Formations | Recherche | Vie du campus
Europe needs entrepreneurial learning that goes beyond the classroom
The future of work is changing rapidly. Technological development, artificial intelligence, new forms of work and evolving skills requirements are challenging higher education institutions to rethink how students learn, build a professional identity and enter the world of work.
For higher education, this is not just a pedagogical issue. It is also a matter of innovation policy. How can institutions create an environment where students not only study entrepreneurship, but actively develop solutions, test ideas, build prototypes and connect with ecosystems across Europe?
This question was at the heart of the paper ‘From entrepreneurial learning to the future of work: evidence from EU4Dual practice-based mobility’, presented at the EU4Dual 2026 annual conference. The paper examined how practice-based entrepreneurial mobility contributes to skills development, entrepreneurial identity and early-career trajectories.
The key argument is that entrepreneurial mobility can become more than just an exchange activity. If properly structured, it can function as an institutional model to strengthen innovation capacity, business creation and entrepreneurial agency within European higher education.
From mobility activity to innovation infrastructure: evidence from practice-based mobility
Traditional mobility has often focused on studies, work placements, cultural experience and academic credits. Whilst these remain valuable, student entrepreneurs need a different kind of pathway. They need access to mentors, laboratories, incubators, sector-specific expertise, testing environments, customers, pitching opportunities and local start-up ecosystems.
This means that entrepreneurial mobility should not be understood solely as movement between countries. It must be understood as access to complementary innovation environments. A student entrepreneur may have a promising but still incomplete business idea. One institution may offer business coaching, another prototyping facilities, another sector-specific expertise, and yet another greater access to start-up hubs, companies or market validation. The value of a European university alliance lies in the fact that these strengths can be brought together.
In this sense, the emerging EU4Dual model is not just about sending and receiving students. It is about building an emerging European support infrastructure where ideas in the start-up phase can access the expertise, validation environments and networks necessary for commercialisation. The broader contribution lies in the shared model created between the partner institutions.
The analysis in the summary was based on initial qualitative evidence from EU4Dual mobility activities since 2023, including programme documentation, reflections and interviews with participants, post-activity feedback, information on staff exchanges and ten mobility cases involving ten mentors.
The analysis focused on how entrepreneurial mobility affects students’ skills, mindset and career orientation. In practice, the question was not only what students learn, but also how they begin to act when working on real entrepreneurial projects in unfamiliar environments.
This is important because European policy often emphasises skills, employability and the growth of start-ups, whilst there are fewer practical models demonstrating how these capabilities are developed in real-world learning environments.
Entrepreneurial mobility offers such a model. It enables students to move from classroom-based entrepreneurship to genuine development work: meeting potential customers, building prototypes, validating hypotheses, refining business models and communicating their ideas to external stakeholders.
What kind of institutional model stimulates the development of new products and services?
The case studies developed within the EU4Dual context suggest that entrepreneurial mobility works best when it is structured, but not over-controlled. Before the mobility begins, the student’s idea, stage of development and learning objectives must be clarified. The host institution then identifies relevant resources, such as business coaches, labs, design expertise, industry specialists, incubator contacts, start-up centres or pitching opportunities.
During the mobility period, the student works on the project within a real-world ecosystem. The work may include identifying customers, developing business models, designing services, prototyping, testing, market validation, preparing a pitch or planning the commercialisation strategy. The key point is that learning takes place through action. Students do not merely describe an opportunity; they try to drive it forward.
This emerging model raises a deeper institutional question: what do universities actually need to build if they want to foster greater entrepreneurial activity and more effective commercialisation? It is important to note that innovation, in this context, is not merely an invention or the generation of ideas. It becomes meaningful when ideas are tested, developed, adopted and transformed into value within real-world operating environments.
The first requirement is structured access. Students need clear entry points to entrepreneurial support. If access to laboratories, mentors or incubators depends solely on personal networks, the model remains fragile. Institutions need clear pathways that tell students where to go, who will support them and what sort of development process they can expect.
Access alone is not enough. Many start-up ideas cross disciplinary boundaries. A technical product may require service design. A healthcare solution may require clinical or physiotherapy expertise. A digital concept may require business model validation. A commercialisation-focused mobility model must therefore bridge expertise across schools, departments and partner ecosystems.
This is also where test customers and early partners become important. A student entrepreneur may have a technically promising idea, but without contact with users, the project may remain detached from market realities. Institutions need coaching methods that help students identify their first test customers, organise feedback sessions and translate observations into product and business development decisions.
The role of coaching is particularly important. Start-up entrepreneurs need autonomy, but they also need momentum, resources and structure. Regular mentoring helps students set priorities, test hypotheses and avoid wasting time on unclear objectives. The coach should not take ownership of the idea, but should help the entrepreneur make better decisions.
