EARMA Conference Oslo

New demands in a new era: Cluster building for greater impact

Taking advantage of the experiences of the EURION cluster

Format: Fifteen-Minute Discussion Tables

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Impact

With the increasing emphasis on impact of
research and synergies across research activities and projects, new requirements
are emerging for research managers and administrators to facilitate this strive
for greater impact. This session will scan the horizons for new requirements, opportunities,
skills and potential obstacles for joint collaboration across EU-funded
research projects. The participants will discuss and share their ideas,
experiences and lessons learned on joint efforts from research management as
well as communication and dissemination perspectives. 

All Quiet on the Front? Impressions of LERU researchers and RSOs on the preparation and submission of proposals under pillar II

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Technical Report

Topic: Proposal Development

Horizon Europe was launched in 2021 after a bumpy ride towards adoption. The European Commis-sion’s mantra on Horizon Europe is that it is very much an evolution, rather than a revolution. Much indeed looks the same, or at least not completely new and unfamiliar (e.g., three pillar structure, types of actions, etc.). However, once you start looking more closely under the bonnet, in particular at im-plementation modalities, there are various new elements researchers and RSOs need to come to grips with or which may even raise an eyebrow (e.g., new rules for MSCA doctoral fellowships and training networks, new pillar for innovation, portfolio management, etc.).

Connecting research support structures to stimulate an impact culture among researchers

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Impact

In many universities the turn to recognizing and rewarding impact beyond the academic realm has been taken. At Ghent university such desire to recognize and appreciate other forms of impact has been formalized into policies and support structures at the central and faculty level. However, challenges remain on how to implement and operationalize those policies. What kind of support (structure) do our researchers need? What initiatives lead to a conducive or stimulating environment or culture to focus on societal and economic impact of one’s research?

ERION: The Ethics & Research Integrity community within EARMA

Building bridges between administrators, researchers and policy-makers

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

We will reflect on the importance of
ethics and research integrity for research managers and administrators in the European
context and what EARMA is doing in this regard since 2018. ERION is the
Ethics and Research Integrity Officer Network within EARMA. Topics addressed in
the meetings have covered ethics and research integrity in Horizon Europe, Open
Science, GDPR implementation, training and many others.ERION acts as a stakeholder for the European Commission DG R&I
Ethics Sector.

A key component
of ERION is the SOPs4RI project which is working for a strong research
integrity culture in Europe.

European developments as catalyser for advancing EU research support

Example of UASNL

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Operational Lessons Learned

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

Practice based research, next to education and innovation, has become an important pillar of Universities of Applied Sciences (UAS). Accordingly, development of EU strategy and research support at UAS has picked up the pace. Over the last decade, UAS have started to contribute to the European research landscape, establishing valuable research collaborations with international partners in order to tackle societal challenges together.
In this context, we would like to share our experiences with establishing a national network of UAS, which affected different levels of research support. Our main observations are a) that this external organisation accelerated also internal support processes in each organisation, and b) collaboration rather than competition has advanced the EU readiness of all partners.

Finding funds made easy!

Personalized funding opportunities: Engage researchers in searching for funding opportunities.

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Proposal Development

UMC Utrecht is, as an innovative University medical center, always looking for better ways to inform researchers about funding opportunities. In Utrecht we use ResearchConnect as a platform to search for funding opportunities, combined with the integrated search algorithms of another company, Impacter.
The issue we were dealing with is that only a small portion of researchers is engaged in the process of fund searching. We were looking for ways to engage the researchers in this process and the idea was to show personalized funding matches to the researchers in a relevant channel that would nudge them to interact more with the funding database and with us as the research office. 

From Strategy, to planning, to execution

How theory collides with reality in a practical case study

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

For any organisation the journey from initial ideas, through to a high level strategy, then detailed planning and actual implementation is fraught with challenges, but also filled with the promise of a better future. This talk will cover current thinking in organisational strategy, highlight key implementation differences between corporate and university strategy as identified by EARMA surveys, and walk through how University College Dublin managed the journey from overall university strategy, to research strategy, to annual planning, and execution. The talk will close with a live survey of the audience's experience of developing and implementing strategy.

GraINN Cluster

Bottoms up – grassroot initiative?

