The message could not be clearer: under Theresa May, Britain will have a “comprehensive industrial strategy”.

Greg Clark has been made secretary of state for business, energy and industrial strategy, instead of being in charge of business, innovation and skills, like his predecessor.

“Putting industrial strategy in the title of the department is a dramatic step-change,” said one aerospace executive on Tuesday.

Days before she became prime minister, Mrs May delivered a stinging appraisal of George Osborne’s stewardship of the economy.

With the Treasury dominant to the business department in shaping the business landscape, there had been a “striking” lack of deep economic reform and a stubborn “problem with productivity”.

By including industrial strategy in Mr Clark’s job title, Mrs May appears to be sending a message to the Treasury and industry: if productivity is to improve, the government will have to take a more determined approach.

Sajid Javid, the previous business secretary, was a committed laissez-faire Conservative who openly shunned the idea of an industrial strategy and initially failed to react quickly to the troubles of Tata Steel’s UK operations.

By contrast, Mr Clark wasted no time getting his message out. In his first pronouncement on being appointed on Thursday, he put a “comprehensive industrial strategy” at the top of his priorities. On Friday, he met senior executives from Airbus and Rolls-Royce at the Farnborough air show.

“There clearly is a different emphasis on industrial strategy,” said Paul Everitt, head of the aerospace and defence industry lobby group, who met Mr Clark. “We are definitely encouraged that [the government] is looking to be more active. But it is too early to know or understand exactly how that will be taken forward.”

Like many developed economies, Britain’s industrial base has withered during the past 20 years, halving to less than 10 per cent of the economy.

While manufacturing in Germany, France and other eurozone countries was badly hit by the global financial crisis, British industry alone has continued to shrink since 2009, according to the CBI business lobby group. Mr Osborne’s March of the Makers initiatives, launched in 2010 and aimed at promoting high value added manufacturing, struggled to deliver.

But industry still funds two-thirds of private sector spending on the research that drives innovation, and productivity has improved at twice the rate of the whole economy in the past two decades.

Mr Clark has lost responsibility for apprenticeships and higher education — — both hived off to the education department — but has ended up with greater powers, the biggest being the absorption of the entire energy department.

His team and his new title suggest the Treasury will face a new, stronger competing power base for supply-side reforms.

Industry is quietly jubilant. “We are looking for a minister who will now be strong enough to fight for his department and his budget,” said Terry Scuoler, chief executive of the EEF, the lobby group for UK manufacturers.

Whitehall watchers are more sceptical. “With the debt-to-GDP ratio rising and an accountant [Philip Hammond] in charge, the Treasury will see off unaffordable prestige projects,” said one Treasury veteran.

But prestige projects are not what industry said it wants. The CBI, EEF and other business lobby groups have long argued that a successful industrial strategy is about much more than promising a new rail or road project, although investment in infrastructure is important.

They want to see a collaboration with the government on which sectors are best placed globally and on how to remove barriers to innovation.

Many point to the success of the formal partnerships developed in the aerospace and automotive sectors — two of the UK’s biggest export industries — where government, business and unions agree priorities for state support and private sector investment.

Airbus increased investment into the UK after the creation of the Aerospace Technology Institute, in which government and industry have pledged to share equally £2.4bn over seven years to fund cutting edge aerospace research.

The Automotive Council, similarly a partnership of government and private sector, performs the same function for the UK car industry, where productivity is twice the national average.

“There is a three-pronged attack on people, technology and the supply chain,” said an executive of one of Britain’s biggest industrial companies. “There is a process whereby a technology plan is set in place. There is work on how to nurture and improve the quality of the supply chain. That is what I call an industrial strategy.”

There is also satisfaction that the energy portfolio will be run by ministers overseeing business. British industry has long complained that environmental charges have helped to impose electricity costs 80 per cent higher than the European average, said the CBI.

Mr Osborne wanted to reunite business and energy during the last Parliament. But he was thwarted when the Liberal Democrats were handed the department for energy and climate change at the start of the five-year partnership.

Again, there may be hurdles. “When energy hits the headlines, it can be an all-consuming job for a secretary of state,” said a former senior civil servant.

It may be some time before the true nature of Mr Clark’s industrial strategy becomes apparent. Some critics see the creation of BEIS more as an attempt to make a “fresh clean break” from the Cameron premiership than a radical switch in business policy.

“In reality, you will see a fair amount of continuity rather than a massive switch away from Cameronism,” said one.

But Mr Clark will be under intense pressure to reveal his hand sooner rather than later. Industry is feeling vulnerable after last month’s vote to leave the EU.

“We are picking up indicators of lower confidence,” said Mr Scuoler. “There must be some risk of a Brexit-led recession.”