University-Society Relationships: Institutional Barriers to the Effective Implementation of the University’s Third Mission in Tanzania

Abstract

In the past few decades, the roles and missions of universities have evolved from traditional missions of teaching, research, and publication to engaging directly in solving day-to-day societal problems and contributing to economic development. The increasing demands of the knowledge-based economy and globalization have played a significant role in transforming university roles. However, the third mission of universities is highly neglected in many universities compared to teaching, research, and publication. This study employs a qualitative approach to explore institutional barriers hindering the effective implementation of the universities’ third mission in Tanzania. The researchers carried out semi-structured and key-informant interviews with the members of the academic staff and administrative personnel from the three universities. Although all the respondents admitted that the university’s third mission is crucial in building solid university-society synergies and promoting local and regional development, its implementation is less prioritized in many universities than traditional university missions. The study revealed six main institutional barriers to implementing the universities’ third mission, ranging from (i) inadequate financial resources, (ii) work overloads for academics, (iii) lack of comprehensive institutional policies and regulations, (iv) lack of strong linkage between research and third mission, (v) barrier on incentives and reward systems for best practices, and (vi) barriers in capacity building for effective implementation of third mission. The study concludes that the university’s third mission is crucial in this competitive world. It helps universities and academic staff members brand themselves to the community and build strong synergies between the university and society.

Introduction

In the past few decades, the roles and missions of universities have evolved from traditional missions of teaching, research, and publication to engaging directly in solving day-to-day societal problems and contributing to economic development (Rüegg, 2014; Sam & van der Sijde, 2014). Worldwide universities such as Oxford, Chicago, Manchester, Cambridge, and Harvard, just to mention a few, show a remarkable shift from teaching and research roles to orienting societal problems, providing innovative digital skills and knowledge embedded in society (van der Zwaan, 2017). Not far away from the universe move, African universities, particularly in Nigeria, South Africa, and Egypt, moved on to the third mission of the universities in the 1960s following the political independence of the continent. However, its implementation was a commitment to the 1962 UNESCO conference about African higher education developments (Mugabi, 2014). Since the 1960s, higher education institutions in Africa have lived partially the dream of becoming close and constantly attached to the communities where those institutions are located.

Nevertheless, through the establishment of the Quality Assurance baselines in Higher Education, the forgotten ambitions of making African universities “not only responsible for teaching, learning and research but also for serving society” were rejuvenated with an emphasis on promoting academic involvement in community outreach platforms as part and parcel of universities’ social accountability (African Union, 2015, 2018). The ever-increasing demands of the knowledge-based economy and globalization have been argued as the catalyst for the transformations, roles, and missions of the universities (Sam & van der Sijde, 2014). These dynamics have marked an extraordinary milestone for the institutions to directly promote knowledge exchange skills and technologies to society to solve real-life and societal-oriented challenges to contribute to local and regional development (Boruck Klein & Mafra Pereira, 2020; Japan International Cooperation Agency, 2004). Shapiro (2005) argues that “universities were once largely insular institutions whose purview extended no further than the campus gates.” However, today’s universities work closely to address different stakeholders’ needs beyond teaching, research, and publication.

The third university mission concerns “the entrepreneurial role of the university for economic development, underlying the concept of entrepreneurial university in which the collaboration between the university and external stakeholders is emphasized” (Sam & van der Sijde, 2014). Through the third mission, universities exploit knowledge for innovation. The engagement of universities in the public service mission has resulted in these institutions being regarded as public goods that produce a considerable set of externalities, benefiting individual members of academic staff and the whole society by contributing to development (Tilak, 2005). The community wants to see the direct contributions of higher education in their local context (Garlick & Langworthy, 2008). Universities need to act as supporters or enablers of social change through the flow of knowledge and skills to society concerning moral and material support. This has been one of the key focuses of the universities in the past few decades, and “Most institutions recognize the value of contributing to the wider community, and in many countries, such work is considered an important component of academic life” (Marshall, 2018).

According to Duke (2008), the earlier terminologies of extension, extramural, and outreach imply what is currently known as the public service or the third mission. However, this kind of relationship was based on a one-way process where universities had to transmit knowledge and skills to the community outside the university. The new kind of partnership, especially from the 20th to 21st centuries, is based on reciprocity, where benefits and efforts must flow from all directions (Weerts & Sandmann, 2010). Alperovitz and Howard (2005) suggested that mutual benefits in implementing the third mission should be emphasized to strengthen the relationships. As universities share knowledge, skills, and technologies with society, the university should also welcome and honor the experience of society. The practical implementation of the third mission by universities requires transparent partnership and collaboration, which is highly based on trust as a prerequisite for providing better services (Duke, 2008).

