Catapults: Should there be a tighter focus on technology?

Four years after Dr Hauser's report was published, Business Secretary Vince Cable has asked Dr Hauser to see if the Catapult network can be improved and expanded. According to Dr Cable, the UK 'has sometimes failed to commercialise new technology'. "That is why the Catapult centres are so important for securing future economic growth and ensuring that not only can we seize new global opportunities but, more importantly, that we can also leave the competition trailing in our wake." Submissions to the Hauser review needed to be with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills by the end of May. Concerned about the apparent lack of direct representation of the electronics industry within the Catapult network, the Electronic Systems Community – ESCO – has made its views known. Chief executive Sarah Macken noted: "Our major concern is that existing Catapults could be aligned more effectively with the market potential of the Electronics Systems sector. Gaps exist within existing Catapults and there are critical areas of industrial concern that are not being addressed." In 2011, the electronics industry submitted an outline expression of interest in the creation of an Electronic Systems Catapult, but this failed. As part of the work involved in making this submission, a list of critical enablers was created (see box). According to Macken: "It is not clear from the current Catapults whether there is a focus on these critical 'enablers' for future applications. Having said that, there is an overall view that the Catapults are still getting established and many Electronic Systems companies are still developing relationships with relevant Catapults, such as the Satellite Applications Catapult." One of the questions being asked as part of the Hauser Review is just what a Catapult centre should offer. Macken said they should have state of the art facilities which can be accessed easily by industry and by SMEs in particular. "They should enable interaction," she suggested, "and innovative collaboration between universities and industry. They should provide a coordinated pool of skills and knowledge and should also provide training on new technologies and applications, with equipment available for hire that might not be available to participating companies." And she sees skills as an important element of the Catapult network. "But, rather than adding complexity, the skills provision by Catapults should be complementary to the existing skills landscape. "Electronic systems companies see an important potential role for Catapults in the provision of vocational training and for arranging work experience for shared apprenticeships." In Macken's view, shared apprenticeships could be a viable way forward for skills development amongst small companies. "These could make training and obtaining apprentices more achievable for SMEs and micro businesses by being part of a consortium which contributes to a fund and shares a pool of apprentices to which placements are offered." Catapults, she contends, could play a key part in this by providing training centres and facilities. Another issue highlighted by ESCO in its submission is an apparent shortage of 'big ideas' amongst the existing catapults. As a result, it is calling for more focus on bid ideas and on tangible outputs. "Some seem to be short of 'big ideas'," she noted, "and to be concentrating on some relatively low impact first projects. I believe the Future Cities catapult, for example, would be better engaged on 'big impact' projects, such as smart traffic management and smart parking." So what does ESCO want from the Catapult network in the future? What should they be focusing on? "New Catapults should focus on some of the key enabling technologies needed to drive many of the UK's strategically important industries," she said, "and societal challenges where the UK has an industrial strength and the potential to be a world leader, rather than limiting to specific applications, which tend to be relatively narrow in scope. There is also a need, in ESCO's opinion, for a greater focus on enabling technologies and on the development of systems that will bring economic growth. "For example, the Internet of Things, Industry 4.0 and future cities will all rely on the development of low cost networked sensors. So a Catapult that focuses on sensor technology – which will be a key enabler – would be targeted at a specific market and therefore more likely to attract companies who are developing their business strategies around those market objectives." But Digital Health is the one topic which ESCO sees as having 'huge potential' and which it would like to be handled by a new Catapult. "We see huge potential benefits in such a Catapult," she noted. "This is an area where there appears to be a significant lack of coordination between companies and researchers and customers – in particular, the NHS. "I believe a Digital Health Catapult would bring the NHS and companies together to ensure that technological developments are appropriate to address the pressing problems in healthcare. "The NHS could help shape the research agendas of companies and universities and a Catapult could help the NHS to realise significant cost savings and potential improvements in patient outcomes from the development and implementation of Electronic Systems technologies." Examples given by Macken include the adoption of remote diagnosis, remote healthcare and assisted living. "UK based Electronic Systems companies are already developing advanced systems for overseas clients," she continued, "and these have the potential to generate significant benefits for the NHS." ESCO also believes that, with the continuing trend towards battery powered hand held products in both consumer and industrial applications, there is the need for a Catapult to address battery technology. However, Macken emphasised that ESCO is not anti Catapult: "We support the concept of Catapults as a way for UK industry to engage more easily with new initiatives and to form a centre around which greater networking takes place," she concluded. Topics of interest to ESCO • design and manufacture of components, subsystems and systems • reliability, test, certification and life cycle engineering • semiconductor technologies, including: CMOS; compound semiconductors; MEMS; and smart microsystems • power, power management and power electronics • electro-optical integration • analogue, digital and mixed signal • systems, software and hardware architectures, including reprogrammability • plastic electronics • algorithms, cryptography, modelling and simulation • compilers, debuggers and schedulers • operating systems and middleware • embedded software • design methods and tools