What motivates you to lead Tallinn University of Technology for the next four years?

I would definitely not do it out of habit and even less out of convenience. It is reasonable for a rector to serve two terms because, on the one hand, the university community expects more stability than a single term can provide, and on the other, based on my experience at my previous university, a new rector’s first term is typically focused on launching his/her plan and making changes where necessary. So, unless something went really wrong, it is only expected that the work has just gained momentum. A second term would offer the opportunity to build on this momentum, and I believe I am ready to continue that work.

How would you describe an ideal student?

Definitely motivated. Motivation has to come from within, but it is our role not to discourage it. 

Curiosity is essential in a student, and it is our responsibility to foster an environment that promotes critical thinking, encourages questions, and supports the expression of opinions – even when they differ from those of the lecturer. 

Curiosity in a student also means being actively involved in student life, contributing to student organizations, and enjoying the learning process. 

…scientist?

An ideal scientist must also have the interest, curiosity, and motivation to explore the unknown and discover something new. Today’s scientists must expand their thinking beyond their own field and adopt an interdisciplinary approach, actively seeking collaboration with experts in other fields.

...lecturer?

This is an important question, because a lecturer certainly needs to be demanding, but how does that affect the lecturer’s career? One issue I would like to address is the feedback system. Students provide feedback to lecturers after the exam is taken and the course is completed,  which often results in more demanding lecturers receiving lower ratings. However, it is the students of demanding lecturers who ultimately benefit the most. An ideal lecturer does not compromise for the sake of better feedback. 

If we expect students to pose critical questions, lecturers must likewise be able to critically evaluate themselves. A lecturer needs to collaborate and find the right balance between classroom sessions, and distance and hybrid learning formats to ensure opportunities for face-to-face interaction with students. I would like to see tenured professors interacting more with undergraduate students.

…and the ideal university?

A university’s success lies in its people. We can prepare ambitious strategies and development plans and measure our outcomes, but in the end, it is the people who deliver results and embody the values that define the university. An ideal university values and recognizes all members of its community in the broadest sense. This includes academic and non-academic staff, lecturers and researchers, support personnel and, most significantly, our students, who make up the majority of university community. It is essential that everyone feels valued, recognized, and receives meaningful feedback. 

A university is a complex organization, where each professor is a distinct individual. It is essential that persons expected to deliver the greatest results receive the support they need, and those in supporting roles feel recognized within the organization. 

The organization also relies on its management to provide stability: a consistent environment without frequent changes of direction fosters confidence and a more productive workplace.

What kind of University of Technology does Estonia need? Has this changed over time? Do we need a different kind of University of Technology today compared to the 1990s or the 1960s?

It has certainly changed over the years, driven by the rapid pace of technological and societal advancement. Tallinn University of Technology is the only university in Estonia offering engineering education, which underscores the relevance of this matter. I believe it is essential to educate the next generation of Estonian engineers and engineering scientists.

Estonia currently needs a University of Technology that contributes to the country’s economic growth. It must be admitted that we have not yet made sufficient progress in this area. There are various underlying reasons for this. The time has passed when exports were primarily based on raw materials instead of production and innovation, and we can no longer rely on the same model to sustain our economic growth. 

According to the RDIE Strategy, our labour productivity is expected to reach 110% of the European average by 2035. However, it has recently fallen from 84% to 77%. We need a new economic model. We compare ourselves to the Nordic countries, but their strength lies in high-tech industries rooted in innovation. The University of Technology has a key role to play in advancing applied research built on cutting-edge science, providing both an economic boost and the opportunity to establish high-tech industrial enterprises.

An excellent example of this is the project led by Margus Lopp and Kristiina Kaldas, where they collaborate with a private company that has received state support for applied research. Private companies are not required to involve researchers, yet they did in this project, realizing that success would not be possible without their expertise. This is how we produce technologies that must be patented to protect our intellectual property. Both the number of patents and university-founded companies should increase significantly. 

