Selecting a Site for the Dante Headoffice

1. Selecting a Site for the Dante Headoffice Jürgen Harms CUI, University of Geneva juergen.harms@cui.unige.ch

2. Summary The Dante site Formal aspects Actions Selection criteria & comments Post-festum observations

3. Task and Environment • Accommodate network and project management centre with an • (initial) staff of 10-20 • Formal responsibility: Rare, (Dante-) Owners Assembly • Selection process from April 1992 – October 1992 • Two-level procedure: • “Evaluation panel” (A.Arvlias, J.Barbera, F.Liello, J.Harms)‏ • (Dante-) Steering Group • Ultimate decision: (Dante-) Owners Assembly • Note: formally, the Dante organisation had not yet been founded at that time

4. 1992 The Selection Process • 1. Launch request for offers + summary site information • 2. Elaboration of evaluation criteria • 3. Meet representatives from all (6) candidate sites • 4. Ranking: - short listed sites • - 2nd rank sites • - rejected sites • 5. Acquire expert advice on corporate tax issues • (obtain funding by loan from RARE, prepare briefing paper for experts)‏ • 6. Final report to Owners Assembly + formal decision • 7. Follow-up by Steering Group (+ detailed negotiation with • site – e.g. tax status!)‏ 10. Apr. July 7. Sept. October

5. Selection Criteria (1)‏ 1. Accommodation • Meeting facilities (international venue!)‏ • Long-term perspectives • Cultural environment • Place & facilities • Timing constraints • Cost • Expansion possibilities 2. Facilities • General infrastructure • Telecommunications • Neighbourhood with other organisations 3. Fiscal environment • Local taxes • VAT issues • Profit rules • Capital taxes • Corporate taxes

6. Selection Criteria (2)‏ 4. Employment conditions • Labour flexibility • Availability of temporary staff • Local skills • Income tax • Social security, pension • Health insurance • Dismissal rules 5. Quality of environment • School education • Attractivity of place • Housing • Public transport • Ease of access by air/rail

7. Selection Criteria: Comments • Abandon concept of “algorithmic assessment” • Incomplete information from sites, weighting of fiscal aspects ? • Place and facilities • Traffic relations to customers and providers • Relative importance for official support in the critical initial phase • Neighbourhood with other organisations • Co-location with “players” does not only have advantages • (positive: synergy; negative: risk of political interference)‏ • Financial considerations • Preponderance of corporate tax issues and tax exemption • Salary lever, rental of premises: close to negligible differences • Short-term scenario • Substantial differences in delay of availability

8. Post-festum Observations • Evaluation process: excessive emphasis on short-term issues ? • Ephemeral value of the result of negotiations (e.g. tax exemptedness)‏ • Importance of attractivity to (candidate) staff • Site-selection = determining the “working style” • Importance of the ease and flexibility of transfering funds • In case of non-€ site: impact of currency exchange rates • Value of expert advice for questions co-lateral to “community-expertise” • “Call” procedure might leave valuable sites “undiscovered”