maghrenov deliverable 2.3: industrial internship programme

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under the grant agreement no. 609453.

DELIVERABLE Project Acronym: MAGHRENOV Grant Agreement number: 609453 Project Title: Convergence between EU and MAGHREB MPC innovation systems

in the field of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (RE&EE) – A test-bed for fostering Euro Mediterranean Innovation Space (EMIS)

D2.3 INDUSTRIAL AND INTERNSHIP PROGRAM

Version: 1.0

Authors: Josep BORDONAU (UPC), Àlber Filbà (UPC) Internal Reviewers: Olga Mackiewicz (KIC SE) Claude Ayache (KIC SE) Mikel Lasa (KIC SE) Richard Biagioni (KIC SE) Nadia Zeddou (IRESEN) Abdelhak Chaibi (R&D MAROC) Hélène Ben Khemis (ANME) Dissemination Level

P Public X

C Confidential, only for members of the consortium and the Commission Services

D2.3 Industrial Internship programme

© MAGHRENOV Consortium Version 1.0 - 29/09/2014 2

Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. 2

List of Figures ................................................................................................................. 3

Revision History ............................................................................................................... 4

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 5

1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 7

2 Objectives and Hypotheses ............................................................................................. 8

3 Analysis of the Current Situation ...................................................................................... 9

4 Design of a Survey and Analysis of the Results .................................................................... 10

5 Industrial internship programme .................................................................................... 22

6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 24

7 References .............................................................................................................. 25

8 Annex: existing internship programmes ............................................................................ 26

8.1 UPC BarcelonaTech – ETSEIB Internship programme ........................................................ 26

8.2 ENSTA ParisTech internship programme ....................................................................... 28

8.3 Grenoble INP internship programme ........................................................................... 29

8.4 KU Leuven internship program .................................................................................. 31

9 Annex: survey .......................................................................................................... 34



List of Figures Figure 1. Type of company or institution responding the questionnaire. .......................................... 10 Figure 2. Topics related to the surveyed companies and institutions (more than one topic could be selected). .................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3. Types of profiles of the internship candidates where we should focus (more than one profile could be selected). ................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 4. Intensity of the specialization for professional profile. .................................................. 12 Figure 5. Intensity of the specialization for bachelor profile. ....................................................... 12 Figure 6. Intensity of the specialization for MSc profile. ............................................................. 13 Figure 7. Intensity of the specialization for PhD profile. ............................................................ 13 Figure 8. Intensity of the specialization for post-doc profile. ....................................................... 14 Figure 9. Duration of the program for professional profile. ......................................................... 14 Figure 10. Duration of the program for bachelor profile. ............................................................ 15 Figure 11. Duration of the program for MSc level profile. ........................................................... 15 Figure 12. Duration of the program for PhD profile. .................................................................. 16 Figure 13. Duration of the program for post-doc profile. ............................................................ 16 Figure 14. Type of immersion for professional profile. ............................................................... 17 Figure 15. Type of immersion for bachelor profile. ................................................................... 17 Figure 16. Type of immersion for MSc profile. ......................................................................... 18 Figure 17. Type of immersion for PhD profile. ......................................................................... 18 Figure 18. Type of immersion for post-doc profile. ................................................................... 19 Figure 19. Intensity of mobility for professional profile. ............................................................. 19 Figure 20. Intensity of mobility for bachelor profile. ................................................................. 20 Figure 21. Intensity of mobility for MSc profile. ....................................................................... 20 Figure 22. Intensity of mobility for PhD profile. ....................................................................... 21 Figure 23. Intensity of mobility for post-doc profile. ................................................................. 21

List of Tables Table 1. Proposal for the industrial internship programmes. ...................... Error! Bookmark not defined.



Revision History

Revision Date Author Organization Description

0.1 26/09/2014 Josep Bordonau

UPC Initial draft

0.2 28/09/2014 Àlber Filbà, Josep

Bordonau

UPC 1st review including

1.0 29/09/2014 Àlber Filbà, Josep

Bordonau

UPC Final Version

Statement of originality:

This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise. Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been made through appropriate citation, quotation or both.



Executive Summary A survey on the concept of the internship programme and MSc programme has been prepared, taking into account the conclusions of the WP2 held last June 2014 in Barcelona.

The main conclusion of the workshop was to work towards the preparation of an ERASMUS+ proposal comprising both concepts integrated on a global perspective and coordinated with KIC InnoEnergy educational programmes, industry & research partners, as well as business creation activities.

