This article is a part of Poland Unpacked. Weekly intelligence for decision-makers
How can the transfer of knowledge and research results into the economy be improved? After exactly one year of work, a team appointed by the Minister of Science has presented its recommendations. While many of the proposals are well founded, there remains uncertainty over whether they can actually be implemented, as they go beyond the remit of a single ministry.
For months, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education has signaled its intention to put greater pressure on universities to step up efforts to translate research and scientific output into economic activity and social services. That ambition has finally taken more concrete shape. On May 12, a special team presented its recommendations on how to strengthen the transfer of research results into areas that contribute to economic development.
The task of the 17-member group of experts was to develop recommendations to unlock pathways for the commercialization of academic work. They were also expected to identify directions for potential deregulation and to propose solutions for institutions that support and finance technology development. It took a year to develop the ideas.
The big clean-up
In short, the recommendations set out what needs to change so that inventions developed at universities do not end up in drawers but in companies. There is nothing particularly groundbreaking on the list; the proposals have been repeatedly raised in various forms and at different times, and consulted with stakeholders. The set largely reflects market needs.
“The report shows not only what should be done, but also how exactly this knowledge transfer should be carried out in practice. The time for discussion has already run out,” says Natalia Osica, chair of the expert team behind the recommendations, founder of Pro Science, and an expert in communication in the field of knowledge transfer.
In an interview with XYZ, she assures that the experts placed strong emphasis on defining concrete implementation pathways for the ministry.
“We wanted to prepare a document that would work like an instruction manual. We know that for years people have been talking about what is needed, but not about how to implement it. Creativity only makes sense when it goes hand in hand with practice. Our goal was to advise the ministry on solutions that are feasible to implement in the near term. Throughout the year we spoke with public offices, agencies, and universities, continuously verifying the chosen pathways,” explains Natalia Osica.
Jakub Jasiczak, head of the Special Purpose Vehicles Association, offers a positive assessment of the proposals prepared by the ministerial experts.
“The nine recommendations developed by the task force, divided into three more detailed pillars describing the proposed actions, address real barriers at the science–business interface. A solid piece of work has been prepared,” says Jakub Jasiczak, an expert in cooperation with universities.
He stresses that the ministry should as soon as possible clarify what it intends to implement and by when.
“Now it is time for real action. I am waiting for clarity on who will be responsible for each area. Without this, the scientific community’s confidence in the need for change will be seriously undermined,” says Jakub Jasiczak.
Nine rules to rule them all
The nine operational recommendations are intended strictly for the Ministry of Science.
“We specify precisely what needs to be done within the remit and capabilities of this ministry. The ministry will decide whether to involve the National Centre for Research and Development (NCBR) or perhaps request support from the patent office. We assume it is the decision-making hub and leader. In addition, we propose three cross-ministerial initiatives that are necessary for the transfer of research results to function properly in the market. Here we recommend that the Minister of Science reach out to other ministries to secure their involvement,” says Natalia Osica.
The proposed mechanisms are intended, among other things, to streamline the system of financing university and research institution initiatives (grant programmes) and to reward actual implementation rather than patenting alone.
A key element is reducing the costs of commercialization at the launch stage. An institution selling intellectual property (IP) rights would only share in profits once a solution is actually implemented on the market. It is also considered desirable to introduce support for international patent protection, with the aim of increasing the attractiveness of Polish inventions for foreign investors.
There is also a proposal to create special funds for spin-offs, i.e. companies built on scientific ideas. A dedicated register of such companies would also be established. Knowledge transfer would be measured and included as a factor in the positive evaluation of universities.
Building change on incentives for researchers
The proposed ideas are designed around motivational incentives for researchers. From the outset, the authors make it clear that all recommendations were developed with active scientists in mind – those who, on the one hand, have a scientific vision, and on the other, are already ready to move towards practical applications.
“Above all, knowledge transfer must be quickly unlocked for them. As for the broader ecosystem’s capacity, these processes will gradually develop in the background. We have also included recommendations on how to develop entrepreneurial skills among students, doctoral candidates, and academic staff,” says Natalia Osica.
One recommendation that could become a strong driver of action among researchers is the idea of an entrepreneurial leave scheme. It would allow academics to develop a company for up to three years without having to give up their academic career. An important, though challenging, element is the integration of funding institutions (NCN, NCBR, NAWA, FNP, etc.). The aim is to ensure that projects financed at one level can continue at the next. Today, they often get stuck in a “black hole” of missing follow-up programs.
Experts argue that it is worth investing in fostering entrepreneurship in the next generation – students and doctoral candidates. A useful reference point could be the “Universities of the Future” program (which we covered in XYZ). In its basic version, it is available to first- and second-year students. In an expanded version, it could also encourage doctoral candidates and students to implement their own projects.
Commercialization: far below expectations
Today, the evaluation system in Poland still measures researchers primarily by publications. As long as the emphasis in assessment is not shifted from academic papers to practical application, knowledge transfer will remain an often unwanted “after-hours activity” for scientists. Changes to the evaluation model are already considered certain, and it is only a matter of time before the Ministry of Science announces the details. University rectors will have to adjust to a new mindset.
