Stuart Wilkinson

Stuart Wilkinson is Assistant Director, Innovation & Engagement at the University of Oxford (his university page, LinkedIn), and a Fellow of Reuben College. He works across the university, trying to create impact from the research that academics do. That ranges from helping a new technology to be launched as a start-up, through to getting results from humanities research into policy.

Our conversation covers:
-The tensions between curiosity-led research (which can yield utterly unexpected uses) and challenge-led research (which is aimed at a particular problem).
-The role of knowledge exchange in and from universities, as part of national and global innovation systems. (For more on the functions of innovation systems see Hekkert et al in their classic 2007 paper).
-How that role has evolved out of what used to be called 'tech transfer'.
-Tells the story of YASA, an electric motor technology that was first developed in Oxford and, after some 13 years, was bought by Mercedes. The story is partly about needing patient backing (from the university, and from government). Plus, the need to pivot as the landscape changes, in the case from a future where hydrogen cars looked possible, to a present where it is clear that electric vehicles are the way forward.
-Link to the UN High Level Climate Champion's Race to Zero initiative, and Nigel Topping's emphasis on the automotive sector.
-How the success of the vaccine (which had been in development in Oxford for a while before the COVID pandemic hit) has galvanised their work.

This is part of a series of interviews about innovation for sustainability conducted for the UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, as a contribution to a module in this Masters. You can find out more about these interviews, and the module, here.

Transcript

David Bent-Hazelwood: 0:07

This is one of several interviews on innovation, business and sustainability for the students studying for the MSc in responsible, sustainable resources even at UCL. My name is David bent, and I'm an honorary lecturer at the UCL Institute for Sustainable resources, and CO lead for the module on eco innovation and sustainable entrepreneurship. Most of the course gives people the latest academic theory and insight. And these 30 minute interviews are with practitioners to give some of the grips under the fingernails of innovating for sustainability today. I'm very glad to say we're joined by Dr. Stuart Wilkinson, who is the Assistant Director, innovation and engagement at the University of Oxford. Hello, Stuart. Hi, David. Alright, so what's your role on the organisation? What does assistant director innovation and engagement at the University of Oxford really mean?

Stuart Wilkinson: 0:56

Good question. I mean, the University of Oxford, as most people know, is a large teaching, but also research institution, one of the large, largest research universities in the UK. And we are why do we do research, we do research to have an impact, and to make a difference to the world through innovation engagement, which is the way that we describe that both through a whole variety of ways of having a kind of impact through new companies through licences, through changes in policy, through public and community engagement through engaging with business. And so I have a role kind of strategic role across the University working with the many people in the university whose role is to try and have that kind of impact of working with those different teams with those different specialisms working alongside academics, from across the disciplines, from humanities, through to medical sciences, from social sciences, through to physical sciences, and thinking about how the research they're doing the things that they care about in the lab, and in their research can can be translated into making a difference to people

David Bent-Hazelwood: 1:57

who and can you Well, the next question was, what role does that department have in the organisation you just described? All of that sounds great. We can skip that question. But it sounds like it's most universities which have a research function that research function is more or less discovery led, rather than necessarily mission led or challenge LED or particular issues. So you probably in your work cover a vast range of different issues. Is there a specific meaning given to sustainability? Is there a way in which is framed in your organisation?

Stuart Wilkinson: 2:33

Just to pick up on that discovery? aspect? I think you're right, broadly, it's curiosity driven and discovery. I think they, over the last few years, funding is changing to be more challenge LED. And I think that's one of the interesting changes in research is a big global challenge. And how do you align interests to try and address that challenge, and one of the things we've been grappling with is that sorts of partnerships of how you collaborate across a broader team of researchers in the university that you work in a more interdisciplinary manner. And there is that shift going on, particularly with sort of government funding and large initiatives and also appropriate funding so. So I think there was a culture shift. And I think as new academics come into the system, they very much have that sort of way of viewing the world. And similarly, the students and entrepreneurial students, they're thinking about big challenges that they want to address. So So traditionally, very discovery led, and that's very much where we're starting from, sort of led to that sort of challenge make funding. But you asked about sustainability, certainly, for us. So I think, I think, in such a large organisation, a word means different things to different people at different times. So word innovation means different things. So quite clearly, sustainability has a sort of environmental considerations to most people most most of the time. However, it also has a broader sort of issue around sustainable initiatives in terms of not just the research project that comes and goes, but sort of long lasting rather than just environmental. And so I think one of the key things to discern is, how broad that definition of sustainability is for anybody who's trying to progress their idea. Is it purely from an environmental perspective? Is it some financial consideration, or is it some sort of longevity? Looking at?