Estonia needs us to be the leading entrepreneurial and innovative university, driven by high-level science, rather than just the second-best research university focused solely on basic research. While our greatest impact on society comes through our graduates,  we must substantially strengthen our involvement in research, development, and innovation that supports entrepreneurship. As long as one ministry funds basic research in universities and another supports applied research in companies without involving universities, the gap between them will persist. 

What is TalTech's biggest weakness or risk in 2025?

Too few our research results are translated into practical applications, which means technology transfer remains limited. Our role is to convince the state that this system works best when integrated: funding applied research in private companies is important, but universities must also be involved. With the state’s high expectations for universities, this is one challenge the new rector assuming office in autumn will need to address.

... and greatest strength or opportunity?

Our people. We have great researchers, and the quality of our research has improved. We have significant potential and ample opportunities for cross-school collaboration: engineering and technology, materials science, which closely intersect with the natural sciences; the School of Information Technologies and the AI sector, which will bring about significant changes in the coming decades; a new professorship in data analytics focused on artificial intelligence established at the School of Business and Governance; and the opportunities offered by the Estonian Maritime Academy. The greatest opportunity lies in our talented people and the ideal environment that fosters collaboration across diverse disciplines.

The state's budget is concerningly tight. What role does the university play in driving economic growth?

Our role is to be a driver of economic growth. Currently, 90% of the university’s contribution to economic growth is through graduates who become specialists in companies, and 10% through the companies established by the university This proportion must increase: we must focus on creating more start-up and spin-off companies while expanding our contribution to business collaboration and the development of high-tech industries. Our true potential lies in bringing together all our disciplines and integrating AI. Now is the right time to do it.

What opportunities does the university have for achieving financial independence?

Approximately half of the University of Technology's €173 million budget comes from stable state funding: €65 million in activity support for higher education, €12 million in baseline research funding, plus funding for doctoral allowances and salaries for early-stage researchers. The remaining half, however, is self-generated income – earned through competitive research projects in Estonia and European funding programmes, as well as through collaboration with industry. We have also been successful in securing scholarships from the Development Fund, which supports students. The fund's volume has multiplied over the past three years. 

Although we attract considerable external funding, there is ongoing concern about the amount of activity support for higher education. Over the next five years, the number of young people pursuing higher education is expected to grow by nearly 20%. OSKA reports highlight shortfall of engineers and IT specialists in Estonia. Therefore, student enrolment in engineering, technology, and IT fields should increase in the coming years – and indeed, it has. The state’s activity support for higher education, which funds our educational activities, should increase at the same pace. This is a significant challenge, and I am not naive to think the state will simply increase funding.

We also have an ambitious vision to establish the Estonian Engineering Education Foundation, which would be supported by contributions from the university, the state, and private companies. This would enable us to fund engineering and IT education in future to support and advance these fields in Estonia. The challenges are significant, but I believe Estonia is ready for the involvement of such an endowment and private funding. This is undoubtedly a significant undertaking, and it is essential to reach a mutual understanding with the government. Currently, donation activity is inhibited by the fact that donations are subject to income tax. 

Donald Trump signed an order withdrawing the US from the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization early in his term. How can we effectively communicate with policymakers to support and foster a science-driven society?

This is a very important question. Information technology has opened up numerous opportunities for the dissemination of all kinds of information. The role of all scientists, including myself, is to respond whenever misinformation is spread. We must provide evidence-based, scientific guidance and clearly distinguish truth from lies. 

Our scientists recently participated in a project funded by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission. The project focused on providing scientific advice for the public sector. Our role is to be proactive and offer expert advice. While there are science advisors in the ministries and we actively interact with officials, ideally, there should be a platform or forum where we could meet regularly to discuss current issues. 

