Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March L 2 C Learning to Collaborate Project Overview and Management and Progress Report (WP 7) Albert Angehrn & Alicia Cheak, INSEAD

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Structure of the Presentation 1.Project Overview 2.D7.1 Quality Assurance Plan 3.Management and Financial Report Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March L2C: Learning to Collaborate The objective of the project is to The objective of the project is to address and significantly advance the state-of-the-art (both theory and practice) in two relevant areas: 1.Technology-enhanced learning of Collaboration Dynamics and Competencies Development. 2.Design of Advanced Simulations based on models of human behaviour in different contexts (organizational, group/team and interpersonal). Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Three Project Outputs A comprehensive online Knowledge Base and active Virtual Learning Community on Advanced Collaboration Dynamics & Technologies (ACDT). ACDT Framework: An eLearning Framework to address the effective development of Collaboration Competencies in the Information Society. ACDT Simulation Games Prototypes: Validated computer- enhanced solutions deployable in educational and organizational contexts. Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Relationship among L2C outputs Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Mid-Team Review Milestones Milestones Review 1 Knowledge harvesting, State of the Art review, common concept building among the partners A set of L2C Simulation Games prototypes Set up the Knowledge Base Set up the Virtual Learning Community Set up the Quality Assurance Plan Dissemination and Exploitation Plan Definition of the Evaluation Framework Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Learning to Collaborate Overview of the L2C Project Phase 1 : Conceptual foundations (M1-6) Workpackage 1: Knowledge Harvesting and Integration Workpackage 1: Knowledge Harvesting and Integration Workpackage 2: Knowledge Management tools development Workpackage 2: Knowledge Management tools development Phase 2: Prototype development (M7-12) Workpackage 3: ACDT Framework, Simulation Scenarios and Design Workpackage 3: ACDT Framework, Simulation Scenarios and Design Phase 3: Piloting and continuous improvements to the prototypes (M 12-24) Workpackage 4: Pilots and piloting cycles Workpackage 4: Pilots and piloting cycles Workpackage 6: Embedded, continuous evaluation Workpackage 6: Embedded, continuous evaluation Phase 4: Deployment and dissemination (M 1-24) Workpackage 5: Dissemination and exploitation Project Management (M 1-24) Workpackage 7: Project management Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March FOUNDATION (WP 1) PILTING & TESTING (WP 4) DESIGN & MODELLING (WP 3) CONTINUOUS EVALUATION (WP 6) DEPLOYMENT & DIFFUSION (WP 5) KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT (WP 2) Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Simulation Design & Development Process Overview

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March D7.1 Quality Assurance Plan Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Decision Making Structure Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Three Project Committees Created General technical implementation issues (technologies adopted, methodologies, validation circumstances, etc.). Review and update the solutions adopted, the technical directions of the project and identification of new solutions. Meetings planned: April 15, Project Steering Committee Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) To update the strategy of the project, review the progress of work, update plans and set priorities, to establish and enhance communication with third parties (the participation to international events and conferences included), and to resolve conflicts, whenever necessary. Meetings held: October 10, 2006Meetings planned: April 15, Technical Committee The Exploitation & Dissemination Board defines the commercialisation and dissemination strategy in accordance with the project sponsors in the individual companies, and possible assigned consultants Meetings planned: May Exploitation & Dissemination Board

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Steering Committee Members Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) OrganizationMain representative of each partner for the project INSEADAlbert Angehrn UCSCFederico Rajola UAFMRainer Marr + Alexander Fliaster OFAIProf. Robert Trappl OUSiv Vangen SCILTaiga Brahm IFRuggero Cesaria ALBANikos Mylonopoulos UCAnna Simioni MetisThanos Giamas FVASusanna Albertini AlphaMartina Eckert SUChris Huxham

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Technical Committee Members Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) OrganizationRepresentative (WP Leaders) INSEADAlicia Cheak UCSCFederico Rajola UAFMAlexander Fliaster OFAIPaolo Petta MetisThanos Giamas FVALouis Ferrini

