* Tir 
TV * 
tir * COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 16.09.1996 
COM(96) 410 final 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
COMETT II 
The Final Evaluation 
Report 
(Presented by the Commission) 

1. Introduction 
This report concerns the second phase of the COMETT Programme, COMETT II (1990-
1994). COMETT II is the successor programme to COMETT I (1986-1989), the Community 
Action Programme for Education and Training for Technology. COMETT II was adopted 
by Council Decision 89/27 EEC of 16 December 1988, OJ n° L 13/28 of 17.1.1989. Article 
6 of this Decision requires the Commission to submit a final evaluation report on the 
experience and results of COMETT II, by 30 June 1995, to the Council, the European 
Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee. 
This document is the Commission's report which fulfils this requirement. It is mainly based 
on the synthesis of a large number of evaluation and monitoring documents produced over 
the programme's lifetime, in particular the last two years. Given the range of activities 
developed under the COMETT programme, this report can only provide a concise overview 
of what has been, in fact, a very rich and varied Community initiative - of which the main 
elements have been safeguarded under the new LEONARDO DA VINCI programme. 
The key achievements of COMETT II 
Five Calls for Applications have been organised between 1990 and 1994; the projects submitted requested 
a Community contribution totalling almost 1.2 billion ECU. 
The selection procedure led to the acceptance of some 3000 projects, leading to: 
• the creation of over 200 University-Enterprise Training Partnerships, covering nearly ail European 
regions, as well as many technology and sectoral areas 
• the organisation of some 40 000 transnational exchanges of students, graduates and personnel 
• the organisation of almost 10 000 advanced training courses, attended by a quarter of a million 
Europeans 
• the development of more than 4500 training materials, of which over one third were software or video 
based. 
These projects have 
• involved over 30 000 organisations from 19 European countries, including the entire higher education 
sector, over 20 000 companies (of which over 3/4 were SMEs) and some 5000 other types of 
organisations 
• covered training needs in virtually all technology and related areas 
• often been a catalyst for cooperation and innovation much beyond the COMETT programme itself. 
Moreover, 
• a unique European network structure has been created, which is capable of organising efficiently 
annually thousands of transnational industry-university exchanges - notably student placements - and 
international advanced short courses 
• cooperation with other European programmes in the field of education, training, R&D and-innovation 
has been a red thread through the programme 
• much greater awareness and understanding has arisen of the benefits of industry-university cooperation 
for advanced education, and for technology transfer 
• both the quantity and the quality of advanced training supply has increased, in particular in peripheral 
areas, thus contributing to European competitiveness 
• the added value of cooperating within a European programme like COMETT has become recognized 
in universities, and to a lesser extent, firms. 
SL-.3 
2. COMETT - an overview 
One of the most important issues for the future economic and social development of the 
European Union is its ability to harness the fruits of its research efforts for the development 
of innovativeness and quality in its industries. COMETT, the European Union Programme 
on cooperation between universities and industry regarding training in the field of 
technology, has developed since its inception in 1986 with these and related issues as its 
focus. Its message has been that advanced training and the acceleration of higher education-
industry cooperation are core technology transfer mechanisms for the industrial valorisation 
of our R&D efforts. 
COMETT I ran from 1986 - 1989 with a budget of 50 million ECU and COMETT II from 
1990 - 1994 with a budget of some 230 million ECU. Both were centred on transnational 
university-industry cooperation in advanced technology education and training. The main 
objectives specified in the Council Decision for COMETT II were to: 
• improve the contribution of advanced technology training to the economic and social 
development of the Community 
• foster the joint development of training programmes and optimum use of training resour­
ces through the creation of transnational sectoral and regional networks of advanced 
technology training projects 
• respond to the skill requirements of SMEs 
• promote equal opportunities for men and women in advanced technology training, 
• give a European dimension to cooperation between universities and industry in advanced 
technology training. 
COMETT consisted of four, closely related, component strands: 
• Strand A: the university - enterprise training partnerships (UETPs) operating both on a 
regional and/or sectoral basis. Essentially, they were joint consortia of higher education 
institutions, enterprises and relevant other organisations. 
• Strand B: the transnational mobility programmes. Strand Ba concerned student place­
ments in enterprises of other countries; Strand Bb covered advanced long placements 
of graduates, and Strand Be supported exchanges of university personnel to enterprises 
of vice versa. 
• Strand C: the training projects. Strand Ca supported short training courses, Strand Cb 
joint training projects, and Strand Cc the large pilot training projects. 
• Strand D: complementary measures, such as surveys, evaluation and monitoring. 
COMETT was the first major European education and training programme in which the 
EFTA coumries took part. 
The programme was closely monitored and several external evaluations took place during 
its lifetime. This Final Evaluation of COMETT draws mainly on these and related docu­
ments from the ongoing internal monitoring activities. 
3. Networking 
The Council Decision called for a European network of university - enterprise training part­
nerships (UETPs) to be set up which would (1) contribute to the identification of training 
needs and their solution, (2) meet those needs on a structured and coordinated basis, (3) 
provide a support structure for activities such as placements for industrialists, staff and 
students, (4) strengthen cooperation and inter-regional transfer within Europe in developing 
and applying technical training, (5) develop transnational sectoral networks. 
The European network created consists of some 200 UETPs. These UETPs represented 
some 12 % of the total programme grants. The average UETP budget was of the order of 
180 000 ECU, 25 % of which was covered by COMETT. The UETPs are essentially of two 
types. Regional UETPs bring together universities, enterprises and other interested parties 
within a geographic area. Sectoral UETPs bring partners, from different Member States, in 
a particular technology or industry, together. Both types of UETP were expected to liaise 
and cooperate with similar projects across Europe. Thus, 'two types of network have 
developed. Internal partnerships within the UETP and external, European-wide networks 
of cooperation. 
The two main contributions of regional UETPs have been (1) to develop the local and 
regional interfaces and infrastructure associated with university - industry cooperation, and 
(2) to integrate this regional infrastructure into the first European-wide cooperative network 
dedicated to furthering the European development of university-industry cooperation in 
continuing education and training. Sectoral UETPs have contributed more directly to 
technology transfer and industrial training development. Their clientele were seen as a more 
homogeneous group with more similar technical requirements. This has made work such 
as training needs analysis, drafting of State-of-the Art reports and the formation of 
"European Working Groups" particularly relevant and easier to undertake for such types 
of UETPs. 
Firms were positive about the UETPs' role as a conveyor of information, linking firms to 
higher education and advising on European programmes. In this context, some point to 
UETPs having acted as a sort of "clearing house", drawing existing studies together, 
defining methodological approaches, choosing training options, etc. as well as consolidating 
and articulating the demand from SMEs. Particularly important have been the effects of 
UETPs in stimulating a transnational outlook among the partners. In the higher education 
sector, an international exchange on training methodologies and teaching systems as well 
as contacts with firms abroad hosting their students have taken place. For firms, a wider 
access to the European training potential and a greater awareness of the European 
dimension of R&D and technology have resulted. 
The European dimension of both regional and sectoral UETPs has been their greatest 
strength. This European dimension ranges from UETPs' direct contact with the Commission 
and knowledge of Commission Programmes, to expertise in applying for and managing 
European projects, to their core strength as part of a well structured, dedicated European 
operational network. Their second axis of strength lies in their network of domestic, 
regional or sectoral members. Regional UETPs often have sectoral specialities and sectoral 
UETPs and their nodes are often involved in regional infrastructure. 
Generally, UETPs now have an accepted role (some much stronger, some much weaker) 
in their domestic higher education-industry interface and indeed in the wider skills supply-
demand interface. 
The fragility of the financial base and the lack of industrial involvement were the two main 
difficulties confronting the UETP network. This weakness and insecurity of the financial 
base of most UETPs is seen as the main weakness. It entails a sub-critical size for the 
UETP and limited numbers of staff as well as difficulties in realistic, long term planning. 
Finally, the networking in COMETT was developed at two levels. At the project level, net­
works between partners in a UETP or joint training project were developed. But also 
between projects a network effect emerged. Here, UETPs and their partners cooperated with 
other UETPs, and cross-fertilisation and cooperation between projects took place. Thus, the 
UETPs were only the most visible aspect of the COMETT networking activities. 
4. Training Actions 
The Council Decision on COMETT II indicated support for advanced training activities in 
three specific areas: 
• for crash training courses with a European dimension in advanced technology 
• for devising, developing and testing, at a European level, joint training projects 
• for distance learning utilising new training technologies and/or resulting in transferable 
training products 
» 
Calls for Applications for short courses (Strand Ca) took place each year. From 1991, the 
Calls were on a "pool" basis, i.e. grouped and submitted by UETPs only. Calls for joint 
training projects (Strand Cb) took place in 1990 and 1992. A number of joint training 
projects were invited to submit detailed applications to become eventually pilot projects. 
In all, just over 2000 applications were made, divided evenly between organisation of 
"pools" and joint training projects. Application was made for over 400 million ECU, but 
only 101 million ECU could be awarded. The major areas covered by COMETT,II training 
projects were advanced manufacturing, information and communications technology, 
environment, materials, health & safety, training (methodology and technology), and inno­
vation management. 
Two types of partnership have been established to carry out COMETT training activities: 
• UETPs, acting as coordinators for Ca-pool project submissions and contracts 
• consortia established specifically for a particular training project. 
COMETT training projects had a wide spread of international partners and typically worked 
in two or more European languages. Over 80 % of courses involved trainers from other 
European countries. More generally, the European dimension was the base for genuine 
European value-added, resulting in particular from the improvement in quality due to the 
opening up of course development to a wider pool of expertise across national borders. 
Some of the first mechanisms for quality assurance across national frontiers have been 
developed. Regional poles of advanced training competence in Europe have become better 
known and rnore accessible to all Europeans. 
In all, COMETT courses were seen by trainees as directly relevant, as a way of updating 
their technical knowledge and as relevant to work. The final national evaluations pointed 
to the improvement in course quality achieved due to access to international resources and 
the integration of industrial participation at an early stage. 
5. Mobility of People 
The objectives of the COMETT mobility activities were the simultaneous promotion of (1) 
transnational cooperation, (2) industry-university collaboration, (3) technology transfer and, 
(4) advanced education and training. To achieve these objectives COMETT provided 
support for three types of activity: 
• Strand Ba: students or young graduates undergoing periods of training ('placements") in 
industry in another participating State. 
• Strand Bb: advanced long training placements for graduates. 
• Strand Be: fellowships for personnel from universities to go to firms or vice versa. 
The major allocation of funds went to Strand Ba placements. In all, some 36 000 students 
were supported during COMETT II; the annual numbers rose from 3800 in 1990 to almost 
8000 (out of 33 700 applications) in 1994. An estimated 15 000 companies have benefited 
once or more from these placements: the equivalent of 20 000 years of human resources 
input. 
The typical placement lasted 5 to 6 months and received and average monthly grant of 430 
ECU. These operated under the "pool" system from 1991. The average pool size in 1994 
was 50 placements for regional and 30 for sectoral UETPs. Some 80 % of total placements 
went through regional UETPs. 
Strand Bb was for the support, on an experimental basis, of long placements - up to two 
years - for advanced industrial development and training projects, with monitoring from 
both a university and the enterprise. Applications were low and the few placements selected 
were carefully monitored. By 1992, it was apparent that they were little different in nature 
from Strand Ba or Be, and no further calls for applications took place. 
Strand Be for the mobility of staff between universities and enterprises saw a total of 1900 
applications and some 800 awards during COMETT II. Their average duration was 4.5 
months with an average support of 7000 ECU for the period. Some 2/3 were university 
personnel; also some 2/3 of recipient companies were SMEs. The Strand was organised on 
the pool system from 1991. 
The COMETT student mobility programme has been a major success. They have been 
.highly beneficial for: 
• enterprises, which have evolved a placement culture and have received a transfer of 
technology through the student. SMEs have often been involved in their first European 
programme 
• students, who have improved language abilities, cultural understanding, professional 
prospects and their innovatory capabilities 
• higher education institutions, which have been catalysed into developing placement 
requirements and mechanisms and have received feedback which has encouraged them 
to update courses and teaching techniques. 
Results of personnel mobility activities, Strand Be, have been encouraging, despite not 
having the same success or interest as the student placements. European university-industry 
links have been strengthened. The programme has shown its applicability to SMEs and 
most projects have shown a strong transfer of ideas, concepts and technologies between 
those who have participated. 
More generally, COMETT placements have helped in developing new modes of technology 
transfer and provided new models for human resource updating and recycling - so im­
portant in lifelong learning. At an organisational level, .COMETT developed the unique 
pool system as an efficient and decentralised mechanism for undertaking placements. 
6. Transversal Themes 
This Final Evaluation Report of COMETT also examined eight transversal themes: 
(1) Cooperation and links with other European programmes. This is important in 
making COMETT a coherent part of European policies for human resources. This liaison 
has taken place extensively along two axes: 
• links with R&D programmes such as DELTA, ESPRIT, BRITE-EURAM, and SPRINT; 
these were considerable in number, but a need was felt for better and structural coordin­
ation at policy level with these programmes. 
• links with education and training programmes, such as ERASMUS, FORCE, LINGUA 
and TEMPUS, which are both more common and more direct. 
(2) R&D, training & innovation. COMETT's Council Decision required it to develop 
effective mechanisms for the development of R&D through education and training, to 
enterprises who can benefit from it and exploit it commercially. Those units, institutions 
or UETPs which have done this most successfully have those who have been able to offer 
the full spectrum of technology transfer activities to companies. The contribution of 
COMETT to social and organisational innovation should also be acknowledged: the 
development of networks, the organisational and operational changes induced in 
participating universities and enterprises. 
(3) Participation in COMETT. Over 30 000 organisations across Europe have been 
directly involved in projects: 
• universities have had the most extensive participation: in most projects in all Strands, 
university people were the driving force 
• 20 000 enterprises were involved in COMETT, more than half through student place­
ments; companies most directly involved in training projects were predominantly service 
providers 
• some 5000 other organisations such as-public authorities, professional organisations, etc., 
in general closer to the enterprise than the university culture; this non-restrictive 
interpretation of the notion 'university' and 'industry' has enriched the programme in 
terms of the quality of project and multiplier role, particularly to SMEs. 
(4) The impact of COMETT on SMEs. 15 000 out of the 20 000 enterprises participating 
in COMETT are SMEs with less than 500 employees. Half of these have less than 50 
people. Mobility actions have been particularly attractive to SMEs. The level of 
involvement in training projects and UETPs was variable. The variety of activities within 
COMETT was helpful to SME participation. It should be noted that at least another 20 to 
30 000 SMEs also benefitted from COMETT through attendance at courses. 
(5) The regional impact of COMETT. This has occurred at two levels: the intra- and the 
inter-regional: 
• Particularly within the less favoured regions, and mainly through the UETPs, COMETT 
has provided a legitimate meeting ground for higher education, industry, and other 
interested private and public bodies. From this forum, other regional initiatives have 
developed, further strengthening local infrastructure. 
• Inter-regional cooperation has been strengthened in areas well beyond COMETT activi­
ties. Again, UETPs have been central to the process, providing a structured, responsive 
and easily identifiable contact point for those seeking partners. In addition, mobility 
actions have opened up regions to a much wider European influence. 
(6) Equal opportunities for men and women. Although this general objective did not 
have a specific dedicated activity specified within the Council Decision, an increase of 
female participation in student placements from 36 % in COMETT I to 43 % in 
COMETT II occurred. In courses, female participation fluctuated around 22 % representing 
the underlying industrial population distribution. Female project staff were well represented 
in Strand A and B. 
(7) Industry-university cooperation. Its promotion has been a core success of COMETT, 
increasing the industrial application of R&D, improving the qualifications provided by 
universities and transferring technologies between sectors and regions. Cooperative relations 
have been instigated in some cases and systematised in many others. COMETT has fostered 
a common awareness within both parties of the importance of such cooperation, and, more 
generally, of the major European value-added of such activities on a trans-European basis. 
(8) The sectoral bottom-up approach. COMETT adopted this principle of non-prioritising 
for giving full reign to the university and industrial potential within participating States. 
This has resulted in the selection of projects which were predominantly technology based 
rather than oriented towards a particular industry. This is probably due to the strong 
university participation and the R&D-transfer emphasis of the programme. That said, such 
an approach has permitted continual change and innovation in the projects being proposed. 
7. Conclusions 
The primary conclusion is that the Programme has been a major success: the major 
strategic requirements of the Council Decision establishing COMETT II have been fulfilled. 
COMETT has: 
• improved the contribution of advanced technological training through its incorporation 
in experiential learning associated with industrial placement, the improvement of the 
quality of courses and widening their availability, the development of local and regional 
university-industry cooperation interfaces and the creation of a European level interface, 
and the advancement of economic and social cohesion within Europe 
• fostered joint development and the optimum use of training through the integration of 
industry into the joint development of courses, the improved utilisation of technical 
training as an integral part of the technology transfer process and the improvement 
brought about in the calibre and accessibility of training 
• developed activities supportive of equal opportunities for women in training and techno­
logy development. 
• made an important and direct contribution to SMEs, through (1) student placement acti­
vities which- have accelerated their technical and economic development and their 
integration into the wider European market, and (2) short courses which have improved 
the development and management of their technical skills 
• provided major European value added through its development and internationalisation 
of placement activities, its development and creation of international networks dedicated 
to improving university-industry cooperation, and its strong integrative and cohesive 
effect, in^economic and social terms, across the European advanced higher education 
scene. 
While COMETT II has been an undoubted success, from the weaknesses emerge a number 
of approaches, areas and activities which initiatives at European level may need to 
consider: 
• the transition of a training to a learning based approach 
• the move to put technical elements for learning in a wider skills acquisition strategy 
• the growing importance of the application of quality assurance in training 
• the integration of technology training in a wider technology transfer approach 
• the advantage of more structured cooperation between European programmes 
• the need to help project coordinators achieve quality in training project management. 
10 
Annex 1 
COMETT II 
The Final Evaluation Report 
11. A3L 
Table of Contents 
Table of Contente 13 
COMETT Tenninology 14 
1. Introduction to COMETT 16 
1.1 Context 16 
1.2 Emergence of the COMETT Programme 17 
1.3 Programme components and operation 18 
1.3.1 COMETT Strands 18 
1.3.2 Participation by EFTA countries 19 
1.3.3 Calls for Applications 19 
1.4 Programme evaluation 22 
2. Networking 25 
2.1 Introduction 25 
2.1.1 The concept of networking 25 
2.1.2 Networking in COMETT 25 
2.2 Functions and structure of UETPs 26 
2.2.1 The Council Decision and its operation 26 
2.2.2 The development of the network 28 
2.2.3 Financial aspects 28 
2.2.4 Legal status and strength of partnerships 29 
2.2.5 European dimension 30 
2.2.6 Information management 31 
2.3 The contribution of the UETPs 31 
2.3.1 The regional UETP networks 31 
2.3.2 Contribution of sectoral UETP networks 32 
2.3.3 Articulation of industrial training needs 33 
2.3.4 Stimulation of the transnational outlook in partners 34 
2.4 Strengths and weaknesses of UETPs 34 
2.4.1 The strengths 34 
2.4.2 Weaknesses of UETPs 35 
2.4.3 The self-image of UETPs 36 
3. Training actions 39 
3.1 Introduction 39 
3.1.1 Training activities in COMETT ^-. . 39 
3.1.2 Some key data on training projects supported in COMETT 40 
3.2 Training in advanced technology 41 
3.2.1 What is advanced technology training ? 41 
3.2.2 Partnerships and consortia for advanced training 43 
3.3 The European dimension in training 44 
3.4 Some key messages from the COMETT training experience 45 
13 
4. Mobility of people 47 
4.1 Mobility within COMETT _ . . . 47 
4.1.1 Typology of mobility grants 47 
4.1.3 Strand Bb and Be 49 
4.2 Qualitative observations 50 
4.2.1 Strand Ba 50 
4.2.2 Strand Bb and Be 51 
4.2.3 Main messages for the future 52 
5. Transversal themes 53 
5.1 Cooperation and links with other European programmes 53 
5.1.1 Introduction 53 
5.1.2 Links with R&D programmes 54 
5.1.3 Links with programmes for education and training 56 
5.2 R&D, Training & Innovation 57 
5.2.1 Introduction: innovation in the European Union 57 
5.2.2 COMETT's role in the technology transfer system 57 
5.2.3 COMETT's social and organisational innovation 58 
5.3 Participation in COMETT by type of organisation 59 
5.3.1 Introduction 59 
5.3.2 University participation 60 
5.3.3 Enterprise participation 61 
5.3.4 Participation by other organisations 61 
5.4 Impact of COMETT on SMEs 62 
5.5 Regional impact of COMETT 64 
5.5.1 The development of regional infrastructure 64 
5.5.2 Inter-regional integration 65 
5.6 Equal opportunities between men and women 66 
5.7 Industry-University cooperation 68 
5.8 The sectoral bottom-up approach within COMETT 69 
6. Conclusion and main findings 73 
6.1 Fulfilment of the Council Decision 73 
6.2 Future strategy development 74 
6.3 Future operational development 74 
6.4 Project implementation 75 
14 
COMETT Terminology 
Below are listed the main COMETT-specific terms used in this document. Clarifications of other terms 
are given throughout the report. 
Call This term is used to refer to a Call for Applications. Within COMETT II, five Calls were issued 
(1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994). Only in 1990 could projects be submitted in all COMETT 
categories by any organisation; the Calls from 1991 to 1994 were restricted to certain types of 
projects and/or certain types of organisations. 
Strand The term used in COMETT to refer to a programme category and project type. There are four 
operational Strands (A, B, C and D), each of which contains two or more sub-categories or 
types of projects (also commonly referred to as Strands). 
Transnational Used as a synonym for 'international' when referring to European countries. 
Project 
Strand A 
Strand Ba 
Strand Bb 
Strand Be 
Strand Ca 
Strand Cb 
Strand Cc 
Strand D All initiatives supported by the COMETT Programme under one of its Strands are called 
projects. At a minimum, a project needs to involve one higher education institution and one 
company from two different EU countries. The types of projects supported are: 
University-Enterprise Training Partnerships ("UETPs") 
Transnational student placements in enterprises 
Transnational long graduate placements 
Exchanges of staff between higher education and industry 
Advanced short courses 
Joint training projects (development of courses and training materials) 
Training projects with emphasis on structural impact ("Pilot projects") 
Complementary measures (studies, reports, conferences, evaluation and monitoring, ...). 
Pool system An operational mechanism within the COMETT programme in which small project 
applications are grouped into one submission, then awarded a single contract for a set of 
applications and decentralised operational management. 
Enterprise Used interchangeably with terms such as "company", "firm", "industry" to refer to any 
organisation exercising some economic activity (notably those employing staff with some 
need for training) 
SME Small or Medium-sized Enterprise. With the simple definition used within COMETT, in line 
with Commission practice, this signifies companies with less than 500 employees. 
University Any type of organisation delivering recognized education at a high level. 
Course A structured training event, typically involving face-to-face teaching. 
Material (or "training material") A support medium for courses or for learning through-self-study. 
Sector Used as a generic term for classifying projects by subject area or discipline. COMETT 
sectors include both technology areas and industrial sectors. 
15 . AÇ> 
1. Introduction to COMETT 
1.1 Context 
The 1990s will be remembered as a decade of dynamic developments and 
transformation, both political and economic, which changed the map of Europe. In 
parallel, we witness an unprecedented and increasing pace of technological change. In 
the light of the growing competitive pressures and the globalization of markets, it has 
become even more important to be able to harness the fruits of research efforts and 
make sure they are effectively applied to the benefit of European society. Indeed, 
Europe's economic and societal model, which attempts to reconcile relatively high 
wages with responsiveness to social demands, requires a highly efficient and 
competitive industry. This will depend increasingly on the capacity of enterprises for 
continuous innovation and systematic quality improvement. 
The key to this lies in education and training. Increased attention at local, regional, 
national and European level is required for the development of human resources, for 
effective use of education resources and for making training available where needed. At 
European level this implies that cooperation between training and education organis­
ations from different Member States has to be encouraged and that greater synergy has 
to be achieved between efforts in research and development and advanced education and 
training. It also requires enterprises and higher education institutions to work closely 
together in the development and organisation of appropriate advanced education and 
training activities. And finally, it asks individuals, organisations and education systems 
to accept and actively pursue the concept of lifelong learning. 
These and related important challenges for Europe have been underlined in the Europe­
an Commission's White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment. Indeed, 
this document pays much attention to the importance of human resource development to 
improve Europe's competitiveness. The White Paper stresses the importance of the ap­
plication, transfer and dissemination of R&D results, and highlights the need for inten­
sified cooperation between education institutions and enterprises. 
Similar themes have also been developed by IRDAC, the Industrial Research and Devel­
opment Advisory Committee of the European Commission. In its recent publication on 
the challenges for Europe's education and training systems, Quality and Relevance, 
IRDAC underlines the importance of securing a strong link between R&D an4-training 
initiatives, both at national and European levels. Already in its 1991 report, Skills Short­
ages in Europe, IRDAC had argued that European R&D investments would not yield 
the anticipated economic benefits if they were not matched by equally substantial and 
relevant education and training efforts. In Quality and Relevance, IRDAC extended its 
analysis to the broader needs of enterprises for remaining competitive in a rapidly 
changing environment. Industry-education cooperation emerges as the overall recom­
mendation, in addition to a strong plea for lifelong learning and linking R&D and 
education efforts. 
17 
The European COMETT programme has been concerned with these and related con­
cerns since its inception in 1986. The competitiveness of European companies is at the 
heart of the programme. The Council Decision on COMETT II states in its Article 3 : 
COMETT II aims at reinforcing training in, in particular, advanced technology, the 
development of highly skilled human resources and the competitiveness of European 
industry. 
In the mid-eighties it had become obvious to European policy makers that insufficient 
advanced training risked becoming an important blocking factor to Europe's full har­
nessing of its R&D efforts. COMETT I was launched in 1986 by the European Com­
munity with the clear message that such advanced training was an efficient and effective 
means of technology transfer and dissemination, and that more dialogue and cooperation 
between enterprises and universities across Europe was required to make such training a 
success. 
1.2 Emergence of the COMETT Programme 
When the COMETT I programme became operational at the end of 1986, it was the 
first major European support mechanism for education and training projects. Its overall 
aim was - and has remained unchanged over the whole COMETT I/II period - to pro­
mote and support transnational industry-university cooperation in advanced technology 
education and training. The programme came into being alongside the first outcomes 
of major European R&D programmes such as ESPRIT which had pinpointed the 
overriding importance of advanced training as a complement to R&D efforts and as a 
crucial factor for European competitiveness. There were many who, rightly, feared that 
otherwise advanced skills shortages would undermine the value of European R&D and 
were likely to threaten Europe's competitive position. COMETT was conceived in 
response to these concerns, as a programme which focuses on the development of 
highly skilled human resources and the delivery of advanced technology training. It 
required projects to be based on European cooperation and on collaboration between 
industrial and academic partners. 
Despite its challenging objectives and the complexity of the projects supported, 
COMETT I raised tremendous interest throughout the European Community. The pro­
gramme was largely over-subscribed and the initial funding - 55 million ECU - totally 
inadequate. Very soon, it became apparent that a second phase would be appropriate. 
Already mid-way through COMETT I, on 16 December 19881, the Council approved the 
decision for the COMETT II programme for the period 1990-1994, with-an initial 
budget of 200 million ECU. COMETT II was not a radical departure from COMETT I, 
but predominantly a deepening and extension of the first phase. 
The main focus and objectives of the programme as specified in the Council Decision 
on COMETT II are: 
[COMETT] ... is centred on the changing requirements of industry and its personnel, 
requirements which necessitate complementary action both in the Member States and at 
Council Decision 89/27/EEC of 16th December .1988, OJ n° L 13/28 of 17.1.1989. 
Community level. Through the training projects it supports, COMETT II will contribute 
to the utilisation and exploitation of the results, methods and tools ofJechnology 
developed by Community policy for research and development. COMETT II will 
facilitate innovation and technology transfer as well as the balanced economic and 
social development of the Community. 
In this context, the objectives of COMETT II are the following: 
(i) to improve the contribution of, in particular, advanced technology training at the 
various levels concerned, and thus the contribution of training to the economic 
and social development of the Community; 
(ii) to foster the joint development of training programmes and the exchange of 
experiences, and also the optimum uses of training resources at Community level, 
notably through the creation of transnational sectoral and regional networks of, in 
particular, advanced technology training projects; 
(Hi) to respond to the specific skill requirements of small and medium-sized businesses 
having regard to the priority measures set out in the Annex; 
(iv) to promote equal opportunities for men and women in initial and continuing 
training in, in particular, advanced technology; 
(v) to give a European dimension to cooperation between universities and industry in 
initial and continuing training relating to technologies and their applications and 
transfer. 
1.3 Programme components and operation 
1.3.1 COMETT Strands 
The COMETT programme supports a variety of transnational activities involving the 
cooperation of enterprises and higher education institutions. Several types of education 
and training related activities are being supported, which all have in common that they 
set out to promote, on a trans-European basis, training for technology. There are four 
main interrelated components to the COMETT programme, each of which is designated 
as a separate Strand with its own funding arrangements. These areas of activity com­
prise: 
• Strand A: The development of the university-enterprise training partnerships 
(UETPs) operating both on a regional and/or sectoral basis. These UETPs are unique 
structures, each comprising several tens of higher education institutions, enterprises 
and other organisations in a joint consortium. In addition to their specific-advanced 
training activities, UETPs have acted as the backbone of the COMETT programme 
through their support and active involvement in the projects supported under the 
other Strands', and through their transnational networking and exchange activities. 
• Strand B: transnational mobility programmes for student placements in firms of 
other European countries (Strand Ba), advanced placements for graduates (Strand 
Bb), and transnational exchanges of personnel seconded from universities to industry 
or vice versa (Strand Be). These mobility activities were almost exclusively managed 
by the UETP network. 
• Strand C: the development and organisation of short training courses (Strand Ca), 
joint training projects (Strand Cb) and pilot projects (Strand Cc) in the field of 
technologies and their applications. 
19 
• Strand D: a programme of complementary measures which have been supported 
throughout the programme (information, evaluation, project monitoring, surveys, 
training to support projects, conferences and workshops, ...). Over the duration of the 
programme, the nature and focus of these measures has shifted in order to reflect the 
launch, mid-term and final stages of the programme. For example, at the beginning 
of COMETT II, much attention went to information provision and awareness raising, 
while at the end, the evaluation and monitoring measures grew in importance, as well 
as the support for specific UETP initiatives which helped them strengthening their 
management capacities. 
With the exception of some measures under Strand D, all projects received funding on 
the basis of competitive tendering through Calls for Applications. In line with the spec­
ifications laid down in the Council Decision, the Community support: 
• was limited to 50 % of project costs in Strands A and C 
• was based on a ceiling and a flat-rate contribution per exchange in Strand B 
• varied between 50 % and 100 % of the costs in Strand D projects. 
1.3.2 Participation by EFT A countries 
COMETT was the first major European education and training programme in which 
organisations from EFTA Member States (Austria, Finland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Nor­
way, Sweden, Switzerland) participated. Because of the financial contribution of these 
countries, the COMETT II budget rose from 200 to 230 million ECU. 
The agreements between the European Community and each of the EFTA countries 
were ratified in time (with the exception of Liechtenstein) so that universities and com­
panies from these countries could join the programme and submit projects already for 
the first Call in 1990. Austria, Finland, Sweden and Iceland were quite active from the 
start and brought in several high-quality projects; the other three countries missed the 
beginning somewhat but would make this up from 1991 onwards. By 1992, the involve­
ment of EFTA countries was at the same level as the EU countries. 
The participation of organisations from these countries was subject to certain 
restrictions, particularly that most projects needed to involve organisations from at least 
two Member States of the European Community. In reality, this was not a very difficult 
criterion since most COMETT projects include many partners from several countries. 
With the entry into force of the EEA agreement on the 1st of January 1994 most of the 
small differences in participation rules between EU and EFTA countries disappeared. 
1.3.3 Calls for Applications 
Support for COMETT projects was awarded after competitive tendering. During 
COMETT II (1990-1994) five Calls for Application were launched. Some of these calls 
were "open", while others were of a restricted nature: 
• The first Call, in 1990, was an open Call for Applications, where European organis­
ations were invited to submit proposals in all the different Strands of the programme. 
Negotiations with EFTA Member States had been finalised just in time so that 
organisations from these countries could join the programme. 
20 
• In 1991 the Call for Applications was restricted to the 158 UETPs which had been 
accepted under COMETT II in the Î99f> Call. According to the conditions of this 
Call, each UETP could submit projects in Strands Ba, Be, and Ca under the so-called 
"pool" system (see box below). Additional possibilities for funding arose through the 
launch of the 'Positive Actions' scheme (see box below) and the targeting of the new 
German Lander with a view of to quickly integrating them into the COMETT 
network. 
• The Call for Applications in 1992 was an open one for projects in Strands A and Cb, 
to a large extent meant to complement the networks already developed. As regards 
Strand A, existing regional and sectoral gaps had been identified and publicised, and 
through the Call, almost all these gaps were filled. The pool system was continued 
for the other Strands, with the possibility for new UETPs to submit projects in these 
Strands as well. 
• The Calls for Application in 1993 and 1994 were once again restricted, to existing 
UETPs. Consortia which had been established in 1990 and for which no Strand A 
funding was available, were asked to assess their development potential and were 
given the opportunity to ask support for a limited number of critical development 
activities under the programme of complementary measures (Strand D). 
