Assessment of EU funding in Serbia with a focus on CIP, FP7 and IPA projects. The assessment provides in-depth analysis of the current status via case studies, process and stakeholder analysis and a broad list of recommendations. The publication also provides a concept of a project office (functional unit that handles all services related to EU funding) which is used as a model for companies and business organizations alike.

3. Published by:
Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Serbia - Bureau for the
Cooperation with the EU
Vojvodina ICT Cluster
supported by
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)
GmbH
Program for Private Sector Development in Serbia ACCESS
December 2011
3/45

4. Author:
Jürgen Kappenmann, Consultant
Contributions by:
Bernd Kleinheyer, Consultant
Milana Sredojevic, Assistant
4/45

5. Acknowledgements
The publishers wish to thank the many individuals at the Ministry of Economy and Regional Development, Ministry of Education and Science, Ministry of Culture, Media and Information Society,
Ministry of Finance, Serbian EU Integration Office, National Agency for Regional Development,
the Improved SME Competitiveness and Innovation EU-funded Project, GIZ / ACCESS and last
but not least the Bureau for the Cooperation with the EU at the Serbian Chamber of Commerce
and the Vojvodina ICT Cluster who contributed their valuable time, knowledge, advice and resources to the creation of this policy paper.
Special thanks are owed to Djordje Lazić from Belit d.o.o. and Bratislav Stoiljković from CIM Grupa d.o.o. for their time, efforts and outstanding insights for the creation of the case studies.
5/45

6. Publishers
Serbian economy is faced with big challenges in terms of accession with European Union (EU) and
doing business on its market. In its efforts to help Serbian enterprises, Chamber of Commerce and
Industry of Serbia (CCIS) founded in 2005 a Bureau for the Cooperation with the EU. Numerous
concrete activities in the form of advisory and information meetings concerning the rules for doing
business with EU and economic cooperation are only the first steps of the Chamber of Commerce and
Industry of Serbia’s engagement to facilitate this important work to its members.
CCIS provides services to business community, developing powerful infrastructural support and provides help for making it capable for integration into a single market and its survival on it.
The mission and objective of the Bureau is to take an active role in the creation of an improved business climate in Serbia in order to accelerate harmonization with EU standards. In such way, enterprises are obtaining necessary support for adjusting their business strategy with the European, regardless
of the activity they are engaged in, so as to be prepared for secure and open business deals with economic entities in the country and abroad.
The most important task within the European integration process is to create an education program
that will upgrade the level of knowledge of Serbian businessmen on key issues: acquis communautaire, fulfilment of obligations stemming out of the Stabilization and Accession Agreement (SAA), European standards, trade issues etc.
For further information on the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Serbia and the Bureau for Cooperation with the EU please visit www.pks.rs
Vojvodina ICT Cluster is a recognized partner in the development and application of new ICT products and services with high profit potential and an important partner in the development of individuals,
companies and regional businesses.
The mission of Vojvodina ICT Cluster is to create conditions for ICT development through coordination
of our and our partners’ efforts toward a strong positive influence on social and business environment.
To our members, the cluster serves as the platform for cooperation and provides a portfolio of services, such as building capacities and competitiveness of its members through training and education
at the Cluster Academy, building links with the education system, creation of new business opportunities, access to new markets, lobbying activities etc. The cluster also has an important role in building
tighter bonds in the triple helix Business – Education – Government.
For further information on the Vojvodina ICT Cluster please visit www.vojvodinaictcluster.org.
6/45

7. 1 Contents
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Contents .................................................................................................................................... 7
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 9
2.1
Scope .............................................................................................................................. 9
2.2
Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 10
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 11
Case Studies ........................................................................................................................... 12
4.1
Procedural Method ........................................................................................................ 12
4.2
Belit d.o.o. Case Study (CIP ICT-PSP) .......................................................................... 13
4.3
CIM Grupa d.o.o. Case Study (FP7 SME) ..................................................................... 16
Support Structures & Findings ................................................................................................. 20
5.1
Procedural Method ........................................................................................................ 20
5.2
Evaluation Studies and Research.................................................................................. 20
5.3
Structures, Roles and Services ..................................................................................... 22
5.3.1 Overview Involved Organizations ............................................................................. 22
5.3.2 Network of FP7 National Contact Points .................................................................. 23
5.3.3 Activities and Services Offered by FP7 NCPs .......................................................... 24
5.3.4 CIP NCPs ................................................................................................................. 24
5.3.5 General Service Provider ......................................................................................... 25
5.4
Case Study Specific Findings ........................................................................................ 25
5.5
Findings and Suggestions ............................................................................................. 28
Development of the VOICT Project Office ............................................................................... 37
6.1
VOICT Project Office as a Model ................................................................................... 37
6.2
Central Competence Centre .......................................................................................... 37
6.3
Executive Summary of the Business Plan ..................................................................... 38
6.4
VOICT Project Office Services Portfolio ........................................................................ 39
6.5
Case Studies (IPA I and MoERD).................................................................................. 39
Concluding Outlook ................................................................................................................. 40
7.1
White Paper(s)............................................................................................................... 40
7.2
Evolvement of EU Funds and Financial Framework 2014-2020 .................................... 41
Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................... 42
Terminology ............................................................................................................................. 43
Annex: List of Interviewees ...................................................................................................... 44
7/45

8. Charts
Chart 1: Assessment Scope ...................................................................................................................9
Chart 2: Generic Concept Process .......................................................................................................10
Chart 3: Creation of Case Studies ........................................................................................................12
Chart 4: Process Model Case Study ....................................................................................................12
Chart 5: Overview Procedural Method Support Structures...................................................................20
Chart 6: Overview Involved Organizations ...........................................................................................22
Chart 7: Process Overview Project Office ............................................................................................37
Chart 8: VOICT PO Competence Centre..............................................................................................37
Chart 9: Executive Summary Business Plan VOICT Project Office ......................................................38
Chart 10: VOICT Project Office Service Catalogue (Excerpt)...............................................................39
Chart 11: Basic Concept White Paper(s) ..............................................................................................40
Chart 12: White Paper Overview ..........................................................................................................40
Chart 13: Evolvement of EU Funds ......................................................................................................41
Tables
Table 1: Evaluation Studies and Research...........................................................................................22
Table 2: Case Study Findings ..............................................................................................................28
Table 3: Abbreviations..........................................................................................................................42
Table 4: Terminology............................................................................................................................43
Table 5: List of Interviewees .................................................................................................................44
8/45

9. 2 Introduction
Observers agree that the absorption of EU funds in Serbia is limited and the general environment for
doing so has to be improved over the coming years before EU accession. At the same time, it is
agreed that there are significant differences and results when it comes to specific programmes. Regarding participation in the 7th EU Framework Programme for Research (FP7), the results are good,
especially academic institutions show a very good track record, so are the results for the absorption of
IPA Components I and II funds. In contrast, so far overall participation in the Competitiveness and
Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) is low and the results, with a few notable exemptions, far
from being satisfactory. Yet one characteristic feature is common to both programmes, CIP and FP7
alike, and that is the very low participation and meagre success rate of Serbian SMEs.
So the primary goals of the two co-publishers, the Bureau for the Cooperation with the EU of the Serbian Chamber of Commerce and the Vojvodina ICT Cluster, are two-fold. Firstly, with this policy paper
“Assessment of EU-Funded Innovation and Research Projects in Serbia” a basis for a common understanding of the status quo of support structures is created. Secondly, an open and constructive dialogue between all parties involved is initiated.
Accordingly, the perspective from which these processes and support structures offering information
and services to SMEs are assessed is one of SMEs and BMOs (representing SMEs) when addressing
matters related to EU-funded projects, i.e. the demand side.
This endeavour, as will be seen in greater detail in the single chapters, comprises three core elements, namely success stories of two Serbian SMEs, Belit d.o.o. and CIM Grupa d.o.o., and interviews
with the key stakeholders and support structure representatives. Plus, in this aspect the Assessment
even reaches beyond pure analysis, the development of a model concept for a project office is included.
The target groups of this policy paper are in the first place decision-makers and members of BMOs
and R&Ds, ministries and national / regional institutions and agencies. And, last but not least, Serbian
SMEs and their staff. That is to say the demand side and supply side alike. Yet the Assessment contains a wealth of information for any reader generally interested in the subject matter.
2.1 Scope
Securing a clear focus the following scope has been defined:
•
EU-funded projects (focus on CIP and FP7, basics of IPA),
•
Via the concept development for the VOICT Project Office also national innovation projects
awarded by national bodies,
•
Support structures for CIP and FP7 projects to SMEs and R&Ds offered by public and private
organizations.
Steering Processes
Strategic Level
CIP
EIP
IPA
FP7
ICT-PSP
Cooperation
Ideas
Components
I & II
People
Capacities
Components
III-V
Support Structures
Chart 1: Assessment Scope
9/45

10. The overview highlights the three levels of this scope:
•
Strategic Level with the general steering processes,
•
Operational Level with the two main programmes (CIP and FP7) and,
•
Support Structure Level providing information and support for the main programmes.
A generic process model as outlined below was used throughout the policy paper:
Project
Selection
Data
Collection
Concept
Development
Analysis
Implemen tation
Evaluation
Chart 2: Generic Concept Process
2.2 Objectives
Translating the primary goals into concrete objectives, this policy paper provides a brief and compact
overview on the following, in plain language:
•
Documentation of two CIP and FP7 case studies taken from the ICT sector,
•
Documentation of the status quo of the support structures for EU-funded innovation and research projects in selected programmes in Serbia with their generic processes and procedures,
•
Documentation of the status quo of the interaction between public and private sector bodies
and organizations in Serbia,
•
List of findings and suggestions as a basis for a Public-Private-Dialogue on the subject-matter,
•
Model for a project office for business associations and
•
Outline of the future focus and settings of CIP, FP7 and IPA.
10/45

