University of Surrey - Keynote Speech by Professor Patrick J Dowling, chair, CVCP Business and Industry sector group.

University of Surrey
Guildford, Surrey
GU2 5XH, UK

Tel (01483) 300800
Fax (01483) 300803

crest

news

ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY RESEARCH AND INDUSTRIAL LINKS AUTUMN CONFERENCE: UNIVERSITY OF TEESIDE 16th SEPTEMBER 1999

Keynote Speech by Professor Patrick J Dowling, chair, CVCP Business and Industry sector group.

Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, Colleagues

I am delighted to have been asked to address you at the start of your Autumn Conference, on a topic which is very close to my heart - universities, business and the knowledge economy.

Peter Mandelson, when introducing the Government's Competitiveness White Paper in December last year, said:

"knowledge and its profitable exploitation by business is the key to competitiveness"

The thrust of that White Paper is about encouraging enterprising and competitive business, whilst recognising that as the UK's economic emphasis moves towards knowledge based and service industries, it is essential to invest in our science and knowledge base. In particular, it recognises the role universities have to play in modernising the UK economy, so it is not too surprising that the CVCP gave the White Paper the warmest of welcomes.

On top of this, the 1988 Comprehensive Spending review acknowledged the lack of investment in university research infrastructure and the need to correct the situation. This represented a sea-change in Government policy, from regarding universities as relatively unproductive consumers of public funds to recognising them as central to economic competitiveness.

All of these developments have presented universities with both opportunities and challenges. However, recognising the opportunity is relatively easy, grasping it is quite another matter and that is where the members of AURIL have a key role to play.

There is little doubt that the business climate in the UK is becoming more enterprising. It is being driven by competitiveness on a global scale coupled with a growing ability to trade without boundaries. The electronic revolution and the recognition that here in the West our advantages will increasingly pivot around our ability to use brainworking, will compel us to build the knowledge driven economy and fast!

As evidence of Government's positive attitude towards universities it is worth quoting another extract from the White Paper:

"The most dynamic economies have strong universities, which have creative partnerships with business".
Following Peter Mandelson's departure from the DTI, the CVCP was most anxious to ensure that the DTI remained committed to the White Paper. Happily, Stephen Byers, the current Secretary of State, made it very clear when we met him in June that they were. In that discussion, we emphasised:

CVCP support for the White Paper and the recognition and acceptance of universities' role in driving the economy, and the need to work in partnership with industry.

the need to develop regular meetings between CVCP and DTI officials, on the model of our regular meetings with DfEE officials.

the case for strong DTI involvement in the PM's initiative to recruit more overseas students.

the need for a review of the wide range of DTI university-industry schemes with a view to their rationalisation. Their plurality imposes real and opportunity costs for universities, not to mention initiative fatigue. We understand that Ministers share our concern (although more schemes have recently been released, of course).

Through our various meetings we have built up useful links with DTI. We also have a good relationship with the CBI. CVCP plans to work with various partners, including AURIL, to keep up the pressure for the involvement of universities in shaping as well as delivering policy. Turning to Government policy again, there are a number of key themes, but four are of particular relevance to the enterprising university of today, many of whom had already established good links with industry long before the advent of the White Paper: Firstly, the improvement of our links with industry. The 1998 PREST survey showed that university-industry links are growing rapidly; in many cases with a strategic approach replacing mere opportunism. Companies are increasingly looking to universities not just for highly trained people and research services, but as a source and stimulus for innovation. From our own experiences we know how universities have successfully affected company performance, and how universities have spun out companies from our own institutions. However, it must be admitted that the scene is patchy across the spectrum of UK universities.

The most recent CBI Innovation Trends Survey showed that company spending on innovation is dropping and the R&D scoreboard shows that UK companies (with exceptions in some large high-tech companies) invest less in R&D than their competitors.