Although the university’s third mission has been highly emphasized in the past few decades, this phenomenon is not entirely new. Initially, universities carried out the public responsibility role, but its recognition was low or not formalized (Scott, 2006). Scott further emphasizes that, during the medieval period, even though the university’s public service mission was not recognized as a formal mission of universities, academics had to obediently and highly serve the universal church and their kingdoms. University professionals also demanded their knowledge be utilized outside the university frontiers, and university doctors had to serve as judges in the court. In contrast, others had to serve as mediators and diplomats (Scott, 2006). All these functions carried out by academics of universities during the medieval period are now formally recognized as the university’s third mission.

Engagement of universities in the public service mission, especially during this era, makes universities look more modern, improving marketability and competitiveness due to openness and user-friendliness, increasing institutions’ reputation (Duke, 2008). University professionals need to engage in research that catalyzes socio-economic transformation and provides guidelines for the sustainable development of society (Alzyoud & Bani-Hani, 2015). As Chatterton and Goddard (2000) argue, the contribution that universities make to society through different works carried out by academics should all be accumulated together and defined as a “third role” or public service mission. This role is crucial in promoting sustainable development but is highly needed by any university, especially in this era of the free market economy. Jacob et al. (2015) argue that, due to high competition in a market system, universities need to be more socially responsible for them to attract more customers.

Although the university’s third mission is one of the core functions of universities in Tanzania and worldwide, studies show that the third mission within the institutional setting is notably lacking or neglected (Jacob et al., 2015; Macfarlane, 2007). Most universities emphasize teaching, while research and publication become the second priority and neglect the third mission (Macfarlane, 2007). Yet, the institutional barriers to effectively implementing universities’ third mission in Tanzania have not been uncovered, even though the third mission has been stipulated in the Tanzania higher education principles with clear goals of promoting and offering digital skills and knowledge to improve the welfare of the society (Mkunde & Dachi, 2023). However, the reality on the ground expels from its designated roles. Thus, our intention in this study is to explore the above knowledge gap grounded in the hard reality that public service mission is highly needed to ensure the knowledge available, skills and solutions in the universities extracted from research undertaking are disseminated or shared directly with society to promote theoretical and practical knowledge of the real world and socio-economic transformation. Previous studies like that of Nabaho et al. (2022) and Mugabi (2014) have intensively discussed the concept, dynamics, and operation context of the third mission of universities in East Africa, including Tanzania, drawing examples from Uganda, Makerere University while diverging from engaging themselves in a tenacious debate over the institutional barriers to implementing their third mission. Similarly, Mkunde and Dachi (2023) have massively investigated the role of universities in the societies in Tanzania, not uncovering the barriers to the universities reaching out to the communities. Thus, our study is approaching the existing research gap to generate results that could be used to shed light on the overall implementation of the third mission of universities in developing countries, particularly sub-Saharan African countries.

The concept of a third mission in this study should be understood as those “processes or activities related to different types and forms of knowledge flows and interactions, involving academic researchers engaging with external stakeholders such as businesses, policymakers, practitioners, and the general public” (Kitagawa et al., 2016). In most cases, public service is considered the universities’ third leg or public service mission, whereas teaching and research are considered the universities’ first and second missions. Kraemer-Mbula (2014) adds that the third mission of a university is those activities through which universities reach out to the community to better respond to its needs. This role of universities as critical agents of socio-economic change acquires new relevance, as most economic agents are informal and are located in communities rather than in formal productive units. In this study, phrases like the university’s third leg, public service mission, and social function/role of HEIs will be used interchangeably with the phrase third mission.

Higher Education System in Tanzania

Higher education (HE) in Tanzania, as in other developing countries, builds on colonial systems. During the scramble for and partition of Africa, Tanzania was under Germany while neighboring countries, Kenya and Uganda, were under the British. German, the colonial Master of Tanzania (by that time Tanganyika), was defeated during WWI; hence, Tanzania had to become an overseas territory of the British since she was closer to Tanzania. Until the independence of Tanganyika in 1961, neither Germany nor British had introduced a single university in the country. Therefore, the history of HE in Tanzania is drawn from the post-colonial period, making it as young as many other African countries (Fussy, 2018).

The first university in Tanzania was established in 1961 when the oldest country’s university (University of Dar es Salaam [UDSM]) was initiated as a constituent College of the University of London (Fussy, 2017; Mgaiwa 2021a; Mgaiwa and Poncian, 2016). In 1963, Dar es Salaam University College (DUC) was combined with Nairobi University College of Kenya and Makerere University College from Uganda to form the University of East Africa (UEA). DUC had to be recognized as a constituent college of the UEA (Cloete et al., 2011). In August 1970, Tanzania formally established its first national university under the UDSM Act 12 of 1970. The desire to develop the first country’s university was associated with, among other things, the need to create an educated generation that was ready to catalyze societal changes and solve day-to-day societal problems.

More universities were established during different periods to suit the demands of a country, having well-educated citizens who could contribute positively to national development. In the 1980s, for example, the Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) was established from the former Faculty of Agriculture of the UDSM under the Parliament Act. This was followed by the introduction of another public university in the 1990s, the Open University of Tanzania (OUT; Anangisye & Fussy, 2014). The number of HEIs offering bachelor’s degrees and above in the country is now more than 50, consisting of universities, university colleges, institutes, campuses, and centers. UDSM, for example, currently has two constituent colleges that mainly focus on training prospective secondary school teachers to suit the country’s demand.

