How shared technology transfer offices can help universities commercialise research

Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) play a crucial role in university innovation and research commercialisation.

While top-tier institutions such as Imperial College London, Oxford, and Cambridge have the resources to operate expansive, independent TTOs and international innovation centres, smaller universities often face significant challenges in supporting academic spinouts and maximising the commercial value of their research. 

Pilot programmes exploring shared TTO models demonstrate how collaboration can help smaller institutions overcome these barriers and improve efficiency. We cover the benefits below.

Benefits of shared TTOs

For many smaller and more applied research institutions, the traditional model of a standalone TTO is often unsustainable. Limited budgets, a smaller pool of commercialisable research, and a lack of specialist expertise can all hinder the ability to identify, protect, and exploit intellectual property (IP). Shared TTO initiatives, such as the Wessex regional pilot funded by Research England, address these challenges.

Pooling resources and expertise

The Wessex project, involving universities such as Portsmouth, Chichester, Solent, AECC University College, and Arts University Bournemouth, creates a lean regional TTO model. By pooling resources and expertise, these institutions can generate sufficient scale to support a vibrant pipeline of academic-led spinouts. 

The collaboration also widens participation in the IP and commercialisation process, ensuring that more staff, especially academics, are equipped to engage with innovation and entrepreneurship.

Similarly, a collaborative project led by the London School of Economics (LSE) with partners including Bristol, Lancaster, Leicester, and the Royal College of Art, is investigating shared TTO models specifically for the social sciences, humanities, and arts disciplines. Through literature reviews, surveys, interviews, and workshops, the project has identified both the appetite and the practical pathways for sharing TTO functions. 

Key benefits

• Access to specialist skills: Smaller universities access expertise in IP law, business development, and venture creation otherwise unaffordable.
• Economies of scale: Shared services reduce duplication and enable strategic investment in tools, training, and market intelligence.
• Enhanced innovation ecosystems: By working together, institutions create dynamic environments for spinouts, attracting external partners and investors through professional, scaled support.

How leading universities approach technology transfer differently

In contrast, leading research universities such as Imperial, Oxford, and Cambridge take a different approach. Rather than sharing TTO resources, these institutions invest heavily in their own tech transfer infrastructure and pursue growth by building direct relationships with industry and investors. 

Imperial College London, for example, has restructured its commercialisation activities to create dedicated teams for IP development and industry partnerships, and has established international centres in India and Silicon Valley.

Key benefits for top-tier universities

• Maintain control and agility: With their own TTOs, these institutions move quickly on commercial opportunities and tailor support to the unique strengths of their research base.
• Build deep corporate relationships: By engaging directly with major corporates, leading universities co-create spinouts, attract investment, and test technologies in practice.
• Reinforce institutional brand and culture: The prestige and scale of these universities make them attractive partners for industry, and their independent TTOs are integral to maintaining this reputation.

Leading universities' reluctance to participate in shared TTO models stems from protecting these advantages and ensuring that their commercialisation strategies remain closely aligned with institutional priorities and culture.

Future TTO models

While shared TTOs offer clear benefits for smaller institutions, the sector could explore additional collaborative models. These might include:

• Regional or thematic consortia: Universities could collaborate by geography or research area, sharing resources where there is natural alignment.
• Hybrid models: Larger universities could offer TTO services to smaller partners while maintaining independence.
• Digital platforms: Technology could provide flexible TTO support, reducing barriers for all institutions.

Conclusion

The emergence of shared TTO models marks an important step towards levelling the playing field in university innovation. By pooling resources, smaller universities can unlock efficiencies and opportunities to innovate, allowing more of their research to reach its commercial potential. 

At the same time, the contrasting strategies of leading universities highlight the importance of scale, agility, and deep corporate engagement in driving world-class commercialisation. As the sector develops, a mix of shared and independent approaches will maximise UK research impact internationally.