11. 3 Executive Summary
The mixed picture regarding the participation and results of Serbian applicants in some of the key EU
instruments for the improvement of competitiveness, innovation and research (CIP and FP7) provides
the backdrop for this Assessment.
Following their primary goals, the co-publishers compiled a brief and compact overview of the status
quo of support structures offering information and services on the CIP and FP7 programmes to SMEs
and R&Ds. The corresponding findings and suggestions open up the basis for a public-privatedialogue between the stakeholders. The core subject of this dialogue is to improve the participation of
Serbian SMEs (in cooperation with R&Ds) in these programmes and to systematically secure better
success rates in the due process.
The core findings and suggestions indicate some of the main issues, challenges and fields of activity
which can be addressed in such a dialogue:
•
As the two success stories from the Serbian ICT companies Belit d.o.o. and CIM Grupa d.o.o.
show, successful SME participation is not the result of a systematic approach by public and private sector organizations but rather of self-initiative taken by single companies. Support structures
do have their role and function but their impact is limited. Certain services, like assistance during
the development of project proposals, are much sought after but are hardly covered at all or left to
private sector providers, often outside of Serbia.
•
The capacities of single support structure providers are in some cases described as insufficient;
especially trainings and education are mentioned. These structures offer a wide range of information and services, mainly built on the NCP network. A common understanding and task description is not (fully) implemented.
•
One key finding concerns the understanding of the demand side´s needs regarding all aspects of
the application and implementation of EU-funded projects. There is no systematic or specifically
designed assessment evaluating the SMEs and R&Ds needs. The creation of such an assessment is strongly suggested as the basis for specific actions.
•
The main difficulties and challenges single applicants are facing, are lack of information, experience, finance, consortium building support and project proposal development.
•
SMEs´ familiarity with funds and procedures is estimated in differing ways. Some estimate that
knowledge as such is good, while experience and willingness to get engaged is limited. It can be
assumed that familiarity is on a high level only with companies already involved; with all others the
picture is completely different. Therefore the need for awareness raising measures in general,
promotion of open calls and delivering knowledge related to application procedures via different information channels is an ongoing effort to be made.
•
The preparation and implementation of the Info Days on some EU programmes is a key example
of how stakeholders do or do not cooperate and how the interests and needs of the demand side
are taken or again not taken into account. Here, room for improvements is more than evident.
•
On the steering level it became apparent that there is a lack of strategic approach and coordination on the government´s and stakeholders´ side when it comes to EU-funded programmes. Although decision-makers might recognize the importance of the subject matter, wide-spread priority
setting and consistent implementation, as seen in many other countries, is missing or incomplete.
•
Private sector structures like BMOs are so far not or not fully involved in the processes relevant to
SMEs but often used as (one-way) communication channels between the public and private sector
stakeholders. Instead, these organizations should have the possibility to provide decision-makers
with the perspective of entrepreneurs and companies at any stage of the process. Systematic and
institutionalized private-public-dialogue schemes are one instrument in this context.
The model of the Vojvodina ICT Cluster Project Office with its core components of service provider
and competence and dialogue partner show how a BMO can address all aspects of EU and national
projects in its own organizational structure and member service portfolio.
11/45

12. 4 Case Studies
In a first step, the Assessment derives its findings and suggestions from the screening and evaluation
of a number of selected specific project proposals (ICT and others) and their application procedure up
to the point of submission of the proposal.
4.1 Procedural Method
The primary focus of the ICT case studies is to select, screen and evaluate two EU-funded project
proposals (CIP ICT-PSP and FP7 ICT). The national (MoERD) and IPA proposals are, to a lesser
extend and detail, covered by case studies done by the VOICT Project Office.
The procedural methodology behind the case studies is to evaluate two historical (but still running)
projects which are excellent success story examples of Serbian companies in the ICT industry. The
single steps and elements are listed below:
Chart 3: Creation of Case Studies
For the case studies a process model, as described below, including five sub-processes and underlying support and information processes was developed and used throughout all documentation. The case studies were created through research of available documents and websites and interviews with company representatives, which were done along a questionnaire built on this process
model.
Chart 4: Process Model Case Study
The two case studies are BECA with Belit d.o.o. (CIP ICT-PSP) and ReFLEX with CIM Grupa d.o.o.
(FP7). In the Support Structures chapter a table with the main findings from each process step is
listed.
12/45

13. 4.2 Belit d.o.o. Case Study (CIP ICT-PSP)
Brief Project Description1
BECA: Balanced European Conservation Approach – ICT services for resource saving in social housing
EU Programme: The Information and Communication Technologies Policy Support Programme
Area: Theme 1 - Low carbon - ICT for a low carbon economy and smart mobility
Total Cost: € 5.55m (EU contribution € 2.70m)
Project Reference: 270981
Execution: from 01/01/2011 to 31/12/2013
Project Status: Running
Contract Type: ICT-PSP PB Pilot Type B
No. of Consortium Members: 19
Consortium Members’ Countries: Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Serbia
The BECA project addresses the need to reduce energy consumption in European social housing by
a very significant amount, to meet overall emission reduction targets. To reduce peak and overall
demand for energy and water across EU social housing substantially, BECA will develop a full set of
innovative services for resource use awareness and resource management. Balance is achieved by
addressing not only energy but water, by including all key energy forms - electricity, gas and heating and by including strong activities in Eastern Europe as well as the rest of the EU. Social housing organisations in seven European countries (Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Bulgaria, Czech Republic,
Serbia) and their partners are cooperating in the project to provide ICT-based energy management
and energy awareness services directly to social housing tenants and service operators. Services will
be piloted by approx. 5,000 social housing tenants across seven sites in seven European countries.
Sustained reductions in resources use are to be achieved through usable ICT-based services directly
to tenants, as well as by effective monitoring and control of local power generation and, for district
heating, the full heating delivery chain. Intensive work will be addressed to optimising services for
tenants and maximising impact on resource use behaviour. Service requirements will be investigated
with tenants and staff, and service prototypes based on initial use cases will be subject to user testing
within the first year of the project. Results are used to finalise service design in a second iteration of
use case definition and service specification lasting some eight months, cumulating in implementation
of operational services at all the seven pilot sites. Pilots at sites will operate for at least 14 months;
lead sites will be identified to being operation early and provide example solutions to others. The consortium, led by social housing providers and public authorities, includes global ICT and service providers and distribution network operators working with local consultants and specialist advisors to
carry out all steps in service implementation.
Consortium Members in Serbia
BECA Project Related Competences
Organization2
Short Introduction
Belit
d.o.o.
(Belgrade
Information
Technologies d.o.o.)
Belit was founded in 2000 focusing mostly on the
domestic market, providing its customers with innovative software solutions in the field of finance, as
well as design and implementation of public registries. Belit has substantial experience in EU projects,
until recently mainly IPA. In 2011 Belit has been officially registered as an Innovation Centre.
University of Belgrade, Faculty of
Mechanical
Engeneering
Beogradske
Elektrane
(Belgrade
IT/software technical
knowledge, connections and IPA project
experience
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering is a public educational institution with over a century long history. Its
EU funds related experience so far has been mostly
FP7 and Tempus related.
Technical
knowledge, project
experience and network and connections
Beogradske Elektrane is a public utility company in
charge of heating over 2.5 million square meters in
Technical
knowledge
1
See www.beca-project.eu and http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/apps/projects/factsheet/index.cfm?project_ref=270981
2
For details see www.belit.co.rs/; http://www.bg.ac.rs/eng/memb/facult/techn/en_masinski.php; www.beoelektrane.rs
13/45