David Bent-Hazelwood: 4:28

And in terms of the priorities of the innovation and engagement function? Do you have like a sustainable priority? Is there are there like, a particular set of challenges that are most important to you and that you prioritise when you're trying to look across the university?

Stuart Wilkinson: 4:48

Sort of, mostly for us, it's responsive to what's going on, right in terms of the way that we work universities, secure funding from a variety of sources, and although sometimes we'll be we'll be engaged at the very first stages of hankering to shape and increasingly this challenge lead programmes, thinking about how to shoes to shape and make them sustainable from the outset, it's, it's true to say that as we picked up on that discovery sort of side thing, so that often we're engaged after the project has taken off and responding to those developments. So there's two ways of thinking so one strategically, how can we focus and build an expertise in certain areas around environmental sustainability, and we have some strategic funds that help plans. But often the academic staff are pursuing their own endeavours, acquiring funding, and then someone will come to us and go, Well, I think I've come up with something, how do I take it? How do I make sure that this, this has an impact outside of academia, outside of a paper that hopefully you've all read? How do I venture? Someone who knows? How do we build some stuff around that.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 5:59

And the impact could be an innovation or widget or company, but it could also be engagement, it could be a policy idea that is picked up and in an intangible kind of way. So there's a vast range of different innovations that you're talking about that?

Stuart Wilkinson: 6:14

Yeah. So before we started, you asked about my job title, innovation, engagement. And underpinning that is a term used in many universities called knowledge exchange. And if you know anything about knowledge exchange, research, England have recently spent a lot of time thinking about how you describe that and different perspectives of knowledge exchange, or types of knowledge exchange, I should probably explain what we mean by knowledge exchange, engaging with the beneficiaries research before, during and after. And so that can be through commercial reads through business collaborations, or it can be through spinouts, and licences. But it can also be through policy, or through public and community nations, or through regional development, in its broadest sense. So a whole variety of forms of helping that idea to have an impact in the outside world. And now as a university, we've we've done a lot of work around commercial engagement and spin outs and startups for many, many years. And increasing over the last five to 10 years, we've thought about those sort of policy, engagement type forms in much more detail. Yeah.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 7:24

And it's worth making connection to one of the things we teach in Module, which is that there are different levels of innovation. The one that people most often think about is product level, there is a widgets, there is a new thing. But we also describe levels of process, like how the thing is made organisation, what is making the widget, then your ecosystem, your industrial setting, and your finally the political economy. So all the things you just talked about, there are different kinds of knowledge exchange with those different kinds of levels. And that's just the connection to make. Wonderful. So I now wanted to go into talk about some stories. So can you tell us one or more stories of a good example of your work for innovation for sustainability?