The "Pool system" 
Part of the COMETT budget and operation has been set aside for the so-called 'pool 
procedure'. Under this system, selected UETPs were awarded block grants for the 
decentralised management of a number of smaller projects. The pool procedure was 
introduced during COMETT I for the administration of student placement contracts; 
given its success and operational flexibility it was extended under COMETT II to cover 
student placements (Strand Ba), personnel exchanges (Strand Be) and short courses 
(Strand Ca - from 1991 onwards). 
The main characteristics of the pool system are the following: 
• First of all, the pool system was exclusively for UETPs. This implied that through all 
Calls (with the exception of Strand Ca in 1990), only Ba-, Be- and Ca-projects 
submitted through the UETPs were accepted. In practice, this required that the 
contractor of these projects was also the organisation responsible for the UETP. This 
exclusivity right was only possible because of the quality of the UETPs accepted, 
their capacity to set up and manage transnational projects, and their almost complete 
geographical and sectoral coverage. 
• Under the annual Calls for Applications, UETPs merge all individual demands from 
members and interested parties into a single application. During this preparatory 
process, UETPs act as a filter and broker, so that only those projects remain which 
meet all COMETT requirements. All these proposals in combination are then 
submitted as a single project application. 
• During the selection process, UETP proposals for pool projects are assessed and 
compared in terms of quality. This results in the allocation of a 'pool' grant to the 
UETP - in general with less support than asked for - which can be used flexibly over 
.21 
the academic year for the organisation of student placements, personnel exchanges 
and short courses. The contract may, however, exclude the organisation of certain 
projects if these were considered to be below COMETT standards. 
• During the contract period, the UETPs were given the opportunity to finalise the 
programme of pool activities, and possibly modify them (under certain conditions) if 
they were forced to do so because of the environment changes. 
The pool procedure was introduced to facilitate and decentralise the operational 
management of the many smaller projects within COMETT. Another aim was to help 
UETPs in developing international cooperation and so strengthen the COMETT network 
as a whole. Both objectives appear to have been, to a large extent, fulfilled. 
The Positive Actions initiative 
In 1991 the Commission launched a series of actions, Positive Actions, the main aim of 
which was to improve COMETT coverage overall and overcome some of the economic 
and social differences of the countries and regions involved in the programme. The first 
task was to analyse the gaps and weaknesses in the development of the COMETT 
network and on the basis of this analysis to identify actions that would strengthen and 
enhance the regional and sectoral UETP network. The actions which were launched can 
be listed under the following headings: 
• National studies and promotion measures, mainly meant to assist the coverage and 
penetration of COMETT in particular countries and regions, where the results of the 
1990 Call for Applications had not been totally successful. This concerned Spain, 
Greece, southern Italy, Portugal, Switzerland, and Norway in particular. As a result, 
in the 1992 Call the results were highly satisfactory for most of these regions, 
particularly as regards the emergence of regional UETPs in areas hitherto not 
covered. 
• UETP networking and training of UETP managers. A number of activities were 
undertaken to promote the development of the UETP network and training of UETP 
managers (including a comprehensive analysis of their training needs).This marked 
the beginning of a number of special support measures for UETPs which continued 
beyond the Positive Actions initiative. 
• The organisation of two specific conferences concerning student placements, one in 
Lappeenranta, Finland and the other in Segovia, Spain. The main aim__o_f these 
conferences was to promote and strengthen transnational student placements across 
Europe, an activity within COMETT where the demand was high. The outcomes 
were eventually integrated in a Guide on European student placements. The use of 
electronic mail and database to facilitate the daily work of placements managers was 
also explored. 
• In the general context of targeting industry and SMEs, three projects were supported 
to examine and improve industrial participation in COMETT. Although these studies 
were mainly based on specific cases and regions, they provided valuable insight into 
the way COMETT could be made more attractive to enterprises. 
22 
• Within the framework of the Positive Actions initiative, a special effort was made to 
improve the understanding of the sectoral and technology context .of the COMETT 
programme. To that end, ten major sectoral surveys were undertaken amongst the 
projects in the most important COMETT areas. Several of these surveys were 
followed-up by workshops to discuss the results. 
Related to the Positive actions were the measures taken in 1991 to assist the integration 
of the new German Lander into the European Community. One million ECU was 
allocated for the preparation of university-enterprise training partnerships (by the 1992 
Call), additional grants for transnational student placements to and from these regions, 
as well as for various initiatives to introduce people and organisations from thé new 
federal states to the COMETT environment. 
1.4 Programme evaluation 
A considerable amount of programme monitoring and evaluation took place over the 
lifetime of the programme. This section focuses on the formal, external evaluations 
which have taken place; Annex 4 provides more details on the different programme 
monitoring activities. 
The first external evaluation of the programme COMETT concerned the first years of 
COMETT I (1986-1988), and was undertaken by Coopers & Lybrand and the Science 
Policy Research Unit of the University of Sussex. The second external evaluation 
covered both the last two years of COMETT I (1988-1989) and the early stages of 
COMETT II (1990-1991). It was carried out by ECOTEC and finalised in August 1991. 
The report concluded, overall, that the various objectives of COMETT had been 
successfully achieved. It noted in particular that "the training needs analysis work 
[supported by COMETT] has often been pioneering and has helped improve 
communication between employers and university trainers". Commenting on the 
transnational student exchange programmes, it was noted that the benefits of this 
activity "... extend beyond COMETT. In particular there are considerable long term 
benefits to the trainees involved. The activity has strongly contributed to university-
enterprise cooperation and the development of transnational networks." 
The third evaluation exercise, launched in 1992 and finalised in mid-1993, consisted of 
a three-facetted approach: 
• An evaluation exercise, similar in nature to the first and second COMETT evaluat­
ions, carried out by GMV Conseil, in association with other consultants. Their report 
will be referred to as the 'GMV evaluation report'. 
• National evaluations carried out by the authorities in the Member States and the 
EFTA countries. 
• A strategic evaluation carried out by a panel of seven independent experts, chosen by 
the Commission for their knowledge about the dialogue between university and 
industry technology training in Europe. The final report of this expert group will be 
referred to as the 'evaluation report of the panel of experts'. 
The GMV evaluation report, the evaluation report of the panel of experts and a sum­
mary of the national evaluations were published in one volume in 1993. 
,23 
The panel of experts' report was in general very positive. It recommended notably the 
COMETT Programme to be: "... the predominant mechanism for Community actions 
involving transnational cooperation between universities and industries related to 
training (initial and continuing) for and because of technological change. " Nevertheless, 
they also identified areas for improvement, such as the access of SMEs to the 
programme, closer links with other Community programmes and initiatives, and the 
need for a more active participation of industry in projects. The GMV evaluation report 
learned that COMETT was: "... globally perceived as a politically important 
programme, offering real added value, and possessing a catalytic and multiplicatory 
effect." As regards the programme's impact, the report concluded that: "... COMETT 
greatly contributed to the remodelling, enlargement and internationalisation of the 
cooperation network of project contractors." The report also recognised that the 
industrial perception of the programme and the level of involvement in projects was 
quite variable. A common issue emerging in these reports concerns the burden of 
administrative procedures and paperwork, with strong demands being made to decrease 
and simplify this work, or to provide assistance and support to facilitate this task. 
These evaluation reports were timely and proved to be of considerable help to the 
Commission when preparing the proposals for the new LEONARDO DA VINCI 
programme. 
Finally, in 1994 all Member States and EFTA countries were asked to make a second 
and definitive evaluation of the COMETT programme in their country. Although there 
are, of course, differences between countries as to the implementation, progress and 
perception of COMETT, some common elements in the opinions of Member States 
could be identified. A summary report of this exercise, published in 1995, confirmed to 
a large extent the results of the previous national evaluations. It concluded notably that: 
"... The major contribution of COMETT to the higher education/industry debate has 
been to draw attention to the benefits to be derived from transnational cooperation in 
the area." Also it emerged that: "... COMETT's major operational success has been in 
the European added value which it has brought through the formalisation and 
acceleration of transnational student placement activities and, to a lesser extent, of 
higher education institutions technical training development. " 
24 3.5 
2. Networking 
This chapter focuses mainly on the contributions and achievements of the UETPs, the 
consortia supported under Strand A. However, since networking is a feature common to 
all types of COMETT projects, the topic is discussed in a somewhat wider context. 
2.1 Introduction 
2.1.1 The concept of networking 
Networks are as old as human society. It suffices to witness the formation of not only 
political parties, cliques and insider groups but also the importance of a variety of 
"societies" and "invisible colleges" in the development of modern science. It is no 
surprise that such an effective and even necessary structure of human communication 
should be formalised, funded and put to work for European economic development by 
many European Programmes, including COMETT. 
By and large, networks are associated with the provision of some form of "service". 
They are a way of connecting the users and providers of this service. Usually the net­
work design represents a compromise between its ability to provide every possible con­
nection pattern simultaneously if required by the users and the cost of network provision 
and maintenance. A difference is often made in networking between local (intra-
regional) area networks and wide area (inter-regional/international) networks. It is pos­
sible that the forms of optimal networking solution differ between the two situations. 
Equally, one might be sensitive to how often information needs to be disseminated, the 
type of access network members desire, and the rate at which it can be distributed. 
2.1.2 Networking in COMETT 
The GMV evaluation report noted2; 
One of the most cited impressions of the programme was the setting up of a network at 
European level. For those benefiting from it, this network provides an undeniable value 
added element in terms of European integration, concentration of abilities, ease in 
tracking down partners as well as complementary elements, synergy, economies of 
scale, European critical mass sufficient to create a project, etc. ... COMETT h&s helped 
to a large extent in reshaping and enlarging the project initiators' cooperation 
networks. Today, putting aside the inter-UETP partnerships, it can be seen that half the 
partnerships engaged in the COMETT programme are transnational, and that half have 
been set up thanks to COMETT. 
Thus while the UETPs are the structural framework of COMETT networks, and the 
focus of this section, the other strands of the Programme have often gone on to develop 
their own specialist networks. 
There is some régularisation of a French to English translation. 
26 
What does the "COMETT network" refer to? 
The term "network" as used in COMETT has a double meaning: 
• It may refer to a project partnership or consortium itself, in general one which has 
been supported under Strands A, Cb or Cc. The term network is appropriate here 
since such partnerships involve between 15 and 200 participating organisations. The 
largest UETPs actually have some sub-networks operating within their consortium 
structure. 
• It may also refer to the cooperation between COMETT projects themselves, really a 
network of networks. Thus, the 'UETP network' points to the mechanisms of 
collaboration and exchange between UETPs; again, many overlapping sub-networks 
have emerged. There were also many networks of Strand C projects operating in 
similar areas. 
"The COMETT network" thus represents an estimated 900 sub-networks, not counting 
the several 1000s of bilateral or trilateral mini-networks for student and persoimel 
exchanges. 
2.2 Functions and structure of UETPs 
2.2.1 The Council Decision and its operation 
The network of University-Enterprise Training Partnerships (UETPs) was launched 
under COMETT I and developed and elaborated during COMETT II. It was explicitly 
set up to act as the structural backbone for achieving the five overall objectives of the 
Programme (cf. Section 1.2 above). In particular, the Council Decision requires the 
following of this "European Network": 
The development and reinforcement of university - industry training partnerships 
(UITPs) and the extension of the European network, both regional and sectoral, in 
order to further transnational cooperation particularly in the following fields: 
• in contributing to the identification of training needs in technology and to resolving 
them in liaison with relevant bodies in this field 
• in assisting and facilitating the development and exploitation of projects within the 
other strands of the COMETT II Programme 
• in strengthening cooperation and inter-regional transfer between Member States in 
the development of initial and continuing training for the needs of technologies, their 
applications and transfer 
• in developing links in the form of transnational sectoral networks bringing-fogether 
projects from various strands of the programme in the same area of training. 
From this base,'the COMETT II Vademecum and Application Package were developed 
by the Commission as the operational foundation for UETPs and the effective Calls for 
Applications to receive financial support for such projects. The Vademecum saw UETPs 
defined: 'as cooperative initiatives between universities and enterprises which: 
For consistency with COMETT I, the acronym UETP (rather than UITP), and "enterprise" instead of 
"industry" has been used in Strand A. 
27 
• involve agreement between universities and enterprises designed to contribute to the 
identification of training needs in technology and to undertake actions Jn order to 
meet those specific training needs for highly qualified human resources 
• aim to meet those needs on a structured and coordinated basis in coordination with 
relevant bodies and agencies 
• provide a support structure for the execution of some or all of the following 
activities (whether within the COMETT framework or supported under other 
schemes): (a) work placements for students and academic staff in enterprises, (b) 
secondment of staff of enterprises to universities with a training objective, (c) joint 
collaboration in the development and implementation of retraining and updating 
programmes for the staff of enterprises and for training personnel (particularly 
mid-career personnel), including, in particular, the staff of SMEs 
• strengthen cooperation and inter-regional transfer between Member States in the 
development of initial and continuing training for the needs of technologies, their 
applications and transfer 
• develop links in the form of transnational sectoral networks bringing together 
projects fi'om various strands of the programme in the same area of training. 
Thus, the European Network consists of two types of UETP: 
• regional UETPs: partnerships at a regional level bringing together within a particular 
geographical area groups of universities and groups of enterprises engaged in a joint 
training venture undertaken with the support of the relevant private and public 
authorities and of such a nature as to have a significant impact on training efforts 
within the area 
• sectoral UETPs: partnerships of a transnational character within a given technologic­
al field or an industrial sector which bring together universities, enterprises and other 
relevant organisations specialising in that field with the objective of improving 
training in that sector. 
Both these types of UETP should include an active commitment to liaise with counter­
part initiatives in other Member States. Thus, the UETP structure has two distinct 
features: 
• An internal partnership between region-based actors: local higher education 
institutions, enterprises, training institutions, chambers of commerce, trade unions, 
etc. In the case of a sectoral UETP the actors might be similar but based in different 
regions and with a common industrial or technological interest. 
• A European-wide network for cooperation in higher education - industry relation­
ships, particularly in the area of advanced technical training. This network then 
provides the opportunity for the partners in sectoral or regional UETPs to extend 
their training and mobility activities across Europe through cooperation wilh. other 
UETPs in the COMETT network. 
No particular legal status was required of the UETPs. It varied according to local, 
regional and national circumstances. By and large, higher education institutions played 
the greatest part in the organisation and administration of the UETPs due to their 
existing or rapidly developing direct interest in mobility activities and in the develop­
ment of continuing education based on their R&D and extension of existing courses. 
28 
2.2.2 The development of the network 
COMETT II inherited a strong network from COMETT I. Half of the 158 UETPs 
accepted for funding following the 1990 Call for Proposals had already been funded 
under the first programme. However, the 1990 results pointed to the difficulties which 
some regions had in participating in COMETT activities: several peripheral regions, as 
well as the EFTA States which were participating for the first time - along with the new 
German Lander which had become part of the Community. In this context, the Positive 
Action programme was used during 1991 to develop the groundwork for the 1992 Call. 
This initiative was specifically targeted at those regions, countries and sectors with 
acknowledged weaknesses in the COMETT UETP structure. The positive results of this 
well planned approach are recognised in the Final National Reports and Evaluations 
where, for example, the full participation of Germany, including the new Lander, is to 
be seen along with a strong integration of UETPs into the Norwegian and Swiss infra­
structure, as well as improved sectoral coverage. By 1992, the large majority of 
Europe's regions were covered by a regional UETP, the main exceptions being in certain 
parts of Italy and Spain. 
The sectoral UETPs structured themselves, by and large, along generic technology lines, 
rather than traditional industrial sectors. The major fields were: 
• Software and Information Technology applications (9 UETPs) 
• Advanced Production and Manufacturing Technology (7 UETPs) 
• Environment and related fields (7 UETPs) 
• Agro-food and Biotechnology (7 UETPs) 
• Materials Technologies (6 UETPs) 
• Mechanical Engineering, Design and Applied Mathematics (6 UETPs) 
• specific manufacturing sectors (6 UETPs) 
• Telecommunications and related fields (5 UETPs). 
It should be remembered that many regional UETPs have sectoral specialities them­
selves. 
The outcome of the 1992 Call saw some 207 UETPs established: 130 regional and 77 
sectoral. The greatest number of regional UETPs were in France (21), followed by 
Germany (19), the UK (17) and Italy (13). The sectoral UETPs are by definition highly 
European in nature and often cannot be allocated to a particular lead country. 
2.2.3 Financial aspects 
Overall, the support for the work programme of the UETPs within COMETT ^represent­
ed some 12 % of the total programme budget. Remember, however, that UETPs also 
benefitted from funding in the other Strands, particularly through the administration of 
the "pool" scheme, which is discussed later in the report. As regards the funding prin­
ciples, the COMETT Vademecum stated : 
The aim of the Community funding granted to UETPs is above all to support: 
• activities with a European dimension 
• activities which are designed to lead to cooperation, exchanges and communication, 
both within the UETPs themselves and via the UETPs operation within the European 
network. 
29 
The Community may make a flat rate contribution to the activities mentioned above up 
to a maximum of 50 % of the UETP's programme of expenditure. The support will be 
reduced progressively with a funding ceiling per UETP of 70,000 ECU, 60,000 ECU 
and 50,000 ECU respectively for the first three years of operation. 
Provision was made, however, for a certain flexibility in such funding, particularly for 
UETPs set up under COMETT I. In fact, with a total of 207 by 1992, more UETPs 
were funded than originally planned for and funding levels correspondingly reduced. 
The average UETP budget was 180,000 ecu in 1992, of which 25 % was covered by 
COMETT. Contributions in kind accounted for 38 % of their budget: half from the con­
tractor or coordinator and half from partners. Cash contributions accounted for another 
13 %: again almost equally shared between the coordinator/contractor and the other 
partners. The other significant sources of income were regional aid (7 % - especially 
regional UETPs) and national aid (4 %). French UETPs were outstandingly successful 
in obtaining funds from these sources. Other sources included income from managing 
other COMETT projects, seminars, etc. Thus, at an overall level, one-third of finance 
comes from EU support and one-third from in-kind contributions. This is a strong 
pointer towards the difficulties of viable self-finance which UETPs may have if they 
have to operate under similar conditions in the future. 
2.2.4 Legal status and strength of partnerships 
The legal status of the 147 UETPs which had seen three years of operation included: 
• 64 as simple agreements among partners 
• 33 as new independent foundations or associations. 
• 21 as independent businesses, usually on a not-for-profit basis 
• 20 as parts of existing organisations or associations, for example, in professional or 
industrial federations or in Chambers of Commerce, and 
• 9 other forms of legal status. 
Given the initial requirement for the UETPs to become self-financing over a period of 
three years and the size of the typical UETP annual turnover (300-400,000 ECU), it is 
of concern that 44 % of partnerships had not tackled the issue of a proper legal status -
despite having been in existence for at least 3 years, some even 5 or 6 years (since 
COMETT I). Although such a status could not be imposed, the Commission has made 
explicit remarks in its documents on the risks being taken by the contracting party in 
such a situation, giving the possibility of partners withdrawing at the end of the Pro­
gramme. Of course, when new legal structures have been set up, there is greater ability 
to enter into other contracts and relationships, but it also means the entity must market 
and make itself known. 
The personnel situation within UETPs reflects both their rather loose legal structures as 
well as the difference in activities between regional and sectoral UETPs. There were 
only 75 senior full time employees among the 147 UETPs which reported information 
in sufficient details on their personnel deployment. These are concentrated in regional 
UETPs. The high numbers of senior part-time workers in sectoral UETP corresponds to 
an organisation which often has one senior coordinator "per country pole" with other 
part-time support. Additionally, sectoral UETPs generally requires high level, senior 
technical input compared to more generalist knowledge in regional UETPs. 
30 
As with the legal structures, employment patterns of UETPs give some concern for their 
long term viability. While reliance on part-time workers can be uncertain, the depend­
ence of the development of the UETP on the efforts of, quite often, only one person can 
be equally fragile. Some of the Final National Evaluations point to the resignation of 
good people from the UETPs due to their uncertain future, compounding the weakness 
of the UETPs position. 
Decision making in UETPs reflects the variety of legal and operation structures which 
have developed. Of the over three year old UETPs, 58 % have an independent manage­
ment committee or board, 27 % have such a committee but which is responsible to 
another organisation, usually the contracting organisation, and 7 % still had no decision 
making body. Of regional UETP management boards, 32 % are answerable to another 
organisation compared to 17 % of sectoral UETPs. This is possibly an indicator of the 
integration of UETPs into regional infrastructure. Only 44 % of UETPs had set up a 
steering committee for more day to day management. Within UETPs, 57 % had set up 
working groups for particular topics. Some 30 % of UETPs had undertaken subcontract­
ing or substantial delegation of work to partners or outsiders. Sectoral UETPs, per force, 
tend to operate more decentralised management structures. Their management structures 
are less developed. Conversely, regional UETPs, without the problem of travel costs, 
hold more meetings and have a more developed management structure. 
Among the UETPs of three years old and over, there is an average of approximately 50 
partners per UETP (with other UETPs making up 10 % of these partners). Sectoral 
UETPs average 17 universities as partners, compared to 10 in regional UETPs. This can 
be explained by sectoral UETPs being a structure based on a technology area as 
opposed to an industrial sector, with universities as the founding members. Interesting to 
note is that 73 % of all UETPs' industrial partners are SMEs, i.e. companies with under 
500 employees. 
Overall, the nature and role of UETPs' members, partners or associates is often not very 
clear. Because of the variety of UETP structures, the notion of what a "member" of a 
UETP is, has never been defined. Some define it as equity participation, others as part­
icipation in management and still others as simply expression of interest. Thus, the level 
of active participation in COMETT by enterprises and others may be considerably lower 
than some of the raw data suggests. Throughout the programme, a number of measures 
were taken (such as the issuing of formal recommendations to projects and a number of 
initiatives under the Positive Actions scheme) to improve industrial participation and to 
strengthen and deepen partnership structures. 
2.2.5 European dimension 
The European dimension is considerable, particularly in sectoral UETPs which average 
participants from 10 countries. Their activities are immediately and directly trans-
European. Their management form varies from a democratic decentralised model to a 
centralised, pyramidal form. Regional UETPs are less immediately European, achieving 
this dimension over a longer time period, through placement, training and other colla­
borative ventures. After 3 years, they claim partnership with an average of 4 UETPs 
abroad. 
31 
From the last available full survey of UETPs, their pattern of linkages to other 
COMETT activities showed that 54 % had strong links to other UETPs, underlining the 
importance of the inter-UETP activities and their strength as a Europeanising force. 
Other strong links were to student placement activities, short courses and joint training 
projects. 
Links to other European Programmes have grown for UETPs, particularly to other 
education and training initiatives. Two out of the average three reported programme 
links per UETP will be to education and training; the other to R&D. There is little dif­
ference between sectoral and regional UETPs. The main links are reported to be to 
TEMPUS, ERASMUS, FORCE, SPRINT, LINGUA, EUROFORM, ESPRIT and 
BRITE/EURAM in that order. Again this reinforces the role of the UETP as a European­
ising force, moving to supporting much wider activities than the original COMETT 
brief. 
2.2.6 Information management 
Over 50 % of UETPs publish a regular newsletter and a similar proportion use 
electronic mail on a regular basis. On the other hand, there were some 10 % of UETPs 
which have not published a promotional brochure. Information activities appear to 
centre on traditional methods: mailings, visits and information days. This said, 
three-quarters of UETPs provide information on a full spectrum of topics from 
COMETT, to other COMETT projects, to EU Research Programmes. Other information 
activities include developing an inventory of education and training opportunities, and 
other training related databases. Again, the Europeanization aspect of UETPs is 
reinforced. 
Half the UETPs have formed linkages with Euro Info Centres, with national and with 
regional networks. There has been some concern, however, about the proliferation of 
networks targeting the same customer with similar services. In the atmosphere of ration­
alisation, some rethink of the role of UETPs, particular as information source, may be 
necessary. 
2.3 The contribution of the UETPs 
The UETPs have often been called the "backbone" of the COMETT Programme. The 
Panel of Experts' Evaluation noted: "The UETPs are seen by the Panel as an essential 
part of a European Network for developing industry-university links and are vital to the 
running of COMETT itself." In this section, the specific contributions of the UETPs are 
examined under four headings: regional UETPs, sectoral UETPs, training needs analysis 
activities, and transnational activities. 
2.3.1 The regional UETP networks 
The regional UETPs' two main contributions have been: 
• to develop the local or regional interfaces and infrastructure associated with univer­
sity-industry cooperation, and 
32 
• to integrate this regional infrastructure into the first European-wide cooperative 
network dedicated to furthering the European development of university-industry 
cooperation in continuing education and training. 
At a local and regional level, the UETPs have developed the organisation, information 
and management interfaces between higher education, domestic enterprises at a local 
level, public authorities, and other institutions involved in regional and national develop­
ment (particularly, but not exclusively in education and training). This has taken place 
through information events, workshops, training courses, projects, etc. In particular, they 
have acted as information and management structures for EU Programmes (cf. above). 
In some countries, a number of UETPs have been strongly integrated into a wider role 
in regional and even national technological and industrial development strategies. Their 
success in this wider development role may be related to their initial institutional 
positioning. 
However, the UETPs most acclaimed contribution has been to integrate, the above 
activities with similar and parallel activities in the regions of other European countries, 
forming international cooperative partnerships. UETPs have provided not only a frame­
work for international training and placement activities but also, as one country 
commented in its national evaluation report 'an international vision on technology 
training', often internationalising purely regional projects. 
The primacy of the UETP's contribution as the development of the trans-European inter­
face seems to hold for both regions in which there was already a strongly developed 
higher education-industry interface, as well as the less experienced regions. The latter 
regions, of course, have benefited to a relatively greater extent from the UETP's effect 
on domestic infrastructure. However, within a participating country, the effectiveness of 
UETPs could vary greatly from one region to another. Italy, for example, emphasises 
their effectiveness and importance in the South. 
The generally positive attitude to UETPs must, however, be tempered by noting that in 
some regions, the contribution outside the universities and companies directly involved 
may be small. Equally, enterprises would not see as great a value added in the work of 
UETPs as might regional or European authorities. Attitudes of universities varied 
greatly, reflecting the fact that the added value of the UETP network is to a large extent 
dependent on the size of the institutions, the past experience with student placements 
and continuing education, and the existing linkages with industrial and transnational 
partners. 
2.3.2 Contribution of sectoral UETP networks 
Sectoral UETPs seem to have had fewer identity problems than regional UETPs and 
have contributed more directly and in greater measure to technology transfer and indus­
trial training development. Their clientele were seen as much better defined and, by and 
large, a more homogeneous group with similar technical requirements.' This and the 
more focused expertise of the UETP personnel have made work such as training needs 
analysis, reports on the state-of-the-art technology, and the formation of "European 
Working Groups" both more relevant to UETP activities and easier to undertake. 
33 
For similar reasons, the development of the industrial base of the UETP network has 
also been easier to construct. Some have managed to develop not only a strong network 
but to have become, to some extent, a voice for the sector in European level education 
and training issues. A number have also developed recognised European wide training 
programmes and had a more visible impact on training. It was noted that such special­
ised, high level courses fit in better with the advanced education system. Like the 
regional UETPs, the sectoral partnerships have also become effective organisers of 
mobility programmes and coordinators of other non-training EU Programmes. 
However, as with regional UETPs, the overall magnitude of their contribution should 
not be over exaggerated: COMETT is a small programme. Comparison of the overall 
effectiveness of regional and sectoral UETPs is not practical; they address different 
development issues. The Panel of Experts' Evaluation notes, 'Sectoral UETPs are 
generally better placed in the more technologically advanced regions and regional 
UETPs are necessary where there is not an adequate level of technological skills.' 
Equally, the National Final Evaluations do not make any overall judgement as to 
whether sectoral or regional UETPs are better or more valuable for COMETT 
objectives, but their analysis would be generally supportive of the Panel of Experts' 
position. 
2.3.3 Articulation of industrial training needs 
Direct training needs analysis is a very difficult area for regional UETPs and even more 
so for sectoral UETPs. Indications are that firms and even UETPs and regional author­
ities do not see it as the UETP's main role: it is a company function and UETP per­
sonnel do not often have the expertise. Firms were much more positive about the 
UETPs' role as a conveyor of information, linking firms to higher education institutions 
and advising on European programmes and projects. In this context, some point to 
UETPs having acted as a sort of "clearing house", drawing existing studies together, 
defining methodological approaches, choosing training options, etc. as well as consol­
idating and articulating the demand from SMEs. Equally, innovative approaches were 
seen in some UETPs with the use of instruments such as round tables, sectoral work­
shops, and future issues groups as an effective method of making known industrial 
demand requirements. This said, most UETPs have carried out training needs analyses 
(TNA) as their main approach to assisting in the articulation of industrial needs and 
many have been very successful. 
The UETPS and the Skill Needs project 
A major impact of the UETPs in tackling the articulation of industrial needs has, in fact, 
taken place outside the formal framework of COMETT II itself. In 1990 the European 
Parliament, concerned at the possibility that skill shortages might retard Europe's econ­
omic development asked the Commission to examine the skill position across the 
regions of the Community. Using largely COMETT's network of UETPs to undertake 
the analysis, within six months the first regional results were available and within a 
further two years a comprehensive picture of skill needs across Europe had been 
achieved and was already being updated. Out of this work sprang many regional 
initiatives to» correct local difficulties, as well as improved regional networks and 
observatories for monitoring skill needs on an ongoing basis. 
34 
In various UETPs, the carrying out of the TNA has provided the process through which 
university and industry have been brought together not only to discuss training but also 
to form the basis for a more general future cooperation in the field of human resource 
development and beyond. 
2.3.4 Stimulation of the transnational outlook in partners 
All evaluation and monitoring reports have recognised the effects of UETPs in stimul­
ating a transnational outlook among the partners. This has occurred for both universities 
and enterprises. For higher education institutions, an international exchange on training 
methodologies and teaching systems as well as contacts with firms abroad hosting their 
students have taken place. For participating firms, a wider access to the European 
training potential and a greater awareness of the European dimension of R&D and 
technology have resulted. 
It has .also been observed that there is a specific benefit of the integration of SMEs into 
European programmes for the first time via student placements and the location of 
partners abroad. Through such actions, firms have become much more aware of the 
potential benefits of collaboration in Europe, not only in terms of training, but also in 
relation to R&D programmes and business generally. Quantitative evaluations bear out 
the positive attitude of students and enterprises. 
In addition, UETPs have helped purely national projects to become European. This has 
led to the development of strong international networks of universities, institutes and 
enterprises around short courses and training projects. UETPs have achieved this change 
in outlook through different modes of transnationality; some emphasising specific 
technological sectors, others involving a very broad spread of organisations from their 
region, while still others have concentrated on developing their education institutions as 
catalysts. In all. COMETT has thus contributed considerably to developing a collective 
transnational approach to education and training. 
2.4 Strengths and weaknesses of UETPs 
2.4.1 The strengths 
The European dimension of both regional and sectoral UETPs has undoubtedly been 
their greatest strength. This European dimension ranges from UETPs' direct contact with 
the Commission and knowledge of European Programmes, to expertise in applying for 
and managing European projects, to their core strength as part of a well structured, 
dedicated European operational network. The UETP may also benefit from links to 
other European networks and information sources. 
Again for both sectoral and regional UETPs, their second axis of strength lies in their 
network of domestic, regional or sectoral members. Regional UETPs often have sectoral 
specialities and sectoral UETPs and their nodes are often involved in regional infra­
structure. Generally, UETPs now have an accepted role (some much stronger, some 
much weaker) in their domestic university-industry interface and indeed in the wider 
skills supply-demand interface. 
35 
The initial positioning of the UETP is quite important in this context. Strong positioning 
includes links to or physical location in university extension centres or liaison offices, 
continuing education and training providers, contract research institutes, chambers of 
commerce, etc. The access to supplementary funding can often be a function of such 
strong positioning and/or the network created. 
Another dimension also relates to the institutional positioning of the UETP (or sectoral 
UETP node). Positioning with or in institutions where the objective was to transfer 
R&D to industry has assisted in creating a direct working contact with local industry. 
This has improved the perception of university graduates, created industrial interest in 
university research and researchers and opened effective channels for firms to higher 
education institutions. Positioning UETPs with institutions whose objectives were 
predominantly academically oriented seem less successful. Here UETPs have had more 
focus on- student placement but also more difficulties due to the lack of a stable 
structure of industrial involvement. 
At a lower level, UETP strength resides in factors such as the dedication of its 
managers, its well motivated personnel, its reputation, its 'independent status as a base 
for democratic partnership', its technical credibility, its links to R&D programmes, etc. 
The recent introduction of recruitment activities has improved the position of some 
UETPs. The full geographic coverage of a State by UETPs was also seen as important. 
2.4.2 Weaknesses of UETPs 
The fragility of the financial base and the lack of industrial involvement are the two 
main difficulties confronting the UETP network. The weakness and insecurity of the 
financial base of most UETPs is seen as the main weakness. It entails a sub-critical size 
for the UETP and limited numbers of staff as well as difficulties in realistic, long term 
planning. The strong dependence of some UETPs on European funding for complement­
ing their own resources, and their inability to generate other funds compounded this 
insecurity. 
