PURE Brussels Report - 8th-9th February 2010

Embedded Scribd iPaper - Requires Javascript and Flash Player
http://www.obs-pascal.com
PASCAL PURE WORKSHOP BRUSSELS 8th – 9th FEBRUARY 2010
MID-TERM REVIEW AND ACTION PLANNING
Convened at the Brussels offices of Kent County Council
This announcement is a ‘headline’ summary of the action points prepared by Professor Chris Duke, PURE Academic Director as part of his full report of the above meeting. That full version can be found elsewhere within the website.
Main Points for Action
A. Supporting 1. 2. 3. 4. New Regions should be supported in and given adequate time to establish a local RCG, support and understanding prior to producing RPs and pre-visit RBPs. In particular an ongoing ‘client manager’ for each Region (often probably the CLR) appears to be essential. Consultation should continue about how support to Regions can be continued and benefit gained from ongoing PURE networking after 2010. General documentation, requests for information, Briefing Papers etc should be kept to a minimum and be as brief, clear and simple as possible.
B. Communicating 5. Efforts should be redoubled, building on excellent recent improvements, to make the PURE Website accessible and user-friendly – and to encourage its active and interactive use. 6. In view of the wide support for the notion of Clusters and uncertainty how to use them, the arrangement for Clusters to be reconfigured to include groups of similar Regions as Clusters in a matrix across all present and any new thematic Clusters. 7. As (especially new) Regions identify new Cluster themes these should be added to the reconfigured ‘cluster matrix’. C. Benchmarking 8. The early experience and successes with Benchmarking eg. in Melbourne should be fully shared as a basis to give other Regions confidence to do this. 9. Emphasise in all documents and other work the purpose of Benchmarking – learning and improving, not ranking or competing 10. Easy web-based approaches to Benchmarking should be made available immediately via the Website and the most serviceable (and available in IP terms) adopted by other regions for benchmarking. 11. Based on the Benchmarking experience so far, David Charles and Bruce Wilson should be invited to review the Tools and make revisions based on feedback. 12. The Project should now explore how to connect outcomes from 1st rounds of HEI and Region benchmarking to point up gaps, opportunities and actions. 13. Possibilities should be explored to link the focus and findings of Benchmarking with the reconstructed Clusters system.
http://www.obs-pascal.com
D. Broadcasting 14. Useful examples of Good Practice should be prepared in each Region with a simple template for PURE Wiki and then where fitting onto the Website Clusters. 15. A special strength of PURE is the diversity of Regions; efforts should be made to analyse this experience and to include findings among the main Project outcomes. 16. Invite each Region through its Coordinator and the leader of the CDG to prepare a 2-3 page progress summary for the Ostersund meeting. E. Linking 17. In preparing reports for the Ostersund and Gabarone meetings, focus on distance travelled and the diverse achievements of different Regions. 18. Possible partnership with the New Club of Paris should be investigated with a view to linking that governmental and policy network to PURE’s field-anchored experience. 19. Discuss with regions and prepare an inventory of national and international links which each (or more) region may find advisable and useful in supporting their own objectives. PURE to facilitate these links.
Key colleagues have been identified within PURE and the regions to take these Action Points forward. Each region is encouraged to put forward its own views on the above and to indicate how each can be made to work in their own context. See the full Report for further details.