Entrepreneurship essentially involves recognising and acting on opportunities, mobilising resources, creating value for users and customers, and developing a sustainable business or impact model through entrepreneurial actors. For this reason, practice-based mobility must include real resources for action. It is not enough simply to encourage students or researchers to innovate. They need access to tools, spaces, materials, expertise and feedback environments that make development possible.
Exposure to the ecosystem adds another layer of realism. Pitch events, start-up hubs, companies, incubators and external experts create productive pressure. Students learn to communicate beyond the university, to defend their hypotheses and to receive feedback from people who are not responsible for marking their work.
Recognition is also necessary if the model is to evolve. If entrepreneurial activities such as prototyping, market validation, business model development and pitching remain outside formal learning structures, progress will remain marginal. Institutions need clearer ways of recognising entrepreneurial work through credits, placements, modules or learning pathways.
Policy relevance: from skills to start-up capacity
At European level, the model is directly linked to current policy priorities. The Skills Union emphasises the need for people to adapt, retrain and remain competitive in a rapidly changing world. The EU’s Start-up and Scale-up Strategy highlights the need for Europe to become a stronger environment for the launch and growth of technology-driven businesses.
Entrepreneurial mobility lies at the intersection of these programmes. It develops skills, but not in isolation. It links skills to business creation, innovation ecosystems and career development.
This is where universities can play a concrete role: they can transform entrepreneurship from an abstract skill into a practical pathway for development. Start-ups do not arise solely from funding instruments or policy statements. They emerge from people who have the skills, confidence, networks and environment to take action. Higher education institutions can create these conditions if entrepreneurship is treated as a practical learning pathway, rather than merely a subject.
A European university alliance can add another layer: it can help students think beyond national markets right from the start. When student entrepreneurs test their ideas across borders at an early stage, Europe becomes part of their mindset before the business is fully formed. This can support the emergence of start-ups originating in Europe: businesses that do not view Europe as a market for future expansion, but as a natural starting point.
Building a European home base for commercialisation
Building a European-based environment for commercialisation requires more than good intentions and individual mobility initiatives. The model needs reliable support structures, practical resources, institutional ownership and a clear balance between autonomy and support.
The quality of accommodation is a key requirement. Students need more than just a welcoming ecosystem. They need workspaces, local guidance, access to resources, the availability of mentors, and practical support to connect with staff, laboratories and external partners. Even minor logistical issues can undermine the learning experience and slow down development. Funding and the design of resources also require attention. Student entrepreneurs may need support for travel and accommodation, as well as small prototyping budgets, access to materials, testing environments and market validation activities. Funding for mobility should reflect the realities of business development, not just the costs of physical travel.
The model also requires stronger institutional ownership. Entrepreneurial mobility cannot rely solely on motivated individuals. To evolve, it needs shared processes, clear roles and commitment from universities, incubators, international offices and research and development units. At the same time, the model must protect the student entrepreneur’s ownership. Students must be treated as entrepreneurs, not merely as exchange students. Early-stage founders need structured feedback and help to navigate unfamiliar environments, but the project must remain their own. The right balance is structured autonomy: the student owns the project, whilst the institution creates the conditions for progress.
Finally, the model requires more robust evidence as it develops. Much of the current understanding stems from participants’ reflections, programme documentation and the mentor’s observations. These are valuable, but future research should include stronger external perspectives from stakeholders and longitudinal follow-up. We need to know what happens after the mobility period: whether students continue to develop the business, set up new businesses, join other incubators or find employment in roles related to innovation.
A practical path towards a stronger culture of innovation
The most important insight from the EU4Dual practice-based mobility programme is that entrepreneurial capacity increases when students are placed in real-world development situations with access to real ecosystems. This has implications for how universities design entrepreneurship education. Instead of asking solely which courses students should take, institutions should ask what environments students should be placed in, what resources they should have access to, what feedback they should receive and what evidence of progress they should produce.
Entrepreneurial mobility can therefore become a tool for institutional innovation. It helps universities to link teaching, research and development, business services, international partnerships and regional ecosystems. It also helps staff to learn from one another across partner institutions and to develop shared practices for coaching, prototyping, incubation and start-up support.
For Savonia and the EU4Dual network, this work points towards a more ambitious model: a European pathway where student entrepreneurs can move between ecosystems, develop ideas with multidisciplinary support and build businesses with an international mindset from the outset.
The EU4Dual case studies suggest that promising ideas exist across Europe; the greatest challenge is to create environments where they can be tested in a practice-oriented way, supported by sufficiently in-depth expertise, commercialised and scaled up in a growth-oriented manner. Practice-based entrepreneurial mobility offers a concrete way of supporting this, particularly at an early stage.
