Investigating the effect of state support on innovation pathways by tracking the legacy performance of firms involved in academic co-operations

The performance of firms involved in projects from 2 UK research councils was investigated; firms in Innovate UK projects receive co-funding while firms in Arts & Humanities Research Council (AHRC) projects do not. Firms in 266 projects 2009–2012 were tracked for Standard Industrial Code (SIC), location and year-on-year financial performance 2012–22. The results show that firms (un- and co-funded) were mainly not local to universities. The growth performance of non-funded firms was steady in the majority of SIC codes, but some SIC codes performed very well, while for co-funded firms, many SICs performed under control but losses were made up for on average by exceptionally high performance in other SIC codes. Overall, non-funded firms achieved average growth of ∼29 % above control while co-funded firms only achieved an average growth of ∼18 % above control. Firms (both co- and un-funded) associated with 21 universities perform consistently well, while other firms (co- and un-funded) associated with 24 other universities perform consistently poorly. This difference in performance was better correlated to degree of business ambidexterity in the tech transfer function, rather than with university reputation.