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

Inland Norway University for Applied Sciences was formed in 2017 as a result of the fusion of two regional Universities of Applied Science in the Inland Region of South-East Norway. The Region is the size of Denmark and has a population of approx. 370 000 people. The campuses are distributed across the region with a driving distance of up to four hours from one campus to another. All campuses were originally district colleges before the 1970’s and have their own distinct culture and their own RMAs. The GraINN cluster was formed in order to meet the challenges of widespread campuses, different cultures and fragmented RMA-resources. It was led by a grassroot-movement of eager RMAs who understood the need for high quality cooperation across faculties and departments.

Grant proposal : journey or end?

Researchers and RMAs spend considerable time and effort writing grant proposals. How much of it is worth it?

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

Modern public science funding practices involve ever larger recourse to grant-in-aid systems. The recent plummeting success rates proportionally increase the amount of time researchers have to spend on project proposals, and the need for more research support staff. In response, recent research has shown the lack of predictive validity of grant schemes. Against this background, we propose in this panel discussion session to start reflecting on the question of how much time and effort researchers’ and RMA’s should allocate to answering calls for projects.

How To Utilize Tools for EU Project Management

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Operational Lessons Learned

Topic: Project Management

There are many reasons for fragmentation in EU
project management except from freedom of choice. Among them we can note the
following: Firstly, EU Projects change in terminology and in financial measures
every now and then, secondly, the people who manage projects constantly vary.What do we do differently? We assume that it is equally
important to manage communication of a project, rather than to manage the tasks
of the project. Hence, we built on an approach that the tool need not to manage
the project as such, but the communication of the project, in a way that will
suit EU consortia. 

In this
session we will share some practices, thoughts, and tips on how to implement
such tools properly, with a demonstration of a specific tool (Basecamp) that is
being used successfully. Aspects such as desired modus operandi, business model
and degree of access rights, as well as proposed “mapping” of a typical EU
project to the tool. This session will be very useful for experienced project
managers who seek ways to improve their skills and professionalism in handling
complex EU projects.

Impacting Research Management through North-South capacity development partnerships (30 min presentation)

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Impact

There is rigorous
debate as to where "academic impact" (i.e. peer-reviewed
publications) ends and "research impact" (i.e. beyond the academe)
begins. The StoRM and the TReMOR Projects are two recent, international North-South
partnerships towards improving Research Management capacity across the
participating countries across SADC, the UK, and the EU. This presentation
showcases their capacity development initiatives, and how their online
resources, under the "new normal", have impacted RM capacity
development on the African continent and further afield.

Improving researcher's participation in Horizon Europe through effective showcase of interests in upcoming calls

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

Some of the challenges every large organization has, when it comes to participation to European programmes and that normally impact the research support systems activities are:
• Creation of collaboration dialogues with other organisations to generate proposals
• The possibility to have fast and easy access to available expertise for specific collaborations generation
• The possibility to facilitate/stimulate the participation of newcomer scientists

It's a Research manager’s crisis baby!

Ten golden rules to survive the personal frustration when promoting European projects culture in research organizations

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

Once more… no answers…. It is ten o’clock in the morning and you still haven’t received any reply to the last “EU funding opportunities” mail that you sent two days ago. Siping your coffee in front of your screen you realize that actually none of your “EU funding opportunities” mails got any answer… Ever. Researchers in your institutions seem just not interested in EU projects. You feel sad and kind of useless. Do not worry, it is normal: It’s a research manager’s frustration. It is not contagious, and thanks to these ten simple rules you will soon feel better.

In the last ten years, most European research organizations have invested considerable resources to increase their European research projects portfolio. These policies originate at national level from the desire of European Countries to recover, through the funds provided by European research and innovation programs (e.g. Horizon Europe), part of the money they invest to participate in the European Union. Research organizations have therefore all implemented ambitious European policies with the scope of considerably increase the number of EU-funded projects. They equipped themselves with departments of research management and highly skilled research managers eager to help researchers to build and win thousands of EU projects. Unfortunately, these policies often sink in the shallow waters of reality. Most researchers are not attracted by European funds, which are seen as time consuming, too competitive, and also too difficult to manage compared to national funds. This Euro-inappetence makes the work of research managers difficult and undermines their chances of achieving the goals set by their organizations. This can provoke frustration and in the worst case, can lead to resignation from the job.

The European Affairs service of theInstitut National
de Recherche en Informatique et Automatique (Inria), which counts eight
offices around France, has come up with a list of 10 Golden Rules to overcome
this frustration and motivate researchers to participate and coordinate
European projects.

In this session, we will use these rules as starting point to engage an active discussion with the audience, sharing experiences, and exploring new ideas. Speakers will animate the debate encouraging the audiences to provide feedback through direct interventions (brainstorming) and through a participative game-based learning platform (e.g. Kahoot!)