Limited involvement of industrial partners, particularly SMEs, and the difficulty in 
retaining industry's interest in projects have emerged as an other core difficulty. These 
issues can be compounded in the less favoured regions by the weak industrial base and 
the non-innovative, traditional nature of many companies. The UETP staff itself may 
also have little actual technical or industrial knowledge. 
In some regions, the higher education base may also cause problems. This could arise 
when the universities themselves have a weak technical and organisational base. Some 
higher education institutions appeared to be mainly interested in student placement, with 
little participation in training development. Equally, the traditional outlook of some 
universities may cause difficulties in instituting and recognising industrial placements. 
Other weaknesses include the poor development of networks and poor coordination with 
other national and local training bodies, the rapid turnover of UETP staff, overlarge 
regions to be covered, a disinterested attitude by public authorities, etc. Ppor planning, a 
lack of marketing strategy, and the lack of time for self-training in a complex area were 
also stated as weaknesses seen in some UETPs. The time required to become known 
and accepted is also a difficulty. 
36 
An additional weakness in EFTA countries is that their UETPs currently cannot access 
as easily the synergy between COMETT and other EU Programmes in comparison with 
EU Member States. This difficulty will pass over the coming years. 
2.4.3 The self-image of UETPs 
The UETPs' self-image reflects these weaknesses. It shows them as competent in Europ­
ean level university-industry relations, particularly the European dimension, and as 
making a significant contribution to advanced technical training. They see their structure 
as efficient and able to develop transnational projects or networks with good co­
operation within the UETP network. Secure within the higher education world, their 
confidence weakens when they have to deal with representative organisations and even 
more so with industry, particularly SMEs. They are not fully sure of their contribution 
to regional economic development. Direct training, training needs analysis and direct 
dissemination and marketing of training cause them further concern. 
While such qualitative opinions by UETPs and national authorities are important indic­
ators of the health and strategic development direction of UETPs, there is some concern 
that a system of operational objectives and quantitative indicators has not been develop­
ed sufficiently either for or by individual UETPs and was seen as a problem in up­
grading their work. 
37 .2>S 
3. Training actions 
3.1 Introduction 
3.1.1 Training activities in COMETT 
Training, when defined in a wide sense as acquiring or updating knowledge and .skills, 
can be performed: 
• through formal training activities, i.e. classroom teaching, or through distance educ­
ation provision 
• by self-study or learning-on-the job 
• by bringing people in touch with each other, which can be used as an informal way 
to let them learn from each other 
• through transfer of people to another job or location. 
The COMETT Programme aimed at promoting training in, in particular, advanced 
technologies in a European context. As Section 1.2 already highlighted, the Council 
Decision on COMETT II includes explicit references to a number of training objectives, 
to be realized by COMETT II. The relationship between these objectives and the formal 
training activities supported by COMETT will be considered below3. 
The programme provided a number of operational mechanisms in this regard. Let it first 
be recalled that the many partnerships and networks - UETPs and others - created and 
supported by the programme have provided to many people an informal platform for 
contacts and thus for exchange of knowledge and experience. At the same time 
COMETT has offered a range of possibilities for the organisation of placements and the 
exchange of people (cf. Section 4 further on in this report). However, in terms of train­
ing activities, the most visible and eventually most substantial part of the COMETT 
budget was allocated to the more formal training development efforts. These activities 
will be discussed in the following paragraphs. 
In COMETT II, support for training projects was granted under Strand C, Joint Training 
Actions. This programme category was split into 3 categories or sub-Strands: 
• Short training courses (Ca) 
• Joint training projects (Cb) 
• Pilot projects (Cc). — 
This sub-division was the operational implementation of the requirements laid down in 
the Council Decision on COMETT II (see box below). 
Several issues, such as industry-university cooperation, synergy with other European programmes and 
equal opportunities between men and women, will, however, be discussed as part of the transversal themes in 
Section 5. 
.39 
Support for advanced training activities as specified in the Council Decision on 
COMETT II 
"(a) Support for crash training courses with a European dimension in, in particular, 
advanced technology designed for the rapid dissemination - by and in universities 
and by and in industry - of the results of research and development in the field of 
new technologies and their applications, as well as for the promotion, particularly 
for small and medium-sized businesses of the transfer of technological innovation 
to sectors in which it was not previously applied. 
(b) Support for work on devising, developing and testing at European level joint 
training projects in, in particular, advanced technology, initiated jointly by 
different industries in association with the universities concerned in at least two 
different Member States of the Communities in fields relating to the new 
technologies and their applications. 
(c) Support for multilateral arrangements for training in, in particular, advanced 
technology initiated jointly by different industries in association with the 
universities concerned aimed at establishing systems for distance learning utilizing 
new training technologies and/or resulting in transferable training products. " 
3.1.2 Some key data on training projects supported in COMETT 
For the short bourses supported under Strand Ca there have been Calls for Applications 
in each of the five operational years of COMETT II; from 1991 onwards these calls 
were subject to the 'pool' scheme (cf Section 1.3). For the joint training projects of 
Strand Cb, projects could be submitted in 1990 and 1992. There has not been a Call as 
such for the pilot projects (Strand Cc). Instead, out of the Strand Cb applications in 
1990 a number of projects (or combinations of projects) were shortlisted and invited to 
submit a more detailed application. This resulted in the selection of 30 pilot projects. 
Between 1990 and 1994 no less than 2036 applications were received under Strand C: 
1017 for the organisation of pools of short courses and 1019 for joint training activities. 
Eventually more than 50 % of the applications were accepted; this relatively high figure 
is to a large extent attributable to the pool system (cf. Section 1.3), where most of the 
projects were accepted, but in general only for part of the proposal. 
In the five years of COMETT II the totality of applicants in Strand C asked some 500 
million ECU for their training actions. Some 101 million ECU would eventually be 
awarded. Three quarters of the projects accepted were short course projects; however, 
from a financial point of view they account for only a quarter of the support granted in 
Strand C. Most, of the training budget went to the joint training projects in Strand Cb, 
with an average grant of 200 000 ECU, and to the pilot projects, each receiving 500 000 
ECU. On the average the joint training projects have been supported at a level of 30 to 
50 % of total project costs; for pilot projects the figure came close to 50 %. In Strand 
Ca, support was more of a flat rate nature, based on the number and type of course 
sessions to be organised - but in any case lower than 50 % of the project costs. 
Many organisations have participated as a partner in Strand C training projects. All 
together there are an estimated 8500 different organisations which are or have been in-
40 
volved in the development of advanced continuing training projects within COMETT, 
probably making it the biggest Continuing Education and Training network worldwide. 
The distribution of the main types of organisations in Strand C projects is approximately 
as follows: 
• over 5500 different companies, including some 4000 SMEs (small and medium-sized 
companies) 
• 1200 universities and other higher education institutions (which are, on average, 
involved in 2 projects) 
• over 1500 other organisations (such as professional organisations, research institut­
ions, public authorities, not-profit making associations, etc ...) 
• 200 UETPs (most UETPs submitted pool applications under Strand Ca, and over 1 
UETP in 2 is participating in, on average, 3-4 Cb/Cc projects). 
In Strands Cb and Cc, the average number of project partners is 19, including, on aver­
age, 7 enterprise, 5-6 universities, 1-2 UETPs and 4-5 other organisations. There are 
also typically 6 different countries to which partner organisations belong. 
The outputs of these training projects are many and varied. In summary, by the end of 
the operational period of COMETT II (end of 1995) it is estimated that: 
• there will have been 9500 course sessions, 
• given for some 260 000 trainees, 
• with a total of 280 000 training hours (being the sum of the duration of the training 
courses). 
Also: 
• approximately 4600 training materials will have been produced, and 
• an estimated 250 000 people will have used one or more of these training materials. 
About the nature of the training materials produced it may be mentioned that some 
60 % of them are mainly text or paper based, 30 % are software based and 8 % are 
videos. 
3.2 Training in advanced technology 
3.2.1 What is advanced technology training ? 
The Council Decision on COMETT II makes several references to the requirement for 
COMETT to support training in advanced technologies, notably within the objectives: 
"(...) to improve the contribution of, in particular, advanced technology training at the 
various, levels concerned, and thus the contribution of training to the economic and 
social development of the Community (...)" 
However, no definition was provided of what was to be understood by advanced tech­
nology, either in the Council Decision, nor in the COMETT II Vademecum. Never­
theless it is obvious that the criterion of applicability of the technologies considered is 
an important one. 
.41 
The more advanced an area is, the more difficult it becomes to develop training actions 
which are based on a thorough analysis of training needs. At best there will be a repres­
entative group of research and development people who feel that the type of subjects 
treated might well be interesting. This situation is part of the rationale for the COMETT 
framework: by promoting cooperation between universities and enterprises, combined 
with a strong emphasis on links with other European programmes, an attempt is made to 
create the best conditions for an optimal choice of advanced training topics which could 
contribute to the economic development of the Community. 
What eventually was considered as 'advanced', innovative and important areas in 
COMETT can be deduced from ranking the technologies areas most frequently appear­
ing in COMETT projects. In COMETT I (1986-1989) three sectors stood out as being 
the most important: Innovation Management, Advanced Production and Micro­
electronics. In COMETT II (1990-1994) there were many more areas which were in 
high demand, but not at the same moment: 
• the only sector that remained very strong in demand throughout COMETT II was 
Advanced Manufacturing 
• in 1990 there was strong demand for project support in the areas: Materials, Health 
and Safety, and Innovation Management 
• in 1992 there was a decrease for Materials, Health and Safety, and Innovation Man­
agement, but Environment and Training (technology and methodology) boosted; new 
top areas were often Information Technology based: Data and Information Process­
ing, Software Engineering, and, to a lesser extent, Telecommunications and General 
Information Technology topics 
• by 1994 it had become very difficult to identify any dominant sectoral pattern, given 
the considerable freedom given to UETPs in the final selection of sub-projects and 
courses to be held as part of their Strand Ca-pool project. 
The survey undertaken for the establishment of the GMV evaluation report clearly 
showed that both project coordinators and trainees underscored the direct applicability 
of the technology training provided in the COMETT training courses. Over 90 % of the 
project coordinators supported this statement, as well as the fact that the training 
delivered had been effective in assisting technology transfer. And 90 % of the trainees 
surveyed agreed that the COMETT training courses they had attended were predo­
minantly considered as a tool and support mechanism for increasing or updating their 
technical knowledge. 
The evaluation report of the panel of experts uttered some criticism on the restriction to 
technology training. They recommended: "Training not only in technical skills but also 
the developrhent of managerial, social and enterprise skills.... These skills are a crucial 
element in the proper harnessing of technology, to maximise efficiency and 
competitiveness in the modern company." It should be noted that this is one of the few 
criticisms given by the panel on the scope of the programme. In line with this 
recommendation, the Commission has widened the scope of the support possibilities 
within the framework of the new LEONARDO DA VINCI programme. 
The final national evaluation reports indicate that COMETT has been an undoubted suc­
cess in terms of the improvement of technological training's economic contribution. It 
should be underlined, however, that this has not been achieved only through the 
activities supported under Strand C, but also through the experiential learning practices 
42 
associated with student placements. The more formal training approaches under Strand 
C have also seen an improvement in the quality of courses, mostly due Jo transnat-
ionality and industrial involvement, and their wider availability. 
The limited size of the COMETT budget, in comparison with national spending in the 
area of continuing education and training, has also meant that the direct and catalytic 
effects of COMETT have been, in relative terms, modest. It thus clearly emerges that 
the COMETT contribution to improving quality of supply has been more marked and 
more important than its contribution to the quantity of provision. Nevertheless, ft is also 
true that the programme has been a pioneer in many of the lesser developed regions of 
the Community. 
3.2.2 Partnerships and consortia for advanced training 
An essential feature of the training activities supported under COMETT is that they are 
based on collaboration between different partners: they are joint training projects. The 
Council Decision specifies amongst the objectives: 
"(...) to foster the joint development of training programmes and the exchange of 
experiences, and also the optimum uses of training resources at Community level (...)" 
For the development and implementation of training activities, there have been two 
types of partnerships: 
• the UETP's accepted under Strand A, which were meant as more structural and long 
term partnerships, which have been involved in training needs analysis and as 
contractor for the Ca-pool projects (from 1991 onwards) 
• partnerships and consortia established specifically for a particular training project 
under Strand C; in principle, these were of a temporary nature. 
It should be noted, however, that the boundary line is not clear-cut. Some UETPs had a 
rather narrow focus, while many of the more successful Strand C projects started oper­
ating like real UETPs, with goals and action plans extending far beyond the original 
project specification. This shows that efficient cooperation and the process of learning 
resulting from it is indeed a stimulus for further joint actions. 
Although each partnership includes a variety of organisations including typically several 
enterprises, universities have often been the driving force behind the initiation and pro­
ject coordination. The role of enterprises has been much more focused, notably by pro­
viding contributions in kind (staff time, equipment and services) for specific aspects of 
the project, and most importantly, by indicating the technology areas with a need for 
training, both from a qualitative and quantitative perspective. Once the project is on its 
way, many universities often have a major input for the development of courses and 
training materials, with enterprises steering as far as content, delivering teachers and 
sending trainees are concerned. 
The accumulated monitoring and evaluation experience within COMETT suggests that 
industry has increasingly come to appreciate the extent to which user requirements have 
been integrated in the training products. Satisfaction was highest when these concerns 
had been considered in the early development phase of the project. Thus, contributing to 
the movement from supply driven to responsive training has been one of the strong 
features of COMETT, one which was facilitated by the programme's strong emphasis on 
43 
industry-university cooperation. At the same time, this development reflects the growing 
importance of Total Quality approaches, with their strong emphasis on customer needs. 
Universities have also come to realise the positive impact resulting from cooperation 
with companies, not only for a particular joint project, but also for their regular educ­
ation programmes. Working together in a COMETT project apparently has provided 
great opportunities for informal learning for both university and company staff - an 
added value of the training project which may not have been fully anticipated. Through 
international cooperation and by developing university-enterprise relationships partners 
had the opportunity to understand other cultures, different approaches of training 
processes, and of project management. When the cooperation and interaction is properly 
managed, partnerships can become a real platform for learning and creativity. 
3.3 The European dimension in training 
The terms "European dimension" and "European added value" frequently appear in-
many documents relating to COMETT and other European education and training 
programmes. The Council Decision on COMETT notably specifies amongst its 
objectives: 
"(...) to give a European dimension to cooperation between universities and industry in 
initial and continuing training relating to technologies and their applications and 
transfer (...)" 
What does this mean in the context of advanced education and training? A possible 
definition is that a project provides European added value if it addresses issues which 
could not have been dealt with (or not adequately enough) within a national framework. 
Such a description comes close to the subsidiarity principle, and is essentially based on 
economic considerations. A related argument for promoting the European dimension in 
projects is the fact that many organisations and individuals across Europe are faced with 
common problems and that all can gain by developing and implementing solutions 
jointly. 
Both arguments apply to advanced education and training projects. The European di­
mension or European added value could take the form of: 
• the organisation of training courses with lecturers and trainers who are not available 
in that country 
• the organisation of training courses for an international audience (for instance, when 
national markets are too small to reach break-even, or when the interaction between 
course participants benefits from it) 
• the pooling of scarce available resources, knowledge and expertise to design and 
develop training courses and longer programmes 
• the transfer of knowledge and expertise from one region to another, e.g. by specific 
developments or through the repetition of an existing course in another region 
• the set-up training delivery systems which cover more than two countries and could 
even be pan-European 
• the use, translation and/or improvement of existing high quality training materials 
with the aim of dissemination in other countries. 
44 
There are a number of perspectives for assessing this European dimension and value 
added of COMETT II: 
• the European spread of partners within the projects consortia 
• the internal use of different European languages 
• the nationality spread of lecturers and trainers 
• the synergy with other European programmes . 
As regards the international spread of partners, remember that the average joint training 
project includes partners from 6 different countries. This figure means that typically one 
third of the eligible European countries are involved in every joint training project. By 
any standard, this is really a high number. 
The European nature of the consortia is also shown through the internal use of different 
languages: the data available through project reports has revealed that a mere 20 % of 
the training consortia kept to one language. A typical COMETT-consortium was capable 
of effectively using two or three languages, 20 % used even four or more. This reflects 
the strong language capacities of the partnerships, which is a key condition for 
achieving quality and success in the European market. 
Another measurable characteristic of the European dimension is the international spread 
of the trainers involved. Though no fully reliable data are available on the number and 
proportion of lecturers and trainers from a country other than where the course is organ­
ised, a safe estimate is that at least 80 % of training projects supported by COMETT 
involved such 'foreign' trainers. A finding supporting this high international nature of 
the courses and the very frequent presence of foreign lecturers is that only a third of 
courses offered was delivered fully in trainees' native language. 
These and other results lead to the conclusion that COMETT II did indeed provide a 
high European added value, and contributed strongly to bringing a European dimension 
into advanced technology training. Much of the quality improvement in the advanced 
courses offered on the European market is due to the opening up of course development 
to a wider pool of expertise across national boarders. Course developers have learnt to 
compare their own approaches and institutional settings with state of the art methods 
and knowledge elsewhere. Regional poles of competence in Europe have become better 
known. This opening has also been important in focusing attention on quality assurance, 
in particular by the end of COMETT II. 
3.4 Some key messages from the COMETT training experience. 
An overriding message emerging from the analysis is that the COMETT programme has 
been a most effective mechanism for promoting the European dimension and added 
value in training projects. The programme has contributed considerably to the develop­
ment of many new and innovative European partnerships, and, as such, contributed to 
the further Europeanisation of the advanced continuing education and training market. 
This issue will be discussed as part of the transversal themes in Section 5. 
45 
The programme has also been instrumental in showing to both industry and academia 
that cooperation in the field of advanced technology training (and beyond) can be bene­
ficial to both. The programme has contributed to accelerating the transfer of European 
R&D results through targeted training actions, but lacked sufficient resources to do this 
on a scale which would have a demonstrable effect. To the extent that the programme 
was meant to be a catalyst in this process, it can, however, be considered as successful. 
Throughout the life of the programme, quality management and assurance issues have 
grown in importance. In that context, it should be highlighted that COMETT has clearly 
demonstrated that successful networking and project management in this area requires a 
great deal of knowledge, skills and personal commitment. The availability of these com­
petencies in the partnership has a strong impact on the success in meeting the particular 
project objectives. This is a strong argument for paying more attention in the future to 
the support, information and training of training project coordinators. In anticipation of 
the new education and training programmes, the Commission has already supported 
several projects to develop a number of practical guides for use by project promoters. 
Most of these documents, which draw heavily on the COMETT experience, are now be­
coming available, so that they might be used within programmes like LEONARDO DA 
VINCI. 
46 
4. Mobility of people 
4.1 Mobility within COMETT 
4.1.1 Typology of mobility grants 
Support for the mobility of people is a common characteristic of many European pro­
grammes in the field of education, training and research. Indeed it is increasingly recog­
nised that an individual staying for a certain period of time in another organisation can 
provide benefits for the individual, the host organisation, and the person's home base. It 
is indeed through people that the transfer of ideas, knowledge and technology occurs, 
and mobility schemes are an excellent means by which to achieve this. Since the 
European Community as a whole will benefit in the medium and long term from such 
exchanges, it is no surprise to see important sums of European grants being spent on 
mobility; moreover, transnational exchanges are excellent mechanisms to make people 
aware of each other's culture and understand the benefits of moving towards closer 
European integration. 
Of course, every programme uses the mobility activities it supports as a vehicle for the 
achievement of its specific objectives also. In COMETT, these are numerous, but it can 
readily be seen that exchanges of people can benefit or improve, in particular: 
• transnational cooperation 
• industry-university collaboration 
• technology transfer 
• advanced training. 
In this context, grants for transnational exchanges (Strand B) fall into three categories: 
• Strand Ba: support for students or young graduates undergoing periods of training in 
industry in another Member State or EFTA country as part of, or complementary to 
their training at university 
• Strand Bb: grants for advanced training placements; these differ from Strand Ba in 
that participants must be engaged in the most advanced training level (but not in 
research activities) 
• Strand Be: fellowships for personnel seconded from universities to industry or vice 
versa in another country, to bring their skills to the host organisation. 
The large majority of projects and grants concern transnational student placements in in­
dustry (Strand Ba), and these activities will be the main subject of the discussion-below. 
Bear in mind that since 1991, all transnational exchanges under COMETT II were man­
aged by the UETPs under the pool scheme (cf. Section 1.3). This guided and effective 
decentralisation of the programme has no doubt been at the heart of the success of the 
programme in this Strand. 
47 
The COMETT Student placement Guide 
With support from the Commission, the COMETT student placement guide 
'Transnational student placements: the COMETT experience' was published in Spring 
1993. This Guide draws heavily on the experience of COMETT in operating 
transnational placements in Europe. It was aimed principally at assisting the UETPs 
operating transnational student placement programmes. Intended as a practical working 
tool, the Guide can facilitate the organisation of effective industrial placements. 
However, the Guide has been compiled with a wider audience in mind, and anyone 
organising or wishing to start a European exchange programme should find general 
guidance on operational aspects as well as useful examples of good practice. The Guide 
attempts to address some of the barriers hindering successful higher education-industry 
student exchanges. These barriers include admission restrictions, language problems, 
work permit issues, housing and practical problems, recognition of qualifications and 
financial arrangements. 
4.1.2 Key data on student placements (Strand Ba) 
Industrial student placements within COMETT needed to meet the following criteria: 
• be an exchange from a university to a company in another EU or EFTA country 
• concern students in the course of their study, or just after the completion of their 
degree 
• last between 3 and 12 months 
• have a work programme relating to technology and related fields. 
In addition, quality conditions had to be met in relation to the preparation, organisation, 
monitoring and evaluation of the placement. 
Overall, over 36 000 European students will have benefitted from this possibility in the 
5 year COMETT period. The annual figure has risen from 3800 placements awarded in 
1990 to almost 8000 in 19945; this results in an annual average of over 7000 of such 
placements. To put this figure into perspective, over the three years of COMETT I to­
gether, some 4000 student placements had been supported. 
In reality, the demand for placements was much higher than the number of grants 
awarded. In 1994, for instance, there was a demand for 33 700 transnational placements, 
but support was only available for about 8000 grants. So, three out of four potential 
placements could not be supported. This figure is illustrative of the considerable expans­
ion of student placement activity in Europe which has been stimulated by the COMETT 
programme. An estimated 15 000 companies, predominantly SMEs, have had access to 
the equivalent of almost 20 000 man-years of human resources. 
A typical placement lasted for 5-6 months, with a student receiving an average monthly 
mobility grant of 430 ECU (the real amount depended on travel costs and cost-of-living 
in the host country). In total, some 80 million ECU was spent on student placements, 
representing 35 % of the programme budget. 
5The actual number of students on placements are some 10 % higher, since the grants were sometimes 
distributed over a higher number of students (which was possible thanks to complementary funding). 
48 
Almost all regional UETPs and a large majority of sectoral UETPs have actively partic­
ipated in the pool scheme for the organisation of student placements. 80 % of student 
placements were arranged by regional UETPs, with an average pool grant (by 1994) of 
50 students; for sectoral UETPs the average was 30. 
About 2/3 of participants were undergraduate students, the rest being young graduates 
and postgraduate students. Important to note is that 40 % of the total number were 
female. 
4.1.3 Strand Bb and Be 
Strand Bb was an experimental type of exchange which had not existed under 
COMETT I. The initiative was meant to support long term placements (up to two years) 
for advanced industrial development projects, involving monitoring from a university 
and a host enterprise. In the 1990 Call relatively few projects were submitted, and only 
13 were selected (of which eventually 10 accepted the contract). Given the low 
response, it was decided to monitor closely the development of these projects, before a 
Call would be re-issued again. By 1992, the project results were not totally convincing, 
in particular the rationale for the existence of a separate scheme. A decision was taken 
not too pursue this sub-Strand any more, for two main reasons: 
• the demand in Strand B was overwhelming and of high quality, in particular in 
Strand Ba, and maximum effort was to go to those activities 
• the analysis of the ongoing Bb-projects had also shown that the nature of these 
projects was not very different from projects already supported in Strand Ba or Be; 
there was therefore no real need for a separate support mechanism. 
Strand Be, however, was much more successful, and an increasing number of grants 
were awarded each Call. Remember that this Strand supports advanced exchanges for 
training purposes of university staff into enterprises or vice-versa, always of course, of a 
transnational nature. As for student placements, from 1991 onwards they were organised 
through the pool scheme administered by UETPs. 
Some 1900 submissions for such exchanges were put forward, and eventually over 800 
were accepted. The average duration of the fellowships was 4.5 months, with an average 
financial contribution per exchange from COMETT in the order of 7000 ECU. In total, 
COMETT spent some 6 million ECU on this type of activities. 
About 2/3 of the people exchanged were university staff, the remainder coming from 
industry. Interesting to note is that 2/3 of participating companies were SMEs. Over half 
of the fellows came from peripheral countries; the UK, France and Germany were the 
host countries most in demand. 
49 
4.2 Qualitative observations 
4.2.1 Strand Ba 
Accumulated experience to date suggests that in the area of student placements, 
COMETT has to a large extent achieved its objectives, not only in terms of quantity, 
but above all in terms of quality, in particular as regards: 
• the role of student placements as an effective technology transfer mechanism 
• the contribution to setting up transnational networks 
• the provision of a very clear and tangible European dimension to cooperation 
between universities and industry 
• added value to all those directly concerned, and for European society as a whole. 
Thus, the overall opinion on Strand B is positive as regards its contribution, and the 
effectiveness of mobility actions. This, in itself, is a major result of the COMETT 
programme, if one compares' the current situation with the modest volume of trans­
national student placement activity at the start of the programme, and the numerous 
organisational and attitudinal hurdles which had to be overcome. Mobility activities, 
especially student placements, have had a beneficial effect: 
• on enterprises, often involving SMEs for the first time in a European programme; in 
certain countries a placement culture is developing which was previously non-existent 
• on students, who have become better prepared for their professional future, thanks to 
their improved language abilities, broader cultural understanding, and innovator 
capacities 
• on higher education institutions, where it has catalysed the development of placement 
requirements and mechanisms, and has assisted in awareness building and updating 
courses and teaching methods. 
More generally, and not fully anticipated, the mobility actions within COMETT have 
helped in developing new models of technology transfer in knowledge, techniques and 
models. They are also increasingly regarded as providing a new form of human resource 
updating and recycling. 
In countries where industrial placements are a well established activity, COMETT seems 
to have had a mainly positive, operational effect rather than playing an imiovatory role 
in the modification of policies and practices. In other countries, where placements were 
not yet widespread, it has increased awareness of the potential benefits at both the 
university and the industry; in several it has also led to legal changes in order to 
facilitate the mobility arrangements. 
The unique pool procedure has demonstrated that UETPs are capable of playing an 
active role in the organisation of placements. The UETP network has gradually devel­
oped a unique know-how and set of competencies. Despite legal, financial and other 
hurdles, the network has developed the capacity to organise effectively and efficiently 
almost ten thousand European placements and exchanges a year. It has gained the trust 
and confidence of all actors involved. It has also served as a bridge between mobility 
actions and training development activities. The UETP network is likely to appear as a 
valuable resource within the LEONARDO DA VINCI programme and probably other 
European initiatives as well. 
50 
Overall therefore, Strand Ba has been the greatest networking and Europeanising force 
within the COMETT programme. It has brought more industry and university people 
into contact with each other than any other COMETT Strand - and probably any other 
European programme. And it has been a most effective mechanism for involving SMEs, 
both advanced and traditional ones, in European collaborative education and training 
ventures. 
Enterprises' views on the value of student placements 
A survey, conducted at the end of 1994 amongst 199 enterprises which had received 
together some 500 COMETT student on placement, confirmed the increasing 
recognition by companies across Europe of the value of transnational student placements 
of the type promoted by COMETT. The report states in its conclusion: 
" [...] European companies which have participated in COMETT are generally satisfied 
with Strand Ba, the transnational student placement programme. They are willing to 
continue recruiting students - at least the same numbers as they have done in the last 
few years of COMETT. They also accept the fact that students must be remunerated. 
[...] Strand Ba is a convenient way for enterprises to meet objectives related to the 
European dimension [...] and the specific objectives of COMETT in particular [...]. 
These objectives reflect the needs of enterprises, particularly those of small and 
medium-sized companies (up to 500 employees). Students are generally perceived as 
"problem" solvers by enterprises. [...]" 
4.2.2 Strand Bb and Be 
As regards personnel exchanges (Strand Be), the overall COMETT experience is 
encouraging. Although the scheme has not met the same success and interest as the 
student placements activity, the quality of the projects supported was in general high 
and has increased over the duration of the programme - which is certainly attributable to 
the guidance given by UETPs. European links between universities and companies have 
been strengthened and extended. A smooth transfer of ideas, concepts and technology 
has resulted from most of the projects. The scheme has demonstrated its suitability for 
SMEs, as well as the practical advantages of having the practical aspects administered 
by an effective and knowledgeable intermediary organisation such as a UETP. 
A potential area of conflict is between the personal interests of the fellow for his own 
professional career, and the interests of the sending and receiving organisations; given 
the strong personal commitment required, this appears inevitable in such types of 
project. Also, given the relatively modest numbers involved, little structural change has 
resulted from these exchanges. 
Concerning the limited success of the introduction of the Strand Bb scheme, the main 
lesson learned is the need to clearly targeting such activities, with a distinct different­
iation from other support schemes, both in terms of the type of activity, and concerning 
the potential beneficiaries targeted. 
51 
4.2.3 Main messages for the future 
The organisation and administration of transnational student placements and personnel 
exchanges between companies and higher education institutions is not a straightforward 
task. It has taken much time and effort to develop an effective - yet still far from 
perfect - network mechanism which can bring the demand and supply side together and 
ensure that the three parties concerned (the individual going abroad, the sending 
organisation and the receiving organisation) will have benefitted from the exchange. 
Within LEONARDO, the know-how and competence available in this network should 
be maintained, further developed and disseminated. This will require the effective and 
rapid dissemination of information, tools, and know-how across Europe. While the im­
portance of electronic communication will no doubt increase, direct contacts between 
the people involved will remain important. The current annual volume of transnational 
student placements and staff exchanges indeed implies thousands of negotiations and 
discussions every month, often between people for whom this is a first time experience. 
It will therefore remain an important challenge to the ensure the continued credibility 
and high quality image of this type of operation. 
The quality of the exchange programme is partly dependent on the preparation (linguis­
tic, cultural or professional) of the students and staff before they go abroad. Member 
States and the Commission need to examine more closely how this could be achieved in 
a more structured manner, so as to improve the return for both the individual and the 
host organisation. The development of guidelines for those staff monitoring placements 
would also be a worthwhile investment. 
More research on the most effective and efficient network structures and cooperation 
procedures appears appropriate. The COMETT experience has also shown that these 
small mobility projects lower the threshold for industry-university cooperation and often 
open an avenue for other forms of collaboration. Examining this issue in more depth 
would also be useful to determine the possible involvement of the network structure for 
other forms of mobility - or to let other exchange initiatives benefit from the rich UETP 
experience. 
A final point concerns the legal and social security issues regarding students on place­
ment, especially when undertaking longer placements, which are generally considered to 
be the most worthwhile investment for all parties concerned. 
52 
5. Transversal themes 
5.1 Cooperation and links with other European programmes 
5.1.1 Introduction 
The first main recommendation presented in the evaluation report by the panel of ex­
perts is: "The objectives of the COMETT Programme must be a coherent part of EC 
policies for human resources, economic, technological, social and cultural development, 
and take account of the Maastricht Treaty, its associated Structural Fund regulations 
and the Framework Research and Development Programme. " 'A coherent part of EC 
policies' means coherence with European programmes in Education and Training (such 
as ERASMUS, TEMPUS, FORCE), Research and Development programmes (such as 
ESPRIT, BRITE-EURAM, DELTA)6, as well as other European initiatives (e.g. 
SPRINT and the Social Fund). 
Most people in industry and education would no doubt agree with the above recom­
mendation. In most national evaluation reports there is almost consensus about this 
issue. Both in the EFTA countries and in the peripheral regions of the Community 
itself, COMETT has often been perceived and used as a gateway to greater integration 
and an opportunity to overcome national and regional handicaps for cooperation. 
The rationale for seeking links with European research and development projects is 
clear: in the light of competitive pressures, the globalisation of markets and technologies 
al development, it becomes more and more important to harness the fruits of research 
efforts, and make sure that these are effectively applied to the benefit of European 
society and its economy. The rationale for linking COMETT with other education and 
training programmes is the demand for a coherent European Union training policy and 
education cooperation framework, across all categories and levels of people. This same 
rationale is now explicitly recognized in the new LEONARDO arid SOCRATES pro­
grammes. 
The overall result is that, while COMETT has been more successful in creating links 
than any other European Programme, synergy was "modest". Because of COMETT's 
strong focus on training for technology, the emphasis in the evaluation and monitoring 
reports has often been on links and coherence with Research and Development pro­
grammes, but this section will look at education and training programmes as well. The 
discussion relates predominantly to Strand C (training projects) and Strand A (con­
sortia). 
Please note that the successor programmes to these programmes have been given other names in the 4th Framework 
Programme. 
53 
5.1.2 Links with R&D programmes 
Quantitative data about links between COMETT Strands and other European Program­
mes show impressive numbers. The following figures give the average number of links 
of COMETT projects with Research and Development Programmes: 
• 1 link per UETP supported under Strand A 
• 1 link per 3 projects in the category short courses (Strand Ca) 
• 1 link per 3 projects for the joint training projects (Strands Cb, Cc). 
