Quick recap 

The team explored the idea of collecting user scenarios to better understand the needs of their community and the potential for collaboration among partner organizations. Lastly, they deliberated on the budget for the work package and the need for a more collaborative and distributed leadership model across all work packages. 

Next steps 

• All partners to review their assigned tasks in Work Package 2 and populate them with more detailed descriptions and examples. 

• All partners to estimate budget requirements for their activities within Work Package 2. 

• Lahila Robertis to lead Work Package 2, with potential co-leadership from other partners. 

• Kinevin to take responsibility for Task 2.1 (Community Research). 

• Patrick, Larissa, and Arthur to collaborate on Task 2.2 (Community Engagement Strategy). 

• West University of Temishawara, Lacrops, and potentially Architects Council of Europe to work on Task 2.3 (Communication Strategy). 

• Paola to check on any potential limits for person-month costs in Horizon projects. 

• All partners to define concrete activities and expected outputs for their tasks in Work Package 2. 

Summary 

Initiative Leadership and Work Package Updates 

Starglide shared about a recent discussion with the Science Park border director and Ulrika, who showed interest in leading the proposal, with team support. Starglide indicated that there might be an opportunity for them to lead and that upcoming sessions would be beneficial for this. However, no one volunteered to lead the work package. Starglide also committed to providing more content related to each work package by Monday. Lastly, GNE agreed to take on the host role in the meeting. 

Identifying Roles and Project Responsibilities 

Starglide initiated a discussion about identifying roles and responsibilities within the project, emphasizing the need for team members to consider which tasks or packages they would be interested in taking on. paola_valandro and Carlo Battisti both offered to take on specific roles, with Carlo presenting a comprehensive overview of the project's tasks, timeline, and potential partners. GNE also shared their organization's interest in contributing to the project, particularly in the areas of finance and business model development. The team agreed to further discuss and distribute responsibilities among themselves. 

Community Engagement and Story Mapping 

Starglide proposed the idea of collecting user scenarios and experiences to better understand the needs of their community. paola_valandro expressed interest in community engagement strategies, while Anna from the Cynefin Co. offered to provide a tool and method for collecting and mapping stories. The team agreed on the importance of connecting with the community and using the gathered stories to build both internal and external content. The goal is to make the project more inclusive and not solely reliant on the perspectives of project managers. 

Task Distribution and Package Leadership 

The team discussed the distribution of tasks and responsibilities for the project. Paola suggested that they could contribute their skills and interests to the project. Carlo proposed that the team could simplify their work by delegating tasks to work package leaders. starglide suggested that the team clarify their interests in the current package and identify potential leaders for each task. Anna expressed her organization's interest in contributing to task 2.1, but was hesitant about leading the package. Diana from the University of West University in Romania also expressed interest in being an associate partner and contributing to the communication strategy. 

Task Distribution and Collaboration Discussion 

Diana suggested that initial work, such as defining research questions and formulas, could be done by a few experienced organizations to allow others to focus on more detailed, labor-intensive tasks. Larissa expressed interest in linking a newly formed community to the platform and reaching out to people from the lab environment. Paola noted that it was beneficial to have one partner lead the work package but emphasized that other partners could contribute to specific tasks. Ulrika, representing the Forum for Social Innovation, expressed interest in her organization's potential involvement but needed to discuss this with her colleagues before committing. 

Task Assignments and Communication Strategies 

Paola noted that ART-ER would lead task 2.1 on community mapping and needs assessment, while RISE?, Forum for Social Innovation Sweden, and Science Park Borås expressed interest in the community engagement strategies task. For communication activities under task 2.3, Starglide and ?LaCarpus? will work on branding, and West University of Timisoara and potentially the Architects Council of Europe (marked with a question mark) will also contribute. The team discussed the need for a designated Work Package 2 leader, with the possibility of having co-leaders. The integration of non-net entities into the project was also mentioned as an important consideration. 

Architects Council of Europe's Potential Role, and Climate KIC’s

The team discussed the potential for the Architects Council of Europe to take a leading role in partnership with Climate KIC project, highlighting their strong partner base and reach. They agreed to keep the proposal open for further discussion, with Lahila and Diana Monsberger expressing their support. Diana proposed that smaller citizen organizations could contribute significantly to the work package and suggested they could act as co-leads alongside larger institutions. The team agreed to further develop a more collaborative and distributed leadership model across all work packages. paola_valandro discussed the distribution of responsibilities and geographical coverage in the context of European projects, noting an interesting distribution pattern in Work Package 2. 

