Periodic report - 1st period - all docs - CORDIS

Transcription

2. Work Package
achievements
2.1
1-4:
Project
objectives,
work
progress
and
Project objectives and person month planned for the period
WP 1
Analysis of relevant SMEs as well as FP7 projects to compile a comprehensive picture on RDI
needs, trends and challenges of SMEs
WP 1
Statistical measurement of the relevancy of the SME’s RDI needs established in the
qualitative analysis
WP 1
Validation of survey results with relevant stakeholders and EU decision makers.
WP 2
WP 2
WP 2
WP 3
Identification of best practices of NM R&D commercialization
Compilation of Guidelines for successful commercialization
Creation of a prototype activity in an international Workshop on NM R&D commercialization
Finalizing findings from WP1 and WP2 into policy tools, strategies and practice for SMEdriven European research on Networked Media R&D
Raise awareness for the project activities at EU and international level
Disseminate the project and its findings to the public at large, progress raising and broadening
interest and knowledge about commercialisation in Europe’s regions
Greater visibility of SMARD project results and network
Generate regional and political support for Guideline
WP 4
WP 4
WP 4
WP 4
Figure 4: Person Month planned for Period 1 (Spt. 2011 – Aug. 2012) according to DOW
7
2.2
Work progress and achievements during the period
WORK PACKAGE 1: ANALYSIS OF
THE DIGITAL MEDIA INDUSTRIES
NM R&D FOR ENHANCING THE COMPETITIVENESS OF SMES IN
a) Summary of progress towards objectives and details for each task
Objective 1: Analyse relevant SMEs as well as FP7 projects to compile a comprehensive
picture on RDI needs, trends and challenges of SMEs
The following activities have been realized:
•
Development of a concept for a needs and requirements analysis of SMEs in the digital
media industries and the web economy (see deliverable 1.1.1)
•
Development of templates for
o
conducting interviews with SMEs
o
developing case studies on selected SMEs
o
analysing FP7 projects
(All templates included sections for formulating need statements based on the prior
analysis)
•
Sending the templates to the project partners for input and then integrate feedback into the
templates;
•
Conducting the qualitative analysis of RDI needs by:
o
analysing eight relevant SMEs through in-depth interviews (each project partner
interviewed two SMEs);
o
developing more detailed case studies on 4 SMEs that were previously interviewed
(one case study per partner); these focused on the particularly interesting SMEs for
the analysis;
o
analysing relevant FP7 projects: The project partners analysed 12 relevant FP7
projects + an additional 3 FP7 projects; altogether 15 FP7 projects were analysed;
The qualitative analysis formed the basis for developing the RDI needs survey in task 1.2
(see below).
Objective 2: Conduct Europe-wide survey on RDI Needs of SMEs (qualitative assessment)
The main activities were:
•
Developing a concept for the survey on RDI needs of SMEs in the digital media industry
and web economy. This concept was discussed and further developed by contributions
from the partners, in particular through an extensive workshop session at the Salzburg
SMARD project meeting; the survey included general questions on SMEs as well as a set
of RDI need statements (based on the findings of the qualitative analysis).
•
Implementation and design of the web-based RDI survey: Based on the concept and the
contributions from the partners, the survey was finalised and implemented in the form of an
online survey (utilising Survey Gizmo). Great care was taken that the survey was both
comprehensive in terms of identifying RDI needs as well as not taking too much time to
complete; another aspect was to have a pleasant design.
•
Pretesting of survey and finalisation: Before the start of the survey, the survey was
extensively tested internally to discover bugs and mistakes, but also any
8
misunderstandings in the text or design-related issues; this feedback was included to refine
and finalise the online survey;
•
Establish a database of relevant SMEs and SME multipliers in Europe, based on a template
that was developed and provided by SRFG; this database formed the basis for distributing
the survey Europe-wide; to establish a Europe-wide database, each partner was allocated
various European countries to research SMEs and multipliers;
•
Distribution of the RDI needs survey to SMEs by SRFG and the partners Europe-wide
through:
o
The database of SMEs that was established previously (SRFG: 9 countries; other
partners 7 countries each);
o
SME multipliers established in the database; these were asked to distribute
information to SME contacts in different countries;
o
Utilising various contact networks of each partner;
o
Posting links on SMARD website as well as other platforms and websites;
Distribution was mainly done via email (using an invitation text formulated by the partners)
but also via contacting SMEs by phone.
•
Extraction and analysis of the survey data and findings by SRFG: At the end of June the
online survey was closed; the data were extracted from Survey Gizmo, cleaned and
recoded; this was followed by an extensive statistical analysis and data visualisation, which
formed the basis for the Survey Report (see below).
•
Survey Report on RDI Needs of SMEs in the digital media industry and the web economy:
Following the analysis of the survey data and findings, a comprehensive RDI needs survey
report was written by SRFG; a draft survey was sent to partners to provide further input; the
report was finalised until the end of August 2012;
Objective 3: Concertation meeting with stakeholders and decision makers (discussion &
synthesis of survey results)
Activities implemented until August 2012:
•
Develop a concept for a concertation meeting with stakeholders and decision-makers (see
Del. 1.1.2); the concept provides a basis for planning and preparing the actual concertation
meeting which is being held in conjunction with the WP2 workshop on commercialisation at
the NEM Summit in Istanbul in October 2012;
•
Preparation and organisational issues for the concertation meeting, which is being done
together with organising the WP2 workshop on commercialisation (e.g. invitation letter,
concept for the workshop etc.);
Please note: This activity is still in progress: in the Stuttgart project and Advisory Board meeting in
September 2012 the workshop/concertation meeting session was further elaborated. The actual
concertation meeting will be held at the NEM Summit in October 2012.
b) Major outcomes and significant results:
Deliverable 1.1.1 Concept of Needs and Requirements Analysis of SMEs: The methodology
and approach for the qualitative analysis as well as the relation and dependencies on tasks 1.2
(Conduct Europe-wide survey on RDI needs of SMEs) and 1.3 (Concertation meeting with
9
stakeholders and decision-makers) were described in detail in the Deliverable 1.1.1 Concept of
Needs and Requirements Analysis of SMEs prior to the qualitative analysis.
Establish a basis for RDI Needs Survey: The major outcome of the qualitative analysis was to
create the basis for designing and formulating questions and RDI statements for the quantitative