As was common in most African countries, for many years, ownership of universities in Tanzania was mainly under the government (Mgaiwa & Kapinga, 2021). Changes occurred from the 1980s up to the 1990s, influenced mainly by Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) conditionalities that influenced private sector engagement in the provision of HE (Mgaiwa & Poncian, 2016; Varghese, 2004). Since Tanzania adopted socialist ideology soon after independence, socialism ideology’s influence on the HE system was inevitable. For instance, “following the Musoma Resolution of 1974, student admissions into higher education were to be made subject to the condition that the applicants had to have served into public service or national service for some time; this resulted in higher education institutions being transformed into institutions serving the workers and peasants” (Biswalo, 1985, cited in Mgaiwa & Poncian, 2016). During this period, the former president, the Late Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere, put little emphasis on it. To him, much emphasis was put on basic education, which could help solve problems of ignorance, poverty, and diseases.

Furthermore, HE was freely provided under socialist principles of free provision of public services (Mgaiwa, 2021b). Currently, especially following adherence to SAP conditions of the free market and the increase in societal demand for accessing HE, Tanzania has more than 50 universities. These institutions comprise 30 fully fledged universities,12 of which are public and 18 private, and 17 university colleges, 7 of which are public. At the same time, 10 are private university colleges, one is public, and 3 are private university campuses, centers, and institutes (Tanzania Commission for Universities, 2025).

As is the case all around the globe, universities in Tanzania are expected to perform three primary roles. First, Tanzania’s HE policy 1999 clearly states that “universities, as the highest level of institutions dedicated to the professional and intellectual development of mankind and society in general, are expected to concentrate on research, teaching, and public service or consultancy” (United Republic of Tanzania, 1999). Fussy (2018) extends the interpretation of the three critical roles of Tanzanian universities: knowledge production (research), knowledge transmission (teaching), and knowledge valorization (third mission/public service mission). The academic staff members should carry out all these critical functions of the university. However, as stated earlier, the main focus of the universities is on teaching, while other roles, including research and publication and public service mission/third mission, are highly neglected (Fussy, 2017).

Theoretical Framework

This study is guided by a theory called the Triple Helix Model, which was founded by Etzkowitz and Leydesdorf (Cai & Lattu, 2022; Etzkowitz & Zhou, 2017). The model was initially developed to explain the dynamic link between government, industry, and academia in promoting and applying entrepreneurship, innovation, and economic growth through the lens of economic knowledge (Bellandi et al., 2021; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 2003). Since then, the model has undergone various modifications, including those made in 2003 by the founders (Cai & Lattu, 2022; Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022). The new insertion of the model claimed that the public cannot be considered a fourth helix in articulating the university-industry-government relations. However, a reliable consideration of what represents the fourth helix is misplaced. However, knowledge consumers have been understood as the fourth helix: non-government organizations, community, and individual users (Lerman et al., 2021).

This model is relevant to this study as it shows the relationship between government, university, and consumers (industry). In relation to our research, this model has helped us explain how universities as knowledge producers should also work harmoniously with the larger community to foster development, particularly in the current knowledge-based economy, which has not been transformed into a reality. On the other hand, the model helps understand the government’s role in promoting university-community engagement. However, the aspects of the Triple Helix Model pay attention to institutions’ goals, which can be understood by looking at the government’s goals and motivations for their establishment (Cai & Amaral, 2021). The creation and implementation of any institution should focus on its vision and mission. Then, institutional and societal relations are critically integrated into the Triple Helix Model (Zhou & Etzkowitz, 2021). This stresses that the institution represents an autonomous force in governance and that its routine relies on actions and outcomes. This statement calls for institutions like universities to implement their goals, visions, and mission by setting genuine logic and operational tools like policies to meet society’s existing, unplanned, and unforeseen socio-economic challenges. In this regard, the rationale of the Triple Helix Model unleashes the universities’ hidden socio-economic potentials to the societies. This can be achieved when the universities translate their undertakings, such as research and consultancies, into realities within the determined discourse.

Methods

Research Design

This study employs a qualitative research design to understand institutional barriers to effectively implementing the universities’ third mission in Tanzania. Qualitative research seeks to understand complex social processes in their natural settings. It usually intends to develop a case-specific rather than a general conclusion on the matters under study (Corbetta, 2003). As for the case of this study, a qualitative research approach helped the researchers understand the barriers to effective implementation of the university’s third mission from different actors and draw a conclusion based on the specific case study. To achieve this objective, three universities from Tanzania (one public and two private universities) were selected as study sites to collect the data necessary to answer the research question. All universities selected for this study are accredited by the Tanzania Commission for Universities and offer education that leads to the awards of undergraduate and postgraduate degrees.

