EUPRIO September 2011 25 th Anniversary Conference Communicating Knowledge Transfer

1. EUPRIO September 2011 25th Anniversary ConferenceCommunicating Knowledge Transfer Sue Gunn, Director, Research and Enterprise, City University London

2. EUPRIO mission…. • to create a network to assist members • to promote professional excellence • to promote exchange of ideas and techniques • I hope to follow that in this session

3. Overview of the next 3 hours (with break) • A. Introductions to the group and KT communication issues faced • B. KT as a profession in the UK – the last 10 years - how it has been financed and supported – Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) • Case study Hertfordshire v City University • B. Interactive Creative problem solving session • Ideas to meet our challenges in communicating KT

4. Introductions • You will be introducing 1 other person • Take 10 minutes (5 each) to ask name, current post, experience and one key KT communication challenge facing them that they would be keen to explore more • <put only the challenge on to a post-it.> • Plus what they would REALLY like to be doing right now in life if there were no barriers!!

6. Knowledge Transfer (Knowledge Exchange – mutual benefit?) “is about transferring good ideas, research results and skills between universities and the business and the wider community to enable innovative new products and services to be developed” (www.ost.gov.uk)

7. 10 years of ‘£’ supported Knowledge Transfer • 1999 - 2001 start of funding- rounds 1 and 2 – what the landscape looked like then...REF over • 2003 Lambert review of HE/Business interaction • 2004 Round 3 of funding based on success criteria and capacity • 2007 Round 4 funding – strategic plans • 2007 Lord Sainsbury Report The Race to the Top • 2008 Innovation Nation White Paper (DIUS 2008) • 2009 Report to government from PACEC and Cambridge University to assess any economic and social benefits from funding. HIGHLIGHTS to follow • New Government - spending review cuts but Round 5 announced – 4 years to 2014/15.

8. How we support KT at City University • Commercialisation of Intellectual property(patents,licensing, spin outs etc) • London City Incubator/Enterprise Education • Research Grants support for contract and collaborative research projects • Private and Institutional consultancy support • Proof of Concept awards • Follow- on funding researcher bid support to demonstrate impact • Budgets direct to 7 schools for local initiatives

9. Research & Enterprise Team until this month

10. How the £1.6M KT budget from Government budget works at City • £700k Central team costs – staff, office etc • £150k Legal costs, patents etc (Schools pay half) • £ 500 Services (e.g proof of Concept, marketing, incubator, Enterprise education) • 750k allocated direct to schools • ........£500k shortfall from income generated by CPD team p/a

11. Highlights from 2009 report into KT..... • Initial concerns about emphasis on KE impacting on traditional teaching/research proven unfounded - synergies realised • Considerable progress in embedding culture shift/positive attitudes towards KE but still in transition • 31% spent on dedicated KT staff to 2004 – 52% pIanned 2004 - 2009 • KT offices becoming very professional and pro-active in opportunity generation but key constraint is attracting suitably qualified staff

12. Highlights continued • KE income 2001-07 rose by 12% per annum to £1.94 billion in 2007. • Marketing/communications spend 1.2% to 4.3% of total, but still only 37% of organisations engaged know about KT office • 45% academics perceived impact in department. 45% had no contact with KT office even if they knew about it • Senior management support growing – balance differences • Government policy and funding = main drivers of KT activity

13. High research Intensive v Low research intensive universities

14. Growth of KT support UK Organisations • AURIL – conference, vacancies, policy input, CPD • PRAXIS and UNICO (now PRAXISUNICO) www.praxisunico.org.uk • IKT – mentoring/CPD (AURIL links), conferences • http://www.researchintoktpractice.co.uk/IKT/about.php) • (AUTM US, SNITTS Sweden, AESTTP EU, Global Innovation Network – communities of practice)

15. Many KT publications and brochures • Government • Business organisations, (CBI,IOD) • Design Council • Academic papers growing – PhD studies starting • Every university has a web page and brochure

16. Where are we heading now?…………. • Research Excellence Framework + focus • Funding secure for 2011 to 2015. 12,500 professionals involved - roles – promoter, innovator, gate keeper, transformer. Chamelions! • More de-centralisation – control to facilitation • Teams that fit the local situation – eg City – space defined by institution • Academic promotions (and recruitment) based on KT • More focus on INDUSTRY benefitting from IP – Glasgow free IP

17. Pro- Vice-Chancellor Research and Enterprise Administrator Director Marketing Exec / Bus. Development Manager Enterprise Education Professional Development Courses Technology Transfer & Commercialisation (IP etc) Administrative Assistant London City Incubator My team from October 2011. Costs down by £400k p/a

18. A tale of two Universities - Case studyThe University of Hertfordshire (UoH)and City University, London (CuL) • Drivers for a university to be enterprising – in service of society, in service of the commercial world or in service of the academic mission.

20. Two business facing web sites and brochures • Herts - http://www.herts.ac.uk/business-services/home.cfm • http://content.yudu.com/Library/A1orn8/CredentialsBrochurev/resources/index.htm?referrerUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yudu.com%2Fitem%2Fdetails%2F204198%2FCredentials-Brochure-v6 • City - http://www.city.ac.uk/for-business • http://my.page-flip.co.uk/?userpath=00000013/00012513/00055352/

21. Session 2 – The issues around communicating KT to relevant audiences • KT services and motivation are often still not understood by businesses, staff or academics, still!

22. Communication Challenges expressed at City by KT team • Main interest = research agenda • SME’s do not think of universities as a resource • Lack of expertise register • No Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems – hard to build on links we have with employers allready

23. Challenges continued • Professional teams have other priorities eg undergraduate focus • Lack of people and resources dedicated to it • Marketing team focussed on student message and brand building • Language difficulties (academic v lay person) • Bureaucracy generally (eg web rules)

24. And more...from the marketing team this time. • Finding a balance in the way research is written up so that academics don’t feel their work is being dumbed down • Journalists wanting to see a finished, working solution, not an early stage prototype (even if it does have the potential to change the world) • The focus of communications activity being on other things (student recruitment, brand building) so research gets left behind

25. And again.... • Academics not keeping marketing up-to-date with what they are doing or being reluctant to engage in communications activity because of other pressures on their time • Research being “blue sky” or esoteric, so that commercial benefits to SMEs are difficult to spot and convey • Being able to demonstrate what positive benefits of the research are to be found to the man or woman in the street

26. Academics challenges • 2/3rd say no time for KT due to other commitments • 28% say there are insufficient rewards incentives for it • Previous bad experience/generational differences

27. Task - Re word the challenges in small groups • Try and use 7 words or less • Wouldn’t it be nice if....WIBNI • All will go up on wall on new charts • Top 3 using ticks. Identify owners of these

28. Brainwriting challenge – generate 50 ideas • 1 minute on each box - ideas around meeting the task/challenge • - Can be based on the idea before, or start a new one if stuck • Rules – as many as possible, move on, defer judgement • Prompts – Imagine you had all the resources you needed/magic wand • What are some ideas you can think of for achieving this? • How to .....How might we....In what ways might we...tackle this? • PRIZE FOR ONE BEST IDEA OVER TWO MASTERCLASSES SESSIONS

29. Assessing an idea • We will then pick top 2 using stickers (red best green second best) • based on: • Attractiveness, those that really seem on target/critical • Most promising • Those that have most advantages/Compatibility/Practicality

30. Thank you everyone!