This section answers the question “What are the different functions and roles within a team involved in FP research projects?” The sub-sections below describe the findings of the case studies and interviews. All of the functions and roles found in the case studies were also found in multiple FP projects in the survey.
3.1.1. Functions, role divisions and descriptions
In all projects of which a case study has been conducted, we find a structure based on Work Packages (WPs) led by WP leaders, who are responsible for coordination and goal attainment related to the specific WPs. The WP leaders generally report to a scientific coordinator, who, together with the WP leader team, takes strategic scientific decisions in a body called the Executive Board or the steering committee. However, it can be observed that in smaller consortia the Executive Board function is often bypassed and strategic issues are discussed on a consortium level, for instance through the General Assembly (GA).
All projects make use of a project manager, often supported by a project office, who is responsible for administrative, financial and legal matters. The project management and scientific coordination role can be either fulfilled by different people or be combined by the Project Coordinator.
Depending on project characteristics, several specific function divisions and descriptions are observed. Functions like Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) manager, a technology implementation manager, advisory board members, a gender officer or a training coordinator were deemed relevant in projects with respectively highly
10 The limited number of 30 case studies examined in the study allows for a qualitative analysis
only. We have therefore avoided mentioning exact numbers of case studies when describing the manifestation of certain phenomena. When using “in general”, “often”, “most/mostly”, “prevalent”, “typically”, “predominantly”, “usually” and “clearly show the tendency”, we refer to at least two-thirds of case studies within (within a certain group of case studies). When using “some” and “only a few” we refer to approximately one-third of the case studies (within a certain group), whereas “can also be” is used to indicate everything less than one-third up until one instance.
patentable project results, project results that were close to market or for instance project focused on training activities.
All consortia in the case studies have a General Assembly, as is required by EC regulation. The General Assembly is always chaired by the Project Coordinator and takes high-level decisions that affect the project’s overall direction.
Given the relative size of our sample, specifically with respect to Project Coordinators, combined with the questions included in our survey (for practical reasons limited to a fixed set of project roles), we cannot ascertain a significant difference between FP6 and FP7 with regards to 'Functions, role divisions and descriptions'.
3.1.2. Division of work
All 30 case study projects in this project were structured around WPs. In projects structured around WPs, WP leaders are appointed to manage these WPs. The Project Coordinator is often the WP leader of the management WP. Some projects make use of a lower management level in the form of task leaders, or higher management level in the form of sub-project leaders. These sub-project leaders are hierarchically placed above the WP leaders but below respectively the Executive Board (if present) and the General Assembly.
In the case studies of FP6 and FP7 projects with a high average performance score, most coordinators are assisted by a formal project office with one or more people assisting the coordinator with administrative, legal or financial issues. On some occasions the project manager cannot rely on formal assistance (e.g. from within the coordinator’s own organisation) but is supported by more senior individuals in the consortium. For example, in one of the projects, the Project Coordinator was not the most experienced FP participant. The unofficial management assistance that the Project Coordinator received from the more experienced individuals in the consortium was acknowledged as highly valuable.
Some consortia for these high-performing FP6 and FP7 projects also made use of a specialist external consultant to provide project management support or even take full responsibility for project coordination. These organisations could either fulfil the role of project manager, taking care of all financial and administrative matters, or even the role of Project Coordinator.
In some consortia in this set of projects, there was a formal function below that of WP leader, namely task managers (TM). The TMs were made responsible for WP sub- tasks. In contrast, in another project there was a formal role between that of the WP leaders and the (scientific) coordinator, namely that of Development Group (DG) leaders. The DG leaders were responsible for coordination of several WPs within their development line.
In case studies of FP6 and FP7 projects with a high average performance score, the functions of Project Coordinator, scientific coordinator and project manager are usually combined into one role, but can also be seen divided across two persons. In one of these projects there were three different individuals for scientific coordination, project management and official coordination. The exact division of work between these individuals differs substantially, although the official Project Coordinator is always responsible for external communication to the EC (as mandated) and adherence to the grant agreement. On some occasions the project manager unburdens the scientific coordinator in every possible way (e.g. even in deliverable development), whereas on other occasions the scientific coordinator also conducts administrative tasks himself.
3.1.3. Division of management functions and roles
In case study projects with a low performance rating, we see additional roles and functions related to the nature of the project. So-called hub leaders and sub-project
leaders were observed in larger projects in these case studies (e.g. in one instance a consortium consisted of 59 partners). In this instance, project management was partially conducted by a specialist management consulting firm within the respective field. In addition, specialist dedicated roles like dissemination and exploitation managers could be seen in projects closer to the market.