EARMA Conference Oslo

Attracting talent to Small and Medium-sized public Universities (SMU)

Strategies to attract the best early-stage and consolidated researchers

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Operational Lessons Learned

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

Small and medium sized public universities (SMU) face challenges when have to recruit scientist for their research projects and teaching activity.
Location, research environment (infrastructure, connections, facilities, research excellence of hosting research groups), position in rankings may not help on being attractive to the best scientists.
However, some SMU are getting very good results, managing a process of continuous improvement. Everyone has his own recipe and secret ingredients… but what are the key actions and the common patterns?
The session will present the experience of a group of SMU that are facing this challenge, with case studies on the actions undertaken to make working conditions attractive, to align strategy policy and actions, to use regional, national and EU funding to reach the goals.
In addition, focus will be made on what are the prerequisites to frame those single actions in a sustainable strategy. Having a good dedicated budget is important, but it may be not enough if governance commitment, long term plans, top support services are missing.

Bridging the R&I divide within Europe

How to enhance the excellence and research infrastructure of WIDERA countries?

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

While the Horizon 2020 funding framework has produced great results and impacts across Europe, its effectiveness to bridge the research&innovation divide between East and West is a more complicated question. This roundtable invites participants to reflect on past developments (impact of Horizon 2020 on R&I capacity building in widening countries, targeted calls, imbalance of funding) and the potential of Horizon Europe to address the lingering issues and offer new opportunities for building convergence and a more even European Research Area.

Democratising access to AI across a research organisation

How to get AI into the system of a large research organisation

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

In this table I'd like to discuss our unique AI consulting concept and how it works in practice.

We set up a free AI consulting service for Helmholtz Association scientists, i.e. currently 35 AI experts work for an organisation of 42,000 in short and mid term projects (no charge, our AI consulting is free for the researchers!); I'd like to share how we manage and pair supply/demand and would be happy to happy to discuss friction points and success stories.

How to achieve the goals with RDI services?

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

The topic of Discussion Table relates to the Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) work and how RDI, more specific pre-award services, can support in achieving the goals in RDI funding. Host presenter, development manager Sanna Juvonen leads RDI service team at Finnish University of Applied Sciences, Laurea. She is responsible of pre award services, which have been created due to the organizational change, where faculty became responsible persons of RDI-project in addition to submitting RDI applications. Services are meant for faculty who participates to the project application process. The need and level of support varies depending on how experienced the faculty is in RDI and what kind of help is needed in project preparation process. Services differ from sparring the idea according to the funding instrument, guidance, building a consortium, supporting the search for partners and the quality assurance of the consortium, producing text paragraphs, also directing writing strategically and submitting the application. Communication and guidance of financial instruments means the selection of financial instrument and suggestion of options, review of application criteria.
The development work in RDI services brought out important perspectives in RDI application process. Pre award services are not enough to achieve RDI funding but project preparation team needs to create a common understanding of the goals in addition to the tasks, which are related to the goals. Moreover, project preparation is diverse and requires special expertise. To achieve RDI goals, it is important to clarify, whether project preparation team has the expertise needed in RDI preparation and who are responsible of different tasks in project preparation. Discussion table views practices, how to better achieve the goals with RDI services.

IBEC Projects Office: An integral, personalised and tailor-made Research Management Support

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

We present the unique model of our Projects Office at IBEC, based on providing a global vision of both the research group and institution. This enables a targeted and personalized management which is aligned with the group interests, institutional strategy and (inter)national scientific landscape. We believe this is the future model for institutional Projects Offices, in which Projects Managers are not only administrative managers but represent an integral support system for the researchers.

MSCA Cofund management

A discussion on the opportunities, challenges and lessons learned.

