Date: 18-19 June 2018
Place: Prague, Czech Republic
Participants
The group consisted of 15 participants from 6 different countries representing several fields of work.
Description
The first SL6 Workshop focused strongly on building coherent knowledge and creating a broad picture from fragmented knowledge that participants brought to the workshop and shared it with each other. None of the participants had a complete understanding of the whole chain of decision-making (from H2020, to EIB, and other types of providers) and the flow of finances to specific recipients from SMEs. At the same time, only a few participants from public institutions and academia were aware of RRI. During the workshop, we focused on involving all the participants actively. Participants worked in small groups, which were changed several times. We made sure that everyone had a chance to present their opinion and no one dominated the discussion.
The workshop was divided into an introductory session and ten sessions with a specific topic or issue. On the first day, we briefly introduced the concept of the Social Lab, H2020, RRI and other related topics. Thereafter, participants introduced themselves and were asked to define their “Personas” – general features of positions they were about to represent and their backgrounds.
During this first session participants attempted to answer this question: Why do we need the EU budget for Investment in Industrial Leadership? The objective was to break the ice and allow participants to get to know each other. We also wanted them to show their personal attitude towards investing and possibly RRI. We were trying to formulate this narrative: Why does investment from EU level make sense? The method used in this session was working in three groups with a modified “thinking hats” activity.
Second session of the SL introduced societal challenges and key action points from H2020 as well as some findings from the Diagnosis Report. The objective was to translate the 6 keys of RRI to the logic of investment opportunities. Discussion was framed by a general question: Do we react to Societal Challenges and our Key Action Points adequately?
The objective of the third session was to establish a vision of the future. Participants worked in two groups and had to visualize their ideas on flipcharts. The questions they were asked included these: What is our vision for the EU investment environment and innovation environment in 2030? Do we know the context and variety of our present reactions? What do we want? What does ideal future look like?
The topic of the fourth session was Reconnecting with RRI. Participants worked in three groups and tried to answer the question: What are the potentials, visions and benefits of RRI for our work in this part of H2020? The objective of this session was to establish a creative tension between current reality and vision as a prerequisite for pilots.
First day closed with participants’ reflection, re-wording of outcomes, and presenting the second day of workshop.
The second day started with a short discussion in which participants shared their views answering this question: Using the information you gained yesterday and remembering conversations from yesterday, what comes to your mind when you look at the gap between current reality and potential future?
The objective of this initial discussion was to prepare participants for the activity that followed in Session 6. This session was called the “Marketplace of Ideas“. During this activities, participants mingled. The aim was to talk with everyone else and find out what their ideas for future action were. Participants then wrote their findings on flipcharts (title and short description)
After all the collected ideas were displayed on flipchart papers attached to the walls, participants joined the activity called the “Gallery walk“. In this activity, participants had time to walk around the room and look at the ideas. It was up to them, where they stopped and read the details or where they just briefly looked and continued further. The objective was that they choose activities which they consider suitable to be developed into future pilot actions.
During the eight session, participants were asked to choose their top 4 favourite activities. Then they added a sticker to the activity they liked. The objective of this session was to visualize which activities participants found most suitable for pilots actions.
The aim of session nine was to look at the selected ideas in closer detail. In smaller groups, participants discussed the individual ideas and answered the following questions: What are the objectives? Which aspects of the visions and of the current reality from Session 4 were addressed? Who is a pilot action owner and driver? Who is a co-driver / part of the team? What support is required from the SL manager?
In this final session participants reflected on both workshop days in a group discussion. Each participant evaluated the workshop and said what they learnt.
