Accepted model of knowledge transfer is holding the UK back The UK’s current model of knowledge transfer is actually restricting commercialisation, according to leading expert in the field, Professor Mike Smith, who is retiring this month a

The UK’s current model of knowledge transfer is actually restricting commercialisation, according to leading expert in the field, Professor Mike Smith, who is retiring this month as Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research and Knowledge Transfer at Sheffield Hallam University.
Professor Smith, speaking at the Innovation through Knowledge Transfer 2012 conference scheduled for 19-20 April at the University of Bournemouth, will maintain that the reason why is in the name.
“Thinking purely in terms of knowledge ‘transfer’ or ‘exchange’ is part of the reason why the HE and private sectors in the UK so often struggle to work well together,” he says. “In fact, the future lies in the 'co-creation' of innovation.”
He continues: “Because universities focus on what technologies or skills they can ‘transfer’ to the private sector, this creates a trading relationship: we sell, you buy. It is a ‘sage on a stage’ model – the academic expert bestowing their knowledge on a private sector audience.
“This model actually restricts effective commercialisation and is one of the main reasons knowledge transfer in the UK is hitting the buffers. If we’re to see the sector advance, universities and companies need to start identifying non-obvious, unmet needs and jointly create the innovation to fulfil them, developing relationships based on trust rather than trade.”
According to Professor Smith, the different governance systems in the public and private sectors may be to blame for the oft-cited ‘culture clash’ between the two. The sector is constrained in its governance and needs to have the freedom to operate more effectively, particularly in areas which could contribute to economic transformation.
“The public sector is relatively risk averse with restrictive governance arrangements built around contract and audit,” he explains. "This restricts the development of trust which is essential to the co-creation of innovation. Even when universities have created separate organisations to manage their commercialisation, these often labour under public sector-style governance which forces them into a slow-moving, trading paradigm. We need to have different kinds of arrangements if universities and the private sector are to successfully co-create innovation.”
Professor Smith also believes that effective co-creation of innovation has to bring a third party to the table – the user. This idea draws on his many years’ experience commercialising medical technologies, in which the needs of patients were of primary importance.
“I first became involved in commercialising research because I saw it was the only way that the innovations being developed within academia would actually reach patients – those technologies had to be commercially available to hospitals and the only way that could happen was through the private sector,” he explains.
“It’s important to remember that, while making money is all well and good, the main driver for commercialisation is to take our research out of the lab and into the real world, so it has an impact on and provides a benefit for people. Involving them in the process of innovation will help ensure this happens.”