Universities need ‘distinctive’ approaches for tech transfer

McMillan group report for Hefce urges institutions not to focus just on the number of spin-off companies 

September 1, 2016
Man with lightbulb head
Source: iStock

UK universities need to take “distinctive” approaches and be “less preoccupied by comparisons” when judging how best to share their research with wider society, a review of their technology transfer activity has concluded.

The review, led by Keele University vice-chancellor Trevor McMillan, was established after the previous government asked the Higher Education Funding Council for England to develop a guiding framework for good knowledge exchange between universities and businesses.

The group considered technology transfer practice in the UK – as well as in France, Germany, the US and Australia – and concludes that UK universities were at a “world-class standard in technology transfer, although we should be aspirational in our practice”.

It finds that technology transfer – rather than producing financial benefits for all – usually has a net cost for universities.

“Technology transfer is expensive, and universities do it to further their societal impacts. Universities cannot be indifferent on who pays because of matters of governance and sustainability," it says.

While Professor McMillan’s group found that research-intensive universities tend to engage in the most technology transfer, and many universities “quite appropriately” do none, it concedes that it is difficult to identify which universities were pursuing the most effective policies. “Outcomes of technology transfer are significantly skewed by a few blockbusters and success is likely influenced by a myriad of factors”, the group reports.

Technology transfer “is only one route to impact”, it adds, and focusing just on the number of spin-off companies created from technology developed at a university gives a “distorted picture” of how much a university’s research has contributed to society.

The group recommends that universities continue with other forms of knowledge exchange, and senior university leadership has an essential role in deciding whether to give priority to technology transfer and, if so, how to approach commercialisation.

It concludes that when it comes to universities – and countries – maximising their impact on society through research, it is important to retain individuality through “distinctive innovative approaches”.

A university’s approach to technology transfer must take into account the institutions’ character, the nature of the technology itself, and the local “ecosystem”: the entrepreneurial conditions beyond the university.

“There are no one-size-fits-all policies that work for every technology, university or place. Universities (and countries) have to develop a strategy that fits their characteristics and circumstances,” the report says.

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Related universities

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

Laurel and Hardy sawing a plank of wood

Working with other academics can be tricky so follow some key rules, say Kevin O'Gorman and Robert MacIntosh

Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford will host a homeopathy conference next month

Charity says Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford is ‘naive’ to hire out its premises for event

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Woman pulling blind down over an eye
Liz Morrish reflects on why she chose to tackle the failings of the neoliberal academy from the outside
White cliffs of Dover

From Australia to Singapore, David Matthews and John Elmes weigh the pros and cons of likely destinations