DOCSLIB.ORG

Making the Best Better

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Making the Best Better MAKING THE BEST BETTER UK Research and Innovation More efficient and effective for the global economy Report for Department of Business, Innovation and Skills By Sarah Jackson On secondment from the N8 Research Partnership 30 March 2013 1 MAKING THE BEST BETTER UK Research and Innovation More efficient and effective for the global economy The purpose of this report is to document and analyse evidence of the efficiencies within the higher education research base. The evidence has been collected from existing reports and data, combined with new case studies. Providing recommendations for future efficiency savings is explicitly outside the scope of this work. Key highlights and conclusions The higher education sector is moving towards a ten year track record of delivering efficiencies, including headline savings of over £1.38bn over CSRs 2004 and 20071, and Research Councils delivering savings of £428m over the current CSR period. These efficiencies have been achieved using two key drivers: a. Increasing domestic and international competition b. Science ring fence, allowing reinvestment of savings to increase world class performance of universities. The evidence collected for this report shows a strong ten-year track record of institutions delivering both operational and productive efficiencies, which is improving research and teaching. This strong link between driving efficiencies and improving student experience and better research is increasing investment in skills, knowledge and human capital. Capital budgets are being utilised more effectively, primarily through creating clusters of excellence and sharing equipment. This is delivering state-of-the-art facilities, enabling new science and better equipment and expertise for business. The increased effectiveness of the system is delivering both greater outputs for science and research, and also greater impact in the global marketplace: generating new knowledge, leveraging private investment in R&D and increasing the quality of human capital. This pays a critical role in the industrial strategy, supporting innovation and growth in the economy. HE institutions have been delivering efficiencies for a number of years, but there is a significant weakness in the ability to tell the story: “Universities are good at telling people about their exciting research, but not about how much money has been saved”2. 1 Universities UK (2011) Efficiency and effectiveness in higher education: A report by the Universities UK Efficiency and Modernisation Task Group London: Universities UK. p.16. http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Pages/EfficiencyinHigherEducation.aspx 2 Professor Sir Ian Diamond, speaking at the 2nd Annual UUK Conference on Efficiency, 26 February 2013 2 Contents Introduction - Efficiency and world class performance .............................................................. 4 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 5 Section 1: Building towards a ten year track record .................................................................. 9 1.1 Operational and Productive Efficiencies .................................................................................................. 9 1.2 The Wakeham Review: Efficiencies and Sustainability of Research ..................................................... 11 1.3 The Diamond Report ............................................................................................................................. 11 1.4 How the system works and where the efficiencies are realised ............................................................. 12 1.5 Building an evidence base of efficiencies within HEIs ........................................................................... 13 1.6 Efficiency taxonomy............................................................................................................................... 13 Section 2: Operational Efficiencies - Cash Savings reinvested for students and research.. 14 2.1 Procurement .......................................................................................................................................... 14 2.2 Human Resource Management ............................................................................................................. 15 2.3 Challenges in managing workforce change – why these need to planned not mandated ..................... 16 2.4 Estates .................................................................................................................................................. 18 2.5 Shared Services .................................................................................................................................... 19 Section 3: Productive Efficiencies............................................................................................... 20 3.1 Teaching and Student Service Delivery................................................................................................. 20 3.2 Science Assets and Equipment – higher cost, higher productivity, efficiency and sharing .................... 