Single Knowledge Exchange Office

Working Group

24th April 2012

Dr David Bembo

Vice-Chair, Association for University Research &

Industry Links (AURIL)

AURIL

Company Limited by Guarantee; 11 Elected Members form Council; Executive Director (Dr Alasdair Cameron) and administration team.

Advocacy & influencing, networking events, identifying & disseminating best practice, CPD framework

Institutional membership, around 100 HEIs, PSROs

>1,500 people on electronic mailbase; alsoAURIL Social network – ‘My AURIL’ - KT 2.0 ! Plus Twitter, LinkedIn, etc.

Annual conference; workshops & discussion fora e.g. Directors Cut; guidance and policy documents; consultation with Govt & other KE stakeholders, UUK, CBI, Funding Councils & Research Councils, IPO, etc.

European links via ProTon Europe, the EU KT ‘Network of Networks’

KE and the Impact Agenda Impact: Increasing emphasis on demonstrating the economic, societal and health benefits of the UK research base. Knowledge Exchange is a very broad swathe of activities. Nomenclature is important here, e.g. general acceptance that Technology Transfer is about ‘hard edged’ activities (e.g. patenting, licensing, spin-outs). Remit of SKEOWG: Business engagement – collaborative & research, consultancy, training & skills Technology Transfer activities European Research Funding, European Economic Development Funding (ERDF) An ambitious scope - some larger, research intensive HEIs already deliver such a broad group of functions via 2 or 3 separate units

Govt CSR2010 UK science funding

A relatively good outcome, but a

significant reduction in real terms

Wakeham Review 2010

Focuses on TRAC rates and Full

Economic Costs FEC base of HE

research activities ; driving down HEI

overheads (indirect costs rates) and

increasing efficiency

Knowledge Exchange is an indirect

cost! Does regionalisation of

activities lead to cheaper or better

or both?

http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/reviews/fec/fECReviewReport.pdf

Diversity in UK HE Sector UK HEIs, huge diversity in size and mission: 24 HEIs with income <£20 million 22 HEIs with income £20-50 million 48 HEIs with income £50-150 million 71 HEIs with income >£150 million From highly active in research and KE (e.g. 24 Russell Group members) to highly teaching focused. Funding Council QR funding based on RAE research quality * volume * subject weighting. In Wales alone (circa 10 universities) QR ranges £139K - £39.9 million for 2011-12 (280x) With so much variation in research capacity & quality, clearly KE resources and priorities will differ hugely also.

0

20

40

60

80

<£20M £20-50M £50-150M >£150M

2011 update to original 2003 IP

Guide for Universities

UK Intellectual Property Office

Universities UK

PraxisUnico

AURIL

Available at:

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/about/pres

s/press-release/press-release-

2011/press-release-

20110519.htm

Managing Intellectual Property for HEIs – in 2011

Original 2003 Guide – more of a how to guide or ‘recipe book’ for IP

assessment and protection.

2011 Guide – encourages HEIs to consider their strategic focus and

formulate & adopt IP policies which support this. One size doesn’t fit all.

“The issue is not simply one of protection in order to encourage

commercial investment. University researchers require continuing access

to the results of their research for use in future (research) projects and

teaching. (These may be more important than IP exploitation income.)

Effective IP management is required to ensure that this is the case…….

Negotiations and agreements therefore need to be structured so that

future needs of the university can be accommodated.”

“There is undoubted potential for universities to generate surpluses

from their IP management function, although there is a need for

realism over the scale of returns.”

The Easy Access IP initiative recognises that universities can and

should protect IP for reasons other than income to the institution.

Important to consider that it doesn’t represent free access to all

unfettered IP generated by a HEI.

Tried and tested? Not many deals completed to date.

Shared resources and regionalisation in KE

In a hub & spoke model, don’t forget the spokes! Integration with the

research base – and researchers - is key. This takes manpower to walk

the corridors and build relationships.

Sharing of best practice and industry networking is not a virtual activity.

Web sites can play a part, but only a part. And content need to be current!

Look at successes in e.g. Research Pooling in Scotland, an opportunity to

align KE with research coordination. TIC models would seem appropriate.

Not all activities can be centralised successfully. Separate legal entities

need autonomy and local solutions, e.g. in legal support.

Differences in local IP policy and operational approaches between HEIs

are not insurmountable (e.g. French model & incentives).

‘Network of National Networks’ in KE/KT. Best practice a

key element. Support for establishing new national

networks. UK among the leaders.

Shared resources and regionalisation in France (Philippe Gorry CNRS, ProTon 2011)

Disappointing Shanghai University league table ranking of French

institutions drove government thinking towards a critical mass solution

Successive legislation paved the way, e.g. 2007 laws increasing

university autonomy, 2009-10 stimulus package

French Government stimulus package “Grand Emprunt” (big loan)

€35 billion package to boost the country's long-term competitiveness, inc:

€2 billion to set-up 4-5 technological institutes with industry (open

innovation model) ; €1 billion to support university TTOs ; €100 million for

a national patent fund

Different approach to USA 2009 Stimulus Package (USA more focused

on university research capacity or industrial R&D, versus KE).

© Gorry,CNRS 2011 (representing Reseau CURIE)

Riccardo Barberi, University of Calabria and NetVal

NetVal, 47 university tech transfer offices, plus PSROs.

NetVal’s role includes best practice, policy deveopment and shared IP

management.

Calabria one of the less well developed regions of Italy in terms of industry,

commerce and technological innovation.

“If it is today possible to have a serious technology transfer program in a

region such as Calabria, this is due to NetVal.”

ProTon Annual Conference, Rome 2011

Final thoughts...

BIS Innovation Strategy 2011 advocated: i) More open sharing of

knowledge and IP, while incentivising creators; ii) A more coherent and

integrated innovation infrastructure – universities, R&D institutes,

information infrastructure - improved coordination; leverage existing

investments more effectively. Catapults!

BIS also recognised that businesses need to better understand and

access research (the ‘pull’ could be stronger.)

The UK HE sector has reacted to Government requirements to

demonstrate the value (Impact) of its research. Current economic

conditions are further influencing this. Well documented Impacts will

secure the future of the research base.

A mature approach to the SKEO needs to recognise

existing strengths, promulgate best practice and

better resource those areas where shared services

would enhance support for economic growth.