On the university side, I don't believe that many of us can be satisfied with more than just a handful of our current industrial partnerships. How long does it take to set them up? Are we happy with the IPR arrangements? How enduring do we think they are? Are we giving them what they want? Are they paying fairly for what they get? Is it just a one-way street to them? At recent meetings with both Lord Sainsbury and with Stephen Byers, we have emphasised the need for a two-way flow of knowledge transfer. We need to know companies' strategies and priorities if we are to engage in meaningful partnerships.

CVCP welcomed HEFCE's introduction of a new funding stream to help strengthen university-industry links, to complement existing grants for teaching and research. The Reach-out Fund (which is paralleled by related initiatives in Scotland and Wales) recognises the application of knowledge, alongside the generation and dissemination of knowledge, as a core university activity.

The Reach-out initiative will strengthen universities' capability to form links with industry, and assist the development of a more strategic view of these relationships. I support the intention that it should become a permanent funding stream, which will deliver funding to all universities. The breadth of activity envisaged as eligible for support is also to be welcomed, ranging from the commercialisation of research to the provision of training opportunities. We applaud the intention to give universities flexibility in determining how to use their income. A flexible approach of this sort acknowledges the diversity of interests, strengths and geographical perspectives adopted by universities in pursuit of their strategies for links with business and their communities.

However, the level of funding initially proposed for the Reach-out Fund is, to say the least, very modest. It will not become an effective balance to teaching and research until the scale of its funding is significantly increased, a point we have stressed not only with HEFCE, but with Government. I expect that CVCP will press for additional funding for this purpose as part of the next Comprehensive Spending Review.

If I may draw on the experience of my own University, which traditionally has strong links with industry, we continue to work hard at improving them, not only with respect to research, but also to teaching and learning. We have a growing portfolio of short courses, which have been developed in discussions with industry. Such courses are run either at the University or in-house, the latter proving to be increasingly popular, as industry sees the advantage of tailoring courses to their needs and integrating them into company training programmes.

We have also been supportive of and have been fortunate to take part in both of the UK's first Virtual Centres of Excellence in Mobile and Personal Communications and Digital Multimedia Broadcasting. These represent a different way of conducting research and training postgraduates with industry involvement. Industry and academia are partners in planning the research and industry works much closer in monitoring and collaborating in the research process itself. There is certainly a different culture imbued in the PhD students who are part of these centres - they are much in demand by industry and show all the signs of being switched on to IPR, standards issues and commercial processes in a way that may not occur with a postgraduate trained in the traditional way.

It is essential that universities remain flexible in meeting the needs of industry, if we are to continue our involvement in their training throughout their life in industry. However, as I emphasised earlier, industry must be encouraged to share its own visions for the future, if the virtuous circle of knowledge transfer is to be achieved.

One way of encouraging a two-way flow is the creation of a high level Business Advisory Group, such as the one we have at Surrey. The Group's membership is drawn from the chief executives of major national and international organisations and the University's senior management team. We meet two or three times a year over dinner in a London Club, to discuss the University's response to industry's needs and the feedback has been enormously helpful in helping to shape our partnerships with industry.

The second key theme is the commercial take-up of university research or rather the lack of it, a problem which I know attendees of this conference wrestle with daily.

The translation of ideas into wealth must be improved and there will be growing emphasis on the ability not only of the larger corporations, but of SMEs too, to identify and turn ideas into marketable opportunities.

Lord Sainsbury has made it clear that greater commercialisation of research is a key goal of Government. Hence the introduction of schemes like University Challenge. The high-level Council of Science and Technology, which advises the PM, is also keenly interested, and has asked a group chaired by Sir Alec Broers of Cambridge to report this autumn on ways to improve the exploitation of the SET base.

CVCP is playing an active role in helping to identify best practice here, and earlier this year it launched a report on lessons UK universities can learn from the USA about commercialising their research. The report, Technology Transfer - the US Experience, addressed many of the key themes from the White Paper and many of you, like me, will have found the report's recommendations and findings helpful.