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Exploitation & Dissemination Board Members Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) OrganizationRepresentative (Marketing and Business ties) INSEADAlbert Angehrn UCSCChiara Frigerio UAFMAlexander Fliaster + Florian Schloderer OFAIDr. Sabine Payr OUSiv Vangen SCILTaiga Brahm IF Luigi Buson ALBATarsinos Panagiotis UCMr. Gualtiero Insalac MetisVassilis Argyroulis FVASusanna Albertini AlphaMartina Eckert SUPam Hearne

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Monitoring 1. Progress and Status Reports 1.Bi-annual activity reports 2.Annual cost statements and financial report 3.Auditing of processes Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Coordination and Communication 1. L2C Internal Project Space ( Responsible partner: INSEAD Temporary collaboration platform on moodle for project coordination and communication while the L2C Knowledge Community (Workpackage 2) is under construction. Contains the key/basic tools: chat, forums, wikis, calendar, differential admin and editing rights, online status, , document upload/download, search function, folders, etc. Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) 2.L2C Website ( Responsible partner: MeTis Project website to communicate the project’s objectives and outputs to the general public.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Coordination and Communication 3.L2C Knowledge Community ( Responsible partner: FVA Collaboration platform for L2C partners, consisting of  Knowledge Base: uploading, categorizing, organizing and assessing content generated within the L2C project.  Virtual Knowledge Community: collaboration space to facilitate discussion and collaborative work on the research, design, and deployment of L2C simulation games Detailed description of the L2C KC and status will be presented in the WP 2 presentation. Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Management & Financial Report Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Annual Management Report for Year 1 The Annual Management Report is officially due on April 15. However, the EC required a draft copy of the report for the first L2C review meeting on March 31, Status: A draft version of the Annual Management Report from all partners was submitted March 23,2007. A final version will be submitted by April 15, 2007.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Management Report: Overall Progress for the Period Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Good Interaction and collaboration among the partners. Key communication and collaboration mediums have been set up. All the deliverables and prototypes have been delivered.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Management Report: Deliverables Submitted for Review (M1-12) Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Management Report: Workpackage Status Work Package Planned Start Date Actual Start Date Planned Completion Date Actual Completion Date WP1– Knowledge Harvesting and Integration M1 (Mar 2006) M6 (Aug 2006)M7 (Sept 2006) WP2– Knowledge Management Tools Development M5 (July 2006)M2 (Apr 2006)M8 (Oct 2006) WP3 – ACDT Framework & Simulation Games Prototypes Development M7 (Sept 2006) M12 (Feb 2007)M11.5 (Feb 2007) WP4 – Pilots & Prototyping Cycles M13 (Mar 2007)Has not started yes M24 (Feb 2008) WP5 – Exploitation and Dissemination M7 (Sept 2006)M1 (Mar 2006)M24 (Feb 2008)In progress WP6 – Embedded, Continuous Evaluation M6 (Aug 2006) M23 (Jan 2008)In progress WP7 – Project ManagementM1 (Mar 2006) M24 (Feb 2008)In progress Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Management Report: Quarterly Consortium Meetings Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) DateLocationTopic January 2007Metis, Athens, Greece4 th Project meeting September 2006UCAC, Milan, Italy3 rd Project Meeting May 2006ALBA, Athens, Greece2 nd Project Meeting 6-7 March, 2006INSEAD, Fontainebleau, FranceKick-off meeting

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Management Report: Status of Individual Workpackages Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) WP 1, 2 and 3 are now complete. WP 5, 6 and 7 are ongoing. WP 4 will officially start on April 1 (but some initial testing with actual users has already begun)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Management Report: Effort Declared in Y1 Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current situation Used (Year 1) Budget (Total- Year 1 + Year 2)% WP148,1255,586,7% WP249,0752,594,5% WP348,6368,570,9% WP40760 WP521,2765,532,5% WP614,7746,531,8% WP75,4510,850.5% Total187,31375,349,9%