Partner Task Review and Budget Planning 

Starglide proposed that each partner review their assigned tasks, adding their own language and examples to make the descriptions more detailed and relevant. They also discussed the need to consider the budget for the work package, keeping in mind the Commission's limits on costs per person per month. Paola agreed to check the specifics of these limits. The team decided to move forward with this plan, with starglide and Paola leading the effort. Lahila confirmed her availability to contribute to the discussions upon her return. 

Quick recap 

The team discussed various topics including a previous injury, potential meeting cancellations, and the development of an evaluation framework for project reports. They also explored the possibility of partnerships with organizations like the Architects Council of Europe and the potential for different partners to lead technical, financial, and social aspects of a project. Lastly, they addressed challenges in financial management, the need for better organization of documents, and the idea of creating a European Cooperative Society to manage the project. 

Next steps 

• Alessandro to update diagrams and videos used in explanations over the weekend. 

• Ulrika to share work package descriptions and updated presentation materials with her organization. 

• Ulrika to contact Malmo and Jens to discuss latest updates and potential collaboration. 

• Alessandro and Ulrika to have a meeting on Monday morning to prepare for the evening work package 4 meeting. 

• Alessandro and Ulrika to set up the project management platform together. 

• Alessandro and Ulrika to draft work package 1 content, including coordination, quality control, and administrative/financial management. 

• Ulrika to arrange another meeting with her university's financial officers to discuss budget concerns and project management approach. 

Summary 

Evaluation Framework and Leadership Structure 

The team discussed the development of an evaluation and monitoring framework for project reports, potentially led by RISE. Patrik proposed a leadership structure across work packages and the identification of synergy roles to manage finances efficiently. The team also considered the involvement of GNE in the project due to their experience in project evaluation and financial aspects. The importance of sustainability criteria and values in project assessment was also emphasized. 

Exploring Partner Collaboration and Leadership 

starglide proposed the idea of having different partners to build a framework that can position a project based on its technical, financial, and social dimensions. Mária shared her ongoing project, Manifest 20, which involves collaboration with various organizations, and suggested that they could potentially partner with others. Carlo proposed the idea of rotating leadership among partners to manage risks and ensure progress. The team agreed to further discuss and refine these ideas. 

Assessment Framework Development and Collaboration 

Ulrika, Paula, and Patrik expressed their interest in contributing to the development of the assessment framework for social innovation projects. They noted their previous experience working with the European Social Fund and their desire to collaborate with other partners. The team also discussed the importance of connecting different tasks and subtasks, and the potential for collaborative workshops to ensure a high level of collaboration across partners. Patrik offered to lead this work package. 

Collaboration and Project Management Discussion 

Patrik proposed a collaboration between his organization and others to leverage their diverse skills and expertise. Anna clarified her role in knowledge collection and confirmed that her organization would offer support but not lead any tasks. Starglide agreed to reach out to other potential partners and to use a project management software to manage the work packages. The team also discussed the importance of creating a relationship diagram to illustrate the synergies and collaborations between the tasks. Paula offered her financial expertise as a supporter, but she would not lead any tasks. 

Team Progress and Document Improvements 

Starglide expressed satisfaction with the team's progress and announced plans for future discussions. Patrik and Alessandro were asked to assist Ulrika in navigating the latest writings, and Mária was invited to join the Discord group. There were some technical difficulties with accessing and viewing certain documents, which were addressed by sharing the main documents again. The team also discussed the need for better organization and accessibility of the documents. 

Quick recap 

The team focused on the development of an online platform to collect and organize knowledge, with Starglide leading the task and the potential involvement of Munkun and students. Lastly, they discussed the creation of roles to evaluate projects, the importance of local chapters in gathering stories, and the establishment of a project management platform. 

Next steps 

• Alessandro to set up the project management platform and update the Excel spreadsheet with recent comments. 

• All interested partners to review and add to the work package descriptions and timeline proposal document. 

• Ulrika to circulate work descriptions to potential university partners next week. 

• Alessandro to transform the proposal into the Commission's required format for easier filling. 

• Ulrika to prepare a proposal on how her university can contribute and why for internal discussions. 

• Ulrika to meet with Patrick from RISE on Monday to discuss support for the project. 

• Alessandro to try to find an example of a support letter for Ulrika. 

Summary 

Organization Support 

Carlo provided updates on work packages and document uploads. Ulrika shared that her organization needs to secure support letters and a positive decision from their Vice Chancellor, likely by Wednesday, before confirming their contributions and potential coordination role. Starglide offered to assist Ulrika's preparations this week and suggest using project management tools to demonstrate their capabilities. 

