Operational Committee and contributors

The Operational Committee, which carried out the Gap Analysis and which implements the actions validated by the Steering Committee, is made up of actors who are daily involved in the institution's research activities or in direct connection with the research departments.

These actors were selected based on their role to represent the fundamental dimensions of the accreditation:

• human resources actors, for their expertise in HR
• research and valorization and international relations actors, including R4, R3, and R2, for their mastery of research environments and expertise accompanying international researchers
• representatives of the institution’s strategic E2S UPPA project, for their experience with growth-generating projects
• actors from the Doctoral Schools for their involvement in the training of young researchers
• actors from the Directorate of Legal Affairs for regulatory aspects
• actors from the Directorate of Operations, Support and Ongoing Improvement for their knowledge in continuous improvement projects

Furthermore, in order to collect the most comprehensive and representative information possible, this Committee chose to call for volunteer participation of researchers of all levels (R1 / R2 / R3 / R4) who would participate in the elaboration of the gap analysis and help define the action plan. These volunteer Contributors interviewed other research actors (classmates, colleagues…) on all 40 criteria of the accreditation in order to pinpoint the strengths and weaknesses of our current practices and thereby identify the needs.

Working Group (Operational Committee)

Working group (Contributors)

Methodology

STEP 1:  1 meeting of the Operational Committee to understand the accreditation and its expectations. Presentation of the project and its expectations

STEP 2: 1 meeting to define our methodology. Decision to increase the Operational Committee by integrating fixed-term and permanent researchers, representing all categories, on a volunteer basis. They will be identified as “Contributors”

STEP 3: Call for voluntary Contributors. 15 Contributors volunteer to participate

STEP 4: 1 meeting to raise awareness among the 15 Contributors about the stakes and the criteria of the accreditation. Contributors made aware of the stakes and the criteria of the accreditation, along with the nature of their contribution.

STEP 5.1: 5 meetings organized by the Operational Committee to identify the strengths and weaknesses of our practices with respect to the criteria of the Gap Analysis.
Meetings held by 4 to 6 members of the Operational Committee according to their availability.

• 2 meetings held with members of the STEE College
• 2 meetings held with members of the SSH College
• 1 meeting held with members of the EEI College
  Raw data collected from various research actors

STEP 5.2: The 15 Contributors collect existing practices through the processes they decide: formal or informal meetings, email exchanges, etc., the objective being to gather the most representative feedback possible. Regardless of the process of data collection chosen, feedback was solicited on all 40 criteria of the gap analysis. Raw data collected from various research actors.

STEP 6: 4 meetings: The Operational Committee compiles all of the data gathered in Step 5 from meetings with Colleges and feedback from the Contributors. Elaboration of the gap analysis of our existing practices.

STEP 7: 4 meetings to define the Action Plan. Participation of the members of the Operational Committee and Contributors according to their availability. Action Plan defined

STEP 8: In collaboration with the Directorate of Communications, work to publish updates about the progress of the project and the overview of the Action Plan.

Articles published every two months. Researchers informed of the project’s progress and the direction of the Action Plan.