Insafe SDDP: Getting The Best Out Of Our Network - Vision
|
Executive Summary
This report has been developed to describe the first series of results in the context of the Getting the Best out of our Insafe Network 2007 Co-Laboratories. Co-laboratory A explored the weaknesses of the current model of interactions within the network, while co-laboratory B envisioned the ideal model of a European network of Safer Internet Nodes, and co-laboratory C generated action options to be taken to overcome the obstacles in order to achieve the ideal model of an Insafe network.
Participants of co-laboratory B were asked to visualize the ideal scenario of a well-functioning and efficient network between all Nodes. They were tackling the following triggering question:
What are descriptors that characterize an ideal, efficient network of EU safer internet nodes?
In response to the TQ, the 21 participants came up with 74 obstacles. The ideas were then clustered in 9 categories in an interactive manner, thus providing opportunities for further and deeper clarifications of salient distinctions between separate ideas. The ideas were clarified and discussed throughout the SDDSM, thus enabling participants to achieve a better understanding of the views of other members and greatly expand their own and others. Following the voting process, 29 ideas received one or more votes and were structured to create the influence MAP shown below.
The voting results were used to select factors for the subsequent structuring phase to identify inter-relations among the generated factors.
According to the participants of this workshop, the descriptor appear to be the most influential was:
- Descriptor #26, Coordinating node focuses on nodes' needs
The SDDP co-laborarory was facilitated by Yiannis Laouris, Ilke Dagli, Tonia Loizidou, Elia Petridou, Tatjana Taraszow and Kerstin Wittig. The workshop was attended by 19 participants from all over Europe.
In sum, the participants of the dialogue reported their satisfaction that their voices have been heard and documented and communicated their expectations for follow-up activities to address the diagnosis of their needs.
