When It Comes To Engineering Schools, A Hybrid Approach To Corporate Engagement Is Effective
Excerpted from the September 2024 issue of TechEngage. UIDP members can view the entire issue here.
Engineering schools at universities across the country are keystones of corporate engagement. They are leaders in R&D and demo new technology all the time. As they are premised in large part on proving how and why things work, engineering schools provide something private industry covets — easy paths to commercialization. And when it comes to talent, engineering schools are gold mines, with companies competing, and fiercely so, to bring the best of the young graduates into their organizations.
Since engineering schools have such a built-in advantage and profile when it comes to industry engagement, it is useful to ask just how that engagement should be managed. Should engineering schools have their own, independent corporate engagement offices, or should those offices be tied into the larger, central office for U-I partnerships?
There are certainly arguments for both models. A centralized office with a mandate for industry business development and agreements can bring consensus and focus to partnerships. A central office might have a better grasp of a university’s campus-wide funding pipeline, the readiness of tech across multiple colleges, and might have easier access to the C-suite of important companies. When it comes to interdisciplinary partnerships, in which engineering schools are usually involved, a central office might be better positioned to build alliances across campus.
On the other hand, decentralized offices embedded in the engineering department have the autonomy and freedom to do deals of their own. With their proximity to leadership, faculty, and students, they know first-hand what the dean wants, what the PIs are capable of, and what the department’s priorities are. When it comes time to set up an institute or ink a major agreement for sponsored research, embedded offices can move fast.
But increasingly, the distinction between central and decentral is being blurred, and oftentimes intentionally. As agreements become increasingly complex, embedded offices could increasingly be asked to broker those deals on their own — but request the services of the central office if certain expertise is needed. And as each university is different, so too are the preferences they might have. What works for one school might not work for another.