survey on RDI needs of SMEs (see task 1.2).
Del 1.1.3 – Survey Report on RDI Needs of SMEs in the Digital Media Industry and the Web
Economy: The main survey findings were presented in a Survey Report. Please note: the report is
to be further validated through the External Advisory Board in the Stuttgart project meeting in
September 2012 as well as in a workshop with decision makers and stakeholders at a workshop at
the NEM Summit in Istanbul in October 2012. Findings of the survey will also feed into the Strategy
for SME-driven Research on Networked Media RDI. (see WP3)
Del. 1.1.2 Concept for the International Concertation Meeting, which outlines the concertation
meeting to be held in conjunction with the WP2 workshop on commercialisation at the NEM
Summit in Istanbul.
c) Deviations from Annex I
•
According to Annex 1 at least two FP7 projects per partner had to be analysed (8
altogether). To gain even more insights we decided, however, to analyse at least 3 projects
per partner (12 altogether). In the end, we analysed 15 projects. As a consequence Del 1.1
– Concept of needs and requirements analysis of SME – was delivered later then foreseen
(16 January 2012 instead of October 2011). The postponing was agreed with the Project
Officer
•
The target of the survey was N=400. While we originally had 603 respondents in the
survey, not all respondents could be included in the survey for data analysis. In a first step,
191 non-respondents, i.e. respondents that did not answer more than the first five
questions, were identified and excluded. Also respondents that filled in the survey twice,
respondents that needed an impossibly short time span for filling in the survey or that
tended to always select the same values were excluded where necessary. As a result of
this data cleaning, 352 remained in the final dataset.
•
Due to scheduling and organisation planning it was decided to hold the concertation
meeting in conjunction with the WP2 workshop on commercialisation. This was also
communicated to the European Commission.
•
Overall deviation from Annex 1: Change in terminology – from R&D to RDI: In the Salzburg
project meeting the four project partners agreed to focus rather on research, development
and innovation (RDI) needs instead of research & development (R&D) needs, as we
learned from initial interviews in the qualitative assessment (see below) that many SMEs do
not consider their research activities as R&D but often rather as innovation. Hence we
decided to use a broader terminology.
d) Statement on use of resources
PM
Spent in
MFG PM
SRFG PM IBBT PM CSP PM Period 1
spent
spent in
spent in spent in all
Total
Plan PM Period 1 Period 1
Period 1
Period 1 Period 1 partners
PM
WP 1
16,11
22,24
17,9
2,5
10,7
2,74
6,3
Figure 5: Comparison Person Month Planned and Person Month Spent on WP 1 (PM = Person Month)
10
The additional 4,13 person month spent for WP 1 during the 1st reporting period can mainly be
explained by the fact that some tasks (such as the distribution of the survey) have been
accomplished by junior researchers and junior project managers.
WORK
PACKAGE
COMMERCIALIZATION
2:
TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER
MODELS
IN
REGIONS
FOCUSING
ON
a) summary of progress
Objective 1: Identification of best practices of NM R&D commercialization +
Objective 2: Compilation of Guidelines for successful commercialization
•
Literature review has been conducted as basic input for the work package
•
Templates have been made to collect best practices in the four regions
•
Best practices have been collected in the four regions, based on the input of the four
SMARD consortium partners and their direct partner organisations
•
Based on interviews with four relevant stakeholders in each regions by all partners (16
interviews in total): technology transfer offices, incubators, government agencies and
SMEs, the guidelines for successful Networked Media R&D commercialisation has been
written and finalised after multiple feedback rounds with the consortium partners.
•
The guidelines have been made publicly available and dissemination has been accelerated
through communication efforts (social media, newsletters etc).
•
The guidelines are to be validated by the SMARD Advisory Board (meeting of the first week
of September 2012).
Objective 3: Creation of a prototype activity in an international Workshop on NM R&D
commercialization
• A workshop concept has been designed and discussed with the consortium partners
•
The workshop concept has been validated with two stakeholders:
o
The European Commission representatives of DG Connect
o
The SMARD Advisory Board (September 2012)
•
Three EU funded projects have been asked for participation to serve as case studies in the
workshop. Their participation has been confirmed.
•
The workshop has been confirmed to take place within the NEM Summit, to be held in
October 2012 in Istanbul, Turkey.
•
The workshop preparations are currently being undertaken.
b) Clearly significant results
•
Template for best practice delivered to project partners (Del. 2.2.1)
•
Collection of best practices from all partner regions (Del. 2.2.2)
•
Public deliverable: Guidelines for successful Networked Media R&D commercialisation
(Del. 2.2.3)
11
•
Concept for International Workshop on NM R&D Commercialization (Del 2.2.4) and
announcement and preparations for the interactive workshop (October 2012, Istanbul)
c) Deviations from Annex I
• The final guidelines for successful Networked Media R&D commercialisation have been
made available with some delay, given the fact that conducting the interviews to collect the
underlying data have taken more time than anticipated.
•
The interactive workshop has been postponed, given the cancellation of the concertation
meeting initially planned for May/June 2012. There are no direct consequences for the
other activities.
MFG PM
Total
spent in
WP 2 PM
10,2
7,14
PM
Spent in
spent in
Period 1
2
0,7
4,19
3,3
10,19
The additional 5,05 person month spent for WP 2 during the 1st reporting period can be explained
by the fact that some tasks (such as the collection of best practices) have been accomplished by
junior researchers and junior project managers. Furthermore, the conduction of 16 interviews for
the collection of best practices has proven to take more time than estimated in the project
proposal.
WP 3 Developing EU strategic framework for support and transfer of Networked
Media R&D for SMEs
Objective: Finalizing findings from WP1 and WP2 into policy tools, strategies and practice
for SME driven European research on Networked Media R&D
a) summary of progress
In the reference period, WP3 has worked as planned and has delivered
• the SMARD Draft Strategy on Commercialization (D3.1) and
• the Validation Plan (D3.2) .
The draft strategy is based on the results of WP1 and WP2 and includes 16 statements to be
validated, located along a process.
The validation foresees the tasks to be performed in the following months. Validation is based on
the consultation of stakeholders.
The process to draft the strategy and the validation plan can be synthesized as follows:
•
Analysis of WP1 and WP2 outputs and raw materials (interviews, cases, projects, etc)
•