Look inside – think beyond: A toolbox to support researchers in finding alternative ways of exploiting project results

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Impact

Impact is becoming increasingly important to funding institutions, but for researchers who are the experts for excellence in their research areas it is not an easy point to address in project proposals. Our exploitation toolbox aims to bridge this valley.

Its presentation will give an overview of how researchers can be coached their way across this bridge: to align their excellence in research with stakeholders’ expectations and to find alternative ways for exploiting their results.

Open Research Europe

An alternative publishing model in action

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Open Science & Responsible Research & Innovation

In March 2021 the European Commission launched their new publishing platform, Open Research Europe in collaboration with F1000, in doing so, solidifying their commitment to making open science an achievable mandate for their Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe beneficiaries. This presentation will go through the publishing model of Open Research Europe highlighting some different aspects of the platform devised to ensure it is meeting the needs of researchers from all the subject areas it covers.

Open Research: From Thought to Deed

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Open Science & Responsible Research & Innovation

Openness as a concept in scholarly communication is gaining increased traction with more and more universities and research institutes adopting the concept. But is it just a concept or even worst an aspiration?  This paper will discuss in
practical terms the step involved in implementing open research in a single
institution and in a network of 
universities aligning with national and European policies and
infrastructures. The challenges, cultural ethos and successes will be examined
with a view to highlighting what works and what does not work. Ultimately, we
will attempt to answer the question is Open practical?

Paths towards the creation of RMAs professional communities

A comparative perspective between Italy and Portugal

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

This presentation will focus on possible paths towards the creation of RMAs professional communities in European countries where formal RMA associations do not exist, on the basis of two case studies: Portugal and Italy.
Starting from an overview of the main RMA associations worldwide, we will describe the paths developed by the two countries towards the establishment of a community of professionals, focusing on the main activities implemented so far, similarities and differences. Eventually, we’ll make some considerations on the expected impact on professional recognition.

In particular we will present the experience of two informal networks of professionals working as research support staff:
• the Platform of Professionals at the Interface of Science, established in Portugal in 2016
• a working group on RMAs under the Research Unit of the Italian National Association of University General Directors (CODAU) created in Italy in 2019/20.  The Platform of Professionals at the Interface of Science (PIC) is an informal Portuguese network, that integrates research managers and administrators working in the different areas of R&I management and communication, technology transfer and value creation. With the mission of promotion and enhancing the professional recognition of such professionals, PIC has engaged in several policy actions aiming at promoting the inclusion of RMAs in the R&I decision-making processes in Portugal.

The Italian working group is a network of Italian professionals who work in the universities in different areas of R&I management, communication and evaluation activities. It has been established with the aim of analyzing and endorsing the professional role of RMAs in Italy, in particular through the creation of a professional development framework, which identifies and maps the skills, areas of activity and training needs of Italian RMAs. The purpose was that of increasing awareness about the role and the potential of this activities within the national RMA community.

We will present a comparative analysis among the two experiences at the national level and lessons-learned on the followings:
• Mapping the community and professionals’ definition
• Raising awareness and Communication
• Training initiatives
• National context and policies towards professional recognition.    Results will show common traits and differences and highlight the importance of a bottom- up or co- creation approach in raising awareness about the RMA profession. Suggestions will be offered to colleagues who wish to implement similar activities in their own contexts.

Post-award tool kit: simplification and digitalisation to support research management

Strategies and tools to support the post award phase implemented at Ca’ Foscari University

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Project Management

Ca’ Foscari has launched a series of initiatives aiming at simplifying and improving the current management and post award reporting procedures. This is part of the University’s plan to develop and strengthen the support offered throughout the project life cycle.

Professional development through best-practice exchange for managers and leadership

NARMA professional development program

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

NARMA (Norwegian Association of Research Management) has since its establishment in 2013 put professional development of research administration at the center of its mission by establishing initiatives and forums for best-practice exchange.In 2019 a new initiative was launched; a seminar for best-practice exchange at the management level. In this presentation we’ll briefly present the background and overall aim of this initiative, participants feedback and their experiences and lessons learned based on the initiative. 

Professionalisation of research management in Africa

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

Research management is an emerging profession in Africa, with ongoing efforts to encourage institutional recognition. The Southern African Research and Innovation Management Association, supported by other African associations, initiated a programme as impetus to the professionalisation of research management. The first phase resulted in a Professional Competency Framework and the second phase involved the establishment of the International Professional Recognition Council to lead the development of a framework for a professional recognition programme.