20 3.3 Innovation Funding – Technology Strategy Board ................................................................................. 30 Section 4: Financial Management ................................................................................................ 31 4.1 Awash with Cash - the case against: “Surplus, but not surplus to requirements” .................................. 31 4.2 Developing new teaching and research facilities: leveraging resources from financial markets ............ 32 4.3 Net cash or debt position ....................................................................................................................... 34 Section 5: Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 35 Appendix 1: List of Contributors ................................................................................................. 36 Appendix 2: Case Studies ............................................................................................................ 38 3 Introduction - Efficiency and world class performance The efficiency and effectiveness agenda is critically important for any organisation; it increases competitiveness and creates new sources of value. By itself, “Efficiency is not a measure of success in the marketplace”3 (Mouzas, 2005). In the context of the research base, efficiency needs to be considered alongside the quality of services provided for students, the quality of teaching and the quality of research The evidence collected for this report demonstrates that it is the imperatives of effectiveness and increasing world class performance that are driving greater efficiencies across the sector. Definitions: When collecting case study data, the following definitions have been used4: Operational Efficiency: Delivering the same output for reduced input Productive Efficiency: achieving greater output (quality or volume) for the same, or proportionately less, input. Structure: This report is split into 4 parts: Section 1: Building towards a ten year track record of efficiencies. Section 2: Operational efficiencies and how savings are being reinvested Section 3: Productive efficiencies: how the sector is delivering more, with proportionately less Section 4: “Surplus but not surplus to requirements”- financial management in HE Scope: In view of limited time, and given the balance of funding5, the report is focused mainly on efficiencies and effectiveness of the research base, and also includes a detailed case study on the Technology Strategy Board. Providing recommendations for future efficiency savings is explicitly outside the scope of this work. Contributors: The list of contributors is detailed in Appendix 1. The case study material builds on the work undertaken by UUK in this area. Author: I have completed this report whilst on a part time, 6 month secondment to BIS from the N8 Research Partnership - the collaboration of eight research intensive universities in the North of England. Acknowledgements: I am very grateful to colleagues in BIS for their support and welcome into the team, especially Maria Cody, Helen Cross and Bryony Butland, and to Graeme Reid for his leadership and sponsorship of the project. I would also like to thank all contributors to the report, who were hugely enthusiastic in telling their stories, and also Jamie Arrowsmith and Chris Hale at UUK. Finally, to thank Professor Chris Brink (Vice-Chancellor, Newcastle University) and Professor Trevor McMillan (Pro-Vice Chancellor, Research, Lancaster University) for their encouragement and support to undertake this secondment, and to Allison Armstrong and Nick Goldspink for their help in finalising and formatting the report. Sarah Jackson, Director of N8 Research Partnership On part time secondment to BIS, October 2012-March 2013 3 Mouzas, S (2005) Efficiency versus effectiveness in business networks Journal of Business Research, Volume 59, Issues 10–11, October 2006, Pages 1124–1132 (Lancaster University Management School) 4 Definitions based on templates received from BIS central finance team, and subsequent helpful discussions with Rosa Fernandez, Economic Advisor, BIS 5 For example, for FY 2012-13, the science and research budget was 5.3bn and the innovation budget £0.6bn (BIS, 2012- 13) 4 Executive Summary Efficiency in the HE
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Landscape Analysis
    The UK’s research and innovation infrastructure: Landscape Analysis 3 Contents Executive summary 6 Chapter 1: Introduction 8 1.1 Scope and definition of research and innovation infrastructure 9 1.2 Infrastructure diversity 10 1.3 Scale and coverage 11 1.4 Questionnaire methodology, limitations and potential bias 13 Chapter 2: Overview of the landscape 15 2.1 The cross-disciplinary nature of infrastructures 17 2.2 Large scale multi-sector facilities 18 Chapter 3: Lifecycle 21 3.1 Concept 22 3.2 Current lifecycle landscape 23 3.3 Evolution of the landscape 26 3.4 Lifecycle and planning 26 Chapter 4: International collaboration and cooperation 28 4.1 International collaboration 29 4.2. Staffing 29 4.3 International user base 30 Chapter 5: Skills and staffing 32 5.1 Numbers 33 5.2 Roles 36 5.3 Staff diversity 36 Chapter 6: Operations 38 6.1 Set-up capital costs 39 6.2 Sources of funding 41 6.3 Primary funding source 42 Chapter 7: Measuring usage and capacity 43 7.1 Usage 44 7.2 Measuring capacity 45 7.3 Managing capacity 47 7.4 Barriers to performance 49 Chapter 8: Links to the economy 52 8.1 Working with businesses 53 Chapter 9: Biological sciences, health and food sector 56 9.1 Current landscape 57 9.2 Interdependency with e-infrastructure 63 9.3 Engagement with the wider economy 63 4 Chapter 10: Physical sciences and engineering sector 65 10.1 The current landscape 67 10.2 Characterising the sector 69 10.3 The importance of international collaboration 71 10.4 Impacts 71 Chapter 11: Social sciences, arts and humanities sector 73 11.1 Form
