Abstract
This study describes a government–academia–industry joint training project that produces Vietnamese midlevel technical managers. To ensure collaboration success, a proactive assessment methodology was developed as a supplement to the conventional project management practices. In the postproject feedback, the funding agencies acknowledged that the project fulfilled its contractual obligations and achieved its objectives. The implementing university was pleased as it broke ground in this type of collaboration in Taiwan. The industrial partners, however, were not so sure about the effectiveness of this collaborative training endeavor because there were many skirmishes between company supervisors and Vietnamese interns caused by the interns’ self-interested perception and expectation. Consequently, a theoretical framework for predicting internship acceptance and preventing unfavorable perceptions was proposed to strengthen the proactive assessment methodology. Collaboration research, funding agencies, academia, and industry could all benefit from this study.
Highlights
There are many Taiwanese-invested companies in Vietnam, staffed primarily by Vietnamese (Ho, 2007)
The Industrial Development Bureau (IDB) of the Ministry of Economic Affairs has launched an initiative to fund academia–industry joint training that would produce the desired skill set in midlevel managers
The consensus was that the “General Environment” dimension is inconsequential because the request for proposal (RFP) had already been issued
Summary
There are many Taiwanese-invested companies in Vietnam, staffed primarily by Vietnamese (Ho, 2007). After completing the academic training, the trainees must take on a 3-year resident internship at a Taiwanese-invested company in Vietnam to receive their master’s degree diploma This case project involved two government agencies, one university, and two companies. 2. The moderator stated the objective of this focus group session: to identify the success factors of each project assessment stage based on the contextual factors. Even though the Wilder Collaboration Factors Inventory (Mattessich et al, 2001) is available for assessing collaboration readiness, a focus group would be more suitable because the predefined collaboration factors may not completely address the distinctive profile of the case project. In the same afternoon of the focus group meeting, another session was convened to assess the readiness of the case project This time the moderator played the role of the PM trying to justify the project readiness while the participants played the judges. Three months after project completion, the PM called the stakeholders for their feedbacks
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