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) WPStatusAnalysis & Adjustments WP1 Activity completed with minor underspending. Comment: No particular comment. Reallocation: The unspent resource will be moved to other workpackages (namely WP 4). WP2 Activity completed with minor underspending. Comment: No particular comment. Reallocation: The unspent resource will be moved to other workpackages (namely WP 4) towards the ongoing development of the knowledge management tools. WP3 Activity completed with an under spending of almost 29% under the estimation. Comment: The time allocated for conducting this activity was overestimated given the short time frame for the development of the first version of the 5 different prototypes. Reallocation: The unspent resource will be moved to WP 4 since WP 4 is a natural extension of WP 3 activities, involving pilot testing and further developments to each of the prototypes. WP4 Not yet started.Comment: Reallocation: WP5 Ongoing Activity over 2 years, with 32,5% spent in the first year. Comment: We expect to increase our dissemination activities in Year 2 when the prototypes will have been defined, tested and deployed. Reallocation: No reallocation needed. WP6 Ongoing activity over 1.5 years, with 31,8% of effort spent in the first year. Comment: Significant evaluation will start with WP 4. Reallocation: No reallocation needed. WP7 Ongoing activity over 2 years, with 50,5% of effort spent in the first year. Comment: No particular comment. Reallocation: No reallocation needed.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Budgeted (in DOW)New Budgetdiff WP155,548,12-7,38 WP252,549,07-3,43 WP368,548,63-19,87 WP476106,6830,68 WP565,5 0,0 WP646,5 0,0 WP710,8 0,0 Total375,3 0,0 Management Report: Budget Readjustments for Year 2

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current Experiences and Insights WP 1 : This workpackage has not met any major problem. As the project started in March 2006, M6 which is very important for Workpackage 1 fell in the vacation period in August. Therefore the planning for Workpackage 1 was extended for one additional month to M7.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current Experiences and Insights WP 2: No major problems were encountered. Longer period of development required for KM tools. WP 2 started in M2 instead of M5 (with the allocated resources stretched out over this time period), in order to allow enough time for the design and development of the knowledge management tools. In order to integrate all the features requested by the partners, a few MM were shifted internally from WP 5 to WP 2. Further refinement to the knowledge management tools will take place during the piloting phase in WP 4.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current Experiences and Insights WP 3 : Tight development schedule. Five prototypes were under parallel construction within a 6 months period. Translating theory into practice took more time than originally anticipated. The large amount of information about different models and theories of collaboration (from WP 1), and the fact that many of these models/theories do not distinguish clearly the three different levels of collaboration addressed, were the major challenges in the identification of specific dynamics for each of the simulation game prototypes. Initial evaluation of theoretical and design soundness of the prototypes. At the time of reporting for D6.1 Evaluation of the First Prototypes in February 2007, the partners had the design specification (i.e. D3.1) as a point of reference.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current Experiences and Insights WP 3 : Early user feedback is key. Initial pilots have been conducted in the form of three tests of three prototypes with three groups of managers (user feedback collection). A reallocation of resources of partners from WP3 to WP4 was undertaken, with WP 4 a natural extension of WP 3.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current Experiences and Insights WP 5 : This WP has not faced a major problem. Rich discussions were conducted on how to design an effective website to communicate about project results. They will be integrated in the next project phase. Ideally, communication should start at Day 1. The consortium decided after a communication with our Project Officer that the WP should start M1 and finish in M24.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current Experiences and Insights WP 6: No major problems have been encountered. Strong coordination and planning is key. However, due to the closeness of the evaluation process activities to the evolvement of other WPs, it was essential to reach a strong coordination among WPs to work along together. Because the deliverable was delivered a month before expected, so that it could be considered in the first review meeting, a full evaluation of the working prototypes was not possible. The Knowledge Base and Virtual Community dimensions were evaluated from a technical point of view. More detailed and continuous evaluation will continue in WP 4. For the evaluation of the simulation games prototypes, the design specifications were assessed, as represented by the description of the design, pedagogical and implementation guidelines of each of the 5 prototypes currently in development. A more detailed evaluation covering both pedagogical and technical dimensions of the actual prototypes will take place, as planned, during the piloting phase (WP 4).

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current Experiences and Insights WP 6: Challenge of development and evaluation at the same time. Finally, it was not always easy to manage partners’ needs and requests of time extensions when they are involved in several evaluation activities. What happened is that an output is evaluated as it is being completed, and that these evaluation activities had to be completed in a very short period of time. This issue will be better managed in WP 4 which spans a year and will allow for more well planned and properly timed evaluation (i.e. corresponding to pilot tests).