Stuart Wilkinson: 8:10

So I think the story that immediately springs to mind is a relatively old one. I think it fits into what you've just said, I think how thinking in universities about innovation has changed over the years kind of comes out of this story as well. So when I, when I started my career in what's now called knowledge exchange, I started off in an area called tech transfer. So working with academics, you'd identified an idea that was protectable. So finding some intellectual property and patterns, and then seeking to either licence it to an existing company, or to set up in a company and spit it out as a spin out company based on research. In this new job, after a few weeks, I was handed this project saying we're not quite sure what to do with this. But this student and his supervisor have come up with an electric motor. So they get on with that and work anyway falls very much with support colleagues, but very much kind of like over to you find your way forward. And it was quite, it was quite an interesting project to start off with in that an academic has formed the collaboration with Morgan cars. So very bespoke small hand made car manufacturer in the UK, a very unusual car manufacturer, very traditional car manufacturer, but that traditional car manufacturer decided to make a hydrogen sports car right back this was back in 2005 or something. So really future thinking for a very small traditional business. And I think the sooner I can The vacancy sensors will always be growing, this will be a relatively easy project. And as he got into the project, he realised that that he was going to have to go back to the drawing board to completely wipe piece of paper and think about his component. This electric motor in this project is funded by government as well to fund this collaboration. And so the sort of senior academic post on a student, and they started to think about what kind of electric motor was required in this hydrogen sports car. And off, they went on that research. And I joined the story about three or four years later, two or three years later, where they were they filled out the blank canvas, and they'd come up with a with a model. And because it was driven by this company, they got quite a lot of attention. They've gone to various car shows, and got quite a lot of attention. And we're starting to get inquiries that people wanting to buy this motor, I should say, at the same time. This This was in life was Jeremy Clarkson, the various heydays, but Jeremy bucks at the time was saying how electric cars were never going to happen. complete waste of time, and petrol forever and effectively. So it was kind of a man, that wasn't just that opinion that was broadly held that how could you possibly change that sector, it was obviously never going to change, the attitudes are very, very different than stage. So we can quite unfounded, although there was some interest in the motor from below us in the sector that could see those changes coming from those around the sector, or from investors. They weren't very interested at all, to be honest. And we found it really hard to get any sort of traction.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 11:41

And just one question of clarification, as you're telling the story, was the Moto Sun, which would be part of a hydrogen car, was it a standalone motor with electric motors that were for for a fully electric car that wouldn't rely on hydrogen?

Stuart Wilkinson: 11:55

So it was a component for a hydrogen car, but it can be any type of any In fact, it's electric motor that could go in any height, all sorts of situations. So it was a true platform. Right?

David Bent-Hazelwood: 12:07

And then, just to a piece of jargon for us to touch on high talk here means

Stuart Wilkinson: 12:14

eight turns very fast. Yes.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 12:16

It's not fast talking turns very fast.

Stuart Wilkinson: 12:20

Apply power very quickly. So naturally lends itself to sort of sports car type applications and designs. Off the back of that, how do relatively heavy thing going relatively quick, relatively fast. Yeah. So yeah, so So a mechanical widget in a sector that that was sort of emerging, but never quite believed in? It's very much a product and a really good question. It was a product in a system, rather than a system. Anyway, so.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 12:53

And there's a great deal of scepticism from not mean, those in the know in the automobile sector going we're probably gonna have to go electric at some point. But outside of it, there was a lot of scepticism and that's what I interrupted you, and you're about to tell us the story.

Stuart Wilkinson: 13:07

Yeah. And abroad, investors could see the technological advantage, but couldn't really believe the sector was going to change. I think the investor we got to the end was a high net worth individual, he made his money from Southern cars. So I had that sort of understanding that the sector would change eventually, I had that foresight. And I guess I tell that because innovation is subject to some curious horses about how how it takes off and who needs to buy into the idea, and how much they're dependent on that knowledge of the idea how much they're dependent on a broader what everybody thinks it's happening in the sector. So yeah, so So we managed to get some investment, we set up that company and and off it went, we focused in on electric. Automotive starts off with automotive sports cars, were very interested in power, the fastest and sports car and various kind of iterations, lots of great things on the way absolutely 2011 2012 13 as it sort of made inroads. And then got more support from government. I mean, just an interesting example of different universities working together. So we in Oxford very much came up with this new idea for a motor in terms of the production isolation of that. colleagues at Oxford Brookes University were fundamental in terms of thinking about how do you manufacture and producers not just this is a great idea, but actually, how do you make it so this manufacturer so that was actually going to fit financially into the model that's being used, and working very much due to scaling up reducing costs to get it into mainstream cars automated, and to sort of cut a long story short, that company started to grow and started to make these motors and started to get some traction. But last summer was acquired by Mercedes as their key electric motor to sort of fuel and power so don't feel the power all of their electric cars for on their targeted days, so from a very small staff to a massive impact and how a sector has changed, and that innovation was ahead of the sector, in some respects are ahead of the investment, but now very much as a key part in terms of transforming that sector into a far less traditional modelling Turner new model.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 15:22

