Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Critical success factors for effective partnering
Detailed findings from the interviews and survey were grouped around five key
emergent themes of (1) organisational structure; (2) operational management; (3)
leadership; (4) developing organisational capabilities to improve partnering; and (5)
creating an enabling environment for partnering.
Organisational structure
Respondents both from universities and industry stressed the importance of system-
atically and proactively searching for new R&D ideas to create partnering opportu-
nities with external groups. Effective execution of this “search and select” function
required appropriate organisational structures — such as specialist teams formed
into dedicated business development units — to coordinate and support new R&D
partnerships. In some cases these teams were sector-specific (such as those at Impe-
rial and the Broad Institute which have dedicated teams for life sciences, physical
sciences and so on): in other organisations team briefs were broader than one sector.
The majority of those involved in the study felt that universities were rapidly
learning more corporate ways of organising their business development resources
and were developing a critical mass of activity closely aligned with the areas defined
in their research strategies. However, most of the informants noted an asymmetry
between the supply and demand: the relatively early stage partnering opportunities
available from universities outnumbered the later stage projects and programmes
that partnering companies were more interested in.
Dedicated funding for establishing the commercial potential of early stage tech-
nologies (sometimes referred to as “proof of concept”) featured strongly in our
findings. UK universities reported “success” with their University Challenge seed
funds. Companies were exploring how they could capitalise on this success and
benefit from the new technologies emerging from universities by actively seeking
opportunities to co-invest in technology development. Universities involved in the
study had expanded their portfolio of investments by offering in-house proof-of-
concept funds to finance development of technologies in other institutions.
An interesting finding was an arrangement where university research partners
sub-contracted part of their research back to the industrial partner in an arm's length
arrangement which could be considered as reverse-outsourcing — seen by some as
“a sign of true partnership.”
Theme-based networks or more formal structures, such as industry clubs and
consortia, emerged as favoured modes of partnering for basic research. Although
relatively few such clubs exist, the arrangement was popular amongst the universities
and the companies involved in the study as it offered the opportunity of an “early
view” of new technologies.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search