The articulation of the proposal is being made with a taskforce composed of:

• A representative of KIC InnoEnergy EDU.

• A representative of the Moroccan Universities.

• A representative of the Tunisian Universities.

• Representatives of WP2 partners (UPC, KIC InnoEnergy, IRESEN R&D Maroc, ANME).

This is an initial inherent assumption in the sense that the future industrial internship programme and the MSc programme will be structured as mobility programmes, based in international cooperation and with an additional scope for the symmetry in the participation of EU and MPC (Maghreb Partner Countries).

However, there are still a number of variables to be considered in the detailed design of such programmes. These variables have been explored with the answers of the experts consulted by means of the survey.

The main findings are summarized below.

Internship

• Focused to MSc students.

• The content should be quite specialized from the technical point of view.

• Duration of the internship according to the level of the candidate:

o 3 months for a professional internship.

o 3-6 months for a Bachelor internship.

o 6 months for a MSc internship.

o 1 year for a PhD internship.

o > 1 year for a post-doc internship.

• Type of immersion: industry and/or research centre.

• Mobility is welcome at all levels (from professional to post-doc).



Approaching the KPIs

The transition phase from the current situation to the future internship and MSc programmes is determined by the application to the ERASMUS+ proposal to be done in 2015, as agreed in the Workshop held in Barcelona last June 2014.

This means that, in practical terms, the MAGHRENOV partners and associated partners are going to work towards a smooth transition.

The first actions are oriented, as suggested by the MAGHRENOV application and relevant organisations like the UfM (Union for the Mediterranean), to bidirectional collaboration focusing on a symmetry scheme EU-MPC.

Accordingly, the current programmes running in EU (especially in KIC InnoEnergy, but not restricted to) and the current international programmes running in Morocco and Tunisia are taken into consideration for the period 2014-2015. This is going to be done for the different levels considered in the MAGHRENOV proposal: industrial internship, MSc, PhD and post-doc.

In practical terms, the results of the MAGHRENOV project, as the new industrial internship program will be able to be fully evaluated in 2016.



1 Introduction The main objective of this document is to define an industrial internship programme according to the vision of the MAGHRENOV project.

In order to do so, different actions have been done and are explained in the document. The document explains the different actions and the main findings.

The sections of the document are the following ones, with a short description of the content:

• Executive summary.

o As usual in the state of the art, this summary provides a short description of the main findings and conclusions of the document.

• Objectives and hypothesis.

o The list of general and particular objectives of the task as well as the working hypothesis are described here.

• Analysis of the current situation.

o This section analyses some current experiences in terms of similar programmes.

• Design of a survey and analysis of the results.

o A survey has been prepared to incorporate the opinion of experts in the field, with different affiliations, in order to assess the main choices for the design of the industrial internship programme.

• Industrial internship programme.

o This is the main section of the document, detailing the programme, according to the results described in the previous sections.

• Conclusions.

o Methodologically, a section listing the conclusions of the work.

• References.

o References to the websites being analysed.

• Annex: survey

o Content of the survey that has been distributed among the actors.

• Annex: description of existing programmes.



2 Objectives and Hypotheses The main objective is the development of an industrial internship programme. In order to do so, two partial objectives have been defined:

• Definition of the working hypothesis or, equivalently, the boundary conditions for the new programme.

• Definition of a strategy for elaborating the industrial internship programme and to run it accordingly until the end of the project.

The working hypotheses are as follows:

1. The programme should be implementable in EU countries and Maghreb countries, in order to keep the concept of symmetry, as stated in the MAGHRENOV proposal and by relevant institutions like the Union for the Mediterranean.

2. The programme should be defined in such a way to be compatible with existing internship programmes in partners or associated partners to MAGHRENOV.

3. The programme should be defined as being part of an application to the ERASMUS+ programme in 2015.

4. The programme should be used as a tool to improve the cooperation EU-MPC in the field. This means that the existing programmes (at the time being, 2014) should converge to the new one in the medium term and long term.

5. The programme implementation should be sustainable in the long term, even when the eventual ERASMUS+ funding is over.

6. A contingency plan must be done to cover the eventuality that no ERASMUS+ funding is achieved in 2015.

Similarly, the strategy for the elaboration of the proposal is based on a methodology starting on the establishment of a working group, with relevant representatives from the different actors:

• A representative of KIC InnoEnergy EDU.

• A representative of the Moroccan Universities.

• A representative of the Tunisian Universities.

• Representatives of WP2 partners (UPC, KIC InnoEnergy, IRESEN R&D Maroc, ANME). These are the regular representatives in WP2.