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Current Experiences and Insights WP 7: No major problems were encountered. However, due to how the project has unfolded, some workpackages required less effort or a longer time frame than had been anticipated. Some partners were new to EC projects and needed particular support. The Consortium Agreement took more time than expected due to involvement of legal departments of partner organizations.

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Financial Cost Statements The Financial Cost Statements are officially due on April 15. However, the EC required a draft copy of the financial report for the first L2C review meeting on March 31, Status: A draft version of the cost statements from all partners has been submitted. A final version will be submitted by April 15, Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Financial Cost Statements The Financial Cost Statements are officially due on April 15. However, the EC required a draft copy of the financial report for the first L2C review meeting on March 31, Status: A draft version of the cost statements from all partners has been submitted. A final version will be submitted by April 15, Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Effort Declared Per Partner M1-6 Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Reported effort & planned effort for each partner per workpackage (person months) WP1WP2WP3WP4WP5WP6WP7 Name of Partner ReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlan INSEAD 8,65104, ,412061,654 UCSC 551,240304,50,841,57,500,5 UAFM 4,980,7404,502,50, ,5 OFAI (funded) 1,55, , ,5 OU ,50,12,5030,10,5 SCIL 2, ,5 IF ,5302,50,250,5 ALBA 2,54,52, ,56040,20,8 UC 1,110,520205,50302,50,20,5 MeTis 2,5 4, ,50,31 FVA 1,8127,8411,508,505,50,67,50100,5 Alpha 3,5 4,35507,505,50,25000,10,5 SU 0,7552,430100,50,251,50,05400,5 TOTAL40,7155,529,6452,5068,50768,465,51,5546,52,8510,8

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Effort Declared Per Partner M7-12 Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Reported effort & planned effort for each partner per workpackage (person months) WP1WP2WP3WP4WP5WP6WP7 Name of Partner ReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlan INSEAD 1,35101, ,85121,2561,64 UCSC 052,840,8304,50,541,767,500,5 UAFM 1,9282,0241,134,502,51,0220,56400,5 OFAI (funded) 05,50,526,61103,5020,93,500,5 OU 05221,2200,50,92,50,4530,150,5 SCIL 02,51, ,5 IF ,5312,500,5 ALBA 04,50, ,562,540,20,8 UC 010,521205,50,4312,50,10,5 MeTis 02,51,562, ,50,31 FVA 0,3925,1611,54,98,505,507,50,8100,5 Alpha 03,50,6557,5 05,50, ,5 SU 3,7550,131100,50,151,50400,5 TOTAL7,4155,519,4352,548,6368,507612,8765,513,2246,52,610,8

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Effort Declared Per Partner M1-12 Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7) Reported effort & planned effort for each partner per workpackage (person months) WP1WP2WP3WP4WP5WP6WP7 Name of Partner ReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlanReportPlan INSEAD ,25121,2563,254 UCSC 55440,8304,51,343,267,500,5 UAFM 6,8282,7241,134,502,51,0720,5640,050,5 OFAI 1,55,50,526,61103,5020,93,500,5 OU 55221,2200,512,50,4530,250,5 SCIL 2,5 1, ,250,5 IF ,50,250,5 ALBA 2,54, ,540,40,8 UC 1, ,50,4312,50,30,5 MeTis 2, ,50,61 FVA 2,221311,54,98,505,50,67,50,8100,5 Alpha 3,5 557,5 05,50,255000,10,5 SU 4,552,531100,50,41,50,05400,5 TOTAL48,1255,549,0752,548,6368,507621,2765,514,7746,55,4510,8

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Targets/Plan for Third Semester: ActivityWPResp. Partner Agent Brain Module Implementation4OFAl Integration of Brain Module in Agent Prototype4INSEAD and AlphaLabs Specification of New Dynamics for Simulation Prototypes (Detailed Scenarios) 4All Implementation of New Dynamics in Simulation Prototypes 4INSEAD and Alphalabs Fine-tuning of Pedagogical Material for Simulation Prototypes 4All Further development of L2C Knowledge Community site 4FVA Pilot Runs4All Evaluation of Users Feedback from Pilot Runs6UCSC Production of Effective Communication Material7MeTis Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)

Review Meeting – INSEAD, Fontainebleau – 30 March Thank You for Your Attention Project Overview, Management & Progress Report (WP 7)