Analysis of literature on technology transfer, cases, EU funding programs and policies
•
Draft of the first list of statements. 1st round of feedback, comments and contribution from
partners, via e-mail consultation and via skype conference calls
12
•
Inclusion of feedbacks, review of the list of statements, draft of the process-roadmap.
Release of the second version. 2nd round of feedback, comments and contribution from
partners, via e-mail consultation and via skype conference calls
•
Inclusion of feedbacks, review of the process-roadmap. 3nd round of feedback, comments
and contribution from partners, via e-mail consultation and via skype conference calls.
•
Draft of validation plan, release and collection of feedback by partners, via e-mail
consultation and via skype conf calls.
•
Release of “Draft Strategy “ and “Validation Plan”
b) clearly significant results
• the SMARD Draft Strategy on Commercialization (D3.1) and
• the Validation Plan (D3.2) .
c) deviations from Annex I
In Annex I the validation process of the SMARD Strategy (within WP3) forecasts a dedicated
workshop involving stakeholders, to be hold during the EU Networked Media cluster concertation
meting around month 12. Within WP2, the DOW forecasts another dedicated stakeholder
workshop, to be hold during a previous concertation meeting, aimed at presenting WP1 and WP2
results. This interactive workshop has been postponed to the NEM Summit in October 2012, given
the cancellation of the concertation meeting initially planned for May/June 2012. The SMARD
consortium has evaluated as not feasible (for organizational reasons) and nor effective (in relation
with SMARD goals), to organize 2 SMARD workshops during the NEM concertation meeting
forecast in Istanbul in October 2012.
As a consequence, the WP3 leader, together with Project leader and the SMARD consortium has
proposed a change in methodology in order to achieve the forecast goal of WP3, that is the
validated Strategy. The change of methodology will consist of:
•
the WP3 workshop will merge in the WP2 workshop: most relevant WP3 issues, useful for the
Strategy validation, will be tackled together with WP2 goals and feedback for validation will be
collected.
•
The WP Leader will hold qualitative validation interviews with FP 7 Projects and SMEs on the
occasion of the NEM Summit
•
the validation process will include other actions beside the workshop (see validation plan):
o
consultation of experts belonging to the SMARD advisory board;
o
consultation of local stakeholders
o
consultation of FP7 project leaders during NEM summit
This change of methodology has been confirmed in an amendment (October 2012).
13
PM
Spent in
MFG PM
spent
spent in
Total
Plan PM Period 1 inPeriod 1
Period 1
WP 3 PM
7,2
5,45
12
1,8
0,4
0,35
2,9
WP 4 Dissemination
Objective 1: Raise awareness for the project activities at EU and international level
To that aim, the following activities have been undertaken:
•
Production and Update of Dissemination Plan
•
Development, launch and maintenance of project website: www.smard-project.eu
•
Development of project logo
•
Development of project flyer
•
Development and production of project rollup
Objective 2: Disseminate the project and its findings to the public at large, progress raising
and broadening interest and knowledge about commercialisation in Europe’s regions
This objective has been realized through the following activities:
•
Direct Talks to stakeholders (see communication reporting in annexe)
•
E-mailings on the occasion of the of Dissemination of the survey
•
Participation in the following third party events:
14
Partner
Details
rd
3 party events
•
2011 NEM Sumit, Turin (presentation September 27th,2011)
•
8th FP7 Networked Media Concertation meeting, Brussels (presentation December 14th 2011
•
Kick-off meeting Entrepreneurship and Innovation Cluster, Brussels (presentation March 23rd
2012)
•
CeBIT 2012, Hannover Trade show (MFG booth, participation March 6-10th 2012)
•
Heidelberg Innovation Forum 2012, Heidelberg (flyer display, participation, April 17th, 2012)
•
The European Cluster Conference 2012, Vienna (MFG booth, flyer display, participation April 1820th, 2012) Tehnovacija 2012, Maribor (dissemination, participation April 5th 2012)
•
NEM Summit 2011, September 2011, Torino, Italy
•
Science Night April 2012, Salzburg
IBBT
•
•
•
•
•
iMinds 2011, November 2011, Ghent, Belgium
Startups.be launch event, March 2012, Brussels, Belgium
ISPIM Conference 2012, June 2012, Barcelona, Spain
HTSF Conference 2012, May 2012, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
CSP
•
MFG
SRFG
Objective 3: Greater visibility of SMARD project results and network
This objective has been realized through the update of Website, establishing of Web 2.0 channels
for disseminating SMARD project results:
•
•
•
Post on SMARD survey on http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/netmedia/neweve_en.html
Making twitter and linkedin channel on ICT Tech Transfer the project’s voice (see
communication reporting)
Update of website (events, upload of deliverables)
Objective 4: Generate regional and political support for Guideline
•
•
•
Guidelines published on SMARD website and dissemination through twitter and linkedin
Guidelines sent to SMARD Advisory Board (Marta Ysern Business Development
Barcelona Media, Flavia Barca Director of IEM Fondazione Rosselli, Rome, Thierry Baujard
President Media Deals Berlin)
Guidelines sent to stakeholders (such as FP 7 projects and regional stakeholders)
b) clearly significant results
•
•
•
Launch of Website www.smard-project.eu (Del 4.1)
Dissemination and Exploitation Plan (Del 4.2) and Dissemination Report (Del 4.3)
Launch of Flyer (Del 4.4)
15
•
•
Use of Twitter and linkedin channel for project
PM
Spent in
MFG PM
Total
spent in
spent in
WP 4 PM
Period 1
3,6
0,4
0,12
0,6
4,72
6,84
11,4
Figure 8 shows that 2.12 person month less than foressen have been spent on WP 4. This can be
explained by the fact that the concertation meeting planned for May 2012 has been cancelled and
that the workshop on NM Commercialization has been reported to October 2012. The latter is an
important moment for promoting the project – in the workshop itself but also through PR activities
after the workshop.
2.3
List of deliverables and milestones
16
Del.
no.4
Deliverable name
W
P
no.
Lead
benef
iciary
numb
er
Nature5 Diss
eminati
on
level
6
Delivery
date7
Actual / Forecast
delivery date
from Annex
I (proj
month)
Dd/mm/yyyy
Status
No
submitted/
Contractua
l
Submitted
Yes/No
D1.1
Concept of Needs and
Requirements Analysis of
SMEs
1
2
O
PP
M2
16/01/2012
Submitted
Yes
D1.2
Concept for international
concertation meeting
1
2
O
CO
M8
07/05/2012
Submitted
Yes
D1.3
Survey Report on Networked
Media R&D needs of SMEs
1
2
R
PU
M12
03/09/2012
Submitted
Yes
D2.1
Template for best practices
2
3
O
PP
M2
16/01/2012
Submitted
Yes
D2.2
Collection best practices from
BW. Piedmont, Flanders,
Salzburg
2
3
O
PP
M3
16/01/2012
Submitted
Yes
D2.3
Guideline for successful
Networked Media R&D
commercialization
2
3
O
PU
M6
06/06/2012
Submitted
Yes
Comments
Postponed
, see p.
10,
section:
WP 1, c)
Postponed
, see p .
12,
section
4
Deliverable numbers in order of delivery dates. Please use the numbering convention <WP number>.<number of deliverable within that WP>. For example,
