Not all SMEs collaborate the same way – and universities need to adapt accordingly
Using the term small and medium-sized enterprises or SMEs is useful as policy label, but not so much when it comes to designing collaboration. Universities often talk about working with SMEs as if they are a single audience. In reality, a micro-enterprise, a growing small company, and a medium-sized business may all fall within that same category but they do not approach universities in the same way. They face different barriers, have varying capacities and require different kind of support. When universities build one broad SME offer, they usually create something that only works for a few within that category. This can make it too generic to be useful, too heavy for some companies, and too vague for others.
Our research shows that if universities want more meaningful SME engagement, segmentation by company size and type needs to be built into the design of collaboration strategies, structures and approaches.
Starting with what is in reach
The one-size-fits-all model creates predictable friction
Our research shows that company size strongly shapes collaboration patterns. Micro and small companies tend to prioritise speed, relevance, and low transaction costs. Medium-sized companies are often better postitioned engage in structured and sustained forms of collaboration. When universities treat all three as variations of the same partner type, they default to broad programmes, standardised processes, and partnership models that do not full account for the differences and business realities.
A micro enterprise looking for quick expertise does not need to go through the same process as a medium-sized manufacturer planning future capability development. When the same processes are applied to both, such as complex legal arrangements or length approval steps, the interaction can become disproportionate to the opportunity, and create misalignment from the start.
Where the differences show up
1. Micro enterprises need access, speed, and low risk
Micro companies are often highly motivated to collaborate, but they face the strongest capacity and connection barriers. Their engagement with universities tends to be short term, applied, and tightly connected to immediate operational or technical challenges. These collaborations are often supported by public or regional funding because even modest levels of cost or uncertainty can be enough to stop progress.
What micro companies usually cannot absorb is complexity. Multiple handovers, unclear ownership, lengthy approvals, or legal and administrative steps are often unrealistic. For many micro businesses, every hour spent navigating the university competes directly with running their company.
Universities therefore need to lower the entry barrier for these organisations. What micro companies usually need first is a clear contact point, a concrete response, and a manageable first step. The priority is on lowering the threshold for starting a collaboration, rather than scaling the relationship early.
Start with what is already within reach – identify the skills, relationships, knowledge and institutional assets you can use right now, and activate them through your existing networks instead of waiting for ideal conditions.
2. Small companies need momentum, continuity, and applied value
Small companies are often better positioned than micro firms to collaborate, but they still lack the internal capacity of larger organisations. They tend to value short-cycle, high-impact projects, particularly around applied R&D and commercialisation. While the willingness is often there, time and transaction capacity remain limited.
That makes continuity especially important. A small firm may be ready to engage if the process feels manageable and the value appears early. It is far less likely to persist if each step becomes harder to navigate than the problem it was trying to solve.
For universities, this means creating practical pathways that make progression possible without forcing it. Not every collaboration needs to become strategic. For many small firms, repeatable, well-managed, applied engagement is the right outcome.
3. Medium-sized businesses need more structure, but not the corporate model
Medium-sized enterprises sit between agility and scale. They retain many SME characteristics, but they are more able to participate in more formal education and management activities, and their R&D and commercialisation patterns start to resemble those of larger firms.
This makes them the more likely candidates for deeper partnerships, provided universities do not approach them the same way as large companies. Medium-sized businesses may benefit from more structured pathways, clearer planning, and account management. At the same time, they still value flexibility, proportionality, and practical relevance.
In other words, medium-sized businesses may be ready for more structured collaboration, but universities still need to match the process to the opportunity. That distinction matters.
It is not just size, activity matters too
Company size is only part of the picture, as barriers not only differ by company type, but also by collaboration activity.
Universities often segment by who the partner is. SMEs experience the university through what they are trying to do.
In consulting and licensing, micro and small firms are especially affected by entry-points barriers. They may not know what the university offers, who to contact, or how to begin. In joint R&D, those same connection barriers remain important across firms of all sizes because the activity itself is more complex. In formal education partnerships, larger firms and some medium-sized businesses are much more likely to participate because these activities require greater capacity, longer time horizons, and more organisational stability.
Therefore, universities need a more useful segmentation logic, one that considers firm size alongside innovation intensity, collaboration readiness, preferred activity type, internal capacity, and risk profile.
Motivation is not the problem
One of the most persistent misconceptions in university engagement is that SMEs are simply harder to interest. Whereas our research shows that across firm sizes, businesses report strong motivation to collaborate with universities, especially to improve innovation capacity and gain access to knowledge and technologies. The issue is rarely whether SMEs can see value in collaboration, but if that value can be reached through a process that feels proportionate and usable.
Motivations do vary across the SME landscape. Micro and small firms place more emphasis on funding and reputational benefits, reflecting tighter resource constraints and greater dependence on external support. Medium-sized and larger firms tend to place more weight on capability-building, early access to discoveries, and access to qualified graduates.
These differences should shape how universities frame their offer, communicate relevance, and decide where to invest their engagement effort.
The shift universities need to make
Universities should stop treating SMEs as a single partner category. Instead, focus on (1) what kind of company are we trying to help, (2) through what kind of activity, (3) under what timelines and (4) with how much process?
This changes the design logic and moves universities away from broad SME outreach and towards better-fit engagement. The universities that will succeed with SMEs are the ones who understand that different companies need different routes in, and make collaboration usable from the first step.
Ready for more?
Dive deeper into how universities can more effectively collaborate with SMEs in the brief “Designing university–SME collaboration that actually works.” It examines why these partnerships often fail to scale and identifies misalignment—not motivation—as the core challenge. Drawing on large-scale European data and case studies, the brief translates insights on engagement, institutional design, and ecosystem collaboration into practical approaches that help universities create accessible, low-friction pathways for SMEs to innovate, grow, and engage meaningfully.
Luca Barbera (author) is a Project Officer at UIIN. His work encompasses a broad spectrum of research topics, including sustainability, deep tech, engagement practices for universities and academics, with a particular emphasis on the valorisation of results.