By multiplying these averages with the numbers of UETPs and training projects, and 
adding the somewhat less frequent links in Strand B (student placements and staff ex­
changes), one sees emerging thousands of links between COMETT projects and other 
European R&D initiatives. 
Most frequently reported R&D programmes with links with COMETT are: 
• Telematics for Flexible and Distance Learning (DELTA) (in particularly in Strands 
Cband Cc) 
• ESPRIT 
• BRITEEURAM 
• SPRINT (notably in Strand A) 
while many linkages with RACE, STRIDE, IMPACT and VALUE are also reported. 
Cooperation between COMETT and European R&D-programmes 
Telematics for Flexible and Distance Learning (DELTA). One area of strong and 
long-standing cooperation at project level has been with the DELTA programme, which 
was concerned with the development of technologies and systems tailored to the design, 
distribution and delivery of training materials. To some extent DELTA can be said to be 
the "container" of innovative education and training approaches, whilst COMETT-
projects were looking at the "content". A number of DELTA projects have used 
COMETT outputs in their activities and, vice versa, DELTA projects have facilitated the 
development and delivery of COMETT projects. 
ESPRIT. This major R&D programme on Information Technology includes many sub-
programmes, for most of which many links with COMETT have been reported. Of 
particular relevance was the ESPRIT VLSI Design programme, which was designed 
complementary to COMETT, notably by directing its support towards initial education 
at universities. But at the same time, the programme profited from the COMETT exper­
ience and its training products for setting up training areas. An example of a more 
structural level of cooperation with ESPRIT has been in the analysis of IT training 
needs. 
BRITE-EURAM. An example of the synergy pursued by COMETT has been through 
supporting training activities in the Aeronautics area, which is of special concern for the 
BRITE-EURAM programme. Although administrative procedures did not facilitate 
direct cooperation, some 20 COMETT training projects in this area were supported, also 
known and partially followed in DG XII. The best example of the cooperation is 
COMETT's pilot project ECATA on advanced training for the aeronautics industry, 
which emerged from a DG XII initiative. 
54 
SPRINT. Many contacts, exchanges of views and mutual attendance to events have 
taken place over the life of both SPRINT and COMETT. One of the first outputs were a 
number of joint studies, such as in relation to the role of Industrial Liaison Offices 
(ILOs) in universities. 
IMPACT (Information Market Policy Actions). In the framework of the IMPACT 
programme, projects dedicated to train electronic information service provider and 
university teachers have given technical assistance to the COMETT programme. 
One must be careful, however, when interpreting the quantitative data. A more detailed 
analysis has found that a 'link' reported by a COMETT project with another programme 
is not necessarily the same as coherence. In many cases it only means that the same 
organization is involved in several European programmes, with a loose link at the 
subject level. Evaluation and monitoring reports have recommended that coherence 
between programmes like COMETT and other European programmes be improved. 
So, despite the many good reported examples of real coherence and cooperation at pro­
gramme level, the outcome is not entirely satisfactory. Often, participation in other 
programmes serves to cement and reinforce the COMETT collaboration, even if the 
links were only indirectly relevant to the training activity being pursued. Nevertheless, 
there are strong arguments in favour of better and structural coordination of programmes 
concerned with the dissemination, valorization and transfer of EU sponsored R&D 
programmes. 
It should also be recognized, however, that COMETT did much more than support the 
transfer of R&D-results related to European programmes. Indeed, only some 5% of 
R&D in Europe is supported through European initiatives. Many COMETT projects in­
deed focused on the interregional transfer of locally developed knowledge and techno­
logy. 
Another aspect to be borne in mind is that COMETT is not only concerned with 
advanced research. Probably more than half of COMETT projects are closer to the final 
stages of the technology development cycle, already with some distance from applied 
research, and notably from European R&D programmes which are, by definition, pre-
competitive. This 'technology profile' of COMETT projects was the result of the select­
ion process, which with regard to relevance and direct applicability of the training, is 
what one can expect. 
Improving cooperation between education and R.&D programmes does not emerge by 
itself: it needs structural support. On several occasions the idea has been put forward -
both by project promoters as well as by experts and evaluators - to recognise UETPs 
more formally,as a mechanism for technological cooperation in training and R&D at 
European level. Within the new LEONARDO programme, the UETP-type structures 
supported would benefit from formal recognition by R&D programmes to act as a 
broker, a facilitator of cooperation between research and education projects. It would 
also respond to the clear wish for cooperation at project level which has been expressed 
by the actors in the field. It is very probable, that for such coordination to be effective 
at project level, there is a requirement for far greater cooperation at the European inter-
Programme level. 
55 
5.1.3 Links with programmes for education and training 
When considering the number of links between COMETT and other European pro­
grammes in the area of Education and Training, the figures are again impressive. The 
links are even more numerous than those with R&D programmes, on average: 
• 2 links per UETP 
• 1 link per 3 projects for the short courses (Strand Ca) 
• 2 links per 5 projects for the joint training projects (Strands Cb, Cc). 
There are also many links in Strand B, particularly between student placements sup­
ported under COMETT and student exchange programmes supported by ERASMUS. 
Overall, the relations developed with European Education and Training programmes are 
not only more numerous but appear to be much more direct than in the case of links 
with R&D programmes. This seems logical since COMETT is pre-eminently an educat­
ion and training programme, and it is more natural for an ERASMUS or FORCE project 
to expand into COMETT (or vice versa) than for say, a BRITE-EURAM project. 
» 
An important observation is that over the life time of COMETT, the number of links 
has been growing steadily. This is both related to the dynamic of COMETT itself, and 
to the increased possibilities and participation levels in the other programmes. There is 
now hardly any higher education institute in Europe which has not participated in either 
ERASMUS, COMETT, LINGUA or TEMPUS. 
Main links Between COMETT and other European education and training pro­
grammes 
As regards the UETPs in Strand A: 
• 3 out of 5 indicate a link with TEMPUS 
• 2 UETPs out of 5 have links with FORCE 
• 2 out of 5 UETPs have links ERASMUS. 
Other programme links include LINGUA, EUROFORM, PETRA, NOW, EURO­
TECNET, IRIS and SOCIAL FUND activities. 
Lower numbers hold for the short course projects in Strand Ca: 
• 1 Ca out of 8 is linked to TEMPUS 
• 1 Ca out of 10 has links with ERASMUS 
• 1 Ca out of 20 is linked to FORCE. 
A similar pattern is found in Strand Cb/Cc: 
• 1 in 8 Cb's has links with ERASMUS 
• 1 in 8 Cb's has links with TEMPUS 
• 1 in 9 Cb's bas links with FORCE (this figures has been increasing over the years) 
Other programme links for this Strand include notably EUROFORM, EUROTECNET 
and LINGUA. 
A common criticism reported by project participants is the variety and sometimes com­
plexity of European support and funding mechanisms in the area of education and train­
ing. It is not always obvious for which programme a project should be submitted and/or 
to understand the sometimes subtle differences between programme components. In res­
ponse to this criticism, the Commission has streamlined the whole process by reducing 
56 
the number of major education and training programmes to two, SOCRATES and 
LEONARDO. 
5.2 R&D, Training & Innovation 
5.2.1 Introduction: innovation in the European Union 
All vibrant societies, all flourishing economies are in a state of continuous innovation. 
Not to innovate is to stagnate, eventually to die. The R&D potential of Europe's uni­
versities and research institutes is core to such change. The Commission's White Paper 
on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment notes: "Research and technological 
development can contribute to renewing growth, strengthening competitiveness and 
boosting employment in the Union. However, in order to achieve this a series of 
conditions must be satisfied: an adequate level of funding; an appropriate range of 
research activities; and effective mechanisms for transferring the results. " 
The Bangemann Report to the European Council goes further than simple innovation. It 
speaks of: "This revolution (which) adds huge new capacities to human intelligence and 
constitutes a resource which changes the way we work together and the way we live 
together.... Europe's ability to participate, to adapt and to exploit the new technologies 
and the opportunities they create, will require partnership between individuals, 
employers, unions and governments dedicated to managing change. " 
When COMETT was established in the mid-80s, the Programme was, in fact, asked to 
address central aspects of these challenges which now figure so prominently on the Eur­
opean Union agenda. COMETT was required to develop effective mechanisms for trans­
ferring the results of R&D through education and training, and at the same time to build 
up a cooperative partnership between researchers, universities and industries. This sec­
tion of the Final Evaluation Report discusses briefly how effectively this core techno­
logy transfer activity - transforming R&D into social and economic innovation - has 
been undertaken and what lessons there might be for current and new European Pro­
grammes. 
5.2.2 COMETT's role in the technology transfer system 
In many European countries, much, sometimes most, R&D spending takes place in uni­
versities. The transfer of this knowledge into enterprises and other structures which can 
either exploit it commercially or benefit from it - or both - is at the heart of COMETT. 
However, transferring R&D results from higher education to industry, from one instit­
ution to another, is not a straightforward handing over of a "package". The results of an 
institution's R&D is most often an ill defined, and possibly non-definable, collection of 
skills, knowledge, techniques and tacit information. Transferring this from the laboratory 
bench to a company which is under commercial pressure, with limited time and 
financial horizons poses many problems. 
By and large, those in the. COMETT programme who have coped best with these 
conundrums, have been those in a position to take a system approach. Here, the various 
technology transfer activities, ranging from superficial information gathering or update 
.57 
activity to contract R&D or even spin-off company activities, are taken as part of a 
continuous spectrum in which companies can participate at whatever level they find 
appropriate at the time in question. This system might be called "the family" of 
technology transfer activities. Within it, the actual amount and importance of associated 
training required is often vastly underestimated by industry itself. Thus, the obvious 
implication of this system approach is that COMETT training activities should prefer­
ably be linked institutionally to those offering other technical transfer facilities. 
Closely allied to the issue of promoting a systems approach to technology transfer, is 
the nature of the actual interface presented by COMETT projects to industry. Compa­
nies differ in size and structure. The fundamental nature of the technology for transfer 
varies from sector to sector, as does its place in the continuum from basic research to 
very applied, development work. These differences require a corresponding flexibility in 
the way in which COMETT activities are undertaken with industry. 
Section 2.4.1 on the strengths'"of UETPs indicated that, by and large, consortia which 
are positioned in dedicated technology transfer units are, perhaps not surprisingly, most 
effective in technology transfer. The flexibility and responsiveness of the interface 
which COMETT activities can present to companies in such a situation is crucial. 
Projects operating from a university department may be strongly linked to academic 
activities and requirements, and may find it difficult to respond easily to commercial 
necessities. The interface to university R&D and technology may not be as responsive 
as in a dedicated technology transfer unit or an associated research institute. In a similar 
vein, evaluations indicate that development of the pilot and joint training projects 
operated most effectively through a partner who could provide the professional interface 
to potential client companies. 
The importance of placing COMETT technology training activities in an appropriate 
system with a flexible interface is further reinforced by the need for an incremental ap­
proach in undertaking technology transfer with companies, particularly SMEs. In work­
ing with SMEs, a gradualist approach is necessary which takes firms through a series of 
activities which permits the potential partners to get to know each other. Commencing 
with small scale activities, such as information and low level consultancy implying low 
risk and low investment, those involved can then move on to education and training 
activities and then on to more intensive technology transfer projects including contract 
research. 
The COMETT experience suggests that keeping advanced European technology training 
activities separate from a context where such an integrated and incremental approach is 
possible, res'ults in two particularly negative aspects. Firstly, it creates the need for dis­
ruptive quantum jumps in working relations with companies. Secondly, and most 
importantly, it,disrupts the information flows between the individuals working with the 
university and the enterprise. It becomes harder to pass information on company 
activities and needs resulting from work in the area of training, in order to support 
consultancy, contract research or joint venture activities - and vice versa. 
5.2.3 COMETT's social and organisational innovation 
It is now well accepted that the effective exploitation of R&D requires parallel social 
and organisational innovation. It is important to remind ourselves that one of the most 
58 
important successes of COMETT has been in producing and disseminating such inno­
vation. The main strands of this social and organisational innovation include: 
• the development of European and regional networks for the flow of R&D and 
associated skills and information; and so contributing to the development of a 
European science and technology space 
• the organisational changes induced in many higher education institutions to accom­
modate and certify the experiential learning of student placement; as well as, in 
firms, the organisational development required to integrate the student and his/ her 
developing technical skills into being a productive part of the company 
• the integration of user enterprises into the early development and testing of training 
materials. 
Innovation has also taken place at the level of individuals, since all R&D and 
innovation is ultimately embodied in human thought and practice, attitudinal change has 
also been important. 
It is important to realise that these non-hard technology innovations, which were partic­
ularly numerous within COMETT, are as crucial to the exploitation of the technology as 
the generation of the technical innovation itself. 
5.3 Participation in COMETT by type of organisation 
5.3.1 Introduction 
The mere consideration that COMETT involved over 30 000 organisations from all over 
Europe directly in its projects shows that the programme has been fairly successful in 
its catalytic and awareness raising functions - in relation to the budgetary conditions 
under which it had to operate. The mobilisation of such a number of organisations is an­
other indication of the European added value of the programme, in particular when one 
realises that for many of these, the participation in COMETT was the first European 
programme involvement. At the same time it should be recognized that the average 
level of project participation was typically not very high - not unsurprising given the 
huge numbers of organisations involved and the relatively modest funding levels 
available. 
Because of its main objective to foster European cooperation between universities and 
enterprises - in the broadest sense - COMETT has resulted in the establishment of an 
extremely varied range of partnerships, consisting of all kinds of participating organis­
ations. In each partnership there is at least one higher education institutioiH-to some 
extent they have been a stable factor in COMETT projects. On the other hand, the 
involvement of enterprises and other organisation has been of a much more variable 
nature. Enterprises exist in all sizes and types. Their focus of activity can be extremely 
diverse, including traditional manufacturing, high-tech research or consultancy. The 
picture is even more varied for the 'other' types of organisations (see below). Thus, 
diversity of partners and their core objectives implies a diversity of participation 
models. Participation levels will vary from a very active participant to a "sleeping' 
partner. And project involvement may range from concentration on one «et of activity to 
a range of contributions spread over the project life time. 
59 
-Vf 
There is diversity also in the results of all efforts brought in by the many partners. 
COMETT produced a diverse set of outcomes in many technological and sectoral fields, 
it created opportunities for many people to cooperate, and to develop and use education 
and training possibilities. The next paragraphs briefly discuss the extent of participation 
of different types of organisations towards realising these outputs: 
• universities and other higher education institutions 
• enterprises 
• other organisations. 
5.3.2 University participation 
Although universities are not the largest subset of organisations involved in COMETT -
which is understandable since there are less than 4000 higher education institutions in 
the EU and EFTA - the extent of their participation has been most significant. A few 
universities even showed up in over 100 different COMETT projects. The more general 
and common characteristic was their active involvement in projects: in most projects in 
all COMETT Strands, university people were the driving force. 
This is not surprising. Indeed, most types of activities supported by COMETT are part 
of, or strongly related to, the core business of universities. COMETT offered univer­
sities an excellent opportunity to disseminate their knowledge and research findings, 
through mechanisms they were in general familiar with. The design of the COMETT 
programme and the culture within the higher education community were compatible 
with each other. In addition, the funding available was considered a welcome addition 
to many universities keen to explore new types of cooperation, or, in the case of student 
placements, to respond to growing student interest and demand. 
Some additional reasons why universities took a fairly active role in COMETT: 
• the university world has always been international; European cooperation presented 
few additional hurdles 
• the relatively open university culture facilitates cooperation, while in companies 
confidentiality and commercial aspects have to be considered 
• the need to become more responsive to market needs and governmental budget re­
strictions forced many universities to seek new avenues, just at the moment when 
COMETT became operational. 
The active role of universities is reflected by the range of project functions they have 
assumed. In mobility actions, universities were often the driving force - although the 
increasing interest from industry as a result of COMETT should also be noted. In joint 
training projects, more often than not, university staff took the first initiative, and then 
continued coordinating and leading throughout the design, development and delivery 
phases. Their important - but certainly not exclusive - role in the delivery of lecturers 
and trainers should also be highlighted. A weak point in university participation has 
generally been their often poor marketing and dissemination of project outcomes. For 
most universities these were new activities; through COMETT many came to realise 
that an excellent researcher or lecturer is often not very good on the marketing side. 
In summary, therefore, the participation of higher education institutions has been essen­
tial for COMETT, and their contribution to the programme's success has been very 
substantial. 
60 
5.3.3 Enterprise participation 
An estimated 20 000 enterprises were involved as partners in COMETT projects, of 
which more than half were through student placement arrangements. The prime criterion 
for a company to join a COMETT project will always be the benefit it may gain from 
it, be it immediate or long term. The benefit may be realised both by contributing to the 
project development as an active partner, or by merely using and exploiting the 
outcomes. This is most obvious in the case of student placements and staff exchanges, 
where the direct advantages for companies are very visible, and are often accompanied 
by longer term benefits. As a result, the extent of direct involvement of companies was 
in general higher in Strand B than in the other Strands. 
The data available suggests that, overall, about 20% of participating enterprises showed 
fairly strong participation, 40% medium, and 40% weak. Although this distribution can 
hardly be considered as being optimal, one should realise that 20% strongly involved 
firms still means some 4000 companies. In all COMETT Strands it was very uncommon 
to find enterprises coordinating a project. When considering more specifically the train­
ing projects and partnerships, not surprisingly, most firms' principle interest in 
COMETT projects has been in their outputs rather than their development. However, a 
substantial number of the companies participating in COMETT projects have been a 
'supplier' - a direct provider of services - to the project. This applies particularly to con­
siderable numbers of SMEs in the software, consultancy or professional training sectors. 
Obviously, here, an important motive for participation has been the opportunity to 
deliver their services. 
As for those more interested in the outputs as a means of updating the knowledge and 
skills of their workforce, the main contributions of companies have been: 
• provision of placements to students (and sometimes university staff) 
• input to training needs analysis 
• provision of specialised knowledge and expertise 
• lecturing 
On the other hand, the input of 'user' enterprises in the design and realisation of train­
ing materials has been relatively limited. 
Finally, it is risky to draw general conclusions from these and other findings. The 
COMETT experience has shown that the type and nature of industrial involvement is 
extremely variable - much more than in, say, European R&D programmes - and takes 
many different forms. It changes and fluctuates, moreover, over the life of the project. 
5.3.4 Participation by other organisations 
Although COMETT put the concept of industry-university cooperation central in its 
operation, both the notion of 'industry' and that of 'university' were very broadly 
interpreted. As a result, several thousand other and different organisations have joined 
the programme - in total over 5000. The following main groups can be distinguished: 
• economically active organisations which employ people but are in general not 
considered as 'companies': hospitals, utilities, transfer agencies, etc. 
• public authorities and semi-governmental organisations at local, regional, national and 
international level 
61 
• professional organisations, such as chambers of commerce, employer federations, 
trade unions, professional associations, etc. 
• scientific and education organisations: research institutions, research associations, 
education consortia, etc. 
All these groups have been involved as partners in COMETT projects across all Strands 
and countries. 
In relation to COMETT, a rearrangement into two main groups is most useful: 
• those organisations which are close to the 'enterprise' concept and culture, including 
all kinds of private and public employers, as well as organisations representing or 
interacting with enterprises (professional organisations) 
• those organisations which are close to the (higher) education and research commun­
ity, such as research institutes. 
About 2/3 of the 'other organisations' involved in COMETT belong to the first group. 
The rationale for participating in the COMETT programme varies: 
• for the first group the motivation is often similar to that of the enterprises them­
selves, whereby the project provides a platform to connect other enterprises to the 
development; professional organisations such as chambers of commerce are to be 
found in particular in Strand A, while 'other employers' are also frequently en­
countered in Strand C projects (e.g. a hospital involved in a training project on 
medical technology) 
• for the second category the main drive is often the opportunity provided by the 
project for the transfer and exchange of knowledge and research results; these 
organisations have been active in all COMETT Strands. 
Overall, the non-restrictive interpretation of the concept of 'industry-university' has 
resulted in an enrichment of the programme, both as regards the quality of the projects, 
as well as concerning the multiplier role they have played towards other organisations, 
notably SMEs. 
5.4 Impact of COMETT on SMEs 
The Council Decision on COMETT II includes amongst its objectives: 
"(...) to respond to the specific skill requirements of small and medium-sized businesses 
(-y 
Whether this objective has been achieved is difficult to assess. On many occasions it 
has been said that SMEs did not participate very satisfactorily in COMETT. The panel 
of independent experts even said in their evaluation report: "The COMETT Programme, 
like many other Community actions, is not sufficiently well-tailored to meeting the needs 
of SMEs ... they do not appear to have easy access to the programme." If this were true, 
there would be a serious mismatch between the programme's objectives and the way its 
operational mechanisms have been designed and implemented. 
It is, however, very difficult to gain clear insight into the real impact of a European pro­
gramme like COMETT on SMEs, for a number of reasons: 
62 
• there are millions of SMEs in Europe, of which only a limited number could be 
interested in a (technology) programme like COMETT 
• activities of SMEs are highly diversified, from consultancy to manufacturing, and 
from R&D to training 
• in the Comett context SMEs are defined as firms with less than 500 employees; 
nevertheless a firm with 10 employees will have very different needs than a firm 
having 450 employees 
• many SMEs are subsidiaries of, or strongly linked to, other firms, and follow the 
training and other policies of these companies. 
So making generalisations about 'SMEs' is dangerous, and one has to be very careful 
about drawing conclusions. 
A first question concerns the extent of SME participation in the programme. The 
following figures - using the COMETT definition of an SME - are self-explanatory: 
• about three quarters of all enterprises participating in COMETT projects are SMEs -
or approximately 15 000 SMEs by the end of the programme 
• about half of these SME's have less than 50 employees 
• in 80% of COMETT projects at least one of the partners is an SME 
• a UETP has typically more than 10 SMEs amongst its members 
• for the short courses the average number of SMEs per project is about 4; for the 
larger training projects the number is about 5 to 6. 
These figures are impressive. However, a closer analysis reveals that 40% of SMEs in 
COMETT projects are in a dominantly "supply" or "delivery" role. This means that their 
main motivation to participate is to deliver a contribution, not to act as a beneficiary. 
Especially in Strand C (Training Actions) this is clear: 2/3 of SME participants in this 
Strand act dominantly as suppliers to the project. Software companies are the most 
explicit "supply" sector. Thus, although the results are not as significant as the raw data 
may suggest, the overall impression remains very positive, especially in the light of 
COMETT's catalytic function and the programme constraints, such as the fact that 
projects are not necessarily directly financially or commercially attractive, and that they 
require transnational industry-university collaboration. 
Thus, despite its constraints, the programme must have a number of other attractive 
features for SMEs. It would appear that the complexity of COMETT with its varied 
range of measures, criteria and activities has proven to be a rich breeding ground for all 
kinds of different SME-related training initiatives. A more focused programme would 
probably have seen a much smaller and less varied number of SMEs participating. 
These considerations notwithstanding, it remains a valuable recommendation to continue 
to reflect on how access by SMEs to programmes and their outputs can be simplified. 
Another observation is that, although participation numbers are high, the role of SMEs 
as project partners is in general modest. In Strand C, for instance, in only 20% of cases 
were they found to be actively involved in the project development, and only in a few 
cases had they an important role in decision-making. It must be recognized, however, 
that several of the COMETT programme criteria and requirements are to some extent 
incompatible with SME modes of operation. SMEs in general have no long term 
perspective, and therefore it is far from self-evident for them to become involved in the 
risky type of project development activities which COMETT supports. 
63 
Active project participation is, however, not a condition for reaping benefits from a 
successful project. Many SMEs have been in touch with the programme without being a 
participant in any of the projects. An estimated 40 000 SMEs will have directly or in 
directly benefitted from COMETT II. This means that some 200 000 employees from 
SMEs have, in one way or another, profited from the outcomes of COMETT projects. 
SMEs and advanced technology training: potentially conflicting objectives within 
COMETT 
In relation to the 'advanced technology nature' of COMETT, it is useful to point out an 
important difference between SMEs and large firms. Most large companies have 
research facilities and highly specialized R&D staff. This facilitates industry-university 
cooperation, since it may essentially concern knowledge exchange and transfer between 
research groups. In such a context even enterprise-enterprise cooperation can be worth­
while, as is shown within the many pre-competitive European R&D projects. 
But SMEs rarely can afford to have proper and well organised research facilities, in 
particular in the manufacturing sector. For most SMEs, the immediate applicability of 
knowledge and skills gained is a condition for survival. And for new technologies and 
updating of knowledge they are highly dependent on what is offered outside. It is 
therefore no surprise to find within COMETT that, the more applied and less R&D 
intensive the nature of the COMETT activity, the higher the success has been in 
attracting SMEs. Despite the existence of many high-tech SMEs, this finding also 
suggests that the focus on advanced technology transfer may sometimes be incompatible 
with the desire to involve a large number of SMEs. 
Finally, let us remind ourselves that SMEs which join a programme like COMETT, 
share a common and normal characteristic: they want to draw benefit from it, which 
implies increased profitability over the short, medium or long term. The success of a 
European programme with SMEs is determined by how effectively SMEs are convinced 
of the benefit they may get from being involved in the projects. Profit making and 
potential for improved competitiveness of those involved are to be recognised as necess­
ary conditions for the strong involvement of SMEs in any European programme. 
5.5 Regional impact of COMETT 
5.5.1 The development of regional infrastructure 
One of the greatest contributions of COMETT to the regions has been what one repre­
sentative of a participating country has called: 'the provision of a legitimate and demo­
cratic forum for the discussion of university-industry cooperation'. This forum has 
manifested itself mostly through the activities of regional UETPs. In regions with 
limited of such infrastructure, mostly in the less favoured and peripheral areas of the 
European Union, COMETT appears to have provided, sometimes for the first time, a 
legitimate meeting ground for higher education, industry, and other interested private 
and public bodies. From this forum many regional initiatives developed, further 
strengthening local infrastructure and development. The strength of this effect is to be 
seen in the level of co-funding and regional project funding achieved by some UETPs. 
64 
At an individual UETP level, those most effective in promoting general regional devel­
opment issues have, perhaps not surprisingly, been located in regional development 
agencies or similar bodies. UETPs which were successful in this regard have tended to 
incorporate major regional decision makers, who were explicitly using COMETT ex­
change and training activities to support regional development plans and to integrate 
these activities with regional ESF and ERDF projects. A few dozen COMETT regional 
UETPs could be classified in this category, predominantly in the less advanced regions. 
COMETT has also, on occasion, acted as both a forum and a model for regional policy 
development. This occurred particularly where regions had a greater than average auto­
nomy in developing educational and more general regional economic policy. In one 
country, COMETT even acted as a base for the development and implementation of 
regional and county strategic plans in the area of higher education-industry cooperation. 
The specific intra-regional development actions undertaken by COMETT include: 
• bringing regional higher education institutions together to cooperate and coordinate 
their offer of advanced continuing education to local industry 
• bringing regional industry and universities together to discuss relevant concerns and 
possible cooperation in higher level education and continuing education 
• providing a platform for discussion and action on wider aspects of local technology 
transfer 
• the undertaking of regional and local training and skill needs analysis 
• the creation and development of specialised regional networks to address specific 
regional issues at a sectoral level and at a topic level 
• the active participation in regional development programmes 
• the direct development and provision of training to regional industry 
• the introduction of new training delivery techniques, bringing the training to a wider 
audience within the region 
• the development of a regional unit of operational expertise in dealing with European 
programmes, particularly those in education and training and to a lesser extent those 
in R&D. 
It is recalled from Section 1.3.3 that in 1991 a series of "Positive Actions" were 
launched. Among other things, these actions sought to identify and correct structural and 
functional problems in the implementation of COMETT at a regional level and were 
particularly important in the development of COMETT and higher education-industry 
cooperation activities in the less favoured regions of Europe and the new German 
Lander. 
5.5.2 Inter-regional integration 
COMETT has had a particularly strong impact in developing inter-regional cooperation 
- well beyond the specific activities supported by the programme. Again the UETPs 
have been central in this process, providing a structured, responsive and easily iden­
tifiable initial contact point for those seeking partners in a region. The variety of partic­
ipants involved in UETPs has made such partner seeking all the more effective. Also 
the fact that most European regions hosted a UETP has been important for the levels of 
cooperation and involvement achieved. 
65 
COMETT's mobility activities have contributed strongly to opening up regions to a 
much wider European influence with an influx of new technologies, new cultures, new 
ways of seeing and doing things. This has taken place for higher education institutions, 
students and perhaps most importantly for SMEs. It has led to a number of develop­
ments including: 
• the transfer of technology between EU regions 
• the linking of universities sending and enterprises receiving students across par­
ticipating countries 
• the creation in enterprises of an awareness and future contacts in other European 
regional markets 
• the development of research and development personnel with a European outlook, 
and the availability of such personnel to local enterprises. This includes the improve­
ment of linguistic abilities. 
In the development of all forms of training products, the inter-regional approach has 
been of most importance in improving course quality. In addition, the national 
evaluations undertaken indicate that COMETT has improved the availability of special­
ised technical courses in peripheral regions. Such regions do not have the critical mass 
of industry and higher education to provide for the wide variety of specialisation 
available in core, more developed regions. Their consolidation into a more integrated 
European training market makes for better access. 
In conclusion, this inter-regional technology (and cultural) transfer has been a mainstay 
of COMETT in achieving regional integration and increased European cohesion. While 
it has taken place most obviously through mobility actions and delivery of training 
courses, other less obvious technology transfer has occurred through working on peda­
gogics and training delivery techniques. Equally, organisational and management struct­
ures required in enterprises and universities to exploit new technologies effectively have 
formed part of the inter-regional transfer. 
5.6 Equal opportunities between men and women 
The issue of equal opportunities for men and women is explicitly addressed in the 
Council Decision on COMETT II. The objectives include the statement: 
'(...) to promote equal opportunities for men and women in initial and continuing 
training in, in particular, advanced technology (...)' 
However, neither in the Council Decision nor in the COMETT II Vademecum are 
criteria or guidelines for implementation of this objective given. The issue is overlooked 
in the evaluation report by the panel of experts, and the same holds for most of the 
national evaluations. The GMV Evaluation Report notes on this topic: "COMETT has 
not had a particular effect on strengthening equality of opportunity between men and 
women in the training sphere: none of the project initiators met made reference to a 
conscious policy in this sense . In the poll sample, women represented 31% of course 
Only a sample was surveyed; there are of course a number of COMETT projects which have such a 
conscious policy, including a UETP focusing on this topic. 
66 
participants and 38% of COMETT students, which, however, according to experts, 
seems to be a representative proportion of the European student population in the 
scientific and technological domains. Thus, no discrimination was noted. " 
This observation summarises well the situation, but it remains worthwhile to consider 
some more details. In the area of student placements, in particular, the continuous in­
crease of female participation should be mentioned. In COMETT I, the percentage of 
female students receiving a placement grant was 36%; by the end of COMETT II the 
figure will have risen to 43%. This percentage comes close to the female participation 
in higher education and exceeds by far that of female students in engineering education. 
The data available actually shows that the male/female distribution in COMETT 
placements to a large extent reflects the distribution in the particular discipline or 
programme of study (e.g. engineering, exact sciences, management, etc. ) in higher 
education. 
The increase of females in COMETT placements is most likely attributable to the wider 
range of disciplines making use of it, reducing the relative importance of engineering 
students (where females represent only one quarter). 
In the area of training courses, the figures on female participation have been quite stable 
over the years. Since 1987 the annual attendance of females to COMETT courses has 
fluctuated around 22%. This no doubt reflects that the composition of the target group is 
quite stable (unlike the university students): for many COMETT courses the trainees 
need to be people with certain degrees, in particular in engineering, and/or in certain 
positions, notably middle management posts in production and research and develop­
ment areas. Both categories are still dominantly male - a situation COMETT can do 
little about. Thus, when 22% of the trainees in COMETT II courses are female, this 
would appear to be a realistic representation of the target group. 
It can also be mentioned that females are very well represented within projects as 
project staff, in particular in Strands A and B. Another observation to be reported is that 
projects which were particularly strong on promoting equality between men and women 
- which currently comes down to the positive discrimination of females - are very un­
common; moreover they were often weak on other COMETT criteria. 
In conclusion, the objective of promoting equality between men and women is probably 
the one which has been given least attention to, both at programme and project level. 
This can be explained by the fact that the COMETT programme design did not include 
any specific action which could have facilitated it. It also results from the recognition 
by programme and project staff that, in the end, a programme like COMETT can do 
very little do about a problem which is rooted in choices and attitudes of girls in 
secondary education. At the same time the figures available clearly show that no 
discrimination of either sexes has taken place. 
67 
5.7 Indus try-University cooperation 
Probably one of the most original features of COMETT was its strong requirement of 
industry-university cooperation in projects . As shown in the previous sections and 
chapters, this collaboration can take many different forms. Despite criticism on the 
effectiveness and outcomes, few will nowadays state that such cooperation is useless or 
needless. The objectives of industry-university cooperation vary depending on the situat­
ion. Three major arguments are often put forward: 
• faster industrial application of findings from research 
• improvement of the output of technical qualifications 
• more effective transfer of technology between sectors and regions. 
In Europe the awareness has grown of the need and importance to reinforce the techno­
logical base through cooperation, both on an international level, and between univer­
sities and companies. For many people in industry and higher education, COMETT has 
been one of the first major opportunities to develop such collaboration on a systematic 
and structured basis. As a result of COMETT a number of long lasting partnerships 
between universities and industries partners have been created. In all evaluations of the 
programme, these cooperation opportunities and the resulting partnerships are highlight­
ed as a positive and satisfactory aspect. 