CVCP is currently giving thought to follow-up work, which could include:

a review of the operation of university Technology Transfer offices with a view to disseminating best practice;

a review of IPR policies with research sponsors (a project identified in the recent Biotechnology Clusters plan), which would be led by OST;

an exploration of how to support PhD students and post-docs in gaining industrial experience, which could be pursued with the Research Careers Initiative.

Thirdly, universities are being encouraged to build an entrepreneurial culture.

This could be interpreted as training staff and students not merely to get jobs, but to instil in them a culture, which is well established in the West Coast of the USA, and that is to create jobs. More than anything else it requires open and regular dialogue between the people who have ideas and the people who can spot the opportunities and translate them into money, only rarely are these the same people. This is of course a key role for those of you attending this conference. Ultimately an idea has to marry an opportunity and you play an important role as marriage brokers.

CVCP is considering the contribution that it can make, by examining the impact of Science Enterprise Challenge, university entrepreneurship competitions and other schemes. We have also encouraged universities to join in a Franco-British club to foster entrepeneurialism and we support the planned campaign to be led by the British Chambers of Commerce to encourage the development of greater entrepeneurialism at all levels in UK society.

At Surrey, we have had some success at building an entrepreneurial culture, not least through the creation of wholly owned companies, such as Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. The company is an excellent example of technology transfer within a university and allows the application of satellite engineering R&D to be transferred into a commercial environment. The company's success is well documented and it has received many awards including most recently the Queen's Award for Technological Achievement. It has designed, built and successfully launched some 16 satellites and has helped to train teams of satellite engineers from a number of other countries, including China and Chile. Lord Sainsbury has referred to it as one of the best examples of technology transfer in the university system (but then he was reading this from the slip of paper I passed to him.)

The fourth key theme concerns making graduates attractive to SMEs.

SMEs are a principal vehicle for driving the enterprising culture and they need a ready supply of talent. Preferably, this talent can be provided by qualified, trained professionals with an entrepreneurial spirit. The questions are: Are we producing such graduates? Do SMEs recognise their value? How do universities effectively communicate with the mass of SMEs?

At CVCP we recently had a productive exchange with Colin Perry, who chairs the CBI small business panel, on ways of tackling the barriers between universities and SMEs. In addition, we are writing a response to the DTI's new Small Business Service, which is currently out for consultation, based on such interchanges and with the sector and other colleagues within the CVCP.

More recently, we have turned our attention to SMEs in 'the creative industries'- including advertising, leisure, software and media. This is a sector of growing economic importance, in which the UK is often world leader or second only to the US. The key input is ideas, and sales can consist of rights rather than commodities. It is a rapidly growing sector, with great export potential, but one with which universities have not had a great history of engagement. Nevertheless, there is clear agenda in terms of filling the skills gap, building up productive links with these industries and encouraging entrepreneurial approaches in our graduates in relevant disciplines. We shall build on our contacts and keep members of the CVCP informed of the selected opportunities and challenges as they are identified.

In our region, SMEs are particularly numerous and important to the economy. Like all universities, we face the challenge of how to deliver assistance to these companies in a user-friendly and cost efficient manner. We think it best to concentrate on particular sector groups, dominant in our region, and are helping to build consortia which are capable of furthering pre-competitive research. Methods of networking with SMEs through university hosted business clubs, Research Parks and Teaching Company Schemes are widespread throughout the HE sector and the news that DTI has doubled its contribution to TCS, allowing a further 200 projects to be established is welcome news indeed.

One of the most effective ways of working with SMEs, I witnessed in Bangalore during a recent visit to the Institute of Management. There they concentrate on SMEs who reach a critical stage where there is a need to grow, but the skills and funding needed to do so are lacking. As well as providing advice through board membership, they also frequently take a stake in the SMEs - a win-win situation.

There is one other facet of the Government's thinking on competitiveness and the UK economy, which I have not touched upon, and that is the important role of the regions.

Regional Development Agencies in England are to be given �39m to identify key skills gaps affecting regional economic development. They will be required to prepare innovation strategies and will co-ordinate inward investment, raise skills, improve economic performance and encourage links between business and higher and further education.