Sampling Techniques and Participants’ Characteristics

The study used purposive sampling to recruit suitable respondents to answer the research question (Table 1). Purposive sampling strategies are designed to enhance understanding of selected respondents’ experience(s) or develop concepts and theories. A researcher seeks to fulfill this mission by choosing “information-rich” respondents with high insights into the problem under study (Devers & Frankel, 2000). In qualitative research, purposive sampling is mainly employed as it helps researchers prepare criteria and choose suitable respondents knowledgeable about the question under study.

Table 1.

Data Collection Methods and Sampling Techniques.

Data collection method	Targeted respondents	No. interviewed	Sampling method
Key-informant interviews	Deputy Vice Chancellors or Deputy Principals responsible for research and public service mission	3	Purposive sampling
Key-informant interviews	Dean of Faculties and/or Head of Academic Departments	10	Purposive sampling
Semi-structured interview	Members of Academic Staff	21	Purposive sampling
Documentary search	Institutions’ policies and annual reports on public service provided by academics of HEIs, research articles, thesis and dissertations, magazines, newspapers, conference papers, and online materials	—	—
Total		34

In this study, a total of 21 members of academic staff (7 from each university) and 13 management personnel members were selected purposively to answer the research question. Thirty-four respondents from three universities were interviewed between July 2020 and March 2021. Most interviewed respondents were Assistant Lecturers, Lecturers, and Senior Lecturers. A very small portion of the sampled respondents had the rank of professors since many universities in Tanzania have a limited number of professors. Besides, most of the interviewed respondents had 2 to 20 years of working experience.

Data Collection

Semi-structured and key-informant interviews with academic and management staff members (Appendices A, B and C) from the three selected universities were employed for data gathering (Table 1). A total of 13 key-informant interviews were carried out with management staff from the three selected universities, as shown in Table 2. Besides, 21 semi-structured interviews were carried out with the academic staff members to explore the institutional barriers to the effective implementation of the university’s third mission. Semi-structured interviews are a highly recommended qualitative data collection technique, allowing the researcher to collect rich and detailed information from the respondents. Using semi-structured interviews as a tool for data collection is the most effective way as it allows for the effective sharing of new understandings of the research topic (Dearnley, 2005). It further allows the researcher to probe the respondents and get more information. According to Kallio et al. (2016), the qualitative semi-structured interview is more objective, and trustworthiness is maintained, making the study results more plausible. Apart from primary data, the study also relied on secondary sources where institutional policies and other essential documents with information on the universities’ third mission were reviewed.

Table 2.

An Estimation of The University Academics’ Time Allocation for Core Functions.

Academic staff	Teaching	Research	Third mission	Other roles
	30%	30%	30%	10%

Data Analysis

Since this research falls under qualitative design, qualitative data analysis techniques were used to analyze and interpret data obtained from the field. Thematic analysis was employed, and the collected data were coded and categorized according to themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Byrne, 2022). This kind of qualitative data analysis mainly focuses on “what data says and aims at identifying patterns within the data” (Sgier, 2012). Data gathered through key-informant interviews and semi-structured interviews were coded, analyzed, and interpreted to answer the intended research questions. The overall procedures of data processing and analysis were as follows:

• Familiarization with data: During the interviews with respondents, conversations were audiotaped, which enabled the researchers to transcribe and group all necessary information needed for data analysis. Familiarization of data started during the data collection period and proceeded during and after transcription and data translation. In this stage, the researcher had to review, listen, read, re-read, and write memos and summaries of the collected data to gain familiarity with the research data before the actual data analysis process began.

• Transcription of tape-recorded data: this procedure involves representing audible data in written form. In this step, judgments about “what level of detail to choose (e.g., omitting non-verbal dimensions of interaction), data interpretation (e.g., distinguishing “I don’t, no” from “I don’t know”) and data representation” (Bailey, 2008), were mainly considered.

• Organization and indexing of data: In this step, the researcher organized his data into easily retrievable sections. Firstly, data were grouped according to the study sites. The study sites (universities) were also coded as Study Site 1 (SS-1), Study Site 2 (SS-2) and Study Site 3 (SS-3). Data from different institutions were grouped according to their themes, and then they were linked with similar data from other sites. All interviews were given numbers which later were used to serve as pseudonyms in data analysis. These data were stored in a different file with the original information for easy retrieval and identification.

• Coding: Data coding was carried out in line with specific objectives and later analyzed and presented as the study findings. Highly repeated content was coded and grouped to answer the research question. Even though there are many electronic data analysis techniques, the researchers opted for manual data analysis techniques to avoid unnecessary misleading. Qualitative researchers widely use this approach to familiarize themselves with their data and avoid unnecessary misleading (Fussy, 2017).

• Thematization: In this stage, the researcher identified themes before writing the report. This step was guided by data coded according to their specific themes.