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Operational Lessons Learned

Topic: Project Management

Cofunds foster excellence in researchers' training, mobility and career development, spreading the best practices of Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions and form the next generation of research leaders. Ireland, through its several higher education institutions and research centres, has secured 17 cofunds to date in areas such as Arts & Humanities, ICT Standards, Software Engineering and Advanced Materials. This session is aimed at project managers who are currently managing MSCA cofunds and those in the process of setting up their grants, and it will discuss the challenges of running such programme. This 15-min round table will discuss 2 main topics in managing cofunds: i) Dissemination of the call and its evaluation process; and ii) Training and development. 4 PMs with different levels of expertise will stir the discussion and capture lessons learned from participants. We will focus on lessons learned, issues and their solutions, and processes that the different PMs have encountered along the post-award journey of their Grants. In each table, we will also discuss the impact that the pandemic has caused in the proper execution of the programmes focusing on how the PMs overcame those issues. Learning outcomes from this session include main issues to watch out for when managing a cofund; ideas for support and collaborative opportunities within a network of cofund managers and NCP, and how to maximize training and development opportunities. At the end of this session, we expect to have captured a comprehensive idea of the issues that all attendees have faced and we will put together a report with our findings for dissemination to the EARMA network (JoRMA).

Managing Projects or Managing Uncertainty? The Complex Role of the Post-Award PM

Defining project leadership, responsibility and accountability in the context of standard PM methodologies

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Project Management

Over the last year, the authors have collected survey data on existing capacities, structures and best practice in research project management across Europe. We found that while all respondents were involved in project support, less than a quarter had any formal training in project management, and only 20% consistently follow a standard project management methodology. Many of these RMAs are designated ‘project manager’ alongside a Principle Investigator (PI), but we asked ourselves, if the PI is accountable and responsible for project delivery, how well do the standard methodologies apply to the RMA-Project Manager role?

Measuring societal impact; the quantitative vs qualitative approach

A discussion towards a common societal impact analysis framework

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Impact

The societal impact of academic research is increasingly getting attention. The impact planned for in the first Horizon Europe grant proposals where this was a requirement, should by now have materialized. But the EU lacks a clear framework for societal impact analysis. Therefore, a debate about how to measure societal impact is long overdue.

Working in research support in a university hospital in the Netherlands, the UMC Groningen, I notice a stark contrast between two ways of showcasing societal impact. My librarian colleagues focus strongly on measuring societal impact metrics of our institute as a whole. The way they are able to collect impact metrics is nothing short of impressive, but in my view this approach ignores the intricate nuances of a given impact project somewhat. On the other hand, my colleagues of the communication department have a keen eye for the story, but without quantitative support, the showcased impact lacks hard evidence and makes comparisons between institutions or projects impossible.

My experience in the United Kingdom taught me that both strategies could be reconciled. When I was working in an impact team at a Welsh university, I noticed there was a very strong focus on evidencing impact. Per impact project an impact case study was written, where often quantitative data was collected to show the reach of the claimed impact. This was then combined with qualitative data, to show the significance, or depth, of the impact. Both this quantitative and qualitative data are then brought together into one narrative and presented as an impact case study. For instance: “Our newly developed medical treatment has had the following positive effects on these ten interviewed patients. The treatment has been applied a thousand times, therefore, the health benefits of the treatment can be extrapolated, giving a sense of both reach and significance.”

Combining both quantitative and qualitative evidence in an impact case study, much like the British approach, allows for showcasing all facets of societal impact of research. However, benchmarking against other institutes is arbitrary (when compared to a purely quantitative approach). Where do you stand in this debate? Should your institution focus on qualitative evidence, allowing for the broadest range of impact possible but forsaking comparability? Or should we develop a finite list of impact indicators so we could compare our institution against others? Or thirdly, as proposed here, a combination of the two; best of both worlds or the worst?

Take home message: increasingly, research funders focus on the societal impact of the projects they fund. To assess whether higher education institutions have delivered on their promises requires a societal impact assessment framework. What should impact assessment look like, should we follow a qualitative or a quantitative approach, or a mix of both?

Research leadership programmes

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

The University of Oslo Research Leadership Programmes have run since 2007, and offer one course (“Starting Level”) for researchers who recently have been given leadership responsibilities and one (“Consolidating Level”) for more experienced research leaders. The programmes are tailored specifically for research leaders on the operational level, with an emphasis on personal development and peer learning. About 700 research leaders have participated over the years, one fourth of these coming from other Norwegian institutions.

Talent development for young researchers

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

The NMBU Talent Program is a career development program that supports young, talented researchers in their effort to develop as researchers. The program provides an opportunity to build on skills and competences that will improve the chances for attaining funding from top research programs nationally and internationally. The duration of the program is three-years and includes support per participant with (1) Funds for competence building, (2) Allocation to a mentor, and (3) Participation in biannual meetings.

