We thought it would be easy to convert interview notes into an action plan – but in fact it was not easy at all. Reformulating views on issues that cause friction in an organisation into concrete measures, without it losing the underlying message, requires a lot of reflection. The steering group have read the first compilation (a wealth of pages containing the full content of the interviews) and now we have completed the action plan version one of… seven perhaps? It is 15 pages long…
The steering group’s task now is to make an initial prioritisation among all the “actions” and submit comments on the measures we have proposed. Then we will rewrite, condense further and resubmit it to the steering group. After that meeting in late March, we will present the action plan in other contexts. The project, of course, has both a communications plan (who we talk to about the action plan and how) and a timetable (when we talk to people). The timetable is extremely tight. In the first week of June, we intend to send in our application including all appendices. This means that the vice-chancellor must have made a decision in May, and the vice-chancellor’s Management Council and the Central Administration’s management group are to have seen it in April. The HR organisations and the Lund Doctoral Students’ Union are also on our to-talk-to list along with other groups. Yes, we hear what you are thinking: Are so many actors going to give their opinions on the action plan? Won’t it be extremely diluted as a result? We emphasise that the content of the action plan stems from the researchers themselves, from the interviews we conducted. We will not allow that content to be lost in the review round.