Results

University administration systems should play a significant role in ensuring the effective achievement of institutional core missions, including the third mission. Findings from this study revealed several institutional challenges that act as hindrances to the effective implementation of the university’s third mission. It was observed that all public and private institutions share almost the same kind of challenges. This section presents six institutional challenges hindering adequate public service provision in universities. These challenges include (i) inadequate financial resources, (ii) work overloads for academics, (iii) lack of comprehensive institutional policies and regulations designed to ensure the effective implementation of the third mission, (iv) lack of strong linkage between research and the third mission, (v) barrier on incentives and reward systems for best practices, and (vi) barriers in capacity building for effective implementation of the third mission. The detail of each challenge is presented and discussed below:

Inadequate Financial Resources

How universities are funded and the funds disbursed is crucial in attaining their core teaching, research, and third mission. Findings from this study revealed that a lack of or limited amount of funds allocated for the third mission hinders academics’ engagement in the third mission. The allocation of funds is prioritized in two traditional core missions of universities: teaching and research. In contrast, the third mission of universities has always been less prioritized, neglected, or ignored in financial allocation. By reflecting on the actual situation, funds in public universities are provided by the central government, which, in most cases, provides funds for specific purposes. The study carried out by Fussy (2017) shows that Tanzania’s government uses “mainly a block funding method or direct institutional allocations to provide funds to the country’s universities. Under this direct institutional allocation, two types of funds are allocated to universities: development and recurrent. The development fund is allocated for investment in, for instance, infrastructural development and should be used only for such purposes. On the other hand, the recurrent fund facilitates the payment of bills, teaching activities, staff development, and, if possible, research.” Based on this finding, the public service mission or the third mission has nowhere been mentioned as one of the aspects to be included in the financial allocation. This implies that an aspect of the third mission lacks a specific budget in HEIs. Therefore, allocating funds for the third mission depends on university leadership priorities.

It was observed that this limited amount of funds disbursed by the government or obtained through other sources is always inadequate, even to accommodate the day-to-day activities within HEIs. Some universities opted to admit more students as a mechanism of getting enough funds through tuition fees and other direct costs, something which, in one way or another, compromises the quality of HE where the number of students does not match the available human and physical resources. Though universities work hard to solve financial difficulties, allocating less available funds is prioritized on activities like teaching and administrative functions while neglecting other aspects, including the third mission.

While the financial problem was the main challenge hindering the effective implementation of the third mission in private and public universities, the situation was seen to be more severe in private universities than in public universities. Private universities rely on student fees and funds from donors or contributions from other stakeholders to run their day-to-day activities. Generally, it was observed that funding mechanisms in private universities are not effective enough to allocate enough of the budget for the third mission. During an in-depth interview with one of the senior administrative staff from University B, the researcher asked if there is any mechanism designed for funding the third mission, and this was the respondent’s response:

We have no clear funding mechanism supporting this because the research budget is not there. We face serious financial problems as we mainly depend on student fees to run our day-to-day activities. What we collect from students is not enough to be allocated to activities other than those related to teaching and administration, which are core to us. Teaching is our top priority, so the money we collect from our students first focuses on improving teaching environments like teacher salaries [Lecturers], building university infrastructures, paying water and electricity bills, and renovating our buildings…We sincerely want to engage in the public service mission as indicated in our mission, but there are no clear financial mechanisms to ensure that academics engage in this. (Senior Administrative Staff, University B).

Work Overload Among Academics

Many studies show a year-to-year increase in work overload among members of the academic staff of universities (Kyvik, 2013; Mustapha & Yu Ghee, 2013; Tight, 2010). This acts as an obstacle to achieving the core roles of the university. Balanced workloads among university academics are crucial in effectively implementing their core duties and responsibilities of generating, transferring, and valorizing knowledge. It is therefore estimated that every academic staff member should spend at least 30% of their time on teaching, 30% on research and publication, 30% on the third mission or public service mission, and 10% on other service roles like administrative roles (Table 2).

Findings revealed that many academics fail to effectively engage in the third mission due to work overload, especially in teaching and administrative roles. Teaching is considered the main priority of employers, while other functions are highly neglected. The respondent’s view strongly supports this during an in-depth interview with one of the university’s junior administrative staff, where the respondent emphasized:

Although the public service mission is one of our core missions as an institution, I think it has been given less priority than other roles. It seems like we are mainly focusing on teaching here, which has been given the highest priority compared to other aspects. We spend a lot of time teaching, and it is normal for staff to teach many courses with many students each semester, making them not engage in other activities, particularly the third mission. Can you imagine, for example, you have to teach, set tests and examinations, administer them, mark, and then release results for maybe more than 500 students? How will you get time for the public service mission? This is why even the administration doesn’t emphasize it more; if many people engage in the third mission, who will teach? …. apart from that, I have many other things to do as an administrative staff. I must attend meetings within and outside this institution, supervise my subordinates, and perform many other roles. (Head of Academic Department from University A).

