Remarks on the Platform
General remarks on improvement of the Platform
– the language should be proofread,
– the source of the text should be clearly stated at the website
– after clicking on “join now” button at http://www.s3platform.eu/ nothing happens
– at http://www.s3platform.eu/about/ there is a non-functioning link in the following sentence: “At the moment, only academic literature, lengthy guides and few tools exist.”
– under the tab “What is RIS3”-> “RIS3 resources” (see figure below) the button “Access the Implementation Handbook” directs users to a non-existing link
– All the text at the bottom of the page under “Phases 1-3” and “Phases 4-6” should be deleted, since it is already at the top of the page and this way it takes a lot of space
– there is also a “hidden” part of the portal, which you can get to over search. If you e.g. write the words “tool” in the search box this eventually leads you to the website http://www.s3platform.eu/6-monitoring-evaluation/6-6-quality-scorecard/, which has lots of faulty links, and seems to be some previous draft version which should probably be deleted. Are there more of such “hidden” websites on the platform?
On making contents on the Portal better
– the apps should somehow be accentuated, as they are the most important output of the project – and also the most helpful one to the (potential) users. Therefore in the menu, a menu point to access the online tools would be necessary.
– the Platform should provide content that has been produced in this project, and that would help (potential) users to better orientate themselves in the RIS3 process and with the apps. It would benefit from the following:
1. best cases of devising RIS3 – in particular if combined with
2. expert opinions (from the pilot partners, EFIS, etc.) on how to use the apps in the RIS3 process and why/how they might be useful (if possible, in addition, as compared to other sources)
3. examples of reports generated with help of the apps
– one should provide some comments of the pilot partners and – perhaps – other experts as well, as this will not only show the added value of the project, but also help future users orientate themselves
– the repository of RIS3 strategies (http://www.onlines3.eu/ris3-strategies-repository/) could maybe be extended to include Swedish, Croatian, Hungarian, Greek RIS3 as well as the one from Cyprus
On layout of the Portal
– In order to make the homepage more engaging when the user first arrives it would be good if a short paragraph describing smart specialization (‘What is RIS3?’) is moved so that it is visible above the fold. That should also be useful as it describes what RIS3 stands for, and that should be explained as the first thing.
– The menu point ‘What is RIS3?’ and its subdirectory, ‘RIS3 Resources’ could easily be put under ‘How to form RIS3?.
– The ‘Forum’ menu point gets lost at the very end of the row. It would be good if we could switch it with the ‘Online S3 project’ point. However, the ‘Forum’ menu point may be best positioned at the bottom of the homepage and/or as a submenu of the ‘About’ menu point
Remarks on the part of the Platform with the RIS3 process
Phase 1: Governance
– the link in the following sentence does not direct the user to the definition of the EDP: “The aim is to bring together regional stakeholders in order to harness their knowledge, resources and connections for discovering new R&D and innovation activities and implementing them in practice (see EDP).”
– the link in the following sentence does not guide one to the definition of “civil society”, but rather to a document going into some detail on the quadruple helix model: “The innovation users are also described as the “civil society””. That should be corrected by either inserting a link leading one to the description of the mentioned notion or it should be clearly stated that this is a link leading one to explanation of the quadruple helix model
Phase 3: Strategy formulation
– under “Case examples”, the link to Malta’s RIS3 report does not work: “Malta’s RIS3 report including their vision”
Phase 4 – Priority setting
– As far as the content/ideas are concerned, it is a good summary. However, the text would benefit from a review by an editor: it is extremely repetitive and contains a lot of redundant, filler sentences (e.g. ‘As a result of this phase, regions should formulate a set of priorities.’). In short, the text should be much more to the point.
– The ‘Example priorities’ are for some reason presented as a drop-down, due to which they are hidden. As this is some of the most valuable input for users, they are worth expanding. Also, under the example for Galicia, one of the priorities is ‘etc.’ – this should be deleted.
– Tool 4.1. is referred to on this page as ‘EDP workshops’, while in the menu and tool itself, it is called ‘EDP focus groups’. One name should be picked and stuck to in order to avoid confusion.
Phase 5 – Policy mix
– Text is repetitive, needs professional editing.
– Tool 5.4 is referred to as ‘Administrative framework conditions’, while in the menu and in the app it is called ‘State aid law compliance for RIS3 implementation’. For the sake of clarity these should be harmonized.
Phase 6 – Monitoring and evaluation
– Heavy editing needed, as the text is repetitive and without flow. Grammar needs checking too. (e.g. ‘Reflecting monitoring indicators to the baselines show whether the RIS3 implementation has had hoped results.’) All links in the text should open in a new tab, rather than in the same one.