Select Committee on Science and Technology Minutes of Evidence


Memorandum submitted by Rolls-Royce plc

1.  SUMMARY

  Rolls-Royce views the efficient exploitation of advanced technology into its products as a key to business success. The company has set up processes to ensure that product requirements flow down to technology acquirers and it works closely with those acquirers to ensure technology transfer is complete and rapid. Government supports this activity directly and indirectly, but its agencies do so most effectively when their objectives are closely aligned to those of industry. Those objectives must, however, recognise long as well as short term benefits.

2.  INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

  The modern aero-engine is one of the most technologically advanced and complex machines in production in the world. Rolls-Royce is Europe's principal manufacturer of such machines, and the only company outside the US capable of producing engines for large civil aircraft. To maintain this position, large investments in R & D are essential. The 1997 DTI R & D Scoreboard shows Rolls-Royce as having the largest expenditure in R & D of any UK engineering company, and the 20th largest in the world.

3.  TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION AS PART OF NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

  3.1  Industry acquires technology in order to allow new competitive products to be developed. Each technology advance requires investment by industry to take it to market even in the rare cases where research is funded entirely by government. This must therefore largely be a market led process. However the difference between the time taken to bring technology to a marketable product and the time horizon of reliable market forecasts makes this a speculative process, in which industry constantly tries to minimise risk. This is particularly true of aero-engines and aeronautics in general, where technologies must be proven to be safe and reliable, product design and qualification times are comparatively long and the civil market (and, increasingly, the military market) has to respond to rapidly changing world and local economic conditions.

  3.2  Every industry ignores emerging technology at its peril and it is often difficult to foresee the long term implications of such technologies. These therefore offer even higher risks, although fortunately costs at this stage of development are usually smaller.

  3.3  The Company utilises processes which allow market needs to be expressed in terms of required products with their technical and business attributes. These in turn are translated into science and technology needs which are allocated to appropriate research facilities and universities throughout the UK.

  3.4  Selected universities are encouraged to establish a long term relationship with Rolls-Royce, through the Company's UTC arrangements. These give the Universities five year commitments which enable them to establish strong links which stimulate new ideas for relevant research and also make technology transfer almost instinctive. Academics and industrialists regard themselves as partners in furthering the Company's technology base in support of its product strategies.

4.  ASPECTS OF CURRENT ARRANGEMENTS OF GOVERNMENT FUNDED RESEARCH

  4.1  Rolls-Royce products benefit from government funded research carried out in various locations: universities, government research establishments (primarily DERA) and within the Company. Funding for these activities from HMG is channelled through EPSRC (Universities only), MoD PE, DTI CARAD and the EU Framework programmes, in addition to Rolls-Royce's own funds. Very limited use is made of independent research and technology organisations because of their restricted range of skills and relatively high costs.

  4.2  Each of these funding sources has its own objectives and only a proportion, often 50 per cent, of the cost of a project is supported. Where the objectives of the funding source are aligned with those of the company, the projects are usually successful and of benefit to the company and the UK economy. When the objectives are not aligned, success can still be achieved but it is always more difficult and less efficient for all participants. Thus DTI, whose primary objectives are related to the prosperity of industry, have been successful, through the CARAD programme, in making significant contributions to technology generation, transfer and collaboration despite very limited funds. Establishing and maintaining alignment between the MoD technology objectives and the military business is more difficult because of the Company's need to develop products which will generate revenue in the relatively short (five year) timescales, whilst MoD is planning strategically for 10-15 years in the future. When the business climate changes, the Company will adapt its strategy but the MoD has no corresponding need to change. Consequently the Company may become less committed to some elements of the programme and will restrict the private funds it is willing to devote to them. This problem is compounded by the MoD's drive to increase the ratio of private sector funding in their programmes with industry.

  4.3  In government laboratories, the situation is similar. Alignment of their objectives with those of industry is the key to successful technology transfer. This requires a mature view from industry on the nature of innovation especially in the avoidance of short-termism and the willingness to take risks, as discussed in section three above. Its objectives will then be expressed in a form recognisable and useful to research establishments.

  4.4  Rolls-Royce is involved in a number of schemes designed to promote collaboration in research in the UK. Many of these are funded by the company itself, particularly in universities. Government schemes, such as the LINK scheme, provide useful supplements to this activity particularly in "pump priming" of new ventures where both parties need encouragement to institute new ventures. Some schemes, such as IMI, have too little funding available.

  4.5  Intellectual property has no value to the country unless it can be brought to the market in saleable products. The retention of such property by entities (such as DERA) which cannot exploit them in this way is a waste of national assets, particularly if obtained through HMG funding. Release to foreign companies, even if a licence fee is obtained, is not in the national interest unless a proportion of the revenue from the exploitation is also forthcoming. It is therefore vital that the bodies such as DERA maintain close links with UK companies so that intellectual property can be effectively exploited.

  4.6  The value of intellectual property is also transitory. In general, therefore, the Company always sets in place clear agreements on IPR before commencing any external R & T work. Problems will potentially arise when a third party (such as an overseas subsidiary) requires access to information which has been generated using UK government funds. In general DTI and MoD are sufficiently flexible in this regard although processes to obtain release can be slow.

  4.7  The Foresight, Defence and Aerospace Panel has effectively mobilised the industry to provide strong inputs to government, and has built effective networks across the major players and down into many layers of the food chain. DTI has expressed its support for the proposals but repeatedly states that no money has been made available to support the initiatives. The current DTI support to Aerospace R & T through the CARAD (Civil Aerospace Research and Development) programme remains under threat under current public expenditure conditions. MoD has provided more practical support, by including some dual use elements in the programmes it supports. Overall, however, the effect has been limited and funding continues to decline.

  4.8  EPSRC has a number of initiatives to support technology transfer which are productive. For Rolls-Royce, the most useful have been where funds have aligned with Company funds in UTCs and related activities. The ROPA scheme, for example, recognises the investment made by industry in academia and allows staff in those institutions to broaden their research in fields related but not identical to industrial projects.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 1998
Prepared 8 June 1998