**3. Communicative actions in the context of university-industry collaboration**

Habermas argued business, family, media, and language interactions by considering the theory-practice understanding in his theory of communicative action. In this context, Habermas classified social actions as instrumental, symbolic, communicative, and strategic actions. Particular attention was given to the importance of communicative action and strategic action while focusing on the interactions between the stakeholders in the UIC ecosystem. Although it is assumed that the validity of inter-subjective speeches is based on communicative action, it is stated that mutual awareness between actors is related to common compromise and universal validity principles in action. Habermas argued that the compromise in strategic action is lacking in the background and motivational conditions constitute differences. However, the preliminary assumptions of the compromise in communicative action can motivate actors. Therefore, the institutionalization of strategic actions must be established within binding norms between subjects, and thus the motivation of inter-subjective motivational conditions must be guaranteed [34]. The strategic action concentrates on the tendency of the actor to succeed, whereas the communicative action in the inter-subjective interaction tends to reach understanding. Habermas clarified that the communicative action is oriented to observe valid intersubjective norms that connect mutual expectations and awareness [35].

The main purpose of the communicative action theory is to address the problems of action coordination and social integration by developing an intersubjective theoretical framework that avoids the pitfalls of objectivism and subjectivism. In the theory of communicative action, Habermas attempted to develop a cognitive moral theory in the form of discourse ethics [36]. In the theory of communicative action, an analytical approach that questions "meaning" has been developed and the structure and perception of linguistic expressions have been properly highlighted rather than merely examining the speakers' intentions. Thus, the theory is more concerned with how the actions and communications of different actors tend to be understood within the mechanism that they create "interconnectedness." According to the theory, the meaning of the sentences and the meaning derived from the meaning of the sentences are related to each other. They are also related to the validity of the sentences within the context of the internal structural relationship of the language. In this way, it has been suggested by speakers and listeners that the meaning of sentences can be better understood when it is known under what conditions they are correct and valid [37]. In the light of these explanations, Habermas perfectly argued the distinctions between the communicative action and the strategic action. Of course, his arguments help us better conceiving and examining the interconnectedness between parties and stakeholders in the UIC ecosystem and ensure a more comprehensive and holistic understanding and systematic conceptualization.

#### **4. The nexus between the CSR and stakeholder approach**

Most of the research on the concept of stakeholder is divided into four sub-areas. These are listed as such: normative business theories, corporate governance and organization theory, CSR and performance, and strategic management. In terms of

strategic management, the idea of stakeholders, stakeholder management or stakeholder approach is to suggest that managers should formulate and implement all the groups that support the business and processes that satisfy only those groups. The main task in this process is to manage and integrate the relationships and interests of shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, communities, and other groups to ensure the long-term achievements of enterprises [38].

While most of the attention in the stakeholder approach literature is directed at managing the stakeholders of an enterprise, some researchers have focused on the impact of stakeholders on the strategies of enterprises. Further, some studies have focused on how external stakeholders increase the impact of the strategies of enterprises [39]. The stakeholder approach emphasizes the importance of investing in relationships that include core values or principles. Therefore, the stakeholder approach can allow managers to share their values in the implementation and formulation of strategic planning. A typical example of this is the business strategy concept [40].

The sustainability of an enterprise is one of the primary stakeholders; for example, it depends on the attendance of shareholders, investors, employees, customers, and suppliers. It also depends on public stakeholders (e.g., governments and societies) that will operate to provide infrastructure and legal frameworks. Secondary stakeholders are those that affect or shape an enterprise or are affected or shaped by that enterprise. However, it is the sector that is not exposed to the direct transactions of an enterprise and does not play a key role in maintaining the existence of that enterprise (e.g., press and special interest groups). Although these groups are not required for the direct operation of the enterprise, they can strongly influence how the enterprise is perceived by the public and various government agencies. Therefore, these groups can have a major impact on an enterprise through the interaction of stakeholders [41].

The concept of CSR is defined as a process in which enterprises decide to contribute voluntarily to a better society and a cleaner environment and manage the relationships of enterprises with their stakeholders [42]. The CSR practices express the practices, decisions, behaviors, and impacts of an enterprise that are understood as the environmental, social actions, decisions, behaviors, and impacts [43] that contain, affect, and respond to the demands of stakeholders. Organizations may face some dilemmas when considering the interactions between the CSR and various stakeholders within the context of ethical values. The ethical dimensions are the basis of sensitivity to the environment of organizations [44].

