The Grant

The RM Training Handbook – from competences to programmesProgramme guides, RMComp clustering and a living European standardMore: www.thegrant.eu/rm4This episode in the RM Framework Series is all about the handbook for research management training providers. I’m joined by Prof. Dr. Frank Ziegele and Niklas Rauterberg (CHE – Centre for Higher Education), who lead the handbook work package in the Horizon Europe RM Framework project – designed to create a European qualification system, handbook and quality label for RM training. We start with the “why”: professional identity for research managers, shared reference points across Europe, and the shift from supply-driven “what can trainers offer?” to demand-driven “which competences do specific roles actually need?”. From there we unpack the Programme Development Guide (a checklist from programme conception and business model to curriculum design, delivery and continuous improvement) and the Curricular Component Method, which makes RMComp project's 800+ learning outcomes usable by clustering them into areas, identifying competences relevant for all RMs and then narrowing down to what a specific training should cover. Using a pre-award training example, we walk through how to pick competences, translate them into learning outcomes and build concrete session topics. We close on the handbook as a living document – connected to pilot testers, national ambassadors and evolving topics like AI – and how it could eventually support self-assessment and personalised career paths for research managers across Europe. Time codes:00:02:48 Introduction00:04:49 Fly in00:05:26 Why we need the handbook? 00:14:10 The purpose and structure00:20:25 How to use the handbook00:39:28 The added value and final reflections

Missioner på AAU – fra strategi til hverdagspraksisSeed funding, impact frameworks og projektportefølje i et missionsdrevet universitetMere information: www.thegrant.eu/aau-missioner Dette afsnit er lavet i samarbejde med Aalborg Universitet.Aalborg Universitet har de seneste år truffet et klart valg: AAU vil arbejde missionsdrevet og samle kræfterne om udvalgte missioner, hvor store samfundsudfordringer omsættes til konkrete mål, indsatser og samarbejder på tværs af fagmiljøer. Sammen med tre gæster – Frede Blaabjerg (professor på AAU Energi og formand for Danmarks Forsknings- og Innovationspolitiske Råd), Niels Bech Lukassen (afdelingschef ved Missionssekretariatet) og Paw V. Mortensen (Energy Mission Officer) – folder jeg den missionsdrevne tilgang ud fra tre vinkler: strategi og forskning, ledelse og organisation samt hverdagen tæt på kommuner og virksomheder.Vi går bag om begrebet “missionsdreven”: Hvad adskiller det fra “bare” at lave gode projekter? Hvordan tager man afsæt i konkrete samfundsudfordringer og samtidig værner om faglighed og nysgerrighed? Undervejs deler gæsterne eksempler på missionsdreven forskning og samarbejder, nye roller for forskere, projektledere og støttefunktioner, og hvordan seed funding og projektporteføljer kan bruges til at samle kræfterne om nogle få, tydelige missioner. Episoden er tænkt som en invitation til AAU-medarbejdere – uanset om du arbejder med forskning, undervisning, administration eller eksterne samarbejder – til at se din egen rolle i AAU’s missioner.Tidskoder:00:02:32 Introduktion00:08:07 Hvorfor taler vi om missioner?00:12:24 Hvad betyder “missionsdreven” egentlig?00:25:29 Hvordan ser missionsdrevet forskning ud i praksis?00:51:02 Hvad kræver det af os som universitet?00:59:10 Hvad kan vi lære af erfaringerne indtil nu? 01:06:37 Afslutning og opfordring

Erasmus+ Rising Proposals, Falling Success RatesData, AI, evaluators and the future of proposal-based fundingMore: www.thegrant.eu/205In this episode I’m joined by Roberto Zanon (Solvere) to dig into what’s actually happening with Erasmus+ success rates. Roberto has analysed national agency and centralised call data and the picture is stark: in just a couple of years, success rates have collapsed in many actions, with some calls now around 5–10%. We talk about what’s driving the surge in proposals - NGO funding crises, organisations submitting dozens of applications, template convergence across EU programmes, Covid-era online consortia and, of course, AI tools that make it much easier to write applications at scale. We then look at the consequences: overwhelmed evaluators and agencies, inconsistent assessments that can feel like a lottery, big geographic differences between countries, and the risk that people start seeing the system as unfair. Finally we explore ways forward: better evaluator training in logical framework and theory of change, clearer and more consistent policies on AI in evaluation, more flexible programme management (caps, two-stage calls, better stakeholder feedback) and why genuinely well-rooted, mission-driven projects still stand out.Time codes:00:02:06 Introduction00:03:46 Fly in00:07:03 The numbers and the trends00:14:48 What’s driving the surge? 00:25:18 The consequences: For organisations and the system00:38:11 How do we move forward?00:56:06 The toughest challenge

IP in Projects (Part 2) — damage control in real lifeAI tools, ownership claims, documentation & dispute resolutionMore: www.thegrant.eu/201-202In 2nd half of this episode on IP in projects, I continue the conversation with Juan Luis Rodríguez Quintero (RTDS Group) looking at IP once things get messy: ownership claims, conflicts, blocking patents and results nobody planned for in the grant. We talk about why you should never leave everything to the lawyers, how to combine legal expertise with an understanding of research collaboration, and what to do when AI tools and prompts enter the picture. Who can actually claim ownership, and how do you get the consortium to recognise it? We then move into damage control and good practice: transparent documentation of results and contributions (lab notebooks, photos, minutes), using the EU IPR Helpdesk and neutral IP managers, and putting business models on the table before running to the patent office. The goal: keep projects out of court, protect real commercial value, and still let researchers publish and build their careers.Time codes:00:01:49 Damage control and good practices 00:14:12 Lessons learned and recommendations00:22:26 The toughest challenge

IP in Projects — the hard part after grant signatureConsortium agreements, background, access rights, patents vs publicationsMore: www.thegrant.eu/201This episode is a practical guide to IP in project implementation with Juan Luis Rodríguez Quintero (RTDS Group). We start with the consortium agreement: why it’s the day-to-day rulebook, how to document background in Attachment 1 (including restrictions), and how access rights work for implementation and exploitation. We also discuss managing publications vs patent filings, what counts as active contribution, and how to keep a clean record of who did what as results emerge. Then we tackle conflict points and fixes: joint ownership without a plan, partners exiting or going bankrupt, and when to use mediation/arbitration. The takeaway is a simple playbook - regular IP check-ins, novelty checks before fighting, and early negotiation of post-project access on fair and reasonable terms - so you protect value without blocking dissemination.Time codes:00:01:41 Introduction00:03:21 Fly in00:05:48 The starting point: Consortium Agreement 00:19:39 IP in real-life-implementation00:28:15 Conflict points and case examples