Deliverables

D5.4 - Third report on dissemination & exploitation support activities

  • OPR coordinator... profile
    OPR coordinator...
    16 January 2019 - updated 2 years ago
  • 10 comments
    Total votes: 3
Closed since 17/02/19
Document(s): 
PDF icon wegovnow_draft_d5-4_oprp.pdf
Year of publication: 
2019

This report (D5.4) presents an overview of the various activities conducted during the WeGovNow project’s second reporting period. Various dissemination and communication activities have been pursued during this time period on the basis of an established communication strategy (D5.1). The focus has been on disseminating the approach and objectives of WeGovNow, but also on communicating interim achievements throughout the various stages of the overall project.

A basic distinction was made between overall project level communication addressing a wider audience at the international level and pilot site level communication targeting local stakeholders. During the project’s final year a great effort was made when it comes to pilot site level communication in order to support the implementation of local validation trials conducted in three pilot municipalities, namely the City of Turin (IT), The London Borough of Southwark (UK) and San Doná di Piave (IT). Various communication means have been employed throughout the project’s life cycle. Moreover, different exploitation support activities have been conducted to facilitate the further utilisation of project outputs.

Please note: This report has been generated for the purposes of the Open Public Review Pilot. Further information is currently compiled and will be fed into the final version of this report due at the end of the project duration.

Comments

Log in to post comments
Jūratė Imbrasaitė's picture
Jūratė Imbrasaitė,
18/02/2019 02:11

The deliverable is appreciable for variety of communication and dissemination means developed and applied. However, not all communication and dissemination activities are clear. What are communication message for different target groups?  Were dissemination tools differentiated in respect to different target groups?

The monitoring of effectiveness of campaign  should be increased. For example,- the number of videos and  a number of  views or likes/dislikes should be provided.

The exploitation section should be further developed.

 

 

Total votes: 0
Galia Novakova NEDELTCHEVA's picture
Galia Novakova ...,
18/02/2019 00:22

WeGovNow is a project known to a relatively small group of people specifically interested in ICT and eGovernment (in comparison to all EU Twitter users). It is good that the consortium has been active in promoting the project to European cities that are working on issues related to the project, through European networks such as EUROCITIES, URBACT and URBAN INNOVATIVE ACTION at project level, and through national or regional city networks at partner level. The WeGovNow partners raise awareness of the project through different publication means, including: Newsletters, Online news, Newspapers/ magazines, Books and journals. Exhaustive list of non-academic and academic publications is presented. 

In general, the dissemination and exploitation support activities are sufficiently elaborated. Disseminating knowledge and results online and interacting via social media channels (including a website) is good within WeGovNow’s communication strategy. However, it is not clear who will maintain and do the updates of the website.

The proposed dissemination of the project results and the outlined communication strategy do address the right mix of audiences. However, the dissemination measures to reach SMEs are not sufficiently detailed. As well, there are many typos along the document.

IPR management is properly addressed.

Total votes: 0
Raffaella GENTILE's picture
Raffaella GENTILE,
16/02/2019 20:35

The dissemination/communication/exploitation report is well designed and activities implemented and described seem to have reached the aim to let the project be known by citizens/stakeholders as future users of the platform, other public entities and scientific audience. Anyway maybe a wider description of the audience reached thought the different dissemination/communication means should be further improved in the documents (ie number of persons participating in the events, newsletter potential readers, etc.).
I fully agree with some of the previous comments, in particular as regards: 
the ‘expoitation section' should be further developed with more information on how the results of the three pilots will be further exploited and sustainability of the platform after the EU project ends
a proof-reading is strongly recommended 
more clearer separation between dissemination and communication actions could be very useful.

Total votes: 1
Antonio De Nicola's picture
Antonio De Nicola,
16/02/2019 17:41

The deliverable describes the dissemination done by the project in detail. My opinion concerning this part is positive but I have one remark on the quality of the academic publications. At the moment, there are several conference papers and only one paper in a journal that, at the best of my knowledge, is not indexed neither in SCOPUS nor in ISI Web Of Science. EU project should put more attention on that as review process of indexed journals are (usually) more rigorous.    

