5,690
edits
R-I-Peers San Sebastian Virtual SDDP Best practices to overcome problems, barriers, issues when implementing your GEPs: Difference between revisions
From Future Worlds Center Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
R-I-Peers San Sebastian Virtual SDDP Best practices to overcome problems, barriers, issues when implementing your GEPs (view source)
Revision as of 05:55, 19 August 2022
, 19 August 2022no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|report_title=[[Towards the identification of best practices in the Gender Equality Arena within an organisation]] | |report_title=[[Towards the identification of best practices in the Gender Equality Arena within an organisation]] | ||
|project=[[R&I PEERS]] | |project=[[R&I PEERS]] | ||
|Triggering_Question=What | |Triggering_Question="What are the best practices to overcome problems, barriers, issues when implementing your GEPs?" | ||
|location= | |location=San Sebastian - Virtual | ||
|dates=9th December 2020 | |dates=9th December 2020 | ||
|LeadFacilitator=[[Andreas P. Andreou]] | |LeadFacilitator=[[Andreas P. Andreou]] | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
|editor= [[Yiannis Laouris ]] | |editor= [[Yiannis Laouris ]] | ||
|total_duration=9 hrs | |total_duration=9 hrs | ||
|stats=Participants= | |stats=Participants=9 <br> Number of ideas=29 <br>Number of Clusters=4 <br> Ideas received Votes=20 <br> Ideas on MAP R=15 <br> Spreadthink ST=62% | ||
|isbn=ISBN | |isbn=ISBN | ||
|link=[[Media:R-I PEERS D6.7 Spain Greece MLW FINAL 20220302.pdf|Download Report]] | |link=[[Media:R-I PEERS D6.7 Spain Greece MLW FINAL 20220302.pdf|Download Report]] | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
==Generation and Clarification of ideas based on TQ== | ==Generation and Clarification of ideas based on TQ== | ||
For the successful execution of this virtual workshop, 9 stakeholders from across Europe directly involved in the design and implementation of GEPs in their organisations accepted the invitation to participate in the workshop. The workshop brought together eight female and one male | For the successful execution of this virtual workshop, 9 stakeholders from across Europe directly involved in the design and implementation of GEPs in their organisations accepted the invitation to participate in the workshop. The workshop brought together eight female and one male participant. While five of them were directly involved in the operations of the R&I PEERS project, the other four are dealing with gender equality aspects in their organisations (i.e., three research centres and one research funding organisation). | ||
In the first phase of the workshop, the participants were asked to generate ideas to address the TQ “What are the best practices to overcome problems/barriers/issues (administrative, structural, financial, covid...) when implementing your GEPs?”. They came up with a total of 29 practices which, according to their experience, knowledge and expertise, would be helpful in addressing such challenges, which often appear while implementing GEPs in research organisations. | In the first phase of the workshop, the participants were asked to generate ideas to address the TQ “What are the best practices to overcome problems/barriers/issues (administrative, structural, financial, covid...) when implementing your GEPs?”. They came up with a total of 29 practices which, according to their experience, knowledge and expertise, would be helpful in addressing such challenges, which often appear while implementing GEPs in research organisations. | ||
==Clustering the ideas== | ==Clustering the ideas== | ||
The third phase of the workshop concerned the clustering of the proposed ideas into groups in terms of their similarities and common attributes. In particular, the ideas were compared in pairs in order for the participants to discuss and finally decide whether two ideas should be clustered together (i.e., one idea has enough characteristics with another idea to justify placing them into the same cluster). During the implementation of the clustering phase, the following clusters were identified which are graphically demonstrated in Figure 2: | The third phase of the workshop concerned the clustering of the proposed ideas into groups in terms of their similarities and common attributes. In particular, the ideas were compared in pairs in order for the participants to discuss and finally decide whether two ideas should be clustered together (i.e., one idea has enough characteristics with another idea to justify placing them into the same cluster). During the implementation of the clustering phase, the following clusters were identified, which are graphically demonstrated in Figure 2: | ||
In response to the TQ, the 9 participants came up with 29 ideas, which were categorized in 4 clusters. | |||
# Cluster 1: Training | # Cluster 1: Training | ||
# Cluster 2: Equality Committee | # Cluster 2: Equality Committee | ||
| Line 45: | Line 46: | ||
Following the voting process, 20 (out of 29) ideas received one or more votes resulting to a ST of 62%. | |||
Although this is high, one should take into account the small number of participants and ideas, yet all stakeholders received five votes each. | |||
15 were structured to create the influence MAP shown below. <br> | 15 were structured to create the influence MAP shown below. <br> | ||
