1. Knowledge Transfer from Public Research Organisations: Study for STOA Paula Knee Erik Arnold Technopolis 29 February 2012

2. 2 The Study The study was conducted in two phases: First examining the role of Technology Transfer Office (TTOs) in innovation and, after an initial literature review, widening to encompass knowledge transfer from PROs more broadly The study covered PROs i.e. universities and public research institutes Method: to review knowledge transfer in theory and practice – via literature review and detailed case studies of individual PROs – 19 in Europe and 3 in USA. Cross-section of PROs by geographic location, size / innovativeness of economy, size of institution, research-intensity Interviewed head of Knowledge Transfer Office (KTO), senior staff member responsible for knowledge transfer (vice rector level) and academics

3. Role of Businesses and PROs in Innovation Businesses Businesses are at the centre of innovation Innovation is a complex process interactions and feedbacks between market opportunities, technological capabilities and internal learning processes They take innovation inputs from a range of internal and external sources External sources, in the first instance, are suppliers and customers PROs are another, but generally, lesser used source of inputs PROs Social role of PROs is to produce knowledge and make it widely available to society Historically this has been through providing skilled graduates (teaching) and creating and disseminating new knowledge (research) In recent time a more pro-active approach to the interaction of PROs with society – particularly businesses in pursuit of economic and social impact – the third or knowledge transfer mission for PROs 3

4. Sectoral Patterns of Innovation Different sectors innovate in different ways – relying on suppliers and customers and other external sources to different extents and with different objectives for their innovation activities - products/ process/service innovation Some sectors are more predisposed to work with PROs than others: Those in science-based sectors will seek inputs from the research-base (e.g. pharmaceuticals, electronics) Are able to absorb knowledge from the research-base Tend to rely on patents to protect innovations Other sectors interact with PROs in different ways, making use of different knowledge transfer mechanisms Furthermore, the science-base sectors interact with PROs in a variety of ways, over and above the transfer of formal IP 4

5. The Journey from Technology to Knowledge Transfer Early third mission policy was directed at technology transfer – involving the transfer of formal IP Over time policy-makers and PROs themselves have recognised that PROs interact with businesses in a variety of different ways and in most cases formal IP is not the mechanism used, and that very few PROs could generate income from this activity The focus has shifted from: 5 Technology Transfer Knowledge Transfer Knowledge Exchange

6. KT Mechanisms MechanismType of knowledge transferred PublicationsExisting codified knowledge Informal interactionsTacit knowledge (know-how, skills) Contract R&D & consultancyContract R&D: New codified knowledge Consultancy: Existing codified knowledge Formal collaborative partnerships (collaborative R&D etc.) New and existing codified knowledge, tacit knowledge, Accessing research skillsTacit knowledge /know-how Exploiting intellectual propertySelling /licensing IP: codified knowledge Spin-outs: codified / tacit knowledge Others e.g. trainingCodified and tacit knowledge 6

7. The Current Role of KTOs in Innovation A complex role mediating and stimulating a wide range of KT interactions in support of a wider innovation system Therefore KTOs are responsible for a range of KT mechanisms The mission of most KTOs is not to generate IP-based income for the PRO, but to ensure knowledge flows to where it can be put to best use Most KTOs are the responsibility of the vice- rector (or equivalent) for Research or relatively new senior post of vice-rector for innovation/ enterprise/ knowledge transfer Majority (63%) of KTOs studied are structured as internal support functions 7

8. Development and Implementation of a KT Mission 8 PHASE 1: Government- level Formal political support / requirement for KT Removal of legal/regulatory barriers to KT Strong policy support for KT PHASE 2: PRO-level Establishment of KT strategies, policies, processes and governance structures Creation of KTO, recruitment of professional KT staff PHASE 3: PRO-level Consolidation of KT mission Embedding a KT culture Recognising &rewarding KT activities among academic & KT staff Embedding the PRO in innovation networks

9. Policy Recommendations (1) Public policy needs to: Recognise the public good role of PROs and ensure that policy interventions relating to knowledge transfer do not focus solely on the protection and exploitation of PRO-generated IP Ensure this third mission is incorporated into relevant legislation in countries where a legislative basis for such policy shifts is required Ensure that PROs are obliged to have knowledge transfer (or ‘third’) missions and that this mission is embedded in PRO institutional strategies. Eliminate remaining legal and structural barriers to PRO knowledge transfer activities A third mission, as required by public policy, must have appropriate funding. No one funding method suits all jurisdictions but the route to funding should be clear Publications. Therefore the impact of full open access for publicly funded research outputs should be reviewed with a view to moving in this direction 9

10. Policy Recommendations (2) At the level of PROs Roll out the extended KTO model in smaller and often more regional universities as well as in the leading institutions Academic career structures need to align with the three PRO missions of teaching, research and knowledge transfer Knowledge transfer professionals need to be recognised and rewarded appropriately PROs should organise the KTO function so that it is the shared responsibility of the senior university research manager or a specialist KT/innovation manager PROs should ensure their KT activities not only ‘sell’ IP and licensing but also the wider range of ‘soft’ cooperations possible – and that this balance will depend on the type of PRO Especially smaller and more regional PROs should explore opportunities to pool their KT activities 10

11. Policy Recommendations (3) Stimulating ‘demand’ - enabling businesses to interact with PROs To bring businesses into networks with PROs To deepen relationships and help businesses remain in the networks 11

12. 12 Thank you technopolis |group| has offices in Amsterdam, Ankara, Brighton, Brussels, Frankfurt/Main, Paris, Stockholm, Tallinn and Vienna