Planning for Performance: A Case Study on Strengthening Research Culture and Innovation Commercialisation at UiTM Faculty of Accountancy

Planning for Performance: A Case Study on Strengthening Research Culture and Innovation Commercialisation at UiTM Faculty of Accountancy

Mohamad Shahril Isahak¹*, Mohd Fairuz Adnan², Erlane K Ghani³, Muhsin Nor Paizin⁴

^1,2,3Faculty of Accountancy, University Technology MARA, Cawangan Selangor, Kampus Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia.

⁴Akademi Zakat (AZKA) PPZ, Taman Shamelin Perkasa, 56100 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

^*Corresponding author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000714

Received: 20 September 2025; Accepted: 26 September 2025; Published: 28 October 2025

ABSTRACT

This analysis outlines the approach adopted by the Faculty of Accountancy (FPN) at Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) to enhance its research, publication, and commercialisation (RPC) environment. In direct support of the university’s strategic objectives, FPN developed a comprehensive Strategic Action Plan. This plan featured targeted, high-yield programs, such as the Research Grant Venture and the Route to High-Impact Publication. The outcomes were substantial: in 2023, the faculty obtained RM6.81 million in research grants and generated 223 indexed publications. This performance led to FPN receiving top university accolades and a 94.9% performance score. Partnerships with industry and international bodies resulted in grant acquisition surpassing goals by 263% and 392%. A key success was the market launch of the I-Asnaf Act application, which supports the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. FPN’s achievements are mainly due to methodical planning, proactive risk mitigation, and productive engagement with stakeholders. This case presents a transferable framework for academic units seeking to enhance their research environment and commercial reach through strategic alliances.

Keywords: Strategic Planning, Research Culture, Commercialisation, University-Industry Collaboration, UiTM.

INTRODUCTION

The international higher education sector is now defined by fierce competition for students, research funding, skilled academics, and institutional reputation (Altbach & Reisberg, 2018). Within this climate, a vibrant ecosystem for research, publication, and innovation commercialisation (RIC) serves as a key marker of distinction for universities aiming to increase their influence and global standing (Marginson & van der Wende, 2007). For institutions in developing countries, nurturing this ecosystem is particularly crucial, as it directly contributes to advancing national innovation and economic progress (Etzkowitz et al., 2000). However, shifting a conventional academic department into a high-output, research-focused faculty requires more than intent; it calls for purposeful strategic design, efficient execution, and the development of cooperative networks with essential partners (Guerrero et al., 2016).

In Malaysia, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) has established a clear mission through its PSUiTM2025 strategy, built on the foundations of Quality Education, Global Excellence, and Value-Driven Governance. A primary objective of this strategy is to enhance the university’s research output and commercial impact (UiTM, 2021). The Faculty of Accountancy (FPN) at UiTM stands as a notable instance of an academic unit that has actively pursued this institution-wide goal. FPN has initiated a comprehensive change process to methodically reinforce its RIC culture, decisively moving “from planning to performance.”

This case analysis examines the strategic measures and execution model employed by FPN to implement this change. It assesses how the faculty’s organised Strategic Action Plan (SAP), which incorporates measures such as the Research Grant Venture and Route to High-Impact Publication, produced concrete results in grants, indexed publications, and commercialised products. Additionally, the study examines the crucial role of stakeholder integration, both within and outside the university, in achieving these outstanding results. This is demonstrated through partnerships with industry and international entities that greatly exceeded set targets. By evaluating FPN’s methods and accomplishments, this analysis provides a framework that is adaptable for other academic faculties seeking to enhance their research dynamism and social impact through strategic design and collaborative partnerships.

BACKGROUND OF STUDY

The shift to a knowledge-driven economy has redefined the function of universities, establishing them not just as educational institutions but also as crucial catalysts for economic development and innovation (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000). This “entrepreneurial university” paradigm requires a strong focus on research and development (R&D), the creation of intellectual property, and its effective commercialisation for public good (Guerrero et al., 2016). Within this global context, Malaysian higher education institutions are encouraged by national policies, such as the Malaysia Education Blueprint (Higher Education) 2015-2025, to enhance their research outcomes and strengthen innovation ecosystems, thereby enhancing national competitiveness (Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2015).

As Malaysia’s largest university, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) bears a strategic responsibility to make a significant contribution to this national mission. Its PSUiTM 2025 strategy clearly aims to achieve global distinction through high-value research and value generation (UiTM, 2021). This direction demands that every faculty synchronise its operational aims with this broad vision. The Faculty of Accountancy (FPN), historically concentrated on training accounting professionals, has acknowledged the need to advance beyond its traditional teaching-focused model in reaction to evolving expectations in higher education and UiTM’s strategic direction. As a result, FPN has made a strategic pivot to enable its academics to participate in internationally significant research, secure competitive grants, publish in high-impact journals, and translate knowledge into market-ready solutions for real-world problems.