14. Heating Company)
Belgrade. Production and delivery of the heating
water is coming from eleven heating sources.
Case Study
Information Channels
The Serbian consortium members were informed about the call via the CIP Info Day organised by the
Serbian MoERD and the former MoTIS and PKS, which took place at the PKS premises at the beginning of 2010. This initiated formation of the team consisting of the three Serbian partners. Not long
after that, thanks to its previous connections and history of cooperation, the Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering was contacted by the Centre Internacional de Metodes Numerics en Enginyeria Barcelona, Spain. The Spanish partner introduced the project idea which was already partly developed as well
as other potential consortium members. After those initial contacts were made, the consortium was
formed and the project development and proposal writing process started.
Project Preparation
Consortium work organisation - The consortium was formed along the seven pilot-sites in seven countries. Partners on these seven pilot-sites were organised in seven ‘sub-groups’. Each ‘sub-group’ involved, was in charge of developing their part of the project proposal, and so was the Serbian group.
What was crucial for the quality and coordination of all consortium members was substantial experience provided by the Project Coordinators.
Serbian ‘sub-group’ work organisation - Jointly, the three Serbian companies evaluated the call and
later on worked on the project proposal development with their relevant competences as described
above. External experts were not involved at this stage, or any other stage of the application process.
Consortium members’ communication and coordination – Officially, there were at least five meetings
among Serbian partners in the phase of project preparation, but there was also constant formal and
informal communication. Besides these meetings, Serbian partners were in contact with foreign partners via e-mail and phone. The meeting where all the partners finally (physically) met was a kick-off
meeting after the project was approved and implementation started.
The milestone for exiting the project – At this phase it was set by the assessment of the technical feasibility of the project in Serbia. Once this assessment came to a positive conclusion, the project was
further developed.
Project Proposal Writing
Consortium work organisation – As already said each ‘sub-group’ was in charge of writing the project
proposal part dedicated to its pilot-site.
Serbian ‘sub-group’ work organisation – All Serbian partners were involved with their specific expertise
in the project writing process. Like mentioned above, a project writing expert was not hired, having in
mind previous experiences in project writing and project management partners already had. From
Belit’s side, Djordje Lazić as the Project Manager was delegated for these activities.
Consortium members’ communication and coordination – Serbian partners were constantly in contact
with the Consortium Coordinator and other partners via e-mail and phone. On the Serbian side, Belit
could be described as leading partner in charge of organisation of the paper work and formalities.
Apart from the previously mentioned five meetings of the Serbian partners during the phase of project
preparation and development, there were about another five meetings during the proposal writing as
well as constant informal communication via e-mail and phone.
The milestone for exiting the project – At this phase, it was the first project proposal draft, which was
evaluated by the Serbian partners and on which was decided that project has potential for success.
Evaluation
Although the application process was successful, Serbian partners had an evaluation meeting to discuss the project application process and derive respective conclusions. The partners concluded that
they have dedicated a lot of time to administrative issues as well as documents gathering, paper work
etc. The time spent on administrative issues was partly caused by the situation resulting from the Serbian Government reshuffle. Another factor was that many of the documents needed, had to be prepared for the first time and lack of specific CIP related experience caused extensive time spending.
14/45

15. During the second project proposal that Serbian partners also did together (and which is now positively approved), experience from the first project proposal preparation process was very useful. Previous
joint work resulted in improvement of the team coordination and communication. Also, some of the
documents already prepared could be used in the second application process and know-how gained,
helped fostering the process of obtaining new ones. All of the above mentioned, decreased time
needed for project proposal preparation.
Financing
Rules and regulations of the CIP programme clearly state that the funding of the project is split between the EC fund (50%) and winning consortium (50%). Therefore, organisations within the consortium have to use their resources to finance one half of the total budget.
Each of the pilot-sites had its own budget within the project. This means that each of the sub-groups in
the consortium was responsible for its part of the budget. Further on, each of the partners was responsible for budget lines coming from its involvement.
Belit states that financing was not a problem for them, especially since they are completely aware of
the importance of R&D and positive impacts these activities might have for the future development of
the company.
Human Recourses & Previous EU Funds Experiences
Belit does not have a specific strategy for dealing with EU-funded projects exclusively, but its corporate strategy clearly defines EU-funded projects as a part of the core business. The company is directly involved in implementation of EU-funded projects since 2003. In 2007 the department for international projects was founded in order to follow various opportunities, establish and maintain business
contacts, write proposals and carry out all the tasks in managing and supporting projects. The department consists of a certain number of employees who have gathered significant experience in EUfunded projects as experts. In 2009 Belit decided to focus more on innovation projects. The work in
this field resulted in Belit being officially registered as an Innovation Centre at the MoES in 2011. The
focus of the Innovation Centre is the development and implementation of new ideas and technologies
and coordination of networking activities with the academic sector.
The number of Belit’s full time employees is 20, but the company regularly contracts about ten full time
free-lancers. When it comes to this project three persons from Belit were involved. All of them had
already a certain EU funds experience and their involvement was not 100% dedicated to project issues only. Already mentioned Djordje Lazić, Project Manager from Belit, approximately dedicated 4060 working days on the project preparation and project writing activities. The same goes for other two
project partners and personnel involved on their side.
Support Structures
National public support structures - When it comes to national support structures (organisations) Belit
kept good communication with state bodies responsible for the CIP and CIP ICT-PSP programmes
which are MoCMIS (former MoTIS), MoERD and the PKS. More precisely, they mostly communicated
and relied on the help from NCPs in responsible ministries: Zorica Marić, MoERD; Stefan Lazarević, at
that time MoTIS, Maria Šola (MoES) and Nataša Kecman, PKS. Communication channels used were
participation in Info Day events and workshops, e-mail communication, phone calls and face-to-face
meetings. Their support mostly came in terms of advices on application procedures and Belit is generally satisfied with the support they provided. Organization of the Info Day events and other work seminars which provides valuable information related to the programme and best practices is highly appreciated by Belit.
Private support structures – There was no external expert hired during any of the phases of the application process. Belit and other Serbian partners have sufficient experience to handle the application
process by themselves.
EU support structures – Belit is aware of various supporting organisation within the EU structures as
well as specific events organised by them (e.g. scheme or call specific events - Brussels Info Day)
which are very useful for networking. What lacks in order to fully exploit their potential are financial
means.
Websites providing information – Belit knows and uses available local and EU websites which provide
information on CIP and other EU programmes. Yet information on different aspects and support
mechanisms available is spread over too many different sites which render information gathering and
research difficult and time consuming.
15/45

16. 4.3 CIM Grupa d.o.o. Case Study (FP7 SME)
Brief Project Description3
ReFLEX - Reinforcing Flexibility of SMEs by dynamic business process management
EU Programme: FP7-SME-2010-1
Total Cost: € 1.4m (EU contribution: € 1.073.167)
Project Reference: 262305
Project Type: Collaborative project
Execution: from 01/04/2011 to 31/03/2013
Project Status: Running
Contract Type: Research for the Benefit of Specific Groups – Research for SMEs
No. of Consortium Members: Seven
Consortium Members’ Countries: Serbia, Germany, Macedonia, Greece, Slovenia
The goal of the ReFLEX project is development and implementation of an open-source software solution which will support the planning and management process for SMEs’ rolling parks, through application of state-of-the-art technologies.
Achieving business flexibility is a necessary condition for the business development of SMEs. ReFLEX project is aiming to perform a research on the new model for the description of dynamic business processes, and to develop an ad hoc BPM solution tailored to the needs of SMEs which will help
them REspond more quickly to changing customer requirements than their larger and less agile competitors, and be more FLEXible, thus providing them with clear benefits and making their smaller size
an advantage.
Consortium Members in Serbia
BECA Project Related
Competences
Organization4
Short Introduction
CIM Grupa d.o.o. Niš
CIM Group was established in 1991 and is operating in the fields of management systems,
business process improvement, excellence
models, and software integration. CIM Group
offers consulting services and innovative software products aimed at helping organizations
continually improve process performance. CIM
Group has significant experience in EU projects,
mainly FP6 and FP7.
Coordinator; partner in
seven previous FP6 and
FP7 projects; R&D and
Management Services
provider; BPM technology supplier
Faculty of Electronic
Engineering, University of Niš
The Faculty of Electronic Engineering is a state
institution of higher education with almost half a
century long history. The Faculty has substantial
EU funds related experience, mainly FP7 related.
R&D provider; EU project experience; software
engineering expertise
Investgradnja d.o.o.
Leskova
GP „Investgradnja“ ltd. was established in 2004
which operates in the fields of construction and
specialised construction works. Investgradnja
maintains extensive rolling stock and a major
mechanical park, including all necessary tools
for building, assembly and execution of construction works.
BPM software developer
and user; certified in a
diversity of QM systems
3
See www.reflexforsmes.eu
4
For details see www.cimgrupa.eu/; http://www.ni.ac.rs/en/index.php/faculty-of-electronic-engineering-.html;
16/45

17. Case Study
Information Channels
Due to previous participation in FP6 (3 successful projects & one failed application) and FP7 (five successful projects) that had generated a proven network, CIM Grupa had good access to call information, partners’ profiles and EU policies on R&D and innovation. Before launching the project, it had
conducted its own background checks on EU policy-shaping, stakeholders and applicant landscapes.
This knowledge had been obtained by drawing on capable partners from previous consortia, by attending project conferences and by sharing the workload of monitoring calls with approved partners. In
this, factual information search from useful web sources (CORDIS, wbc-inco.net) was combined with
informal fact-finding mostly at conferences. CIM Grupa found that stakeholder meetings where horizontal communication was possible were the key to successful applications. CIM Grupa did have the
necessary resources in terms of travel budget and manpower but acknowledges very much the fact
that other SMEs are unlikely to be in this position.
Monitoring developments outside the consortium was parallelized with building the technological focus
of the project. Ideas for projects were carried forward or recycled from previous projects so that a
common stream could be roughly maintained. Regular meetings put an emphasis on continuity and
mid or long-term perspectives of technologies. Specific partners matched this technological debate by
call information they had easy access to.
Project Preparation
The project was prepared with a partner line-up emerging early on from previous projects shared by
the partners. The Faculty of Electronics of the University of Niš was brought in by CIM Grupa so that
the consortium could enjoy the proximity benefits Academia can offer.
CIM Grupa emerged as an obvious consortium leader for a number of reasons:
•
The FP7-SME call that was targeted, eventually required an SME to be in the lead
•
CIM Grupa had previously worked closely with consortium leaders on other projects and acquired the necessary management know-how
•
CIM Grupa had the necessary resources in manpower (all the more because project management overheads are 100% fundable by the EU)
The mostly longstanding partnerships brought into the consortium had been formed considering a
number of factors:
•
R&D expertise and technological focus of the partner
•
Complementarity of skills and resources (some partners are technology leaders, some are management experts, some are familiar with the political and administrative environment)
•
Geographical location (partners should be easy to reach in terms of on-site technology implementation) and spread out (Southern European or WBC-only projects are rarely approved)
•
Integration of a partner from a big EU member state (esp. Germany, UK, France)
Previous experience: On previous projects, CIM Grupa had acquired partners through proactive communication and socializing at stakeholder workshops, stating clearly its technological focus but also
focusing precisely on benefits they could offer possible partners. With this attitude even large multinationals became interested in co-operation. CIM Grupa has partnered on different FP projects with, for
example, Thales, SAP or France Telecom.
On ReFLEX, the main role of CIM Grupa as a consortium leader was to define a roadmap and to organize communication between the partners. This was done through meetings and teleconferences.
Frankfurt airport was found to be a convenient meeting location as all partners could easily get there.
On previous projects, CIM had learned that the specific mix of systematic (roadmaps, milestones,
deliverables) and ‘creative’ approaches differed from one project to another. With REFLEX, too, the
preparation process had its swings and adjustments. Although CIM Grupa pushed for work to be delivered along the roadmap the focus of meetings had to be constantly (re-)negotiated. Phases of open
debates on technology had to be narrowed down to delivering milestones. No golden recipe – there
are plenty of management models at hand - seemed to work but plain compromising between heterogeneous work styles was found to be a must - ‘the truth is on the pitch’. In this process, CIM Grupa’s
17/45