deliverable 4.2 would be the second deliverable from work package 4.
5
Please indicate the nature of the deliverable using one of the following codes:
R = Report, P = Prototype, D = Demonstrator, O = Other
6
Please indicate the dissemination level using one of the following codes:
PU = Public
PP = Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services).
RE = Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services).
CO = Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services).
7
Measured in months from the project start date (month 1).
17
WP 2, c)
D2.4
Concept for International
workshop on Networked
Media R&D
commercialization
2
3
O
CO
M10
19/04/2012
Submitted
Yes
D.3.
1
Draft strategy for SME-driven 3
research on networked media
R&D
4
O
PP
M10
24/07/2012
Submitted
Yes
D3.2
Validation plan
3
4
O
PP
M10
24/07/2012
Submitted
Yes
D3.3
Concept for international
concertation meeting
3
4
O
CO
M12
D4.1
Website
4
1
O
PU
M2
16/01/2012
Submitted
Yes
D4.2
Initial Exploitation and
Dissemination Plan &
Materials
4
1
O
PP
M4
22/11/2011
Submitted
Yes
D4.3
Dissemination Report and
Plan/Materials Update
4
1
R
PU
M12
28/09/2012
Submitted
Yes
D4.4
Project flyer
4
1
O
PU
M4
15/12/2011
Submitted
Yes
D5.1
Work plan for every work
package
5
1
O
CO
M2
16/01/2012
Yes
D5.2
Web 2.0 collaboration
platform
5
1
O
CO
M1
11/10/2011
Yes
Yes
Alternative
proceedin
g agreed
with
Project
Officer Amendme
nt, see
explication
on p. 13,
section:
WP 3, c)
18
Milestones
Milestone
number
Milestone name
M1.1
Database of
European SMEs
International
concertation
meeting
M1.2
M2.1
M2.2
M4.1
M5.1
Collection of Best
practices from
BW. Piedmont,
Flanders,
Salzburg
Publication of
Guideline for
successful
Networked Media
R& D
commercialization
Dissemination
Report and
Plan/Material
Update
1st Periodic
Report
Work
package(s)
involved
1
Lead
beneficiary
Achieved
Yes/No
2
Delivery date from
Annex I
dd/mm/yyyy
M5
Comments
Yes
Actual / Forecast
achievement date
dd/mm/yyyy
9/12/2011
1,4,5
2
M10
No
16/10/2012
Agreed with
Project
Officer to
hold the
workshop
within the
NEM Summit
2012, see p.
12, section
WP 2, c)
1,2
3
M3
Yes
16/01/2012
2,4
3
M6
Yes
06/06/2012
1,2,3,4,5
M12
28/09/2012
5
M7
Dissemination
Report and
Plan/Material
Update
available
Yes
Postponed,
see p . 12,
section WP
2, c)
31/10/2012
19
2.4
Project management during the period
Consortium Management tasks and achievements
•
•
Drafting of Work Plan for every work package (Del 5.1)
Coordination of consortium partners and internal knowledge management through regular
project updates (email /phone) and maintenance of web 2.0 collaboration platform (Del 5.3)
Figure 9 Screenshot of filedepot of web 2.0 collaboration platform
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Coordination, moderation of monthly consortium conference call
Constant monitoring of project results (c.f. WP1, WP2; significant results, workplan
Coordination)
Coordination, preparation of project kick-off meeting in Turin at CSP premises, Sept. 26th27th, 2011 Turin, Environment Park, Via Livorno 60
Coordination, preparation and conduction/moderation/resolution minutes of second project
meeting in Salzburg at Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH premises, JakobHaringer-Str. 5/III, 5020 Salzburg, February, 1st – 2nd 2012
Coordination and preparation of third project meeting in Stuttgart at MFG BadenWürttembeg mbH premises, Breitscheidstraße 4, 70174 Stuttgart, Sept. 5-6 2012
Coordination, preparation of first advisory board meeting in Stuttgart at MFG BadenWürttembeg mbH premises, Breitscheidstraße 4, 70174 Stuttgart, Sept. 6-7 2012
Coordination and information of the Advisory Board
Communication with the European Commission (regular up-dates via phone calls + emails,
provision of deliverables)
Communication to external partners such as NEM Summit Organisers (Project Manager as
voice of the project)
Coordination of Amendment No.1 and Amendment No.2
Organisation, coordination of partners to the periodic report (internal consortium reporting),
this included preparation of templates, exchange with/advices to partners
Consultation of European Commission:
o Various personal consultations with project officer Rossella Magli, Scientific &
Communication Officer European Commission, DG Information Society and Media,
Unit D2 - Networked Media Systems, Viorel Peca, Head of Unit, Networked Media,
20
o
o
o
o
o
DG Information Society European Commission Unit D2 - Networked Media
Systems; Francisco Medeiros Deputy Head of Unit, Networked Media DG
Information Society, European Commission, Unit D2 - Networked Media Systems
(during NEM Sumit, 27-28 Sept. 2011,
October 19th 2011: Meeting with Viorel Peca, New Head of Unit, Networked Media
DG Information Society, Brussels, Presentation of SMARD Project (Jürgen Jähnert)
December 13th - 14th 2011, FP7 Networked Media Concertation meeting, SMARD
Presentation to all FP7 NM Projects (Jürgen Jähnert and Martina Groeschel)
January 27th 2012, Presentation Jürgen Jähnert to Francisco Medeiros and Viorel
Peca, SMARD Contribution to next call / work programme ICT 2013
Participation in Kick Off of Transversal Cluster on Innovation and Entrepreneurship
(Brussels, March 23rd)
Feedback on Paper on Innovation Hubs and Innovation and Entrepreneurial Studies
(coordinated by Bodgan Ceobanu, Networked Media, DG Information Society
European Commission Unit D2 - Networked Media Systems)
Changes that have occurred during the reporting period:
• The project manager Martina Groeschel has left the lead partner’s organization by end of
April 2012 and Alexandra Rudl took over project management tasks from May 2012 on. As
Alexandra Rudl has already been working for the lead partner organization before, there
was an extensive period of transition from beginning of March until end of April 2012 when
the new project manager has taken over the project management responsibilities step by
step.
List of project meetings, dates and venues:
• Project kick-off meeting in Turin at CSP premises, Sept. 26th-27th, 2011 Turin,
Environment Park, Via Livorno 60
• Second project meeting in Salzburg at Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
premises, Jakob-Haringer-Str. 5/III, 5020 Salzburg, February, 1st – 2nd 2012
Cooperation with external stakeholders / other projects:
• Establishment of an external Advisory Board (Marta Ysern Business Development
Barcelona Media, Flavia Barca Director of IEM Fondazione Rosselli, Rome, Thierry Baujard
President Media Deals Berlin)
• Several Calls with Thierry Baujard, Media Deals, concerning the involvement of investors
• Call on possible cooperation between SMARD and EBAN on 10 July 2012 (exchange of
project results, mutual information on events)
• Setting up of cooperation between SMARD and EMC2 Project (exchange of project results,
mutual information on events)
• Cooperation with FAME project (exchange of project results)
Project planning and status / deviations and their impact
The timing for deliverable 2.2.3 (Guidelines for successful Networked Media R&D
commercialization) has proven too ambitious for several reasons. In the first place, the SMARD