It is important for university members to hold diverse perspectives – after all, an ideal scientist must be critical and ask challenging questions. However, the university adopts its own stance on political matters once these issues have been thoroughly discussed at the university. Academic freedom certainly also ensures that everyone can express their own views. Universities, alongside churches, are among the oldest institutions, and the foundation of their sustainability lies in academic freedom – the ability to explore any field of study and express one’s views openly. However, we must bear in mind, especially in today’s world, that with freedom comes responsibility.

It is unlikely that you will continue research activities while serving in a top executive role at the university. What made you decide to take this path instead of your research career?

My active research career ended in 2011, when I was elected rector of Tallinn University. I do not want research to be a side activity. If I am rector, I am 100% committed. 

The question of why pursue a top executive role instead of a research career is related to a broader issue of  ‘where do we find academic leaders?’. When I was asked to consider running for rector, my research career was progressing rapidly, and it was incredibly exciting. My first reaction was, 'But I’m a researcher, and I want to continue pursuing research.' But I found myself thinking that after building my own lab and research group, perhaps as rector I could support and encourage others, enhancing the quality of research more than I could as a researcher. I want science, universities, and Estonia to succeed, and I believe I can contribute more effectively in this role.

To some extent I made this choice out of curiosity. I am the type of person who, once I set my mind on trying something, quickly decides to go for it. You will never know unless you try.

What goals do you have for the University of Technology by 2030?

I want the University of Technology to play a key role in driving the growth of Estonia’s high-tech industry, as well as advancing the defence and artificial intelligence sectors. 

I mentioned earlier that I want to run for rector because I feel the work is unfinished and I would like to complete it. The development of interdisciplinary centres at the university is closely connected with all three areas. I am referring to the university’s six centres of excellence, in addition to the previously established the FinEst Centre for Smart Cities, the Energy Efficiency Centre of Excellence and the Centre of Excellence in Circular Economy for Strategic Mineral and Carbon Resources. We launched these university’s centres of excellence a year ago, and they have been very active since then. I see our strength in this – we have active people, and if we provide the right opportunities, they will produce results. Interdisciplinarity cannot be forced either. 

We also consulted with the university’s International Advisory Board for guidance on the centres of excellence. Their feedback was very positive in terms of the university’s development, but they also noted that the university has to support the centres for about ten years, after which about half of them will attain sustainability and thrive. By 2030, it should be clear which ones have the potential to take off. 

In addition, other new initiatives have been launched, with plans to become the centres of excellence within a year: the Centre of Excellence for Responsible Economy and ESG led by Merle Ojasoo, and the Security and Defence Technologies Centre of Excellence, managed by Henri Shasmin. I hope that by 2030, two-thirds of our centres of excellence will be fully sustainable.

Although the number of students in the School of Engineering may not reach 5,000 by 2030, we are targeting an annual increase of 10–15%, and the number of students admitted to the School of Information Technologies should also increase. One of our concerns regarding studies is the percentage of students graduating within the nominal period of study. The target is 60%, but currently, the average is only 50%, so it is clear that we need to make significant improvements in this area. 

This is also closely linked to the funding of higher education. Under the current agreements, higher education funding is set to increase in 2026; however, beyond that, it is uncertain whether the funding will stay the same or decrease. If the state is unable to secure an additional 30 million euros per year, alternative sources of funding will need to be found. However, the state’s expectations of the university continue to grow; we are expected to admit more students into engineering, production, and construction programmes, while maintaining or even increasing enrolment in IT.

The goal is to measure up to the standards of top European technical universities within the next 5–10 years. Technical universities are drivers of the economy, and we have strong prerequisites and collaboration partners, such as the EuroTeQ network, to make an impact.

Internationalization of the university – for whom, why and how?

This is important, first and foremost, for us, to ensure the academic quality of the University of Technology. Without international students, cooperation and researchers, we would risk isolating ourselves in a bubble, with no external benchmarks, which would be detrimental to our quality. The question is what level and proportion of internationalization we truly need. By law, we are a national technical university, but international engagement is key to ensuring quality – so it is essential to strike the right balance.