This finding is consistent with that of Fussy (2017), who reported that many academics fail to engage in other core missions of universities, like research and service roles, due to work overload, mainly in teaching and administrative roles. His respondents also complained about teaching many courses with many students in one semester, which makes them always busy focusing on the teaching role and prioritizing less on other core duties and responsibilities, including research and the third mission. However, he further warns that many academics should not use work overloads as an excuse since others are engaging in research and third missions despite their heavy teaching, research, and administrative workloads.

Sometimes, work overload does not necessarily mean that academics work longer hours (Kyvik, 2013). Based on findings from this study, academics complained much about the high number of students, which does not allow them to perform other core research duties and third mission. It was reported that the number of students is increasing year after year while the number of lecturers is either constant, slightly increasing, or sometimes decreasing due to factors like study leaves, transfers, and natural controls. A high number of students increases pressure on academics, particularly on issues related to supervising seminars or tutorials, setting, administering, and marking tests and examinations, and consulting students, as emphasized by the respondent above. A balanced ratio between students and lecturers could give enough time for academics to effectively engage in other core missions of the university, like the third mission, and hence contribute to the development of the community.

Lack of Comprehensive Institutional Policies and Regulations Designed to Ensure the Smooth Implementation of the Third Mission

Effective engagement in the third mission among academics of HEIs needs strict policies, rules, regulations, and guidelines, requiring all academics to actively fulfil the universities’ third mission. However, this study’s findings revealed that no or less strict policies, regulations, and measures force academics to engage in the third mission. Most of the policy guidelines designed by institutions focus on improving teaching and research to improve institutions’ visibility at a global level while ignoring the third mission that gives institutions a good reputation in society.

During the interview, one academic staff member from University A reported that although the third mission is part and parcel of the core mission of universities, in reality, “it seems like the service role is not a part of the institutional culture.” Most institutional policies and regulations are there mostly to favor teaching roles, while other roles are less prioritized. Another respondent from the same institution added:

If I am asked to arrange my roles based on institutional priorities, teaching would be the first one that consumes a lot of time and the one that I must do throughout the year as per university rules and regulations. Teaching is strictly monitored every day, and anyone assigned to teach a certain course must teach, and failure to do that leads to serious disciplinary measures. Based on my academic and administrative staff position, administrative roles are the second thing I must do. After that, little emphasis is placed on research and publication, which is less strict than teaching and administrative roles. Lastly, according to our institutional policies and guidelines, I should engage in the third mission as an academic. This has been given minimal emphasis because there is no explicit policy guideline to ensure we fully engage in this mission. Nowadays, our DVC encourages us to give back to the community [to engage in the third mission], which is at least encouraged at the institutional level. (A Member of Academic Staff from University A).

During the literature review, it was also observed that there were no specific policies or guidelines for the public service mission. The third mission is only stated in other policy documents like institutional visions, missions, and strategic plans, and there are no specific guidelines to ensure its offerings. The lack of comprehensive institutional policies and guidelines for the third mission makes institutions less prioritize it as they do other core missions, especially teaching.

Lack of Strong Linkage Between Research and Third Mission

Research is believed to be a cornerstone of any successful university, particularly in promoting the socio-economic development of the local community, nation, region, and the globe (Fussy, 2017, 2018). All respondents of this study admitted that there is a close connection between research and the third mission. Their connections are based on the belief that findings obtained from research are translated into services by using them as solutions to societal problems and hence promote socio-economic development. That is to say, there is no third mission without research. During an in-depth interview with one of the junior management staff from University A, a researcher asked a question about the linkage between research and the third mission, and the respondent reported that:

What is researched should be within the community’s needs and demands and address societal problems. … as we open up room for public service/third mission, we realize the research gap and devise a plan to educate the community. Through research, we can easily realize what real people want to know or learn from the university. (Head of Academic Department, University A).

However, the study further revealed that many academic staff members engage in research activities not as a means to solve different existing day-to-day societal problems and promote socio-economic development but as a condition for academic promotion from one rank to another or as a requirement for a certain degree award. This weak linkage between research and the third mission leads to many published or non-published research being worthless to society.

On the other hand, the poor linkage between research and the third mission in universities is linked to a lack of research culture among academics. Fussy (2017) asserts that, within institutions, Many academics do not engage in research activities or only research to fulfill a certain condition. This is unhealthy if we want to build strong institutions that positively contribute to community development by translating research findings into solutions to real-life problems. It is, therefore, clear that achievement in the third mission in universities needs a solid research base that will enable academics to obtain and use their research findings to solve different day-to-day societal problems. Furthermore, the quality of research expected to bring social impacts should be encouraged by providing moral and material support to the researchers who would love to transform their research findings into services to the community. These supports should range from financial support to time and reduced workloads to give academics enough time to engage in the third mission.

