229_MASS Internal evaluation Kick off meeting by wanghonghx


									                       Internal Evaluation of MASS Project

  Evaluation of Kick-off Meeting Thessaloniki, Greece

                                     November 2009

(Incorporating transnationality, partnership and project management)

MASS – Internal Project Evaluation                             Page 1
Kick Off Meeting Thessaloniki, Greece November 2009

Methodology: Partners divided into small groups to discuss given questions, then fed back. Agreed that
they would take further time to reflect then respond to a Zoomerang survey with questions compiled by
Romanian partners.

Feedback from End of Meeting Discussion 25/11/09

What went well during meeting?

Time out for understanding and reflection time between each segment. Gave partners chance to check
language, and reflect on what new information meant for them in their context. Acknowledged effort
needed by some to work in English.

All aspects of Kick Off Meeting were included: important information, project objectives, technical queries
and team bonding.

Location and Practical arrangements. Partners collected from hotel and kept together for full day.
Spacious room with convenient terrace.

Team very positive.

Good preparation by hosts (Greece) and project promoters (UK).

What did not go well during the meeting?

Native English speakers need to talk more slowly and pause frequently.

Meeting too long. 3 days was too long to take from work. One member only attended for 1 day; another
for 2 days.

Lack of preparation of participants.

Not everyone had read the application and some were working from out of date copies.

Not all project themes were covered during the meeting ie presentation of tools and EQF. Would like to
have seen tools and material at start.

Lack of theoretical grounding to introduce the project. Suggested that a literature review should have
been made available to give a clearer definition of soft skills.

MASS – Internal Project Evaluation                                                                   Page 2
Feedback from Zoomerang Survey December 2009

 1. Did you have a clear workplan and timetable available before the meeting?

 Yes                                                                            7   88%
 No                                                                             1   12%
 Total                                                                          8   100%

2. What kind of preparatory activities had you developed before the mobility?

Familiarise myself with the NA guidelines and rules. Prepare guidance notes for partners.

Developing agenda, agreeing financial procedures, looking at evaluation framework.

Internal discussion at Zuidema about approach and activities. Discussion with ROC Aventus about how
to work together.

Reading and interpreting the project application. Filling in forms and other email requests from IB.
Discussing our role (the Swedish one) in the project. Information among our colleagues and persons who
will participate in the project. Information to the local press.

Studying the application thoroughly. Telling SWE partners about the project. Answering questions from
Angus College.

Studying the project application. Prepare the presentation of our institution. Prepare presentation
materials and handouts.

Overview of the project meetings aims. A review of the project main points. What were the expectations
and results. Communication with the hosts and with the other partners.

 3. The content. All relevant topics were covered during the meetings.

 Strongly agree                                                                 3   43%
 Agree                                                                          3   43%
 Undecided                                                                      1   14%
 Disagree                                                                       0   0%
 Strongly disagree                                                              0   0%
 Total                                                                          7   100%

MASS – Internal Project Evaluation                                                                     Page 3
4. Time Management. The schedule well balanced to allow you to clarify all the pending issues.

Strongly agree                                                                     3         38%
Agree                                                                              3         38%
Undecided                                                                          2         25%
Disagree                                                                           0         0%
Strongly disagree                                                                  0         0%
Total                                                                              8        100%

5. Procedures. There is an agreed decision-making procedure on important tasks of the project;
each partner has their say.

Strongly agree                                                                     5         62%
Agree                                                                              3         38%
Undecided                                                                          0         0%
Disagree                                                                           0         0%
Strongly Disagree                                                                  0         0%
Total                                                                              8        100%

6. Contributions made by the partners are valued.

Strongly agree                                                                     6         75%
Agree                                                                              2         25%
Undecided                                                                          0         0%
Disagree                                                                           0         0%
Strongly disagree                                                                  0         0%
Total                                                                              8        100%

7. All the participants of the project meeting have a clear image of the further tasks to carry on.

Strongly agree                                                                     2         25%
Agree                                                                              5         62%
Undecided                                                                          1         12%
Disagree                                                                           0         0%
Strongly Disagree                                                                  0         0%
Total                                                                              8        100%

8. Give a feedback to the quality of the whole meeting - the accomplishment of the initial goals.

Very good                                                                          5         62%
Good                                                                               3         38%
Barely acceptable                                                                  0         0%
Poor                                                                               0         0%
Very poor                                                                          0         0%
Total                                                                              8        100%

MASS – Internal Project Evaluation                                                                    Page 4
9. In your opinion what was successful?

Strong relationships formed. Willingness to cooperate.

Getting to know each other.

Time for reflection and understanding in ones own language. The feeling that we share a common project
idea. The overall structure of the meeting.

The “social dimensions” of the partnership. Time for reflection in our own language. Clarifications about
finance and administration.

Team building. Friendship. Warm relationships among team members. Hospitality of our hosts. Clear
well balanced schedule. The team is excellent. Communication is great. A good well-organised
coordinator. Very well organised meeting. Well balanced work-leisure.

10. What in your opinion could have been improved?

Quicker circulation of documentation from meeting after the event.

Duration of the meeting. Could have been shorter. Availability of learning materials.

It would have been good if the Greeks could have participated in more of the social activities. The room
for the meeting was not so good. Hard to hear what people were saying.

I hope that Bureau Zuidema would “be in”. Missed the “deeper” contacts with them a little. A pity that the
Greeks worked in the evenings. I think it is valuable that as many partners as possible also can take part
in dinners and so forth.

Discussion upon the content.

The first meeting was great. I think there are some things to be improved upon during the projects
development. It’s OK so far.

MASS – Internal Project Evaluation                                                                   Page 5
Project Co-ordinator’s Commentary and Actions

Feedback suggests a largely successful first meeting but not everyone’s expectations were satisfied.
Comments reflect tension between wanting more content to be covered in less time whilst acknowledging
language issues with some partners. Very careful planning is required for the next meeting. Co-ordinator
needs to ensure all partners request for information are built into next meeting.

Feedback suggests partners recognise the importance of team bonding and the development of good
relationships for a successful project. The next meeting will ensure a planned social programme.

The importance of thorough preparation by all participants for the next meeting will be addressed by early
circulation of papers and clear following up of actions within each working group.

There is evidence of a lack of clarity by some partners as to where this project will lead. This is to be
explored in more detail and followed up on at the next meeting.

MASS – Internal Project Evaluation                                                                    Page 6

To top