Optimising Research Support to Drive Income in UK Universities

By Dr Clive Hayter / 28 October 2025

Against a backdrop of constrained public funding, fierce competition for students and a crowded sector, UK universities must reimagine how they support research - not only to advance academic excellence, but to increase institutional income. [1] The Research Excellence Framework (REF), Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF), and innovation funding streams offer significant opportunities, but only if support structures are aligned with income potential. Optimising research support is no longer a back-office function; it is a strategic imperative.

From administration to strategic enablement

Traditionally, research support teams have operated in a reactive mode - focused on pre-award proposal development and post-award administration. While these functions are central to a support function, more can be done to unlock the full potential of research as a revenue stream. To drive income, support must become a proactive, strategic service partly embedded within academic departments.

Businesses segment their customer base in order to target their products and services. In the same way and rather than a one-size-fits-all approach typically employed, universities could segment their applicant population, using research data, so that they can target more personalised support to those research leaders with established track records as well as more developmental resources to those with little or no experience of funding systems.

Research development officers should be embedded within faculties, working closely with researchers to identify funding opportunities, co-develop bids, and build long-term relationships. Ideally, they should have some disciplinary expertise and understand the research process. It means shifting the mindset from 'supporting applications' and process compliance, to 'strategically enabling success.' Institutions that make this transition will be better positioned to increase grant capture, diversify funding sources, and improve the quality of submissions.

Aligning research support with institutional income goals

Perhaps the most important shift is cultural: universities must begin to see research not just as scholarship, but as a driver of institutional sustainability. This means aligning research support with income targets - whether through quality-related research (QR) funding, commercialisation, consultancy, or philanthropic grants.

To do this effectively, institutions need a clear understanding of the income landscape. REF QR funding, for example, is influenced by both Grade Point Average (GPA) and volume, requiring a nuanced submission strategy. KEF metrics can inform decisions about knowledge exchange investment, while innovation funding streams offer opportunities for spinouts and IP development.

Research support should be explicitly tasked with contributing to these income goals. This requires close collaboration with finance teams, strategic planning units, and senior leadership. It also requires a shared understanding of how research contributes to the university’s broader mission and financial health.

More proposals does not equal success

It is tempting in the current financial climate for universities to encourage every research active academic researcher to submit an extra proposal, sometimes recycling previous submissions which were unsuccessful with a view that 'this time it might be lucky'. This is not a recipe for success or financial sustainability. Just recently UKRI commented that the peer review process was under strain in-part caused by a substantive increase in the volume of submissions it was receiving.

Devoting strategic support resources to research quality improvement activities might feel a longer-term endeavour. But simple steps such as offering grant writing support or instigating peer review can have an immediate impact on research income without a corresponding fall-off in success rates. Simple checklists on how well a research proposal aligns to the particular funders’ strategic priorities and proposal mentoring with a senior established research leader can also support this.

Understanding how peer review works is crucial for success. In the early 2000s the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council employed a programme of 'mock panels' in universities to give transparency and exposure to its peer review processes. These were successful in raising the quality of proposals by allowing researchers to see how bids were dealt with and how to optimise presentation of a good idea.

It seems counter-intuitive, but fewer, better, well-placed proposals are far more time efficient and productive than a high volume, scatter-gun approach.

Facilitating interdisciplinary and impactful research

Funding bodies increasingly favour interdisciplinary, challenge-led, and impact-driven research. UKRI’s strategic themes, Horizon Europe’s missions, and philanthropic funders all prioritise projects that address societal challenges and deliver real-world benefits. Research support must be designed to facilitate these goals.

This includes brokering partnerships across faculty and departments – often establishing cross-cutting challenge-based Centres and Institutes, connecting researchers with external stakeholders, businesses and civic organisations and providing tailored training on impact generation and case study development.

Support teams should also help academics navigate the complexities of interdisciplinary bids, which often require coordination across multiple institutions, funders, and sectors. This is where professional project management and multi-stakeholder bid development expertise can make a significant difference.

Professionalising the research support workforce

To deliver on this vision, universities must invest in the professional development of research support staff. These roles should evolve from an administrative to strategic focus, with clearer career pathways, recognition by academic colleagues, and integration into institutional leadership. This shift will attract and retain talent, improve bid quality, and foster a culture of excellence.

Professionalisation also means equipping staff with the skills to engage with funders, interpret policy changes, and contribute to strategic discussions. Research support should not be siloed from academic leadership - it should be part of it. Institutions that elevate the status of research support will benefit from more cohesive planning, better coordination, and stronger outcomes.

There is also a case for creating hybrid roles, particularly in smaller institutions, that combine research development with impact, KEF, and innovation support. These roles can act as institutional 'connectors', helping to align research with income-generating activities across the university and create an understanding of the complete research lifecycle.

Looking ahead: A vision for 2030

By 2030, research support in UK universities will be strategically aligned with institutional missions and national priorities, fostering a culture where impact is embedded from inception to outcomes. Researchers will benefit from personalised, career-stage-specific support and research services will be digitally transformed leveraging the benefits of AI to reduce the administrative burden, enable greater grant capture, automate compliance and inform action through predictive analytics.

In conclusion

The future of research support lies in its transformation from a reactive service to a strategic enabler. Embedding support within academic units, harnessing data for decision-making, facilitating interdisciplinarity, professionalising the workforce, and aligning with income goals, we will unlock the full potential of research enterprise in UK universities.

This is not just a matter of operational efficiency - it is a strategic imperative. In a sector facing financial pressures and increasing expectations, research support must evolve to become a cornerstone of institutional success. The time to act is now, developing step-by-step action plans, informed by stakeholders and which set institutions on the path to outcome driven change.

Strive Higher can help universities take this further by:

• Developing strategic frameworks that link research directly to institutional financial goals,

• Supporting the creation or evolution of interdisciplinary research centres,

• Facilitating cross-departmental collaboration between research offices, finance and senior leadership to embed income-focussed planning,

• Designing career pathways and competency frameworks for early career researchers and research support staff with a wrap-around development programme for each audience,

• Making full use of data available to track research performance, inform strategic planning and resource allocation and benchmark institutional performance against sector standards.

If you would like a conversation about any of the issues raised in this article, please get in touch. 

[1] Research support services in UK universities traditionally comprises professional and administrative functions that facilitate the planning, funding, conduct, dissemination, and impact of academic research.