Promoting the RMA profession over the globe

How the RMA profession is understood in different contexts?

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: International

Universities, research organisations and states all around the world, each in different intensities, agree that international cooperation shall play the key role in further development towards excellence in research. Yet the level of support and means of facilitating of such cooperation differ as in many cases the vague idea of “making good thing” prevails, but the handling of such cooperation itself may in practice be a challenge without prior experience.

Quality assessment of RDI at Turku UAS: Research Group evaluation process and the role of RMA in RDI quality

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

One of the core tasks of Finnish Universities of Applied Sciences is to deploy RDI activities that promote working life and regional development whilst contributing to the reform of the economic structure of the region. R&D activities were added to the statutory tasks of UASs in 2003 and innovation activities in 2015. Given its short history, this has had implications to the quality culture of UAS. Over the past few years, the development of RDI processes at Turku UAS has been strengthened. We present a case study depicting the connection between RDI and the internal Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) assessment cycle: reflecting how it is working at Turku UAS for Research Groups’ evaluation and the role of Research Managers and Administrators (RMA).In Finnish HEIs the assessment of RDI is done as part of an internal self-evaluation cycle and the PDCA concept is widely implemented. The PDCA cycle is applied at Turku UAS and the quality system covers all areas and functions. The Finnish Education Evaluation Centre (FINEEC) audits quality management of research activities at Finnish HEIs. While many European HEIs focus primarily on the quality of the output, FINEEC concentrates on the quality systems that monitor and develop the quality of the processes as well as outputs.Turku UAS’ RDI assessment includes 1) RDI projects’ lifecycle evaluation, 2) Research Groups’ evaluation. In this session we focus on Research Group’s evaluation, a process conducted in two parts: a self-evaluation questionnaire of the Groups via an online questionnaire and an internal activity report compiling information from various sources (financial information; Finnish Research Publication Portal). To enforce the use of collected information, an annual target discussion with the Research Groups has been added to the process.The role of the RMA in PDCA and Research groups’ evaluation is two-folded. First, providing tools for assessment and offering compiled, visualised monitoring reports for decision making (Check-part of the PDCA). Second, unravelling the need for support in certain themes, knowledge, and issues that Research Groups have shortage and wish to develop (Act-part of PDCA) e.g., knowledge in new funding sources, Open Science, incorporation of Sustainable Development Goals, innovations, and tools for goal-oriented stakeholder networking.Turku UAS has conducted an evaluation of the Research Groups in the same format for the last four years. During this time, we have learned that there is a discrepancy between set RDI goals and available knowledge and/or human resources The top challenges vary from year to year, but internal and external cooperation and networking is a recurring theme. Establishing and maintaining cooperation is a long-term and complex task which, in most cases, relies on individuals’ personal contacts. Only synergy of operations (education, RDI, business), multidisciplinary cooperation and wider stakeholder networking can be solutions to this matter. It also craves more evolved quality culture and completion of the PDCA cycleWe wish to understand how does your organisation deal with RDI assessment. What kind of practices you have?

Refurbishing researcher’s information profiles in (post)COVID era

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Proposal Development

Are researcher’s online profiles targeted to fund raising purposes? Can it be an effective tool for pattern matching? How can we help researchers "to sell" their profiles in online brokerage events? This presentation will arise discussion on lights and shadows of online brokerage events.

Research evaluation matters

Barriers and incentives towards responsible research evaluations at Danish Universities

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

Research evaluation is too often about measuring what can be measured instead of what should be measured. The starting point should not be the availability of data, but what is valued about the entity under evaluation. The PARE-project (Probing 5 arguments for responsible evaluation on HE leaders) examines knowledge and attitudes toward value driven research assessment among leaders at Danish universities and uncovers barriers and incentives to responsible research evaluation practice.

Research management striving to re-invent an up-to-date idea of professionalism in a post-pandemic age

How is going to be professionalism for RMAs in a post-pandemic era? Which skills can we expect to require following the pandemic? What is professionalism for those in RMA overall?