project partners have decided that it would make sense to include some (preliminary) results of
WP1, which have only been available since February 2012. Furthermore, obtaining data and
information on best practices in tech transfer and commercialisation from the different stakeholders
(especially some government agencies) has turned out to be more difficult than initially estimated.
In all four regions, more time was needed to collect these data and reach the targets in this regard,
leading to a delay in the subsequent analyses of the data and information and obviously in bringing
all elements together in a guideline for successful commercialisation. The postponement was
accepted by the EC (project officer Rossella Magli, cf. email 30.03.2012) and the guidelines were
21
delivered by 06/06/2012. The postponing of this deliverable does not have an impact on the overall
project plan.
Deliverable 2.2.4 (Concept for international workshop on NM R&D commercialization)
(originally to be delivered June 2012) was delivered and discussed with EC (project officer
Rossella Magli) already in April 2012.
Deliverable 3.3.1 (Draft Strategy for SME driven research on networked media R&D) was due
end of June 2012 and should include results from WP 1 (mainly the survey) as well as from WP 2
(mainly the guidelines). Whereas the results of the guidelines have already been finalized by May,
the survey has been only closed by end of June and first preliminary results were only available
during the first week of July. In order to produce a coherent document, the consortium wanted to
include these first preliminary results in the draft strategy and thus asked for postponing the
deadline until end of July. The postponement was accepted by the EC (project officer Manuel
Carvalhoso, cf. email 27/06/2012) and the draft strategy was delivered by 24 July 2012.
The postponing of this deliverable does not have an impact on the overall project plan.
The updated project planning is as follows:
Figure 10 Updated Project Plan
22
3
Explanation of the use of the resources
3.1 Overview for consortium
MFG PM
spent
Total PM
WP 1
WP 2
WP 3
WP 4
WP 5
Total
SRFG
PM
IBBT PM
spent
spent
Period 1 Period 1
17,9
10,2
12
11,4
10
61,5
16,11
7,14
7,2
6,84
6,6
43,89
2,5
2
1,8
3,6
7,3
17,2
10,7
0,7
0,4
0,4
0,5
12,7
2,74
4,19
0,35
0,12
0,12
7,52
CSP
PM
spent
Period Total PM Spent
1
by all partners
6,3
3,3
2,9
0,6
0,7
13,8
22,24
10,19
5,45
4,72
8,62
51,22
Figure 11: Comparison Person month planned / spent during Period 1
Total Staff
Budget
Total 405.390,00
Plan Budget Period 1
(according to Figure 4)
289.310,03
Budget Spent
Period 1
278.031,75
Figure 12 Comparison Plan Budget per WP in Period 1 and Budget spent in Period 1
The difference of 11.278,28 Euro between the planned budget for period 1 and the spent budget
can be explained by the fact that some activities have been postponed from summer 2012 to
autumn 2012. This is the case for the concertation meeting (see international workshop on NM
R&D) as well as for the validation of the draft strategy (through validation interviews instead of
workshop).
3.2 Verification of expenditure per partner
For each partner the following documents are listed:
•
Staff Costs
•
Other Direct Costs (Travel)
•
Other Direct Costs ( Events and Others)
23
Personalkosten 1.9.2011 - 31.8.2012
inkl. 7 % OVH-Aufschlag
year
project_name
name
SMARD
ECKHOFF Robert A.
WP 1 - ANALYSIS OF NETWORKED MEDIA R&D
WP 1 - ANALYSIS OF NETWORKED MEDIA R&D Ergebnis
WP 4 - DISSEMINATION
WP 4 - DISSEMINATION Ergebnis
WP 3 - STRATEGIC FRAMWORK
WP 3 - STRATEGIC FRAMWORK Ergebnis
ECKHOFF Robert A. Ergebnis
LASSNIG Markus
WP 5 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT
rate Periode
34,16
2012,06
2012,07
2012,08
34,16
2012,08
34,16
2012,08
54,07
2012,01
2012,02
2012,04
2012,05
WP 5 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT Ergebnis
54,07
2012,01
2012,02
2012,03
2012,04
2012,05
WP 2 - TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MODELS
54,07
2012,02
2012,03
54,07
2012,06
46,3
2011,09
2011,1
2011,11
2011,12
2012,01
2012,02
2012,03
2012,04
2012,05
2012,06
2012,07
2012,08
WP 2 - TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MODELS Ergebnis
LASSNIG Markus Ergebnis
MARKUS Mark
47,55
48,76
1 v. 5
Daten
2011
Stunden Projektkosten
49,15
51,33
17,42
7,87
2.434,94
2.543,10
862,84
389,72
125,77
6.230,61
2012
Gesamt: Stunden Gesamt: Projektkosten
Stunden Projektkosten
100,75
3.682,53
100,75
3.682,53
109,03
3.985,30
109,03
3.985,30
68,50
2.503,76
68,50
2.503,76
278,28
10.171,59
278,28
10.171,59
20,75
758,44
20,75
758,44
20,75
758,44
20,75
758,44
29,75
1.087,40
29,75
1.087,40
29,75
1.087,40
29,75
1.087,40
328,78
12.017,43
328,78
12.017,43
4,50
260,35
4,50
260,35
3,57
206,35
3,57
206,35
1,53
88,71
1,53
88,71
12,83
742,47
12,83
742,47
22,43
1.297,88
22,43
1.297,88
42,10
2.435,69
42,10
2.435,69
48,87
2.827,18
48,87
2.827,18
57,05
3.300,62
57,05
3.300,62
8,27
478,27
8,27
478,27
3,40
196,71
3,40
196,71
159,68
9.238,46
159,68
9.238,46
11,27
651,83
11,27
651,83
8,73
505,27
8,73
505,27
20,00
1.157,10
20,00
1.157,10
2,30
133,07
2,30
133,07
2,30
133,07
2,30
133,07
204,42
11.826,51
204,42
11.826,51
49,15
2.434,94
51,33
2.543,10
17,42
862,84
7,87
389,72
107,93
5.491,49
107,93
5.491,49
16,28
849,55
16,28
849,55
20,07
1.046,94
20,07
1.046,94
13,57
707,82
13,57
707,82
3,77
196,52
3,77
196,52
71,85
3.748,64
71,85
3.748,64
74,65
3.894,73
74,65
3.894,73
4,07
212,17
4,07
212,17
312,18
16.147,86
437,95
22.378,47
02.11.2012
year
project_name
name
MARKUS Mark Ergebnis
STRASSER Andreas
WP 5 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT
rate
39,82
40,92
43,29
WP 5 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT Ergebnis
39,82
40,92
43,29
WP 4 - DISSEMINATION
39,82
40,92
43,29
WP 4 - DISSEMINATION Ergebnis
WP 2 - TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MODELS
WP 2 - TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER MODELS Ergebnis
39,82
Periode
2011,09
2011,1
2011,11
2011,12
2012,01
2012,02
2012,03
2012,04
2012,06
2012,08
2011,09
2011,1
2011,11
2011,12
2012,01
2012,02
2012,03
2012,04
2012,06
2012,07
2012,08
2011,09
2011,1
2011,11
2012,06
2012,08
40,92
2011,1
2011,11
2012,02
40,92
43,29
2012,02
2012,07
STRASSER Andreas Ergebnis
SMARD Ergebnis
Gesamtergebnis
2 v. 5
Daten
2011
2012
Gesamt: Stunden Gesamt: Projektkosten
Stunden Projektkosten Stunden Projektkosten
125,77
6.230,61
312,18
16.147,86
437,95
22.378,47
9,50
404,77
9,50
404,77
2,00
85,21
2,00
85,21
11,00
468,68
11,00
468,68
1,00
42,61
1,00
42,61
7,50
328,38
7,50
328,38
7,50
328,38
7,50
328,38
1,50
65,68
1,50
65,68
2,00
87,57
2,00
87,57
2,00
87,57
2,00
87,57
4,00
185,28
4,00
185,28
23,50
1.001,27
24,50
1.082,86
48,00
2.084,14
60,50
2.577,75
60,50
2.577,75
71,50
3.046,43
71,50
3.046,43
35,00
1.491,26
35,00
1.491,26
39,00
1.661,69
39,00
1.661,69
123,25
5.396,43
123,25
5.396,43
92,00
4.028,16
92,00
4.028,16
125,75
5.505,89
125,75
5.505,89
44,00
1.926,51
44,00
1.926,51
3,00
131,35
3,00
131,35
34,50
1.598,05
34,50
1.598,05
34,50
1.598,05
34,50
1.598,05
206,00
8.777,12
457,00
20.184,45
663,00
28.961,57
4,00
170,43
4,00
170,43
3,50
149,13
3,50
149,13
1,50
63,91
1,50
63,91
6,50
284,60
6,50
284,60
25,50
1.181,17
25,50
1.181,17
9,00
383,47
32,00
1.465,77
41,00
1.849,23
3,50
149,13
3,50
149,13
19,50
830,84
19,50
830,84
