Like a bridge over troubled water?

The water is certainly troubled at the moment – the latest chaos caused by Trump’s tariffs, threats to academic freedom, the return of coal and so on have caused huge waves across the world. But it’s important to remember that the same challenges we faced before Trump’s election – the climate catastrophe, AI, wars – are still with us. Simply put, society is still facing numerous challenges.

Universities have a significant role to play in facing these challenges. But despite the impact agenda (i.e. the aim to positively influence society), knowledge constructed within the academy does not always translate easily into real-world solutions. Indeed, many results do not even make it beyond the walls of academia and into industry so that theoretical developments can become tangible solutions or concrete applications.

A key question is: How can a bridge be constructed to facilitate better relationships between universities and the industrial sector? This should matter to universities, as it will make them more relevant and provide much needed financial input into the sector. It also matters to industry. Industry needs people with deep expertise from a research perspective and an understanding of practice and practical problems.

One solution is the industrial PhD student as knowledge broker. Industrial PhDs are employed by industry and study for a doctorate while affiliated to a university. They spend 50 to 80% of their time on their PhD and the remainder of the time in industry. They are funded by their companies, and many have previous experience in industry. They are often driven by the desire to do applied research and solve ‘real-world’ problems. These people are not aiming to become professors and return to their companies when the degree is finished.

In the inception of the industrial PhD, the idea was that students would ensure that the research they conduct addresses real problems in industry; ensure that their results would reach relevant stakeholders in industry; act as a boundary spanning function or knowledge broker; and provide a workforce that can operate effectively in both contexts.

So, is it working? In a study combining questionnaires conducted across 5 universities and interviews from 2 STEM universities in Sweden, I found the answer to this question. It’s yes, and no.

Let’s start with the positives – my participants stayed the course on the PhD and became experts who wanted to build bridges between the contexts and importantly maintain that role after graduation. But there were issues too: students described how at the start of the PhD there was a lot of engagement from all parties (supervisors, managers and students). They had high hopes for the project and that the boundary functions roles could be fulfilled. However, with time, the differences between industry and academia meant that the PhD student often became peripheral to the industrial context and more drawn in to the academy. There seemed to be continued interest from academia in the projects, but declining interest from industry, despite the initial engagement and the fact that industry was funding the doctorate. Simply put, the pace of industry is faster, and a new idea had turned up before the PhD was finished. This doesn’t mean that the PhD became irrelevant; rather, it was just no longer the main focus of the industrial partners.

So, what could academia do to strengthen the bridge? Many students noted the lack of clarification about expectations around the PhD, the different roles the students have, and the support functions available to them (or lack of). It shouldn’t be too difficult to address this – it just means putting some structures in place and looking beyond the purely legal and financial agreements as to how the PhD will function. Communication was a real challenge, as was community building – academia needs to work harder to bring industrial PhDs together to create a sense of belonging and provide training in communicating research with people in industry. And industry needs to work harder to help the PhD student figure out how to create applicable and useful research. For example, this could include providing a sounding board or ensuring access to key stakeholders. In the findings, I found that when this was in place, it was highly effective and motivated the students.

All PhD journeys are messy to a certain extent – the industrial PhD is even messier. While the ambition of boundary spanning and brokering is a noble one, like a bridge, it needs construction and maintenance.

Maria Cervin-Ellqvist is a PhD student at the Department for Communication and Learning in Science at Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden, co-supervised by Dr Lisa McGrath. In April, Maria visited the SIoE to deliver a talk about her interdisciplinary research in which she explores communication, learning processes, and learner experiences in higher education, currently with a focus on industrial PhDs in STEM. In all her research, the implications for practice as well as policy are central. Her research has appeared in Higher Education and Journal of Writing Research.