Deliverables

D5.1 - Project Web Presence and External Dissemination Plan

  • Open Public Rev... profile
    Open Public Rev...
    13 February 2017 - updated 4 years ago
  • 4 comments
    Total votes: 6
Closed since 27/03/17
Document(s): 
PDF icon d5.1_693514_project_web_presence_and_external_dissemination_plan_.pdf
Year of publication: 
2017

This document presents the project’s dissemination strategy, which has the objective to help the project achieve the largest possible impact in Europe. It describes the main target audiences of dissemination activities, the publication policy, the main dissemination materials & channels to be used (including online and social media presence as well as publications and presentations to both academic and non-academic audiences), and first plans for collaboration with third parties.

Tags: 
Websiteonline presencesocial mediadissemination planeventsworkshopstarget groupsconferencespresentations

Comments

Log in to post comments
Antonio Opromolla's picture
Antonio Opromolla,
27/03/2017 14:32

Positive aspect of the deliverable:
- detailed reference to the EU policies in the affected domain;
- the approach of a free access of data;
- the attention to the usability aspects of the designed communication tools (accessibility, responsiveness of the design, etc.).

Weaknesses of the deliverable:
- the AIDA framework is mainly used in the marketing strategy. The reference to a model more oriented to the communication of public services would have been more appropriate;
- the "wider public" is the main target of this project, the focus on this cathegory should be increased. An idea about that is to organize workshops and open days (to which the deliverable refers) as specific events during which, according to a participatory approach, people can be involved in experimenting with the platform. An important element to consider are the differences between different targets, that could require different approaches;
- the contents and the objectives of the mentioned tools are not well defined. An important element to consider is the identification of short/medium/long term objectives;
- a more detailed reference to the actual possibilities of participating in the mentioned conferences and events could be necessary and could give a strong structure to the communication plan;
- a more detailed reference to the specific characteristics of the communication plan in the three pilot areas is necessary;
- there is a general lack in the identification of the quantitative elements related to the identified tools (how many people/businesses, etc. can be involved with that specific tool?).

Total votes: 0
Adriano Noli's picture
Adriano Noli,
24/03/2017 21:08

This paper is very well conceived, with great attention to details and clear information.
However some suggestion can be provided in order to better address dissemination actions and for effort optimization.
- Specific focus on three different urban areas identified
- A more detailed description of target audiences (depicted with few lines each, with no sub-criteria or segmentation)
- A deeper view of dissemination reporting activities, where the template provided is clear but there is not enough information on expectations and goals

Total votes: 0
Ioannis Chrysakis's picture
Ioannis Chrysakis,
22/03/2017 17:44

General Comment and Review:
The deliverable presents a dissemination strategy focused on the AIDA approach. The image of exhibit 1 gives a tasty supervisory look of the whole approach that seems to be completed enough. The project targets public authorities mainly at local level, EU policy makers, the business community, the wider public, academia and the media.

Although the deliverable is well structured and written (defines clearly dissemination goals and channels), I think that the authors give more than expected details in some points: in EU policy (subsection 2.2) and EU guidelines (subsections 3.5.2, 3.5.3, 3.5.5 and 3.5.5). Finally more social events could be organized for engaging more people in order to spread it in the wider public, except from flyers, newsletters, social media etc. Finally I expected to see one paragraph about how pilot evaluation activities (Work Package 4) can be exploited for dissemination purposes.

Specific Suggestions and Comments:
-You could include KPIs (Key Perfomance Indicators) in order to have a measurable value that demonstrates the efficiency of community enactment.
-A brief video that indicates the idea of the project could assist in dissemination if it could be uploaded in famous social channels like youtube and vimeo.
-It could be nice to appear all available social channels on the project's website.
-Also a different section could be placed in the website for paper.li and blog as soon as they have been established.
-At the support from the European Commission (p.24) possibly you could add some communities from the list: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/all (e.g. EPractice)
-You could add a goal that takes into account user's feedback about developed tools
-You should remove the duplicate/redundant information appeared in Local policy makers (page 26 and 27)
-How about creating Hackathons/webinars on developed applications and services?
-You could increase project leaflets (1000 are quite few)

Total votes: 4
Yuri Misnikov's picture
Yuri Misnikov,
20/03/2017 22:04

While the dissemination strategy is credible, more information could have been provided if the project is going to capitalize on its web presence to strengthen the impact of its outreach and communication activities. Is it planned, for example, that web analytics tools will be applied to measure the success and effectiveness of web presence?

Also, extensive references to the EU official documents in this deliverable seem to be excessive and descriptive - these are rather part of the project description/rationale than the report on the project progress. Dissemination strategy - while being comprehensive - might benefit from being less descriptive and give more details and facts, e.g. as far as the target audiences are concerned. For example, the deliverable does not mention three pilot communities to specify how dissemination activities would differ from community to community given the difference in general conditions, user audiences and policy challenges. It is advised to that the future editions of this deliverable include more factual information.

Total votes: 0