Despite these generally positive evaluation results, there are some critical remarks to be 
made as well. Many of the partnerships created through COMETT had difficulties get­
ting off the ground, whilst others faced many other difficulties. Amongst the reasons for 
this are reported, in relation to industry: 
• main interest in short-term problems and solutions 
• lack of familiarity with the opportunities offered by COMETT (and other European 
programmes) 
• unwillingness or unpreparedness to participate in the training project development 
process, through input of experts and support (a remark often heard is: "They only 
want outputs") 
• not used to thinking and acting at a European level. 
Criticism regarding university involvement in cooperation projects with industry is 
mainly concerned that: 
• they are too academic, i.e. too far away from the concerns of application 
• their procedures are too slow, resulting in long development times before results 
become available 
• they are not flexible enough. 
There are, however, a number of trends which help in reducing the problems involved 
in industry-university cooperation in education and training: 
• the awareness within industry of the benefits and long term advantages of more 
systematic cooperation is growing 
• firms increasingly become aware of their wider responsibility, both economic and 
social, with regard to initial and continuing education 
• because of constrained or reduced public financial resources, universities become 
more inclined to think in terms of client-oriented activities. 
It is recalled that both 'university' and 'industry' should be interpreted in the broadest sense. 
68 
COMETT has contributed to these trends and developments, notably by showing that: 
• most successful cases of cooperation occur when the cooperation is adopted as a 
means of achieving specific goals 
• cooperation is best achieved when those involved agree that the cooperation gives 
results which are demonstrably better than would be achieved by university or com­
panies working on their own 
• cooperation is an effective way of matching supply and demand in complex and 
novel areas. 
In conclusion, it has been an important accomplishment of COMETT to have raised the 
awareness in both industry and academia of the added value of cooperation in the field 
of education and training. This has been particularly true in countries and regions where 
such cooperation mechanisms were barely developed. The information available also 
suggests, that this result is irreversible, in the sense that the large majority of organis­
ations involved in such collaborative ventures intend, despite the problems encountered, 
to continue to be involved in such cooperation mechanisms in the future. 
5.8 The sectoral bottom-up approach within COMETT 
The Council Decision on COMETT II includes an explicit statement about the techno­
logy content of COMETT projects. Key terms are: "... reinforcing training in, in 
particular, advanced technology, ... COMETT II will facilitate innovation and 
technology transfer ...". The basic mechanism which was supposed to achieve this goal 
was cooperation between enterprises and universities across Europe. 
Perhaps surprisingly, explicit references to technology and sectoral issues were scarce in 
the official COMETT documentation. In any case, the information available gave no 
clue as to in which sectoral or technological direction the COMETT programme should 
go: indeed, the main option chosen appeared to be essentially a bottom-up approach. 
Given the objectives of COMETT, a strategic choice could have been to target activities 
which were most relevant to particular industrial or economic sectors (a sectoral 
approach, partly followed in the FORCE programme) or to certain fields having 
potential for application in many different circumstances and industries (a technology or 
discipline-based approach, also followed in many R&D initiatives under the Framework 
Programme). 
No such explicit choices were made at the beginning of COMETT. Project-^activities 
might either be targeted at an industrial sector, at a technology area or both. A hybrid, 
COMETT-specific sectoral classification system was developed for that purpose, and the 
terms "area", "field", or "sector" have since then been used interchangeably to refer to 
the subject of training in projets. 
The sectoral distribution of the projects accepted in general reflects the submission 
profile. However, some sectors were more successful than others, related to the partic­
ular qualities of projects presented within that area. The table (next, page) shows a 
69 
ranking of the 15 highest funded COMETT sectors for three periods9. As one can 
observe, there are both 'technology fields' and 'industrial sectors'. 
Ranking of COMETT Sectors (in terms of volume of support received) 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 COMETT I 
(1987 - 1989) 
Advanced Production and 
Manufacturing 
Innovation Management 
Microelectronics 
Information Technology 
(General) 
Materials 
Mechanical Design 
and Analysis 
Architecture 
and Regional Planning 
Telecommunications 
Data and Information 
Processing 
Software Technology and 
Engineering 
Training (Technology and 
Methodology) 
Biotechnology 
Civil Engineering 
Agro-food 
Health and Safety COMETT II 
(1990) 
Training 
(Technology and Methodology) 
Materials 
Health and Safety 
Environment 
Mechanical Design and 
Analysis 
Information Technology 
(general) 
Innovation Management 
Microelectronics 
Biotechnology 
Civil Engineering 
Advanced Production 
and Manufacturing 
Production and 
Manufacturing (general) 
Telecommunications 
Agro-food 
Architecture and Regional 
Planning COMETT II 
(1991 - 1992) 
Advanced Production 
and Manufacturing 
Environment 
Information Technology (general) 
Mechanical Design 
and Analysis 
Materials 
Software Technology 
and Engineering 
Civil Engineering 
Training 
(Technology and Methodology) 
Telecommunications 
Agro-food 
Production and Manufacturing 
(general) 
Architecture 
and Regional Planning 
Production Management 
Health and Safety 
Biotechnology 
Clearly, the bottom-up approach has resulted in a selection of projects which were pre­
dominantly technology based, rather than oriented towards an industrial sector. This is 
probably due to the strong drive by universities and the emphasis on the link with 
Research and Development programmes as stated in the Council Decision. The 
9 1993-94 is not included, since no major A and Cb-projects were accepted, and since it is not really 
possible to classify the pool projects into particular areas. 
70 
COMETT allocations are an indicator of the quality and the quantity of the demand in a 
certain area. The figures and trends show that: 
• the quality of the broad set of most important sectors has not changed significantly 
over the years 
• the need for advanced, project-based industrial training may fluctuate significantly 
and rapidly 
• the COMETT selection strategy is based on a large number of criteria, which in their 
totality do not seem to lead to any sectoral prioritising. 
The lack of clear patterns in the trends (exception made for the boost in Environment 
and the relative stability in a few sectors) give the important message that Current 
sectoral trends in advanced training demand have little predictive value for the future, 
even in the medium term. It also confirms that COMETT's prudent bottom-up approach 
as regards sectoral priorities was entirely justified. Thus, leaving it entirely up to the 
enterprises and higher education institutions to decide jointly on which subjects to 
cooperate, rather than setting out 'target areas' appears to have been a wise decision 
which has also contributed to the success and continuous innovation in itself. 
For completeness, some "top-down" initiatives should be mentioned. Under the "Positive 
Actions" initiative of 1991-1992, some funding was made available for a number of 
sectoral surveys of COMETT projects, as well as for some experimental workshops. 
These have strongly contributed to the understanding of the sectoral issues within 
COMETT10. Another sector-oriented decision has been the priority setting for sectoral 
UETPs in the 1992 Call for Applications, the main concern being to ensure broad 
sectoral coverage of COMETT at sectoral UETP level. Finally, a red thread throughout 
the management of the programme has been the emphasis on linking COMETT activi­
ties with other European programmes, in particular R&D initiatives, which has some­
times taken the form of concerted action. 
10A synthesis of the surveys as well as further sectoral information is provided in the report 'A sectoral 
view on COMETT'. 
6. Conclusion and main findings 
6.1 Fulfilment of the Council Decision 
The primary conclusion of this final evaluation of COMETT II must be a simple state­
ment that the Programme has been a major success. This is not to say that there are 
no areas requiring some rethinking and change. However» the major strategic require­
ments of the Council Decision establishing COMETT II have been fulfilled. 
COMETT II has improved the contribution of advanced technological training to the 
economic and social development of the Community through: 
• the development of local and regional industry-higher education interfaces, and the 
creation of interfaces at European level 
• the improvement of quality of courses and widening their availability 
• the promotion, development and acceptance of experiential learning associated with 
industrial placement of students by higher education in industry 
overall advancing social and economic cohesion within Europe. 
COMETT II has fostered joint development and the optimum use of training 
through: 
• the integration of industry into the joint development of courses 
• the improved utilisation of technology education and training as an integral part of 
the technology transfer process 
• the improvement brought about in the calibre and accessibility of training. 
COMETT II has adhered to and respected the principle of equal opportunities between 
men and women through the projects it has supported. 
COMETT II has made an important and direct contribution to SME needs through: 
• offering, notably via the UETPs, a platform for improving business links, increasing 
technology transfer opportunities and widening their European horizon 
• student placement activities which have accelerated their technical and economic 
development and their integration into the wider European market 
• training courses and materials which have improved the development and manage­
ment of their technical skills. 
COMETT II, has provided major European added value through: — 
• its development and in most instances creation of international networks dedicated to 
improving university-industry cooperation 
• its important- contribution to the internationalisation of placements activities 
• the European dimension of the training activities supported 
• its strong integrative and cohesive effect, in economic and social terms, across 
European higher education and advanced technology training. 
73 
6.2 Future strategy development 
While COMETT II has been an undoubted success, there are a number of approaches, 
areas and activities which similar European initiatives might develop further based on 
the experience gained over the past five years: 
• The transition from a training to a learning based approach has been seen in 
COMETT II and in industrial training more generally. Promotion of a "learning 
culture" and moves to the "Learning Organisation" place more emphasis on the 
learning process of individuals and teams. They require «more attention to issues such 
as learning capacity, motivation and work organisation. Thus deep, strategic shift 
should be fully reflected in European education and training initiatives. It also calls 
for a new type of training of trainers. 
• Closely allied to the shift to a learning rather than training focus is the move seen in 
some projects of COMETT II to place the purely technical elements for learning into 
a wider skills acquisition strategy. Here, issues such as project-based training, 
multi-disciplinary competencies, core competencies for both individuals, teams and 
firms were addressed. This approach deserves to be further developed. 
• COMETT II has made major strides in improving and assuring the quality of course 
and materials provision. It is important that this advance be built upon. A Total 
Quality approach needs to be integrated into the operational fabric of education and 
training initiatives. Again, this is a key element in moves toward the creation of an 
effective "learning culture". 
• Central to the improvements in university-industry cooperation brought about by 
COMETT has been the development of continuing technological training as a core 
part of technology transfer from universities to industry. The COMETT experience 
has pointed to the advantages to be gained from an institution being able to 
undertake an integrated approach to technology transfer, ranging from consultancy 
and short workshops to major contract research and even joint ventures. This 
integrated approach can yet again be seen as a move from "simple training" to the 
development of a "Learning Organisation". 
• The European dimension has often been perceived as one of the most important 
value added of the COMETT programme, often yielding many indirect benefits for 
participants. This needs to be safeguarded and strengthened through more structural 
cooperation across various European programmes. 
• It is important to guard against "fashions and fads" in training; what is sometimes 
promoted by small groups, is not necessarily what is needed by Europe. 
6.3 Future operational development 
COMETT UETPs have been called the "backbone" of the programme and a central 
reason for its success. COMETT II has pointed to a number of operational issues: 
• COMETT experience has pointed to the importance of requiring such network nodes 
to quickly take on a legal character. This provides for a more stable node with better 
prospects of development. 
• The institutional location of the node is central to its success. Early discussions on an 
appropriate site clarifies the expectations placed on the node by the various actors 
involved. 
74 
• The respective merits and advantages of regional and (European) UETPs need to be 
recognized, so that each type of partnership can optimise its contribution to the 
European network. 
COMETT student mobility has been most successful in achieving its objectives, partic­
ularly in involving industry and SMEs. 
• Its 'good practice network' might be opened to assisting other initiatives which have 
not achieved such success with industrial placements. 
• Given the current COMETT mastery of the mechanics of student mobility, additional 
university-industry development requirements might be placed on the mobility 
activity. 
• Personnel placements have worked particularly well in some countries, and that 
positive experience should be fed into new exchange arrangements. 
COMETT II has developed many thousands of training courses and an impressive 
quantity of materials has been made available. The quality improvement in this training 
has been consistently remarked upon. 
• It is important that many more organisations and individuals have access to these 
resources; marketing and dissemination of materials should receive a much higher 
profile in the future. 
• Programmes should reflect how they can contribute towards the development of the 
"Learning Organisation", notably by making room for on-the-job and on-line training, 
project based training, vendor engineering of training suppliers, etc. 
• More professional interfaces for university based trainers interacting with industry 
should be developed. This might involve universities in joint ventures with prof­
essional training consultants or closer liaison with technology transfer units. 
6.4 Project implementation 
COMETT II has provided some valuable lessons in terms of project management. These 
include notably: 
• appropriate needs analysis before the full launch of the project is essential 
• adequate project preparation and planning is necessary; in particular a full and 
common understanding of the project objectives should be pursued 
• the intrinsic risks of transnational education and training projects should be 
recognized; scenarios should exist to cope with the damage caused by the turn-over 
of project staff or the loss of a partner 
• better awareness of the real, and often underestimated, costs of the "European over­
head" is important. — 
Awareness of these and related issues will help improve the quality of collaborative 
training projects and their outputs. 
75-16 
Annex 1. Statistical overview 
This is only a selection out of the many statistical data available. More details can be found in the 
different reports which have been produced (cf. Annex 3). The synoptic overview of COMETT by country 
(Annex 2) also includes a short table per country. 
Table 1. Distribution of projects submitted by Strand and Year 
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total 
Strand 
A 366 j - j 114 j - ; - 480 
Ba 351 j 148 j 194 j 181 ! 176 1050 
Bb 99 | -j - j - | - 99 
Be 138 | 55 j 89 ! 96 j 95 473 
Ca 328 I 131 j 182 j 194 j 182 1017 
Cb 726 ! -j 293 j - j - 1019 
Cc 32 ! - j -| -j - 32 
D 342 | 88 j - j 146 j 144 720 
Total 2382 j 422 j 872 j 617 j 597 4890 
Notes1 
(J) Meaning of the Strands: see 'COMETT Terminology' in the beginning of this report, as well as 
Chapters 2 through 4. Strand D includes 'preparatory visits' in 1990-1991, some Positive 
Actions in 1992 and complementary support for UETPs in 1993-1994. 
(2) From 1991 onwards, applications under Strands Ba, Be, Ca could only be submitted by UETPs 
(accepted under Strand A in 1990 or 1992) - cf. the 'Pool system' described in Chapter 1. 
From 1993 onwards, the complementary measures under Strand D were reserved to UETPs accepted 
in 1990 under Strand A. 
(3) The notion 'project' is not identical across projects and years. In particular the pool projects 
(Strand Ba, Be, C a from 1991 onwards) include several sub-projects. 
(4) The 32 applications under Strand Cc were re-submissions of Cb-projects which had been 
shortlisted as potential pilot projects. 
These notes also apply to many of the other tables. 
77 
Table 2. Distribution of projects accepted by Strand and Year 
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total 
Strand 
A 158 j - | 49 j - j - 207 
Ba 246 | 148 | 172 j 1.77 ! 175 918 
Bb 13 j - j -j - I - 13 
Be 66 j 54 j 67 j 86 j 92 365 
Ca 123 ! 130 | 154 j 188 I 179 774 
Cb 191 j - j 113 | - ; - 304 
Cc 30 ! - j - j -j - 30 
D 49 j 88 j - ! 146 | 141 . 424 
Total 876 j 420 j 555 ; 597 ; 587 3035 
Notes 
0) 
(2) Although most pool project submissions were approved, in general the project was only 
partially accepted. 
The table reflects the status at the moment of decision. Following contract negotiations, some 
projects eventually did not start; a few projects were also stopped after a some time. 
Table 3. Evolution of demand and awards of placements (Ba) and exchanges (Be) 
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total 
Demand 
Student 16,130 j 14,558 j 26,525 j 31,820 | 33,744 122,777 
placements 
Personnel 420 j 215 j 512 j 427 j 327 1,901 
exchanges 
Awards 
Student 3,777 j 5,272 ; 6,926 j 7,725 j 7,940 31,640 
placements 
Personnel 95 j 124 j 140 j 228 j 252 839 
exchanges , 
Note 
The number of students on placement was actually somewhat higher than approved (cf. Chapter 4). 
78 
Table 4. Distribution of financial demand by Strand and Year (in 1000 ECU) 
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total 
Strand 
A 82,413 j - | 18,973 j - j - 101,386 
Ba 103,429 j 51,413 j 101,765 j 128,538 j 128,365 513,510 
Bb 8,093 | - j - | - j - 8,093 
Be 8,669 j 3,361 j 9,849 j 7,705 j 5,855 35,439 
Ca 19,204 ! 17,496 j 24,400 j 35,840 j 24,919 121,859 
Cb 286,638 j - j 89,163 j - j - 375,801 
Cc 17,607 j - j -\ - j - 17,607 
D 2,976 | 1,570 j - j 6,279 j 3,715 14,540 
Total 529,029 j 73,840 j 244,150 ; 178,362 ; 162,854 1,188,235 
Table 5. Distribution of allocations by Strand and Year (in 1000 ECU) 
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total * 
Strand 
A 21,605 j - ; 7,607 j - j - 29,212 
Ba 10,148 ! 14,279 j 17,708 ! 18,491 ! 18,954 79,580 
Bb 99 j - I - ! - j - 99 
Be 613 j 907 ! 946 j 1,680 j 1,762 '" 5,908 
Ca 2,123 j 6,212; 7,119 j 5,161 j 6,282 26,897 
Cb 35,591 ! - ! 23,288 ! - I - 58,879 
Cc 14,770 | -! - ! - I - 14,770 
D 95 Î 248 j - | 3,461 j 2,722 6,526 
Total 85,044 ; 21,646 ; 56,668 ; 28,793 ; 29,720 221,871 
Notes 
(I) 
(2) 
(3) These amounts are based on the situation at contract stage. 
For multi-annual projects (A, Cb, Cc) the amounts indicated refer to the year in which the 
project is accepted; in reality, the allocations were distributed over the different years of the 
project. 
Due to rounding errors, there are some one-digit differences with the totals of Tables 7 and 8. 
79 
Table 6. Distribution of projects accepted by Country and Year 
1990 j 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total 
Country 
B 49 j 17 | 19 ! 16 I 15 116 
D 88 | 43 | 77 ; 76 j 71 355 
DK 24 j 111 12 | 15 j 14 76 
.-. 1 1 i 1 , 
E 61 j 30 j 47 j 55 j 57 250 
F 166 j 63 j 80 | 91 j 88 488 
GR 63 j 25 ; 29 j 34 j 31 182 
I 76 | 37 | 48 j 63 | 61 285 
IRL 47 | 16 j 18 | 18 j 17 116 
L 4 j - | 1 | - | 3 8 
NL 49 j 21 | 23 j 24 j 22 139 
P 38 j 25 ! 30 | 34 | 34 161 
UK 128 | 61 | 71 | 78 j 84 422 
Total EC 793 \ 349 j 455 j 504 j 497 2,598 
A 23 j 16 | 17 ; 18 j 19 93 
CH 5 | - j 23 ; 13 j 12 53 
FL - ; - j 2 | 2 I 1 5 
I§ 2 | ' 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 17 
N 6 1. - j 20 j 16 ! 16 58 
S 28 j . 14 | ' 17 | 20 ! 20 99 
SF 20 | " 19 I 17 j 20 ! 20 96 
Total EFTA 84 j 52 \ 100 | 93 j 92 421 
Total 877 j 401 j 555 ; 597 j 589 3,019 
Notes 
(V 
(2) 
(3) The abbreviation 'EC (European Community) has been used, as this was the official 
denomination during most of COMETT II. 
The distinction between EC and EFTA has been kept as it was at the beginning of the 
programme (1990). 
The countries refer to the site of the main contractor at the contract stage. It is recalled, 
however, that COMETT projects are transnational in nature and that a typical COMETT project 
involves different partners from 3 to 6 countries. ^ ^^^^ 
Table 7. Distribution of allocations by Country and Year (in 1000 ECU) 
80 
1990 j 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total 
Country -
B 4,374 I 898 j 1,895 ; 926 j 1,085 9,178 
D 10,228 | 2,498 j 7,421 j 3,851 j 4,035 28,032 
DK 2,843 | 742 j 1,341 j 718 j 761 6,405 
E 6,188 ! 1,932 j 4,325 j 2,379 j 2,497 17,321 
F 13,743 I 3,250 j 7,681 j 4,383 j 4,389 33,445 
GR 5,478 j 1,271 j 3,031 j 1,861 j 1,862 13,503 
I 8,414 | 1,874 I 4,746 j 2,671 I 2,717 20,422 
IRL 3,633 | 1,136 j 2,280 j 1,016 j 1,213 9,278 
L 1,035 j - j 150 | - j 170 1,355 
NL 5,490 ! 1,058 ! 2,765 ; 1,435 j 1,487 12,235 
P 3,344 ; 962 ! 2,063 j 1,196 ! 1,515 9,081 
UK 12,826 | 3,748 j 7,979 | 4,294 | 4,162 33,009 
Total EC 77,596 ; 19,369 \ 45,677 \ 24,730 \ 25,893 193,265 
A 1,196 : 719 j 2,069 j 828 ; 896 5,708 
CH 572 ! - j 2,599 | 858 j 682 4,711 
FL - j - j 350 | 72 j 10 432 
IS 179 j 42 | 310 I 108 ) 93 732 
N 1,107 ! 1,680 j 542 ; 631 3,960 
S 2,558 j 861 j 2,354 j 817 ! 704 7,295 
SF 1,836 j 656 j 1,629 j 837 | 811 5,768 
Total EFTA 7,448 \ 2,278 \ 10,991 \ 4,062 \ 3,827 28,606 
Total 85,044 j 21,647 j 56,668 j 28,792 ; 29,720 221,871 
81 
Table 8. Distribution of allocations by Country and Strand (in 1000 ECU) 
Strand A I Ba/Bb/ I Ca | Cb/Cc j D Total 
Be | 
Country 
B 1,035 j 2,817 | 1,410 j 3,745 j 172 9,178 
D 3,937 | 11,504 j 3,089 I 8,719; 784 28,032 
DK 675 | 2,315 ; 595 | 2,645 j 174 6,405 
E 2,505 I 7,510 j 2,088 j 4,633 j 584 17,321 
F 4,265 I 13,083 | 3,995 j 10,968 j 1,134 33,445 
GR 1,890 | 5,621 j 1,603 j 4,089 j 300 13,503 
I 2,753 | 7,496 j 2,575 j 7,015 j 583 20,422 
IRL 690 j 3,605 j 1,262 j 3,518 j 204 9,279 
L 120 j 105 | 45 j 1,065 j 20 1,355 
NL 1,455 j 3,804 j 1,685 j 4,963 j 328 12,235 
P 1,350 | 3,687 | 1,195 j 2,470 j 379 9,081 
UK 3,860 j 14,036 j 3,347 j 10,679 | 1,087 33,009 
Total EC 24,535 \ 75,584 \ 22,889 \ 64,509 \ 5,748 193,265 
A 735 j 2,624 j 826 ; 1,336 j 187 5,708 
CH 1,130 | 1,321 | 867 j 1,390 j 2 4,711 
FL 150 j 52 j 30 j 200 ! - 432 
IS 159 I 210 | 70 j 240 j 53 732 
N 930 | 1,187 j 477 j 1,318 j 47 3,959 
S 888 I 2,357 j 998 j 2,811 j 241 7,295 
SF 685 | 2,251 j 740 j 1,845 j 248 5,768 
Total EFTA 4,677 \ 10,003 \ 4,008 \ 9,140 \ 778 28,606 
Total 29,212 ; 85,587 j 26,897 ; 73,649 j 6,527 221,871 
82 
Annex 2. Synoptic overview by country 
The following pages contain a brief overview of COMETT for each of the participating countries. More 
details can be found in the National Evaluations of COMETT, as well as the 'National profiles' and the 
'Regional profiles' which have been prepared as part of the monitoring activity. The country order is the 
same as in the statistics of Annex 1. 
BELGIUM 
Population 10.02m., Population Density: 328.4, GDP/head: 16.2 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE BELGIUM (1990-94)1 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 3 
Sectoral 4 1,035,000 
Students 1,030 2,530,580 
Fellows 45 286,340 
Courses 137 1,409,500 
Joint Training Projects 12 2,765,000 
Pilot Projects 2 980,000 
Complementary Measures 12 171,558 
TOTAL 9,177,978 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• There is no specific legislation on higher education-industry cooperation. Constitutional decentralisation 
gives regions, rather than central government, the main role in dealing with such matters. It also gives 
rise to substantial inequalities between effective legislation and opportunity across regions. 
• Programmes and activities include: (1) those previously fun by the Institute for the encouragement of 
Scientific Research in Industry and Agriculture, one of which provides 50% support for applied 
research in industry which often includes academic participation, (2) the work of the Industry-
University Foundation, (3) continuing training provided by the Institutes of Engineers, (4) the research 
work of the 11 Joint Research Centres, partly funded by industryand closely linked to universities, (5) 
the Nation Council for Scientific Policy which includes industrial and university members, (6) the 
technology promotion programmes of individual regions. 
• University teaching staff can engage in external consultancy for up to 20% of their time. No such 
provision exists at third level outside the universities. Flemish legislation provides for funding of 
continuing training as a basic activity. Each university has its own, usually internal, industrial interface 
1 The rows in this table (and in the similar tables for the other countries) refer to the following Strands: 
UETPs: Strand A; Joint training projects: Strand Cb (includes training courses and materials); 
Students: Strand Ba+Bb; Pilot Projects: Strand Cc (includes training courses and materials); 
Fellows: Strand Be; Complementary Measures: Strand D 
Courses: Courses supported under Strand Ca; 
83 
which has been developing to suit particular needs. Planned industrial placement is not common in 
university courses, but of growing importance in non-university higher education. 
• The Industrial Associations are the centre of activity for vocationally based training courses. But, 
outside engineering, there is little focus on higher education. There is some industrial representation in 
boards of higher education institutions. Enterprise personnel on the teaching staff of higher education 
institutions is common, particularly outside universities. Larger companies have university liaison staff, 
mainly in research. Industry provides about 10% of the research budget of universities. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• The high level of participation seen in COMETT I has fallen back, from 10% to 3% in the period 
1993/4. Industrial participation has also slowed down. Until recently, francophone universities were 
still not taking fully part in the Programme, with only one UETP in the region, confined to the 
Liégeoise region, and to student placement activities. The new UETP "Wallonie-Bruxelles" promises 
greater integration of partners into COMETT activities. Sectoral UETPs are well represented, 
particularly in the Flemish region. UETPs receive little financial support from the political authorities. 
A good level of transnationalityhas been seen in projects. 
3. Networking 
• With the regional francophone UETP network, both enterprises and students surveyed were some what 
negative on the added value. Only 9% of enterprises were positive on TNA activities while 35% were 
negative. Some 24% thought of the UETP as a help in conveying training needs to trainers. By and 
large, industry sees the role of the UETP as an adviser in European projects and link to universities. 
• The transnational element is the major contribution of UETPs: 30% of respondents felt more aware of 
the benefit of international partnerships, 37% were stimulated to participate in European projects. 57% 
of industrialists and 78% of students felt COMETT improved the European dimension in the 
enterprises' culture. 
• Compared to regional UETPs, sectoral ones are seen as better equipped to undertake TNA and work on 
mobility and recruitment. 
• The UETPs have worked with and created synergy with most institutions of economic and university 
life assisting in collaboration while also working on regional and national projects. 
• The main strengths of the UETPs are the provision of regular information, mobility activities, advice 
on European projects, responsiveness to requests and their role as a university-enterprise interface. The 
weaknesses are that they are not well enough known with poor marketing resources, poor abilities in 
TNA and little actual knowledge of the technologies. 
4. Mobility 
• The concept of mobility is weakly developed in Belgium as is the role of placement of students in 
enterprises as part of their course. However, the idea is gaining ground. From a position of welcoming 
many more students to Belgium, at the beginning of COMETT, the flows are now in balance due to 
the growing interest of Belgian students in going abroad. Most students go to Germany and the UK. 
• There was nearly 100% positive response from industry, universities and students for mobility 
activities. Smaller universities, in particular, used placement as a first step in internationalisation and 
making themselves known in Europe. They were helped to bring their teaching up to date-and offer 
more attractive possibilities to potential students. 
• Industry moved from looking on placements as "a favour" to being an equal contract with both sides 
gaining. Enterprises now propose regular placements. Conditions of placements, work programmes and 
duration have improved. 
• Despite relatively good participation, staff mobility is still seen as under exploited. Placement is mostly 
from Belgian applied science departments to firms abroad. 
5. Training 
• For training course development, 45% of survey responses were positive. The added value of the inter­
national dimension was very important. There was an innovative reshaping of projects including use of 
multi media and training of trainers. 
84 
• Some 68% of respondents indicated that quality and level of training improved and 57% that a 
European dimension had been added to the enterprises culture. 49% pointed to access to a much 
greater richness of information for course development, 46% to better access to technologies and 40% 
to improvements in work quality. COMETT improved not only quality but also variety of training 
offered. 
6. Overall Impact 
• Only 15% of enterprises felt that COMETT had changed their comportment towards universities. 
However, 40% had used the work as part of a strategy of internationalisation.Firms thought COMETT 
should be much more widely promoted; it was too little known. 
• 96% of those on placement and 80% of those undertaking training were satisfied. The internation­
alising impact on universities (particularly small and specialised ones) was important. 
• Overall, 54% of enterprises thought COMETT had a positive impact on their internationalisation,35% 
on their technology, and 28% on quality of work. Of enterprises, 32% thought COMETT had a 
regional benefit and 18% a national benefit. 
• In total, COMETT made participants aware of the possibilities in Europe and the potential of 
international collaboration. 
GERMANY 
Population 80.27m., Population Density: 224.9, GDP/head: 18.3 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE GERMANY (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 19 
Sectoral 8 3,937,000 
Students 4447 11,096,640 
Fellows 48 407,250 
Courses 357 3,089,000 
Joint Training Projects 33 6,426,500 
Pilot Projects 5 2,292,185 
Complementary Measures 44 783,644 
TOTAL 28,032,219 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• The 3rd Framework Law on Higher Education confirms the structure of the different elements of 
higher education. Much of higher education and associated R&D is financed at a State level. 
• The BMFT promotes and supports cooperative activities between higher education and industry, 
including funding technology transfer training and the development of higher education-industry 
cooperation consortia. The employment of R&D personnel by SMEs is also supported. The States also 
have their own particular programmes. 
• Over the last decade, higher education institutions have become increasingly involved in technology 
transfer, often with central offices and full time staff providing advisory and support services to faculty 
and firms, ^achhochschulen have developed particularly good regional and industrial activities. There 
is increased industrial placement taking place as part of study programmes. Widespread individual 
university/industry contacts. The Fraunhofer Institutes have helped bridge the gap between higher 
85 
education and industry. Regional institutes have been set up at Lander level with responsibilities for 
technology transfer activities. Trade unions often have technology transfer offices on their premises. 
• Chambers of Commerce and Industry have cooperation agreements with higher education institutions, 
particularly the Fachhochschulen, covering areas such as research, technology and continuing education 
and training. There are many industry initiated foundations and research associations which support and 
fund university/industry activities. Industry provides 2 to 3% of externally funded higher education 
research. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• Germany was a very hesitant partner in COMETT I resulting in a poor geographic and technical 
coverage from only 2 regional, 2 mixed and 7 sectoral UETPs. The 1992 Call for Applications saw a 
transformation in the German situation with 27 UETPs giving complete regional coverage and all 
Lander establishing direct linkage with COMETT. The German National Profile notes that it has been 
the sectoral UETPs which have been responsible for international knowledge and technology transfer 
and more active in continuing training. 
3. Networking 
• Regional UETPs have ensured a continuous cooperation between universities, associations and 
enterprises. This enables industries of the region to have access to other European education, training 
and S&T programmes. They also promote a more committed engagement of higher education 
institutions in continuing training and develop third level and continuing education courses and short 
courses. 
• Their strengths include: (1) participation by partners from all parts of Germany, (2) sponsorship, 
mediation and care of students, (3) they enable medium-sized enterprises access to European 
cooperation, (4) they promote growing cooperation by European partners - regular information 
bulletins, participation at trade fairs, etc. (5) they carry out Ca-courses (short courses) and coordinate 
larger transnational projects. 
• Their weaknesses include (1) only one of 27 UETPs has a legally independent status, (2) more SME 
involvement is required as is training linking with R&D for SMEs. 
4. Mobility 
• Under COMETT II, studentship numbers have reached the level of other major EU Members and the 
balance between incoming and outgoing students has been attained. In all ways German participation is 
judged to have been more successful. However, in the exchange of personnel, there has been little 
interest, particularly from industry. 
• It provides young students with positive impressions from their European practical training experience 
which acts es multiplier for cooperation between university and enterprise. Those students will later 
facilitate the introduction of innovative ideas, especially in SMEs. While the realisation of practical 
training in industry between higher education institutions and industry is favourable, the personnel 
transfer (Be) is still underdeveloped. The willingness on the part of the students to complete their 
practical training abroad has considerably increased. 
• Enterprises have had positive experiences with trainees from European universities. This will ensure 
the willingness of industry to offer practical training places in future. However, the new—Lander can 
only offer a few practical training places. 
• The personnel transfer between universities and industry is made difficult, not only because of a 
number of legal framework conditions, but also the design of the content of the practical training. The 
personnel transfer is financially unattractive to practitioners in industry, and on account of the need for 
longer releases of employees, it is almost negligible. 