And just to unpack some different parts of that story. So was it 2009, that you said that you first got

Stuart Wilkinson: 15:29

incorporated the company? Yeah, we got the investments, the company.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 15:32

So that's was that then 13 years from when incorporated to actually being sold to Mercedes. So it's a long period of time is one thing. The second is to, again, going back to those levels of innovation. You can have a good product innovation, but if you don't have a way of making it at scale, then it's going to be limited. So that process innovation from Oxford Brookes is also as you say, very important.

Stuart Wilkinson: 15:54

And that journey, that timeline is both that production, realisation of how do you make more and more of them easier, easier, for usually less profit margin as cost? We just get to that point. But yeah, I think that timeline can be quite sobering to certain people how long it will take, if you're not in the digital sphere, things can happen much quicker. If you're in the medical sphere, then obviously, you're talking about much longer timelines in terms of trials usually. But for traditional sorts of widgets, product type thing, that it can be quite a long timeline for that initial idea starting to actually get that sort of level of uptake.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 16:30

And one of our previous interviewees on this podcast was Beverly gala Jones, who has set up the clean Growth Fund, specifically to address that sort of deep tech need for patient capital. And building the first sort of diamond commercial demonstrator, the two to 5 million pound level, which is that was the hole that she spotted again about 10 years ago. And it took her that long to get the money together. But it sort of speaks to that, that the way in which that ecosystem works.

Stuart Wilkinson: 17:01

so badly, I actually had conversations with about that, yeah, back in the day. Again, it's an understanding around the role that universities can play in, in incubating and developing ideas, the system has changed so that he's obviously doing great things in that space. But University, generally attracting more patient capital, people are all aware of the opportunities, more or less invest, but also local activists in the longer term and a lot more realistic about what it takes.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 17:30

And I think the other thing there is that universities are long lasting institutions typically. And so the the, the person doing the innovation here, the the professor and the student, they're relatively time poor, cash poor. I mean, all entrepreneurs are running around trying to find the next raise, try and find the next breakthrough. If they have if they can be, in some way hosted or supported by a longer lasting institution, than a institution can carry some of the burden of all the things that need to happen, of getting the relationships together, finding the investors, finding the suppliers, finding those who can research the product ideation, all of that can be not just relied on the two people who are in that startup to start at the beginning,

Stuart Wilkinson: 18:13

it increases the continuity. And it also increases the sort of long term view that you can take on things in terms of developing ideas, projects.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 18:21

And I think the other thing I wanted to draw out from that story is the it started off with hydrogen automobiles, but it's not ended up there isn't fully electric. And I think it's

Stuart Wilkinson: 18:33

also they say, electric planes, electric motors, their next mission is to try and power an electric flight.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 18:43

And I think that shows the spillover effect. And also the risk slightly of being of the difference between a curiosity led research, a challenge, research, and then a very technical specification lead research. If you do that latter, then you risk missing out on opportunities, which you won't get otherwise, I think it's fair to say for will and myself who totally the module, we have a scepticism about hydrogen, automobiles and even hydrogen lorries. But 10 years ago, it was completely justifiable to think that there was a possible future they moved on. And now it's a bit different. And we admire the companies that have tried along the way, but not thinking that it's quite the future. Now.

