Internationaal Practical guidelines for Polish companies and researchers based on experiences of the FP 6 first call Dr ir Matthijs Soede Poznan, 9 June 2003

Internationaal Content  SWOT Analysis Framework Programme  Type of projects – Instruments  Experiences with FP6  Conclusions  Recommendations

Internationaal Strengths  Funding for core R&D that we were going to do anyway  Helps to focus R&D strategy on what is needed by supply chain and customers  Access to partner's facilities and technologies  ‘Soft' money (think of how much T/O would be needed to generate this amount of profit)  Positive cash flow  Total budget of $XM far beyond what could be achieved alone  Prestige of being in an International project

Internationaal Weaknesses  Deadline too short to do a proper job  Increasingly complex system, more Euro-speak (easier to get national funding)  High cost to prepare & low chance of success 15%?  Can’t justify cost of preparing proposal but.....  Not very flexible year contract/programme  Involvement of competitors  Inhibits N America/Pacific Rim collaborations  Too much non-core activity compared to in-house project

Internationaal Opportunities  Networking with supply chain and customers  Interactions with new people and technologies leading to new ideas  Access to the EC and possible input to future strategic planning  Staff development  Develop ideas and partnerships for new proposals  Use as background to speed up other technology developments  Separate projects with some of the partners

Internationaal Threats  Liability due to non/bad performance of other partners (especially for a $50M project?)  Changing economic circumstances  Changing technical priorities eg need to troubleshoot production rather than R&D  Impact of £-$ exchange rate  Project has to be very large and ambitious.  Perhaps too large/complex to work and too ambitious  1 year delay in starting work eg others have filed new patents  Confidentiality amongst consortium

Internationaal Type of projects - Instruments  Integrated Projects -to achieve ambitious, clearly defined scientific and technological objectives by integration of different areas, competences, and resources  Network of Excellence -to tackle the fragmentation in research society by integrating the critical mass of expertise  STREPS -new breakthrough projects  CRAFT/Collective research  …

Internationaal … among Participants … among funding bodies governments, contractors, industry, universities, research institutes, etc. … across Activities from basic research Support to SMEs Technology transfer to dissemination and training… … across Technical Areas Design, life-cycle aspects, Materials, Processes, Maintenance, repair, etc... Objectives Real breakthroughs, Support to Industry, Sustain. Development Clear and Quantified Deliverables and Integration... 50% EC Funds The “priority 3” IPs

Internationaal Integration in IPs  Each IP should comprise a coherent set of components  Internal architecture may vary depending on topic, scope and managerial approach  Forms of integration:  “vertical” - full value chain of stakeholders  “horizontal” - multidisciplinarity  “sectoral” - private/public  “financial” - synergy with other schemes (EIB, national or regional funds)

Internationaal Evaluation Criteria IP Relevance to Call3/5 Potential Impact3/5 S&T Excellence4/5 Quality of the Consortium3/5 Quality of the Management3/5 Mobilisation of Resources3/5 24/30

Internationaal Strengthening Europe’s excellence on a particular research topic by integrating the critical mass of expertise needed to provide European leadership and be a world force around a joint programme of activities Tackling the fragmentation of European research where the main deliverable is a durable structuring and shaping of how research is carried out in Europe Spreading excellence beyond its partners Network of Excellence

Internationaal Joint programme of Activities in NoE  Joint Programme of Research  Clear research strategy for year  Joint Programme of Integration  Financial, legal  Joint Programme of Spreading of Excellence  Workshops, training,…

Internationaal Joint programme of Activities in NoE  Joint Programme of Research  Clear research strategy for year  Joint Programme of Integration  Financial, legal  Joint Programme of Spreading of Excellence  Workshops, training,…

Internationaal è Relevance to call 3/5 è Potential impact 3/5 è Excellence of the participants 3/5 è The JPA & Degree of integration 4/5 è Organisation and management 3/5 20/25 Evaluation criteria NoE

Internationaal Experiences in FP6  Too many proposals  Type of instruments not clearly understood  Not enough industry involved  Broad variety of research topics also for not high-tech industry

Internationaal Av. Nbre Partners: 34

Internationaal FP6 and Poland

Internationaal CountryN IndustryN Partners% AT328040,0% DK194839,6% FI256538,5% NL ,0% DE ,4% IT ,8% UK ,6% GR196728,4% SE ,9% BE ,0% FR ,0% CH177423,0% ES ,0% PT54311,6% PL5816,2%

Internationaal Retained for 2nd Stage!!

Internationaal Proposal Title Adaptive Landing Gears for Improved Impact Absorption Aircraft safety and security STREP Acronym: ADLAND

Internationaal FP6 and Poland  Degree of participation is increasing compared to FP5  Participation of Industry should increase  Polish researchers are taking initiatives

Internationaal Conclusions  FP6 is giving opportunities  Industry is still underperforming  Poland is improving

Internationaal Recommendations  Make your own strategy plan  Use your (inter-)national network  Be patient  Ask your regional or national contact point for advice!