Bert spent many years at the National Research Council leading advanced manufacturing research, followed by five years in a small high-tech firm, and more than a decade at the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council overseeing collaborative funding programs.
Bert’s work has consistently focused on partnered research and maximizing the impact of Canada’s academic research system on business innovation. At NSERC, he led the development of the Partnerships and Innovation Strategy, which significantly increased industry involvement, and oversaw the rapid expansion of the College and Community Innovation Program. Today, as a strategic advisor with Global Advantage, he continues to explore how Canada can better align its research, innovation, and commercialization efforts to meet changing global priorities.
“If you want to capture valuable markets, we need size, and size is shaped in part by corporate cultures and in part by the structures government puts in place.”
Do you recognize any emerging trends in Canada’s research system?
There is a visible decline in public support for university-based research – which impacts government research funding. “The government has long been looking for more impact from universities and university research, and it hasn’t been forthcoming to the scale that they’re looking for.” There are also important reductions in international student numbers. These changes are not temporary or politically driven, but rather reflect broader societal shifts. Canada is not alone, other developed countries are also reluctant to make university funding a priority and are constraining foreign student numbers.
He notes that recent national priorities such as trade, defense, and infrastructure do not currently rely on academic research as their foundation.
So, the role of universities and colleges may be forced to change in today’s economy?
Universities are implementing what Bert describes as first-order responses to these challenges: reducing programs, laying off staff, and attempting to strengthen their outreach to government stakeholders. As the situation matures, we’ll see universities developing and implementing more specialized and nuanced approaches that better align activities with stakeholder priorities and focus resources on new approaches to education and research.
Is there an opportunity that Canada is uniquely positioned to leverage?
Colleges already help businesses innovate – not just with various aspects of research, but rather the broader set of activities that businesses need to execute to develop promising products and services, value chains, and marketing channels. To work with firms, colleges organize teams of expertise and leverage their students’ talents to address specific innovation and commercialization tasks, while respecting the short time scales and constrained resources that firms face. Additional government funding to colleges could help more Canadian companies access college innovation support.
Do you think the government’s shift toward direct support for private-sector-led innovation will endure?
Bert agreed and noted that this shift has been underway for more than a decade. He pointed to increased government support for programs like the Industrial Research Assistance Program, which has evolved from funding early-stage research to focusing more on commercialization and revenue-generating activities. IRAP, along with regional agencies like FedDev, now plays a key role in driving innovation with a more direct connection to measurable economic outcomes.
These agencies are channeling resources into efforts that demonstrate tangible market impact.
“For the likes of IRAP, it is less and less interested to fund a company to do research and more and more interesting to support developing commercial operations that have recognizable revenue streams.”
How do you see the innovation ecosystems evolving in the next three to five years as they relate to your sectors? Are there specific geographies or global players we should be watching closely?
Bert emphasized that future innovation programs should be closely tied to building strong export markets. To create high-value, globally competitive products, Canada needs to develop a much deeper understanding of its export partners, something that requires close and sustained engagement with those markets.
He explained that while there has been talk about using post-secondary institutions to build international relationships through academic exchange or “soft power,” the more likely and effective route will be through direct business engagement. Government support, he said, is increasingly geared toward helping companies connect with and expand into global markets.
Do you think Canadian companies struggle to turn research into commercial products? Is commercialization still a major challenge, and are there any trends that suggest it’s getting better or worse?
Bert acknowledged that commercialization remains a significant hurdle in Canada’s innovation ecosystem. He referred to a recent insight suggesting that a country doesn’t need a million small companies to succeed, it needs a few truly successful, globally competitive ones. This reflects a core challenge for Canada: while there’s no shortage of small, innovative companies, very few can scale to the level required to compete internationally.
The problem, he explained, is not a lack of innovation but a lack of scale. Small teams simply don’t have the resources, capacity, or infrastructure to understand and interact with foreign markets in a meaningful way. To grow, companies need to scale strategically, and that requires more than ambition, it requires supportive corporate cultures and structural conditions shaped by government policy.
Bert suggested that we may begin to see changes in how the government supports this transition, with new incentives or systems that help companies move from promising startups to globally capable firms.
“If you want to capture valuable markets, we need size, and size is a function in part of corporate cultures, in part of the structure that government puts in place.”
From our conversations with private sector companies, a common theme is that support tends to disappear once a business starts moving from small to medium size. What’s behind this gap in support for growing firms?
Bert explained that the issue is both structural and cultural. Canada’s tax system and business culture often signal to entrepreneurs that selling is the logical endpoint. When company leaders hear from their peers that there’s no real path forward beyond a certain size, many choose to exit rather than expand.
Changing this narrative, he said, includes changing policy. Adjusting tax rules related to business size could have a direct impact on founder behavior. But the barriers aren’t just at the early stage. There are important growth challenges facing different sizes of firms: 50, 100, … 200 employees. Challenges include developing their products and services, securing financing, accessing foreign markets, and building more sophisticated operations.
So far, Canadian governments have made some efforts, but countries like Finland are more proactive, with a more comprehensive system that supports export-oriented companies through every stage of growth.
Beyond the role of government, how can the private sector improve innovation outcomes?
Historically, many of Canada’s investors focused on opportunities in the resource sector. As more individuals succeed in building innovative companies in value added sectors, they are reinvesting back into the system.
Many of these investors have firsthand experience in innovation-focused industries like SaaS, biotech and advanced manufacturing. They look for opportunities in sectors they understand, and are more willing to support high-growth, innovation-driven ventures. They also contribute their expertise, mentoring emerging entrepreneurs, and providing strategic advice.
Consequently, innovative companies in value-added industries now have more access to capital, know-how, and guidance than in the past. This growing base of experienced innovators and investors is not only supporting startups directly, but also influencing government programs and policy, helping shape a more coordinated, export-focused innovation economy.
As a final question, considering all the challenges we’ve discussed, how do you think Global Advantage Consulting Group contributes to addressing these complex issues? Where does the organization add the most value?
Bert identified three key areas where Global Advantage makes a meaningful impact. First, he emphasized the value of problem framing. In working closely with Global Advantage get to refine what exactly needs to be addressed.
Second, he highlighted the importance of data gathering and analysis. Whether using primary or secondary sources, Global Advantage applies rigorous analysis to generate insights. These insights are grounded not only in the data itself but also in the experience and contextual understanding of the team. Clients to look at their challenges through a new lens fresh data, comparative models, and strategic perspectives they may not have considered before.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, Bert pointed to the collaborative discussions that follow the research phase. These conversations often spark new thinking, helping clients reframe their strategies and uncover pathways forward they hadn’t previously considered.
“They exit the project with a new understanding and new ideas about how to approach what for them are important issues.”
Bert van den Berg’s insights offer a sobering but constructive look at the state of Canada’s research and innovation landscape. His reflections challenge institutions, businesses, and governments alike to rethink old models, embrace collaboration, and focus on relevance and scale. As Canada navigates shifting global priorities, success will depend on its ability to connect education, innovation, and commerce in a way that drives real-world outcomes. Voices like Bert’s, and platforms like Global Advantage play a critical role in guiding that transformation.