Stuart Wilkinson: 19:31

I think the idea I wasn't I wasn't around with that project was sort of came up with in 2006 2007. But as you say, the viability of certain things have shifted what was great about that technology, was it slightly agnostic to to hydrogen or anything else? And also is a disruptive technology. Part of the challenge is, which do you tackle first, so we weren't aware that could be many applications for that technology? So how you actually make some progress somewhere else, rather than than me Make no progress anywhere. So the initial traction I remember once upon talking about automated but the traction was with automotive as a that they were always aware of those other markets, they could service those other markets, they could address both so very focused on one and then as insane looking at electric flights as the next.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 20:20

I think some people in the innovation world call that the bridgehead market, the first one that you can, you can really get into, I think the final part of the story I wanted to draw out was the role of policy in this. So across those 10 years, I mean, I also was very sceptical 10 years ago about how much alternative could change. But if particularly the Paris Agreement, and particularly with we mean business, Nigel topping went from winning business to being a high level champion, Climate Champion with the the UN negotiations, his background was automotive, and it was a big focus for him to get that into that un cycle, and try to drive what they call an ambition loop. Where bigger ambition from government enables bigger ambition from business and setting a deadline of the last internal combustion engine car to be sold in Europe. That took that prompted a lot. I mean, it took a lot of negotiation and policy to make it happen. But I think that prompted a lot from the automobiles about industry about, okay, we've got to do this innovation now.

Stuart Wilkinson: 21:24

I think, again, it's a long time ago, it's 2009, compared to now, and what I've seen is the scope and ambition of some of those ideas has grown dramatically. So that was a product that could be applied to a system. We had a company a few years ago, an autonomous vehicle company. So how do you drive? How do you have driverless cars? And what was really interesting was that innovator there, that academic wasn't just thinking about the complexity of the code and image recognition, but realised very early on that he needs to deal with policy you needed to engage with or how do you get a licence for a driverless car, needed to engage with insurance companies in terms of what how these things can be insured, and very much took a broader view of what does it take to progress, this innovation, not just a product, work with the customer, and work outfits, but think about how that was going to disrupt that industry and what conversations he needs to start on. And I think as he rolled forward, and you look at some of the other innovations, whether it be a vaccine or anything else, the ambition of those innovations is much bigger and requires much more complexity in terms of working through what the implications are. And I think that's really, truly for low carbon innovations more generally. But it's not just about product. It's not just about disrupting a sector, it's also about culture shifts and behaviour shift, which means that it's far more complicated and requires far more interdisciplinary input into is in order to be to yield that success that you want to particularly in a timely manner, particularly so it doesn't take 2030 years to get there. So baking that in at the start bringing, building as interdisciplinary teams and thinking about those considerations is absolutely key, and incredibly challenging.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 23:07

And it speaks to one of the things we talked about in the course, which is about the need for industrial revolutions on a deadline. And therefore, whatever we come up with isn't likely to fit very well with the existing system, because he's we've seen system is pointing in the wrong direction. So that's why you need to think about that, taking a whole system approach. That's fantastic. I want to move on a little bit. And just ask a few more questions. One is, are there any key methods or practices you use when it comes to innovation for sustainability?

Stuart Wilkinson: 23:43

Not specifically, I think this whole space is very agile, and you know, thinking in an agile manner, thinking collaborative collaboratively. I think, historically, if people have been to process lead, it's led to the right outcome. So very much taking an innovation at face value, trying to work out what the implications are, and then trying to wait that the way forward, but more like a jigsaw puzzle and process lead. And I think certain universities have struggled where they've got to fit something into the right size box. Rather than realise that a lot of these innovations are technologically challenging people is a really key factor in all of those things. Certainly early stage, the inputs of a variety of different people is really key. So so take people, that's a personal perspective of how do you build the team? How do you make sure that there's sufficient input and respect all of those different inputs is really, really key. So it's slightly more organic at that stage. But I think when we get when you when you get a proposition that you worked at, then it becomes a little bit more systematic.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 24:51

And just to check what we mean by process lead there is that there are like 17 step process and this thing is it's step six. I will can't go into step seven unless it completes these following like too much kickboxing too much checkbox.

Stuart Wilkinson: 25:06

Exactly too much this is the steps that you have to go through together, as opposed to reagents that you've got, and how do you mix those ingredients to come up with the right recipe?

