Corporate Engagement

Our University engages with private corporations and related entities as a way to inform and strengthen our intellectual mission, support our scholarship and students, and translate our research discoveries to benefit society broadly. The need for such engagement has never been greater. Academic-industry partnerships are increasingly vital to generating the knowledge, datasets, and capabilities that are required to be at the leading edge of discovery. Such engagements may also generate research funding and resources for faculty-initiated programs and for building and maintaining core facilities.

Harvard has established robust policies around corporate engagement and processes for reviewing potential engagements to ensure that they support academic freedom and core institutional values, avoid conflicts of interest, and align with the needs and priorities of the University and its constituents. In 2023, the Provost’s Office established two ad hoc committees to undertake a review of the University’s policies, process, and support: the Corporate Relations Research Policy Committee and the Corporate Relations Researcher Engagement Committee. These committees were coordinated and supported through the Office of the Vice Provost for Research (OVPR) and produced a joint report in June 2024. A summary of the report’s key recommendations is below.

Report: Key Recommendations

Below, we summarize key recommendations from both Committees. We recognize that Schools and units across the institution have varying levels of corporate engagement, and that there are nuances in the relationship of such engagements to teaching and other academic activities that can vary across disciplines. Thus, the Committees’ recommendations should be considered by a multitude of stakeholders before decisions about implementation are made.

Harvard stands to benefit from fostering, broadening, and strengthening corporate engagement to support research in alignment with the goals of its academic mission toward the benefit of society. Toward this aim, we recommend the following:

• Establish a Corporate Relations Steering Committee as a resource to foster University-wide coordination of corporate engagement activities that support research and build upon our institutional strengths and capacity. As a core principle of its charge, this committee would provide University-wide strategy that considers the breadth of potential engagements including gifts, sponsored research, and new types of agreements. Additionally, this committee would be called on to provide guidance and operational support for complex corporate engagements that span many different forms of opportunity across the university, including those that contain gifts and sponsored research or other components. This committee would not add additional review or oversight and would not be involved in the oversight or establishment of typical agreements. Instead, for those instances of complex engagement, the committee would provide streamlining and support to ensure expedient and thorough review. It follows that this group should be a small, nimble group, comprised of representation from faculty members engaged in industry collaboration and leadership from OVPR, Office of Technology Development, and University Development Office that could align institutional efforts and serve many functions, including:
  
  
  • Identifying opportunities for corporate engagement aligned with institutional and School priorities that considers all forms of engagement (gifts, sponsored research, new forms);
  • Coordinating support for uniquely complex corporate opportunities, including making sure that the opportunities are properly and expediently vetted by the relevant unit(s) at the University (i.e., Harvard Trademark Program, Gift Policy Committee, etc.);
  • Providing greater coordination for corporate entities involved in multiple engagements and relationships across the University;
  • Developing guidelines and implementing a process for reviewing prospective corporate sponsored research engagements that parallels that of the Gift Policy Committee in that there is broad institutional input in evaluating whether the institution should accept support.
  • Providing guidance for external entities regarding relevant policies and which offices at Harvard support various funding arrangements.

• Expand familiarity among PI’s, postdoctoral fellows, and graduate students with existing policies, processes, and models for conventional agreements.

• Develop models for emergent agreement opportunities, where appropriate, such as gift agreements with a memorandum of understanding (MOU), industry affiliate agreements, and student and postdoctoral fellowship programs. Consider additional forms of institutional alignment with corporate entities that expand and build upon the corporate alliance model utilized by OTD.

• Work with UDO and School-based development offices to foster an institution-wide effort to explore the feasibility of expanding financial support for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships through corporate philanthropy. As part of this effort, implement processes for tracking student and postdoctoral beneficiaries of corporate support to ensure appropriate conduct and safeguard essential protections.

• In coordination with OTD and School-based offices, develop new and expand existing training programs for Harvard researchers and students to guide corporate engagement activities, with emphasis on responsibilities for researchers on engagement with corporate funders. Consider relevant policies and guidelines, known best practices, and potential risks including conflict of interest concerns illustrated by scenarios. Where possible, incorporate this training into existing requirements and prompt training annually.

• Create a more robust corporate engagement database and IT support so that each individual unit can have visibility into engagement in all units. A University-wide IT solution that can present comprehensive reporting for both corporate gift and sponsored agreements, including those from corporate foundations, will better inform future outreach and align activities, where appropriate.

• Establish institutionally supported School-based efforts to measure corporate engagement by faculty, students, and other researchers, including surveys to assess current activities and views on corporate engagement in research. This effort would provide a baseline through which to create additional policies, procedures, and guidelines for acceptable engagements between University constituents and corporate entities. Such information could also inform return on investment (ROI) assessments of current corporate engagement activities and identify gaps in training, coordination, and other support offered to researchers.

• Initiate pilot programs in priority areas that align opportunities for Harvard researchers to positively impact major societal challenges and the University’s academic research priorities. These opportunities should ideally foster connections between faculty-led research efforts across Schools in ways that play to Harvard’s strengths and present attractive opportunities for both investment and direct engagement from corporate entities. Such pilots can explore creative mechanisms for IP (intellectual property) management and should be supported by the institution, where appropriate, to catalyze research efforts and ensure effective administration of the programs and relationships with corporate sponsors.

The Corporate Relations Research Policy Committee

The Corporate Relations Research Policy Committee was chaired by John H. Shaw, Vice Provost for Research and the Harry C. Dudley Professor of Structural and Economic Geology (FAS) and Professor of Environmental Science and Engineering (SEAS). This committee reviewed policies and practices for engaging with potential corporate entities and included senior faculty and staff leadership from across Harvard’s Schools and various units (e.g., OVPR, AA&D, OTD).

The Committee’s charge was as follows:

• define and evaluate the range of acceptable mechanisms for corporate engagement and the principles that should govern the selection of specific types of agreements;
• establish clear and consistent standards for implementing Harvard’s policies that govern our assessment of potential corporate sponsors;
• recommend mechanisms to ensure coordinated and consistent engagement with corporate entities across our Institution to explore, assess, and implement these relationships; and
• define clear roles for communication, oversight, and accountability.

The Corporate Relations Researcher Engagement Committee

The Corporate Relations Researcher Engagement Committee was chaired by Amy Wagers, Co-Chair of the Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology and the Forst Family Professor of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology. This committee helped define and promote the roles that faculty, staff, students, and postdoctoral fellows can play in corporate sponsored research agreements. The overarching goals of the committee were to help maintain the integrity and independence of our research enterprise, while enabling corporate sponsored research activities that advance scholarship and provide support and benefits to researchers and students.

The Committee reviewed existing university policies and recommended the new policies, or changes to existing policies, needed to promote and safeguard university-corporate relationships. Specifically, the committee was tasked to work with OTD, UDO, and OGC to develop recommendations.