University–industry linkages in the UK: emerging themes and ‘unanswered’ questions

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2015.1046715
• Published date: 01 December 2014
• Date: 01 December 2014
• Pages: 403-439
• Author: Mark Gilman,Cristina Serbanica

RESEARCH PAPER

University–industry linkages in the UK: emerging themes and

‘unanswered’questions

Mark Gilman

a

*

,†

and Cristina Serbanica

b

a

Centre for Employment, Competitiveness and Growth, Kent Business School, University of

Kent, Canterbury,UK;

b

Constantin Brancoveanu University, Pitesti, Arges, Romania

With university–industry engagement forming an integral part of the policy

agenda, this paper underlines current issues and emerging themes in the dedi-

cated literature. It utilises a comprehensive literature review, based on evidence

from peer-reviewed journals/public reports published after 2005 in the UK. The

paper integrates a wide range of disparate studies on university–industry knowl-

edge transfer patterns, determinants and impacts, and offers a panorama that

could be useful to inform on the variety of issues underlying knowledge transfer.

Given the importance/complexity of university–industry interactions, a compre-

hensive study f‌ills an existing gap. Second, due to its focus on current issues, the

study opens the way to ref‌lections and debates on critically ‘unanswered’ques-

tions: how to deal with diversity/heterogeneity? How to increase quality in sup-

ply/quantity in demand for knowledge? How to increase impact on academics,

universities, f‌irms, economy and society?

Introduction

There is much evidence of the success of UK higher education on an internationally

comparative scale and of the spectacular growth in the number and variety of link-

ages between higher education institutions (HEIs) and industry. The last data col-

lected from the Higher Education–Business and Community Interaction Survey

(HE–BCI) highlight an increase in the overall exchange of knowledge between UK

HEIs and the public, private and third sectors, despite the crisis and uncertainty in

the economy. The growth rate, f‌inancially, for the UK is 5%, from 3401 million in

2011–12 to 3570 million in 2012–13 (HEFCE, 2014a). Yet within the UK there is

signif‌icant variation in the wealth and knowledge generation capabilities of the vari-

ous universities, with some even arguing that universities cannot shoulder the burden

for transforming the innovation capabilities of their regions (Huggins et al., 2008).

Measures to encourage university–industry interaction have a long history in the

UK. The early 1980s saw the formation of the Alvey Programme as a signif‌icant

attempt to ensure that UK industry and academia caught up with the US and Japa-

nese lead in areas of IT (Charles et al., 2005). The 1990s saw an increased focus by

the UK government on the impact of interactions between universities and business,

with the introduction of the ‘Realizing Our Potential’report (HMSO, 1993). Separate

initiatives since then have provided funds for universities to invest in different types

of knowledge transfer projects (Abreu et al., 2008). Third stream funding for the

*Corresponding author. Email: mark.gilman@bcu.ac.uk

†

Current aff‌iliation: Birmingham City Business School, Birmingham, UK.

© 2015 Taylor & Francis

Prometheus, 2014

Vol. 32, No. 4, 403–439, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2015.1046715

higher education sector began in 1999, with the introduction of funds specif‌ically to

support HEIs to increase their capability to respond to the needs of business and the

wider community. Programmes such as ‘University Challenge’and Higher Education

Reach Out to Business and Community (HEROBC) illustrate the government’s con-

cern. With the Higher Education Innovation Funding (HEIF) that began in 2001, the

government has largely supported a broad range of knowledge exchange activities

and a signif‌icant culture change in higher education to embrace third stream working

(PACEC/CBR, 2009). However, the Roberts Review of Skills (HM Treasury, 2002)

recommended to both business people and higher education institutions to increase

interactions, especially in science and engineering f‌ields, while the Lambert Review

of Business–University Collaboration (2003) suggested simpler and more predictable

actions to bring academics and business together. Consequently, the government’s

Science and Innovation Investment Framework in July 2004 announced commitment

to long-term funding for the third stream (HM Treasury, 2004). The Leitch Review

of Skills (2006), the ‘Sainsbury Review’(2007), the ‘Innovation Nation’White

Paper (DIUS, 2008) and the ‘Higher Ambitions’framework (BIS, 2009) have all

reaff‌irmed the need for stronger long-term relationships between business and

universities, be it for skill improvement or fostering innovation. More recently, the

Wilson Review (2012) and Sir Witty’s Review of Universities and Growth (2013)

made a number of recommendations to help UK business–university collaboration

become a ‘world leader’and encourage a British Invention Revolution.