David Bent-Hazelwood: 25:18

Or perhaps what's missing? What's the missing ingredient? Have we we bring that person in, maybe outside?

Stuart Wilkinson: 25:24

Having said that, I think checklists are helpful to have in the back of your mind to make sure you're not missing anything. They're not sitting there by those and to be informed by those or led by those.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 25:34

Cool, what are the biggest challenges you face? And how do you overcome them?

Stuart Wilkinson: 25:41

I mean, I think I think I think it's very much if you think about specific innovation, and it's very much down to what are the missing ingredients? And how do you get them, I think if we set it back to a more system view, one of the biggest challenge, I think, I'll get back to that ambition point, if we're trying to develop innovations, which are complex that require change of behaviour, which require interdisciplinary engagement, then creating that challenge load culture, and creating a mutual understanding and language, I think, is really important. So I guess, I can always go back to interdisciplinary working and language and having a common language and spending the time understanding different points of view and approaches and how they can strengthen each other. So I have the joy of being a Fellow of an Oxford College, which is challenge LED. And I also work in my day job with with people from across the university, and appreciating the strength of the social sciences approach. And the strength of the physical sciences approach. And the strength of a medical scientists approach actually reinforces each other. It can seem at times like each other, if they haven't quite appreciated, or why are they? Why are they spending so long defining that term? Or why don't they just want to get on and build a prototype? Working out how you can get those to sort of feed into each other? is the key.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 27:03

Cool. Actually, there's one last thing about your story. I don't think you mentioned the name of the company.

Stuart Wilkinson: 27:09

Yes, sir motors.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 27:12

Now part of Mercedes. Just realise people might have a little curiosity is what it was called, but there, but it's great to also hear the biggest challenge. I mean, that's especially being situated in a university where you're trying to encourage cross disciplinary working. It's the ways in which the disciplines sort of dentistry speak to each other and helping them to do that, is the challenge there,

Stuart Wilkinson: 27:34

or speak different languages? And how do you get that comes out to you so that they can see the benefits of each approach?

David Bent-Hazelwood: 27:39

If there was one thing policymakers could do, which would make your work significantly easier? What would that mean, one

Stuart Wilkinson: 27:45

thing policy makers could do? I think it's probably true for all policymakers, but you've got to connect it, you've got to understand what's happening on the ground in order to make policy that has a positive impact, rather than just a high level view of unintended consequences. So think, engaging with all parts of the system that you're trying to impact and making sure that you make a well, well defined, well argued, well thought through policy, rather than creating headaches that you didn't foresee. Okay, I won't

David Bent-Hazelwood: 28:20

ask you to unpack why that has come up for you. Perhaps you can't say. And then just the last very last question is about the future. So what are the priorities for innovation and engagement at Oxford University, on innovation going forward?

Stuart Wilkinson: 28:36

So I think we're at an interesting time, I think the role of innovation in university research has grown and developed and become more mainstream. We at Oxford, are acutely aware, you know, that you can do excellent research and have an impact. I think the vaccine and the story rather vaccine has is has made a massive impact into how we think about some of these acts, activity stocks, and the massive confidence about how teaching, research and innovation can work together, and has encouraged us to be more ambitious around some of the global challenges that we can address, obviously, about life sciences, but also around the climates and mental health and other issues like that. So how do we galvanise our expertise to make real inroads into some of those key issues that we'll be facing over the next 510 2030 and beyond two years.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 29:35

And that's, if I remember rightly, that's one climate is one of the challenge areas of the college where you're a fellow. So

Stuart Wilkinson: 29:43

the college our fellows and study life, our machine learning, but also environmental sustainability is the kind of key issue that we will bring together, academics from across the university, from colleagues industry and policy to make real inroads into into identifying and tackling those challenges. Just

David Bent-Hazelwood: 30:00

wonderful. Well, thank you very much, Stuart. We have reached the end of our questions. We've heard a really great story there, which illustrates so much of what's happening in innovation for sustainability today and the grit under your fingernails and making that happen at the University of Oxford. Really appreciate your time and thank you very much