The role of the three representatives is to interact with the partners in each area and to be the speaker of the different messages in the taskforce. The partners and associated partners have agreed in such a scheme.

Once the taskforce has been defined, the meetings of the taskforce have been oriented to the development and analysis of the results of the survey for a new industrial internship programme (an Annex is included with this information). In previous meetings (December 2013 and June 2014 in Barcelona) and in the meetings of the new taskforce, different existing programmes have been reviewed. An annex is also included with this information.



3 Analysis of the Current Situation Different industry internship programmes have been analysed, showing common features and also differences. The details of the different cases analysed are shown in Annex 8. The different models show as common features, the international perspective making possible the internship in a country different than the country where the University is located. Another common feature is the duration, being one month a minimum lapse of time and being recommended durations of some months. The list of academic requirements and boundary conditions for the internship is also described in all the programmes. Finally, the last common feature is the active participation of an academic advisor from the University and the need for an advisor in industry. There are some differences in the flexibility of the approaches, being the one of UPC-BarcelonaTECH (ETSEIB) the one more open to different concepts, since it can be done during the regular academic year or out of the regular academic year. It can be done as curricular or extracurricular, with different durations (with an upper limit), thematically fully open, while the concept falls into the courses of the School of Engineering. On the other side, some Universities orient their programmes with certain focuses. For instance, Grenoble INP Internship is very focused on research, with different programmes and durations and having always a strong participation of INPG Enterprise SA, a spin off of INP Grenoble. ENSTA-ParisTech is offering a typical programme for professional development working in tasks in industry (production and sales, preferably) different than the ones directly related with the programme. KU Leuven organizes a programme specifically intended to be done in the summer in between year 1 and year 2 of the programmes. The rest of the features are quite common with the rest of the programmes. MSc RENE in KIC InnoEnergy structures the internship as aligned with the MSc thesis, making possible a 6 month stay in company, as a curricular activity and aligned with the specialisation taken by the student.



4 Design of a Survey and Analysis of the Results The survey has been designed by the taskforce defined in Section 2. The survey is shown with all detail in Annex 9.

This Section 4 includes the results of the survey in a graphic and quantitative fashion and with comments on the results.

Figure 1 shows that the number of answers is relatively limited, being, however, very relevant in terms of the variety of institutions that are represented: industry associations, private and public companies, research centres, universities and governmental agencies.

Figure 1. Type of company or institution responding the questionnaire.

Private company, 2

Public company, 1

Public University, 4 Private University,

0

Governmental agency, 2

Research center, 2

Industry Association, 2

Other, 0

Type of institution or company



Figure 2 shows how the thematic distribution of the answers is. Again, the relevance of the results is clear, having a strong alignment with the thematic of MAGHRENOV, renewable energy and energy efficiency. It is also remarkable the amount of actors being involved in innovation, another one of the main vectors in MAGHRENOV.

Figure 2. Topics related to the surveyed companies and institutions (more than one topic could be selected).

Figure 3 is highlighting the relevance of an industrial internship programme at a MSc level and showing also the relevance of PhD and post-doc internships.

Figure 3. Types of profiles of the internship candidates where we should focus (more than one profile could be selected).

Renewable Energy, 9, 21%

Energy efficiency, 7, 16%

R&D, Innovation, 11, 25%

Entrepreneurship, 5, 11%

Management, 4, 9%

Higher education, 8, 18%

The area of your company or institution is close to one or more of these topics

Professional level, 4, 10%

Bachelor level, 4, 10%

MSc level, 13, 33% PhD level, 9, 23%

post-doc level, 8, 21%

Other (Engineer), 1, 3%

Types of profiles where we should focus



Figure 4 is interesting, because it shows the intensity of technical content in the internship for a professional level internship. The option preferred is a high technological content, being the second choice a combination of technical, innovation and management content. This is an interesting result.

Figure 4. Intensity of the specialization for professional profile.

Similarly, Figure 5 shows how a more transversal focus of the internship is preferred for a Bachelor level internship.

Figure 5. Intensity of the specialization for bachelor profile.

5

1

0

1

3

3

Technical, very specialized

Technical transversal

Tech transversal & innovation

Tech transversal & management

Tech transversal, innovation & management

N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Professional level: Intensity of specialization

2

5

4

0

0

2






N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Bachelor level: Intensity of specialization



Figure 6 is concluding that for a MSc level internship, more transversal options are preferred and an innovation focus is specially welcome. In fact, this is one of the initial MAGHRENOV hypothesis.