57,00
2.495,71
57,00
2.495,71
23,00
979,97
57,00
2.495,71
80,00
3.475,68
1,00
43,78
1,00
43,78
21,00
972,73
21,00
972,73
22,00
1.016,51
22,00
1.016,51
261,50
11.141,84
592,50
26.245,30
854,00
37.387,13
387,27
17.372,44 1.437,88
66.237,09
1.825,15
83.609,53
387,27
17.372,44 1.437,88
66.237,09
1.825,15
83.609,53
02.11.2012
FP7 - VERIFICATION OF EXPENDITURE
ITEMISATION OF PROJECT EXPENDITURE PER PROJECT PARTNER
First Reporting Period (September 2011 - August 2012)
Project Number + Title:
Partner Name + Country:
288734 SMARD
SRFG, Austria
Other Direct Costs Travel
BUDGET LINE:
INTERNAL N°
Item Description
Work Package
Invoice total
with 2
decimals
(incl. VAT)
Euro paid
(2 decimals)
Euro eligible
(2 decimals)
Amount
Explanations
Strasser,Mark MUC-TRN-MUC 25.28.9.2011
WP 5
flight
1.017,82
1.017,82
1.017,82
VR9_1_100990 WP 5
train
114,00
114,00
114,00
Strasser Sbg-Muc-Sbg 25.-28.9.2011
100911
100998
WP 5
travel costs
637,60
637,60
591,60
Mark, Turin Kick-off 25.-28.9.2011
101026
WP 5
travel costs
130,80
130,80
130,80
Strasser, Turin Kick-off 25.-28.9.2011
KA 12-33
WP 1
tickets
16,10
16,10
14,64
Mönchsbergaufzug + Bus
KA 12-45
WP 1
ticket
2,00
2,00
1,67
Lassnig, parking ticket meeting ITG
1.918,32
1.918,32
TOTAL
+ 7 % OVH-Aufschlag
Gesamtsumme
1.870,53
130,94
2.001,47
288734 SMARD
SRFG, Austria
BUDGET LINE:
INTERNAL N°
Other direct costs Events
Work Package
Item Description
Amount
Invoice total with 2
decimals (incl. VAT)
Euro paid
Euro eligible
Explanations
VR8_1_100868
WP 5
conference fee
468,00
468,00
390,00
Mark; NEM Summit 2011
VR8_1_100868
WP 5
conference fee
468,00
468,00
390,00
Strasser; NEM Summit 2011
120145
WP 1
hosting costs
423,40
423,40
378,47
m32; Hosting 1.2.2012
KA 12-21
WP 1
hosting costs
30,00
30,00
27,27
Bäckerei Hofmann 1.2.2012
120128
WP 1
hosting costs
97,00
97,00
86,74
Itzlinger Hof 5.2.2012
VR0212_120226
WP 1
other costs
37,94
37,94
37,94
Survey Gizmo USD 49,00
VR0312_120339
WP 1
other costs
38,22
38,22
38,22
VR04_12_120459
WP 1
other costs
11,50
11,50
10,00
Skype Guthaben
VR04_12_120459
WP 1
other costs
38,55
38,55
38,55
KA 12-97
WP 1
fee
150,00
150,00
150,00
Gudlin; Translation
VR05_12_120579
WP 1
other costs
38,85
38,85
38,85
120607
WP 1
fee
980,00
980,00
980,00
Berger; WV 28.3.2012
VR07_12_120865
WP 1
other costs
40,96
40,96
40,96
2.822,42
2.822,42
TOTAL
2.607,00
+ 7% OVH-Aufschlag
Gesamtsumme
182,49
2.789,49
BUDGET LINE:
Name(s) and Functions of
involved staff
288734 SMARD
IBBT, Belgium
Staff
Workpackage
Month*
Amount in Euro with 2
decimals (basic salary +
employer share)
Sophie De Vinck - senior
researcher
WP1, WP2, WP3
2,76
22.874,09
Sven Johan Lindmark - senior
researcher
WP1, WP2, WP3
1,41
18.958,04
An Moons - senior researcher
WP1, WP2, WP3
0,57
3.433,13
1,62
14.252,68
1,13
7.410,35
TOTAL
66.928,29
Sven De Cleyn - Tech Transfer
WP1, WP2, WP3, WP4, WP5
Manager
Katrien Van Gucht WP1, WP2, WP3
Innovation Models & Issuing
* manmonth
Explanations
288734 SMARD
BUDGET LINE:
IBBT, Belgium
Item Description
Invoice total
with 2
decimals
(incl. VAT)
Euro paid
(2 decimals)
Euro eligible
(2 decimals)
Amount
INTERNAL N°
Work Package
241100682
WP5
relocation own car
44,92
44,92
44,92
to Brussels airport (to and fro)
101100397
WP5
Uniglobe - flight tickets
288,70
288,70
288,70
Brussels - Turin (to and fro)
241100682
WP5
NV Interparking - parking ticket
48,00
48,00
39,67
Brussels airport 26/09 to 28/09
241100682
WP5
Pronto taxi
46,00
46,00
46,00
taxi in Turin
241100682
WP5
Radio taxi
50,00
50,00
50,00
taxi in Turin
101100568
WP5
Uniglobe - flight tickets
474,64
474,64
474,64
Brussels - Salzburg (to and fro)
241200046
WP5
Salzburg taxi
15,00
15,00
13,50
taxi in Salzburg
241200046
WP5
Osman taxi
13,70
13,70
13,70
taxi in Salzburg
980,96
980,96
971,13
TOTAL
Explanations
288734 SMARD
BUDGET LINE:
IBBT, Belgium
Amount
INTERNAL N°
Work Package
Item Description
241100682
WP5
Autogrill Turin
24110682
WP5
241200046
WP5
Invoice total with 2 decimals (incl. VAT)
Explanatio
ns
Euro paid
Euro
eligible
9,60
9,60
9,60
Food Turin
Art Hotel Boston Turin
238,00
238,00
214,20
Hotel Turin
Salzburg Food
18,67
18,67
18,67
Salzburg
food
266,27
266,27
242,47
TOTAL
BUDGET LINE:
288734 SMARD
CSP Innovazione nelle ICT-Italy
Staff
Workpackages
Month
employer share)
Silvia Gilli-administrative manager-
5
September 2011
196,32
5
October 2011
196,32
5
November 2011
196,32
5
December 2011
196,32
5
March 2012
815,68
5
June 2012
815,68
Michela Pollone-contact person and senior researcher-
1
September 2011
1.038,60
2
September 2011
207,72
4
September 2011
138,48
1
October 2011
484,68
2
October 2011
346,20
3
October 2011
380,82
4
November 2011
380,82
4
December 2011
380,82
3
January 2012
846,24
4
January 2012
564,16
3
February 2012
1.093,06
4
February 2012
352,60
3
March 2012
881,50
4
March 2012
387,86
3
Apr-12
775,72
4
Apr-12
387,86
3
May 2012
1.057,80
5
May 2012
387,86
Name(s) and Functions of involved staff
Explanations
3
June 2012
1.410,40
4
June 2012
387,86
3
July 2012
846,24
4
July 2012
282,08
3
August 2012
564,16
Eleonora Pantò-senior expert-
1
September 2011
1.114,08
3
January 2012
1.129,68
3
February 2012
1.412,10
3
March 2012
1.176,75
3
Apr-12
1.035,54
3
May 2012
1.412,10
3
June 2012
1.412,10
3
July 2012
1.412,10
3
August 2012
1.412,10
Sergio Duretti-senior expert-
4
March 2012
694,32
3
May 2012
694,32
3
June 2012
694,32
3
July 2012
694,32
Isabella Bianco-junior researcher-
1
November 2011
650,00
2
November 2011
350,00
1
December 2011
650,00
2
December 2011
350,00
1
January 2012
650,00
2
January 2012
350,00
1
February 2012
650,00
2
February 2012
350,00
1
March 2012
650,00
2
March 2012
350,00
1
Apr-12
1.430,00
2
Apr-12
770,00
1
May 2012
780,00
2
May 2012
420,00
1
June 2012
780,00
2
June 2012
420,00
1
July 2012
780,00
2
July 2012
420,00
TOTAL
41.094,01
288734 SMARD
BUDGET LINE:
INTERNAL N°
Work Package
Item Description
Invoice total
with 2
decimals
(incl. VAT)
Amount
Euro paid
(2 decimals)
Euro
eligible (2
decimals)
WP5
Michela Pollone-Train Stuttgard-Salzburg-2nd
34,00
Consortium Meeting, Salzburg,1-3 February 2012
34,00
34,00
WP5
Michela Pollone-Hotel Salzburg-2nd Consortium
162,00
Meeting, Salzburg,1-3 February 2012
162,00
162,00
WP5
Michela Pollone-Train Salzburg-Monaco-2nd
30,90
30,90
30,90
WP5
Michela Pollone-Flight Monaco-Turin-2nd
258,71
258,71
129,35
WP5
Michela Pollone-Bus Caselle Airport-Turin-2nd
6,50
6,50
6,50
WP5
Michela Pollone 3 days of daily allowance-2nd
150,00
150,00
150,00
TOTAL
642,11
642,11
512,75
Explanations
288734 SMARD
BUDGET LINE:
INTERNAL N°
Work Package
Item Description
Invoice total with 2 decimals
(incl. VAT)
Amount
Euro paid
Euro
eligible
Explanations
WP4
Pantò NEM Summit 2011 -Turin-
468,00
468,00
468,00
DISSEMINATION
WP4
Pollone NEM Summit 2011 -Turin-
468,00
468,00
468,00
DISSEMINATION
194,70
177,00
EVENT COSTS
165,80
150,73
EVENT COSTS
WP5
WP5
Kick off meeting -26-27 September 2011 Coffee break -invoice n°334 27/09/11
194,70
Envi Point
Kick off meeting -26-27 September 2011Evening meal Ristorante Porto di Savona
165,80
Invoice n°1617 26/09/11-Ristorante Porto
di Savona
WP5
Kick off meeting -26-27 September 2011Local rent-Invoice n°1252 29/09/11
181,50
Environtment Park
181,50
150,00
EVENT COSTS
WP4
SMARD Flyer-Invoice n°5 29/02/12 Valentina Savio
471,90
471,90
390,00
DISSEMINATION
WP4