5. Training 
• Cooperation of university with industry in the area of education and further-training is still 
underdeveloped. The increased share of German facilities in the coordination of European courses and 
pilot projects shows an increasing acceptance of the COMETT approach. COMETT projects comple­
ment meaningfully existing plans in specific areas like environmental protection etc. 
86 
• COMETT initiatives in Germany broaden the available offer of training, especially in regard to themes 
that concern the realisation of the EU-home market. German participation in short training courses has 
remained steady during COMETT II. Despite good industrial involvement, courses have relied on 
traditional teaching methods. There has been good complementarity with other EC programmes. Joint 
training programmes have declined. Germany hosted four pilot projects. 
• Positive Actions were used to integrate the new Lander through assistance in the preparation of 
tenders, financial support for student placement, along with support for study visits, conferences, 
studies on higher education / industry cooperation, etc. 
6. Overall Impact 
• A marked revival of the debate between university and industry has taken place. COMETT played 
some part. The central themes and activities were: (1) future requirements on higher education institut­
ions in view of European integration, (2) concepts of cooperation between higher education institutions 
and enterprise for mutual advantage, (3) new teaching concepts in the light of rising numbers of 
students, (4) restructuring of the academic system with regard to the reduction of study periods, (5) 
stronger orientation of third level education towards the requirements of praxis in the professions and 
industry, (6) improvement in the recognition of study periods abroad and the qualifications received 
abroad, (7) increased significance of higher education institutions in continuing education, (8) in 
technology transfer centres COMETT stimulated transnational cooperation in Europe, (9) through 
cooperation of UETPs and centres of technology transfer, it is possible to link research and 
development with continuing education especially benefiting SMEs. 
DENMARK 
Population 5.16 m., Population Density: 119.8, GDP/head: 16.6 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE DENMARK (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 3 
Sectoral 2 675,000 
Students 909 2,142,310 
Fellows 24 172,970 
Courses 54 595,000 
Joint Training Projects 9 1,647,000 
Pilot Projects 2 998,330 
Complementary Measures 12 173,972 
TOTAL 6,404,582 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• The concentration of higher education in the Copenhagen region ended after WWII with the esta­
blishment of new universities at Aarhus, Odense, Aalborg and Roskilde. Engineering studies and 
research spread from the Danish Technical School to Aalborg. The Danish Technological Institute also 
carries out much applied research. 
• The 1990 Law on the Promotion of Industry established the legal framework for incVeasing cooperation 
between private industry and public research institutions. 
• Independent institutions - Technology Service Networks - offer research intensive services to industry. 
The Industrial Researcher Scheme offers economic support for about 50 PhD students per year to those 
87 
working on higher education-industry cooperation projects. The Danish Research Academy also 
finances students engaged on PhDs in industry. Various R&D Programmes promote higher education -
industry cooperation in specific areas. 
• Most universities have a strong Industrial Liaison function. There are four Science Parks. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• Interest in COMETT activities was high in 1990 but has fallen off since 1991 and is now only 
moderate. The COMETT Information Office has worked well with higher education institutions and 
enterprises. The Aalborg international conference on higher education-industry cooperation in June 
1993 was an important success. 
3. Networking 
• Five UETPs were active during COMETT II (three regional and two sectoral - training technologies 
and transport) compared to two in COMETT I. The success of the UETPs seemed to be dependent of 
the objectives of the host organisation; i.e. transfer of R&D to industry versus research and education 
of students. 
- Those working with local industry have improved the acceptance of UETP members' graduates, 
created interest for university researchers working in industry, implemented training programmes 
and opened channels for firms to access university knowledge as well as developing wider higher 
education - industry cooperation. 
- UETPs that focused only on student placement and without a stable structure of industrial 
involvement have proved much weaker but have been beneficial to the student and firm. 
• TNA2 has not been undertaken by regional UETPs. Firms either do not feel UETP staff appropriate or 
feel it should be an in-company activity. One of the sectoral UETPs has carried out extensive TNA as 
a base for activities. 
• The strengths of the UETPs were: (1) membership of the European inter-UETP network: well linked to 
North Europe, weak to the South. 
• The weaknesses include: (1) the lack of economical viability, (2) most UETPs have only reached in­
dustry indirectly with only occasional contacts, (3) insecurity has meant staff turnover increasing, 
weakening the networks, (4) industrial commitment is low and often on an ad hoc basis. 
4. Mobility 
88% of studentships were to send students, only 8% to receive students. Only 24 personnel exchanges 
took place with 87% to send staff. Student exchanges have largely resulted in companies becoming 
more open, although better quality control on students may be needed. Employee exchange, when it 
has occurred, has been very successful. 
5. Training 
• Sixteen short courses (Ca) were mounted and 9 long projects (Cb). In the latter group industrial and 
union participation was high and open and distance learning methods widely used. Two Pilot projects 
(Cc) were undertaken; one sought to develop the use of ICT in open and distance learning, the other 
developed training materials for the transport sector. 
• Training projects developed by organisations with a specific training need have worked well and have 
strengthened relationships with partners. It has not been possible to market the courses outside the 
group of partners. For educational institutions, once launched, the demand for training was smaller than 
expected. Consultancy companies' projects within their own areas of interest have been most successful 
due to (a) the projects are bigger with greater European collaboration, (b) the managers have a 
competence and reputation in training, (c) they work more closely with the end-user. 
• Training demand is changing; companies are dismantling training departments and moving from 
general training to more job specific and company oriented training with a much more result oriented 
TNA^ Training Needs Analysis. 
88 
approach. Training is becoming tailor made, in-company. One UETP has moved to developing training 
after R&D contact giving closer cooperation with the company. 
• COMETT quality is high but volume of activities is small. However, at a regional level," authorities are 
increasingly supporting continuing education and training for economic development. COMETT has 
played some role in this shift. 
6. Overall Impact 
• The Danish National Report notes that "A real breakthrough with the programme has never been able 
to be made The student exchange programme has been the most successful. The need for 
coordination situated more at the national level also made itself felt." The Final National Evaluation 
similarly notes that specific national commitment and support has been "very modest". This has 
impacted on COMETT activities. A Ministry should take ownership, and clear lines of responsibility 
be developed, as well as an information centre established. 
• COMETT has been of benefit particularly in the universities and the technical colleges. The main focus 
has been the need for upgrading of qualifications in industry and the importance of high level 
technological training. However, COMETT is only one among several government tools. 
• In Denmark, COMETT has both supported and has been supported by the "Act on Continuing 
Education" and the "Industry Researcher Programme" so that some synergy has been achieved. 
SPAIN 
Population 39.06 m., Population Density: 77.4, GDP/head: 11.96 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE SPAIN (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 12 
Sectoral 6 2,505,000 
Students 2,595 7,025,867 
Fellows 82 484,470 
Courses 244 2,088,200 
Joint Training Projects 21 3,633,050 
Pilot Projects 2 1,000,000 
Complementary Measures 33 584,018 
TOTAL 17,320,605 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• The Ley de Reforma Universitaria (LRU), 1983, provided the framework for the full collaboration of 
universities with the private sector in research projects as well as in training - but within the specific 
legislation governing each particular university. 
• Further legislation in 1984 and 1986 gave official sanction to teaching personnel participation in 
university-enterprise joint activities. 
• In 1986, la Ley de Fomento y Coordinaciôn General de la Investigaciôn Cientifica y Técnica opened 
the way to concerted public and private actions at a national and international level. 
• This was put into action under the 1988 Plan National de Investigaciôn Cientifica y Desarollo Tec-
nolôgico which: 
89 
- created 74 technology transfer units mostly based in universities and public research bodies: the 
OTRI 
- set up the PRTRI Programme to encourage the rapid industrial application of technical progress 
- launched the Proyectos Concertados Programme to promote R&D activities in industry 
- supported actions to encourage the exchange of research personnel between research centres and 
industry 
• Doctoral theses are increasingly undertaken on the basis of work done in companies' R&D 
Departments. Equally, undergraduate/diploma courses increasingly incorporate a placement period in 
industry. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• The interest in transnational placements has grown rapidly. Interest in training courses and multimedia 
activities has been somewhat less. In 1990, projects submitted were less than in COMETT I but 
increased in 1991 and 1992 due to the work of the UETPs. The acceptance and the quality of project 
is seen as having increased over the lifetime of COMETT II. Spanish participation in non-Spanish led 
projects has also increased. 
• Most Spanish universities have taken part in COMETT II along with some 800 enterprises; the latter 
have been more active than in COMETT I. Unions have also become more active. Geographically, the 
centre-north has been much stronger than the centre-south region; the regional development 
organisations have been a particularly strong backbone in the north. The Positive Actions have sought 
to develop activities in the centre-south. 
3. Networking 
There are 12 regional, 5 sectoral and one mixed UETPs in Spain concentrated for the most part in the 
north and east and reflect the level of regional industrialisation. Eight UETPs are established as not-
for-profit "Foundations". 
• The regional UETPs acted as information and management structures for EC programmes, especially 
in human resources, education and training as well as organisers of international training periods for 
university students. With sectoral UETPs they have acted as providers of an international vision on 
technological training, training periods in companies, new and dynamic training material, etc. 
• UETPs have helped industry define their training needs by launching TNAs and defining the 
methodological approach, assisting in defining training plans and choosing between training options, 
drawing together the various company studies and later developing closely aligned training provision. 
These activities have been particularly important in the context of the SME structure of Spanish 
industry. 
• UETPs have been important in establishing transnational contacts for its associates, especially the 
SMEs. Firms have also been given access to European level training products and to a wider inter­
national vision through hosting foreign students. 
• Sectoral UETPs have provided: a transnational vision to participants, European Working Groups, 
European - level training programmes and third level courses, an analysis of sectoral technology and 
training supply and demand as well as an international comparative study of the situation in Spain, a 
communication network and a data base of training and technology, and a means of advancing the 
technological level of firms in the UETP. 
• The strengths of the UETPs are Quality of services, experience in knowledge and management of 
European training projects, promotion of national and international contacts, European image of the 
UETPs, knowledge of regional and sectoral firms' needs, relations with regional governments, and 
diversification -of services. 
• The weaknesses include insufficient personnel, reduced financial resources, lack of uniformity in legal 
structure, differences in academic, regulations concerning training periods in firms (only some 
recognise these periods), non-innovative industry leading to weak demand for services. 
4. Mobility 
• The student mobility programmes have been very important. They have made COMETT widely known 
and have developed a new higher education-industry formula for students as well as improving their 
professional future. Such students will be an important source of innovation in Spanish firms. 
90 
• They have developed new modes of technology transfer in knowledge, techniques and models and 
brought higher education / industry relations into a labour market context through a concern for 
professional placement as well as providing new forms of human resource updating and recycling. 
• They have helped in giving a comparative aspect to European higher education - industry relations and 
improved language competencies, thus facilitating other forms of transnational higher education-
industry cooperation. 
• There has, however, been little real change even if some universities have adopted co-validation and 
acceptance of training periods. Generally, universities have not established mechanisms for academic 
recognition of training periods. Equally, firms need a clear legal base for cooperating in such 
academically recognised training periods. 
5. Training 
• The increase in the quantity of courses has been limited. However, in COMETT II the course quality 
was significantly better. This was based on better definition of demand through needs analysis. 
• COMETT has also helped cover a high level specialised need in technology training. And in some 
cases it has helped promote training actions at a regional level as well as levering matching finance for 
further training actions. 
• The COMETT framework for training actions (transnationality, evaluation, quality, etc.) have become 
incorporated into other actions, sometimes into regional actions. 
6. Overall Impact 
• COMETT has increased debate and action on issues such as transnational development, skill needs 
analysis and the use of new training technologies. In certain regions, it has initiated the first formal 
university / industry cooperation. In others, it has brought an international aspect to the debate. 
• COMETT has had an impact on industry-university relations in the following areas: (1) linking TNA 
to developing training for enterprises, (2) improving enterprises' decisions through better information 
on advanced training, (3) assisting companies, particularly SMEs, in their first contact with 
universities, (4) understanding the impact of training actions on companies, (5) the academic value of 
training periods in industry and the use of courses in technology transfer to firms. At a National level 
COMETT has helped "Européanise" these activities in university/industry cooperation. 
FRANCE 
Population 57.21 m., Population Density: 105.2, GDP/head: 17.25 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE FRANCE (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 21 
Sectoral 10 4,265,000 
Students 5,831 12,624,370 
Fellows 71 459,430 
Courses 469 3,995,000 
Joint Training Projects 49 9,468,000 
Pilot Projects 3 1,500,000 
Complementary Measures 65 1,133,614 
TOTAL 33,445,414 
- 91 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• The Loi Edgar Faure (1969) and the Loi Savary (1984) provided the framework for university-
enterprise relations. Universities can create public or private organisations with industrial partners. 
University staff can be seconded to industry. Staff can work for third parties. The Groupements 
d'Intérêt Public (GIPs) are particularly aimed at joint research programmes. 
• Since 1967, ANVAR has been active in helping universities to set up companies. Various high-level 
committees operate to encourage and accelerate university-industry cooperation. 
• Several universities, particularly Grenoble and Compiègne, have set up partnerships or sponsorship for 
the development of vocational training courses. There is strong enterprise presence on pedagogical 
committees. Industrial placement is already obligatory on the vast majority of technical, engineering 
and business studies courses. The laws of 1971 and of October 1985 have promoted a large volume of 
continuing education which universities help to service. 
• Large firms have developed a "Campus Manager" to deal with universities, particularly placements. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• The support of the national COMETT Committee and the COMETT Information Centre has been 
central in the full development of COMETT in France. The training legislation, now in'place for over 
20 years, has also been crucial. The strong mobilisation of higher education institutions and enterprises 
often through the UETPs has also been important. 
• French participation in COMETT fell (28% to 21%) in the 1990 Call for Proposals mostly due to 
other countries catching up. By 1993 and 1994, France was, however, making the greatest number of 
proposals among participating States. 
3. Networking 
• Of the 31 French UETPs following the 1990 and 1992 Calls, 21 are regional and 10 are sectoral. Of 
the 21 regional UETPs, 7 are based in a Conseil Régional and 9 are in Chambres de Commerce et de 
l'Industrie. By and large, the UETP network functions well and should survive well into the future. 
The active support of the Information Centre and the national authorities has played an important role 
in this success. 
• The main strengths of the UETPs are that have acted as a coordination and reference point for 
programme users. They have turned new ideas into actual European projects: the network of European 
partners has been most important here. 
• The main weaknesses lie in their frail financial structures which are due to their small size and the 
absence of pluri-annual budgeting. They have had limited human resources. Their visibility has been 
low. 
4. Mobility 
• Universities have had many more problems than engineering schools in participating in student 
placement activities. "Bac +2" institutions have had very limited participation. 
• The usefulness and simplicity of student placements have been of major benefit to enterprises, partic­
ularly SMEs. They have created a European perspective, added new competencies to the enterprise and 
raised awareness of human resource issues, as well as providing expertise for specific projects such as 
technology transfer. The placement has assisted the student in obtaining employment and improves 
language ability. 
• The placements become sources of new commercial relations and the bases of future partnerships, 
particularly for R&D programmes. However, the delays in selection procedures are too long. 
• The COMETT policies and practices have contributed to the normalisation and systématisation of 
placements abroad, particularly by the specification of quality parameters: length of stay, rights of both 
parties, etc. 
• The staff placements have not been successful and should be rethought. 
92 
5. Training 
• There have been certain difficulties due to over ambition. Reuse of existing seminar material has been 
weak. Commercialisation and diffusion of products has been weak. 
• However, COMETT has provided a transnational dimension and value added to the work and has 
integrated the human factor into technological training. New links have been developed between 
training and R&D. 
• COMETT has opened a European market for technical training as an integral part of improving 
technology transfer. It has also helped create awareness of regional poles of competence. However, the 
time to launch training initiatives has been too long and financial support too small. 
6. Overall Impact 
• The overall impact of COMETT has been far greater than the simple amount in ECUs. There has been 
strong regional synergy with local bodies subscribing financially to projects and creating their own 
programmes. It has been a success at both a national and European level. 
• At the start, national policy and programmes were closely allied to COMETT. However, with 
economic and political change .the two have now become more distant: COMETT is a bit "dated". 
GREECE 
Population: 10.25 m., Population Density: 77.7, GDP/head: 7.4 ppp 
SUMMARY TABLE GREECE (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 7 
Sectoral 6 1,890,000 
Students 1,957 5,150,903 
Fellows 77 469,690 
Courses 152 1,603,000 
Joint Training Projects 17 3,088,850 
Pilot Projects 2 1,000,000 
Complementary Measures 18 300,414 
TOTAL 13,502,857 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• There is no general legislative framework to facilitate industrial cooperation except in the specific area 
of research projects. A new environment for university-industry cooperation is being created. 
• Greece's 17 universities provide formal structured curricula administered on an intra-muros policy, 
which does not easily recognise the needs of industry. Over the last 25 years a system of Polytechnics 
have been built up with a practical orientation. A National vocational training structure has been 
developed in these Polytechnics. 
• Industry tends to view the academic world with some suspicion. Its volatile nature makes for diffi­
culties in long-term cooperation with industry. 
93 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• Difficulties among partners made for a slow take off of the COMETT Programme. National and local 
authorities were supportive, industry and professional associations were open but did not participate 
strongly. Several universities were hostile. However, as time went on participation improved, with 
firms taking the lead. 
• No similar programmes existed in Greece and there was little tradition of university-enterprise cooper­
ation. 
• The transnationality of projects proved a difficulty at the beginning but improved steadily during the 
Programme. 
• Of the 900 Greek organisations taking part in COMETT II, 600 were firms and 200 professional 
associations, Chambers, etc. 
3. Networking 
• Of the 13 Greek UETPs, 11 are active and developing well, working with other EU Programmes and 
with along national policy lines. Regional coverage is seen as good. They do no, however, receive 
national or regional co-funding. 
• The development of transnational collaboration, through UETPs and other COMETT projects is 
considered to be the most positive experience for Greek organisations. Sectoral UETPs are based on 
the active participation of industry, especially in the sectors of food, chemicals, textile and metal 
products. 
• The main strengths of the UETPs are: (1) the extensive geographic coverage (with the exception of the 
Aegean Islands), (2) encouraging participation of industry, (3) development of a new collaboration 
modes between university and industry, and (4) their contribution to transnational collaboration and 
exchanges. 
• The main weaknesses are: (1) difficulties in achieving financial self-sufficiency, (2) UETP coordinators 
have acted as training users and very rarely as training suppliers, (3) participating universities are 
mainly concerned by student placements and rarely participate in the development of training 
packages. 
4. Mobility 
• Practical placements abroad is a new concept for Greek students. UETPs, particularly the sectoral 
UETPs, have been important in finding these places. Industrial attitudes towards placements has also 
improved. 
• Generally, universities have not recognised industrial placements. The Polytechnics, however, require 
such placements. 
• The "Pool System" has worked well and helped UETPs develop strong relations with the Polytechnics. 
Management systems for placements have improved over the period of COMETT II. Particularly good 
relations have been developed with the New Lander. 
• The personnel placements have not worked well. 
5. Training 
• Most short courses have taken place in either Athens, Thessalonica, or Patras. 
• COMETT has suffered from competition from a preference of people to organise courses under the 
better financial conditions of the ESF, which not require a transnationality element. 
• The joint training and the pilot projects have encouraged the use of new training technologies. The 
quality has been satisfactory. However, co-financement has been a problem, while marketing and 
diffusion have been weak. Most projects have been run by enterprises due to restrictions on public 
organisations. 
6. Overall Impact 
• Participation in training activities, within the framework of COMETT, has been remarkable; this 
participation while limited during the first years and concentrated around public services, bank and 
local administration, has now become impressive. 
94 
The COMETT programme is considered as one of the most successful programmes. 
Collaboration between higher education institutions and enterprises has been strengthened considerably 
within a national and international context. COMETT has given rise to communication mechanisms 
among universities and industry. 
COMETT has contributed to the change of mentality towards European programmes and created an 
infrastructure for the transitional collaboration and the development of training initiatives. 
ITALY 
Population 56.76m., Population Density: 188.4, GDP/head: 15.9 
SUMMARY TABLE ITALY (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 13 
Sectoral 6 2,753,000 
Students 2,867 7,024,750 
Fellows 83 471,800 
Courses 268 2,574,500 
Joint Training Projects 34 6,515,000 
Pilot Projects 1 500,000 
Complementary Measures 35 582,818 
TOTAL 20,421,868 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• Law 382 (1980) regulates the presence of private companies in university R&D and external remun­
eration for university staff. Law 705 (1985) provided the framework for universities in consortia and 
research companies. Law 67 of 1988 established a framework according to which 10% of R&D 
budgets to be spent on training. Recent developments of the same law encourage transnational place­
ment in industry and centres of excellence as a vehicle for training. Law 391 of 1990 established the 
means by which Italian Universities could participate in joint initiatives with third parties as well as 
hold short vocational-based courses. Legislation in 1990 & 91 regulated private sector teaching in 
universities and encouraged more vocational courses. 
• Three Year Development Plans have initially encouraged general university-industry cooperation and 
followed on to develop areas such as Science Parks. 
• Most universities have industry liaison offices, as well as offices for European Programmes and 
student mobility. Most universities take part in R&D consortia. 
• Confindustria has established agreement on university career guidance, innovation of teaching 
curricula, setting up short diploma courses, R&D, etc. Larger companies have university liaison 
executives for R&D contracts, student placements, products for the university market, etc. Local 
Industry Associations have offices which manage relations with local higher education institutions. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• The ministry of University and Scientific & Technological Research, to which the COMETT Inform­
ation Office has been attached has overseen the COMETT Programme and been important in its 
success. 
• COMETT has been responsible for developing a collective and structured transnational approach to 
education and training which was largely absent in Italy before the launch of the Programme. 
95 
3. Networking 
• Of the 19 UETPs active in Italy under COMETT II, 13 were regional and 6 were sectoral UETPs. The 
percentage of UETPs based in universities rose from 17% in COMETT I to 40% under COMETT II 
as their interest in mobility activities and courses increased. 
• The 13 regional UETPs in Italy have made particular progress in the dissemination of a quality 
approach to training and education across the country - especially Southern Italy. They have also made 
concrete contributions to the understanding of training needs of enterprise - and particularly local 
SMEs - in the country. Within the regional UETPs an entrepreneurial approach to training has 
developed which should ensure the long term effects of the Programme on the quality of training in 
Italy. 
• The COMETT UETPs have systematically analysed the training needs expressed by both industry and 
universities. The TNA has: (1) permitted specific methodologies to be tested on the spot, (2) helped 
companies to reflect more systematically on problems, (3) developed debate on the need for regular 
use of TNA, (4) helped develop short courses. 
• The regional UETPs have developed different models of transnationality. Some have emphasised 
specific technology sectors, others have sought to involve a broad number of organisations from their 
region in transnational projects, others have concentrated on developing the role of Universities as 
catalysts of advanced level transnational training. 
• The 6 sectoral UETPs have made an important contribution to the development of high quality training 
initiatives in their specific sectors. They represent leading technology areas in Italy such as automation 
and involve many of the principal organisations in the country. 
• The main strengths are: (1) the high quality of personnel, team work, project creation and manage­
ment, (2) the transnational dimension, (3) participation by SMEs, (4) the entrepreneurial ability of the 
UETPs and their general strategy of becoming regional development agencies. 
• Their main weaknesses are: (1) difficulties in carrying on discussions with local authorities, (2) limited 
financial resources, (3) lack of recognition for industrial placements in university curricula, (4) the 
weak role of universities in the decisions concerning UETP strategy, and (5) the lack of integration of 
the work carried out by COMETT UETPs with that national and local agencies responsible for 
vocational training. 
4. Mobility 
• The principal contribution of the COMETT Programme to Italy has been the creation of the model and 
procedures for student exchange - previously non-existent in Italy - which have been largely 
responsible for setting up a practical framework for contact between universities and enterprise. 
• The value of mobility has slowly been accepted by universities, enterprise and students. In particular, 
since COMETT I, Italian industry has come to appreciate the value of stagiaires to the extent that 
demand for incoming students surpasses that of outgoing students by 25%. 
• Youth culture has been slow to accept transnational placement due to poor foreign language know­
ledge, social pressures (especially in Southern Italy and for women), poor appreciation of the employ­
ment benefits of industrial experience, military service, rigidity of the university curriculum and lack 
of recognition of the placement. 
5. Training 
• The COMETT Programme in Italy has been influential in developing innovative models of training 
course development in the national context through the encouragement of universities to work on joint 
projects and the development of a transnational dimension in project design. It has stimulated the 
production of highly qualified training resources (including multimedia and distance learning 
materials), cooperation with DELTA and contributed to a broader awareness and flexible education 
systems. It has been especially influential in complementing and strengthening national training 
activities and policy. 
• COMETT has acted as a catalyst in Italy to create an institutional system for collaboration between 
universities and enterprises and has been successful in developing a trade mark with a clear quality 
standard within the Italian context. 
• Cooperation with the Programme frequently leads partners to involvement in other EC initiatives. 
Italian UETPs have strong links with FORCE and TEMPUS. 
96 
6. Overall Impact 
• In Italy, COMETT has created, through the UETPs, clear channels for systematic rather than episodic 
cooperation between local Universities and SMEs, Trades Associations, Chambers of Commerce and 
Local Government. 
• It has been largely responsible for creating a quality-based framework for public debate between 
university and industry in the country. The success of the Programme has encouraged some univer­
sities to review their constitutions in order to recognise industrial placements formally. 
• The COMETT Programme has also been an important multiplier as regards acting as a vehicle for the 
transfer of technology. This consolidates the UETPs as effective developing agencies participating in 
training, R&D and development programmes for the EC and national authorities. 
• Due to COMETT the working relationship between Universities and Industry has concentrated on 
supplying the established training needs of industry through courses and placements and has given the 
relationship a transnational dimension. 
• The COMETT Programme offers a valid role model to mould future training policy for initial and 
continuing education. COMETT will encourage national policies to develop a decentralised and flex­
ible education and training system through direct dialogue between university and industry partners as 
well as active co-operation in joint projects. 
• COMETT, through stimulating debate between universities, industry R&D organisations and local and 
national government, has launched a forum for the discussion of education and training policy with 
both a national and European dimension. 
• The work of the National COMETT Information Centre, located in the MURST, has been crucial in 
involving all the principal actors in the Programme and ensuring the quality standards of the 
Programme. The Information Centre has been especially influential in encouraging the acceptance and 
recognition of student exchange systems in Italy. 
IRELAND 
Population 3.52 m., Population Density: 50.4, GDP/head: 10.8 
SUMMARY TABLE IRELAND (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 3 
Sectoral 2 690,000 
Students 1,205 3,294,330 
Fellows 46 310,530 
Courses 110 1,262,000 
Joint Training Projects 12 2,517,940 
Pilot Projects 2 1,000,000 
Complementary Measures 18 582,818 
TOTAL 9,278,508 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• Regional Technical Colleges & Dublin Institute of Technology Acts (1992) have indicated one of the 
principal functions as "to provide vocational and technical education and training for economic, 
technological, scientific, commercial, industrial, social and cultural development of the State with 
particular reference to the region served by the college". Along with the new Technological 
Universities (1989), all now have defined legal structures under which commercial activities can be 
97 
undertaken. The National University and Trinity College constitutions also provide for such activities. 
A 1992 Education Green Paper showed increased orientation towards the vocation aspects of education 
at third level. 
• Programmes of higher education-industry cooperation have developed since the late 1970s. Current 
programmes include: (1) the Industrial Liaison Officer Programme supporting such activities in certain 
higher education institutions (2) the Higher Education Industry Cooperation Scheme supporting joint 
research, (3) programmes in Advanced Technology (PATs) developing critical commercial mass in 
niche technologies, (4) placement programmes transferring skilled graduates into industry, (5) Regional 
Technical Infrastructure Development supporting the development of particular regionally relevant 
technologies, etc. 
• Most higher education institutions now have explicit policies and support procedures for commercial 
activities. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• Ireland has made steady progress in COMETT II. Two sectoral UETPs have been added, bringing 
Irish based UETPs up to five and, overall some 111 contracts were issued. 
• Difficulties have been in four main areas: (1) dissemination of project outputs to SMEs, (2) extension 
of the European Dimension within all Strands, (3) development of UETP business plans, (4) marketing 
training materials and courses on a European scale. 
3. Networking 
• The sectoral UETP contribution has included developing expertise in European collaborative projects, 
as well as developing a EU dimension in regional activities. All UETPs have undertaken TNA, 
organising short courses and involving Irish firms in international training projects. Training needs 
analysis has been carried out in conjunction with regional and national institutions involved in S&T. 
Also a National Association of UETPs has been formed. 
• UETP activities have led to strong networks being developed around short courses and training 
projects often integrating and being supported by mobility activities. For small firms, it is often the 
first link into transnational activities. They are supported by UETPs as they take part in larger projects. 
• Only two sectoral UETPs are coordinated from Ireland. Both are active in providing European wide 
short courses and in developing mobility programmes. They have entered and coordinated other EC 
programmes (LINGUA, TEMPUS, FORCE, etc.) for their members. 
• The strengths of the UETPs are: (1) good reputation, expertise and skills developed, (2) links to other 
EC Programmes and networking established. 
• The weaknesses are: (1) lack of industrial participation due to working in a region with a low geo­
graphical density of firms at a low technological level, dominated by SMEs, (2) no government 
department has taken "ownership" of UETPs, (3) uncertainty and lack of finance. 
4. Mobility 
• Ireland does not have a strong tradition of placements, outside the new technological universities, 
although awareness is growing due to COMETT and similar national activities. Competitions for 
industrial placements is, however, fierce driven by high levels of unemployment and a weak industrial 
structure. Personnel exchanges have also improved. 
• Student placements have: (1) introduced a transnational element to higher education institutions already 
undertaking industry placements, (2) catalysed the development of placement requirements and 
mechanisms in higher education institutions not already involved in such activities, (3) increased 
student language competencies, (4) acted as the base for stronger co-operation and joint projects, (5) 
provided some firms with a cultural learning experience. 
• Some colleges not already undertaking placement activities have modified policies at an informal level 
to facilitate exchanges. Some Departments have formally modified structures. The staff mobility 
programme is seen as too ridged with the three month placement period being too long. 
98 
5. Training 
• COMETT has improved supply of training in Ireland by encouraging higher education institutions to 
develop and supply technical training, particularly in. areas where travel abroad would have been 
necessary. Access to international expertise has improved quality. Also open, multimedia and distance 
learning activities have been accelerated by COMETT. 
• Innovative collaboration has taken place through: (1) the direct involvement of companies in planning 
and developing courses, (2) the internationalisation of the development process, (3) the development of 
flexible networks to undertake such work. 
• The Cb projects are seen as particularly successful in Ireland. Two pilot projects (Biotechnology and 
highway construction / maintenance) have also worked well. 
6. Overall Impact 
• Overall, COMETT has fostered the debate by adding issues involved in the training dimension and the 
transnational focus. 
• UETPs have added an extra dimension as an infrastructural network. The National COMETT Liaison 
Committee has been effective in bringing together for the first time all those (government, universities, 
enterprises, trade unions, etc.) with an interest in higher education, and scientific and technological 
training. The Programme has also assisted in bringing a EU dimension to national policies in the area 
and links have been established with activities under The Operational Programme for Industrial 
Development (1989-93) in areas concerning higher education-industry cooperation. 
• Strong supporting relationships have been formed with the Industrial Liaison function in higher 
education institutions as well as in national S&T priority development areas (e.g. Timber & Forestry, 
Marine & Aquaculture, Biotechnology). 
LUXEMBOURG 
Population 0.38 m., Population Density: 188.4, GDP/head: 19.64 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE LUXEMBOURG (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 1 
Sectoral 0 120,000 
Students 50 105,030 
Fellows 
Courses 5 45,000 
Joint Training Projects 3 565,000 
Pilot Projects 1 500,000 
Complementary Measures 1 20,000 
TOTAL 1,355,030 
•1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• The full cycle of third level education is absent from Luxembourg with only 1' Institut Supérieur de 
Technologie (1ST) and le Centre Universitaire du Luxembourg (CUL). Thus, firms tend to look abroad 
for higher education-industry cooperation. 
• Only since the establishment of Centres de Recherche Publics (CRP) in 1987 has new and high 
technology training become available. 
99 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• COMETT I has had a concrete, initiating role in developing SITec (a platform for new techniques in 
intensive courses) within the CRP-Henri Tudor. 
• The COMETT Information Office also played an important role. 
3. Networking 
• Luxembourg has only one regional UETP covering the whole country. After a slow start it now works 
well. Sectoral TNA studies have been undertaken. Courses have been given an international element. 
• The UETP brought added value through alerting firms to the European dimension of R&D as well as 
training. 
• Its main strength is that its partners have included the professional associations which has make for 
credibility and ease of approach to firms. Other partners have included the ITS, CU and the CRPs. All 
partners have been active in national and EU R&D and thus permit the UETP to link training and 
research. 
4. Mobility 
• Since the economic difficulties of 1992, students have become more interested in training placements 
and firms more careful about their relevance. 
• Often for SMEs, it has been their first contact with a European programme and has encouraged them 
to move onto R&D programmes. 
• Placements in firms have become more systematic. 
5. Training 
• The development of SITec as a platform for short courses has been the main achievement of 
COMETT. Under COMETT, the CRC-CU has developed short courses for industry, as has the 
Chambre des Metiers: the latter particularly for SMEs 
6. Overall Impact 
• Higher education-industry relations had been developed before COMETT. However, COMETT has had 
an indirect, catalytic effect on higher education-industry relations. It has also drawn attention to the 
importance of transnational cooperation. 
