We disagree that a 'creeping corporate culture' is harming the University of Copenhagen (Nature 540, 315; 2016). Its continuous rise in the international rankings argues against this suggestion. If the art of science is indeed under corporate pressure, we should ask whether such mutual interactions are beneficial or not.

For example, we helped EIT Health (the European Institute of Innovation and Technology's health initiative in Munich, Germany) to set up a consortium of business, research centres and universities to boost enterprise, health-care systems and quality of life. This initiative might be seen as an example of how enterprise tries to optimize science by using the logic of managers at the cost of intellectual and creative freedom, but it is not.

To identify the essential steps towards success, EIT Health applies Technology Readiness Levels, a system developed by NASA to assess the technology that took Neil Armstrong to the Moon. Independent research is just one of these steps.

Innovation in health care is a co-evolutionary endeavour: there is no progress without understanding the root cause of infirmity. Implementation depends on aligning basic knowledge with the needs and desires of citizens; and innovation must be woven into the public and private fabric of communities. When scientists invest in interaction with societal stakeholders in this way, it further encourages research freedom to thrive.