SMARD Flyer-Invoice n°17 30/03/12
Zeronove
2.662,00
2.662,00
450,00
DISSEMINATION
TOTAL
4.611,90
4.611,90
2.253,73
BUDGET LINE:
288734 SMARD
MFG, Germany
Staff
Month
employer share)
1 - 2; 4 - 5
September 11
2.757,10
see timesheets
1 - 2; 4 - 5
October
3.976,59
see timesheets
1 - 2; 4 - 5
November 11
4.480,29
see timesheets
1 - 2; 4 - 5
December 11
2.253,40
see timesheets
1 - 2; 4 - 5
January 12
3.022,21
see timesheets
1-5
February 12
3.287,31
see timesheets
1 - 2; 4 - 5
March 12
2.651,06
see timesheets
1 - 2; 4 - 5
April 12
2.995,69
see timesheets
May
1.246,00
see timesheets
1-5
March 12
1.177,08
see timesheets
1-5
April 12
1.286,58
see timesheets
1-5
May
3.421,75
see timesheets
1-5
June 12
3.476,50
see timesheets
1-5
July 12
3.257,51
see timesheets
1-5
August 12
2.586,84
see timesheets
Bernd Hertl, Dissemination
4
January 12
622,08
see timesheets
4
February 12
654,82
see timesheets
4
March 12
687,56
see timesheets
4
April 12
638,45
see timesheets
4
June 12
605,71
see timesheets
4
July 12
687,56
see timesheets
4
August 12
638,45
see timesheets
Christian Förster, Research
Funding/ Trend Monitoring
3
July 12
405,60
see timesheets
involved staff
Martina Groeschel, Project
leader
leader
leader
leader
leader
leader
leader
leader
leader
Alexandra Rudl, Project
leader
leader
leader
leader
leader
leader
Workpackage
1; 4 -5
1 of 6
Explanations
BUDGET LINE:
288734 SMARD
MFG, Germany
Staff
involved staff
Workpackage
Month
employer share)
Explanations
Jürgen Jähnert, Head of Unit
ICT and Knowledge Networks
1, 4 -5
September 11
2.976,35
see timesheets
1, 3 -5
October
4.155,66
see timesheets
1, 3 -5
November 11
5.925,29
see timesheets
1-5
December 11
2.583,25
see timesheets
1, 3 -5
January 12
3.453,69
see timesheets
1, 3 -5
February 12
3.116,75
see timesheets
4, 5
March 12
1.881,28
see timesheets
3, 5
April 12
1.544,33
see timesheets
2-5
May 12
1.797,04
see timesheets
2-5
June 12
2.386,70
see timesheets
1-5
July 12
3.987,19
see timesheets
1, 3 -5
August 12
2.892,11
see timesheets
Stefanie Springer, Innovation
Fostering/Start-Up and Growth Support
2
September 11
86,56
see timesheets
Fostering/Start-Up and Growth
Support
2
October
108,20
see timesheets
Support
2
November 11
273,92
see timesheets
Support
2
December 11
137,87
see timesheets
Support
2
January 12
173,12
see timesheets
Support
2
February 12
108,20
see timesheets
Support
2
March 12
43,28
see timesheets
Support
2
April 12
86,56
see timesheets
Support
2
May 12
43,28
see timesheets
2 of 6
BUDGET LINE:
288734 SMARD
MFG, Germany
Staff
involved staff
Workpackage
Month
employer share)
Explanations
Heiko Schlecht, Controlling
5
September 11
243,45
see timesheets
5
October
251,39
see timesheets
5
November 11
467,94
see timesheets
5
December 11
346,49
see timesheets
Ingo Schuler, Controlling
5
January 12
49,73
see timesheets
5
February 12
16,58
see timesheets
5
March 12
16,58
see timesheets
5
April 12
16,58
see timesheets
5
May 12
82,89
see timesheets
5
June 12
49,73
see timesheets
5
July 12
99,46
see timesheets
5
August 12
182,35
see timesheets
TOTAL
86.399,92 without ind. costs
Indirect Costs
6.047,99
3 of 6
288734 SMARD
MFG, Germany
BUDGET LINE:
INTERNAL N°
Work Package
Item Description
Invoice total
with 2
decimals
(incl. VAT)
Euro paid
(2 decimals)
Euro eligible
(2 decimals)
Amount
Explanations
5
Project negotiations with EC
111,60
111,60
111,60
Business trip, Martina Groeschel,
Brüssel
4
NEM Summit 2011, 27.-29.09.2011
468,00
468,00
468,00
Registration fees, Martina Groeschel,
Torino
4
NEM Summit 2011, 27.-29.09.2011
468,00
468,00
468,00
registration fees, Jürgen Jähnert,
Torino
4
NEM Summit 2011, 27.-29.09.2011
1.030,72
1.030,72
1.030,72
4
NEM Summit 2011, 27.-29.09.2011
267,00
267,00
267,00
Hotel booking, Jürgen Jähnert, Torino
4
NEM Summit 2011, 27.-29.09.2011
267,00
267,00
267,00
Hotel booking, Martina Groeschel,
Torino
4
NEM Summit 2011, 27.-29.09.2011
50,60
50,60
50,60
Business Trip, Martina Groeschel,
Torino
4
NEM Summit 2011, 27.-29.09.2011
245,90
245,90
245,90
Business Trip, Jürgen Jähnert, Torino
4
13.-14.12.2011
184,10
184,10
184,10
Train booking, Martina Groeschel,
Jürgen Jähnert, Brussels
4
13.-14.12.2011
144,56
144,56
144,56
Jürgen Jähnert, Brussels
4
Project presentation, 12.-14.2011
92,13
92,13
92,13
Brussels
4
Project presentation, 13.-14.2011
130,76
130,76
130,76
Business trip, Jürgen Jähnert, Brussels
4
12.12.2011
71,90
71,90
71,90
Brussels
4
12.12.2011
63,00
63,00
63,00
Brussels
4 of 6
Flight booking, Martina Groeschel,
Jürgen Jähnert, Torino
288734 SMARD
MFG, Germany
BUDGET LINE:
INTERNAL N°
Work Package
Item Description
Invoice total
with 2
decimals
(incl. VAT)
Euro paid
(2 decimals)
Euro eligible
(2 decimals)
Amount
Explanations
5
01./02.02.2012
144,30
144,30
144,30
Train booking, Jürgen Jähnert,
Salzburg
5
01./02.02.2012
83,00
83,00
83,00
Salzburg
5
01./02.02.2012
162,00
162,00
162,00
Jürgen Jähnert, Salzburg
5
01./02.02.2012
109,90
109,90
109,90
Business Trip, Martina Groeschel,
Slazburg
4
23.03.2012
398,00
398,00
398,00
Brussels
4
23.03.2012
541,25
541,25
541,25
Brussels
5
01./02.02.2012
75,20
75,20
75,20
Business trip, Jürgen Jähnert, Salzburg
4
25.01.2012
35,00
35,00
35,00
Business trip, Jürgen Jähnert, Karlsruhe
4
23.03.2012
49,80
49,80
49,80
Brussels
4
22./23.03.2012
193,90
193,90
193,90
Train booking, Alexandra Rudl,
Brussels
4
18.04.2012
95,00
95,00
95,00
Hotel booking, Alexandra Rudl,
Heidelberg
4
22./23.03.2012
76,00
76,00
76,00
Business trip, Alexandra Rudl, Brussels
4
17./18.04.2012
33,00
33,00
33,00
Train booking, Alexandra Rudl,
Heidelberg
4
05.07.2012
35,00
35,00
35,00
Business trip, Jürgen Jähnert, Karlsruhe
4
12./18.10.2012
239,62
239,62
239,62
Flight booking, Alexandra Rudl,
Istanbul
4
12.09.2012
756,00
756,00
756,00
Flight booking, Alexandra Rudl,
Brussels
6.622,24
6.622,24
6.622,24
TOTAL
Indirect Costs
463,56
5 of 6
without ind. costs
288734 SMARD
MFG, Germany
BUDGET LINE:
INTERNAL N°
Work Package
Item Description
Amount
Invoice total with 2 decimals
(incl. VAT)
Euro paid
Euro eligible
Explanations
4
1&1 Internet AG
314,38
314,38
20,87
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
E.P.A. Language Services
148,00
148,00
148,00
Translation Flyertext
SMARD
4
1&1 Internet AG
120,86
120,86
2,85
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
TNT express
67,32
67,32
67,32
Distribution of documents
to Belgium
4
1&1 Internet AG
99,99
99,99
2,78
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
flyeralarm
82,06
82,06
82,06
print
4
flyeralarm
73,21
73,21
73,21
print
4
1&1 Internet AG
207,22
207,22
3,61
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
1&1 Internet AG
189,27
189,27
2,78
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
1&1 Internet AG
272,67
272,67
2,78
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
Frank und Freunde GmbH
2.142,00
2.142,00
102,00
Service contract
1. Quarter 2012
4
Frank und Freunde GmbH
1.706,46
1.706,46
50,19
Maintenance contract
1. Quarter 2012
4
TNT express
156,06
156,06
68,14
Distribution of documents
to Belgium
4
1&1 Internet AG
219,10
219,10
3,61
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
1&1 Internet AG
790,83
790,83
2,78
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
1&1 Internet AG
272,88
272,88
3,61
Internet 1&1/basic
charge
4
sigma orionis