18. role as a deadline and deliverables watchdog meant that the company became obviously less involved
in technological issues but focused more on project management, on which the learning curve has
considerably risen with the REFLEX project.
The focus and substance of the project did change over time but the consortium kept focusing on what
it wanted to do rather than on what was possible under a given programme. Technological issues
were checked against calls rarely vice versa.
Proposal Writing
Consortium work organization: Moving from debating and concept building to processing the paperwork required, apart from straightforward drafting skills, resources and management tools
such
as
•
a minimum time budget of three months
•
delegating tasks within CIM’s organization in a way that allowed long-term capacity building
•
managing idea and project ‘chunks’ of previous proposals so they could be re-used as cornerstones
•
familiarizing timely with electronic submission tools
CIM were in the lucky position to have been part of long-standing consortium, which allowed them
shortcuts unavailable to newcomers.
The main drafting workload was on CIM who had to ensure timely delivery of partner contributions
(organizations’ data, finance, technology process, project deliverables etc). CIM tried to keep the drafting process manageable from the early days of the application on. All partners physically met and
worked together and last-minute drop-ins and drop-outs were avoided. With the usual reminding,
pushing and shoving all milestones were delivered on time so that the drafting process could be considered effective.
Challenges encountered concerned the use of electronic submission tools mandatory on EU projects,
financial information and the diversity of legal obligations (tax, accounting) in different countries.
Evaluation
After a period of full immersion the challenge was to step back and understand the perspective of the
reviewers. The ReFLEX experience was that
•
the 2-stage evaluation process was helpful (getting a chance for improvement, i.e. making use
of the learning incentive)
•
the main criticism reviewers made was about workload distribution within the consortium
•
the score obtained was 12/15, i.e. above threshold level and midfield (but lower than the topof-the-league 14/15 that a project CIM Grupa had previously participated in). Interested parties
commented that this was the maximum result a first-time coordinator could hope for, especially considering the fact that it is coming from Serbia which has had only one coordinator beforehand and even this one was from Academia. CIM had previously failed only one out of
nine applications.
For as much as CIM welcomed the two-stage review process it regrets the lengthy evaluation period
this creates. On previous projects this had a negative impact on the lifecycle of the technologies to be
developed in a fast-moving environment.
Financing
Finance was one of the bigger headaches in the drafting process. The difficulties encountered concerned less the complexity of the overall financial information required but the integration of data from
diverse national sources. As tax laws are far from harmonized throughout the EU each SME partner
which is to invoice within the consortium, came under specific national tax regulations. Parallelizing
the validity of clearance from tax obligations was a major issue. National issues in Serbia concerned
finding reliable information on tax status from certain state institutions (who were shifting responsibilities among each other without proactive problem-solving) and modalities of bonus payouts to be
awarded for successful acquisition of EU projects. Also the diverging accounting standards in some
elements between Serbia and the EU made additional accounting cycle necessary.
18/45

19. The enormous workload arising from these disparities was fortunately matched by the full funding the
EU allows for project management costs.
Matching funding provided by partners was mainly in kind (labour, equipment/depreciation and supplies) with EU funding supposed to cover mainly labour, travel and some overheads. As each of the
partners is individually liable for the appropriate spending of the budget received, co-ordination consisted mainly of data sourcing, costing and contract management. All partners including CIM were
able to provide their matching funding quota.
Previous projects had taught CIM Grupa to plan for extra liquidity bridging eventually delayed payment
of ‘tranches’ by the EU.
Auditing had to be prepared in time by selecting an appropriate auditing company. Each consortium
partner receiving the funds above the specified EU threshold will opt for an accredited audit company
CIM tends to contract audits with the top 10 listed EC audit companies with local presence in Serbia.
Human Resources
CIM Grupa is currently assigning four staff members with the tasks related to the project. These staff
members keep on covering other responsibilities though. Directors were in charge of the EU project
and directed the drafting process themselves.
As CIM Grupa looks at EU projects as a cornerstone of its future business the policy is to gradually
involve more permanent staff in EU projects (up to eight) and to add EU assignments to staff members’ diverse duties so that EU projects are run as transversal issues that are not assigned to a specific unit of the company.
Support Structures
On the ReFLEX project no outside consultant was hired as this was thought to slow the ownership and
learning progress. CIM attended, however, specific trainings on EU projects offered by renowned organizations in Brussels and elsewhere.
The national network of Contact Points for FP7 is seen as the main source of support on the national
level, as for procedures, factual information and early feedback. It was unable though to provide all the
specific information or guidance on project management or tax and bonus issues.
The most effective support came from inside the partner network where the specific mix of skills and
knowledge often allowed accessing critical information quickly and effectively.
19/45

20. 5 Support Structures & Findings
5.1 Procedural Method
The procedural method of this main chapter (see chart below) is the evaluation of already available
related studies and materials, websites and the information coming out of the two main case studies
and the expert interviews in regard to the status quo of support structures in Serbia. Taken together,
this led to general assessments and concluding lists of findings (case study and experts separately)
and suggestions.
Due to this approach and the clearly defined scope of these assessments and analysis the findings
and suggestions are based on the described sources and only reflect issues addressed during the
research.
Assessment
Case Study
Project
Selection
Data
Collection
Analysis
Available Studies and Research
Structures, Roles and Services
Case Study Findings
Expert Interview Findings
Overview Suggestions
Chart 5: Overview Procedural Method Support Structures
5.2 Evaluation Studies and Research
Study Title
Author, Organization
Overview Content
Absorption Capacity of Serbia
for Use of EU
Funds: Practical
Lessons
from
Slovakia
Ivan Knezevic, European Movement of
Serbia, The Pontis
Foundation and The
Center for Democracy
Foundation
Based on the practical experiences of EU Member States from the
fifth enlargement (2004 and 2007), and particularly experiences of
Slovakia, study is dealing with analysis of the administrative infrastructure in the pre-accession period describing it as a precondition
for satisfying absorption once the country becomes an EU member. Number of recommendations are listed especially in regard to
the:





Absorption
pacity of
Cathe
Publisher: Centre for
Strategic Economic
Administrative capacities for EU funds management at national, regional and local level,
Professional and qualified staff,
Inter-ministerial coordination,
Timely project and strategy implementation,
Civil society involvement in monitoring and securing transparency.
Focusing on Autonomous Province Vojvodina the study provides
20/45

21. Autonomous
Province
of
Vojvodina
for
the Use of EU
Funds
Studies “Vojvodina –
CESS”, Government
of AP Vojvodina
For publisher: Mag.
Valentina Ivanić
Team of Authors:
Daniela Vukov, Maja
Sokić, Đula Ribar,
Tijana Đurđev, Stana
Pajković, Andrija
Pejović
following:




Statistical data on EU absorption (especially CARDS and
IPA),
Strategic documents and plans,
Results of a comprehensive survey on EU absorption capacity
done on the personnel of the local-self governments on the
territory of APV,
Recommendations deriving from the results of the above
mentioned survey focusing mostly on strategic planning and
documentation, HR, coordination and cooperation between
various support organisation and co-financing.
A Handbook on
Financial Cooperation and
European Union
Supported Programmes in
Croatia
Central Office for
Development Strategy and Coordination
of EU Funds, 2009
Determinants of
the Increasing
EU Funds Absorption Capacity in Romania
George Georgescu,
PhD, Senior Researcher, Institute of
National Economy
Study presents the example of Romania in the early postaccession period and this country’s failure to attract EU funds at
least at the same extent to the national contribution at the community budget, registering a net expenditure as an EU member. Study
deals with determinants of increasing EU funds absorption rate
which are related, among other, to the availability of internal resources for projects co-financing, adequate administrative capacity
at central and local levels, appropriate inter-institutional coordination and public-private partnerships, high skills and motivation of
human resources working in operational programs and intermediary bodies.
EU Funds: Absorption Capacity and Effectiveness of Their
Use, with Focus
on
Regional
Level
in
the
Czech Republic
Markéta Šumpíková,
Jan Pavel, Stanislav
Klazar (The paper is
based on an original
research for the Grant
Agency of the Czech
Republic, via the
project No
402/03/1221)
Paper focuses on the Czech capacity to absorb the EU Structural
Funds. Even though the functioning of the SF cannot be measured
in countries which are in the pre-accession phase some indications
about the functioning of the future system as well as certain recommendation can be deduced from Czech Republic experience.
Besides statistical data, study provides general information and
recommendation regarding EU funding supply side. Topics covered are:
Author: WBCINCO.NET (incl.
different contributors
as listed in the document)
The objective of this report is to add to the common understanding
of the national innovation system in Serbia and to map the Serbian
innovation infrastructure and stakeholders.
Innovation Infrastructures Serbia
Authors:
Slađana Novota,
Ivana Vlašić, Rumiana Velinova, Kiril
Geratliev, Olga
Borissova
Study gives a comprehensive and easy to absorb overview of
various EU funds related topics, such as: available funds, especially for candidate countries, focusing especially on IPA as well as
funds available after the accession and practical advises on how to
benefit from the EU funding, develop a project proposal and successfully manage project.