Figure 6. Intensity of the specialization for MSc profile.

Figure 7 is showing the results for the PhD internship. In this case, it is quite clear the technical focus as the preferred option, with a certain relevance of the innovation character.

Figure 7. Intensity of the specialization for PhD profile.

3

2

4

0

4

0






N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5

MSc level: Intensity of specialization

5

0

4

1

3

0






N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

PhD level: Intensity of specialization



Figure 8 is interesting, because it is showing a result relatively different than the usual focus for post-doc approaches. Instead of an intensification of the scientific and technical content, a focus on innovation is preferred, probably influenced partly because the answers are coming from actors interested in the results of MAGHRENOV, so sharing the interest in innovation-based approaches. This is not seen as a limitation, but as a modern focus, also aligned with the recent strategies of the EU and the concept of actions with highet TRL (technology readiness level).

Figure 8. Intensity of the specialization for post-doc profile.

Figure 9 is showing that a relatively short internship (3 months) is the option more interesting.

Figure 9. Duration of the program for professional profile.

3

1

4

0

5

0






N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Post-doc level: Intensity of specialization

3 months, 5, 39%

6 months, 3, 23%

1 year, 2, 15%

more than one year, 0, 0%

N/A, 3, 23%

Professional level: Duration of the program



Figure 10 is also aligned with the previous result. The duration for the internship in Bachelor level is also months.

Figure 10. Duration of the program for bachelor profile.

Figure 11 stands an interesting position, relatively different than the traditional approach for the industrial internship in a MSc programme. It is relevant to say that the preferred 6 months approach is compatible with the typical duration of the MSc thesis, so an alignment of both actions make sense, as it is the proposal in KIC InnoEnergy MSc programmes (as RENE, the master on renewables, for example).

Figure 11. Duration of the program for MSc level profile.

3 months, 5, 39%

6 months, 4, 31%

1 year, 2, 15%


N/A, 2, 15%

Bachelor level: Duration of the program

3 months, 0, 0%

6 months, 9, 69%

1 year, 3, 23%


MSc level: Duration of the program



Figure 12 shows again an interesting result. The answers are quite focused to a long duration of the internship (1 year), so this means that an active implication of PhD students and industry is welcome.

Figure 12. Duration of the program for PhD profile.

Figure 13 is consistent with the results shown in Figure 12. A duration for the internship longer than one year is the preferred choice. Again, an ambitious integration of the post-doc candidates and the industry is seen as extremely positive.

Figure 13. Duration of the program for post-doc profile.

3 months, 1, 8%

6 months, 3, 23%

1 year, 7, 54%


PhD level: Duration of the program

3 months, 1, 8%

6 months, 1, 8%

1 year, 3, 23%


Post-doc level: Duration of the program



Figure 14 shows that the concept of industrial internship is seen from a flexible perspective, considering research centres as good choices for the internship as well.

Figure 14. Type of immersion for professional profile.

Figure 15 is showing for the Bachelor level even a more clear result on the view of industry and research centres as similar entities for the internship.

Figure 15. Type of immersion for bachelor profile.

4

0

6

0

3

Industry only

Research center only

Industry & research center

Another lab in the University

N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Professional level: Types of immersion

3

1

7

0

2

Industry only




N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Bachelor level: Types of immersion



Figures 16, 17 and 18 are also showing the same view for the recipient institutions for the interns. It is a consistent result, showing that the type of training is considered to be similar.

Figure 16. Type of immersion for MSc profile.

Figure 17. Type of immersion for PhD profile.

0

2

11

0

0

Industry only




N/A

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

MSc level: Types of immersion

0

3

10

0

0

Industry only




N/A

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

PhD level: Types of immersion



Figure 18. Type of immersion for post-doc profile.

Figure 19 is starting the analysis of mobility options. For the case of a professional internship, mobility is quite welcome, but not specially preferred. This makes sense, taking into account that the professional internship has been identified as the option with the shortest internship, 3 months.

Figure 19. Intensity of mobility for professional profile.

0

1

11

1

0

Industry only




N/A

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Post-‐doc level: Types of immersion

2

4

4

3

No mobility

Mobility is welcome

Both opGons are possible

N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5

Professional level: Intensity of mobility



Figures 20, 21, 22 and 23 show increasing orientation to the mobility concept for Bachelor, MSc, PhD and post-doc. This is considered as an expected result, taking into account the international focus of MAGHRENOV and the international perspective of the actions, aligned with relevant durations of the internships.

