Sadržaj Marie Sklodowska – Curie Actions European Industrial Doctorate Towards increased employability and innovation Sandra Vidović, 19th October 2017
• Study is assessing the European Industrial Doctorates (EID) scheme. • The report presents findings and conclusions from an assessment of the EID scheme activities from its formation in 2012 up until March 2016.
Rationale Study focuses on addressing three main issues that provide the rationale for a European programme on industrial doctorates: Lack of intersectoral mobility between academia and industry; Lack of transferable skills in European labour force of researchers; and No common rules or guidelines around industrial doctorates across EU. The objectives of EID: To promote joint training and strengthen collaboration between industry and academia; To develop PhD candidates’ skills to meet the needs of industry; and To foster industrial competitiveness and the research environment. The EID scheme was launched in 2012 following the introduction in 2011 of the principles for innovative doctoral training developed by the European Commission working group on doctoral training.
Logic model EID scheme
Relevance of the EIS scheme • Most established universities offer training in various transferable skills – while the EID scheme generates structure and raises awareness of training offers along the ‘value chain’ from basic research, applied research towards business relevant activities such as product development, manufacturing, marketing & sales and finance. • Industrial doctorates are often arranged on a bilateral and institutional level. Stakeholders agreed with the idea of structured doctoral training with non- academic participation. • Stakeholders were concerned about the trend to turn doctoral training into skills training – the main aspect of a PhD should be to conduct independent scientific work. Any training offered should complement the research focus of a PhD project. • Stakeholders also highlighted that EID projects, and ITN projects offer PhD candidates access to networks of senior researchers which is considered key to further career prospects. The quality and extent of networks in EID/ITN projects are not generally available in ‘classic’ PhD/graduate programmes.
• EID proposals are based on predefined research topics and also indicate tentative individual PhD projects for fellows. • Survey responses indicate that EID placements were flexible enough to enable participants to fine-tune their research topics once the fellowship had started.
Motivations to apply Main motivations of organisations to apply for EID funding: • Academic institutions - access to research funding, the ability to recruit a cohort of researchers working on a specific research topic, and the possibility to strengthen existing relationships and collaborations with industry. • Industry participants are attracted by recruitment opportunities at very low cost, coinciding with specific development and innovation projects. Main motivations of fellows to apply: • The salary is considered very competitive compared to starting salaries in industry and other PhD scholarships. • Often PhD candidates are employed as research assistant, and cannot spend their whole working hours on the PhD project. The MSCA rules mandate that the fellowship shall only be spent on the PhD project. • EID project enabled access to network of high quality, senior experts beyond that offered had they conducted their PhD in a ‘regular’ programme.
Motivations to apply 2
Demand and participation The overall statistics on participation in EID projects are: • 101 EID projects to date, representing 17 % of the 579 ITN projects funded • 281 organisations participated in EID projects to date, representing 6% cent of the 4,517 organisations participating in ITN projects. • €114 million were awarded by the EU to EID projects to date, representing 6% of the €1.8 billion awarded to ITN projects across the FP7 and H2020 Success rates for EID are generally higher than for ITN overall: • The success rate by EID projects (number of projects / number of proposals) was 18.9 %, much higher than the corresponding success rate for ITN (11.8 %). • The success rate by EID participants (number of participants/number of applicants) • was 14.0 %, again higher than the corresponding success rate for ITN (8.7 5).
Number of EID projects EID are generally smaller than ITN projects overall. The average number of participations per EID project was 2.78 (compared to an average 7.80 participants per ITN project) – minimum 2 partners in consortium
Number of EID projects • Of the 2,013 applicants in EID proposals - 1,789 (89 %) were based in EU Member States, 89 (4 %) in associated countries and 35 (3 %) from third countries. • Organisations participating in EID proposals were based in 40 countries (compared to 104 for all ITN proposals). • The following ten EU Member States provided the highest number of EID applicants: UK, Germany, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland and Sweden. Representing 79 % of all EID applications and 87 % of all EU funding requested by EID applicants in Horizon 2020. • Switzerland was the most important non-EU country in terms of demand for EID projects (representing 3 % of EID applicants).
Participation of organisations Indication that researchers in proposals are more often recruited by universities than businesses. HES – awarding PhD
Participation by scientific panel The limited presence of SOC projects is most likely due to a perceived lack of potential for industrial application and consequentially lower demand for funding under this scientific panel.
EID implemetation Most organisations (academic and non-academic) felt that the objectives and structure of the scheme were clearly set out and realistic.
EID implemetation - funding Most participants who responded considered the level of funding provided by the EID scheme to be adequate for the achievement of the scheme objectives. • Most respondents (90 %) also felt that the type of funding provided to be sufficient to achieve the scheme objectives. Among academic organisations that deemed the level of EID funding to be insufficient, a common concern related to the duration of the EID scheme funding . • PhD programmes lasting for 4 - EID scheme funding covered only 3 years • Need to have alternative funding streams to bridge this gap. • Recommended - an extension of the scheme duration to 4 years. Of non-academic organisations that did not feel EID scheme funding was sufficient, some said that the funds did not cover the material costs of research such as laboratory expenses.
EID implemetation administrative and financial rules Among the minority of respondents who did not consider administrative rules to be appropriate, reasons cited included: • Difficulty in designing standard administrative rules applicable to different local contexts (e.g. the varied lengths of PhD programmes in different countries); • The strictness of the eligibility criteria regarding the mobility of EID fellows and VISA problems relating to the recruitment of researchers from third countries. Conflicts between EID rules and requirements and national regulations or organisational practices • Recognition of qualifications awarded and training, joint supervision, and for exploiting project results • National requirements with regards to salaries and recruitment procedures were not always in line with EU funding - t process and equal opportunities policies in the context of national employment laws • Differences in length between standard doctoral programmes (typically 4 years) • Compared with the three years under the EID fellowship, caused some conflicts with internal rules and management issues.
EID implemetation • The EID is perceived as only relevant for scientific disciplines with clear potential for industrial application, with a strong focus on engineering and information sciences. • Timelines of the scheme evaluation procedure might be too long for some potential industry applicants, who then recruit PhDs directly. Time delay between the expert evaluation and the announcement of evaluation results to applicants • It can be difficult to arrange agreements on how to share background IP, and how this is being used and circulated in the consortium. • Joint supervision can be challenging and might pose risks for PhD candidates, if roles and expectations are not clearly set out at the start. • Requirements of joint supervision and secondments can be difficult to meet for SMEs – they often cannot provide capacity for weekly supervision and guidance, nor meet reporting requirements. SMEs are often participating as partner organisations
Recommend
More recommend