RDAs have a clear part to play in implementing the Government's strategies. Clearly, this will need to be done in partnership with other major players and universities have a central role not only at a strategic level, but also as providers of higher skills training and business support. CVCP has welcomed the new national and regional arrangements and believes such decentralisation of power to be an enabling factor for the diversity of higher education in the UK. Like many other regions, universities and HE colleges in the South East have been proactive in realising the need to co-operate at the regional level.

As relatively young organisations the RDAs are still evolving, but with CVCP representing universities at a national level and regional consortia representing HE at regional levels, combined with the renewed recognition by Government of the importance of universities in achieving its competitiveness strategies, it is my belief that we are well placed to assert our rightful place in the modern knowledge driven economy.

It is therefore of real importance that the CVCP, through the Business & Industry Sector Group which I chair, works with universities and industry to help them identify a way forward. The creation of this Sector Group has demonstrated CVCP's determination to develop the university-industry interface. Through discussions and through close contact with Government ministers and senior industrial and commercial representatives, the Sector Group has identified trends and priorities which have been communicated to members to inform their own strategies and activities.

The contribution that an organisation like AURIL can make is critical to ensuring that CVCP policy is well informed and effectively implemented. The study we undertook jointly with the CBI on Research Partnerships was well received and we look forward to a fruitful outcome of the work that has been put into a project on identifying best practice in the management of consultancy. Doubtless there will be other topics that we will wish to address together.

In summary, my theme has been to emphasise that universities currently have great opportunities in terms of the general direction of the economy, our relations with business and Government's recognition of the role of universities. We at CVCP intend to grasp these opportunities enthusiastically. We rely on AURIL as a body of expert practitioners to support us. We would particularly welcome your input into ways of rationalising the myriad of DTI schemes, as well as your identification of key themes that you consider it would be useful for CVCP to put its collective weight behind.

Together we can make a difference.

Thank you for your attention.

Professor Patrick J Dowling, chair, CVCP Business and Industry sector group.

© copyright The University of Surrey 1999
Disclaimer

For more information e-mail information@surrey.ac.uk
Updated September 1999


		University of Surrey Guildford, Surrey GU2 5XH, UK	Tel (01483) 300800 Fax (01483) 300803




	ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY RESEARCH AND INDUSTRIAL LINKS AUTUMN CONFERENCE: UNIVERSITY OF TEESIDE 16th SEPTEMBER 1999 Keynote Speech by Professor Patrick J Dowling, chair, CVCP Business and Industry sector group. Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, Colleagues I am delighted to have been asked to address you at the start of your Autumn Conference, on a topic which is very close to my heart - universities, business and the knowledge economy. Peter Mandelson, when introducing the Government's Competitiveness White Paper in December last year, said: "knowledge and its profitable exploitation by business is the key to competitiveness" The thrust of that White Paper is about encouraging enterprising and competitive business, whilst recognising that as the UK's economic emphasis moves towards knowledge based and service industries, it is essential to invest in our science and knowledge base. In particular, it recognises the role universities have to play in modernising the UK economy, so it is not too surprising that the CVCP gave the White Paper the warmest of welcomes. On top of this, the 1988 Comprehensive Spending review acknowledged the lack of investment in university research infrastructure and the need to correct the situation. This represented a sea-change in Government policy, from regarding universities as relatively unproductive consumers of public funds to recognising them as central to economic competitiveness. All of these developments have presented universities with both opportunities and challenges. However, recognising the opportunity is relatively easy, grasping it is quite another matter and that is where the members of AURIL have a key role to play. There is little doubt that the business climate in the UK is becoming more enterprising. It is being driven by competitiveness on a global scale coupled with a growing ability to trade without boundaries. The electronic revolution and the recognition that here in the West our advantages will increasingly pivot around our ability to use brainworking, will compel us to build the knowledge driven economy and fast! As evidence of Government's positive attitude towards universities it is worth quoting another extract from the White Paper: "The most dynamic economies have strong universities, which have creative partnerships with business". Following Peter Mandelson's departure from the DTI, the CVCP was most anxious to ensure that the DTI remained committed to the White Paper. Happily, Stephen Byers, the current Secretary of State, made it very clear when we met him in June that they were. In that discussion, we emphasised: CVCP support for the White Paper and the recognition and acceptance of universities' role in driving the economy, and the need to work in partnership with industry. the need to develop regular meetings between CVCP and DTI officials, on the model of our regular meetings with DfEE officials. the case for strong DTI involvement in the PM's initiative to recruit more overseas students. the need for a review of the wide range of DTI university-industry schemes with a view to their rationalisation. Their plurality imposes real and opportunity costs for universities, not to mention initiative fatigue. We understand that Ministers share our concern (although more schemes have recently been released, of course). Through our various meetings we have built up useful links with DTI. We also have a good relationship with the CBI. CVCP plans to work with various partners, including AURIL, to keep up the pressure for the involvement of universities in shaping as well as delivering policy. Turning to Government policy again, there are a number of key themes, but four are of particular relevance to the enterprising university of today, many of whom had already established good links with industry long before the advent of the White Paper: Firstly, the improvement of our links with industry. The 1998 PREST survey showed that university-industry links are growing rapidly; in many cases with a strategic approach replacing mere opportunism. Companies are increasingly looking to universities not just for highly trained people and research services, but as a source and stimulus for innovation. From our own experiences we know how universities have successfully affected company performance, and how universities have spun out companies from our own institutions. However, it must be admitted that the scene is patchy across the spectrum of UK universities. The most recent CBI Innovation Trends Survey showed that company spending on innovation is dropping and the R&D scoreboard shows that UK companies (with exceptions in some large high-tech companies) invest less in R&D than their competitors. On the university side, I don't believe that many of us can be satisfied with more than just a handful of our current industrial partnerships. How long does it take to set them up? Are we happy with the IPR arrangements? How enduring do we think they are? Are we giving them what they want? Are they paying fairly for what they get? Is it just a one-way street to them? At recent meetings with both Lord Sainsbury and with Stephen Byers, we have emphasised the need for a two-way flow of knowledge transfer. We need to know companies' strategies and priorities if we are to engage in meaningful partnerships. CVCP welcomed HEFCE's introduction of a new funding stream to help strengthen university-industry links, to complement existing grants for teaching and research. The Reach-out Fund (which is paralleled by related initiatives in Scotland and Wales) recognises the application of knowledge, alongside the generation and dissemination of knowledge, as a core university activity. The Reach-out initiative will strengthen universities' capability to form links with industry, and assist the development of a more strategic view of these relationships. I support the intention that it should become a permanent funding stream, which will deliver funding to all universities. The breadth of activity envisaged as eligible for support is also to be welcomed, ranging from the commercialisation of research to the provision of training opportunities. We applaud the intention to give universities flexibility in determining how to