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 2. Theoretical

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

How is going to be professionalism for RMAs in a post-pandemic era? Which skills can we expect to require following the pandemic? Following these questions, this presentation aims to define what professionalism for today’s RMAs is – consisting of qualifications, associations, professional frameworks, among others but not exclusively – but, above all, what we could expect this professionalism – its set of skills and expectations - to be in an early future.We all know that Higher Education worldwide has been experiencing a period of identity crisis and widespread criticism following the pandemic. For this reason, in a post-pandemic age, research managers (RMAs) could be expected to reshuffle their skills and re-invent themselves, not only to cope with an era where even professional knowledge has a limited lifespan (Barnett, 2008); but also to create a new idea of professionalism and up-to-date skills for the times lying ahead.All this may end up requiring the re-design of professional frameworks and qualifications so to reshuffle what we are and what we know so far in today’s research management and administration. This re-designing effort may end up impacting professional associations, institutions and the community of RMAs globally. This is, therefore, a call to action to begin re-inventing these skills as soon as we can.This presentation is meant to be theoretical; it moves from the definition of professionalism to the search for the up-to-date skills to be sought in the early future even to figure out what idea of professionalism lies ahead for all those in today's RMA.

Supporting Europe-Africa Partnerships in R&I

Insights from a Decade-long Experience

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Operational Lessons Learned

Topic: International

Sociedade Portuguesa de Inovação – SPI (http://www.spieurope.eu) was created in 1996 as an active centre of national and international networks connected to the research and innovation sectors. Being involved in projects worldwide, SPI has become a leading promoter of linkages between research organisations, private sector companies, science and technology institutions, and national and international public and private organisations. After more than a decade working in projects that target African countries, SPI has gained relevant experience in supporting Europe-Africa partnerships in Research and Innovation. SPI has an overall knowledge of the business and institutional landscape in Africa, which enables its team to identify the rising opportunities for R&I collaborations between European and African individual researchers and research organisations.

The future of European research depends on its ability to build long-term partnerships through which it can assert its relevance in overcoming global challenges through research and innovation. Today, some of the world’s fastest growing economies are in Africa, a continent that has been relatively forgotten for R&I collaboration purposes. Not only is Africa a neighbour continent of Europe, as it has been attracting more and more interest on the part of the European Commission and its cooperation initiatives, namely those announced in the EU Global Approach to Research and Innovation, and the EU Comprehensive Strategy with Africa. As a European organisation which has built valuable bridges with African stakeholders, SPI has been contributing to the development of networks that strengthen and connect EU and African ecosystems.

What opportunities have arisen for European researchers to engage with African researchers and entrepreneurs? What are the strengths of organisations from one continent and the other? What are the regional and global challenges that can and should be looked through a partnership of equals between Europe and Africa? What are African Union and European Union’s research priorities? Based on the company’s past and present experience, and highlighting the ENRICH in Africa project, SPI’s Board Member Dr. Sara Medina will provide valuable insights on the aforementioned questions to all interested stakeholders.

The ETO: creating synergies between transversal funding programmes

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Organising Support Services & Team Building

In 2019, Université Côte d’Azur initiated a transformation process to merge the departments in charge of external fundings, which, led to the creation of the European and Territorial Office. ETO is a one-stop shop gathering policy and project Experts for all type of funding and at any level. ETO adopts an approach by project and not by call, thus creating synergies between funding programmes and supporting the scaling up from the local level to the European and international one.

The EU Policy Making Process (The Potential Impact of Research Results)

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Methodological Session

Topic: Impact

Pillar II of Horizon Europe is designed to address Global Challenges and to support European Industrial Leadership. In the proposal forms of Pillar II the researchers are asked:

“Describe possible feedback to policy measures generated by the project that will contribute to designing, monitoring, reviewing & rectifying (if necessary) existing policy & programmatic measures or shaping & supporting the implementation of new policy initiatives & decisions.”

The EU Policy Making Process is a formal process that can last between two to five years. During this process ‘evidence’ is needed by the different players to help in the policy decision making.
One of the biggest problems in EU policy making is the difference in the language between the Policy Makers and the Researchers.

The policy makers state that “Policy-makers need information which will inform their decision making process. The information must be accessible, politically useful & contribute to finding practical solutions to problems.”
The Policy makers also state that “research reports are often inaccessible and not sufficient to ensure that research findings are used to inform policy.”

This presentation provides and overview of the EU policy making process and how researchers should design their proposals to address these communication concerns.

The Evolution of the EU Framework Programmes (Framework 7 to Horizon Europe +)

Future Challenges for Research Support Offices

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

The European Framework Programmes started in 1984 (Framework 1) and have evolved in one of the World’s biggest research funding programme. The early programmes (Framework 1 to Framework 5) focussed on bringing European researchers together to tackle specific technological problems.
After Framework 6 the scope of the programmes included Social challenges. If Framework 7 the introduction of the European Research Council (ERC) expanded the scope of the programme to Fundamental Research.
This presentation will example the evolution of the Framework programmes, in particular, the evolution from Framework 7 to Horizon 2020 to the current Horizon Europe programme. The presentation will also indicate future directions of the programmes beyond Horizon Europe.