The achievement of universities’ third mission activities “relies largely on fulfilling the other two missions, especially the second mission (research). When research activities are not well funded or lack human resources to undertake them, putting their outputs into use in the community, commercialization of the outputs and transfer of technology may become problematic” (Kraemer-Mbula, 2014). In the context of Tanzania, “the policy guidelines do not state how the knowledge generated through research can be disseminated, particularly beyond the peer-reviewed publications, so that they can be utilized to solve societal problems. This creates a significant tension […] in making use of the knowledge generated from research to improve the livelihoods of Tanzanians and others” (Fussy, 2017). Therefore, a strong linkage between the third mission and other universities’ core missions is crucial to reaching society and contributing to socio-economic development. Universities need to implement clear mechanisms to enable academic staff members to translate their research findings into services and promote the socio-economic development of local communities and the nation.

Barriers to Incentives and Rewarding Systems for the Best Practice

Human beings are naturally motivated by certain kinds of intrinsic or extrinsic rewards to perform a certain task effectively and efficiently. These kinds of rewards can be formally or informally recognized. Different rewards have been in place in the context of universities to motivate academics who excel in different aspects of its core functions. Compared to teaching, research, and publications, findings from this study revealed that there are few or, in some cases, no rewards for the best practices of academics who actively engage in the third mission. In some cases, rewards for outstanding academics are only considered in promoting senior academics and are neglected in promoting junior academic staff. This was reported as one of the factors discouraging junior academic staff from engaging in a third mission in universities. Rewarding systems for outstanding academics could range from promotion, provision of different bonuses, reduced teaching load, and recognition awards for academics who effectively engage in entrepreneurial roles. A proper incentive and reward system could help academics who engage in the third mission increase their efforts and attract those who do not engage in the third mission to do so.

This challenge represents not only universities in Tanzania but also in many other African countries where academics are assessed and promoted based on their performance in teaching and research. At the same time, the third leg (public service mission) is highly exclusive (Kraemer-Mbula, 2014). Academic promotion is based on teaching and research outputs measured through publications, whereas spending extra time engaging in the third mission among skilled academics is often discouraged. However, engagement in the third mission is acknowledged in institutional missions (Kraemer-Mbula, 2014). Therefore, engagement in the third mission appears to rely on an individual’s (academic) motivation rather than institutional influences.

Barriers to Capacity Building for Effective Implementation of the Third Mission

Capacity building is essential in ensuring the quality of services provided. The study revealed that universities have invested less in building the capacity of their members of academic staff on matters related to the university’s third mission. Based on findings from the study area, higher education institutions emphasize building the capacity of academics when it comes to teaching issues and, to some extent, research. At the same time, the third mission has been neglected in capacity building. In the study area, some respondents indicated a low understanding of the concept and issues related to the third mission, and some were even wondering if it was part of their main responsibilities. It was further observed that clear boundaries of what is supposed to be considered the third mission and what is not have not been explicitly stated, thus leading to misunderstandings. It was observed that some academics engaged in activities that, to their knowledge, were perceived as the third mission. However, when reported to the university administration, they were told that those activities were not part of the third mission. The situation was common among junior academic staff members compared to senior ones, and the main reason was a lack of capacity building. During the interview, one of the junior members of the academic staff from University C stated:

I understand that the public service mission [third mission] is one of my core duties and responsibilities as an academic. Still, I think the university has not done much to explain what the third mission means and what kinds of services they expect us to offer to the community. I have been here for over five years, and no seminar or training was provided to explain what they want us to do concerning the third mission. I always see seminars and training related to teaching and research, but they seem to have been ignored for the third mission. On my side, I think maybe it is not part of my key responsibilities or even is not a part of the institutional mission.

Discussion

The university’s third mission has emerged following the emergence of the so-called third-generation or entrepreneurial universities. Unlike first and second-generation universities that rely only on teaching, research, and publication, third-generation universities are more focused on the university-society relationship or, as others call it, the university’s third mission (Boruck Klein & Mafra Pereira, 2020). Under the third mission, the universities’ role is to accelerate society’s socio-economic transformation (Sam & van der Sijde, 2014). Why do some universities, especially in developed countries, excel better in the third mission while others, especially developing countries, do not? This article has explored the institutional barriers to effectively implementing the third mission of universities in Tanzania. The findings show that the higher education system in Tanzania recognizes the third mission as one of its core missions alongside teaching, research, and publication. Nevertheless, the third mission of higher education in Tanzania and many other developing countries is highly neglected due to the convergence of institutional challenges. Some professionals refer to the third mission as the “stepchild” of higher education (Johnson, 2020), meaning that the mission is highly neglected in the higher education system compared to the traditional missions.

Of all institutional challenges, the financial barrier was highly reported as a leading challenge hindering the effective implementation of the third mission and achieving other institutional roles, including teaching, research, and publication. This is consistent with other studies that show that underfunding is one of the chronic problems in the higher education system in Tanzania (Fussy, 2017, 2018, 2019; Mgaiwa, 2018). It is stated that HEIs always declare their willingness to engage in the third mission, which is part of their institutional missions. However, “there is rarely a substantial budget for universities to perform this kind of activity” (Kraemer-Mbula, 2014). Although underfunding is a dominant problem for universities across the globe, universities in sub-Saharan Africa often operate in a context of very limited financial resources, which puts pressure on the successful attainment of the core university missions (Kraemer-Mbula, 2014; Teferra & Altbach, 2004). High financial dependence on one main source (public funding for public universities or student fees for private universities) is considered ineffective in constructing autonomous and self-reliant institutions. In Tanzania, for instance, public funding for HE has rapidly declined since the early 2000s (Ishengoma, 2017). Besides, the disbursement of public funds is associated with problems like delayed funding and underfunding, where disbursements do not correlate with the requested budget. The government’s ability to provide enough funds for universities’ third mission is limited by competing demands, or either the third mission is not a priority or both (Ishengoma, 2013).