use their income. A flexible approach of this sort acknowledges the diversity of interests, strengths and geographical perspectives adopted by universities in pursuit of their strategies for links with business and their communities. However, the level of funding initially proposed for the Reach-out Fund is, to say the least, very modest. It will not become an effective balance to teaching and research until the scale of its funding is significantly increased, a point we have stressed not only with HEFCE, but with Government. I expect that CVCP will press for additional funding for this purpose as part of the next Comprehensive Spending Review. If I may draw on the experience of my own University, which traditionally has strong links with industry, we continue to work hard at improving them, not only with respect to research, but also to teaching and learning. We have a growing portfolio of short courses, which have been developed in discussions with industry. Such courses are run either at the University or in-house, the latter proving to be increasingly popular, as industry sees the advantage of tailoring courses to their needs and integrating them into company training programmes. We have also been supportive of and have been fortunate to take part in both of the UK's first Virtual Centres of Excellence in Mobile and Personal Communications and Digital Multimedia Broadcasting. These represent a different way of conducting research and training postgraduates with industry involvement. Industry and academia are partners in planning the research and industry works much closer in monitoring and collaborating in the research process itself. There is certainly a different culture imbued in the PhD students who are part of these centres - they are much in demand by industry and show all the signs of being switched on to IPR, standards issues and commercial processes in a way that may not occur with a postgraduate trained in the traditional way. It is essential that universities remain flexible in meeting the needs of industry, if we are to continue our involvement in their training throughout their life in industry. However, as I emphasised earlier, industry must be encouraged to share its own visions for the future, if the virtuous circle of knowledge transfer is to be achieved. One way of encouraging a two-way flow is the creation of a high level Business Advisory Group, such as the one we have at Surrey. The Group's membership is drawn from the chief executives of major national and international organisations and the University's senior management team. We meet two or three times a year over dinner in a London Club, to discuss the University's response to industry's needs and the feedback has been enormously helpful in helping to shape our partnerships with industry. The second key theme is the commercial take-up of university research or rather the lack of it, a problem which I know attendees of this conference wrestle with daily. The translation of ideas into wealth must be improved and there will be growing emphasis on the ability not only of the larger corporations, but of SMEs too, to identify and turn ideas into marketable opportunities. Lord Sainsbury has made it clear that greater commercialisation of research is a key goal of Government. Hence the introduction of schemes like University Challenge. The high-level Council of Science and Technology, which advises the PM, is also keenly interested, and has asked a group chaired by Sir Alec Broers of Cambridge to report this autumn on ways to improve the exploitation of the SET base. CVCP is playing an active role in helping to identify best practice here, and earlier this year it launched a report on lessons UK universities can learn from the USA about commercialising their research. The report, Technology Transfer - the US Experience, addressed many of the key themes from the White Paper and many of you, like me, will have found the report's recommendations and findings helpful. CVCP is currently giving thought to follow-up work, which could include: a review of the operation of university Technology Transfer offices with a view to disseminating best practice; a review of IPR policies with research sponsors (a project identified in the recent Biotechnology Clusters plan), which would be led by OST; an exploration of how to support PhD students and post-docs in gaining industrial experience, which could be pursued with the Research Careers Initiative. Thirdly, universities are being encouraged to build an entrepreneurial culture. This could be interpreted as training staff and students not merely to get jobs, but to instil in them a culture, which is well established in the West Coast of the USA, and that is to create jobs. More than anything else it requires open and regular dialogue between the people who have ideas and the people who can spot the opportunities and translate them into money, only rarely are these the same people. This is of course a key role for those of you attending this conference. Ultimately an idea has to marry an opportunity and you play an important role as marriage brokers. CVCP is considering the contribution that it can make, by examining the impact of Science Enterprise Challenge, university entrepreneurship competitions and other schemes. We have also encouraged universities to join in a Franco-British club to foster entrepeneurialism and we support the planned campaign to be led by the British Chambers of Commerce to encourage the development of greater entrepeneurialism at all levels in UK society. At Surrey, we have had some success at building an entrepreneurial culture, not least through the creation of wholly owned companies, such as Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. The company is an excellent example of technology transfer within a university and allows the application of satellite engineering R&D to be transferred into a commercial environment. The company's success is well documented and it has received many awards including most recently the Queen's Award for Technological Achievement. It has designed, built and successfully launched some 16 satellites and has helped to train teams of satellite engineers from a number of other countries, including China and Chile. Lord