Accelerating technology adoption in the UK: Lessons from past and present

The UK’s Industrial Strategy green paper set out ambitious goals for boosting productivity through the adoption of transformative technologies. In Cambridge Industrial Innovation Policy’s submission to the Government’s Technology Adoption Review, we examined how the UK has supported technology uptake to date, compared our approach with leading models overseas, and proposed ways to rebuild a more coherent support system.  This blog outlines our key findings and recommendations:

1. A strong foundation and a need for revival

From the mid‑1990s to the early 2010s, national bodies such as Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), Business Link and the Manufacturing Advisory Service (MAS) formed a well‑coordinated ecosystem that helped SMEs modernise and grow. Independent reviews showed they delivered high returns—up to £4.50 of regional Gross Value Added (GVA) for every £1 spent by RDAs, nearly 90% client satisfaction through Business Link, and net GVA gains for firms supported by MAS that exceeded delivery costs. Yet, between 2010 and 2013 these agencies were disbanded, under fiscal and political pressures rather than performance failings, leaving behind a fragmented patchwork of local Growth Hubs and bespoke schemes. We recommend revisiting and modernising the most effective elements of these former national programmes to restore consistency, scale and impact.

2. Two recent efforts with contrasting outcomes

Recent efforts highlight both promise and pitfalls. Made Smarter Adoption (MSA), piloted in 2018, has paired manufacturing SMEs with expert advisors, leadership training and match‑funding. Rigorous evaluations demonstrate productivity gains, waste reductions and operational efficiencies among participants, prompting calls for a nationwide roll‑out—though progress has been slowed by the need to negotiate region by region with Growth Hubs, mayors and universities. In contrast, Help to Grow: Digital (Dec 2021–late 2022) offered up to £5,000 off approved software via an online portal but despite a target to issue 100,000 grants, the programme issued fewer than 1,000. Its centralised design, narrow vendor list and absence of on‑the‑ground support by trusted local partners were major barrier to the engagement of target firms. Evaluation of these programmes indicates that combining strong central leadership with face‑to‑face delivery may support programme delivery.

3. Learning from the US and Japan

Abroad, two well‑funded, expert‑led systems offer instructive models. The US Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) operates 60+ regional centres under the oversight of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). It mixes in‑house specialists and brokered consultants to deliver services—from lean manufacturing to cybersecurity—backed by five‑year cooperative agreements and robust federal funding. Japan’s SME Support run by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) provides uniform, hands‑on consultations and a suite of productivity grants through ten regional offices, ensuring impartial, equitable assistance nationwide. Both models deliver consistent quality, high SME engagement and rapid roll‑out. Their success underscores the value of either decentralised networks with strong central oversight or fully centralised agencies—approaches that the UK ought to adapt in its own context.

4. Pathways to a more coherent UK system 

To move beyond fragmentation, we propose three complementary options for a future UK framework:

• Empower local delivery
  Bolster local delivery agencies (akin to Growth Hubs and Local Enterprise Partnerships, currently being phased out) with dedicated technical advisors, stable funding and enhanced central oversight—enabling them to align regionally tailored support with national priorities.
• Create a centrally administered network
  Recreate a Business Link–style model in which government sets standards and selects regional providers (LEPs, Catapults, universities or private firms) through competitive bids, requiring in‑house technical expertise for consistent quality and easier monitoring.
• Establish a national body with regional centres
  Launch or expand a single agency—either a revamped MAS or an Innovate UK/KTP network—devoted solely to technology adoption, with its own regional hubs ensuring best practices and expertise reach every part of the UK.

Each approach strikes a different balance between national coordination and local flexibility. Detailed stakeholder consultation, including industry experts, local authorities and central departments, is essential to refine these options and ensure political and practical viability.

Building the future of technology adoption

Rebuilding the UK’s technology adoption infrastructure is not simply a matter of funding new initiatives; it necessitates a strategic realignment of roles, responsibilities, and resources at both national and local levels. By learning from our past successes and the established models in the US and Japan, the UK can create a modern, integrated system that empowers SMEs to adopt transformative technologies, enhancing productivity, competitiveness, and sustainable growth.

We look forward to collaborating with policymakers and industry partners to translate these recommendations into action.

Download the full report here