Data presented yesterday by the advisory team most clearly illustrate this lack of engagement in the science system among decision-makers. While most research and development entities reported some revenue from cooperation with the socio-economic environment in 2019–2024, in the vast majority of cases (80–90%, depending on the type of institution) this concerned only payments for commissioned research.
By contrast, the median revenue from commercialization of in-house research over five years is strikingly modest. For research institutes, it amounts to approximately PLN 307,000 (around EUR 71,000). For universities, it is even lower – just PLN 68,500 (around EUR 16,000). It is also worth noting that more than half of the institutes of the Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN) generated no revenue from commercialization at all during this period.
How not to waste a good plan
At a Tuesday meeting, the Minister of Science acknowledged that many of the recommendations align with the ministry’s intentions. However, the authors of the 130-page report also point to the need for changes in areas beyond the Ministry of Science’s remit. This initiative, intended to become a genuine game changer in the use of modern knowledge for development processes, therefore depends heavily on the willingness of multiple decision-makers to act.
A good example of a proposal dependent on another ministry is the suggestion that state-owned enterprises (SOEs) should, to some extent, be required to engage in pilot projects and the implementation of prototypes of innovations developed at public universities.
When asked about this recommendation, Natalia Osica notes that such a provision for SOEs has indeed been included. However, if these companies are to be formally obliged to cooperate in this way, only the Minister of State Assets can introduce such a requirement. The question remains whether he will choose to do so.
Without the involvement of multiple stakeholders – funded from different sources and operating under different acts and regulations – a well-designed plan may end up, like many academic initiatives, in a drawer.
If we solve this, all that will be missing is good research
Experts in transferring academic output to the market have repeatedly stressed that commercialization is not blocked solely by researchers’ reluctance to engage in business activity. A major bottleneck is also the low supply of research suitable for commercialization. Many studies are, from the outset, considered by tech transfer units to be of little practical use. A blunt conclusion.
“Regarding the recommendations, I feel a certain gap in the area of generating research output and steering the direction of Polish science. But I understand the arguments of the team leader that they had to focus on transfer mechanisms and on recommendations that can realistically be implemented within a year,” says Jakub Jasiczak.
Indeed, many of the recommendations include a note that they could be implemented within six to nine months.
“We are aware that the minister cannot interfere with university autonomy, but we would all like rectors, researchers, and technology transfer staff to change their approach to commercialization. We have therefore gathered ideas for their actions into a shared map of responsibility for knowledge transfer. We propose practices that all parties involved in transfer can adopt in order to, bottom-up and in parallel with regulatory changes, raise the system to a higher level. We cannot force anyone, but we want to inspire action. For example, we propose creating incentive systems for staff involved in technology transfer,” says the leader of the expert team.
All hands on deck
A new evaluation period began this year. The commercialization of researchers’ work is expected to play a significantly greater role in assessing higher education institutions. If the recommendations on knowledge transfer are implemented by the end of 2027, universities will have three years to demonstrate increased revenue from the implementation of their innovations.
“Recognition of implementation activity in the new evaluation system has essentially already been achieved. Simplifying IP valuation and introducing sabbaticals for researchers who set up spin-offs appear to be nearly ready for implementation. The more difficult tasks are expected to be completed by the end of 2027,” says Jakub Jasiczak.
He adds that this is also a signal for the tech transfer community itself. “The advisory team has done its job; now it is our turn to build on it,” says Jakub Jasiczak.
Expert's perspective
Between silos lies the greatest untapped advantage
In Poland, we often talk about technologies, but not enough about system translators. Sophisticated talent scouts should today look not only for brilliant specialists in narrow fields, but also for those who can sensibly stitch together the entire ecosystem. Because it may be precisely there, between silos, that the greatest untapped advantage lies.
Key Takeaways
- Current state: marginal commercialization of research results in Poland. Commercialization of scientific research in Poland remains marginal. The median revenue from commercialization in 2019–2024 amounted to just PLN 68,000 (approx. EUR 16,000) at universities and PLN 307,000 (approx. EUR 71,000) at research institutes. More than 80–90% of revenues from science–business cooperation come from commissioned research services, rather than from the implementation of innovations. Knowledge transfer is still treated as a necessary “add-on,” rather than a priority.
- Operational recommendations for the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW) to unblock knowledge transfer. The proposals include simplifying and reducing the costs of IP commercialization, rewarding actual implementation (rather than patents alone) in research evaluation, standardizing contract templates, expanding academic entrepreneurship programs, and introducing entrepreneurial leave (of up to three years) for researchers founding spin-off companies, as well as stronger support for international patent protection.
- Cross-ministerial initiatives. These include ensuring continuity of funding across the full innovation pathway – from research to implementation – through better coordination between grant-awarding institutions; establishing a hub focused on applied research; and creating an incubation and investment fund for spin-offs. A key cultural shift is also emphasized: implementation should become a value in itself, not a career penalty within academia.