Not all the projects are the same and the level of familiarity of the partners with EC rules and procedures varies a lot. However, based on our experiences EuropaBook has identified some minimum requirements, which allows the reduction of project management failure. This is the rationale behind this paper.
1. A well designed project in terms of: clear, non-ambitious realistic and shared objectives, measurable indicators, clear and participated activities, realistic time-frame, well-designed organizational structure and coherent budget
WHY? All great journeys start with a first step, but the first step has to be the right one! Ill-conceived projects are guaranteed to have a difficult implementation!
2. Project partners should read ALL the components of the contract: special conditions, general conditions, budget, etc.
WHY? Because the majority of project shortcomings are related to ignorance of the content of the contract: e.g. You buy equipment in month 6: should you register the total amount you spend in the first financial report or should you depreciated it?
3. Only one organization in charge for the overall project management
WHY? The “Dual approach” system, e.g. one organization in charge of the technical and the other one of the financial management has proved that the sharing of responsibilities in project management ALWAYS creates misunderstanding and confusion.
5. ONE full time Coordinator: energetic, full-time committed, authoritative but not autocratic, sensible to a partnership approach and with a time-frame perspective
WHY? Even some projects with only one leading organization, propose a confusing management structure including: Scientific Coordinator, Trans-national Team Leader, Programme Director, without definition of clear roles and responsibilities. It goes without saying that all this results in confusion and chaos.
Sensibility to planning is of paramount importance: A Coordinator that realizes how demanding are customs regulations only one week before dispatching project materials, shows a low sensibility to time management and lack of foresight. If more than one person has to be involved, it is necessary that their respective roles and responsibilities are clearly defined. Lack of defined role leads to confusion and is a sure guarantee for project mismanagement.
4. Detailed Terms of References for all the staff
WHY? Many projects show that the role of the staff and of the different management bodies is not clear and defined. The wizard of Scientific Committee, Steering Board always hidden unclear definition role and responsibilities
6. A dedicated Financial Manager, knowledgeable not only of the accounting and financial management but also familiar with contractual clauses
WHY? EC contracts are complex but cannot be blamed for not having contractual clauses. In our experience, some Financial Managers do not read the contract clauses. A Financial Manager unfamiliar with contractual procedures is not qualified to carry out such an important task. The end result is that the majority of the projects do not respect the timing of the report and “cash-flow” shortage is a common issue.
7. A competent Information and communication officer
WHY? Many projects dispose of financial allocation for Information and Communication activities but do not have the necessary human resources for a meaningful utilisation of this financial resource. The results: web-sites are ill conceived and not up-dated; lack of effective working relations with the press; confusing press- releases, etc. In the end the project suffers from lack of visibility and this does not assist project development.
8. A well drafted Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) or Consortium Agreement.
WHY? On-going grants contracts are signed by the EC and the Coordinator but not by the other project partners. Therefore, the aim of a MoU is to define roles, responsibilities, budget allocation and administrative procedures between the Coordinator and the partners. The MoU follows the requirements of the application form and of the contract General Conditions. Where the obligations of the contact are not passed on to the partners, this will cause internal difficulties, as the one of partner “x” who thought they were eligible for 100% of the EC co-financing rather than 80%.
9. Internal monitoring and evaluation procedures with a 6 monthly pattern
WHY? The occasions for supervising if and how project activities are following the right tracks are linked with the reporting to the EC. If the reporting pattern requires a report to the EC on a 12 monthly basis, we strongly recommend having internal reporting every 6 months. A 12 monthly reporting timeframe in a project lasting 36 months, means that the partners can monitors project activities only twice in the project lifetime. And this is not enough!
10. Sharing technical and administrative information with project partners
WHY? Information circulation is a way to involve project partners and to secure that there is “something to share” within the project. The Coordinator has to find a way to establish a balanced flow of info from and between the partners. Sharing the budget breakdown with the partners is an initial evidence of transparency and real working partnership. Disseminate the monitor reports to all the partners is the evidence of collegial management.