3.290,00
3.290,00
3.290,00
4
chamäleon group
149,00
149,00
149,00
Roll-Up Banner
4
printfactory
103,53
103,53
103,53
displayholder
10.404,84
10.404,84
4.179,12
TOTAL
Indirect Costs (7%)
292,54
6 of 6
Workshop
without ind. costs
3.1
Publishable summary
Through EU-funded research projects, many outstanding new technologies and
knowledge are developed. However, these are rarely applied in the digital media and
internet industries. Furthermore, SMEs currently benefit to a relatively lower extent from
the new knowledge and research efforts when compared to larger companies. Besides,
those smaller companies still experience difficulties in accessing EU funding.
One consequence of the above situation is that the transfer of these new technologies and
knowledge between research institutions and creative enterprises is delayed or does not
happen at all. This prevents the integration of new technologies into next generation
products and services.
Therefore, the SMARD project aims at providing support and input on two of these main
issues:
• to increase participation in EU-funded research programmes, especially from
SMEs,
• to support technology commercialisation by providing best practices in technology
transfer and commercialisation.
During the first reporting period the consortium has advanced in identifying and specifying
R&D needs and requirements of SMEs in the Digital Media Sector as we ll
as
in
providing guidelines for successful networked media commercialisation. Based on that, a
draft of the European strategy for SME-driven research on networked media R&D has
been developed. The working process is described in the graph below.
Figure 1: Dependency of work packages / Process of drafting the European Strategy on NM R&D
In WP 1 “Analysis of Networked Media (NM) R&D for enhancing the Competitiveness of
SMEs in the Digital Media Industries”, state-of-the-art in current business and research
trends as well as relevant FP7 initiatives regarding their responsiveness to SME needs
3
and requirements have been analysed in face-to-face interviews. These analyses served
as a basis for developing the survey on NM R&D needs.
In the survey, SMEs of the digital media industries and the web economy were asked to
quantify specific RDI (Research, Development & Innovation) needs statements in terms of
a) the degree of their importance, as well as b) the degree to which these are currently
satisfied. Using these two metrics enabled the consortium to identify those RDI needs that
have the highest potential for action and that should be especially taken into consideration
by decision makers, i.e. those that were rated as highly important but being addressed in
EU research projects only with low satisfaction. As a result, the survey allows the SMARD
project to identify diverse categories of RDI needs in terms of technological needs,
networking and learning needs, organisational or commercialisation needs (see graph
below).
Figure 2 Importance Satisfaction Graph
The main finding of the survey was that technological needs are less important for the
SMEs that responded to the survey (603 respondents) while organisational needs were
evaluated most important. The three main needs identified were:
•
•
•
Minimising the effort to apply for RDI funding
Minimising the administrative effort to manage RDI projects
Minimising the financial risks of participating in RDI projects
In parallel to the conducting of the survey, Guidelines for successful Networked Media
R&D commercialization (WP 2) have been produced based on the Best Practices reported
by each partner.
The guidelines help researchers and SMEs involved in (EU funded) research projects in
their efforts to translate their research results into economic and/or social value and
applying the most appropriate technology transfer and commercialisation methods. This
should result in an enhanced translation of new technologies and knowledge obtained
through these research projects into new products and services commercialised by the
projects partners or other (European) SMEs. The guidelines focus on the three most
relevant and visible technology transfer and commercialisation mechanisms, being by
creating a new spin-off or start-up, by commercializing within an existing SME or existing
4
organisation or through licensing towards a third party. The complete Guidelines can be
downloaded on the SMARD Website
Based on first results of the survey as well as based on the guidelines, a first draft of the
European strategy for SME-driven research on networked media R&D (WP 3) has been
developed including a suggestion for a European NM Research and Innovation Roadmap.
(see graph below). This roadmap as well as single statements being part of that roadmap
will be validated with the SMARD Advisory Board as well as with regional and European
stakeholders from research, business and the policy level.
Figure 3 Draft Resarch and Innovation Roadmap for Networked Media
The finalized strategy will provide:
• suggestions as for an innovation policy approach, addressed to policy makers at
different levels (EU, national, local)
• suggestions as for innovation policy tools contributing to the Horizon2020 drafting.
By doing so, the strategy will contribute to tackle the following open issues and challenges:
1. the full and effective transfer of the “fortune” of innovation to the enterprises, above
all the SMEs, and the market: this refers to the relative small amount of new
knowledge and research results of EU projects that have been translated into new
technologies, products and services delivered to customers,
2. the fully beneficial involvement of SMEs in the research programs, their access to
funds and to the innovation potential of R&D results,
3. the large application of this innovation to the digital media and Internet sector and
the transfer of this innovation from research institutions to digital creative
enterprises with consequent effects on EU Digital Media sector competitiveness.
5
Besides the validation process with the SMARD Advisory Board and with regional
stakeholders, some of the tools suggested by the SMARD draft strategy will be tested
during the SMARD Final Conference. The latter will be held as a conference including a
pitching session in the framework of the already established Heidelberg Innovation Forum
(www.heidelberger-innovationsforum.de). The consortium aims to motivate FP7 projects to
apply for presenting a business idea on the occasion of the SMARD Final Conference.
This shall provide a best practice for raising awareness for commercialization questions in
(European) research projects.
SMARD - European Support Framework on Networked Media R&D for SMEs
www.smard-project.eu
6

Periodic report - 1st period - all docs - CORDIS

Transcription

Similar documents

research. knowledge. resilience

Nyelvlecke

Modelling a Regional Drought Index in France

Local Energy Communities Actions Plans

EIF in Poland - European Investment Fund

firmenwagen MEdiAdATA 2016

Proceeding - Faculty of Business

harmadik rész - cancer, mitochondria, mithochondria, modelling

2014 Annual Report

to this issue - International Journal of Sales, Retailing and

Chapter 3: When Offshore Outsourcing

PJCC update