Surrey restructures commercialisation arm after evidence shows the barriers to the conversion of UK research income into successful growing companies

Dr Jim Shaikh, Managing Director of Innovate Surrey Ltd, argues that the UK risks missing a significant share of the economic and social value that the research could unlock for the country. 

To address this challenge, Surrey has restructured its technology transfer operation – placing it within a commercially governed subsidiary and applying the systematic methods of a startup studio. This reshaping of Surrey's commercial activities is set out in a new paper, which Dr Shaikh presented at the Symposium for Venture Builders at Wolfson College, Cambridge. 

The transformation places Surrey's technology transfer function within Innovate Surrey Ltd, a subsidiary governed by a board that includes senior University stakeholders alongside non-executives with direct commercial experience. That separation allows the subsidiary to take on higher-risk opportunities and carry liabilities that would be difficult to manage within the University's core governance system. A traditional technology transfer office would often pass on such high-inflexionsrisk/high-reward projects. 

Rather than a reactive approach to identifying high-potential IP, Innovate Surrey Ltd runs an active outreach programme it calls "IP Mining" – identifying commercial potential across the University's research base. Opportunities are then screened through a stage-gated pipeline built around achieving value milestones or inflections based on both technology and commercial maturity. Those that clear the early filters receive mentoring, internal funding, industry connections and early investor engagement. The aim is to recruit and incentivise technology transfer professionals based on commercial outcomes, not IP management alone. Academic founders can access training, internal funding competitions and – in the most advanced cases – catalytic funding to run pilots and validate commercial potential. 

The approach reflects a broader shift in thinking about best practice in effective technology transfer. A survey of UK TTOs by Anson and Nanda (2026) found that the most commercially successful Technology Transfer Offices are beginning to resemble venture builders – they operate with a portfolio mindset, manage a systematic pipeline and take an active role in company development rather than simply protecting and managing intellectual property. The same study identified three barriers to that kind of reform – structural incentives, culture and staffing, and access to translational funding – and it is precisely these barriers that Surrey's changes are designed to address. high-reward