Examining Management Processes

1. Examining Management Processes HR, Communications, Cost, and Scope

4. HR and Team Management Case Example: IPR Helpdesk Project (Contract Nº IPS-2001-40004)

5. HR Management • Getting the right person, in the right place, at the right time and for the right purpose • After this procedure, we have the complicated process of coordinating, leading and directing this person • One person is part of a team

6. Onsite: Legal experts Translators Editors Secretaries Events / news writers Computer backup Project Manager Offsite: Legal experts Translators Web designers and maintainers Dissemination Team Coordinator in Brussels Make-up of the Team at IPR Helpdesk

7. Structure of the Team • Decentralised structure – aimed at close relationship with the end user • Divided into technical ‘cells’ or workgroups • Cells are: • Management • Legal • Public Relations • Information and Communications Technology • Administrative

8. Organigrama EUROPEAN COMMISSION PROJECT DIRECTOR LEGAL COORDINATOR IT LEGAL PR ADMIN SUPPORT STAFF AND WORKGROUPS

9. Reporting and Responsibility Lines • Technical cells diffuse the pyramidal structure of reporting and responsability, through use of workpackage or cell coordinators Reponsibility Line Project Coordinator and Manager Workpackage Coordinators Technical Cell Staff Reporting Line

10. Reporting Processes • Each workgroup has to send periodic reports to the overall coordinator detailing progress, problems and ideas • Every 9 months (or in the case that something is urgent, sporadically) • Internally, informal reporting is carried out (meetings, discussions) between cell staff and coordinators, and between coordinators and project managers • Offsite, have to present overall coordinator with reports

11. Reporting Processes (II) • Project Coordinator and Manager have to send periodic reports (?) to the Project Officer at the European Commission • Information on administrative issues, feedback, financial issues, and changes to project plan or activities

12. Selection and Recruitment Process (Onsite) • Grant contracts – usually internally recruited • Profile is created with necessary and desirable requirements • Public offer published on Announcement Board in University and UA website • Then a recruitment tribunal holds decisions • ‘Motive for Recruitment’ must be presented to Vice-rector for Investigation when person is chosen – they must approve it

13. Selection and Recruitment Process • Fixed Place Contracts • “Servicio de Selección y Formación” create profile according to our needs (required and desirable) • Public offer: website and notice board • Selection process includes exam, tests, and a personal interview • The tribunal includes the director of the project, secretary, representatives, and syndicates

14. Recruitment and Selection • Most recruitment was carried out internally – in-house employees • Advantages: employee’s skills are known, costs are less, motivational issues, employee has familiarity with procedures, rules, custom and culture • Offsite, this method was also the most used

15. Appraisal and Reward Schemes • Most staff have temporary grant contracts • Have to sit an evaluation on a tri-monthly basis • Evaluated by Project Manager, using information provided by workpackage • Staff also given questionnaires about their tasks, duty, and time usage

16. Appraisal and Rewards • Rewards follow appraisals • Rewards are in line with the results and work carried out • Monetary and non-monetary • Collaboration payments, pay rises, etc • Responsibility, praise, training, social benefits

17. Training of Employees • Training is usually a reward • Is also provided through a detection of training needs • Courses and conferences in Spain and abroad • Training must be of direct benefit to the IPR Helpdesk Project

18. Decision Making Structures • Decisions must not accumulate at the top of the hierarchy • Workpackage coordinators are responsible for day-to-day running decisions • Project Manager makes large decisions and, where necessary, consults with the Commission who have the ‘final word’

19. Decision Making Structures • Information comes from down-up approach • Decisions are made according to information • Orders come from up-down approach • Decisions can come directly from the Commission without information prior to decision-making • Both offsite and onsite staff are involved in decision making

20. Specific Example: IT Workgroup • Recruitment: Internal to the University • Initally 6 people selected • Project Manager was also in charge of this workgroup, so decisions were all at the top of the hierarchy • Onsite and offsite staff, caused coordination problems

21. Specific Example : IT Workgroup • Appraisals and reporting were initially set at 9 monthly intervals • Appraisal led to training rewards: for example, a website positioning course held in Barcelona • Other reward schemes: collaboration payments for initial setup processes, and praise from management, plus social benefits

22. Specific Example: IT Workgroup • Decision came top-down from the Commission that there were too many human resources spent on this workgroup after the initial set-up period • Decision was made to reduce to three workers • The need for a workgroup spokesperson was detected, and one was selected (natural selection) from the existing employees • Greater coordination and efficiency created

23. Input – Output summary