    [Show full text]
  • Read the Newcastle University Economic Impact Report
    ECONOMIC IMPACT REPORT Our economic impact Engagement Our and partnerships Students International Knowledge profile economy Business Research and engagement innovation Excellence with a Purpose CONTENTS Overview 1 Foreword 2 Our economic impact 5 Our students 6 Knowledge economy 8 Research and innovation 9 Business engagement 10 International profile 12 Engagement and partnerships 14 Case studies: 1: Rural sustainability 16 2: City futures 17 3: Employer engagement 18 4: Partnering with business 19 5: Showcasing creativity 20 The Economic Impact 1 of Newcastle University OVERVIEW Newcastle University was formally established in 1963, but can trace its roots to the School of Medicine and Surgery, which was founded in Newcastle upon Tyne in 1834. Today’s University is a thriving international community of 27,750 students and 5,780 staff, the majority of whom are based on our main city-centre campus and other sites around the city. In recent years, we have expanded our footprint to include two international campuses, in Malaysia and Singapore, which opened in 2011 and 2008 respectively, while our newest branch campus, Newcastle University London, opened in September 2015. The University is a member of the internationally renowned Russell Group, an association of 24 leading research-intensive universities in the UK, and of the N8 Research Partnership, which features the eight research-intensive universities in the North of England. We are ranked among the top 1% of world universities, according to the QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) World Rankings. In 2016, Newcastle became one of only 16 universities in the world, and one of two in the UK, to achieve Five Plus QS Stars in the first international assessment of its kind.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-21 Recruitment
    GW4 BioMed MRC Doctoral Training Partnership 2020-21 Recruitment The Student Application Process Frequently Asked Questions FAQs for Students Contents The GW4 BioMed MRC DTP ................................................................................................................. 3 Who We Are ....................................................................................................................................... 3 What We Offer ................................................................................................................................... 3 Eligibility ................................................................................................................................................. 4 Residency Requirements .................................................................................................................. 4 Academic Requirements .................................................................................................................. 4 English Language Requirements ..................................................................................................... 5 Funding .................................................................................................................................................. 5 The Application Process ....................................................................................................................... 5 Stage 1: Applying for an Offer of Funding ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 N8/Yorkshire Universities Joint Response to David
    N8/YORKSHIRE UNIVERSITIES JOINT RESPONSE TO DAVID SWEENEY The N8 Research Partnership and Yorkshire Universities (YU) together represent 17 higher education institutions (HEIs) in the north of England. Our members make major contributions towards the UK’s research and innovation base. They are also critical institutions in supporting local and regional development, and act as key anchor institutions underpinning place-making in many cities, towns and communities across the north. We welcome the questions posed by David Sweeney, Executive Chair of Research England, in his recent blog for WonkHE1. This joint response by N8 and YU represents a contribution to the important debate about the role of place in research and innovation policy, strategy and funding in the UK. Executive Summary: • Research capacity and funding is not sufficiently spatially distributed in the UK. This reinforces imbalances