Environmental protection and consumer health issues ought to be questioned by taking into account ethical responsibility, moral awareness, and moral obligations [45, 46]. In the light of the stakeholder approach linking with the CSR, contemporary businesses have adopted environmental and social activities involving the economic interests of the CSR while responding to new social demands of interest groups [44, 47–49]. In this context, it is possible to see that many new generation enterprises operating within the TDZs are sensitive to environmental and social activities.

#### **5. Changing business stakeholder ecosystem and triple helix approach**

The ecosystem metaphor has become popular as a tool to identify, explain, and convey ideas, facts, and thoughts about how economic factors interact with the environment in academia, industry, politics, and management [50]. The concept of an ecosystem is defined as "the sum of all relevant environmental conditions and actors acting on the central organization" [51]. In other words, it is a structure

#### *The Impact of the Strategic Interests and Communicative Actions between the Socially… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94343*

consisting of a variety of different elements working in harmony" [8]. At this point, the most important question is about how an ecosystem is described by economic activities as "innovation ecosystems", actors as "entrepreneurship ecosystems" or boundaries as "national ecosystems." Actors and organizations in the changing business ecosystem are another critical area that need to be addressed as part of necessary behavior and cooperation mechanisms [52]. Different types of enterprises, such as organisms in nature, multinational enterprises, small and medium-sized enterprises, family businesses, and entrepreneurial enterprises coexist and thrive in their ecosystems [50]. Based on biology [53, 54], the ecosystems in the business world were explained as a set of interrelated actors, such as universities, science parks, and the public sector. There are diversified types of enterprises that are developed in a common environment of ecosystems.

Surveys with proxy-based behavioral models can enable predicting and evaluating new operational methods. Thus, the "physics" aspect of the ecosystem can help visualize how it can be studied in the future. These models are based on symbolizing the "information exchange" (i.e., the necessary information flow) and the limited capacity (i.e., limited rationality) of actors who will interact and coordinate the system, goods, services, and the flow of funds (i.e., the investment of capital). It can provide a basis for modeling and evaluating human capital procurement, risk sharing, ecosystem governance structure, alternative forms of incentives, and contract agreements. The "chemistry" aspect of the ecosystem affects research areas, conventions, and the rules of the game on various interactions, relational issues, such as self-confidence, willingness to participate, understanding different personalities, different international organizations, and meeting structures. The "biology" aspect of the ecosystem was described as the ability of the system to reproduce itself and adapt to changes in its environment over time [52].

A university, which is considered as the source of knowledge and innovation, has taken an "entrepreneurial" structure by going beyond the interaction with the industry to use its potential much better. On the other side, the industry representatives have increased their scientific field of activity by displaying the functions of the R&D departments as the UIC interfaces. Thus, the UIC ecosystem, which has turned into a different dimension, has sought to use the public resources most effectively. Recognizing such an interaction in many countries, the public institutions have been included in the UIC ecosystem as "stakeholders" to a certain extent with various structural arrangements. This type of public-university-industry collaboration model has been widely adopted as "the Triple Helix Model" [55].

In the multiple actors' involvement in the Triple Helix Model, a university is among both industry and the public as an affected and influencing factor. Research consortia created to develop new technologies that may include the R&D departments of enterprises, research centers of universities, and public laboratories. These innovation developments can be followed in a network format when the innovation activities carried out under certain contacts between these different institutions and are supported by national or multinational funding programs. Therefore, an urgent need for a new layer of "interface experts" and consortium managers located in the non-profit sector arises in this increasingly complex ecosystem [56, 57]. For instance, creating an interface, such as a TTO that regulates communication flows [58] can play an active role in establishing communicative links in the new layer in question. Besides, some horizontal links have emerged as the national professional associations of technology transfer managers in the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM), Federal Technology Transfer Managers, and Licensing Managers Association in the scope of the Triple Helix Model. Over time, these intermediary groups have increasingly become closer thanks to their membership schemes. These groups also help bring technology transfer experts in university and state laboratories together with industry representatives to facilitate the technology and knowledge transfer process through regular meetings, annual conferences, workshops, and so on [59].