Research Offices in Universities and Research Centres support researchers in responding to immediate calls for proposals. They also support Senior Management and Directors of research groups to plan strategically for European progammes.

Based on the evolution of the Framework programmes what new support will be expected from Research Support Offices? The presentation will look at:
- How can support staff monitor these trends and develop appropriate training for their staff.
- How to support senior management in planning for new European research strategies
- How to encourage researchers to participate in European foresight activities to be part of the EU planning process

The WE*-Economy: What WE need to know now, do next and be ready for FP10

*(globally confident community not influenced by or tied to national boundaries/ obligations)

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Interactive Session

Topic: International

The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development emphasized the fundamental role science should play in implementing the 17 Sustainable Development Goals endorsed by the global community. The European Commission responded to this societal demand on science via requesting systematic engagement in Horizon Europe.
Education, science, technology, research and innovation are a prerequisite for achieving a European and global sustainable economy meeting the SDGs. But it cannot be achieved by one country, let alone by the EU alone. Research and innovation have an important role as a catalyst for change. They are a tool for analyzing the impacts of change and a means for ensuring that any transition leads to an increase in our well-being. Hence Horizon Europe is a stepping stone into tackling the SDG challenges globally.

The EU is interested in setting the standards for the rest of the world to take the lead in implementing the SDGs and the transition towards a sustainable economy, including smart investments in innovation and key enabling technologies. But only by involving the entire world, by collaborating and researching with third countries, this endeavor can succeed.

This session focuses on the “why” and “how” of including third countries in a consortium. You will learn about the Do’s, and Don’ts, false beliefs, myths and develop mutually a scenario for a green path forward.

The rise of the Italian Research Managers and Administrators Association

A SWOT analysis

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: EARMA and professional associations

The
presentation aims to analyze the case study of the creation, establishment, and
development of the envisaged
Italian Research Managers and Administrators (RMAs) Association, under an
innovative perspective, not previously covered at a national level.

Specifically,
we are carrying out a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats)
Analysis of the internal and external factors that have a potential positive or
negative impact on the launch of the Italian RMAs Association by an RMAs
informal working group. 

Towards a European framework for Recognition and Rewards?

Recommendations from the Netherlands, Finland and Norway

Format: Oral 30 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Open Science & Responsible Research & Innovation

In this session we will take stock of the diverse approaches, regarding the new trend of responsible assessment policies and initiatives towards assessing and recognizing a greater breadth of competencies in academic careers, - considering open science practices. Especially we will compare the three national recommendations from the Netherlands, Finland and Norway to identify common topics and differences, and furthermore; - given that open science is about to become the new norm, are we heading towards a modernised European framework for recognition and rewards?

Acknowledging Each Other’s Craftsmanship: Perspectives on Proposal–writing support

PANEL SESSION

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Proposal Development

It is widely recognised that the researcher is best placed to write the research parts of proposals, for example, most of the Excellence section of European Commission Research & Innovation Action proposals. The rest of the proposal – the Impact and Implementation sections – are where the researcher often needs help and guidance, and this is where the pre-award research support professional comes in.
The entire RIA/IA proposal benefits from pre-submission reviews and input from multiple professionals, both internal to the researcher’s organisation, and external, in the shape of proposal writing consultants. Both the local research support manager and the external consultant consider aspects such as:

- Is the proposal message clear?
- Is there a coherent story in the proposal that makes it compelling for the reader/evaluator?
- What factors persuade the evaluator to read on?
- How do we convince the evaluator that this is the right team to deliver this proposal?
- How timely and novel is this proposal?
- What is the unique selling point of this proposal and how will it deliver to the Commission exactly what they are looking for?

These are the questions always in the background in supporting researchers to craft successful proposals. This presentation will address how RMAs can best engage with proposal-writing consultants towards the goal of successful proposals. We hope to use this time to provoke a wider discussion on RMA’s and consultants’ experiences from both perspectives and will explore aspects of pre-award support, such as:

-Common traits of winning proposals; Hints and tips on common problems seen in EC proposals (by consultants and research support staff)

- Optimal modes of interaction between pre-award RMAs in academic institutions and external consultants; discuss ways in which pre-award university professional support staff can interact with external consultants for maximum benefit to the researcher

- Discussion of researcher perceptions of the value of local, compared to external, research and innovation support

- Overlap and difference in roles of RMA and consultant: how to delineate responsibilities most effectively for the academic (the customer)

-What are the questions the RMA should ask a consultant before engaging them to support a HE coordination? E.g. Can they support the writing of business and exploitation cases? Will they play a role in Dissemination or Communication as a project partner (post-award)? What would a checklist of questions look like?

