The Grant

• #198 FP10 Briefing w/Science|Business

  FP10, decoded with Science|Business editors Goda Naujokaitytė and Florin Zubascu. For applicants, research managers and policy folks: budget scenarios, Pillar II’s tie to ECF, governance/committees, ERC/MSCA signals, bottom-up vs top-down, and how MFF shapes call design and success rates.Link to episode websiteWe separate rumours from reality on budget levels, how Pillar II could connect to the European Competitiveness Fund (ECF), and what’s still missing on governance, committees, and who sets work programmes. Then we tackle the politics you’ll feel on the ground: ERC/MSCA independence signals, the evolving bottom-up vs top-down mix, and the MFF dynamics that will influence call design, timelines and success rates to 2028—so you can plan bids, partnerships and careers with eyes open. (For searchers who aren’t regulars: FP10 is the successor to Horizon Europe.)Who it’s for: research managers, PIs, EU project officers, proposal writers, R&I policy professionals.Keywords: FP10, Horizon Europe successor, EU R&I, Pillar II, ECF, governance, ERC, MSCA, MFF, call design, success rates.

  --------  

  1:28:44

  --------

  1:28:44
• #197 Collaboration Architecture (part 2) - The Implementation Series (13)

  Episode siteHere in the second half of the episode on collaboration architecture, Monica Expositor-Glasco looks ahead: as AI tools make “near-perfect” proposals commonplace, the real competitive edge shifts from what you promise on paper to how your consortium proves it delivers together. We discuss why evaluator attention will increasingly gravitate to team track record, collaboration culture and evidence that a consortium can execute complex plans, adapt, and still land results. The message: the “soft” side—social architecture—becomes the hardest differentiator. We then get hands-on with practical tools and the principles behind them. Monica walks through dynamic kick-off designs (gallery walks, “cross-WP speed-dating” with three clarifying questions), flipping monthly calls from update theatre to problem-solving, and building a single source of truth with a lightweight project hub and task-oriented channels. We cover weekly asynchronous “last week I / this week I” updates, rigorous agendas framed as questions, and the core principles that make it all work: design before you build, make the implicit explicit (via a team playbook), engineer serendipity, and move from contract to commitment.Time codes (part 2):The future: collaboration as a competitive advantagePractical tools and why they workReflections and adviceThe toughest challenge

  --------  

  39:01

  --------

  39:01
• #196 Collaboration Architecture (part 1) - The Implementation Series (12)

  Episode siteBuilding a strong connection - at the social level - is one of the most important things in the implementation of an EU project. Mónica Expositor Blasco is an expert on this and therefor a natural expert guest for my episode on social elements when implementing EU projects in my Implementation Series. There were many things to discuss, so this episode is divided into two episodes.In this first half, we examine the human side of EU project delivery - how teams actually work together once the grant is awarded. We map the “typical consortium story”: euphoric kick-off, then a slide into silent struggle - passive meetings, free-riding perceptions, unclear roles, and coordination teams forced into “babysitting”. Monica’s point is blunt: these aren’t just people problems; they’re architecture problems. Most projects rely on informal habits and administrative project management, but rarely design how collaboration should function. Rhythms, roles, rules, spaces, and norms that help a set of entities act like a team.Monica introduces the role of a collaboration architect - not just facilitating one good meeting, but blueprinting the whole system. We have a look at the symptoms of weak architecture (information-dump kick-offs, passive observers, “update theatre”), then get concrete about solutions: phased kick-offs with online onboarding before the room, interactive formats instead of slide marathons, and a light playbook that sets communication norms, decision paths and “speak-up-early” principles. We close with practical examples like speed-dating across work packages, movement and micro-rituals to get voices in the room, and agenda designs that prioritise sense-making and decisions over presentations.Time codes:00:01:41 Introduction00:03:59 Fly in00:06:52 A consortium's "typical story"00:17:33 The diagnosis: Symptoms of a weak architecture00:30:36 The solution: Designing the system for success

  --------  

  1:11:45

  --------

  1:11:45
• #195 Research Management Series (6): Ensuring Long-term Sustainability

  Episode siteIn this sixth episode in the Research Management Shorts Series, that I do together with Stephanie Harfensteller, EU Research Coordinator at FIR an der RWTH Aachen, we explore how you sustain a research management strategy once the initial build is done. We get concrete about monitoring and evaluation: tracking the smooth handling of proposals and projects through trained admin capacity; improving research quality in reporting and deliverables; and smart consortium management to maximise impact while projects run (linking to other initiatives, presenting at conferences, building networks).Further, we look at pitfalls and behavioural change. How do you protect the function when budgets tighten or momentum fades? Stephanie explains diversifying support so parts of research management are funded from projects, clarifying roles between researchers and RM staff, and embedding RM inside proposal teams to keep oversight and pace. Finally, we discuss de-risking the system: moving from person-based know-how to institutional knowledge management, training researchers to handle basics (budgets, gender & ethics blocks) so RM can lift its value add, and cultivating a culture where continuous improvement outlives individuals.Time codes:00:02:00 Introduction00:05:22 Fly in00:06:40 Monitoring and evaluation00:16:15 Pitfalls00:25:03 Behavioral change and management

  --------  

  33:56

  --------

  33:56
• #194 Proposal Writing - The Good Story or Technical Details?

  Episode siteIn this episode I bring together two vantage points on EU proposal writing: exprienced grant proposal writer Diana Huber and expert evaluator Christine Cieslak. We explore the permanent tension for a proposal writer: focus on creative storytelling or technical aspects - and why the answer isn’t either/or but a disciplined both/and. Diana argues that strong proposals begin before writing with ecosystem scanning, coalition building, and policy alignment, then translate end-user needs into a narrative evaluators can actually follow. She stresses reading the EU policy backbone (from the Lisbon Treaty onwards) and co-creating with stakeholders so the story is recognisable, relevant, and implementable - rather than buzzword-heavy fiction. From the evaluator’s chair, Christine underlines how evaluators look for clarity, truthfulness, and fit: answer what is asked, avoid empty jargon, don’t “fake it”, and choose the right funding line. We discuss Erasmus+ complexity (centralised vs. decentralised lines, word-count limits), myths about “secret tricks”, and the risk of AI-generated prose that can’t be implemented or may breach GDPR. The practical bottom line: define what you will do, why it matters, how you’ll deliver it with your partners—and write so an informed non-specialist can see the logic in limited space.Time codes:00:01:50 Introduction00:05:26 Fly in00:08:30 From the proposal writer’s view00:23:26 From the evaluator’s view00:37:33 The middle ground01:16:01 Advice01:26:28 The tougest challenge

  --------  

  1:34:47

  --------

  1:34:47

More Business podcasts

Trending Business podcasts

About The Grant