University research is critical. That’s like preaching to the choir with this audience, while some might be asking why did you waste your time typing those four obvious words?

In this case, it’s the George W. Bush Institute talking about that research and what separates the universities that do it extremely well. Yes, its report – The Innovation Impact of U.S. Universities – has rankings. But it also has commentary and policy conclusions that are informative and will be our focus here.

(Also appearing in the “as you already know” category, we embrace rankings here with measurement of our Indiana Vision 2025 plan. And in the 2020 Snapshot we have shared this summer, Indiana’s highest ranking was a No. 2 in the category of University Business Spinouts – a metric certainly tied to campus research efforts).

The Bush Institute notes the following, including an annual university research spend of approximately $75 billion (or 13% of total U.S. research and development):

Our study of why some universities are so much more productive than others in creating innovation impact points to several findings:
  • Higher research spending predicts lower productivity in generating innovation impact
  • Universities in larger metro areas tend to produce more innovation impact than those in smaller metro areas
  • Universities in metros with larger immigrant population shares tend to achieve more innovation impact, independent of metro area population
  • The size, professional background and policies of university technology transfer offices have surprisingly wide-ranging effects on innovation impact
  • The share of research spending funded by industry partners is negatively associated with innovation impact

Universities control their own fate in generating innovation impact to a significant degree through their allocation of resources to research and through policies and cultural factors related to innovation, commercialization and entrepreneurship. The universities that achieve the greatest innovation impact are the ones which choose to do so.

Our study offers clear takeaways for university leaders as well as policy makers, business leaders, philanthropists and communities, with the aim of improving the productivity of university research and promoting technological progress and growth in America’s economy.

Summary Policy Conclusions
For university leaders:
  1. Prioritize research 
  2. Compete hard to attract and retain star faculty researchers 
  3. Run an efficient, outcomes-focused technology transfer operation 
  4. Instill a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship throughout the university 
  5. Engage closely with the surrounding business and innovation community 
  6. Avoid overreliance on sponsored research funding from industry 
  7. Monitor, quantify and transparently disclose innovation impact results 
For policy makers, business leaders, philanthropists and communities:
  1. Increase public-sector support for university research
  2. Understand how institutions vary in their innovation impact productivity
  3. Compete hard for talent – including immigrant talent 
  4. Invest in integrated physical spaces that connect researchers with entrepreneurs, investors and other potential nonacademic partners 
  5. Support technology transfer operations and other enablers of innovation impact
Adam H. Berry is vice president of economic development and technology at the Indiana Chamber of Commerce. He joined the organization in 2019.