-How do you choose the right consultant per programme or research area?

-How do you ensure the consultant is the right fit for the academic/researcher? What factors influence the coordinator: Discipline knowledge, previous success rate, reputation, is it personality-driven?

-Discussion/Q&A: What is the audience’s experience*:

E.g. what are experiences of ‘No win, no fee’ consultants?
We will invite the audience to share good (and bad) experiences of working with RMAs/consultants with a view to complementing each other’s work, respecting our mutual craftsmanship and getting a conversation going about we can best work together to achieve the same goal of maximizing our success.

*Audience members are asked NOT to name specific consultants in their questions/discussions.

Data Protection and Privacy Considerations for the Research Manager

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: International

This engaging thirty minute introductory presentation will cover data protection and privacy issues which research managers need to consider in their daily work administering research and knowledge transfer. The GDPR will be part of the discussion, but this session is distinctive because it will consider basic concepts and practical applications. The key takeaway from this presentation will be enhanced understanding of these issues in the daily workplace and the practical handling thereof. A brief Q&A component at the end will wrap up the session.

Developing Staff and Their Career Paths in the New Work Environment

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

Over the past decade global investments in research and development (R&D) have continued to grow in what the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has termed the move towards “the knowledge economy”. Governments across the world have increased their investments in R&D with the universities being a major beneficiary as recipients of the research funding. This increase in research funding and requirements for proper financial and ethical management of the research enterprise has in turn resulted in continued global growth of research administration as a profession. The expansion of the profession has been helped with longstanding strategies for training of new staff and continued professional development of existing staff to meet the needs of the research enterprise. These strategies have included using internal training programs within the institutions, staff meetings, pairing of staff to work together in the office, as well as attendance in professional conferences and training offerings.
With the changes in the work environment resulting from the COVD-19 pandemic and variations in the schedule that include fully remote or a hybrid of remote and office work schedules, the existing strategies for staff development may not be as effective and need adjustments to meet the needs of the “new normal”.
This session will focus on initiating a discussion amongst participants in order to identify and share good practices in how to address the staff’s professional development needs, such as:

• How to successfully “on-board” new employees in the remote or hybrid environment?
• What are successful strategies used to maintain the team spirit and cohesiveness in this “new normal”?
• In an in-person work environment, staff gain significant knowledge from the routine conversations (“the so-called cross-pollination”) with co-workers. How can this valuable opportunity be maintained in the new work environment?
• Similarly, some of the best information exchange can happen through random interactions (passing in corridors, meeting at the water cooler). Is there an on-line equivalent?
• How can staff gain recognition for their talents where casual interactions and networking opportunities with their colleagues is limited?

Evolution of research impact (30 min presentation)

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: Discussion Starter

Topic: Impact

This presentation will look at research impact from RMA’s point of view: how the concept has been understood previously and where we are now. We will discuss the state-of-the-art impact from the 1990s to 2022 and beyond, how the idea of research impact has evolved from counting publications to the current understanding of science-society relations, and how the creation of impact is nowadays viewed as an interactive process. We will also examine the demands of research funders, for example, how Horizon Europe uses the impact pathway model, and bring up examples of national funders’ requirements. We will look at some of the tools and guides available so far and used by RMAs to help researchers understand their impact and write more enticing funding proposals.

First Impressions and reflections of Horizon EU

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: Interactive Session

Topic: Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight

Speakers: Dipti Pandya, Stavros Fotiadis, Daniel Spichtinger, Eleonora Zuolo

As the first results of the first rounds of the Horizon Europe land, how do we, as research managers and administrators view its impact within our research and innovation communities?

Have the original aims been served such as simplification and synergies with other EU initiatives?

The EARMA Policy and Representation Committee would like to take this opportunity to fully articulate the EARMA community’s sense and initial impressions of the first calls of Horizon Europe.

GDPR and Protection of Personal Data in Horizon Europe

A Case Study for Research Managers and Administrators

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Project Management

This live session asks participants to interact with characters from a case study on data protection issues exposed by research partners awarded with a fictional grant. Participants will play the roles of data controller and processor, committed to handle and store personal data for research purposes. Research managers will work together to seek compliance of research activities with GDPR. Within an unconventional frame, we will share our personal experience and discuss best practices.