Online Platform Development and Partnerships 

Starglide discussed the work package aimed at setting up an online platform to collect structured and tacit knowledge. Instances of the CMS platform are already installed, with Starglide leading the task. The platform is expected to require ongoing maintenance and upgrades, and Starglide expressed a need for a development partner with solid competences on DRUPAL platforms. The discussion also touched on the potential involvement of Munkun in this aspect of the project. 

Work Package Details and Presentation 

Starglide and Mária discussed the details of their work packages, specifically focusing on package 4 and package 5. Starglide explained that package 4 involves data entry and import to populate their platform with existing projects and stories. Package 5, on the other hand, uses this raw material to create products, such as training material and services. They also discussed the different ways content can be presented depending on user needs, such as extracting summaries or developing instructional materials. 

Culture Hub Croatia Collaboration and SenseMaker Integration 

Paola, starglide, and Marina_CHC from Culture Hub Croatia expressed their interest in contributing to the NEB chapters, particularly in the tasks of collecting stories and creating local chapters. They emphasized the importance of community participation and experimental formats. Ulrika agreed to circulate the work descriptions to her team and consider their responses. starglide highlighted the role of RISE in standardizing knowledge frameworks and mentioned two upcoming tasks: the net portfolio and the baseline of stories about the NEB. The possibility of involving students in various ways was also discussed, with Starglide suggesting they could contribute to the collection of stories or building the community. Lastly, the integration of SenseMaker, a tool for collecting and organizing information, into their existing platform was discussed. 

Role Creation and Project Evaluation Strategy 

Starglide and the team discussed the creation of roles to evaluate NEB projects within the platform. Starglide emphasized that the platform should not become an evaluation tool but rather a tool to help project teams position themselves. The idea of having roles capable of rating was introduced, but the team decided that the roles should be more focused on coaching rather than judging. starglide also suggested the idea of periodic publications to explain the evolution of projects. The team agreed that this would be part of taske 4.3. The discussion also touched on the need for offline events for story collection and the potential for these events to become moments for public interaction. However, the selection of chapters for this task was still under consideration. 

Local Chapters, Learning, and Evaluation Process 

starglide and Paola highlighted the importance of local chapters in gathering stories and engaging with the public. They proposed incorporating a learning and evaluation process into the chapter's work and suggested the idea of organizing workshops at the neighborhood level to share experiences and identify local adaptations. They also debated the need for a leader for the work package related to local chapters, net compost, evaluation, and portfolio mix, with Ulrika expressing interest in leading this aspect. Starglide and Paola agreed to have open discussions throughout the following week to further coordinate roles and responsibilities. 

Project Management Platform and Work Package Proposal 

Starglide introduced plans to establish a project management platform and invited team members to contribute to an updated Excel document with comments and tasks. The team discussed the work package proposal, with Carlo suggesting each task leader should provide a clear description of their package. A deadline was set for the following week to draft a proposal, with Mária suggesting a system for maintaining consistency and quality. Starglide agreed to this plan, allowing flexibility in entering work package descriptions and timelines, and committed to working on a net proposal starting from Monday to meet the Commission's requirements. 

Quick recap 

The team discussed the progress of various work packages, the need for improved coordination, and potential changes to the current work package structure. They also explored the organization and prioritization of tasks, the potential contributions of team members to a work package focused on training and consulting, and the allocation of tasks and resources for an upcoming project. Lastly, they deliberated on the involvement of partners and associates in the Nem community, ways to streamline the onboarding process for new partners, and the roles and responsibilities of team members in the ongoing project. 

Next steps 

• Patrick to confirm project manager name by tomorrow 

• Alessandro to send draft update email to group for review 

• Work package leaders to start drafting work package descriptions 

• Ulrika to clarify which work package Science Park would like to lead 

• Alessandro to set up separate documents for each proposal section 

• All partners to send letters of support rather than becoming associated partners 

• Ulrika to discuss potential roles with her organization at tomorrow's meeting 

• Alessandro to join Ulrika's meeting tomorrow if possible 

• Ulrika to send meeting invitation to Alessandro 

Summary 

Improving Coordination and Work Package Leadership 

starglide led a discussion on the progress of various work packages, with Mária, Ulrika, and Patrik discussing their respective roles and the need for improved coordination. Patrik proposed that his organization should take the lead in coordination, with support from others, and identified two experienced product managers to assist. Ulrika confirmed her organization's readiness to lead a work package and emphasized the need for further discussions. starglide suggested the formation of a coordination group for each work package and highlighted the ongoing search for a solid partner with Drupal IT capabilities. 

Work Package Structure and Deliverables 

Starglide proposed changes to the current work package structure, suggesting the removal of two parts related to continuous improvement on online and offline aspects, as they were seen as already included in other parts. Carlo also suggested redefining the structure, having task with associated deliverables. 

