1. Knowledge Exchange Between Universities and the Business, Public and Third Sectors: Preliminary Results From Surveys of Businesses and Academics Maria Abreu, Alan Hughes, Vadim Grinevich and Michael Kitson Centre for Business Research and Judge Business School University of Cambridge Higher Education – Making A Difference To Economies And Communities, Belfast Wednesday 28th January

2. Some Preliminaries: The Evolution of University–Business Interactions The narrow model –Focus on a narrow range of technology transfer mechanisms The wider model –Focus on a wide range of interactions –Exchange rather than transfer

3. The Standard Narrow Model Narrow focus on Technology Transfer Mechanisms: Patents, Licenses, Spin-outs Limitations –Model is incomplete –Potential financial returns were frequently over-estimated –Metrics distorting behaviour (Goodhart’s Law: any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes)

4. The Wider Model: Multiple Knowledge Exchange Mechanisms A ‘systems’ approach and not simply ‘market failure’ Educating people Problem solving Role of many disciplines (not just STEM) Interactions with public and third sectors as well as with business Public space functions (Universities do not move) –Relatively neglected, but distinctive –Includes networking; social interaction; meetings, conferences; entrepreneurship centres; personnel exchanges, including internships Focus on exchange not simply ‘transfer’

5. Knowledge Exchange – Multiple Mechanisms Educating People Training skilled undergraduates, graduates & postdocs Providing public space Forming/accessing networks and stimulating social interaction Influencing the direction of search processes among users and suppliers of technology and fundamental researchers –Meetings and conferences –Hosting standard-setting forums –Entrepreneurship centers –Alumni networks –Personnel exchanges (internships, faculty exchanges, etc.) –Visiting committees –Curriculum development committees Increasing the stock of ‘codified’ useful knowledge Publications Patents Prototypes Problem-solving Contract research Cooperative research with industry Technology licensing Faculty consulting Providing access to specialized instrumentation and equipment Incubation services Source: A. Cosh, A. Hughes and R. Lester UK PLC Just How Innovative Are We? Cambridge MIT Institute 2006

6. Universities as Sources of Knowledge Universities are one of many components in the innovation “ecosystem” Clients and suppliers are typically cited as the most important and frequent sources Focusing on formal collaborations may be too restrictive Universities are used in combination with internal sources, other businesses, and intermediary institutions

7. The Importance of Diversity We should, however, guard against a situation where all our universities aim for the same goals. What is required is a diversity of excellence, with research universities focusing on curiosity driven research, teaching and knowledge transfer, and business-facing universities focusing on the equally important economic mission of professional teaching, user- driven research, and problem solving with local and regional companies. Sainsbury (2007): The Race to the Top: A Review of Government’s Science and Innovation Policies, p.44

8. Some Unresolved Issues Relative importance of non-traditional types of interaction, including “public space” roles? Extent of collaboration of businesses with academics beyond science and engineering? Interactions with the public and third sectors?

9. ESRC Project on University-Business Knowledge Exchange Multi-methodology approach In a first stage, scoping case studies of businesses and academics to help in the development of two survey instruments In the second stage, two large-scale surveys of businesses and academics, with matched questions Finally, a number of in-depth case studies to follow up on findings from the surveys

10. Survey of Academics: Interim Results Online survey of academics is still underway. The results in this presentation are based on data from Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, East of England, North East and West Midlands. Online survey sent to individual e-mail addresses Preliminary results based on 6,800 observations (20% response rate) Results for Northern Ireland based on 632 respondents (24% response rate)

11. Interactions by Discipline

12. Interactions by Discipline: Northern Ireland

13. Types of Interactions People-based activities (eg training, student placements) Problem-solving activities (eg research, advice, publications) Community-based activities (eg public lectures, school projects)

14. Involvement in People-based Activities

15. Involvement in People-based Activities: Northern Ireland

16. Involvement in Problem-solving Activities

17. Involvement in Problem-solving Activities: Northern Ireland

18. Involvement in Community-based Activities

19. Involvement in Community-based Activities: Northern Ireland

20. Impact of Interactions on Research

21. Impact of Interactions on Teaching

22. Survey of Businesses: Interim Results Total sample 23296 Total no of ineligible firms2096 Surveyed firms21200 Total usable responses2357 Response rate (%) 11.1 The survey was carried out during July to September 2008.

23. Firms (%) Employing Someone to Liaise with HEIs Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 Medium and large have this specialised post Micro <10 Small 10-50 Medium 50-250 Large >250

24. Interactions by Discipline Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 Business has high demand for STEM, Social Sciences and Built Environment

25. Why Interact with HEIs? Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 Technology not dominant; the whole of business needs are met

26. How are Interactions with HEIs Initiated? Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 Informal individual approaches dominate. University intermediation relatively infrequent.

27. Involved with HEIs in People-based Activities Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 High levels of interaction rising with size. But 17.9% of micro-firms is a large number of firms

28. Involved with HEIs in Problem-solving Activities Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 Percentage involvement rises with size Low micro and small interaction

29. Involved with HEIs in Community-based Activities Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 Percentage involvement rises with size

30. Positive Impact of Firms’ Involvement in Knowledge Exchange Activities Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 Likelihood of positive impact highest in medium and large firms

31. Constraints on Interactions (% of collaborating firms) Lack of resources in the firm to manage the interaction38.4 Lack of regional programmes that encourage interactions29.1 Difficulty in identifying partners28.1 Insufficient benefits from interaction27.3 Lack of central government programmes26.9 Lack of experience dealing with academics and/or HEIs22.1 Bureaucracy and inflexibility of HEI administration20.9 Lack of interest by academics and/or HEIs19.3 Incompatibility of timescales for deliverables14.5 Cultural differences8.0 Difficulty in reaching agreement on intellectual property6.5

32. Reasons for Not Interacting with HEIs Source: CBR HEI Business Survey 2008 Many firms do not need to interact with HEIs Significant proportion cite information problems

33. University-Industry Knowledge Exchange in the UK : The State of Play There is no one ideal model of university-business interactions Wide range of interactions, but people-based interactions are most important Interactions encompass a wide range of disciplines and involve the business, public and third sectors Many interactions involved strategic, long-term problems rather than specific technical issues Importance of “gatekeepers”, on both sides of the relationship, to identify, promote and ensure the success of interactions

34. THE MYTH OF THE ACADEMIC IVORY TOWER