Banking, Finance and Investments, Faculty of Economics, Management and Accountancy
In a world increasingly shaped by data, the importance of official statistics often remains in shadow, even within national statistics offices. Yet these statistics (such as employment rates, gross domestic product and pandemic data) are the lifeblood of democracy, influencing policymaking, media narratives and electoral choices. With the backing of Marie Sk艂odowska-Curie Actions, the DEMSTAT project will spotlight the vital nexus between official statistics and democracy. Based on the principles of transparency and trust, DEMSTAT seeks to formalise 10 key variables that national statistics offices must produce and disseminate to enhance societal, economic and international relations. This initiative not only underscores the global significance of official statistics but also aligns with EU and UN values and the Sustainable Development Goals.
Prof. Matthew Montebello
Department of Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of 福利在线免费 and Communication Technology
The rapid integration of artificial intelligence and generative AI systems into education, work, governance, and everyday life is reshaping how knowledge is produced, decisions are made, and human cognition is exercised. While these technologies promise efficiency, creativity, and scalability, their widespread adoption has also revealed an emerging, under-examined challenge: a growing 'cognitive divide' between those who critically understand, configure, and govern AI systems, and those who passively rely on them without awareness, agency, or control. This presentation at the research expo positions the cognitive divide as a unifying conceptual lens for examining the societal, educational, technological, and ethical implications of AI-mediated futures. It foregrounds research that explores how AI systems influence human judgement, learning, creativity, autonomy, and power relations across disciplines. Contributions span technical innovation, educational design, ethics and governance, human-centred AI, policy development, and domain-specific applications, highlighting both risks and opportunities arising from AI-augmented cognition. By bringing together researchers from diverse fields, the presentation emphasises the role of research in bridging this divide through AI literacy, transparent system design, responsible governance, and the preservation of human agency. Rather than framing AI as a replacement for human intelligence, the presentation advances a collaborative vision in which AI functions as an accountable, explainable, and human-aligned partner. In doing so, this talk invites critical reflection on how research can shape AI ecosystems that empower individuals and societies, ensuring that technological progress strengthens rather than erodes cognitive autonomy.
Dr Patrick Camilleri | Co-Researchers: Prof. Michelle Attard Tonna and Dr Abeer Watted
Department of Leadership for Learning and Innovation, Faculty of Education
This study examines the professional perceptions of teacher educators regarding the integration of Generative AI (GenAI) within higher education. It specifically investigates the tensions between lecturers’ theoretical attitudes toward AI and the practical negotiation of its affordances and constraints within their instructional design. Employing a mixed-methods approach, the research synthesised quantitative survey data and qualitative semi-structured interviews from a diverse cohort of lecturers (98) across higher education institutions.
The findings highlight a dual reality in teacher professional practice: GenAI serves as a significant lever for productivity, enhancing research output and streamlining course administration. It also simultaneously challenges traditional notions of academic integrity and student cognition. In context, the data collected suggest that adoption is not uniform but is moderated by individual characteristics and varying levels of technological self-efficacy.
To support faculty through this transition, the study advocates for a framework of differentiated professional development. This involves moving beyond generic technical training toward hands-on, pedagogical support that addresses demographic variations in confidence. Furthermore, the study calls for systemic shifts in assessment design, moving toward authentic engagement that reinforces the educator’s role as a moral and analytical mentor. By centring critical AI literacy, institutions can ensure that GenAI serves to augment, rather than replace, the human-centric values of teaching and learning. Future longitudinal research is proposed to track how these initial perceptions evolve into sustained, transformative curricular practices.
Prof. Michelle Attard Tonna
Department of Leadership for Learning and Innovation, Faculty of Education
The Academic Mentoring Programme (AMP) was designed to enhance collegiality and cultivate a mentoring culture among UM academics, to support early-career academics. The first iteration of the programme ran during the 2024–2025 academic year.
Participation was voluntary, and 25 early-career academics (mentees) were paired with 23 senior academics (mentors); some mentors guided two mentees. Guided by an external mentorship expert, the participating academics attended an onboarding session at the start of the programme. The mentors and mentees structured their mentoring journey, scheduling several discussion meetings along the academic year. The nature, structure and frequency of the meetings were determined by the participants at their own discretion.
The AMP evaluation included an online survey and focus groups with mentors and mentees. Ethics clearance was sought by the respective UM body, and authorisation was received.
The evaluation revealed that mentees received informed guidance on the operational navigation of academic duties and gained valuable insights into the psychological, social and political realities of the University. Mentors reflected on their own early-career experiences, which facilitated rapport and highlighted the value of tacit knowledge sharing.
Key areas for improvement included providing additional support for mentors and increasing the flexibility of programme duration to accommodate participants’ workloads. Overall, the AMP demonstrated that structured yet flexible mentoring can foster professional development, strengthen mentor–mentee relationships, and contribute to a supportive academic culture. Lessons learned from this pilot provide actionable guidance for the design and sustainability of similar mentoring initiatives in higher education institutions.