Task Organization and Prioritization Discussion 

The team discussed the organization and prioritization of tasks for their project. Francesca expressed concerns about the fragmentation of tasks and suggested focusing on drafting detailed descriptions for each task to avoid duplication and ensure clarity. Carlo proposed dividing the work into four main areas: contribution to the NEB facility, training programs, consulting services, and continuous improvement. starglide suggested integrating the continuous improvement task into work package 4. The team also discussed the need to keep the proposal concise and focused, with a maximum of 10 pages, and the importance of seeking input from work package leaders. 

Science Park Work Package Discussion 

Ulrika, Starglide, Patrik, and Carlo discussed their potential contributions to a work package focused on training and consulting. They agreed to further consider their involvement, with Ulrika offering expertise from the textile sector and community research and engagement, Patrik expressing interest in training and education, and Carlo coordinating from a built environment perspective. The team also discussed the role of partners in transforming methodologies and the potential for creating a European cooperative, emphasizing the importance of focusing on impact and relevance. Starglide and Patrik agreed to start working on their project, with Starglide promising to send an update to the whole group, and Diana confirming an email for the work partners meeting would be sent soon. 

Task Allocation and Partner Roles Discussion 

Starglide, Carlo, Patrik, and Francesca discussed the allocation of tasks and resources for their upcoming project. Carlo suggested creating a comprehensive list of partners for each task to identify and address any redundancies. Starglide proposed the idea of designating interested partners as 'associate partners', providing them with a budget to support their activities. However, Francesca clarified that 'associate partners' could not receive financial support. As an alternative, Francesca suggested an open call for financial support to third-party providers to run local chapters. The team agreed to further explore these ideas while considering the project's logistical challenges. 

Pilot Program Proposal and Partnership Roles 

Starglide presented a proposal to support local chapters through a pilot program, with associated partners providing services and potentially sponsoring. However, Francesca suggested that the consortium should attach a letter of support instead of having associated partners, as it would be easier to manage and would not require detailed descriptions of each partner's role. The team agreed to keep the proposal open to potential new partners, while also focusing on the ability for individuals to join during the project. Ulrika raised a question about the difference between associated partners and friends, and the role of specific expertise and universities in this context. 

Nem Community Partnership and Knowledge Transfer 

The team discussed the involvement of partners and associates in the NEB community. starglide proposed starting with a letter of support from all followers, which could lead to the formation of a European cooperative. This would allow all letter of support holders to have a say in governance and project direction. Patrik agreed to this proposal, while Mária clarified her understanding that associate partners could have different tasks, including setting up local chapters. The team also discussed the possibility of knowledge transfer as part of the project, with Mária suggesting a collaborative approach to content creation and finalization. 

Non-Core Partners' Role in Project 

Ulrika and starglide discussed how non-core partners could contribute to their project through letters of support. These partners could participate in co-design sessions, provide services, and eventually become members of the cooperative legal structure they plan to establish. However, they would not be formally associated with the project. A conversation about the relationship between the NEBHub and the official channels to handle the NEB Commuity arised. The decision was to clearly position the NEBHub as complementary to the official channels and as a support structure to guarantee replication and scale. 

Streamlining Onboarding for New Partners 

starglide, Mária, Carlo, Patrik, and Ulrika discussed ways to streamline the onboarding process for new partners, including creating a standardized assessment framework and involving local chapters or national forums. Mária raised concerns about the increasing number of applications and the need to relieve the workload on the NEB unit. They explored having experienced partners mentor new chapters and helping on onboarding, supporting local communities and decision makers in expanding the reach of the initiative. 

Clarifying Team Roles and Responsibilities 

The team discussed their roles and responsibilities in the ongoing project, with a focus on document quality and efficiency. Ulrika expressed confusion about her role and the project's direction, prompting Patrik to propose that she be made a co-coordinator or part of the steering committee. This new role was intended as a backup or "shadow leader" to balance seniority and capacity within a work package, especially when one entity is significantly larger or more established than the other. Starglide clarified this role and its purpose to Ulrika, who initially showed some confusion about the new responsibility. 

Project Roles and Responsibilities Discussion 

Starglide and Ulrika discussed roles and responsibilities. They discussed the possibility of Ulrika's organization serving as a co-leader, contributing to project coordination in a recognized way. The final decision on roles and responsibilities within each work package was still to be determined. Ulrika expressed interest in leading specific tasks within Work Package 2 related to community-based participatory processes and impact analysis, which align with her organization's expertise. They planned to continue discussions at an upcoming meeting, which Ulrika agreed to send an invitation for.