Macro-economic absorption capacity,
Financial absorption capacity,
Administrative absorption capacity.
Programming,
Implementation,
Monitoring and evaluation.
The report identifies and describes innovation-related




government institutions, programmes
as well as innovation infrastructures like
Technology and Innovation Centres,
Clusters,
21/45

22. 



Needs of the
Republic
of
Serbia for International Assistance
in
the
Period
20112013
Government of the
Republic of Serbia,
European Integration
Office
Technology and Science Parks,
Business Start-up Centres,
Technology Incubators
and other related organizations.
The document provides useful and detailed information, divided by
sectors (Rule of Law; Public Administration Reform; Civil Society,
Media and Culture; Competitiveness; Human Resources Development; Agriculture and Rural Development; Transport; Environment and Energy) aiming to built basis for planning, programming
and the improvement of effectiveness of development assistance,
in line with national strategic framework and priorities, based on
the three-year programming. Within the ‘Competitiveness Chapter’,
which is most relevant for this Assessment, focus on SMEs is
obvious and following topics are covered:





Description of the sector and recent developments
Strategic framework and sector priorities
Measures for implementing sector priorities
Programming of international assistance
Forecasts and future challenges
Table 1: Evaluation Studies and Research
5.3 Structures, Roles and Services
5.3.1 Overview Involved Organizations
The following chart presents a brief and simplified overview of the main organizations (stakeholders)
involved in supporting SMEs in regard to EU-funded projects in Serbia. These organizations, with their
changing roles, responsibilities and tasks depending on the programme they are based on, are the
core network of actors and service providers for the (support) structures SMEs and R&Ds can address
in Serbia.
The connections between the single organizations display, without indicating hierarchical relations or
claiming completeness, some of the interfaces, interactions and cooperation between them.
= NCP
EC & EC Deleg.
European Level
Ministry
EduSc
Ministry
ERD
Ministry
CuMeIS
NARD
Ministry
Finance
PKS
SEIO
SIEPA
National Level
RDA
BMO
R&D
PK
Regional Level
App.
App.
App.
Applicants
Chart 6: Overview Involved Organizations
22/45
App.
App.

23. These organizations are operating on four levels, from European over national and regional to the
single applicant.
The European Commission (representing the CIP, FP7 and IPA Programmes) and the EC Delegation
in Serbia constitute the European level.
The Serbian national level is firstly built on several ministries and the Serbian EU Integration Office
with their specific tasks and responsibilities in each programme. Also on the national level are NARD
(as the implementation agency for the MoERD and coordinator of the EEN Serbia), the PKS with its
Bureau for the Cooperation with the EU and SIEPA.
The regional level includes the 17 RDAs and the three Provincial and 16 Regional Chambers of
Commerce. The R&D sector comprises the Serbian universities with their specific faculties and a
number of R&D institutes. Finally, BMOs like clusters and associations belong to this level.
Last but not least there are the applicants which are usually organized as consortia. These consortia
usually comprise organizations from different levels, e.g. companies, a faculty or institute and sometimes the BMO uniting them. That is to say that these organizations from all levels are eligible to apply
for EU projects depending on the specific programme.
Additionally, the Enterprise Europe Network Serbia and the NCPs are structures combining several
organizations and persons across different organizations. EEN, itself supported by the CIP EIP Programme, comprises NARD, PKS, SIEPA, the Universities Belgrade, Novi Sad and Nis and the Institute
Mihailo Pupin. EEN Serbia was established in June 2009. After the implementation of the first phase
the second phase for the period 2011-2012 is currently being conducted.
The Serbian financial contribution in the EEN programme amounts to 400.000,00 EUR (for two years)
which is about 47% of the total budget. The coordination body is NARD.
The Serbian NCP network is described in more detail in the next sub-chapter.
5.3.2 Network of FP7 National Contact Points
In General
Definition of a National Contact Point: a person nominated by the national authorities in Member
States and Associated Countries to provide assistance to potential FP7 participants in their countries
according to this document, an appropriate translation reflecting the concept of NCPs should be found
for each national language 5.
NCPs are national structures established and financed by governments of the EU member states and
the states associated to the framework programme FP7. The NCP systems in the different countries
show a wide variety of architectures, from highly centralised to decentralised networks, and a number
of very different actors, from ministries to universities, research centres and special agencies to private
consulting companies. This reflects the specific environment and conditions in each country.
There are 18 thematic networks within the overall Network of Contact Points. These correspond to
themes found in FP7 and operate on a Europe-wide basis6.
In Serbia
Historically, based on growing interest and better understanding by companies, the reach of the NCP
network has been extended from a mere university perspective to private businesses, SMEs and
business organizations. By doing so, following an integrative approach, the network was widened to
other line ministries and the PKS which significantly improved visibility.
The current Serbian NCP structure is a network of small units (one or few persons) recruited and contracted through the hosting organizations. This network of 33 NCPs covers hosting organizations from
different ministries (MoES, MoCMIS), universities (Belgrade, Novi Sad) and the PKS to research centres and institutes (Institute of Physics, Research Center WBC). The Serbian NCPs are coordinated by
the National NCP Coordinator located at the MoES.
5
See “Guiding principles for setting up systems of National Contact Points (NCP systems) for FP7”, EC document
“12/12/2007/European Commission DG RTD A1”
6
For more details see http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/get-support_en.html
23/45

24. On the basis of practical requirements and as there is no specific budget for NCP structures, NCPs
are recruited and paid as regular employees in these organizations and cover the NCP work as additional tasks to their regular job description.
Agreements with the EU and hosting organizations specify general responsibilities (e.g. participation in
EU decision-making and information events, passing on EU information etc.) yet without an accurate
job descriptions nor benchmarks or terms of reference. Most of them cover their role part-time only
due to budget restrictions.
The work of NCPs is not directly funded by the EC but travel and accommodation expenses for participation in NCP meetings in Brussels are covered by EU funds. All other costs are covered by the Serbian government budget.
5.3.3 Activities and Services Offered by FP7 NCPs
In General
As the NCPs are national structures, the type and level of services differ from country to country. In
general, the following basic services will be available in accordance with the Guiding Principles7
agreed by all countries:
•
Guidance on choosing thematic priorities and instruments,
•
Advice on administrative procedures and contractual issues,
•
Training and assistance on proposal writing,
•
Distribution of documentation (forms, guidelines, manuals etc.),
•
Assistance in partner search.
In Serbia
NCPs offer personalised advice and support to applicants, based on the specific topic they are assigned to such as Ideas, Bio, Health, ICT, Mobility, Transport, INCO, Environment, Energy 8 etc.,
through
•
Provision of up-to-date information from the EU level and NCP network to companies and
R&Ds,
•
Creation and update of databases on different issues,
•
Organization of Info Days,
•
Individual (face-to-face, via phone or e-mail) communication with applicants in Serbian,
•
Consortium building and
•
Networking.
Other NCPs cover cross-cutting issues like “Legal and Financial”, “Regional” and “SME”.
Additionally, NCPs provide expert information to their own organization and other public and private
sector bodies on their specific subject matter.
5.3.4 CIP NCPs
Since CIP is centrally managed by the EC, the Regional administrations are not involved in the management of the CIP. At a regional level, additional information on the CIP can therefore be obtained
from the EEN. There are also CIP National Contact Points specialized on ICT.
Currently endeavours (there are two CIP ICT NCPs in Serbia 9) are undertaken to implement a wider
network of CIP NCPs built on the model of FP7 NCPs. The FP7 NCP network is cooperating in many
7
8
9
See footnote on FP7 NCP Guidelines
For more details see http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ncp_en.html
For more details see http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/ict_psp/contacts/ncp/index_en.htm
24/45

25. ways with this CIP structures (line ministries, universities and EEN). In 2010 a first attempt was made
to develop a common action plan for joint activities of EEN and FP7 NCPs.
5.3.5 General Service Provider
There are a number of general CIP and FP7 service providers, like IPR helpdesk, Ideal-ist and WBCINCO.NET, which offer free-of-charge services and support to applicants.
5.4 Case Study Specific Findings
This sub-chapter outlines the key findings and features of the two Case Studies based on the process
and topic logic applied during the interviews and documentation.
Positive Findings
Critical Findings
Information Channels
BECA Case Study
BECA Case Study

Information about the call was delivered via the
Info Day at the PKS and this initiated formation of
the Serbian sub-group of partners.