and inequalities in the UK economy, and is an opportunity cost for UK Productivity and R&D targets. • In order to address this, there needs to be a greater emphasis on place and developing regional R&I ecosystems, which engage partners in the public and private sectors, as well as local citizens; • Definitions of excellence should be reviewed reflecting value of collaborative research which is locally embedded and impactful. Conventional peer review methods, which are accustomed to traditional measures of excellence, may need to be reviewed for funding schemes for which other factors are also strategically important; • Programmes should not be one-size fits all, but informed by regional knowledge. The approach should be flexible and long-term; • To make transformational change, SIPF awards could usefully be significantly larger and longer in duration; • Building capacity and local knowledge could be supported by developing new place-based collaborative research models, disseminating knowledge and informing policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Review of the Scottish Funding Council's Research
    Independent Review of the Scottish Funding Council’s Research Pooling Initiative Chaired by Professor Louise Heathwaite CBE FRSE Contents page Preface Executive summary 1. Introduction 2. The review process 3. Brief background to the Research Pooling Initiative 4. The evidence base 5. Evidence analysis 6. Conclusions and recommendations 7. List of advisory panel members 8. Appendices 2 Preface by Professor Louise Heathwaite CBE FRSE I was delighted to be asked by Mike Cantlay OBE (Chair of the Scottish Funding Council, SFC) and Professor Lesley Yellowlees CBE (Chair of SFC’s Research and Knowledge Exchange Committee, RKEC) to lead this independent review of the Research Pooling Initiative (RPI). Scotland’s major investment in, and long-term commitment to growing critical mass and driving collaboration across its core science disciplines was prescient and has been copied widely elsewhere. Since 2005, SFC has invested over £155m in eleven research pools, matched by over £330m from Scottish Universities and co-funding of almost £10m from the Office for Science & Technology and the Chief Scientist’s Office. Given the continued evolution of the research landscape in Scotland and the UK, now is a good time to evaluate whether the concept of research pooling remains fit for purpose. My remit was to undertake a high-level and summative analysis to establish the impact of SFC's investment in the pooling initiative on the Scottish research environment to date and to provide recommendations on the development of this and SFC’s future investment in research. I am hugely grateful to every member of my Advisory Panel for their valuable guidance and critical insight throughout the review process and particularly for their fortitude and good humour during the oral evidence sessions when the days were very long indeed.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report for 2018-19
    Yorkshire Universities 2018-19 Annual Report and Accounts yorkshireuniversities.ac.uk YorkshireUnis Reference and administrative details for the year ended 31 July 2019 Registered office: 22 Clarendon Place, Leeds, LS2 9JY Registered company number: 03467035 Registered charity number: 1109200 Independent examiner: Mark Heaton FCCA DChA KM Chartered Accountants 1st Floor Block C The Wharf Manchester Road Burnley Lancashire BB11 1JG Bankers: Unity Trust Bank plc Nine Brindley Place Birmingham West Midlands B1 2HB Cambridge & Counties Bank Charnwood Court 5B New Walk Leicester LE1 6TE Manchester Building Society 125 Portland Street Manchester M1 4QD CONTENTS Chair’s foreword .................................................................................................................... 1 Statement of trustees’ responsibilities ................................................................................... 2 Governance, structure and risk management ........................................................................ 3 Mission ................................................................................................................................. 5 Objectives and achievements ............................................................................................... 5 Future plans ........................................................................................................................ 10 Financial review .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 10Th October 2014
