‘Programmes that drive impact need greater visibility’

She is as much an entrepreneur as she is a scientist. Kim Poldner has served as a professor and director of research at two different universities of applied sciences and is now a professor by special appointment at the University of Groningen. Along the way, she has launched several start-ups, and even now, she is eager to get started on a new business idea. She believes that impact programmes certainly help to bring the domains of research and entrepreneurship together. However, these programmes are still relatively unknown, particularly at universities of applied sciences.

Kim Poldner is not the type to sit back and relax. When she has good ideas, she wants to get started, preferably as soon as possible. It’s always been that way. She had barely finished her master’s degree when, in 2005, she opened the first sustainable fashion shop in Amsterdam. Years later, she opted for a PhD programme and remained in academia thereafter, including as a professor in circular business at The Hague University of Applied Sciences and, currently, as a professor by special appointment in regional and circular economic development in Groningen.

Do something now
Even in the world of education and research, passively waiting for things to happen is not her style. After submitting a research proposal in the field of sustainable clothing, she said in an interview: ‘We have to do something now. I can’t just sit around waiting to see whether a grant is awarded or not. That’s why I try to make an impact not only through my role as a professor – through good teaching, research and collaboration with the business community – but also simply in my own neighbourhood.’ During the COVID pandemic, she opened a pop-up second-hand clothing shop in Utrecht. A ‘playground’, she used to call it, a living lab to investigate in practice how various sustainable business models work in real life.

‘Funding institutes could pay closer attention to the impact of research projects by actively pointing out potential follow-up grant opportunities’

Getting more out of research findings
A constant sense of urgency, a desire to make an impact, the courage to take risks, and the drive to put new ideas into practice. These are the typical characteristics of an entrepreneur that Poldner likes to highlight. She encourages colleagues and students to make more of their research findings. Whilst she enjoys her work in academia, she is already mulling over a business idea that no one has taken up yet. ‘That’s when I start to think: shouldn’t I just do it myself?’ For now, she combines this with her role at the university, but: ‘I certainly don’t rule out the possibility that one day I might give up my academic career and go back to running a business full-time.’

Increased focus on valorisation and impact
Poldner would like to see more of that entrepreneurial spirit in her own environment. In general, she finds Dutch culture somewhat risk-averse and observes that many people seek refuge in the comfort of a permanent contract, ‘which I have never had in my entire life’. She welcomes the increased focus on valorisation and impact. ‘It is incredibly valuable that we are fully encouraging entrepreneurship within the education system; it is also a dire necessity to remain competitive in the world.’ She would have loved to have had the current incubator programmes available when she started her first start-up. Yet, she also observes promising innovations collecting dust. ‘Unfortunately, that’s in the nature of the job. As a researcher, you often go from one grant proposal to the next. Usually, there’s hardly any time to allow a completed project to be implemented in education and in practice, even though that’s a requirement for applied research. But usually you’re straight back on a new project. We need to create more space to take valorisation seriously, in whatever form.’

‘Valorisation programmes mustn’t fixate exclusively on high-tech developments’

That’s where she sees a role for funding institutes. ‘For example, using a RAAK SME grant, we developed an innovation that we wanted to bring to market. Fortunately, an entrepreneur from the consortium took up that challenge. But NWO and SIA could pay closer attention to the impact of such research projects by actively contributing ideas and pointing out potential follow-up grant opportunities. They are aware of those; we usually aren’t. There still is a lot to be gained here.’

Closing the information gap
This brings her to the issue of how little these instruments are known. ‘Programmes like these need to be much more visible, especially at universities of applied sciences. To be honest, I didn’t even know that NWO and SIA were involved in entrepreneurship in this way, even though I’ve worked at universities of applied sciences for seven years. For grants like these, I usually look to an organisation like RVO.’ Her colleagues at the funding support offices, which she regards as her gateway to research funding, have never pointed this out to her. ‘They do provide tips on a new Horizon call on circularity, RAAK grants from SIA or the major NWA-ORC programmes. There could be a bit more focus on entrepreneurship there. And include it in the curriculum too. Make sure lecturers and professors, particularly in the technical faculties, know that these opportunities exist and that they and their colleagues are eligible. Most people at universities of applied sciences are doers. They just get started and are less likely to think about grants. We could certainly bridge that gap.’

‘We need to create more space to take valorisation seriously, in whatever form’

A broader focus
Poldner notes that valorisation programmes, such as the Faculty of Impact, often focus on high-tech developments. This is incredibly important – much innovation needs to come from there – but: ‘We mustn’t fixate on it. Those programmes pay little attention to less technical entrepreneurs. In my field, the circular economy, the focus is mainly on technological innovations in areas such as waste management. But no matter how much recycling technology we develop, if our behaviour as consumers doesn’t change along with it, we won’t get very far.’ The focus is therefore often on what we call a low-R strategy, such as recycling, whilst solutions that focus on higher-R strategies like refuse and rethink are not eligible for subsidies. These are therefore much less available for business models focused on reuse, repair, or informing and inspiring people to consume better and less. It is important that valorisation programmes also make room for this.’