Télécharger le document - Eurosfaire

26 / 27
Strategies for Winning Proposals
Take into account a full range of
factors - from EU priorities to your
own long-term goals - when you
plan to present a project to the
Seventh European Framework
Programme / Dror Yeger
The Seventh European Union R&D Programme will soon be
launched, and Israel is prominent among the participating nations.
Israeli companies provide added value in both technological
innovation and entrepreneurship. In encouraging R&D, the
European Framework Programme offers great opportunities for
Israeli industry, including help in entering European markets,
creating strategic partnerships with leading players, benefiting
from grants and retaining full rights to intellectual property.
The Seventh Programme will be conducted over the course of
seven years, and its budget will reach over 50 billion Euros. Funding
for small to medium companies has been increased by 75%. The
Seventh Programme is continuing the Sixth Programme's efforts
to simplify processes and allow more flexibility, especially in the
expansion of the authority of project coordinators.
Your first consideration is whether to aspire to be a coordinator,
or participate as a partner. Although partners need not take on
certain responsibilities and administrative task, coordinators have
an inherent advantage. They can develop and conduct projects
adapted to their own organization's development plan. They direct
the planning and procgress, have an impact on partner selection,
and oversee the budget.
This decision is significant over the long term. It is easier to join
a project if you can provide "evidence of European Union club
activities." If you have been a coordinator, you will have access
to more information and offers to join projects than partners.
Strategy for project presentation
A company with a strong and unique technology has two
options in presenting a project proposal. The first is the top-down
approach: from this perspective, projects are defined by their
technological value and relevance to the technological objectives
of the EU's programme. The downside is that this approach is less
precise, and it may be difficult to link the project to EU priorities
(transportation, education, health, etc.). For example, a company
developing advanced wi-fi will have a difficult time selling the
project, since it has no direct relevance to urgent EU issues. The
project may not be conducive to building a consortium, since the
focus is strongly linked with the initiator's As a result, the partners
gain less added value, which makes the enterprise less viable.
The solution to define your project's agenda more broadly.
The wi-fi developer should develop a proposal to plan an entire
system to provide wi-fi to all of Europe's major cities. This would
include hardware, software and integration elements. This kind of
project offers excellent leverage for the coordinator, since it can
recruit potential clients and strategic partners, and lead to future
collaborations through a 'pull', rather than 'push' method.
The second option is a bottom-up approach. First you define
the need, and then tailor-fit your solution via technological
development. This makes it easier to market the project, since its
value is relative to the cost of the problem. The consortium will
also have a more attractive line-up of partners, because it will
include a broader range of players.
For example, for a Motorola Israel project, which specializes in
communication systems, traffic was defined as a major European
problem. An offer was made to develop a traffic monitoring
system, consisting of smart communication boxes installed in cars
alongside a central data processing system. The partners were a
governmental traffic control company, a large auto manufacturer,
two universities, a large telephone company and others.
In practice, the "value" of a project can be perceived in several
ways: lowering congestion would reduce wear and tear on roads,
and reduce the number of lost work hours, decrease traffic accidents,
reduce the volume of vehicular pollution (a priority of the Kyoto
Accords), and improve European competitiveness with other
world powers.
Choose your partners carefully
Upon reaching the partner selection phase, one must consider
both the consortium's structure and the partners' core capabilities
on the other. Partners are naturally assessed by qualities such
as technological capabilities, core capabilities and potential for
synergy in sharing and transferring knowledge. Thought must
also be given to funding allocations (among countries, partners,
universities and industry), and the type of partners that will be
members of the consortium.
To achieve a high rating in the clause on "quality and relevant
experience of the individual participants" clause, it is helpful to
include universities, small and medium-size entities and players
from new EU nations, such as Poland and Malta. It is important
to be attuned to the EU pulse, understanding the latest trends in
Brussels is imperative to building a winning consortium.
Of course, the people involved make all the difference. Consider
the role of key players in the organizations and their commitment
to the project's success. Too many projects have failed because not
enough consideration was given to the human element. Personal
relationships and networking is vital, whether you take on the
role of a partner or a coordinator.
Other factors include planning problems, a lack of compatibility
between budgets and outcomes, lems with initiating and planning
the proposal, lack of compatibility between budget and results, a
strained, poor use of funds, and of course, overlap with projects
approved in the past.