    MARKET NEWS AND MEDIA REVIEW BULLETIN: 30TH SEPTEMBER – 10TH OCTOBER 2014 Compiled by Jamie Aston Contents Summary Section - UK - USA and Canada - Australia and New Zealand - Asia - International Full Articles - UK - USA and Canada - Australia and New Zealand - Asia - International Page 2 of 45 Summary Section UK Back to top UK universities slip down international rankings :: BBC :: 2nd October Three UK universities have lost their place in the top 200 of a global higher education league table. The universities of Reading, Dundee and Newcastle slipped out of the top 200 of the Times Higher Education (THE) World Rankings for 2014-15. Toolkit maps HE ‘cold spots', links to economic growth :: University World News :: 2nd October A new interactive toolkit developed by the Higher Education Funding Council for England, or HEFCE, has the potential to boost socio-economic development in the United Kingdom – and in future possibly allow previously higher education-deprived youngsters a chance to study. 'Harmful' UK student visa policy 'baffles' top academic :: BBC :: 7th October The UK's policy on student visas is baffling, the vice-chancellor of Oxford University has told an audience of academics. USA and Canada Back to top Pilot program launched for 15 business schools, including Wharton and Harvard :: Find MBA :: 3rd October The loans will be available for international students at 15 business schools, including the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business, Harvard Business School, and MIT Sloan School of Management, among others. (See a complete list of business schools below.) Page 3 of 45 New Study Shows International Students Increasingly Tap Wireless Devices To Make U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Enterprising Universities Using the Research Base to Add Value to Business
    Policy Report September 2010 Enterprising Universities Using the research base to add value to business 1100901_EnterprisingUniversities.indd00901_EnterprisingUniversities.indd A 009/09/20109/09/2010 115:025:02 The 1994 Group > The 1994 Group is established to promote excellence in university research and teaching. It represents 19 of the UK’s leading research-intensive, student focused universities. Around half of the top 20 universities in UK national league tables are members of the group. > Each member institution delivers an extremely high standard of education, demonstrating excellence in research, teaching and academic support, and provides learning in a research-rich community. > The 1994 Group counts amongst its members 12 of the top 20 universities in the Guardian University Guide 2011 league tables published on the 8th June 2010. 7 of the top 10 universities for student experience are 1994 Group Universities (2009 National Student Survey). In 17 major subject areas 1994 Group universities are the UK leaders achieving 1st place in their fi eld (THE RAE subject rankings 2008). 57% of the 1994 Group's research is rated 4* 'world- leading' or 3* 'internationally excellent' (RAE 2008, HEFCE). > The 1994 Group represents: University of Bath, Birkbeck University of London, Durham University, University of East Anglia, University of Essex, University of Exeter, Goldsmiths University of London, Institute of Education University of London, Royal Holloway University of London, Lancaster University, University of Leicester, Loughborough
    [Show full text]
  • Value for Money in Higher Education
    House of Commons Education Committee Value for money in higher education Seventh Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 24 October 2018 HC 343 Published on 5 November 2018 by authority of the House of Commons The Education Committee The Education Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Education and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Robert Halfon MP (Conservative, Harlow) (Chair) Lucy Allan MP (Conservative, Telford) Ben Bradley MP (Conservative, Mansfield) Marion Fellows MP (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw) James Frith MP (Labour, Bury North) Emma Hardy MP (Labour, Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle) Trudy Harrison MP (Conservative, Copeland) Ian Mearns MP (Labour, Gateshead) Lucy Powell MP (Labour (Co-op), Manchester Central) Thelma Walker MP (Labour, Colne Valley) Mr William Wragg MP (Conservative, Hazel Grove) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/education-committee and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Richard Ward (Clerk), Katya Cassidy (Second Clerk), Chloë Cockett (Committee Specialist), Anna Connell-Smith (Committee Specialist), Victoria Pope (Inquiry Manager), Natalie Flanagan (Senior Committee Assistant), Olivia Cormack (Committee Assistant), Hajera Begum (Committee Apprentice), Gary Calder (Senior Media Officer) and Oliver Florence (Media Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • Universities and Colleges and the Industrial Strategy: Exploring Data on Knowledge Exchange, Research and Skills
    Universities and Colleges and the Industrial Strategy: Exploring data on knowledge exchange, research and skills Industrial Strategy Council Research Paper Abigail Whiteley, Katy Haigh and Dan Wake September 2020 Industrial Strategy Council: Universities and Colleges and the Industrial Strategy About the Industrial Strategy Council The Industrial Strategy Council (‘the Council’) is an independent non-statutory advisory group established in November 2018. It is tasked with providing impartial and expert evaluation of the government’s progress in delivering the aims of the Industrial Strategy. Its membership is comprised of leading men and women from business, academia and civil society. Acknowledgements The Industrial Strategy Council would like to thank the Universities UK team and Project Advisory Group for their contribution to this paper. Project Advisory Group • Professor Peter Mathieson, Principal of the University of Edinburgh (Chair) • Mr Filip Balawejder, Economic Advisor, Industrial Strategy Council • Professor Karen Cox, Vice-Chancellor, University of Kent • Ms Alice Frost, Director of Knowledge Exchange, UK Research & Innovation • Dame Jayne-Anne Gadhia, Gadhia Group and member of the Industrial Strategy Council • Dr Cristina Garcia-Duffy, Head of Technology, Strategy and Integration, Aerospace Technology Institute • Ms Angela Joyce, Principal of Warwickshire College Group • Sir Paul Marshall, Marshall Wace and member of the Industrial Strategy Council • Professor Malcolm Press, Vice-Chancellor, Manchester Metropolitan University