Figure 20. Intensity of mobility for bachelor profile.

Figure 21. Intensity of mobility for MSc profile.

3

5

3

2

No mobility

Mobility is welcome


N/A

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Bachelor level: Intensity of mobility

0

9

4

0

No mobility

Mobility is welcome


N/A

0 2 4 6 8 10

MSc level: Intensity of mobility



Figure 22. Intensity of mobility for PhD profile.

Figure 23. Intensity of mobility for post-doc profile.

0

11

2

0

No mobility

Mobility is welcome


N/A

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

PhD level: Intensity of mobility

0

11

2

0

No mobility

Mobility is welcome


N/A

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Post-‐doc level: Intensity of mobility



5 Industrial internship programme The integration of the results in the previous sections makes possible the design of the new industrial internship programme.

The action considered as the most relevant one is the internship in the MSc programmes. It has also been identified as 6 months the preferred duration of the internship. Similarly, on the hypothesis side, a programme designed to be as more compatible as possible is the best approach.

Another obvious boundary condition for all the industrial internship programmes is the thematic, focused on renewable energy and energy efficiency as the technologies identified in MAGHRENOV.

Integrating all the boundary conditions and the results of the analysis of the existing situation and the survey, the Table 1 is a good summary of the design.

Type of programme

Duration Content Recipient Remarks

MSc 6 months Technical, innovation/management

Industry & research centres

Integrated with MSc thesis (6 months in intl. prog.)

Professional 3 months Technical Industry

Bachelor 3 months Technical, innovation/management


PhD 1 year Technical, innovation/management


Post-doc > 1 year Technical, innovation/management


Table 1: Proposal for the industrial internship programmes

In all the cases, international mobility is welcome, being the case of the professional internship the one wit the lowest priority.

The MSc programme is chosen as the first one, since this is the highest priority and it is also the natural programme to be integrated in the future ERASMUS+ proposal.

Anyhow, it is remarkable to say that the approach for the programme does not need an specific contingency plan, since it can run independently of the funding for the educational programmes. Of course, all the funding sources will be taken into consideration for making more aggressive the results of the program, significantly:



• ERASMUS+.

• KIC InnoEnergy.

• National and regional funding.

• Industry and research centre-based funding.

• Self-paying students.

On this point it is relevant to mention the synergy with an internal KIC InnoEnergy project, working towards the sustainability of KIC InnoEnergy educational programmes. Accordingly, this is a remarkable coincidence, since such a project, expected to be finished at the end of 2014, may provide good results for MAGHRENOV as well.



6 Conclusions The conclusions of the report about the industrial internship programme can be summarized as in:

• Thematic oriented to renewable energies and energy efficiency in all cases.

• Focused to MSc students.

• The content should be quite specialized from the technical point of view.

• Duration of the internship according to the level of the candidate:

o 3 months for a professional internship.

o 3-6 months for a Bachelor internship.

o 6 months for a MSc internship.

o 1 year for a PhD internship.

o > 1 year for a post-doc internship.

• Type of immersion: industry and/or research centre.

• Mobility is welcome at all levels (from professional to post-doc).

• In the case of the MSc internship, this action will be aligned with the MSc thesis for making it compatible with all international MSc programs, where the duration of the MSc is 6 months.



7 References http://www.etseib.upc.edu/en/university-companies/3013-practiques-externes

http://www.ensta-paristech.fr/en/becoming-engineer/internships-and-projects/industrial-immersion-internship

http://www.grenoble-inp.fr/business/finding-the-appropriate-working-relationship-25841.kjsp

https://www.esat.kuleuven.be/education/master/ee/students/industry



8 Annex: existing internship programmes This annex lists industrial internship programmes of various institutions from Europe.

8.1 UPC BarcelonaTech – ETSEIB Internship programme



Source: http://www.etseib.upc.edu/en/university-companies/3013-practiques-externes



8.2 ENSTA ParisTech internship programme

Source: http://www.ensta-paristech.fr/en/becoming-engineer/internships-and-projects/industrial-immersion-internship



8.3 Grenoble INP internship programme



Source: http://www.grenoble-inp.fr/business/finding-the-appropriate-working-relationship-25841.kjsp



8.4 KU Leuven internship program



Source: https://www.esat.kuleuven.be/education/master/ee/students/industry



9 Annex: survey

maghrenov deliverable 2.3: industrial internship programme

Education

internship program version

framework programme

existing internship

ku leuven internship

project title

josep bordonau upc

deliverable project

list of figures figure