Problem Statement

Even with clear strategic direction from national and institutional sources, numerous academic faculties struggle to transition from a declared commitment to research excellence to consistently delivering high-level results (Tight, 2019). This execution gap frequently arises from a combination of obstacles. Typical barriers involve the absence of a unified and practical strategic plan, inadequate research guidance and support systems, heavy teaching duties that limit research time, and a weak collaborative culture within the faculty and with external industry partners (Bentley et al., 2015; Hemmings & Kay, 2010). Moreover, a specific difficulty exists in progressing beyond academic papers to attain substantial innovation commercialisation, which demands distinct skills and networks often not fully developed in traditional academic environments (Markman et al., 2008).

Before its strategic overhaul, FPN presumably encountered similar obstacles. Although the goal to enhance research, publication, and commercialisation (RPC) was present, converting this goal into quantifiable, lasting, and outstanding outcomes remained a complicated challenge. The central issue, therefore, was the need to bridge the divide between strategic ambition and actual performance. This case analysis addresses the question: How did the Faculty of Accountancy (FPN) at UiTM effectively develop and implement a strategic framework to overcome these typical barriers and significantly enhance its research culture and innovation commercialisation output, thereby supporting and surpassing institutional targets?

LITERATURE REVIEW

The metamorphosis of an academic faculty into a high-output research and innovation unit is a multifaceted process supported by several connected areas of academic literature. This review synthesises key insights from relevant studies on strategic planning in higher education, the development of a research culture, and the processes of university-industry collaboration for commercialisation. As shown in Diagram 1, these three areas, which are strategic planning, research culture, and collaboration, are not separate but are deeply connected, forming a unified framework that propels research transformation. The subsequent sections examine this literature, with the diagram acting as a visual map of the synergistic connections between these core ideas.

Diagram 1: Conceptual Framework of Key Success Factors for Academic Research Transformation 

 1) Strategic Planning in Higher Education

Productive strategic planning is broadly acknowledged as a key catalyst for organisational change and achievement in universities (Kotler & Murphy, 1981). An effective strategic plan evolves from a simple document into an active framework that synchronises resources, inspires staff, and offers a clear guide for reaching set goals (Dooris et al., 2004). In the realm of academic research, this includes setting definite targets for grants, publications, and impact, while also creating supportive frameworks and procedures. Literature suggests that inclusive plans, which foster a sense of involvement among academics and are effectively implemented, have a higher chance of success (Buller, 2015). FPN’s method, which involved programs such as the Research Champions Programme and Talent Cluster, appears to align with this recommended practice by distributing leadership and forming practice communities, rather than enforcing a strictly top-down directive.

2)  Building a Research Culture

A solid research culture is an environment consisting of attitudes, behaviours, and supporting mechanisms that prioritise and facilitate research excellence (Brew et al., 2017). Having a plan is insufficient; the organisational culture must encourage its implementation. Key components highlighted in the literature include productive mentoring for new researchers (Hemmings & Kay, 2010), the allocation of seed funding and strategic management of workloads to secure dedicated research time (Bexley et al., 2019), and the recognition of research achievements. Additionally, fostering a culture that prioritises collaboration over individual effort is crucial for tackling complex research questions and securing larger grants (Bentley et al., 2015). FPN’s initiatives, such as the FACT Research Writing Bootcamps and Editing and Formatting Hub, directly target these cultural aspects by enhancing ability, minimising administrative hurdles to publication, and encouraging cooperative research practices.

3)  University-Industry Collaboration and Commercialisation

The “Triple Helix” model of university-industry-government relations is a leading framework for comprehending innovation and commercialisation in knowledge-based economies (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000). Successful collaboration requires connecting the different goals and schedules of academia and industry (Perkmann et al., 2013). For universities, advantages include access to funding, practical research questions, and avenues to market innovations. Barriers often involve intellectual property issues, a deficiency of trust, and a mismatch of rewards within the university system (Markman et al., 2008). Effective methods include creating specialised knowledge exchange offices, formulating clear IP protocols, and rewarding academics for engagement activities beyond pure publication (Schmitz et al., 2017). FPN’s standout performance in obtaining industrial grants and commercialising the I-Asnaf Act application demonstrates a successful application of these principles, effectively managing these partnerships to achieve shared benefits and social impact, as seen in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

This literature lays the foundation for understanding FPN’s path. The faculty’s achievement can be credited to the successful combination of a clear strategic plan, focused actions to nurture a supportive research culture, and the strategic development of synergistic partnerships with industry and international stakeholders.

METHODOLOGY

This investigation employs a qualitative single-case study approach to conduct a thorough examination of the strategic actions and outcomes at the Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Faculty of Accountancy (FPN). A case study approach is suitable as it enables the exploration of a current phenomenon within its actual context, especially when the lines between the phenomenon and context are not entirely clear (Yin, 2018). This method is excellent for investigating the “how” and “why” underlying FPN’s successful shift from strategic planning to high achievement.