Currently, there is a complex mixture of national and local support measures to

encourage university–industry interactions, some evolving from previous pro-

grammes, some having continued over many years. The Department for Business,

Innovation and Skills (BIS) granted the Higher Education Funding Council for

England (HEFCE) a total £5.1 billion for f‌inancial year 2013–14 to support –among

others –knowledge exchange and skills, mainly through the HEIF and the Work-

force Development Programme (HEFCE, 2014b). In their turn, the Research Coun-

cils UK (RCUK) and the Technology Strategy Board (TSB) offer knowledge transfer

schemes and collaborative research opportunities to universities and business, to help

transform their results into innovative ideas. Many other organisations such as the

National Centre for Universities and Business (NCUB), the Association for Univer-

sity Research and Industry Links (AURIL), the Institute for Knowledge Transfer

(IKT), the Intellectual Property Off‌ice (IPO), Praxis–UNICO or the Local Enterprise

Partnership Network (LEP) are also offering their support interactions. Appendix 1

offers a snapshot view of the main support structures/organisations and funding

streams for university–industry linkages in the UK, while providing a short descrip-

tion of their roles and purpose.

This enormous knowledge exchange infrastructure, together with special attention

paid to the third stream mission of universities, has led to various advancements and

to an extensive literature and public debate around university–industry cooperation.

This paper aims to highlight a number of emerging themes in the literature dedicated

to the study of university–industry linkages in the UK that are high on the recent

public agenda. The main contribution of the paper is that it integrates a wide range

of disparate studies, offering a panorama on the variety of issues underlying knowl-

edge transfer in the UK, while simultaneously highlighting a number of crucial

‘unanswered’questions. To offer a broader perspective over the present literature,

the f‌irst part of the study introduces the conceptual framework and the methodology,

whilst in the second part seven key themes arising from the research are discussed.

404 M. Gilman and C. Serbanica

Finally, the paper underlines current ‘unanswered questions’that emerge from a

transversal analysis of a wide range of disparate studies on university–industry

engagements. Due to its comprehensive nature, this study could inform both those

inside and outside the UK system about the variety of issues that should be consid-

ered in the knowledge transfer debate, and, by doing so, it f‌ills a gap in the existing

literature. At the same time, it furthers research directions and opens the way to

ref‌lections and debates on future actions.

Contextual framework and research method

The theoretical framework underlying university–industry links was highly inf‌lu-

enced by economic and social developments, especially towards the end of the

twentieth century. The transition to a knowledge-based society has led to the so-

called ‘second academic revolution’(Etzkowitz et al., 2000) and higher education

institutions were/are expected to formalise a third mission and to generate, use and

exploit their capabilities outside the university, through continuous interactions with

the rest of society (Molas-Gallart et al., 2002). Etzkowitz (1983) coined the phrase

‘entrepreneurial university’to describe the series of changes that ref‌lect the more

active role universities have taken in promoting direct and active transfer of aca-

demic knowledge. In turn, Clark (1998) prof‌iled the entrepreneurial university as an

institution with modernised strategies and structures to meet new societal expecta-

tions. In this context, universities interact with industry (businesses) and the govern-

ment in the so-called Triple Helix Model and the synergies between the three

institutional spheres are meant to generate wealth on the market by industry, norma-

tive control by government and novelty production in academia (Leydesdorff and

Meyer, 2006).

Over the last decades, a huge variety of literature has been produced around uni-

versity–industry linkages. Despite heterogeneity, previous studies attempting to pro-

vide a comprehensive literature review of university–business interactions and/or a

conceptual framework have identif‌ied a number of key streams of research on this

topic (Table 1).

Based on these f‌indings, we have developed a simple conceptual framework to

help investigate university–industry linkages in the UK. Figure 1 introduces the

seven key research themes of our current study.

To answer the questions deriving from the above conceptual framework, this

paper utilises a descriptive literature review process (Fink, 1998). The papers

reviewed were selected from high-impact international databases, namely Web of

Science, Web of Knowledge, ISI Proceeding, EBSCO–Business Source Complete,

Academic Search Complete, Educational Resources Information (ERIC) and

SCOPUS (Social Sciences and Humanities). Complementary information was taken

from UK innovation surveys, benchmarking studies, surveys of academics, case

studies, evaluation reports, policy papers, etc.

Articles were f‌iltered through two eligibility screens. The practical screen

identif‌ied studies that: (i) covered the topic of the university (academic/higher educa-

tion/science)–industry (business, SMEs) AND linkages/partnerships/relation-

ships/collaboration/knowledge transfer in different combinations, dictions and

truncations; (ii) in Abstracts/Summaries; (iii) published after 2005 (to keep the focus

on current issues); (iv) for UK/Great Britain. The quality screen f‌iltered for studies

using exclusively the peer-reviewed journals criterion. For complementary

Prometheus 405