Published in The Australian, 20 July 2016

New efforts to nurture organic ­relationships between business and academics are needed if the government’s innovation agenda is to be realised, say researchers.

Collaboration is one of four pillars in the National Innovation and Science Agenda but this will become a “word without any substance” unless there are measures to facilitate continuing interaction between business and researchers, says Angela McCabe, lecturer in management at the University of Melbourne.

New research by Dr McCabe and her colleagues found there was a limit to what could be achieved by university-industry ­research collaborations as academics assumed control over much of the project, and this was left ­unchallenged by industry partners. That was because both parties placed a higher value on academic knowledge than prac­tical or ­applied knowledge, ­according to the study of 23 large-scale projects.

A review of ­research funding and policy by Ian Watt last ­December made a range of recommendations to tackle the longstanding issue — all of which were accepted by the Coalition government in its response in May.

These included simplifying grant funding, developing a research impact framework and axing the requirement for businesses with fewer than 20 staff to make cash contributions to research projects.

Dr McCabe’s research has found the projects that successfully fostered deeper collaboration had pre-existing rela­tionships or were using techniques such as alternative decision-making.

There also needed to be greater opportunity for industry to reach out to academics, Dr McCabe said. “That (could be) a different funding scheme or government (allowing) industry to apply for research grants before they engage with ­academics,” she said.

In a similar vein, Tony Peacock, chief executive of the CRC Association, pointed to Scotland where the company Interface had been connecting small business and ­academics for 11 years.

“Interface did 1000 contracts last year, but in its first year it did only one,” Dr Peacock said. “That goes to the issue of stability. Interface might not have survived its first year in Australia because we tend to chop and change our programs.”

In addition to the need for greater stability of policy and programs, he said streamlining the bureaucracy involved in research projects should be a priority.

“We’re an industry partner in an ARC linkage grant and I just ­received the paperwork this morning — it’s 230 pages,” he said.

Reducing the paperwork could be a greater incentive for small businesses than the exemption to make cash contributions, he said.

“If they get the research for nothing they tend to think it’s worth nothing,” Dr Peacock said.

“I’d rather see companies match money or some meaningful in-kind contribution.”

Judy Raper, deputy vice-­chancellor of research and innovation at the University of Wollongong, agreed that univer­sities and business needed continuity of policy.

“We’ve had lots of good ideas and initiatives, but they tend to change every few years,” she said.

Yesterday UoW launched its iAccelerate Centre, which Dr Raper described as an “innovation ecosystem”.

It is the university’s response to the changing economy of the ­region, with traditional employers like manufacturing in decline.

“We’ve already created 130 jobs. It’s hi-tech, high-growth companies, as well as technology manufacturing and social entrepreneurs. There’s a real buzz.”