Data Sources

The study depends mainly on a comprehensive examination of secondary documentary sources. The primary document examined is Laporan Anugerah Kualiti Naib Cancellor  (2024), referred to as FPN_AKNC2024, created by FPN for yearly performance assessment and strategic review:

FPN_AKNC2024_Section 1:   This report offers extensive data and description on Strategic Planning Outcome 1, outlining the faculty’s strategic action plan (SAP), its connection to PSUiTM2025, key actions (e.g., Research Grant Venture, Fit to Publish), and resulting performance indicators for research grants, publications, and commercialisation for 2023.

FPN_AKNC2024_Section 2: This report presents extensive data and descriptions of Customer Outcome 2, with a focus on collaboration with internal and external stakeholders. It includes information on partnership results, comparative performance with other faculties, and the impact of commercialised projects, such as the I-Asnaf Act application.

These documents function as a substantial source of factual evidence, including quantitative performance metrics, descriptive accounts of strategies and projects, and qualitative assessments of results and impacts.

Data Analysis

A directed content analysis method (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) was used on the documents. This first involved applying key ideas from the literature review, specifically strategic planning, research culture, and university-industry collaboration, as pre-set categories for coding. The text was methodically examined to locate and extract information pertinent to these topics. This involved:

Coding for Strategic Planning: Locating components of the SAP, its creation process, and the particular actions implemented.

Coding for Research Culture:   Locating support frameworks, skill-development programs (e.g., bootcamps, hubs), and performance results linked to grants and publications.

Coding for Collaboration & Commercialisation:   Locating categories of stakeholders (internal/external), types of partnerships, and results linked to industrial grants and commercialised products.

The examination focused on integrating information from both documents to construct a consistent account of FPN’s method, cross-verifying the evidence between the strategic aim (H1) and collaborative execution (H2) to ensure validity.

Limitations

The primary limitation of this method is its reliance on a single source of secondary data: internal institutional reports. Although these documents are official and data-intensive, they are naturally self-reported and intended to highlight achievements. This could present a possibility for optimistic bias. Subsequent studies could reinforce these conclusions by incorporating primary data from discussions with FPN academics, managers, and industry partners to gather multiple perspectives on the execution process and challenges.

DISCUSSIONS

The results from the FPN case analysis offer a strong practical example of how theoretical concepts of strategic management and innovation can be effectively applied within an academic faculty. The faculty’s progression from planning to performance gives key insights into the mechanisms that support the growth of a high-performing research and innovation environment.

The Integration of Coherent Strategy and Cultural Supports

FPN’s achievement was not the result of a single action, but rather the outcome of a consistent and layered strategy, carefully aligned with the broader PSUiTM 2025 plan. This alignment is a vital success element, as institutional strategies frequently falter when subordinate units function independently (Dooris et al., 2004). The SAP served as a central organising framework, but simultaneous investments in the cultural and support systems activated its potential. Actions like the Editing and Formatting Hub and Research Writing Bootcamps directly tackled common publication barriers, such as language skills and methodological precision, thus developing individual and collective confidence, a recognised indicator of research productivity (Hemmings & Kay, 2010). Additionally, the formation of Talent Clusters and the Research Champions Programme fostered a collaborative practice community, moving beyond the conventional model of the solitary researcher. This aligns with Brew et al. (2017), who argue that a solid research culture is built on shared practices and mutual support, which in turn enhances productivity and reduces the sense of isolation that can hinder academic success.

Stakeholder Integration as a Performance Amplifier

A key insight from this case is the transformative effect of profound, strategic cooperation with stakeholders. FPN’s results in Customer Outcome 2 show a skilled application of the Triple Helix model (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000). The faculty not only interacted with industry and international partners but also established synergistic networks that served as a multiplier for its strategic aims. The exceptional performance in securing grants, which surpassed targets by 263% to 392%, suggests that these partnerships were founded on mutual value generation rather than transactional dealings. This finding matches Perkmann et al. (2013), who propose that the most successful university-industry connections are those that align with the core research strengths of the academic unit and the strategic requirements of the partner.

The commercialisation of the I-Asnaf Act application is a representative instance of this integration. It goes beyond traditional academic output by showing direct social and economic effect, satisfying the “Value-Driven” foundation of UiTM’s strategy. By meeting the needs of micro-entrepreneurs and the asnaf community, the project directly aids SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 4 (Quality Education), illustrating how academic research can be transformed into instruments for sustainable development. This transition from knowledge generation to knowledge use is a characteristic of the entrepreneurial university (Guerrero et al., 2016).