The European RMA Community: The Leiden Group

A dialogue and discussion about building a broad European RMA community

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: EARMA and professional associations

In 2015 various European RMA networks, including EARMA, gathered in Leiden, The Netherlands, to consider the establishment of a pan-European network of networks with the specific objective of working together to support RMAs working across the continent.

The Leiden Group was never conceived of as an umbrella-association or a 'one ring to rule them all' association but as a shared workspace promoting mutual collaborations where, critically, each member maintains their own identity and role but pools our shared experiences and requirements.

Now we, the originators of the idea, want to bring the idea to the wider RMA community, all of our members and give colleagues the chance to be part of a wider discussion.

Transnational approaches for strengthening early stage research administrators

Questions and experiences from the ADMIN project

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

The main objective of the ADMIN project (Boosting Research Administration Skills and Services) with partners from five European countries (2020-2022) is to contribute to capacity building of research support staff and enhancing the prospect for Research & Innovation (R&I) projects and initiatives in European funding schemes. The second objective is to strengthen and expand the network of research support staff across project partner countries and beyond so as to allow free flow of information, knowledge and exchange of best practices hence increasing the prospects for excellence in research administration. The overall aim is to boost the capacities of research administrators by improving their performance, highlighting the visibility of their work and outcomes and strengthening relations with academic/scientific staff. The target groups are early stage research administrators who are faced to the challenge to respond to every-day tasks on R&I projects, academic staff, stakeholders and students. We would like to discuss some major questions central to the project with conference participants: Are you familiar with innovative best practice approaches for research management (case studies from various institutions)? What are daily challenges/problems you are facing in your work environment? Results of the discussions will be incorporated in project outputs: an educational video "alone in the office" and a project management handbook including case studies with best practice approaches from varous countries, among them the Application Lab at Harz University/Germany.

Working Together: A Call to Create a Transnational Research Management Support Community for Universities of Applied Sciences

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: Interactive Session

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

The expectations and demands concerning the societal, economic, and environmental impact of all types of research is continually growing in Europe and around the world. In order for the European Higher Education Institutional community to meet these expectations, it is necessary that contributors of varied expertise be fully engaged. While the role of fundamental universities in the quadruple helix process is undisputed, the role of UASs continues to play a less visible role despite the fact that Universities of Applied Sciences (UAS) now have two decades of research experience behind them. Our strengths in the innovation ecosystem, namely close and constant dialogue with local and regional actors such as SMEs as well as our thorough understanding of regional development have made us unique. However, to date, this has not always been effectively capitalized and consequently, requires competencies and tooling to bring it to fruition.

For UASs to increase their role, the research achieved at UASs needs to be properly supported by professional Research Managers (RMs) with an understanding of the unique nature of the research taking place at UASs. While research in the UASs has matured and simultaneously the support we, as Research Managers of the UASs, provide, RMs in UASs continue to struggle to offer the optimum level of support necessary for research. This struggle concerns time and resources as well as expertise. Professional competences and skills necessary for RMs in UASs are often different from those in fundamental universities pursuing basic science research because of the short history of UAS research and its different mission. In addition, issues like making science Open, evaluating Research impact and making it visible, and creating UAS-specific tools and systems such as a CRIS continue to be a challenge. One size does not seem to fit all.

Fortunately, we often have national collaborators to provide a sounding board for ideas. Occasionally, we discover a partner UAS in another country, but UASs struggle with the same issues international and we should collectively be able to support each other. As a result of these perceived deficiencies in the current system, we would like to create a transnational network for research support advisors that provides a platform for sharing and learning together; a network that is open, transparent, and has added value for members that leads to support, change and professionalization of the RM role in UASs.

In our 15-minute interactive session we would like to brainstorm and reflect with RMs of all types of institutions, whether they are from fundamental universities or UASs, about how we can successfully, collectively, work together to provide an established support community specifically focused on UASs.

Brokerage: a tool to support collaborative research initiatives

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Proposal Development

The need for interdisciplinary and cross-sectorial approach in competitive funding schemes for collaborative research is evident. However, how to make this happen? Brokerage or matchmaking is one of the tools to help pre-award consortia building activities with identifying potential partners and elaborating proposal ideas. This tool could be used internally bringing together different faculties, supporting strategic networking with other partner institutions, or exploring new opportunities. The events could be organized as physical, online or hybrid ones.

