80 likes | 158 Views
Projects: protocols and processes. A cross-section of Fellows and staff met on March 16 th to explore: Processes of decision-making Operating principles Criteria and objectives Necessary resources to make it happen. David Archer FC Trustee Laura Billings staff Tessy Britton FC Chair
E N D
Projects: protocols and processes • A cross-section of Fellows and staff met on March 16thto explore: • Processes of decision-making • Operating principles • Criteria and objectives • Necessary resources to make it happen
David Archer FC Trustee Laura Billings staff Tessy Britton FC Chair Sybil Crouch FC Jocelyn Cunningham staff, co-presenter Michael Devlin staff David Dickinson (FC convener and co-presenter) Katy Evans staff Belinda Lester staff Vivienne Long-Ferguson staff Malcolm Noble Fellow and Cheltenham project lead In attendance were:
The factors to be considered. • Differentiation. What is the nature of an RSA project? • Adjudication. What are the criteria by which a request for RSA-resources might be judged? • Equivalence. Should the same criteria be used to evaluate ALL projects? • Scope What are the objectives of the project? (guidelines and responses) • Process. • What is the process we are trying to understand? • What do we need to solve? • What do we need to deliver? • Where does it start and end?
Differentiation. What’s the USP? What makes an RSA project different from: • an Arts Council project • an Regional Development Agency Innovation award • An European Social Fund project …. etc? We felt the clue is in the name: “Royal Society for the Encouragement of the Arts, Manufactures and Commerce”. So how does the RSA get (encourage) the biggest bang for its buck .. and what would be considered a “big bang” by its many stakeholder groups?
Differentiation: – Matthew’s initial model P P P RSA Hubs RSA Projects FRSA Projects F F F
Differentiation: Fellowship Projects, a suggested adaptation RSA Resources Expectation & Commitment RSA staff involvement Fellow involvement Fellows’ projects eligible for resource support
Suggested criteria for fairly determining resource allocation • RSA alignment • Quality Assurance • Unique contribution • Managed risk • Feasibility • Replicability • Scalability • Dissemination • Viability • Time bounded • Finite resources, to be divided effectively across the selected projects, including: • people • finance • space • time • technology (including server space, bandwidth etc)
Equivalence. • We felt that right across the continuum: • all requests should pass through the same process • there should be no preferential treatment or fast-tracking • transparency and clarity are essential characteristics of the process RSA staff involvement Fellow involvement