• COMETT's good administration has encouraged firms to participate in further EC programmes. 
• COMETT activities drew attention to the lack of national co-ordination in the area of collaboration 
between national firms and foreign universities and have encouraged the development of common 
actions in the Sarr-Lor-Lux region. 
• The UETP has supported the QUALIF programme on quality management of informatics projects 
between firms and national bodies. It has also brought together technical innovation bodies with an 
interest in training. 
100 
THE NETHERLANDS 
Population: 15.13 m., Population Density: 367.2, GDP/head: 15.6 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE NETHERLANDS (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 3 
Sectoral 7 1,455,000 
Students 1,567 3,706,315 
Fellows 15 97,460 
Courses 147 1,685,500 
Joint Training Projects 17 3,463,000 
Pilot Projects 3 1,500.000 
Complementary Measures 21 328,329 
TOTAL 12,235,104 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• The higher education sector is divided into universities (WO) and higher vocational training (HBO). 
Community service is explicitly recognised in 1986 higher education laws. 
• The Foundation for Technical Research (STW) subsidised research of high commercial value. The 
Ministry of Economic Affairs has two large programmes stimulating technological research and for the 
collaborative development of new commercial products. 
• The Boards and administration of HBOs contain industrialists and 6-12 month industrial placements 
are obligatory. Quality assessment increasingly includes industrial review as well as per review. 
Industrial Liaison and technology transfer points are in most higher education institutions. Continuing 
education programmes are in expansion. 
• Large companies work well with higher education funding professorships and undertaking guest 
tutorships. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• After a slow development during COMETT I, participation has accelerated rapidly. NUFFIC has 
played an important role in this development through hosting and developing the work of the 
COMETT Information Office. 
3. Networking 
• Of the 10 Dutch UETPs, 3 are regional, located in the three technical universities (Delft, Eindhoven 
and Twente) and covering the whole country, and 7 are sectoral. Most of the well known multinational 
companies are members of UETPs; success with SMEs has been slower. 
• COMETT UETPs help with industrial "cluster" strategies. The organisation of industrial "round tables" 
have been particularly helpful. TNAs have not always been carried out. 
• The main strengths of regional UETPs have been: (1) a close relationship with other intermediary 
organisations, provincial authorities and companies, (2) concrete and visible results from international 
cooperation and, (3) knowledge of European expertise and ability to tap it as required. Sectoral UETPs 
have added a strong international dimension to their work. 
• The main weaknesses have been: (1) lack of funding for activities, (2) regions too large, (3) industrial 
partners nf)t committed enough, (4) industry has low awareness of COMETT, (5) rapid turnover of 
UETP staff. The difficulties in industrial contact is greater in the regional UETPs. 
101 
4. Mobility 
• One UETP has set up "Local Strategy Committees" with partner industries to oversee exchanges and 
influence course content. Others point to a much more modest scale of innovation. 
• More attention is now devoted to such practical matters as housing, the structuring of the contacts (a 
policy of networking instead of informal contacts) and the planned provision of student intern projects 
as part of the operation of businesses, etc. 
• There was a call for simplification of regulations and procedures surrounding mobility schemes. 
Sanctions and reporting after-the-fact could also greatly improve the efficiency of the programme. 
5. Training 
• COMETT has internationalised a number of training course activities and has helped orient trainers to 
training at an international level. More demand-driven courses have been developed due to company 
involvement. 
• Quality has improved in course development through interchange of ideas. European level quality 
guarantees have been developed by preventing major discrepancies in the different universities and 
establishing a common core curriculum (on which exchanges are based). Inspectors have been appoint­
ed td monitor quality. 
• The range of courses available has grown, both in the Netherlands and Europe as a whole along with 
courses delivered in a greater variety of ways. Training activities have been made more international in 
nature and there is increasing interest and participation of SMEs 
6. Overall Impact 
• COMETT has never played a major part in any national debate on higher education-industry cooper­
ation. This is due to COMETT's modest budget and the rich tradition of post-tertiary continuing 
education for industry. Equally, before COMETT, there was a great deal of contact between 
universities, hogescholen and companies. On top of this, there is a comprehensive set of measures for 
the development and dissemination of new technologies particularly to SMEs. Thus COMETT plays a 
supporting rather than a leading role. 
• It has not yet resulted in the formulation of new national or regional policies or links with 
complementary national or regional programmes. However the Ministry has provided financial support 
for the UETPs. 
• Its main impact has been that it adds the European dimension of training. 
PORTUGAL 
Population: 9.85 m., Population Density: 106.6, GDP/head: 9.06 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE PORTUGAL (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 4 
Sectoral 6 1,350,000 
Students 1,321 3,282,700 
Fellows 59 404,660 
Courses 127 1,194,500 
Joint Training Projects 11 1,970,371 
Pilot Projects 1 500,000 
Complementary Measures 24 378,656 
102 
TOTAL 9,080,887 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• In 1980 the INESC (Institute for Systems and Computer Engineering) was established as an interface 
between the Technical University of Lisbon and the communications and IT industries. Its main focus 
is R&D and high level technical training. AITEC (Tecnologias de Informaçào SA) was set up by 
INESC to undertake technology transfer and business incubation. In 1984, FUNDETEC (Fund for the 
development of teaching Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering and Technology) was set up 
by the Technical University of Lisbon to develop new training programmes for engineers. In 1987, 
ITEC was set up by the Technical University of Lisbon to encourage Portuguese participation in EU 
Programmes. 
• In 1986, INEGI (institute of Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Management) was set up in Porto 
to improve university-industry links. 
• In 1988, the Conselho para a Cooperaçào Ensino Superior Empresa (CESE) - the office in charge of 
the proposal of procedures and policies to improve higher education / industry co-operation was set up. 
• From the mid-1970s there has been a strong expansion of Portuguese higher education. More recently 
the universities and polytechnics have been given statutes of financial and administrative autonomy. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• The establishment of the COMETT Information Office in the Conselho para a Cooperaçào Ensino 
Superior Empresa (CESE) has been critical to COMETT's success in Portugal. There is a proposal to 
integrate similar higher education-industry cooperation into other national programmes based on the 
COMETT experience. 
• The CESE recommended the public support of UETPs to establish better synergy with national pro­
grammes. In parallel with COMETT, it has also organised two major higher education-cooperation 
conferences each year. COMETT activities have also inspired CESE to launch a national training 
placement programme for degree level people into enterprises and organisations in other EU & EFTA 
States. It will use much of the information and skills acquired from, the COMETT Programme. 
• Certain pre-established R&D and technology transfer consortia have spread out into training through 
COMETT. 
3. Networking 
• The contribution of COMETT and its UETPs has been: (1) the development of dedicated regional 
higher education-industry interfaces, but dominated by universities, (2) the addition of an international 
dimension to these interfaces, previously very weak, (3) Expanded activities to other EU and National 
programmes (PEDIP, PRODEP, etc.). 
• Two UETPs have moved to work with regional authorities in regional development. One UETP has set 
up as series of technology transfer centres across its region. 
• The UETPs/COMETT have strengthened links to higher education institutions and industry abroad 
giving new R&D and training partners. Similarly for firms, it has brought international contacts and 
potential markets as well as being a door to other European Programmes. However, firmsrparticularly 
SMEs, have a poor input to programme development. 
• The six sectoral UETPs (textiles, agribusiness, mining, telecom, biotech) have produced courses, 
training material, books, directories, etc. and have exchanged students and strengthened links across 
Europe. 
• The main strengths are the transnational dimension of UETP activities, the development of a 
professional management structure and their specialisation in international technology training. The 
main weaknesses are that: (1) UETPs are still largely depend on vulnerable financial support, (2) most 
sectoral UETPs have a confused legal status, and (3) a lack of public awareness and recognition of 
their potential within the new EC education and training programmes. 
103 
4. Mobility 
• COMETT has increased student interest in placement abroad and added a European dimension to 
student training as well as contributing to the development of a European university-enterprise techno­
logy transfer network. However, there is still a lack of recognition of student placements within 
academic curricula and the need for a consistent structural and curricular recognition of transnational 
industrial placement. Also, a lack of real supervision of training work by universities and enterprises. 
• Personnel exchanges, especially enterprise to university, are still difficult due to problems for 
enterprises in matching personnel training needs to university training methods and release for long 
periods. 
5. Training 
• COMETT has produced a strengthening of transnational development of and participation in training 
activities. 
• There has been an improvement of quality and quantity of training materials on the market. However, 
impact limited due to low level of demand (and supply) of technology related training in Portugal. 
6. Overall Impact 
• COMETT has contributed to developing new ideas and suggestions in technical training and increasing 
the awareness of the importance of technology transfer. It has helped in setting up higher education-
enterprise interfaces devoted to technical training and has started an innovative dialogue between 
higher education institutions and enterprises leading to more "tailor made" courses. 
• COMETT has contributed to the improvement of national and international contacts between 
universities and enterprises in training and technology transfer. 
• It has forwarded the integration of transnational industrial placements into course structures. 
UNITED KINGDOM 
Population: 57.75 m., Population Density: 236.6, GDP/head: 14.73 ppp 
SUMMARY TABLE UNITED KINGDOM (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 17 
Sectoral 12 3,860,000 
Students 4,785 13,626,124 
Fellows 69 410,310 
Courses 324 3,347,400 
Joint Training Projects 42 8,679,009 
Pilot Projects 4 2,000,000 
Complementary Measures 71 1,086,556 
TOTAL 33,009,399 
1. Background: Legislation. Programmes & Activities 
• The Department of Trade and Industry, the Department of Employment and the Department of 
Education and Science are all involved in developing policy for university-industry cooperation. There 
is particular emphasis on closing the "Technology Transfer Gap". There are tax incentives for training. 
104 
• Funding earmarked for the development of continuing vocational training is given to the universities. 
The Teaching Company Scheme funds young graduates employed by academic institutions to work on 
defined projects in industry. LINK funds research projects between science based and industrial 
partners. CASE encourages industry to sponsor postgraduates in return for work on a particular 
project. The Enterprise Initiative offers companies the opportunity to hire university consultants for 
short periods. Other associated measures include the encouragement of technology audits, the setting 
up of Faraday Centres (similar to the Fraunhofer Institutes), the Enterprise in Higher Education 
Scheme, the setting up of the Training & Enterprise Councils (TECs), the High Technology National 
Training Programme, etc. 
• There is now extensive representation of professional and industrial bodies of governing bodies of 
higher education institutions and their sub-committees. Higher education institutions are becoming 
increasingly involved in technology transfer and setting up companies. University staff are now 
actively encouraged to participate in the commercial exploitation of their research. Most universities 
have Industrial Liaison Officers and many have set up Science Parks. 
• Income for industry to higher education institutions is increasing. Some large firms have Education 
Liaison Officers. There is strong industry representation on the funding councils for universities. The 
CBI negotiates industry's position with respect to higher education. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• Strong participation in COMETT I carried over into COMETT II. The continued development has 
been based on: (1) the good organisational capacity of higher education institutions and the fact that 
they were well linked to enterprise before COMETT, (2) the historic importance given to industrial 
placements, (3) the entrepreneurial spirit which has developed in higher education institutions since the 
1980s, (4) recognition of the importance of trans-European co-operation, (5) the national structures 
supporting university-enterprise cooperation and the work of the COMETT Information Office. 
3. Networking 
• After 1990, the UK had 25 UETPs: 17 regional covering the whole of the UK and 8 sectoral UETPs. 
Four additional sectoral UETPs were added in 1992. 
• Universities thought UETPs most relevant at a regional rather than national level. UETPs were 
effective at marketing COMETT. Newsletters, meetings, placements, short courses were all useful. 
Generally, companies recognised the need for university - enterprise networks and saw UETPs as one 
of the catalysts in this area. All UETPs saw a need for higher education-industry networks which 
would develop transnational links and provide information on EU training opportunities. 
• Over half the Universities believed that UETPs had little or no effect in helping enterprises commun­
icate their needs: many other routes existed. For firms, UETPs helped in TNA and in raising the 
profile of training in the company. UETPs provided little clear evidence that they themselves had been 
helpful in this area: 54% of regional UETPs though little had been achieved. 
• Universities believed UETPs helped them to look beyond national boundaries establishing links with 
other universities and enterprises across Europe. For enterprises, UETPs found partners abroad and 
provided EU students for placement. 61% of regional and all sectoral UETPs thought they had 
contributed some or a great deal to encouraging transnational co-operation. Sectoral UETPs' 
contribution was not strongly differentiated from regional UETPs. They did, however, seem to have 
closer and more frequent contacts with companies. 
• Universities believed UETPs strengths lay in their extensive contacts with other UK & EU UETPs, 
universities and enterprises. Also, their commitment to industrial development and catalytic stimulation 
of university / industry interaction. Weakness lay in insufficient funding and sometimes in not being 
firmly enough linked into their own regional structures. For enterprises, UETPs' strengths lay in their 
ability to bring European organisations together and provide the latest on EU technology training 
activities. Also, the provision of European placement opportunities. The weakness lay in the lack of 
communality between sectoral and regional UETPs and the funding process which made long term 
planning difficult. Communication through promotion and publicity was poor. Low awareness of 
UETP existence. Regional UETPs saw their strengths as: networking, expertise in mobility 
programmes, links with the Commission, project management, an access point for all to higher 
education institutions, enterprises and EC Programmes. Weakness were insufficient funding, 
dependence on EC funding and inability to generate other funding, difficulty in retaining industry's 
M)5 
interest, being all things to all, etc. Sectoral UETPs strengths included: a clear mission, good support 
from higher education institutions, industry and EC, expertise in EC funding and project management. 
Weaknesses included: relatively poor industry links and a poor commercial orientation as well as poor 
links with some countries. 
4. Mobility 
• Just over half the Universities believed student placements had contributed to innovation within the 
institution. Two thirds of enterprises felt that they had benefited from having the placement; breaking 
down national barriers and opening up marketing opportunities as well as the specific technical 
element contributed. 85% of regional UETPs felt that student placements had contributed to 
innovation: establishing new links, increasing interest and demand for students, linking companies to 
new markets, benefiting universities and linking enterprises to a large pool of well motivated students, 
etc. 
• Half the universities modified policies or practices ranging from greater academic recognition for 
placements to modification of placement procedures. Half the firms surveyed had made modifications. 
About three-quarters of UETPs thought universities and enterprises had made such modifications: 
flexibility in course design, assistance to lecturers in visiting students abroad, insurance policies, better 
language preparation, etc. Enterprises had become more flexible in planning and defining work 
programmes, etc. 
5. Training 
• Universities were evenly divided as to whether COMETT had made innovative contributions in 
training. 70% of firms thought COMETT had made little or no impact in innovation. Of UETPs, only 
16% of regional and 57% of sectoral UETPs thought that some or a great deal had been achieved. 
This failure was due to insufficient funding and lack of availability of SME staff time. 
• In terms of quantity or quality of training, enterprises felt that COMETT had made little or no 
contribution. About half the UETPs felt that COMETT had made a contribution to quantity and quality 
through access to a wider group of experts, adding European value, levering other funding, etc. 
Universities were evenly divided as to whether COMETT had contributed. 
• 59% of firms felt that COMETT complemented their own training activities. Sectoral UETPs were 
more positive than regional UETPs: 57% thought some or a great deal had been contributed. 
• Conclusion: ... "the COMETT programme (has) generally been successful in helping to increase 
awareness of Europe in education and training... (but) has been very modest in scope when compared 
with complementary regional and national actions... The main value added by COMETT has been to 
open up the practice of placements to a wider range of companies.... It has also helped to establish 
new contacts between universities in this country and companies in other Member States or in EFTA 
countries." 
6. Overall Impact 
• Universities generally believed COMETT had added some impetus to the debate on higher education-
industry collaboration. However, many noted that the debate had gone on long before COMETT. 43% 
of enterprises thought COMETT successful in this area. 36% disagreed. 58% of regional and 71% of 
sectoral UETPs though that COMETT had made a worthwhile contribution. 
• Most universities believed that COMETT had made a worthwhile contribution. It had increased links 
both locally and across Europe. Some enterprises thought that COMETT had produced only minimal 
new collaborative ventures. Some thought that COMETT- developed university-industry links had 
introduced new ideas into the workplace. 70% of all UETPs felt that they had made a worthwhile 
contribution in this area. Areas ranged from student placement to creating new transnational links, to 
skills and training needs analysis at regional and sectoral level, to issues of graduate employment. 
• 49% of universities thought COMETT did not influence policy; most policy was already well 
developed. 36% of firms thought COMETT has had some or considerable influence on their policy to­
wards universities. Only 25% regional and 14% sectoral UETPs thought that COMETT had some or 
considerable influence. However, many felt that the indirect influence had been important. COMETT 
complemented and enhanced existing models of university-industry collaboration. 
106 
For firms, the main examples of COMETT benefits were access to providers of European expertise 
and a greater awareness of European training issues. 44% were involved in similar activities. 77% 
regional and 60% sectoral UETPs reported establishing links between COMETT and other 
national/regional policies sharing complementary aims. 
Universities generally believed COMETT to have little impact, even locally. However, the international 
aspects were seen to give credibility to EU training policies. Some thought it had improved technology 
skill in local companies. Half the firms felt that COMETT had made a worthwhile impact on their 
own company particularly through the student placement, opening up new skills and awareness of the 
EU market. Companies felt that the overall regional impact of COMETT was small. UETPs felt that 
impact was limited by insufficient funding being available to generate large scale interest and 
participation. 
AUSTRIA 
Population 7.83m., Population Density: 93.7, GDP/head: 16.7 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE AUSTRIA (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 4 
Sectoral 1 735,000 
Students 796 1,989,560 
Fellows 73 634,310 
Courses 84 826,500 
Joint Training Projects 8 1,336,000 
Pilot Projects 
Complementary Measures 13 187,080 
TOTAL 5,708,450 
1. Background: Legislation. Programmes & Activities 
• There is no specific Austrian university - industry cooperation legislation. However, a 1988 law 
permits university departments to act as entrepreneurs in their academic field: this is particularly useful 
for contract research. Importantly, the "University Study" law includes continuing education 
provisions: a well defined framework for certification, financing, use of university infrastructure, staff 
payment, etc. Recent major reform centres on the establishment of a Fachhochschulen system. 
• Two particularly relevant programmes are (1) "Scientists for Industry" which enables young_university 
lecturers and researchers to spend up to two years in companies and (2) "Scientists Establish 
Enterprises" which provides seed money for start-ups based on the scientist's research work. 
• Important higher education-industry cooperation activities include (1) National and regional S&T fairs 
to present R&D results to companies and (2) "FoDoc Austria" which is a nation-wide information 
system on research potential and projects in all universities and academies. 
• A network of technology transfer and continuing education institutes, university extension centres and 
industrial liaison offices have been established. 
• It is usual to undertake diploma and doctoral theses connected to industrial project work. Lecturers 
from industry are usual in universities' CET programmes. 
• Thus, overall, university- industry cooperation relations are well developed. 
. 107 
2. National Development of COMETT 
The national development of COMETT activities has been rapid and successful because : 
• The UETPs fit easily into the existing, well developed higher education-industry cooperation structure. 
• The COMETT Information Centre provided active and effective support. It initiated projects, arranged 
conferences, seminars, workshops, information services, etc. 
• The Ministry for Science & Research provided central support and co-funding, and expressed a 
willingness to provide future support. 
• The "EC" label was useful. Most leading organisations now participate in COMETT including a strong 
enterprise input. 
3. Networking 
• The 4 regional UETPs (APS, ATTAC, CATT & DANUBE) have provided 
- A regional platform for training & technology issues while raising regional and national con­
sciousness of these issues. 
- International partners and a European dimension to technology training, acting as a regional focus 
of European initiatives. They assist the integration of regional SMEs and other partners into 
European projects and issues. This has red to a motivation and sensibilisation to international 
technological development. 
- Short courses and personnel exchanges as well as spin-off companies from such activity. They 
have developed a greater synergy between research and training. 
- A transnational outlook through work with European partners, placements and the influx of foreign 
students into Austrian firms. 
• The strengths of the UETPs are: (1) secure, legal and independent status as a base for a democratic 
partnership, (2) high acceptance and good regional support and financial commitment of public and 
semi-public institutions, (3) skills in managing European training projects; (4) closeness to firms and 
technical credibility, (5) links to other EC networks, (6) links to universities and the strength of 
existing university "Extension Centres" in Austria, (7) well motivated personnel and lean and efficient 
structure. 
• The weaknesses of the UETPs are: (1) weakness in linking COMETT to other EC projects with 
Austria as an EFTA member, (2) lack of marketing and sales strategies, (3) limited numbers of staff, 
(4) some regions with weaker universities and technical studies base, (5) the time taken to develop a 
specific profile, (6) the lack of time for self-training for a complex area, (7) COMETT projects are too 
short to create an "international training philosophy", (8) annual reduction of financial support, (9) 
uncertainty in transfer to LEONARDO. 
4. Mobility 
COMETT has brought: 
• systematised student placements on a project oriented basis with a clear work plan and defined 
provisions for academic recognition 
• enterprises are adopting a "placement culture" and providing better facilities and professional guidance 
for students; their acceptance of students has become easier and more formalised 
• staff exchanges provide considerable feedback and linkages between universities and enterprises; they 
are, however, very difficult and time consuming to organise, particularly for longer periods. 
5. Training 
COMETT has been important because of 
• Developing training projects with potential users and international partners It has led to multi-location 
delivery of courses and improved international marketing and better access to courses. The threshold to 
organise or participate in courses has decreased. Providing training for SMEs has become more 
attractive. UETPs have complemented the training activities of university Extension Centres. 
• Improving quality (more than the quantity) of training due to (1) a wider exchange of expertise and 
views and (2) providing the opportunity to compare the state of art in different countries. 
108 
• Carrying out a number of specific TNAs, as well as constant evaluation of industry needs. Discussions 
on course concepts and marketing has been organised. Interactive TNA has also been developed. The 
sectoral UETP has carried out a " State of Art" Survey to act as the basis for a TNA. 
6. Overall Impact 
• The overall impact has been good, particularly from the UETP system. There has been a major 
increase in transnational student placements along with improved project oriented design of placements 
and better academic recognition. The transnational higher education / industry personnel exchanges, 
which did not exist at all before COMETT, have been useful. There has been an enrichment of the 
national market for advanced training technology through the international scope and European 
dimension of courses developed. 
• COMETT complements the regional and national programme, contributing to improved Austrian 
training activities. This is to be seen particularly in the co-funding of national and regional. COMETT 
has enhanced the international dimension of training. It has linked higher education institutions and 
industry, supported the development of continuing education at higher education institutions, catalysed 
the development of TNA, provided experience in the international management of programmes and 
projects, improved the institutional management of higher education-industry interfaces, extended 
networks to other forms of co-operation, increased industry interest in highly qualified personnel, etc. 
SWITZERLAND 
Population 6.83m., Population Density: 165.4, GDP/head: 20.3 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE SWITZERLAND (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 3 
Sectoral 4 1,130,000 
Students 417 1,048,540 
Fellows 29 272,630 
Courses 86 867,450 
Joint Training Projects 7 1,390,000 
Pilot Projects 
Complementary Measures 1 2,082 
TOTAL 4,710,702 
1. Background: Legislation. Programmes & Activities 
• There is no specific higher education-industry cooperation legislation. There is legislation enabling 
Federal Government to run S&T policy. Certain specific laws (e.g. energy) underpin some higher 
education-industry cooperation activities. Most higher education is organised at a cantonal level. Thus, 
legislation and provision can show considerable variation. 
• The Commission for the Promotion of Scientific Research (CERS) stimulates research cooperation 
between research institutes and industry. Some ministries spend heavily on R&D with advice and 
assessment by university and industry representatives. Long term, priority research programmes and 
more immediate action research programmes are run by the Federal Ministry. 
• Every university has its Office of Continuing Education. A national programme "Specific measures in 
favour of continuing vocational training at university" provides for complementary and postgraduate 
studies. The two Institutes of Technology are much more closely tied to industry. The upgrading of 
109 
many tertiary education establishments to Fachhochschulen is well under way. Many scientist work in 
both higher education and industry. 
• TE-CH is a national network of technology transfer centres. The two employers' federations have esta­
blished offices to coordinate research projects and relations with the public authorities. Industry 
contributes about 2% of R&D in higher education. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• Participation in COMETT started in 1990. By 1991 there was strong participation in other countries' 
projects and Positive Action projects were launched. 1992 saw a strong participation in the Call for 
Proposals. The 1992 Call saw 7 UETPs established. 
3. Networking 
• Of the Swiss UETPs, 3 are regional and 4 sectoral. They have opened up a dialogue between the 
diverse actors in technology transfer and training. They also respond to regional priority issues. They 
bring SMEs together with both public research institutions and international organisations for 
cooperative work. 
• A six year federal plan has provided the cantonal universities and the federal polytechnics with con­
tinuing training mechanisms. The UETPs have worked very closely with and reinforced and enlarged 
these structures. It has also reinforced federal policies for a stronger internationalisation of higher 
education institutions. Regional policy is not as yet fully formulated, however, it seems quite possible 
that bodies such as the UETPs may form an important part of this policy. They have worked well with 
other EC Programmes. 
• As well as providing an international context for higher education-industry cooperation work, the 
UETPs have also assisted with inter-cantonal cooperation and coordination. Overall, the UETPs have 
had variable success, particularly in the level of enterprise involvement. 
4. Mobility 
• There has been a particularly strong effort on the part of the COMETT Programme to assist in the 
integration of Switzerland into its EU activities through the student mobility placements. 
• Personnel mobility has been poorly understood and not been successful. 
5. Training 
• The Swiss success rate in COMETT II has been high in both the short and long courses. 
6. Overall Impact 
• Aspects of the Swiss federal and strongly autonomous cantonal systems made the start of Swiss 
participation in 1990 somewhat difficult. However, with the establishment of a Swiss COMETT 
Information Office under the Positive Action Programme and increased inter-cantonal coordination, by 
1992, there was a fully functional and successful COMETT programme in operation. 
• Thus, with the near simultaneous launch of special Federal measures on continuing education at the 
same time as COMETT has been a good success at both a federal and cantonal level. 
110 
LIECHTENSTEIN 
SUMMARY TABLE LIECHTENSTEIN (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 1 
Sectoral 150,000 
Students 26 51,890 
Fellows 
Courses 2 30,000 
Joint Training Projects 1 200,000 
Pilot Projects 
Complementary Measures 
TOTAL 431,890 
1. National Development of COMETT 
• As Liechtenstein became more integrated with EFTA, it began to become eligible to participate in 
COMETT. It entered in COMETT activities in 1991 under the banner of Switzerland. In 1992, on 
becoming a full EFTA member, it entered fully into COMETT. 
2. Networking 
• Liechtenstein applied for a regional UETP in 1992 and was successful. The UETP takes in neigh­
bouring parts of Switzerland and Austria. 
3. Mobility 
• The UETP obtained 26 student places in 1993. 
4. Training 
• In 1992, the UETP organised a joint training project on environmental engineering. The UETP organ­
ised a short course in both 1993 and 1994. 
5. Overall Impact 
• The decision of Switzerland not to enter the EU has made it somewhat more difficult to develop 
COMETT in Liechtenstein. 
11 
ICELAND 
Population 0.26 m., Population Density: 2.5, GDP/head: n/a ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE ICELAND (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 1 159,000 
Students 51 154,030 
Fellows 7 56,300 
Courses 7 70,000 
Joint Training Projects 2 240,000 
Complementary Measures 3 52,994 
TOTAL 732,324 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• The institutional separation of research centres from the university and then the lack of graduate 
courses until 1991 limited the potential for university-industry cooperation. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• The COMETT Information Centre and the country's UETP both based in the University of Reykjavik 
have been important in the success of the Programme. 
3. Networking 
• There is only one UETP in Iceland. It has undertaken TNA and has developed and run courses to 
alleviate these needs. It has promoted conferences on higher education-industry relations. 
• Initially, it was particularly strong in the fish processing industry but has since broadened out to other 
industrial sectors. 
• The strengths of the UETP have been the participation of the industrial and professional associations 
with direct access to firms and the strong moral and financial support of the University of Iceland. 
• The main weaknesses have been the lack of direct contact with firms and a very insecure financial 
base. 
4. Mobility 
• Iceland has always been very internationally minded with a tradition of seeking technical education 
and training abroad. COMETT acted as a conduit for this ready made market. However, existing in­
formal mechanisms in Icelandic universities and enterprises have not been formalised. 
5. Training 
• COMETT has pioneered the practice of undertaking TNA and then discussing the best means to 
alleviate the needs with industry. It has also pioneered the extensive preparation of quality training 
programmes with international university experts and enterprise leaders. 
• Quality training courses have been developed. However, not enough courses have been available nor 
have new modes of training delivery been sufficiently exploited. 
• Thus, COMETT has added anew dimension to training (rather than simply complementing it) through 
TNA, high quality course preparation and training of trainers. 
112 
6. Overall Impact 
• COMETT has had a strong impact. It has provided an acceptable European forum for a debate which 
had previously been fraught with mutual suspicion. It has also helped legitimised in industry's eyes 
much of the higher education expertise existent in Iceland. It has provided part of the basis for a 
dialogue on university-industry relations. 
• Due to the SME nature of Icelandic industry, COMETT has had to work with industry and profes­
sional associations at an administrative level. Specific firm contact takes place during projects and 
placements. The direct contact nature of Icelandic society has meant that COMETT may initiate con­
tacts but then ceases to be an intermediary. The programme has catalysed various training, research 
and placement activities. 
• Thus, it has accelerated contacts with universities and firms across the EEA and had a strong effect in 
focusing higher education institutions on the need to market their education, training and research to 
industry. It has also developed better industrial awareness of university graduate recruitment 
NORWAY 
Population 4.27 m., Population Density: 13.2, GDP/head: 15.35 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE NORWAY (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 4 
Sectoral 2 930,000 
Students 360 1,018,100 
Fellows 27 169,180 
Courses 46 477,000 
Joint Training Projects 4 818,000 
Pilot Projects 1 500,000 
Complementary Measures 3 47,280 
TOTAL 3,959,560 
1. Background: Legislation. Programmes & Activities 
• The Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH) in Trondheim is the only technical university in 
Norway and has had to play a major role in the development of the oil industry since the 1970s. 
SINTEF is a foundation of the NTH used for undertaking university-industry cooperation, particularly 
in the field of contract R&D and continuing education. 
• The 1991 White Paper on Higher Education argued for closer internal collaboration between the 
educational institutions in an integrated "Norwegian Network" as well as collaboration with external 
institutions, but there has been no national programme. 
• The Norwegian Research Councils have university-industry technology transfer programmes. The 
Ministry of Industry wishes better collaboration between research institutes and universities. 
• The Norwegian Long Term Plan 1994-97 seeks "to spread available technology and competence to 
companies., (and a) More rapid updating and renewal of technical and professional skills.." 
113 
• The 1993 National Budget noted that "International collaboration in higher education must be strength­
ened including participation in international education programmes.." 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• The somewhat ambivalent attitude of Norway towards the EU and the volume of new EC Programmes 
may have accounted for a very slow start in 1990 with only 11 projects submitted and 6 accepted. 
• The Positive Actions of COMETT in 1991/92 saw a major expansion of involvement with 5 additional 
UETPs being formed the next year 
3. Networking 
• The UETPs have encouraged regional cooperation between regional business interests and the esta­
blished education and training system. They have brought a European dimension to universities' 
traditional industrial liaison and continuing education functions. They have developed a nation-wide 
information distribution network through technical journals and newsletters as well as annual 
conferences on technical skills. They have also assisted in the development of courses and arranged 
student placements. They have moved from training co-operation to RTD projects and developed 
sectoral activities. 
• The activities of the UETP have varied from direct TNA and subsequent course development to 
support to industry in its own efforts: as one UETP put it; "Help towards self-help". 
• Transnationalisation of activities has been a major success of all UETPs. Sectoral UETPs have from 
the start been transnational. Regional UETPs have, however, also been successful. 
• The two sectoral UETPs have been based at the Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH) in 
Trondheim with very close connections to SINTEF. The UETPs have added to the international 
character and activities of this large technology complex through international TNA, short courses, 
student and staff exchanges and have gone on to develop larger RTD projects outside COMETT. 
• The main strengths of the UETPs have been: (1) the strong European network developed, (2) the 
support of the Norwegian government and regional authorities, (3) the active commitment and support 
of the NTH for three of the UETPs, (4) the active support and participation of the Norwegian Society 
of Chartered engineers (NIF) and the Federation of Norwegian Engineering Industries (TBL). 
• The main weakness has been that the budget allocation requirements were underestimated. 
4. Mobility 
• Mobility actions have been used by partners in larger COMETT and other projects as a means of both 
cementing and developing co-operation. 
• The Norwegian government has made granting of work and residence permits to COMETT students de 
facto. Agreements with Student Accommodation Offices greatly facilitated incoming students. 
Agreements with the Universities gave COMETT students full student rights (travel rebates, student 
activities, etc.). The TBL recommended student placements to its members. 
• Overall, there has been an improvement in student placement practices. 
5. Training 
• Courses have been developed from the start for a European audience and with a EuropeaTTcfrrnension. 
