Project implementation – Trust building, bridging and impact For researchers, the outputs of a project are publishable results but One of the heaviest burdens for researchers and also an opportunity to produce a practical and lasting impact on innovators is the complicated nature of financial the economy and society as a whole. With weak or non-existing guidelines and practices in the implementation of industry and SME participation, these outputs may never be utilised EU programmes. While these changes are often or transferred into new products and services. SMEs are pivotal for driven by simplification, they can create more the creation of jobs and the implementation of research but they confusion than clarity. Changing practices alone cannot solve the issue. Mechanisms for bridging the valley should be limited to one or two times during of death between research and innovation are therefore needed the programme period. A model for to secure better and stronger innovation in Europe. CRF II strongly administrative support schemes should be supports the introduction of a new, dedicated SME instrument similar introduced to enable newcomers and to the US small business innovation research model. It is essential to participants weak in administration and set up rules that will allow for the easy and flexible introduction of EU terminology, but strong in research, SMEs in research projects aimed at solving the societal challenges to enter the programmes without disad- but more and stronger support should be considered for a project, vantage. which is evaluated as having the potential to succeed in commercialising its results after project completion. Furthermore, the CRF panel holds the view that it is not publications, patents or technologies alone but interacting networks of people with new knowledge that make innovation happen. Promoting stronger links between research and higher education is vital to increasing human flow in research and to stimulating innovation processes. Winning and leading an EU project is the result of intellectual activity and hard work, and carries great expectations for a successful outcome. Over the years this has unfortunately also turned into a complex management task with a heavy set of rules, regulations and paperwork, all of which are recognised for the purpose they serve in securing taxpayer money and avoiding fraud and other misuse. Even so, the CRF strongly believes that a higher degree of trust should be introduced in the system and that the regime of timesheets, for example, should be avoided all together. The introduction of trust should be accompanied by clear-cut sanctioning rules in the case of violation and infringement. Research projects infringing the general rules for participation should be firmly reprimanded and include the withdrawal of resources if appropriate, while conscious fraud should be penalised with a demand for reimbursement, banishment of the responsible researchers and their institutions and a exclusion of the coordinating legal unit from further participation in Horizon 2020. 12
CRF_rapport_210x297_web_NY
To see the actual publication please follow the link above