1 / 19

Revision Report 6 of the Strategic Plan 2005-2009

Revision Report 6 of the Strategic Plan 2005-2009. Michel Egger, Paris 14.09.2007. Purpose. This report is: FOR DECISION A review of the Strategic Plan 2005-2009 at its midterm A request for decisions by the GB members on the next steps to take. Status Quo.

molimo
Download Presentation

Revision Report 6 of the Strategic Plan 2005-2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Revision Report 6 of theStrategic Plan 2005-2009 Michel Egger, Paris 14.09.2007

  2. Purpose This report is: FOR DECISION • A review of the Strategic Plan 2005-2009 at its midterm • A request for decisions by the GB members on the next steps to take Revision Report 6

  3. Status Quo • The first Strategic Plan (SP1) was approved by CEDR’s GB in Bergen, Norway on 12.05.2005 SP1: • Outlines the priorities CEDR has set and the way MS want their employees to work on CEDR’s activities • Underlines the added value created by CEDR • Minimises the duplication of work done by other institutions Revision Report 6

  4. Definition of the Issue The Revision Report questions the: • Structure • Content • Time schedule • Resources • Form for developing SP1 • Strategic Plan ad hoc Group • Dissemination of results • 2nd SP Revision Report 6

  5. Opportunities of the Report The Revision Report is a good opportunity to: • Put forward ideas on how to strengthen CEDR • To enable the Directors of Roads to observe the progress of the work at midterm • To inform the Directors of Roads of the need for more commitment Revision Report 6

  6. The Annexes Annexe 1: Status report of each task & states when it will be finished Annexe 2: Lists TG & PG meeting + participants Annexe 3: Updated Quality Assurance & Risk Management scheme Revision Report 6

  7. Structure in which the SP is carried forward The EB – The EB members agreed that: • There should be more opportunities & time to exchange information • The TD set up has proved to be consistent • TD workshops are too short. Inventive solutions are underway to organise them differently • The “burden” on the TDCs needs to be shared on some form of rotation basis Revision Report 6

  8. Structure in which the SP is carried forward The 3 TDs commented on by the TDCs: TD Management: • In spite of initial steering/membership drawbacks the activities are running well. Increased commitment is needed to complete the tasks. TD Construction • Commitment & membership for dealing with the tasks will have to be increased if the set targets are to be met Revision Report 6

  9. Structure in which the SP is carried forward The 3 TDs commented on by the TDCs: TD Operation: • Workshops on some issues have been very constructive • A large proportion of the work falls on a few • Task groups have begun to use CEDR funded consultants, so enlarging the roles some are able to play in CEDR’s activities Revision Report 6

  10. Structure in which the SP is carried forward The TGs and PGs:  Is participation • Adequate to means and resources • Proportionate to the country’s size & economy • Is there sufficient commitment at the head of the NRA? Revision Report 6

  11. Structure in which the SP is carried forward Reporting to the EB and GB: Final reports structured to initiate discussion consist of: 1/ A factual & ‘neutral’ report from the TG or PG 2/ A separate report that sets out the consequences, sensitive options & policy recommendations  = The added value from the EB  The GB members present the final reports Revision Report 6

  12. Structure in which the SP is carried forward Financial Resources: To obtain financial help from CEDR: • The requirement is discussed within the TD • The TDC writes a formal request & provides an audit of the situation to the Sec. Gen & Chair. • Sec. Gen. & Chair may allocate up to 100’000€ if sufficient contribution already made by TD • > 100’000, the request goes to the GB • Contract between consultant & CEDR Revision Report 6

  13. SP2 – Suggestions from the Strategic ad hoc Group SP2 will reflect the NRAs present & future challenges: 1/ Content – The priority tasks shall be: • Future focused & aligned with NRAs changes • Client orientated / in collaboration with other stakeholders • Aware of rehabilitation needs & innovative funding • Developed to ensure the effective use of roads • Aware of a future lack of skilled engineers Revision Report 6

  14. SP2 – Suggestions from the Strategic ad hoc Group 2/ Structure – SP2 shall: • Review the structure & working methods • Improve the nomination process/implication • Move from communication to knowledge management • Improve dissemination of results • Ensure quality control of outputs Revision Report 6

  15. Proposal / Recommendation The EB recommends GB members to: • Leave the content of the 25 priority tasks of SP1 as planned but adapt SP2 to the NRA’s needs • Keep the initial time schedule and monitor deviations in the QA scheme • Keep early 2009 as deadline for SP1 deliverables • Maintain the present structure: 3 TDs, 3 TGs, 5 PGs • Decide to develop SP2 2009-2013 • Set aside a GB brainstorming session in 2008 Revision Report 6

  16. Proposal / Recommendation (cont) The EB recommends GB members to: • Change the TDCs now (finish SP1, start SP2) • Elect new members for the Strategic ad hoc Group • Adapt the ToR of the Strategic ad hoc Group • Elect the chair of the next Strategic ad hoc Group • Commit themselves and their personnel to actively support CEDR’s activities Revision Report 6

  17. Concluding Remarks • CEDR has the merit to exist and can from there make progress • CEDR is most grateful for the work & resources put into the organisation so far • The SP with its interlinked 25 priorities is a philosophy driven top down & based on commitment • The benefit of CEDR is reflected in Europe in more efficient NRAs, improved & safer transport and a more harmonious relationship with all concerned Revision Report 6

  18. REQUEST FOR DECISION The GB is requested to: • discuss, amend or approve the proposals made in this paper and thus • contribute to make sure that CEDR will continue to flourish Revision Report 6

  19. SP2 – Time schedule EB Rome Nov 07  Launch SP2 EB Austria Feb 08  Proposal evaluated GB Slovenia Apr 08  Brain storm: topics/struct. EB ? Jun/Sep 08  Finalise proposal SP2 GB Athens Oct 08  Approval SP2 EB ? Nov/Dec  Implement SP2 Revision Report 6

More Related