1) Universities contribute significantly to the UK economy through teaching, research, and commercialization, generating billions annually. However, university-business engagement and commercialization could be improved, especially for small firms. 2) The level of university-business engagement is sub-optimal, with only 20% of innovating firms collaborating with universities. Engagement varies significantly across regions. 3) There is heterogeneity in knowledge exchange capabilities across the higher education sector, with research-intensive universities better positioned for commercialization while less research-intensive focus more on human capital development. 4) Firms may need support to find the "right" university partner, as they are more likely to engage with national rather

1. Universities as engines of growth?
Prof Nola Hewitt-Dundas
nm.hewitt@qub.ac.uk
@profnola

2. Teaching
Third-Mission
Research

3. Teaching
Third-
Mission
Commercial
ization
Research
£33.2 Bn
£39.9 Bn
2.8%
£10.7 Bn
757k
jobs
4%
Researchers
16%
Highly Cited
Articles
Source: Universities UK: Higher Education in Numbers

4. A Sector Under Pressure
Int.
Student
Mobility
Public
Finances
ICT
Lifelong
learning
Regulatory
changes –
Private
Providers
Price
competition
Competition Privatisation
Marketization
(HEPI, 2017).

5. Innovation & Performance benefits
All Firms Small Medium Large
New to the Market Innovation
University Collaboration (0/1) 0.247***
(0.033)
0.221***
(0.046)
0.213 ***
(0.032)
0.212***
(0.083)
Sales of new-to-the-market
innovations
University Collaboration (0/1) 4.085*
(1.788)
1.378
(3.013)
15.860***
(1.960)
12.392***
(2.009)
Source: Hewitt-Dundas, N, Gkypali, A., Roper, S. 2017 Does learning from prior collaboration help firms to overcome the ‘two-worlds’
paradox in university-business collaboration? ERC Research Paper No.55
Do firms benefit from University engagement?
Point 1: Strong Innovation Benefits, but Commercialisation
pipeline for Small firms needs fixed

6. What is the level of University
engagement?
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Universities Customers Suppliers ConsultanciesCompetitors
20.0
48.8
43.9
24.0
19.4
Source: UK Innovation Survey
% Innovators

7. Uneven Geography of
Engagement
Actual 75th
Percentile
Gap
Res. Contracts
No.
1,936 2,357 421
Res. Contracts
£m
£31.5m £36.8m £5.3m
CPD & CE
£m
£225m £285.6 £60.5m
IP Income (non-
software) £m
£5.1m £6m £0.9m
IP Income
(software) £m
£52m £73m £21m
Source: HEFCE 2016 University-SME engagement: the geography of connectivity across England and the effects on Innovation
Point 2: U-B Engagement Levels are sub-optimum

8. Supply-side Considerations
UK Universities: High Research Intensive (HRI) and Low Research
Intensive (LRI)
• Strategy: HRI – KT for development and exploitation of IP and
maximizing the return on research; LRI – Human Capital Dev.
• Activity: LRI generate only a fraction of all KT measures
(Collaborative research, Contract research, consultancy,
patents, licenses, spinouts)
• Geography: HRI perform a smaller proportion of KT in the
region, yet, absolute value still remains significantly higher
than for LRIs.
Source: Hewitt-Dundas, N 2012. Research Intensity and Knowledge Transfer Activity in UK Universities. Research
Policy 41(2) 262-275
Point 3: Heterogeneity in KE Capability Across HE Sector

9. Demand-side Considerations
• Accessing international Universities has limited benefit –
Investment in UK HE is required
• Overall, firms are more likely to engage with National Universities
rather than Local ones: Finding the Right Partner!
• Small firms are 12% more likely to engage with local firms
• Effects of National Collaboration is larger than local for all firms
UKIS
2004-2012
All
n=23,616
10-49
n=10,910
50-250
n=6,629
250+
n=6,053
Regional University 0.062*** 0.071*** 0.068*** 0.038
National University 0.084*** 0.103*** 0.082*** 0.066***
International University 0.011 -0.063* 0.082* 0.039
Point 4: Firms may need support to find the ‘right’ University
Source: Hewitt-Dundas, N, Gkypali, A, Roper, S. 2017 Accessibility, utility and learning effects in university-business
collaboration, ERC Research Paper No. 57

10. University Spinouts:
‘Rhetoric of Aspiration’
Annual growth in Spinout formation 15%
Challenges:
Approximately one-third not generating revenue
Technology is narrow with growth constrained
25% have founders with no commercial experience
Under-representation of Female-led spinouts
Only 25% fully committed to spinout
Avg. Main founder commits 20% of time
2nd Founder commits 10% of time
Only one-third using incubators / science parks BUT does this matter?
Innovation to Commercialisation of University Research (ICURe)
Point 5: Spinout activity can and will increase, but it requires
targeted support

11. A final word
“There are no free rides when it comes to
engagement. Companies typically have
skin in the game”

12. Member Programme
www.csit.qub.ac.uk
CSIT is a Research Centre of the ECIT
Institute
12
Full members:
Associate members (selection):

13. The Era of Open Science is over with
significant implications for Who will generate
knowledge for innovation and Who will have
access to this in the future