Already existing connections among Serbian
partners were basis for their cooperation on this
EU project.
In terms of search for international partners it
seems that the approach was not proactive; instead Serbian partners were approached by
Spanish partners the Faculty cooperated with in
the past.

None of the support organisation helping with the
partners search was contacted.

Previous cooperation with foreign institution was
a trigger to include Serbian partners in the consortium.
ReFLEX Case Study
ReFLEX Case Study

Network of previous partners used as information
pipeline.

Noticeable costs of travel at information sourcing
stage.

Recycling and remodelling previous project components.


CORDIS and wbc-inco.net websites.
Considerable extra investigation outside pure call
terms required (applicant landscape, competition,
risk of overlaps).

Project meetings allowing horizontal communication.
Project Preparation
BECA Case Study
BECA Case Study

From Belit´s perspective the project idea was
introduced only after the call was opened and initial contacts with the partners were made; some
of the other members of the consortium unsuccessfully applied for FP6 funds with the similar
idea before and were then looking for suitable
partners to try again within this CIP call.


Decision-making, call evaluation and project idea
development was jointly done by all three Serbian partners.

Serbian partners had previous experience with
cooperation among each other which helped with
their work and communication.

Serbian partners were in constant formal and
informal communication with each other as well
25/45
Communication among Serbian partners was
rather informal due to the fact that they’ve known
each other from before; if the ´sub-group´ would
have included members not familiar before a
more elaborated project management and communication system is suggested.

26. as the Project Coordinator.

Substantial experience provided by the Project
Coordinator was crucial for the quality of the project proposal and coordination of all consortium
members.

There was no communication with other foreign
partners except for the communication with Project Coordinator and all the project partners were
introduced to each other only after the project
was approved at the kick-off meeting; this way
cost effectiveness was increased.
ReFLEX Case Study
ReFLEX Case Study

Continuity of partnerships and topics/technology
areas carried forward from previous projects.

Diversity of partners’ work styles, schedules and
organizational cultures.

Previous ‘junior’ years as a partner preparing for
coordinator’s role.

Having to compromise on roadmap and proven
management approach.

Careful and practically oriented selection of partners.
Proposal Writing
BECA Case Study
BECA Case Study

Each ‘sub-group’ was in charge of writing the
project proposal of the part dedicated to its pilotsite.


Previous experiences in project writing and project management is an asset.

Constant communication with Consortium Coordinator was crucial as well as constant communication among Serbian partners.
Except for the communication with the Project
Coordinator and communication among Serbian
partners there was no communication with other
consortium partners.
ReFLEX Case Study
ReFLEX Case Study

Managed to obtain all relevant information from
partners in time.

Handling the EU’s electronic submission tools.

Administrative workload especially on finance.

Learned to narrow down open debates to deliverables required for the application.

Locating information on specific issues like tax
and national bonuses.

Organized communication practically and effectively.

Losing impact on R&D content as a coordinator.
Evaluation
BECA Case Study
BECA Case Study


A lot of time was dedicated to administrative
issues as well as documents gathering, paper
work etc.

Many of the documents needed had to be prepared for the first time and lack of experience
caused extensive time spending.
Evaluation meeting was organized even though
the project was approved in order to clearly define positive and negative work aspects and conclusions useful for the implementation of the project as well as future application processes were
drawn.
ReFLEX Case Study
ReFLEX Case Study


2-step process allowing learning and improvements.
26/45
Delay in project implementation (app. 75 days)
due to lengthy evaluation and EU’s internal pro-

27. cessing.
Financing
BECA Case Study
BECA Case Study

According to the rules CIP is based on 50% of
the budget being covered by the EU; the other
half needs to be covered by applying consortia.


Each of the pilot-sites had its own budget within
the project.

Each of the partners was responsible for budget
lines coming from their involvement.

Importance of R&D and positive impacts these
activities might have for the future development
of the company compensates for the expenses
caused by involvement in EU-funded projects
such as this one.
Regardless of the quality of the idea, consortium
partners have to be able to cover 50% of the total
budget which might be a problem for organisations coming from the economy such as Serbian
where illiquidity is very common.
ReFLEX Case Study
ReFLEX Case Study

Full funding of project management costs by EU
possible.

Diversity of financial information had to be harmonized (tax, accounting systems).

Selecting suitable auditors and communicating
with them.

Additional accounting circle required due to some
elements of diverse accounting standards.

Information on specific issues hard to locate,
being ping-ponged between some state institutions.

Having to deal with new partners’ internal finance
departments.

Having to budget for extra liquidity due to eventually delayed EU payments
Human Resources & Previous EU Fund Experience
BECA Case Study
BECA Case Study

Belit’s corporate strategy clearly defines EUfunded projects as a part of their core business.


Belit has EU projects experience since 2003 and
therefore its employees have gathered significant
experience in this field.

In 2007 a department dedicated to international
projects was founded in Belit; this department is
in charge of following various opportunities, establishment and maintenance of business contacts, writing of proposals and carrying all the
tasks in managing and supporting projects.

Belit was officially registered as an Innovation
Centre in 2011.

Three persons from Belit were involved in this
specific project with about 40-60 working days
dedicated to BECA project.
Involvement in EU projects proposal writing and
execution is time consuming and therefore might
be too expensive for a company with a small
number of employees.
ReFLEX Case Study
ReFLEX Case Study


EU projects are managed as a transversal issue
27/45
None

28. in the company.

Gradual build-up of competence and capacity for
EU projects.
Support Structures
BECA Case Study
BECA Case Study

National public support structures used were
responsible ministries and NCPs; they provided
advice on application procedures.


Communication with them was conducted via Info
Days, workshops, phone, e-mail and face-to-face
meetings; Belit is generally satisfied with the
support they provided.
Events in Brussels such as workshops and info
days, even though very useful, are often too expensive to attend; it would be helpful if state bodies would have funds to support SMEs in visiting
these events and participating in similar activities.

There is no qualified forum where Serbian organisations could share their experiences and knowhow in regard to the EU projects.

The Info Days could be more dedicated to networking, best practices presentation and direct
communication between potential applicants and
support structures.

The Serbian Government reshuffle caused a lot
of extra efforts since it lead to changes in the responsibilities in ministries in charge of EU funds
absorption which were not always clearly defined
or known to staff.

Information on EU programmes is spread over
many websites which renders information gathering and research difficult.


Private support structures were not involved in
any of the project phases because Serbian partners had enough experience to handle process
on their own.
EU support structures were not used even
though Belit and partners are aware of them.
ReFLEX Case Study
ReFLEX Case Study

NCP support on terms, rules and procedures
(‘theory’).


Carefully selected private trainings outside Serbia
were useful.
State institutions reasonably helpful but not proactive; sometimes contradictory information.
Table 2: Case Study Findings
5.5 Findings and Suggestions
This chapter summarizes in a very compact way the core combined findings from the research and
assessments done, ranging from the case studies, over available materials to the expert interviews.
As a starting point a general look at the absorption of EU funds in Serbia on the macro and micro level.
Macro Level
•
Absorption of FP7 is widely seen as good with plenty of examples to underline this point. CIP
participation in Serbia is still limited by the fact that CIP is applicable in Serbia only since 2009
but especially ICT-PSP already shows some very good results. For example, in the last ICTPSP call 18 Serbian organization/companies applied out of which 12 were successful (very
high success rate of 66%). As a result Serbia received a five times higher amount from the
ICT-PSP programme than was paid to the EU as contribution for the participation in this programme. As for the details on CIP and FP7 the responsible line ministries provide up-to-date
data.
•
When it comes to IPA absorption is around 95-97%. This is due to the fact that there are huge
needs on the Serbian side in the fields covered by already available by IPA Components I and
II.
28/45

29. •
In Regional Potential calls Serbian applicants have reached very good results (especially in
calls dedicated to the WBC region) and created centres of excellence in the due course.
•
Changes in the GovRS led to reformation of the former Ministry of Science and the former
Ministry of Science and Technological Development and distribution of their former competences and jurisdictions among newly formed MoES and MoCMIS, Digital Agenda and others.
Since these ministries were in charge of CIP ICT-PSP and FP7 the effect on the absorption
and number of applications remains to be seen.
Micro Level
•
It could be said that the greatest difference among sectors and applicants and in their capacity
to absorb EU funds is previous experience. Therefore the following statements can be made:
o
o
Academia is very successful in FP7 absorption since they already have substantial
experience in FP6.
o
NGO sector is very successful since project application procedures are a regular part
of their work.
o
•
Public bodies are very good with a lot of experience (especially IPA). It seems that the
MoERD could be pointed out as one with the highest success rate. This can not only
be traced to the Ministry’s abilities and capacities but also to a great extend to the fact
that it covers a huge spectrum of sectors and fields and therefore is eligible for a great
number of programmes and calls which increases chances to get financing.
Other sectors that could be pointed out as more active and successful are ICT, energy, transport, environment, nanotechnology and agriculture/food processing.
The award of the EU candidate status will open up new funding opportunities for Serbian
companies (e.g. IPA Components III to IV). This should again increase interest on all sides of
the table.
The suggestions added in the right column in the following table are based on the materials and the
observations, assessments and conclusions gathered during the drafting of the policy paper, including
suggestions put forward by the interviewees.
Findings
Suggestions
Familiarity with Funds and Procedures

SMEs and BMOs in Serbia are still, with some
notable positive exemptions, on a very basic level
concerning information, experience, networks etc.
in regard to the CIP and FP7 programmes and
EU-funded projects in general.

