Evolution of the UK Knowledge Exchange SystemPacec report 2009

Timothy Dee

Canterbury Christ Church University

Role of Organisational Change

‘The key to unlocking the opportunities of the 21 Century’ (Bryan and Joyce,2007: 16)

Potential to add from 30-60% to the profit per employee…. In organisations with ‘thinking intensive jobs’

Collegiate model moving to Corporate model

• Observed need for ‘support’ structures within Higher Education Institutions (HEI’s)

• Changes in Knowledge Exchange Infrastructure 2003-2008

• Diversity of HEI infrastructure in place

• Key factors shaping the system and its diversity

• Limited knowledge among academics of issues surrounding the commercialisation of research

• The consistent message is that time is the key factor constraining engagement

• Growth in Infrastructure in UK Universities

• Investment of 700 million GBP over 5 year period

KE within an HEI

• Knowledge Exchange Units (KEU)– providing different types of service to internal and/or external customers

• Formal and Informal interactions within the system between KEU’s and the users of their services

Engagement with Knowledge Exchange

• Translation of research

• Development of human capital

• Soft networks

• Provision of facilities

• Civic and community outreach

Range of Responses

• Highly fragmented or modular structure with large number of KEU’s providing specialised support

• Small number of centralised KEU’s providing a portfolio of support activities

Flowing from the strategic response to Knowledge Exchange….

• Overarching Strategy – covering all aspects of KE

• Fragmented Strategy – no overarching strategy but one or more dedicated (and intergrated?) sub strategies covering distinct aspects of KE eg commercialisation

• Implicit Strategy – no dedicated strategy but KE objectives are implicit or embedded in other strategies

• Strategic development depends on interactions between senior managers responsible for resources and those responsible for delivery to create a user led responsive and adaptable system

• Formal interactions – committees and reporting lines

• Informal interactions – social networks and ad hoc interaction

Development of Operational Interactions

• Much more varied and not as widespread as strategic

• Some HEI’s have developed networked organisational structure

• Most have ad hoc structures often based on personal relationships and individual initiatives

Drivers for Change

• Strong leadership identifying KE as an important activity for HEI

• Ensuring incentive structures are in line eg promotions and assessment

• Improving structures around freeing time for academics that wish to engage

• Awareness of benefits and value of KE to the HEI

• Infrastructural development reducing opportunity cost of engagement

Leadership constraints

• Internal context ie existing capacity and capability

• Access to funding

• Culture within academic group

• Past experiences within HEI

• Government policy

• External demand

Incentives

• Promotions criteria especially cf research outcomes

• Celebration of Success

• Financial incentives for IP generation

• Incentives for consultancy

• Opportunities to relieve time pressures

• Bring KE into workload planning system

• Engagement differs across disciplines

• Higher levels of engagement also signal wider range of engagement

Implies target for both strategic and operational aspects of management

Conclusion

• The KE system is evolving to meet needs• KE is becoming recognised as an activity for HEI’s• Growing numbers of academics are engaging in KE• Growing demand for support in operationalising KE• Organisational structures are adapting to growth of KE

activity• Efficiency and effectiveness of KE system are

proportional to level of interactions• Widespread experimentations in structures ;bureaucracy

and inflexibility as well as IP problems are specific rather than general issues