Sainsbury has referred to it as one of the best examples of technology transfer in the university system (but then he was reading this from the slip of paper I passed to him.) The fourth key theme concerns making graduates attractive to SMEs. SMEs are a principal vehicle for driving the enterprising culture and they need a ready supply of talent. Preferably, this talent can be provided by qualified, trained professionals with an entrepreneurial spirit. The questions are: Are we producing such graduates? Do SMEs recognise their value? How do universities effectively communicate with the mass of SMEs? At CVCP we recently had a productive exchange with Colin Perry, who chairs the CBI small business panel, on ways of tackling the barriers between universities and SMEs. In addition, we are writing a response to the DTI's new Small Business Service, which is currently out for consultation, based on such interchanges and with the sector and other colleagues within the CVCP. More recently, we have turned our attention to SMEs in 'the creative industries'- including advertising, leisure, software and media. This is a sector of growing economic importance, in which the UK is often world leader or second only to the US. The key input is ideas, and sales can consist of rights rather than commodities. It is a rapidly growing sector, with great export potential, but one with which universities have not had a great history of engagement. Nevertheless, there is clear agenda in terms of filling the skills gap, building up productive links with these industries and encouraging entrepreneurial approaches in our graduates in relevant disciplines. We shall build on our contacts and keep members of the CVCP informed of the selected opportunities and challenges as they are identified. In our region, SMEs are particularly numerous and important to the economy. Like all universities, we face the challenge of how to deliver assistance to these companies in a user-friendly and cost efficient manner. We think it best to concentrate on particular sector groups, dominant in our region, and are helping to build consortia which are capable of furthering pre-competitive research. Methods of networking with SMEs through university hosted business clubs, Research Parks and Teaching Company Schemes are widespread throughout the HE sector and the news that DTI has doubled its contribution to TCS, allowing a further 200 projects to be established is welcome news indeed. One of the most effective ways of working with SMEs, I witnessed in Bangalore during a recent visit to the Institute of Management. There they concentrate on SMEs who reach a critical stage where there is a need to grow, but the skills and funding needed to do so are lacking. As well as providing advice through board membership, they also frequently take a stake in the SMEs - a win-win situation. There is one other facet of the Government's thinking on competitiveness and the UK economy, which I have not touched upon, and that is the important role of the regions. Regional Development Agencies in England are to be given �39m to identify key skills gaps affecting regional economic development. They will be required to prepare innovation strategies and will co-ordinate inward investment, raise skills, improve economic performance and encourage links between business and higher and further education. RDAs have a clear part to play in implementing the Government's strategies. Clearly, this will need to be done in partnership with other major players and universities have a central role not only at a strategic level, but also as providers of higher skills training and business support. CVCP has welcomed the new national and regional arrangements and believes such decentralisation of power to be an enabling factor for the diversity of higher education in the UK. Like many other regions, universities and HE colleges in the South East have been proactive in realising the need to co-operate at the regional level. As relatively young organisations the RDAs are still evolving, but with CVCP representing universities at a national level and regional consortia representing HE at regional levels, combined with the renewed recognition by Government of the importance of universities in achieving its competitiveness strategies, it is my belief that we are well placed to assert our rightful place in the modern knowledge driven economy. It is therefore of real importance that the CVCP, through the Business & Industry Sector Group which I chair, works with universities and industry to help them identify a way forward. The creation of this Sector Group has demonstrated CVCP's determination to develop the university-industry interface. Through discussions and through close contact with Government ministers and senior industrial and commercial representatives, the Sector Group has identified trends and priorities which have been communicated to members to inform their own strategies and activities. The contribution that an organisation like AURIL can make is critical to ensuring that CVCP policy is well informed and effectively implemented. The study we undertook jointly with the CBI on Research Partnerships was well received and we look forward to a fruitful outcome of the work that has been put into a project on identifying best practice in the management of consultancy. Doubtless there will be other topics that we will wish to address together. In summary, my theme has been to emphasise that universities currently have great opportunities in terms of the general direction of the economy, our relations with business and Government's recognition of the role of universities. We at CVCP intend to grasp these opportunities enthusiastically. We rely on AURIL as a body of expert practitioners to support us. We would particularly welcome your input into ways of rationalising the myriad of DTI schemes, as well as your identification of key themes that you consider it would be useful for CVCP to put its collective weight behind. Together we can make a difference. Thank you for your attention. Professor Patrick J Dowling, chair, CVCP Business and Industry sector group.

	© copyright The University of Surrey 1999 Disclaimer	For more information e-mail information@surrey.ac.uk Updated September 1999