As the access to information sources on these
programmes on the EU and national level are often time consuming and complex more emphasis
has to be put on easy understandable informational material on the specific situation in Serbia.
A successful model could be the creation of a
“National Handbook on EU Funds” as implemented in other countries.
The R&Ds are, especially in regard to FP7, much
more advanced.

IPA applicants and beneficiaries are mostly the
line ministries and they are very well informed
about funding opportunities.

When it comes to CIP and FP7 potential applicants (SMEs, BMOs and Academia) there is need
for much more information on the programmes as
such as well as on the specific calls, not to mention lack of knowledge and information on procedures.
There is therefore great need for awareness raising measures on EU funds in general, promotion
of open calls and provision of trainings on CIP and
FP7 (application procedures etc.) for public and
private sector representatives alike.

Newcomers often, righteously, describe participation as demanding in terms of proposal development and writing and management.
29/45
BMOs such as chambers of commerce, business
associations, clusters etc. should be much more
engaged and active in this matter. The example of
the VOICT Project Office described below shows
how BMOs can organize not just their and their
members’ participation in EU projects but also
how they can provide expertise and lobbying from
the private sector and SME perspective.

30. Support Structures
Organizations in the Field and Their Capacities

These are the main organizations/departments in
public bodies:
o
o
o
o
o
o
MoERD
MoES (with Project Coordination Unit),
MoCMIS + Digital Agenda
SEIO
NARD (in its role as implementation
agency for MoERD)
PKS - Bureau for the Cooperation with
the EU (plus the Belgrade Chamber of
Commerce, two provincial chambers,
and 16 regional chambers)
As seen before some of these are part of EEN,
one of the major service providers for the CIP
programme.


The issues the sufficiency of available capacities
and cooperation among involved bodies and organizations need further assessment in quantitative and qualitative perspectives.

There is a need for future education and training
of current employees in the support structures,
which should be a continuous process having in
mind on going changes in EU programmes and
application procedures.
Private sector support

While the MoERD is the responsible coordinator
for CIP in Serbia, so is the MoES for FP7.

General issues
Generally, with some few exemptions, capacities
have been described as not sufficient in many dimensions, i.e. staff availability, time contingents,
training and education, funding etc.
Yet, as often clearly-cut job descriptions, service
portfolios and scope of work are not defined,
known or available an assessment on this matter
remains difficult and can only be based on the
personal impressions and self-evaluation of the
staff involved.
For specific issues like training and education the
demand is raised by all and seems an assessment shared by all studies and interviews.

There is no database of private support structures
like consultancies offering proposal writing services in Serbia.
NARD is in the process of certification of their services as well as private bodies’ services, which
then, if certified, would become a part of a database and offered to various potential applicants.
Therefore NARD bases these activities of connecting applicants and experts/consultants on its
ten years experience and familiarity with all the
players in Serbia in this field. However, this database will be built as soon as the certification process of services providers is implemented according to criteria set among others by NARD. NARD
is thus shaping the offering experts and the markets as such along this certification process.
Others know from their experience some consultancies and name them on an ad hoc and informal
basis (it has to be clearly stated that this is not
done by all named organizations).

The above listed organizations are also involved
in IPA programming and DIS (which is not part of
30/45
Since public supporting organisations and institutions do not offer support regarding project proposal writing (only quick checks of ideas), private
organisation offering those services on commercial basis are most often needed in this phase of
the application process; therefore a database
would have significant added value for applicants.

31. this evaluation).
NCP Network (FP7 and partly CIP)

For the detailed findings see chapters 5.3.2 to
5.3.4 above.

As hardly any NCP was aware of the Guiding
principles for setting up systems of National Contact Points (NCP systems) for FP7 or was familiar
with its content, it is suggested that a ‘national
guideline’, following the European Guiding principles, of basic principles, minimum services, recommended tasks and compulsory/recommended
characteristics is developed.
This guideline should then be publicly available for
applicants to they can understand what kind of
support and services they can expect.

The NCP should given sufficient time contingents
to fulfil their tasks as outlined in the described national guideline which usually goes hand in hand
with setting priorities in the hosting organizations.

The coordination regarding NCPs’ efforts needs
further assessment but improvements seem necessary.

There is need and initiative from MoERD side
towards the establishment of a more developed
network of CIP NCPs. The widening and close
cooperation with FP7 NCP structures is suggested to improve visibility and common activities.
With the introduction of the Horizon 2020 concept
(see Concluding Outlook) in 2014 a merger has to
be implemented anyway.
Strategic Planning and Coordination

CIP and FP7 are not perceived as priorities by all
line ministries (the degree varies strongly) even
though these are EU programmes where SMEs
and other private economic organisations could
directly benefit from.

It seems like most of the organizations do not
have a strategy on EU matters translating general
documents regarding EU integration and EUfunds absorption from the national level in an organization-specific strategy but are rather basing
their efforts on ad hoc decisions. Some of them do
have action plans but often there is no (strategic)
planning document which describes the specific
work programme for the year.


In many meetings and discussions during the
research period it became clear that there is a
lack of strategic approach on the government´s
side when it comes to EU-funded programmes.
Although decision-makers might recognize the
importance of the subject matter, wide-spread priority setting and consistent implementation, as
seen in many other countries, is missing.

Existing private sector structures like BMOs
should not just be used as, often one-way, communication channels between the public and private sector stakeholders. But instead these organizations should have at any stage of the process
the possibility to provide decision-makers with the
perspective of entrepreneurs and companies.
Systematic and institutionalized private-publicdialogue schemes are one instrument in this context. The shifting of priorities concerning CIP and
FP7 is here just one example.
On the national level an annual action plan is
setup for the implementation of the CIP.
This process, which includes the most important
stakeholders (like NARD and regional agencies,
Serbian Chamber of Commerce and a network of
Regional Chambers of Commerce, Belgrade
Chamber of Commerce the Universities of Novi
Sad, Belgrade and Niš, Institute Mihailo Pupin,
and selected BMOs), is initiated by the responsible line ministry (MoERD) and is conducted via
31/45
One concrete example in this context could be the
involvement of BMOs in the CIP and FP7 programming and prioritising processes, where an
earlier involvement of the potentially main beneficiaries of this programme could provide a very
positive impact. So far only line ministries have

32. been included here.
two phases.
While the first phase is organized in the form of a
meeting where only a few of the important stakeholders participate, the second one invites feedback from other (private sector) stakeholders and
is therefore addressed to a much wider public.
The result of this process is to decide which calls
for the coming year are most suitable for Serbia
and should be most advertised.


The establishment, along the Austrian model, of a
group of dedicated professionals dealing with FP7
issues and NCPs which monitors, matches partners and projects and disseminates the experience of winners and models of good practice
along technologies on local and international level
was suggested to improve coordination.
EEN provides a platform where some limited
coordination and common planning is implemented.
Demand Side’s Needs

There is no systematic or specifically designed
assessment of demand side’s need when it
comes to support structures. Some organizations
derive information from surveys done in another
context.

Usually a needs assessment is done on the basis
of personal experience and informal feedbacks
through conversations with (potential) applicants
and participants of the Info Days and other
events.


Proper, i.e. systematic and target group specific,
assessment of needs is missing and should be
the basis for all further steps in regard to support
structures. Without this assessment and derived
focus any format of activity will (partly) miss its
target. Involvement of the target group(s) is necessarily the first step in this process.
There is a strong need for a much deeper
knowledge and understanding on what does the
demand side (potential applicants) need in terms
of:
NARD conducts a yearly survey on a random
sample of 3,300 Serbian companies. One of the
eight segments of that survey is dedicated only to
the assessment of the innovation capacities and
needs in Serbia. However, the questionnaire does
not specifically refer to EU programmes.
o
o
o
o
ICIP also did a survey on modernization, innovation, business development, market development
etc. on a sample of 37 random companies plus a
group of regional chambers.
o
o
Information on EU calls and application
procedures,
Trainings and education,
Most attractive calls for Serbian applicants,
Problems faced before and after the application procedure starts,
EU absorption capacities and
Innovation potential.
Data Available

Currently there is no such thing as a public database of Serbian applicants (successful or unsuccessful).
FP7 NCPs collect their own data which is then included in R&D databases.

A public database of all those who applied so far,
successfully and unsuccessfully, would be of
great help for all those who are considering to apply.

Such a database would also help foster exchange
of experiences and knowledge, consortium building and the promotion of best practices. The ideas
mentioned by some are indicating in the right direction and should thus be supported by national
as much as international organizations.
Statistical data on CIP and FP7 absorption is
generally not transparent and publicly available.


First ideas are considered in some organizations
in regard to setting up programme specific databases like a CIP ICT-PSP database.
Services Offered

For the services offered by the FP7 NCP network
see chapter 4.3.

Generally most of the public organizations mentioned above are offering the following:
o

Information on calls and programmes via
e-mail, websites, and free of charge participation in Info Days and workshops,
32/45
Information on calls is perceived by applicants,
often related to limited experience on their side,
as too complicated and general.
In this sense it would be extremely useful if an
‘easy to digest’ and ‘tailor made for a specific sector’ overview of a promoted call would be offered,
with very practical advises (so to say tips) of how

33. o
o
o
o
o


Support in networking and consortium
building through EEN services and other
means,
Project ideas assessment,
Advisory regarding professional project
writing experts hiring,
Advisory on project application, but only
in terms of procedures, not on a tactical
and project application content level,
MoES financially supports the participation in the EC FP7 Proposers´ Day conferences.
The services offered are free-of-charge and are
addressed to companies (in general), SMEs and
R&Ds (with the focus being organization specific).
the project proposal should be developed to meet
certain call’s aims and enhance chances of being
approved for the funding.