Co-creating strategies with research environments

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

Research environments/groups often need a strategy to become successful. However, we lack guidelines and processes to aid environments in their strategic development. In this session we share our conclusions from working closely with research environments to define strategic plans and implementation through co-creation. We will thereby suggest that facilitating co-creative processes enables refined strategies and action plans anchored within a research environment.

Developing Project Managers' Competence at Laurea University of Applied Sciences

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

The discussion table session will give a quick sight into Laurea University of Applied Sciences' (Finland) actions to develop competence in project management. These measures include a training programme for project managers and informal coffee and sympathy discussion sessions for project experts. Laurea’s in-house training programme, Certified Project Manager (CPM), and informal discussion sessions are open for project managers and research and development (R&D) experts.

Diamonds in your Sofa

What you don't know you know in your institutional repository

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Research information systems (CRIS)

Every RPO has or should have an institutional repository. As a showcase for what you do especially outputs that are not suitable for 'publication, they are hard to beat but how many of us extract the full value from them? How many of us treat them as electronic warehouses and never look at them again? In short, how many of us have no idea of how much really know?

Repositories store so much more than just full-text articles, they are used to catalogue everything from artworks to zoom logs and everything in between and that breadth represents hidden but real actionable intelligence for strategy and planning.

We will present our experience in TU Dublin as we use our repository, alongside all the other sources to plan our new research ecosystem.

Managing Grant Audits Under the New Normal

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Project Management

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused chaos and challenges throughout the whole world. This session aims to provide working solutions in how to manage Horizon:2020 (and indeed other Funder) audits in such a climate.
Topics covered include:
- Working remotely and from home
- Access to substantive evidence
- How specific Funders are treating the effects of the pandemic
- What specific Funders won't (or will) accept in terms of evidence
- How to resolve issues that arise and innovative solutions

What to expect when organising a conference?

Experience gathered over years of conference organisation

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Operational Lessons Learned

Topic: EARMA and professional associations

EARMA organises a professional conference every year and the main actor on the substance of the conference is the Annual Conference Programme Committee (ACPC). Both Zuolo and Maunula are long standing members of this committee and have years of experience in organising international and national live and digital conferences. Maunula is the current Chair of the ACPC. The Annual Conference aims at bringing together the most relevant and informative speakers in research management and administration, sharing their knowledge with the largest community of Research Managers and Administrators (RMAs) in Europe. Over the last years, we have gathered close to 1,000 people in different locations and close to 700 people fully online in 2021.

How Research Management Associations can play an ever so important Role in the New Normal

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: EARMA and professional associations

Shortly after the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a “COVID-19 Pandemic” on March 11, 2020, country after country followed suit declaring a state of emergency. In their efforts to stop the spread of a virus the declaration of emergencies included imposing restrictions on social interaction and closing non-essential businesses. With these declarations, the majority of universities across the world moved their teaching activities and majority of research projects to a virtual environment. The impact of this global shift to virtual operations was unprecedented as researchers, local and international collaborators, funding and governmental agencies, and research administration professional all moved towards a virtual work environment primarily working alone and from home.

Over 18 months after the initial declaration, the world is moving towards what is being called the “new normal”, with continued precautionary restrictions (e.g. vaccination requirements, use of face masks, periodic testing of employees for COVD-19 virus, etc.). One of the major changes in this new normal impacting the employees, especially also research managers and administrators is the move towards alternative work schedules which include a continuation of working remotely or a hybrid work schedule in which employees split their times between working remotely and in their offices. The experiences of the past 18 months have shown that research managers across the globe have continued to provide their research community with the support needed effectively and efficiently and that the new work schedules offer them to balance their needs with those of their jobs.

While a remote or hybrid work environment provides many benefits for both employers (e.g. ability to recruit employees from a wider geographical area or retain the existing workforce) and employees, it also offers some disadvantages for the employees as they become somewhat isolated from their colleagues at work. This is where the important role of Research Management Associations across the globe grows significantly in the “new normal”! Associations have played an important role in bringing the research management and administration communities together and help connecting them; this is the moment where this role becomes critical and where the Associations can become the solid bridge between the membership in exchanging experiences, foster knowledge transfer and reciprocal learning.