The part related to exploitation is limited. Hopefully in the next version of the deliverable there will be a more detailed business plan.

Total votes: 0
Giorgia NESTI's picture
Giorgia NESTI,
15/02/2019 12:37
  • The dissemination and communication Plan is well designed and implemented. Nevertheless, I've two major concerns about communcation activities: first, it seems to me that  videos and publications for non-academic audiences are unbalanced towards Italy. More material from London would be welcome. Second, I suggest to add more information about the General Project also on the Local Pilots' websites. 
  • The 'Expoitation section' should be further developed
  • A grammar-check is strongly recommended 
  • Please check also Table of Contents and titles
Total votes: 0
Francisco Santarremigia's picture
Francisco Santa...,
11/02/2019 12:44
  • Good disseminated and communicated Project.
  • However it is not clear how the results will be exploited, an exploitation plan per partner and a business plan would enrich the deliverable. It is not clear what is the “value for money” of the  WeGovNow platform and its economical sustainability after the project.
Total votes: 1
Gemma Molero's picture
Gemma Molero,
08/02/2019 20:08
  • The parragraph before the last one has twice the Word “designed” (pg 38). Please review it.
  • A segregation between dissemination actions and communication actions could be useful. In the curent version of the deliverable are both mixed.
  • Communication of the Project is good and dissemination in events too. However dissemination in journals should be boosted.
  • The exploitation support (point 3 of the deliverable) should include a business plan with a more clear statement about how results of the Project are beyond the state of the art of similar civic participation solutions currently running.
  • The Annex II in the text of the deliverable belongs to the Annex III, and the Annex I and the Annex II in the text of the delievarble seems not to be present. Please review this.
  • The point A of the Annex I has not the same format that the points B, C and D of this Annex and it is confussing.
Total votes: 1
Eva KASPAROVA's picture
Eva KASPAROVA,
03/02/2019 08:31

The process of disseminating project deliverables is described in detail, specifically, clearly and comprehensibly. Project solvers present a coherent logically structured information on the dissemination activities carried out. The amount of activities and the chosen forms of activities are in line with the project's purpose and objectives. The strength of the project is the use of a relatively large number of different forms of clear visual communication through appropriate communication channels. The project focused mainly on the use of electronic forms of communication, press and personal meetings. The effect of the campaign is monitored. The number of website visitors is tracked. However, the project does not specify which specific target groups the individual selected communication activities are addressed to. The predominance of electronic communication channels presupposes the corresponding user experience, namely recipients who use electronic communication. It is recommended to use, in addition to press and personal meetings, the use of other media to promote the outputs of the project, namely TV or radio. It may be advisable to focus on addressing target groups that will also benefit from project outputs, but they do not yet have sufficient prerequisites to use the results of the project, i.e. occasional Internet users or those who do not have experience so far. These groups could thus be partially excluded from the expected partnership because of their insufficient information about the project. The developed plan for exploitation support of project outputs is clear and contains important information on the steps taken to ensure the practical applicability and sustainability of project outputs.

Total votes: 0
Antonio OPROMOLLA's picture
Antonio OPROMOLLA,
01/02/2019 18:37

The deliverable is appreciable for many reasons. For example, the number and typoloy of tools identified is adequate and it seems that thay are positively employed. Some positive elements are the integration of the communication messages also in other channels (the ones of the partners project) and the guides on how to use the different means. Moreover, the fact that the data analytics are shown is an important element.

However, some elements are not clear. For example, not all the materials are provided (for example, where to find the realized videos? how many newsletter has been sent and what are their contents?). Generally the future strategies for dissemination activities are not clear and not clear are the specific impacts of the implemented actions.

Total votes: 0
Adriano Noli's picture
Adriano Noli,
29/01/2019 12:33

This report is well conceived and provides a good overview on performed activities. However, while the communication and dissemination section is extensive and detailed, the support to exploitation is not well explained and commercial relationships with engaged partners and stakeholders are not clear. 

A significant number of typos is reported. 

Total votes: 0