In my view, around 15% of our student body should be international, ideally representing as wide range of countries as possible, instead of a majority coming from just one area. We also need to distinguish between international bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral students.

Science is international by nature, but to nurture the next generation of academics, it is important that more of our doctoral students come from Estonia. In 5–10 years, certain fields may lack PhD holders capable of teaching in Estonian. We have raised doctoral students’ salaries and will continue doing so – the current minimum of 2,300 euros is already higher than at other universities. However, in an ideal university, every member of staff should feel valued. The staff with PhDs working in our labs are paid less than the doctoral students they supervise, and that is not fair. 

With regard to master’s students, OSKA reports highlight a demand for qualified labour that exceeds our current training capacity. There are simply not enough young people in Estonia. We have to accept that master’s students who come from other countries will stay and work in Estonia. Through our collaboration with EuroTeQ, we provide our students the opportunity to study at the world’s leading universities, while also attracting international students to come to study at our university. Even if you do not start with degree studies here, you can begin by taking courses, then participate as an exchange student, and potentially pursue a master's degree, ultimately staying to work with Estonian companies.

The same question about the green transformation.

This is for all of us!

The energy efficiency and energy consumption of buildings constitute our most significant environmental footprint. If, as a technical university, we ignore this, fail to lead by example, or do not even try to develop new or improve existing technologies, then we have failed.

But the question is, how do we achieve this? Experience has taught us not to rush. The Green transformation must not be guided by rigid ideology, where we are fixated on our goals regardless of the circumstances. With rising energy prices and a geopolitical climate that demands significantly greater investment in the defence industry, we must take a dynamic view of the future and remain flexible in how we pursue our goals. 

I am proud that we adopted the Green Strategy. The Green Strategy gave rise to the aforementioned centres of excellence, as it helped us more fully grasp the value of interdisciplinary collaboration, define our sustainable development goals and align them with the focus areas of research. Tallinn University of Technology’s Roadmap to Climate Neutrality 2035 clearly shows that the goals are achievable. The question is, at what price. Thanks to the scientific research and evidence-based scenarios developed by our researchers, we are now able to make informed strategic decisions about building renovations and the development of a more cohesive, compact campus. 

Mobility is the second-largest segment of the university’s footprint. We cannot track people’s transportation choices or parking habits, but raising awareness about the issue may have encouraged more people to opt for alternatives to driving a car. We need to lead by example and create opportunities, as rules and regulations will not be effective here.

Is there a concern, recommendation, or a plan you would like to discuss that we have not covered yet?

We talked about active students, service to society, and cutting-edge technology, and I would like to illustrate that with a great example: our current student formula team, who built the fastest and most durable car in a competition against 889 of the world’s top technical universities. Students are now building a new formula car and the Solaride solar car, but in three to five years, they will be launching or leading companies of their own. We are seeing increased student involvement and activism, which should be further encouraged.

Another way we can help nurture the next generation of engineers and scientists is by promoting math education and building stronger partnerships with schools. If the number of young people increases, how much can we expect the number of students exceeding math proficiency thresholds to rise? The number should increase. The main challenge in math starts in basic education, waiting until secondary school is already too late. It is crucial to keep the discussion of ‘mathematics as the national language’ ongoing.

What makes you the best rector for TalTech?

I am not one to praise myself,  but I think it is fair to say that as my term comes to an end, a stable work environment has been established at the university – one that people expect and value. This is also reflected in the employee satisfaction survey results. I believe my advantage lies in being known as the rector, and I will not change.

Should you not start your work in the rector’s office on 1 August, what letter would you leave on the desk for your successor?

We are great colleagues and share a lot of similar views. Of course, I wish him all the best in his term ahead. I hope he preserves what already works well at the university. Radical changes are not necessary right now. I recommend that he avoid turning the ship around too quickly or introducing too many major changes all at once.

 This interview was published in TalTech's magazine Mente et Manu special edition.