In this discussion session we hope to initiate a spark exchange amongst participants on this important topic to identify specific actions that the Associations can take individually, or collectively, to help the research management and administration community to stay connected with each other for the benefit of the researchers whom they serve.

Open Acces Pilots - changing funders' OA policies and practice in Widening countries

Experiences from implementation of Open Access policies in Poland and Czech Republic with EEA and Norway Grants

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Open Science & Responsible Research & Innovation

Researchers alone cannot make Open Access happen, as institutional policies at funding agency level play an important role. In countries with low participation in Horizon, experience with H2020-OA conditions remains limited. Hence, implementation of OA policies by national research funders is an important prerequisite for Open Science in Europe. This session explores the progress made and challenges remaining in introducing Open Access, based on experiences from research programmes supported by EEA and Norway Grants.

Open Science - connecting the dots

Alliances and networks for Open Science

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: Interactive Session

Topic: Open Science & Responsible Research & Innovation

Open Science stakeholders will in this panel discussion present the perspectives for Open Science. What are the internal institutional challenges? How will the changing environment for scientists and academic publishing, review, and recognition processes effect our work and our institutions? How can we contribute to this transition? And who are the new players and agendas in science?
The panel will consist of experts from research institutions, the academic community, and other key actors. The purpose is to provide an overview over the current state of Open Science, and reach out to and engage EARMA members in contributing to the further development of Open Science.

EEA BALTIC RESEARCH PROGRAMME -

A unique opportunity to promote regional cooperation between scientists, research institutions, national policy makers and policy implementers

Format: Poster

Category: Operational Lessons Learned

Topic: International

MAIN GOAL: Enhance research performance of the Baltic States at the international level and increase cooperation between the Baltic and EEA regions. 
CURRENT STATUS: 28 high-level projects with a total budget of € 23 million will be implemented through international cooperation by April 2024.  RMAs in each of the Baltic countries manage the implementation of projects funded through their calls for proposals. 
WHAT MAKES OUR PROGRAMME UNIQUE?• It addresses common challenges of the Baltic region by promoting closer cooperation between the Baltics and facilitating cooperation with donor countries. • It is a significant incentive for researchers to gain new experience in leading large-scale international projects, as well as to expand collaboration and achieve new scientific results. • Researchers from all participating countries had the opportunity to network before preparing project applications. • 1 programme, but 3 open calls, launched by each of the Baltic States, which offers a unique opportunity to RMAs to work together. • One strategic decision-making body - a joint programme committee consisting of experts from Norway, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania. WHAT DO WE LOVE IN OUR PROGRAMME? • The atmosphere of communication and collaboration between colleagues in the partner countries is inspiring. • The programme community could be portrayed as a friendly and helpful multicultural family. • Regular exchange of information, knowledge and experience and capacity building of those involved in project implementation and monitoring. • It is a great opportunity to support creative and diverse project teams that develop new research directions and promote international collaboration and the growth of researchers. LESSONS LEARNT Challenge 1: Different practices and implementation provisions • The knowledge and experience gained in solving challenges related to different approaches and regulatory frameworks to create a programme on equal terms in all three Baltic States. • Consultations of research institutions on calls organized by other countries and their requirements, as well as advising PPs during the implementation phase. • Establishing of institutional framework of each country for the implementation of the programme.  Challenge 2: Timely opening of the call for proposals • Time pressure to launch a call to allow for a more flexible time frame for project implementation. • No one can start preparing a programme too early. • Harmonization of documents is always more time consuming than one can expect. • Diversity of choices and solutions for IT systems used in different application and implementation phases. • Effective cooperation between other RMAs in participating countries is crucial.  Challenge 3: Organizing international events and remotely if needed  • Despite long experience in organizing information events, it has still been possible to acquire new skills (eg organising a matchmaking event for more than 200 participants from different countries). • The pandemic situation has led to organising the remote events and meetings, together with a challenge to make them as effective as the real ones. It has been possible only thanks to a motivated team. • Different implementation phases as well as planning of joint activities create a constant need for close collaboration between RMAs. Regular meetings are vital to discuss current issues, share best practices and learn from each other's experiences.