How to improve researcher competencies in policy advice by creating a trainer network across Europe?

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: Impact

This session gives an insight into how both a research policy unit at a university and a training unit at JCR are jointly looking towards increasing researcher competencies in advising and shaping policy.

The role of open science

What are publishers doing to promote responsible research?

Format: Oral 60 Minutes

Category: Practical Initiatives

Topic: Open Science & Responsible Research & Innovation

In May 2021, the UKRI published a report outlining the funders’ role in ensuring a responsible research culture and assessment practices – highlighting the importance of diversity, collaboration, and the need for change in research assessment. The European Commission identified open access as one of the five central themes of responsible research and innovation. But what about the role of the scholarly publisher? Scholarly publishers play a vital role in facilitating open access and open science policy and practice, but open science requires collaboration among all the stakeholders in the scholarly ecosystem.

This presentation will show practical ways in which collaboration between the key stakeholders in the scholarly research system can facilitate the shift to open science, and bring about real change in how we discover, value, and use research – to the benefit of our shared research system and society as a whole.

Collaboration of Research Managers within University Alliances

Format: Pecha Kucha

Category: 3. Good Practice

Topic: Proposal Development

Many of us belong to established university alliances, but haven’t you ever had the feeling that nothing concrete comes out of the collaboration? What is the secret of developing a fruitful long-term strategic collaboration between research managers, which really supports and facilitates your daily work?
At Nordic Five Tech, we found a good recipe for success that we want to share with you in our presentation.

Forming a professional association – REGON Case Study

Format: Pecha Kucha

Category: 1. Case Study

Topic: EARMA and professional associations

Czech Republic, South Moravia, around 2010 - vast investment from the structural funds rapidly improves the research infrastructures of local research centres and attracts many excellent researchers. However, the Regional Innovation Strategy (RIS) recognizes that such investments, in isolation, are not sufficient for sustainable development of research and innovation potential of the whole region. The RIS also highlighted the fact that there is a lack of experience in supporting research projects and in research management in general.
Around the South Moravian Innovation Centre (JIC) as the RIS coordinator has formed a group of experts willing to meet and share best practices, discuss common problems and find solutions to them. A Regional Grant Offices Network (REGON) was created. At the begging of 2020, Masaryk University, the most successful Czech institution in the obtaining the projects from the Framework programmes, took a lead of the group and was about to launch the new chapter of REGON. However, COVID-19 suddenly changed plans – the physical meetings were not possible.
Paradoxically, this helped in the end - online platforms created new forms of communication and opened meetings to the research management community from the whole country. The ability to regularly bring together probably the largest group of RM professionals raised the question of how to take advantage of this movement, concentration of skills, great ideas and common goals and benefit together in the long term. This led us to the idea of establishing a professional association - the Czech Association of Research Managers and Administrators (CZARMA). I will guide you through the REGON journey from a regional meeting of a few international project management enthusiasts to an attempt to create a broad professional platform.

Research Support Professionals and Lifelong Learning

The core activities of the Professional Development and Recognition Committee (PDRC) of EARMA

Format: Pecha Kucha

Category: Technical Report

Topic: Professional Development and Recognition

The aim of this session is to present the core activities of the Professional Development and Recognition Committee (PDRC) of EARMA. The scope of PDRC is for EARMA to provide a comprehensive and relevant professional training program for our community members, also available for non-members. Considering that professional research managers and administrators (RMAs) worldwide are facing the transition to the “new normal”, we seek a wider understanding of emerging RMA training needs in order to provide input for high quality training.In this session we will present the results of a survey launched in 2021 on training initiatives and needs of RMAs in Europe and beyond. The survey originates from the mapping of existing training initiatives of RMAs associations worldwide, carried out by an Italian RMAs working group in 2020, that pointed out how different is the approach to training in each country. However, data on training at national level are hardly available worldwide, thus hampering studies on common training needs among RMAs in Europe. The survey aims to provide a general overvie of existing training courses for RMAs at national level and to identify relevant topics, emerging skills and preferred training tools, according to RMAs needs. Other surveys on this topic have been considered and the consistence with the RAAAP survey has been investigated.To complement the results of the survey we present the current EARMA training program and how the PDRC works to develop a comprehensive multilevel program where members at all stages can engage and undertake different tasks, as for instance trainers, assessors and mentors. We welcome all input, experience and suggestions from the audience in the discussion following our presentation.