The Transferkompass (Stifterverband, 2023) study, funded by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK), is based on a survey of 156 higher education institutions, 23 expert interviews, and an analysis of 56 transfer strategies. Its objective was to make visible the strategies and challenges related to embedding knowledge transfer within institutions.
The Monitoring of KTT in Switzerland (Wörter et al., 2024) was commissioned by the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SBFI) and conducted by the KOF Swiss Economic Institute at ETH Zurich. This study analyzes the state of KTT using indicators such as R&D funding, co-publications, patents, and project grants, both nationally and internationally.
#1: Strategic Integration of KTT
Over the past years, German universities have increasingly institutionalized KTT and integrated it into their strategic development plans. According to the Transferkompass, the importance of transfer as a core mission of universities is growing. (Stifterverband, 2023, p. 35)
Despite this positive trend, challenges remain in implementation. The study notes that a broad diversity of transfer formats is still underutilized, with traditional research collaborations remaining the dominant form of university-business cooperation. Other formats such as innovation clusters, digital platforms, and systematic impact assessments are still underrepresented. (Stifterverband, 2023, p. 35)
Compared to Germany, Switzerland exhibits less of a difference in development stage and more of a difference in methodological approach. While the German study focuses on the analysis of formal strategic documents, the Swiss study evaluates KTT based on performance indicators such as efforts, conditions, and achieved outcomes of partnerships. (Wörter et al, 2024, p. 5)
Overall, the Swiss study concludes that knowledge transfer between universities and private industry is well-developed (Wörter et al., 2024, p. 33). However, it also identifies areas for improvement, such as creating clearer IP regulations for spin-offs and improving data collection on IP utilization at universities of applied sciences (Wörter et al., 2024, p. 35).
#2: Forms and Intensity of KTT
In Germany, traditional research collaborations dominate. The Transferkompass finds that these partnerships have increased at most universities over the past five years and are expected to continue growing (Stifterverband, 2023, p. 18). Other formats, such as participation in innovation clusters or collaborations with companies in education and training, have increased at fewer than half of the universities, suggesting significant growth potential (Stifterverband, 2023, p. 36).
The Swiss perspective presents a more differentiated picture, highlighting a broader range of transfer formats. More than half of the companies actively engaged in knowledge transfer primarily rely on informal channels, such as attending scientific conferences or studying academic publications (Wörter et al., 2024, fig. 18).
Educational and mobility-related activities — such as joint supervision of theses, sabbaticals for corporate employees, or shared teaching initiatives — rank second in importance. In contrast, classic formats like R&D collaborations, consulting services, and the use of university infrastructure are central for only about 13–15% of companies (Wörter et al., 2024, fig. 18). It is also noteworthy that Swiss companies predominantly collaborate with domestic universities (Wörter et al., 2024, p. 40–41).
These findings illustrate that traditional indicators like patents, co-publications, or formal R&D projects represent only the visible tip of the iceberg. A significant portion of KTT occurs informally, flexibly, and often eludes straightforward measurement.
#3: Funding and Support for KTT
In Germany, much of the knowledge transfer activity is funded through project-based third-party funding (Stifterverband, 2023, p. 2). Around half of all transfer offices are financed through time-limited external funds. This high dependence on third-party funding — particularly for financing transfer-supporting personnel — makes long-term planning difficult and results in a lack of continuity. The Transferkompass therefore advocates recognizing knowledge transfer as a permanent university mission and financing it accordingly (Stifterverband, 2023, p. 28).
In Switzerland, the national innovation agency Innosuisse plays a central role in supporting collaborative innovation projects between universities and businesses (Wörter et al., 2024, p. 30). However, the number of approved projects has declined over recent years — from around 400 in 2021 to 307 in 2023 (Wörter et al., 2024, fig. 25). This decline is partly due to higher average project budgets and a decreasing share of financial contributions from implementation partners.
When compared internationally, both Germany and Switzerland show above-average levels of private sector funding for university research. Germany leads in this area, followed closely by Switzerland. Despite some national differences, the proportions of private funding have remained relatively stable over time (Wörter et al., 2024, p. 11).
#3: Conclusion: Two Countries, One Shared Goal
Germany and Switzerland share the goal of fostering a strong and effective knowledge and technology transfer system. In both countries, the key challenge is ensuring the long-term sustainability of transfer activities and integrating new collaboration formats more systematically.
A targeted exchange of experiences could help both countries to build on their respective strengths and learn from one another.