EARMA Annual Conference 2023 – Call for Volunteer Expert Evaluators

The 2023 EARMA Annual Conference Programme Committee (ACPC) is looking for dedicated volunteers to help us shape the content of the programme for the 2023 conference to be held in Prague 24th - 26th April 2023.  As always the conference will be structured in ‘topics’ and we are looking for people with expertise in one or more of these strands to support us evaluating and ranking of the submitted abstracts.

Each topic team will be led by a member of ACPC and we are looking for a couple of expert evaluators for each topic team to help us make the selection process as open and transparent a possible. Each topic team member will independently review and assess a set of abstracts. Then they will meet virtually to agree a ranked list of submissions for the strand. 
 
What exactly is involved?
The deadline for submitting your expression of interest to be a 2023 EARMA Annual Conference Expert Evaluator is Noon (CET) on Friday 16th Sept 2022.

Apply using this online form.

The applications will be reviewed by the ACPC and candidates will be informed of the outcomes by September 23rd, and if successful, which topic(s) they will evaluate.
Successful applicants (Expert Evaluators) are invited to attend an online workshop to further explain the processes and timescales. The online workshop is scheduled for 11:00-12.00 CET on Friday 30th September 2022.

Expert Evaluators will be required to review and assess abstract submissions in their topic area between 30th September and 17th October 2022.
For most Topic Teams a virtual meeting will be organized, to be arranged for the week of 18th - 21th October 2022, during which the Topic Team will discuss the abstracts and agree a consensus score and ranking for each submission.

This concludes the work of the Expert Evaluators. Please note, that there is no remuneration for Expert Evaluators. 

Why Expert Evaluators?
We are committed to making the conference selection process as open and transparent as possible.  Bringing a wider range of views from a larger and more diverse set of reviewers than the ACPC alone is a positive move in this direction.  We also see it as an opportunity for more people to be involved and contribute to the association but in a way that is less time intensive than serving on an EARMA committee.  However, we do also see it as an opportunity to find out a little about what it might be like to serve on an EARMA committee and the ACPC in particular.  It is also an opportunity to add to your CV.

Frequently Asked Questions
Q: How many abstracts will I be expected to review? A: It depends on how many are submitted, but typically between 10 – 30 per strand.
Q: Can I be allocated to more than one topic? A: Most expert evaluators will only review for one topic area.  Some might be asked to review more than one, but normally a maximum of two.
Q: Will I be given guidance on how to do the evaluation? A: Yes the ACPC will guide you through the process in an on-line workshop.
Q: Will I be able to see scores of the other evaluators? A: No, it is a blind review process. However, for most Topics, a virtual meeting will be organised including all linked external evaluators and Topic chair (from ACPC) to discuss on the given scores and substantiation to make the ranking.
Q: How many Evaluators will there be?  A: It is expected that each topic will use two to three External Evaluators.
Q: What if I am given a topic that I do not have expertise in? A: You will only be allocated to topic(s) that you have nominated in your submission.
Q: Do I need to be an EARMA member to be an Expert Evaluator? A: No, while we welcome application from existing members, we want to broaden the evaluation pool as widely as possible and welcome applications from any individuals with the appropriate expertise.
Q: How senior do I need to be? A: You can be at any stage of your career; we are looking to have as many different perspectives as we can.
Q: If I am an evaluator does that mean that I can’t also submit an abstract? A: No, you may also submit abstract(s), however you will not be able to review your own. Being an evaluator will not affect your chances of success if you do submit an abstract (or vice versa). However, having been an evaluator, this will surely improve any abstracts you might submit to subsequent conferences!
Q: What if there is a potential conflict of interest? A: You will be required to declare conflicts and the strand chair will guide you through the process, although as the review process is anonymous at this stage it is hoped that the number of conflicts will be small.
Q: Will I be rewarded for my work? A: You will have our undying gratitude and a mention in the conference proceedings, but there is no monetary reward nor conference fee reduction.
Q: Will I be required to attend the conference itself? A: There is no requirement to attend the conference, but you are of course welcome to. 
Q: What will the on-line application form ask me? A: See below
*Name:
*Job Title:
*Organisation:
*Email:
*Phone number: [wanted as a secondary point of contact, just in case]
*Motivation [100 words max]:
*Confirmation that you are available for the workshop (11:00-12:00 CET 30th September 2022); time to undertake the evaluation (30th September – 17th October 2022) [expected to be a few hours over that period]; and commitment to attend the Topic Team virtual meeting (tbc, week of 18th – 21st October 2022), if needed.
*Please indicate which topic areas you are willing to evaluate – indicate first choice, and other choices – and in a few words outline your experience / expertise for the topic. 
●    EARMA and professional associations, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    Impact, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    International, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    Leadership, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    Open Science, Responsible Research & Innovation, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    Organising Support Service & Team Building, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    Policy, Strategy, Evaluation and Foresight, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    Professional Development and Recognition, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise] 
●    Proposal Development, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    Project Management, (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise]
●    Research Information Systems (CRIS), (Yes/No) [If yes… 50 words max on experience/expertise] 

Closer explanation on the topics see the Guide for proposers.