    [Show full text]
  • The British Innovation Fund Investing in the Best of UK University Venturing
    The British Innovation Fund Investing in the Best of UK University Venturing For discussion purposes with Professional Investors only 2Q 2020 BRITISH INNOVATION FUND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Key Areas of Specialty: Agricultural Bio- Technologies technology The BIF has been backed by some of The BIF is managed in the leading local The British Innovation partnership with government pension Deep Tech Life Sciences Milltrust International LLP Fund (BIF) is an schemes in the and Milltrust Agricultural AIFMD-compliant United Kingdom patient capital venture Investments, and supported by an capital fund investing in cutting edge spin- Alternative Advisory team of Nano Tech investment specialists outs emanating from Protein and agricultural and leading UK university research. scientific experts. 2 INVESTMENT PREMISE “Exploration is the engine that drives innovation. Innovation drives economic growth.” - Edith Widder 3 INVESTMENT PREMISE A BRIEF HISTORY OF BRITISH INNOVATION Sir Isaac Newton, PRS 25 December 1642 – 20 March 1726 Sir Alexander Fleming, FRS FRSE FRCS English mathematician, physicist, astronomer, 6 August 1881 – 11 March 1955 theologian, and author widely recognised as one of the Scottish biologist, physician, micro-biologist, most influential scientists of all time and as a key figure and pharmacologist. Inventor of Penicillin. in the scientific revolution. Edward Jenner, FRS FRCPE FLS John Logie Baird, FRSE 17 May 1749 – 26 January 1823 13 August 1888 – 14 June 1946 English physician who was a contributor to the Scottish engineer and innovator. One of the inventors of development of the smallpox vaccine. the mechanical television. Michael Faraday, FRS 22 September 1791 – 25 August 1867 John Adrian Shepherd-Barron, OBE English scientist who contributed to the study 23 June 1925 – 15 May 2010 of electromagnetism and electrochemistry.
    [Show full text]
  • CFE-University-Entrepreneurs-Report-WEB
    PUTTING THE UNI IN UNICORN The role of universities in supporting high-growth graduate startups April 2017 1 ABOUT THE CENTRE Launched in 2013, the Centre for Entrepreneurs think tank promotes the role of entrepreneurs in creating economic growth and social well-being. It is home to national enterprise campaign, StartUp Britain. The Centre is an independent non-proft think tank founded and chaired by Sunday Times columnist and serial entrepreneur Luke Johnson, and housed in the Legatum Institute. It is supported by a prominent advisory board including serial entrepreneur and investor Brent Hoberman, angel investor Dale Murray, Supper Club founder Duncan Cheatle, Betfair founder Ed Wray, and fnnCap founder Sam Smith. 2 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 UNIVERSITIES AND GRADUATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP: PLAYING THEIR PART IN THE REVOLUTION 5 PART ONE: THE NEED FOR INCUBATION GRADUATES’ UNQUENCHED THIRST FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP - AND WHY UNIVERSITIES SHOULD PLAY A BIGGER ROLE 6 CURRENT SUPPORT FROM UNIVERSITIES 10 HOW SHOULD UNIVERSITIES SUPPORT GRADUATE ENTREPRENEURS? 13 PART TWO: WHAT WORKS IN GRADUATE INCUBATION? WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW 18 INTERVIEWS WITH UNIVERSITY INCUBATOR MANAGERS 20 INTERVIEWS WITH UNIVERSITY INCUBATEES 28 CASE STUDY: GRADUATE INCUBATION IN THE US 32 UNIVERSITY INCUBATORS – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? 33 PART THREE: THE FUTURE CHALLENGES 34 OPPORTUNITIES 37 RECOMMENDATIONS 40 CONCLUSION 43 REFERENCES 44 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 46 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE PROBLEM: lives to become entrepreneurs, and have KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ASPIRATION NOT ACTION the knowledge to develop innovative business ideas. Studies have found To improve the rate and sustainability Young people’s entrepreneurial potential them to be more inclined than non- of graduate entrepreneurship, more remains underdeveloped: Young people graduates towards entrepreneurship, universities should consider setting up aspire to be entrepreneurs more than any and – when they do start up – more likely graduate incubator programmes, building other age group, but are unlikely to act on to be running high-value companies.
    [Show full text]