Based on work overload, universities in Sub-Saharan Africa are blamed for overburdening academic staff members with teaching and administrative roles (Jasson et al., 2022). The lecturer-student ratio in African universities is so high that academic staff members lack enough time to engage in the third mission, research, and publication (Simons et al., 2019). The limited number of academic staff is due to governments in many African countries not prioritizing hiring more academic staff members. Besides, replacement takes a long time once those hired retire, are transferred to another institution, or are appointed by the government to assume specific national roles. In this case, the remaining academic staff must work beyond their prescribed roles. Nevertheless, some academic staff members do not engage in the third mission due to lacking intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

Conclusion and Policy Recommendations

The third mission of the university has received significant attention since the 1980s. Many universities across the globe have adjusted their missions from teaching, research, and publication to the third mission, the public service mission. However, in practice, the university’s third mission is highly neglected compared to the first and second university roles. This study explored institutional challenges behind neglecting the third mission of the universities in Tanzania using the selected three universities as the case. It has been revealed that the universities acknowledge the third mission and have incorporated it into their mission statements. However, its implementation is less prioritized than that of teaching and research. Several institutional challenges ranging from funding, work overloads for the academics, lack of comprehensive institutional policies and regulations designed to ensure the smooth implementation of the third mission, lack of solid linkage between research and third mission, barriers to incentives and rewarding systems for the best practice and barriers in capacity building for effective implementation of the third mission have been reported to highly impede the smooth implementation of the third mission of the universities in Tanzania.

The study calls for institutional policy reforms that will consider the university’s public service mission/third mission as one of its day-to-day routines and hence contribute positively to the development of the higher education system and the economic development of society. The university and its professionals who are part of the society and reap benefits from it through research and many other benefits should think of what they give back to the community. If the university is part of society and benefits from it, why does it ignore the needs of society? The study highlights that the effective implementation of the university’s third mission will help to brand the universities during this market-competitive era and help the universities build a good reputation in society. The more the universities engage in the third mission, the closer they become to society and build strong synergies between the university and society.

Implications of the Study

Theoretical Implications

Despite the increased importance of research on the university’s third mission as an essential approach to link the university and society, this research area is highly neglected. This study, therefore, attempts to build a foundation for research on the university’s third mission in Tanzania by exposing the institutional challenges hindering the effective implementation of the university’s third mission. The study also provides policy recommendations that could help to improve the practice. The theoretical implications of this study are that the findings will help the researchers, academic community, and students who aspire to understand the university’s role in the modern era and what kinds of roles are highly prioritized or neglected in its implementation.

Practical Implications

The findings of this study highlight the importance of prioritizing the university’s third mission, similar to teaching and, research and publication. Policymakers and university management authorities can use these findings and recommendations to transform their institutions and make them closer to society by addressing day-to-day societal problems. Engagement in the third mission is an approach that universities use to build strong synergies between the university and society. Such a relationship provides mutual benefits among universities and society as society can learn from the university, and universities can learn from society. To successfully achieve this objective, universities should transform from being more teaching-oriented to being society’s problem solvers. Universities’ staff should be equipped with both knowledge and resources to ensure that they actively engage in both knowledge production (research), knowledge transmission (teaching), and knowledge valorization (third mission/public service mission). Finally, the study highlights that although the study was carried out in Tanzania, the recommendations can be used in other developing countries facing similar problems.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

The present study has three main limitations. First, the study is limited to exploring institutional barriers constraining the effective implementation of the university’s third mission in Tanzania. In this instance, applying the results to different geographic areas and cultural environments may be challenging, especially in the context of developed nations. Future studies should explore individual and community factors constraining the effective implementation of the university’s third mission. The key question should be: are the academic staff members ready/willing to engage in the third mission? Besides, is the community ready to receive services provided by the university? Addressing these questions separately or in combination will help to build an understanding of the multiple challenges constraining the effective implementation of the university’s third mission.

Second, the study was only restricted to three universities from Tanzania as a sample size. These universities were both public and private universities. Although the sample was appropriate for qualitative research, future studies should explore the challenges in several countries, particularly sub-Saharan African countries, mainly using quantitative or mixed research approaches. Quantitative or mixed research approaches would help increase the sample size and make the results more generalized. Future research should also focus on a comparative analysis of the university’s third mission implementation between developed and developing countries. This approach will help universities from developing countries to learn the best experience from developed countries’ universities.