Support to proposal writing is often mentioned as
a service that cannot be delivered or offered to
SMEs. It is strongly suggested that capacities for
such services should be made available at selected BMOs.

Furthermore assistance to the evaluation of (unsuccessful) proposals is nowhere offered. This
service is essential to improve the quality of future
proposals.

The promotion of (Serbian) success stories, as
seen with the BECA and ReFLEX case studies,
should be another cornerstone of the service portfolio.
It seems that only a limited number of (potential)
applicants are aware of the services support
structures are offering.
Information Channels
Info Days on CIP and FP7

Usually organised by the ministry coordinating a
specific EU programme and other support structure organisations (i.e. other line ministries,
NARD, PKS, EEN etc.).


Dedicated to the promotion of the respective
programme in general (CIP, FP7, Eco-Innovation,
ICT-PSP etc.) and a specific running open call
which could be especially interesting for Serbian
applicants.

This involvement inclusion of demand side´s view
(SMEs, R&Ds and BMOs) and more interactive
elements will help to improve the accessibility of
the information and knowledge presented.
Usual components:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
overall introduction by (EC) expert,
information on the specific call,
practical and best practice presentations;
Q&A sessions,
assessment of project proposals
presentation of awarded project in previous calls,
printed materials (leaflets and brochures)

Participation figures vary but overall several hundred participants were documented. The invitations for the Info Days are among others based on
the organizers’ company databases and website
information.

It is strongly suggested that participants of Info
Days are permanently involved in the evaluation
of these events on a systematic basis.

The evolvement of the Info Day concept based on
the systematic needs assessment could ultimately
lead to abandoning the so far used format altogether.
Instead a much more de-centralised format with
big events reserved for the introduction of new
operational programmes (e.g. Eco-Innovation)
and a number of regional or local smaller events
dedicated to the specific applicant, sector, company etc. structures and needs.
Organized centrally in Belgrade and on the regional level (i.e. for Eco-Innovation in Sombor,
Nis, Cacak). There are 7-8 FP7 Info Days planned
for 2011.


Based on a systematic needs assessment (see
above) Info Days have to be organized according
to the needs of specific target groups. These target groups have to be more actively included in
the preparation, implementation and evaluation of
each such event.

The observation of a number of Info Days on
different CIP programmes showed hardly any interactive elements with SMEs. The agenda was
dominated by presentations of a rather general
and unspecific nature which included no elements
directly addressing SME concerns. One had rather the impression that the questions of single
companies were not at the centre of attention but
33/45
Additionally, the focus of the Info Days has to be
much more on the benefits for SMEs to participate
in CIP and FP7.

34. a part to be put at the fringe of the agenda.
The inclusion of Serbian success stories is certainly a good way to show the way ahead for other
companies.
Digital and Internet Based Information Channels

Most of the organizations involved in EU funds
absorption in Serbia offer information via their
websites or separate websites dedicated only to a
certain programme (e.g. www.cip-srbija.rs, a FP7
specific is under development).
Yet most of the websites were described and can
be regarded as hardly user-friendly. Often a specific piece of information could not or only after
time consuming search be found.

Again, the concerns and needs of demand side
representatives should be included in the process
of website development.

One possible solution is the creation of ‘One-StopShop’ websites which, if not possible to offer all information, would at least give directions how to
obtain them.

In terms of content, information available is usually only ‘theoretical’. There is a huge lack of practical ‘tips’ and advices on how to write a project
proposal and find a partner or consultant.
The logic used to present and structure information is not consistent, even when it comes to
different segments of the same website.
Unfortunately this phenomenon can be observed
with EU as much as Serbian websites. Especially
for newcomers and applicants with limited experience the sheer number of different websites and
the way information is presented constitutes a
tangible obstacle.

Information on and announcements of calls or Info
Days are promoted via e-mail address lists gathered by the organizing bodies.

EEN provides information on a daily basis.

Most importantly, information should be centralised instead of disseminated all over a great number of websites and user-friendliness has to be a
overriding criteria for any new or updated websites in this context.
There is a lack of information on support structures (public and private) available in Serbia.
While FP7 NCPs seem relatively known within the
R&D community, CIP information points and contacts only to a far lesser extent.
Direct Communication

NCPs and other staff responsible or assigned to
EU programmes seem to be well connected and
are known to the active applicants in their respective EU programme.

In the FP7 context there are plans to directly inform and communicate with certain target groups
like deans´ and directors` cabinets with the aim of
spreading knowledge through their networks.
Different ways of communication are used including phone, e-mail and face-to-face meetings.
This leads to a certain number of direct and/or
personal contacts with these applicants. These
meetings are usually organized according to a
specific need of an interested party and have
more of an ad hoc nature.
Difficulties and Challenges (Potential) Applicants are Facing
Lack of Information

As described above potential applicants are or
claim to be insufficiently informed about opportunities and procedures.


Support structure representatives find that the
companies and other potential applicants are suf-
34/45
All of the suggestions made in regard to the information channels are applicable here.

35. ficiently informed about the funding opportunities
but they are lacking experience and initiative to
get involved in application procedures (see below).
Lack of Experience

A great majority of companies are lacking not just
EU project experience but also project management and project writing experience, EU funding is
described as a complex topic.


One issues mentioned in this context is the language barrier as proposals and all documentation
have to be handed in English.
Already experienced companies stated that the
best way of gaining experience is learning by doing and starting with minor roles in consortium and
getting know-how from the more experienced.
Both elements of this statement, starting with minor roles in consortia and learning from the experienced, are ways to balance the natural lack of
experience for newcomers.

Outsourcing activities which an applicant might
lack experience in is an option, but lack of finance
is preventing them from doing so (see next paragraph).
Lack of Finance

CIP and FP7 programmes are classical instruments of co-financing. While CIP offers maximum
co-financing of 50% of the total project budget,
meaning that applying consortia must be able to
provide the rest of the funds elsewhere, FP7 allows grants of up to 100% (e.g. the Capacities
programme).

Potential SME applicants in Serbia often can
hardly provide the 50% share of financing by
themselves and the necessary financial mechanisms (venture capital funds, guarantee funds,
business angels, seed capital), where EIP financial instruments can be used, are not sufficiently
developed in Serbia. There is no financial intermediary institution in Serbia which has signed
contract with EIF which would enable them to provide financials to SMEs under favourable conditions.

Generally the (lack of) finance issues is evaluated
and recognized by many organizations. But implementation in this regard is far behind the necessary level. Keeping this issue on top of the
agenda for all decision-makers is therefore a
must.
Proper incentives and support mechanisms from
public bodies as seen in many other EU countries
are just one remedy.

Financial problems are not only connected to the
co-financing issues, but also to the expenses of
the project application development itself. It would
be very helpful if the state would reimburse some
of the expanses companies are facing or provide
project writing support. In this case it would be essential that the procedures on which this support
would be granted is clear and transparent.
Examples in other countries such as Austria could
provide helpful models. One proposal raised is the
following scheme:
o
o
As an incentive SMEs can get grants for
a certain share of their application costs.
If the application is successful the company can keep the full grant, otherwise
50% have to be paid back. Companies
not even handing in an application have
to give back the full grant.
Consortium Building


Consortium building is usually based on already
existing academic or business networks. Serbian
companies prefer so far rather a consortium leader from an EU country that taking the responsibility themselves (yet successful exemptions are
noted).

EEN as a matchmaking platform offers networking
35/45
The format of the Info Day could be modified in its
timing and content to include further elements fostering national and international consortium building.
A concrete 3-step approach for Info Days could be
developed:
o
Information on the work programme for

36. and consortium building services through its work.


o
Generally the involvement of SMEs and R&Ds in
international platforms is very limited; SMEs are
often unable or not willing to take up the additional
workload of national or international networking.
Cooperation between SMEs and Academia is at
the very low level.
o

As often companies are lacking finance to travel
to the various networking events which are organised all around Europe (e.g. Proposers’ Day)
state, support is missing but would be of great
help.

Awareness of many organisations which are
providing help in this regard (e.g. Ideal-ist) should
be raised.
Serbian public R&D institutions are predominantly involved in basic research activities
and are not specifically interested in the market
perspective of their research.
The cause for this is twofold: on the one hand
these institutions show hardly any interest or initiative to cooperate with the business community
and there is no full understanding of the market
potential of their findings. On the other hand public authorities hardly set any incentives to improve
the situation or rather more foster basic research
instead.
the coming year,
Support for consortium building on the
basis of the relevant technology the
work programme is focused on,
Info Day with the information on the call
as such and concluding consortium
building.
Project Proposal Development

Concerning project idea development there is a
possibility to submit one page description of their
project idea to be assessed by EC officials or other competent persons during Info Days.


Companies are not aware of these opportunities.
Participation in EU projects like EUREKA and
COST have been suggested as possibilities to
gather experience in less demanding programmes
before applying for more complex projects like
FP7.
Administrative Procedures

Paper work: lack of experience with project proposal writing, documentation acquiring etc. (the
administrative burden EU projects bring).

Additionally, the fact that EU and Serbian auditing
procedures not being harmonized causes further
difficulties.
36/45