A Transferable Framework for Strategic Change

The FPN case offers a transferable framework for other faculties, particularly those in comprehensive universities, seeking to enhance their research presence. The model emphasises that success demands a dual emphasis: internal capability building (through a clear plan, cultural support, and skill enhancement) and external relationship building (through strategic, value-centred partnerships). The merging of these two spheres is essential; a strong internal capability makes the faculty a desirable partner, while external collaborations supply resources, practical challenges, and avenues to impact that further reinforce internal capability and drive.

However, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations of this study, primarily its reliance on internal data. The recorded successes are apparent, but future studies should investigate the challenges and difficulties encountered during execution through qualitative discussions with the involved academics. This would provide a more detailed understanding of the change management process required for such a transformation.

In summary, FPN’s experience demonstrates that a systematic, well-supported, and collaboratively focused strategic approach can significantly enhance academic faculties’ research culture, output, and commercialisation impact, thereby making substantial contributions to their institution’s and nation’s goals in the global knowledge economy.

CONCLUSION

This case analysis has thoroughly outlined the transformative path of UiTM FPN in reinforcing its research culture and innovation commercialisation. The examination, based on internal performance reports, shows that FPN’s notable success was not coincidental but the direct product of an intentional and unified strategy. The faculty successfully connected the common divide between strategic ambition and actual performance by concurrently implementing a consistent Strategic Action Plan (SAP) and nurturing profound, synergistic relationships with a network of internal and external stakeholders.

The findings result in several clear conclusions. First, FPN’s experience confirms the vital importance of matching faculty-level actions with overarching institutional goals, as described in PSUiTM2025. Second, it demonstrates that strategic plans must be implemented through tangible support systems such as skill-development boot camps, editing hubs, and mentorship programs that actively foster a supportive and productive research culture. Third, and possibly most importantly, the case highlights that external collaboration with industry and international partners is not a marginal activity but a central driver for producing exceptional results in research grants, high-impact publications, and meaningful commercialisation with social effect, as demonstrated by the I-Asnaf Act project.

Ultimately, the FPN case offers a robust and transferable model for academic faculties worldwide. It stands as evidence that, through systematic planning, cultural enablement, and strategic collaboration, academic units can significantly enhance their performance, make important contributions to national economic and social objectives, and secure a position of distinction on the world stage. The faculty’s journey from planning to performance offers a helpful guide for converting academic ambition into a quantifiable, high-impact reality.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors would like to express their appreciation to the Faculty of Accountancy, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia, for its support and enabling this research project.

REFERENCES

1. Altbach, P. G., & Reisberg, L. (2018). Global trends in higher education financing: The United Kingdom. International Higher Education, (92), 13–15.
2. Bentley, P. J., Coates, H., Dobson, I. R., Goedegebuure, L., & Meek, V. L. (2015). Academic job satisfaction from an international comparative perspective: Factors associated with satisfaction across 12 countries. In Academic work and careers in Europe: Trends, challenges, perspectives (pp. 239-262). Springer.
3. Bexley, E., James, R., & Arkoudis, S. (2019). The Australian academic profession in transition: Addressing the challenge of reconceptualising academic work and regenerating the academic workforce. Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne.
4. Brew, A., Boud, D., Lucas, L., & Crawford, K. (2017). What is research culture? The Association for Research Managers and Administrators.
5. Buller, J. L. (2015). Change leadership in higher education: A practical guide to academic transformation. Jossey-Bass.
6. Dooris, M. J., Kelley, J. M., & Trainer, J. F. (2004). Strategic planning in higher education. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2004(123), 5–11.
7. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research policy, 29(2), 109-123.
8. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330.
9. Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., Fayolle, A., Klofsten, M., & Mian, S. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities: emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 551-563.
10. Hemmings, B., & Kay, R. (2010). Research self-efficacy, publication output, and early career development. International Journal of Educational Management, 24(7), 562-574.
11. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
12. Laporan Anugerah Kualiti Naib Cancellor (2024), Fakulti Perakaunan UiTM Puncak Alam, Selangor
13. Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2007). To rank or to be ranked: The impact of global rankings in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3-4), 306–329.
14. Markman, G. D., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2008). Research and technology commercialization. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1401-1423.
15. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2015). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education). Putrajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
16. Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D’Este, P., Fini, R., Geuna, A., Grimaldi, R., Hughes, A., Krabel, S., Kitson, M., Llerena, P., Lissoni, F., Salter, A., & Sobrero, M. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423–442.
17. Schmitz, A., Urbano, D., Dandolini, G. A., de Souza, J. A., & Guerrero, M. (2017). Innovation and entrepreneurship in the academic setting: A systematic literature review. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(2), 369–395.
18. Tight, M. (2019). The neoliberal turn in Higher Education. Higher Education Quarterly, 73(3), 273-284.
19. Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM). (2021). PSUiTM2025: Strategic Plan. Shah Alam: UiTM Press.
20. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.