Some courses have developed from other EU investment (e.g. ESPRIT II). Extensive use of new 
techniques, software programmes and simulation tools have been incorporated. COMETT activities 
have been both a practical instrument and a catalyst. 
• The emphasis has been on quality improvement. COMETT has introduced a number of "quality 
partners" 'into the development of courses and continuing education activities who would, otherwise, 
not have been available in Norway. 
• The close similarity between the objectives of COMETT and national objectives in the field of 
technology transfer and training have ensured complementarity. 
114 
6. Overall Impact 
• COMETT has not been strong at a national level, but has been quite important at the regional policy 
and planning level. At a regional level, the role of COMETT in the development and implementation 
of regional and county strategic plans in Norway should be stressed. 
• Where these had already been prepared, for example in Western Norway, COMETT has become an 
important tool for implementation; in other cases COMETTs objectives are being adopted as part of 
the premises for plans currently in preparation. 
• Membership of COMETT has provided technology transfer and training with a European aspect which 
would otherwise have been lacking or would have had to be laboriously constructed, using national 
resources and on purely national terms; hardly the optimal point of departure for the creation of an 
international programme of cooperation. 
SWEDEN 
Population: 8.64 m., Population Density: 19.2, GDP/head: 16.2 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE SWEDEN (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 4 
Sectoral 23 888,000 
Students 807 2,245,940 
Fellows 13 111,000 
Courses 83 998,000 
Joint Training Projects 13 2,311,038 
Pilot Projects 1 500,000 
Complementary Measures 15 240,952 
TOTAL 7,294,930 
1. Background: Legislation. Programmes & Activities 
• Higher education-industry cooperation is well established since the 1960s in Sweden. Industrialists 
serve on higher education commissions. Since legislation in 1977, industrialists can sit on all study 
programme committees. Faculty can take on external contracts and be seconded to enterprises. Since 
1975, universities give vocational training programmes. 
• The Swedish Board for Technical Development (STU) was set up in the late 1960s to improve the 
technical level in Swedish enterprises: a special target was university/enterprise cooperation. It quickly 
launched a system of liaison offices in higher education institutions. Research managers in big 
companies serve as part-time professors. Small companies can "borrow" scientists for periods up to six 
months, with half their salary paid by the industrial liaison function. In North Sweden, small 
companies can employ a new engineer for six months from the local university with the salary paid 
for by the liaison office. This helps prevent migration to South Sweden. 
• 1992 legislation has given higher education institutions far more autonomy and has introduced a 
system of evaluation of university performance. All Masters of Engineering programmes have com­
pulsory industrial placements. 
3 There are two more sectoral UETPs with a Swedish coordinator, but a non-Swedish contractor. 
115 
• 1992 legislation has given higher education institutions far more autonomy and has introduced a 
system of evaluation of university performance. All Masters of Engineering programmes have com­
pulsory industrial placements. 
• Industrialists are on governing boards of universities and technical universities. Several Science Parks 
have been established with industry. There are many exchange chairs and guest teachers from industry. 
There are many research contracts funded by industry, and cooperative research institutions have been 
built up. On average, 10% of higher education institutions' activities are funded by industry. 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• COMETT is the first EU Programme in which EFTA countries have been able to take part. Support 
from unions, employers, regional, local authorities has been very strong. Interest was heightened by the 
proximity of entry into the EU. 
• The topics in COMETT were high on the agenda for Sweden: (1) the internationalisation of higher 
education, (2) the need for continuing education in SMEs, and the need to use universities for high 
scientific level training, (3) he need for SMEs to get closer contact with foreign markets. 
3. Networking 
• In 1990, Sweden obtained four regional UETPs, all in the South, and two sectoral UETPs. These were 
supplemented in 1992 by three new sectoral UETPs. One of the strengths of Swedish UETPs is their 
strong involvement in DELTA. 
• However, their contribution outside of the companies and universities directly involved in the projects 
has been small. They have had an identity crises. 
• Indirect contributions include: (1) diffusion of information, (2) increased marketing for technology and 
training, (3) European arena for co-operation and political pressure developed by sectoral UETPs 
which have functioned fairly well, (4) the demonstration effect of international activities. 
• Most UETPs have tried to undertake TNA. However, many organisations are active in this field. 
• The main strengths have been the devotion of UETP people and the ability to work in a trans-
European perspective and to support other programmes. The main weaknesses have been the lack of 
involvement of industry, especially SMEs, and the inter-regional transfer of experience. 
4. Mobility 
• There has been nothing fundamentally new in student placements. The personnel placements have 
hardly been used. There is, however, an increased dedication to finding places for students in bigger 
companies. Some of these have used COMETT to try out potential employees in subsidiaries abroad. 
• Some SMEs have experienced foreign students for first time. This has brought an increased sensitivity 
to cultural differences. 
5. Training 
• In the area of training, the largest COMETT contributions have come in the preparatory work-
discussions and negotiations around the application and the formulation of the "order" to university 
teachers. 
• With sectoral UETPs, the influence of industrial branches has been stronger in training development. 
• An IT network has been set up (initially for information and partner search) and is looking towards 
use for in-situ training for industry. Quality control has become an important and conscious issue as 
courses have to be given by different teachers in different countries. COMETT has been in operation 
too short a time to judge it. Its scale has been too small for a major impact. Reuse of courses 
developed has been very low. 
116 
6. Overall Impact 
• The overall impact has been marginally on the national level but there has been some on the regional 
and local level. The Programme is small. Also the economy has been depressed. There has been little 
fostering of university-industry relations, apart from those directly involved. Universities already have 
strong continuing education units. However, the fostering of international relationships for Swedish 
universities and companies has been new. 
• There has been no influence on policy on the national level but some on the regional level. There has 
been some synergy between university continuing education programmes and UETPs. 
• The overall impact has been small. Strand B has been the true success, particularly for the larger 
SMEs. Networks developed will be used for other projects. COMETT has also improved understanding 
of the EU. 
FINLAND 
Population: 5.03 m., Population Density: 14.9, GDP/head: 16.1 ppp. 
SUMMARY TABLE FINLAND (1990-94) 
Number Budget 
UETPs: Regional 3 
Sectoral 2 685,000 
Students 634 1,560,365 
Fellows 71 690,350 
Courses 78 740,000 
Joint Training Projects 9 1,845,000 
Pilot Projects 
Complementary Measures 17 247,568 
TOTAL 5,768,283 
1. Background: Legislation, Programmes & Activities 
• There is no specific law for university-industry cooperation, but existing legislation is quite permissive 
of such activities. 
• The Academy of Finland has a programme to support postgraduates in industry. The Ministry of 
Education has a similar programme in IT. The Technology Development Centre (TEKES) finances 
programmes based on university-industry cooperation and on research training. Finnish education has 
undergone a rapid expansion since 1986. The institutions of higher education are increasingly being 
considered Regional Development Centres. 
• Traditionally, practical training in industry has been a compulsory part of technical degree pro­
grammes. Continuing education is one of the fastest growing areas of higher education. Several 
Science Parks have been launched in the last decade. Institutes of Technology have launched "enter­
prise service departments". Uniscience Ltd has brought the universities and industrial federations 
together to provide services based on the joint know-how of the universities. 85 vocational institutions 
have been grouped into 22 fachhochschule type institutions with close cooperation with industry. 
• Industry has traditionally been close to higher education. Large companies have launched their own 
postgraduate training programmes and are increasing their demand to higher education. They are 
forming lorjg term relationships and contracts. The number of PhDs in industry is rising quickly. 
17 
2. National Development of COMETT 
• Finland, being an EFTA country, only became involved at the beginning of COMETT II but has made 
a good start. This was due to the strong base to existing university-enterprise cooperation and the 
centres of continuing education already in place in universities. Equally, there was much existing 
experience in international student exchanges and Government, itself, was launching an initiative to 
internationalise higher education institutes. The COMETT Information Office also played a major 
catalytic role. 
3. Networking 
• Finland gained five UETPs in 1990: 3 regional, one mixed and one sectoral. All except the sectoral 
UETP were hosted by universities. In 1992, shared responsibility for an additional UETP was ob­
tained. In 1994, a sectoral UETP was moved from the Netherlands to Finland. 
• The UETPs have bridged the gap between Brussels and participating Finnish organisations, particularly 
enterprises. All UETPs have undertaken SNA leading to the formulation of new projects. They have 
also stimulated and assisted international cooperation, very often turning a national project into a 
European one. The two sectoral UETPs have had a visible impact on training in their respective 
sectors. 
• The main strength has been the close co-operation between UETPs and with Information Centre. 
• The main weaknesses have been the lack of full UETP coverage of the country, while at the same 
time, economic recession has limited extension of industrial partners. Because COMETT was the only 
programme in which Finland was able to participate, UETPs have been restrained to working mainly 
with COMETT. 
4. Mobility 
• There has been a long traditions of student placement abroad. Thus COMETT has provided a new 
channel rather than a full innovation. However, particularly for the Institutes of Technology, COMETT 
has provided an efficient means to increase high quality placement. Expert exchanges (Be), while not 
new, have been appreciated as one of the most useful activities in COMETT. In 1994, Finland was the 
second biggest sending country in COMETT! 
• The decentralised nature of COMETT has encouraged individual officers in universities taking care of 
international affairs to take initiatives and more responsibility in arranging placements. Previously most 
work was centralised. Enterprises have moved from an approach of charity towards accepting students 
towards recognising their real added value. 
5. Training 
• COMETT has not had any major impact at a national level due to the small number of projects. 
However, courses which would have been only national have been made European. Courses have been 
held in English for foreign participation. Material produced has been recognised as useful by industry. 
• COMETT has effectively contributed to increasing European co-operation and has helped create new 
contacts and new forms of collaboration. 
6. Overall Impact — 
• Because there has been a strong higher education-industry tradition of cooperation, exchange and 
placements in Finland, COMETT is not seen to have had any significant impact at a regional or 
national level on higher education-industry relations or formulating policies. The innovative effects 
liave been at the transnational level. Established tradition in university-enterprise cooperation gave a 
good starting point for the implementation of the programme. 
• There has been strong synergy with the National Programme to increase the transnational activities of 
the Institutes of Technology. Two thirds of outgoing Ba students have been from such Institutes. The 
Ministry of Education has provided special bonus moneys to academic universities which increase 
their transnational activities. Participation in COMETT is now one of the criteria, for such awards. 
• Experience in cooperating in an EU context, both for authorities.as well as for organisations par­
ticipating^ the Programme has been gained. A solid base of successful participation in an EC Pro­
gramme has been achieved. 
118 
Annex 3. List of COMETT publications 
Below is given a list of the main documents and publications relating to COMETT issued between 1990 and 
1994; some publications to appear in 1995 have also been included. 
Official documents relating to the Calls for Applications 
• COMETT background document 9 languages 
• Vademecum COMETT II 9 languages 
This document contains essential information about the COMETT programme and sets out the objectives 
and operational structure of the programme. 
• Application Package 1990, 1991, 1992 9 languages 
Available in paper and diskette form, the Application Package is aimed at those who wish to submit 
projects to COMETT. The package contains general information on the COMETT programme and 
indicates how proposals should be formulated. Application forms are also included. 
• Application Package 1993, 1994 EN/FR/DE 
Since 1993 this document has been printed in 3 languages. 
General information on the programme and its outputs 
• The COMETT Bulletin EN/FR 
From February 1988 to December 1993, the COMETT Bulletin was produced three times a year and 
contained a range of articles concerning the programme and its links with other Community initiatives 
within the fields of education, training, technology and R&D. It also provided information on COMETT 
projects and the development of the programme. Publication ceased in December 1993 to make way for 
the new Task Force publication Le Magazine. 
• COMETT brochure 9 langues 
First published in 1990, this A5 brochure explains the structure of the programme in a simple and user-
friendly format. Starting with a general explanation of the COMETT objectives, the brochure explains all 
Strands of the programme and contains basic budgetary information. 
• COMETT Pilot projects (information folder) EN 
Aimed at a variety of different audiences, the folder consists of individual information sheets on COMETT 
pilot projects. The information sheets are presented in a simple format and cover each project's objectives, 
training materials and transnational partners. 
• Catalogue of COMETT I outputs EN 
The Catalogue provides key information on the outputs of all COMETT I projects including courses, 
training materials, studies, databases and newsletters. A statistical overview of COMETT I is also pro­
vided. 
• COMETT Project Compendium 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993/94 EN/FR 
The Compendium provides basic information on all COMETT projects accepted after each Call for Applic­
ations. Projects are listed with project title, a short summary and the full address of the contact person. 
A statistical overview is included, and several indexes and lists are provided so that projects may be easily 
identified. 
• Transnational student placements: the COMETT experience. EN/FR 
This step-by-step guide draws heavily on the experience of COMETT in managing transnational place­
ments in Member States and EFTA countries. Intended as a practical working tool for student placement 
organisers, the guide contains tips for organisers and students alike, country files and information on 
student placements within the ERASMUS and TEMPUS programmes. 
119 
Reports and studies 
• The development of COMETT I " FR/EN 
This internal monitoring report on COMETT I covers the period 1987 - 1989. One chapter is devoted to 
each of the five COMETT 1 Strands and country reports are included for all 12 Member States. As well 
as providing general statistics for the duration of the COMETT I programme, the document also presents 
statistics by Member States. 
• The development of COMETT I (Executive Summary) FR/EN 
• COMETT I. Final Report of the Commission 9 languages 
This official report concerns the first phase of the COMETT Programme. It documents the background to 
the Programme, its rationale, structure and implementation, with particular regard to its impact in the 
different operational Strands. It is a synthesis of a great deal of documents, répons, surveys, studies and 
analyses undertaken during the first operational phase. 
• COMETT Programme. Report of activities 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994 9 languages 
The Annual Report is a formal record of all COMETT activities within a given year. Subjects covered in­
clude results of Calls for Application, programme management, monitoring and evaluation, conferences, 
etc. Also included are a statistical overview of COMETT projects, an update on pilot projects and a list 
of publications. 
• National profiles 1992, 1994 Mixed EN/FR 
Covering the twelve Member States and seven EFTA countries, the national profiles contain an account 
of the COMETT development in each country, with a breakdown of activities within each Strand of the 
programme. 
• Regional profiles 1993, 1994 Mixed EN/FR 
Focusing on the contribution of COMETT to regional development throughout the 12 Member States and 
7 EFTA countries, the profiles contain statistical tables of COMETT funding and a breakdown of activities 
within each Strand of the programme. 
• Sectoral surveys (series) 
COMETT activities within ten key technology sectors are presented in a series of sectoral surveys: 
*• Medical technology and biomedical engineering in COMETT (EN) 
• Advanced manufacturing technology in COMETT (EN) 
• Technology and innovation management in COMETT (EN) 
• Microelectronics in COMETT (EN/FR) 
• Software technology in COMETT (EN) 
• Materials in COMETT (EN/FR) 
• Environment in COMETT (EN) 
• Biotechnology in COMETT (EN) 
• Mechanical engineering in COMETT (EN) 
- Agrofood in COMETT (EN) 
COMETT II Evaluation reports 
• COMETT Evaluation (ECOTEC, 1991) EN/FR/DE 
• Transnational training for technology in Europe - the COMETT experience 
(COMETT II Interim evaluation report 1990 - 1992) EN/FR/DE 
• COMETT II: Evaluations (1993) —EN/FR/DE 
• First part - Report by the Panel of Experts: COMETT. Transnational training for technology. The future 
of industry-university cooperation. 
• Second part - National Evaluations 
• Third part - GMV Report: Evaluation of the COMETT Programme 
• The Final National Evaluations of COMETT (1995) EN/FR/DE 
• COMETT II. The Final Evaluation Report (this report, 1995) 11 languages 
120 
Reports for the final evaluation of COMETT (series: 'COMETT: the results')1 
COMETT II in figures - a statistical overview - EN/FR/DE 
Networks and European partnerships - COMETT UETPs: reality and perspectives EN/FR/DE 
COMETT II: the results. The mobility actions, 1990-1994 EN/FR/DE 
COMETT II: the results. Joint training report. Lessons and experience EN/FR/DE 
La mobilité d'étudiants COMETT en entreprise, 1990 - 94 FR 
Placements de formation avancée, 1990 - 94 FR 
Echanges de personnel, 1990 - 94 FR 
Cours de formation de courte durée, 1990 - 94 FR 
COMETT II: the results. Strand Cb/Cc report ' EN 
Complementary measures - strategic plans and actions of COMETT UETPs, 1990-1994 • EN 
EFTA countries in COMETT II - an overview EN 
COMETT II: the results. 
- Linking R&D and education EN 
- SMEs in COMETT projects EN 
- A sectoral view on COMETT EN 
The creation and development of successful university-industry partnerships 
The contribution of the COMETT programme to the innovation in continuing education and training 
COMETT: the results. Manual of good practice for skill needs analysis EN/FR 
COMETT: the results. Student mobility in the COMETT programme EN/FR 
COMETT: the results. The impact of COMETT on SMEs EN/FR 
The regional impact of the COMETT Programme 
Other outputs 
COMETT Video: "Forging the Europe of the future' 
COMETT leaflets 
- COMETT - User Guide 
• COMETT - facts and figures 
• University-enterprise training partnerships 
• Industrial student placements 
• Training for European industry 
• COMETT and higher education 
• Technology management 
- COMETT and SMEs 
• Women and technology 
• Linking R&D with training 
• COMETT and Micro-electronics 
• COMETT and Biotechnology 
• COMETT and Agriculture 
• COMETT and the automobile industry 
Slide show COMETT 1992, 1993 and 1994 
COMETT Posters 
Database of COMETT projects 9 languages 
EN/FR/DE 
EN/FR/DE 
9 languages 
— EN 
1 These are partly working titles, since the documents are to appear in 1995 
'121 m AolSl 
Annex 4. Organisation of the COMETT programme 
A.4.1 Management and main actors involved 
A number of organisations have worked together to implement and manage the COMETT 
programme. As specified in the Council Decision, the European Commission, in particular 
the Task Force Human Resources, Education, Training and Youth (now DG XXII) had the 
primary responsibility for the implementation of COMETT. In addition to setting out the 
policy guidelines this comprised notably the dissemination of information relating to the 
programme, its application possibilities and the project outcomes, the assessment and select­
ion of projects, the issue of contracts and the financial management. 
The Commission was assisted in these processes by the COMETT Committee, composed 
of representatives of the 12 Member States, and the EFTA Joint Committees, the 
COMETT Information Centres established in each of the EU and EFTA Member States, 
and the COMETT Experts group. The COMETT Technical Assistance Office provided 
technical and professional support. 
The COMETT Committee consisted of two representatives from each Member State, 
selected on the basis of nominations made by the Member States, as well as two 
representatives of the social partners at Community level as observers. The Commission 
had to consult the Committee on matters concerning the implementation of the COMETT 
Programme. The Committee met three to four times each year. The Committee delivered 
opinions mainly on general policy issues, such as the general 
guidelines for the financial assistance to be provided, the pool scheme (which the 
Committee fully supported) and the complementary measures. As regards project selection, 
the Committee was involved in the general procedures for selecting the various types of 
projects, and had to provide an opinion on any project requiring a contribution of more 
than 100.000 ECU. Towards the end of the programme, the Committee also became 
increasingly involved in the evaluation of the programme, in particular the national eval­
uations. 
Since the launch of COMETT II the EFTA countries have participated in the COMETT 
programme, and Joint Committees were established between the European Community and 
each EFTA country, in order to discuss COMETT matters involving EFTA countries. These 
Committees met about twice each year, in general after a COMETT Committee meetings 
(which EFTA country representatives were not allowed to attend). 
At the national level the COMETT Information Centres played an important role in the 
dissemination of information and raising awareness. The Information Centres' main tasks 
have been to respond to information queries concerning COMETT, especially on projects 
led by organisations within their country, and to produce informational material (brochures, 
bulletins, etc). During the life of the programme, they have also organized a considerable 
number of information days, workshops, press meetings and conferences, and have assisted 
potential promoters with the preparation of new applications and to disseminate information 
about COMETT project outputs. Some Centres went even further and acted to some extent 
as a broker for project partners, often in cooperation with UETPs from their country. 
123 
As to the content and quality of selected projects, the Commission has been assisted by the 
COMETT Expert Group. They were appointed by the Commission, in consultation with 
Member States, on the basis of their knowledge and experience of a particular area or 
sector relevant to COMETT. The Group was invited to express its opinion on projects 
submitted and selection procedures applied for each call for applications, with particular 
attention to projects under Strands A and C. In particular they were asked to review the 
quality and relevance of the proposed projects for industrial needs. In addition to the 
Experts group, other Commission Departments, especially those responsible for R&D 
programmes, have been involved in the selection process, so as to ensure synergy across 
Community actions. 
Finally, the COMETT Technical Assistance Office (TAO) is non-profit organisation based 
in Brussels, with whom appropriate contractual arrangements have been made, which had 
primarily a direct support task to sustain the Commission in its work. Its activities included 
notably the practical organisation of the Calls (preparation, translation and printing of 
Vademecum and Application Package, mailing of application documentation, providing 
information and assistance to potential applicants, organisation of the selection procedure, 
including scrutiny and pre-assessmentof all submissions, preparation of contracts, payments 
to contractors, and monitoring progress on the basis of annual project reports. It also 
produced the drafts of many of the COMETT publications and documents. 
A.4.2 Overview of support activities 
There have, essentially, been three types of support activities in the COMETT Programme: 
• oral and written responses to queries for information 
• production and dissemination of reports and other publications 
• organisations of meetings, workshops and conferences. 
Direct support to interested organisations, by responding to oral or written requests for 
information, has been a major, continuous activity during the COMETT programme. It has 
been an important task of the Commission staff, the COMETT Technical Assistance Office 
and the COMETT Information Centres. Queries were not only made by potential applicants, 
but also frequently by national and international organisations, policy-makers, sectoral 
associations, governmental bodies, etc. 
A wealth of information products have been produced in relation to the COMETT 
programme. This includes: 
• official application documentation for promoters, particularly the COMETT Vademecum 
and Application Packages 
• promotional brochures, providing information about various aspects of COMETT 
• official reports, providing facts and findings illustrating the progress made, such as the 
annual reports and the interim report on COMETT II 
• newsletters, published both at Commission level (COMETT Bulletin), and at national 
and local level by the COMETT Information Centres, many UETPs and coordinators of 
major projects 
• surveys and analyses of particular areas, conducted with the support of COMETT, such 
as the sectoral surveys 
• documents setting out which COMETT projects have been accepted and what types of 
outputs have become available, such as the COMETT Compendium 
• guidelines and tools, developed by experts and working groups, aiming to assist project 
,124 
coordinators and other people involved in Comett projects (examples: use of housestyle 
in training materials, copyright, quality assurance, marketing, ...). 
A list is provided in Annex 3. 
An important mechanism for the provision of information, exchange of experience and 
receipt of feedback has been the organisation of a varied range of meetings and 
conferences. There have been five major COMETT conferences during COMETT II 
(Amsterdam, Glasgow, Aalborg, Antwerp and Bonn) with attendance varying between 200 
and 500 participants. Each of these conferences covered a specific overall theme of 
relevance to COMETT, allowed the Commission to report on progress and receive feedback 
from project coordinators, and offered a platform for people to learn from each other, to 
discuss areas of common interest, prepare new projects and promote the products 
developed. 
In addition to these major conferences, a larger number of meetings, workshops and smaller 
conferences has been held and sponsored in the course of COMETT II. Part of these were 
funded in the framework of the Positive Actions initiative (cf. Section 1.3.5 above), such 
as conferences on student placements and sectoral workshops. COMETT has also been 
present at events organised by related European education or R&D programmes. Two 
informal discussion meetings with Commission staff, COMETT Committee members and 
the Expert group were held in the first years of the programme, for the discussion of 
themes of general policy and strategy. 
A.4.3 Monitoring of the programme 
The monitoring of the COMETT Programme and the projects supported by the staff of the 
European Commission and the COMETT Office is complementary to ' the external 
evaluations carried out. The main purpose of this activity is to ensure that only high quality 
projects are being funded, that contractual agreements are respected in view of reaching the 
objectives of the programme, and that data and information is gathered which can be fed 
back to the programme management. 
To this end, a number of procedures and activities have been developed. In order to ensure 
transparency, at the beginning of COMETT II a Vademecum was drafted and widely 
disseminated. This Vademecum not only described the objectives and organisation of the 
programme, but also gave much detail on the selection criteria for projects. For every Call, 
a special complementary Application Package clearly indicated to promoters what was 
expected - and what they could expect. Through this information effort, the way was paved 
for objective, monitoring at later stages. 
A second crucial aspect were the selection procedures. Simplified, the following pattern 
was adopted: 
1. Initial screening and assessment of the applications received by the Commission, with 
the support of the Technical Assistance Office. This preselection took place on the basis 
of criteria given in the Vademecum and the Application Packages. 
2. Assessment of projects by the COMETT Experts Group, as to content, approach and 
added value; soliciting of views with other Units in the Commission for whom the 
projects could be of relevance. 
3. Submission of a draft list of projects to be accepted for discussion with the COMETT 
Committee and the COMETT-EFTA Joint Committees. 
125 
4. Final decision on projects selected by the Commission, taking into account the views 
expressed by the Committees. 
When projects were approved, a contract was made, indicating the conditions for support. 
In many cases, 'technical recommendations' for project improvement were issued. Reporting 
obligations were also included in the contract. Reports had to be produced at the end of 
each contract-year, and for major projects sometimes also at interim stages. All reports 
were analyzes as to content and use of support; the information gathered has been used for 
the Annual Reports, as an input to the external reports and for the large number of studies 
and reports produced about COMETT (cf. Annex 3). 
For the Pilot Projects supported under Strand Cc very specific procedures have been 
developed. For each Pilot Project an external Project Advisor was assigned, high quality 
European experts familiar with COMETT. The Project Advisor had the obligation to visit 
the project regularly and report to the COMETT Project Officer after each visit to the Pilot 
Project. A tripartite relationship has been developed between the project coordinator, the 
COMETT Project Officer and the Project Advisor. When renewing contracts - after the 
annual report - the Commission gave the Project Advisors the opportunity to formulate a 
number of recommendations. Overall, this process was resource-intensive but proved to 
be beneficial in assuring the good development of the Pilot Projects. 
In a number of cases - if there was a suspicion of difficulties with the progress of the 
project - there have been formal project reviews. This has been the case for a number of 
UETPs and several Pilot Projects. For such reviews use was made by the Commission of 
the experience of Comett Experts and Project Advisers. 
It must finally be recognised, however, that the very large number of projects supported 
by COMETT did not allow a comprehensive animation and monitoring programme 
involving all projects to be undertaken on a regular basis. This has only been possible for 
the Pilot Projects and, to some extent, the UETPs. 
126 
Annex 2 
COMETT II 
The Final National 
Evaluations of COMETT 
Synthesis of Member States' Reports 
127 ASU 
CONTENT 
INTRODUCTION 131 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 132 
THE COMETT II PROGRAMME 135 
SECTION A : FULFILMENT OF THE COUNCIL DECISION 136 
1. Improving Economic & Social Development and Cohesion 136 
1.1 Improving The Contribution of Training 136 
1.2 Regional Structuring & Development 136 
1.3 Improving Economic & Social Cohesion 137 
2. Optimum Use of Training 138 
2.1 Linking research, training & technology transfer 138 
2.2 The Improvement of Quality 138 
3. SMEs and Innovation 139 
4. Equal Opportunities 140 
5. The European Dimension & Value Added 140 
5.1 European Value Added 140 
5.2 European Networking 140 
5.3 European Integrating Effects 141 
SECTION B : THE HORIZONTAL SYNTHESIS 141 
1. The General Overview 141 
1.1. Stimulating the Debate 141 
1.2. Fostering HEI / Enterprise Relationships 142 
1.3. Influence in Formulating Policies 142 
1.4. Relationships / Synergy with National / Regional Programmes 143 
1.5. Overall Impact of COMETT 144 
2. The UETP Networks 145 
2.1. Contribution of Regional UETP Networks 145 
2.2. Articulation of Industrial Needs -r-: . . 146 
2.3. Stimulating Transnational Outlook in Partners 146 
2.4. Contribution of Sectoral UETP Networks 147 
2.5. Major Strengths and Weaknesses of UETPs in Participating States 147 
3. Mobility & Exchange Actions 149 
3.1. Contribution of Mobility Actions to Innovations in HEI / Enterprise Co­
operation 149 
3.2. Modification of Policies and Practices to Facilitate Exchanges 149 
129 
Training Course Development 150 
4.1. Generating Innovative Modes of Collaboration in Training Course Development! 50 
4.2. Contribution to Improvement in Supply of Technology - Related Training .... 151 
4.3. Complementing / Strengthening Training Initiatives at National Level 152 
4.4. Other Points Raised 152 
130 
INTRODUCTION 
In the context of establishing the Final Evaluation Report for the COMETT II Programme 
(1990-1994) required by Article 6 of the Council Decision 89/27/EEC1 of 16th December 
1988, the European Commission is examining the ways in which the participating States are 
supporting higher education - industry co-operation and contributing to the implementation 
of the Programme. Towards this end, the participating States were requested to undertake a 
final National Evaluation of COMETT II. They were provided with a framework of questions 
to which these National Evaluation reports should respond. 
This present report is an analysis of the National Evaluation Reports2. Section A presents an 
examination of the extent to which COMETT II has fulfilled the objectives of the Council 
Decision. Section B provides a horizontal analysis, across the responses of participating 
States, for each topic in the framework of questions. Appendix 1 provides a synoptic table 
for each participating State indicating, in summary, its response to each question posed in the 
Commission's framework3. The Synoptic Tables were circulated to National Delegations and 
comments and additional material received. The Final Report was submitted to the 
Commission in February 1995. 
There is, however, one major methodological difficulty in National Evaluations. In only one, 
perhaps two cases , is it clear whose views -firm, student, higher education institution (HEI)5, 
UETP, government - are being presented. These two Evaluations expose a wide variation in 
actors' perceptions of the success of COMETT II. These two cases apart, the Evaluations are 
largely presented as a set of already synthesised views on the Programme. This serious 
difficulty also underlies the present report. Equally, the analysis and information within this 
report is based on and explicitly confined to that provided by the Final National Evaluations. 
1 Council Decision 89/27/EEC of 16th December 1988, OJ n° L 13/28 of 17.1.1989. 
2 Four of the Final National Evaluations were not available on the 31st. Dec. 1994. In these-xases, their 
1993 National Evaluation was used as a substitute for initial analysis in Section A and B. National Evaluations 
which arrived subsequently were entered into the synoptic tables and important points integrated into Sections 
A and B. 
3 These synoptic tables were circulated to national authorities for verification and correction. During this 
activity, in some cases, sections of the synoptic tables which lacked infonnation were completed by the authority. 
Again, as appropriate, this information was integrated into Sections A and B. 
4 This is the UK. The different actors* viewpoints can also be seen in the Belgian (Fr) Evaluation but with 
less consistency. These are also the only two quantitative Evaluations. 
5 For consistency, universities, polytechnics, grandes écoles, and other forms of third level education 
providers are referred to as higher education institutions (HEIs). 
131 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
This report is an integrated summary of the 18 Final National Evaluation Reports provided 
by participating States in the European Commission's Task Force on Human Resources* 
COMETT II Programme for co-operation between Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and 
industry regarding training in the field of technology. This report is in three sections. Section 
1 examines the fulfilment of the Council Decision establishing COMETT II as seen through 
the Final National Evaluations. Section 2 provides an overall synthesis of the Evaluations. 
Section 3, the appendix, provides a summary of the main points of each individual National 
Evaluation. 
Fulfilling the Council Decision 
COMETT II has improved the contribution of advanced technological training through its 
incorporation and employment in 1) the promotion, development and acceptance of 
experiential learning and praxis associated with industrial placement by higher education in 
industry, 2) the improvement of the quality of courses and widening their availability, 3) the 
development of local and regional higher education / industry co-operation interfaces and the 
creation of a European level interface, 4) the advancement of economic and social cohesion 
within Europe. 
COMETT II has fostered joint development and the optimum use of training through 1) the 
integration of industry into the joint development of courses, 2) the improved utilisation of 
technical training as an integral part of the technology transfer process and 3) improving the 
calibre and accessibility of training. 
For SMEs, through student placement activities, COMETT II has made an important and 
direct contribution to their technical and economic development and their integration into the 
wider European market. Short courses are also mentioned, but much less consistently. 
No comment was made on the role of COMETT II in developing equality of opportunity. 
COMETT II has provided major European value added through its development and 
internationalisation of placement activities. In addition, it has improved, and in most instances 
created, international networks dedicated to improving higher education / industry co­
operation. It has also had a strong integrative and cohesive effect across European higher 
education and advanced technical training. 
At a General Level 
The major contribution of COMETT II to the higher education / industry debate has been to 
draw attention to the benefits to be derived from transnational co-operation in the area. It has 
also contributed to improving the debate on high level technology training and qualification 
in industry generally. However, in the latter two areas, in States in which the debate was 
already well developed, COMETT was marginal. 
COMETT IPs major operational success has been in the European value added which it has 
brought through the formalisation and acceleration of transnational student placement 
activities and, to a lesser extent, of HEIs' technical training development and delivery. 
132 
COMETT IPs has contributed to European cohesion through its direct and catalytic effects 
in higher education / industry co-operation, student placement and industrial technical training 
development in the less favoured regions of the Union and other participating States. 
COMETT II has had little or no influence on national policy outside perhaps Greece and 
Portugal. Although, a number of States indicated that the policy debate had been 
"Europeanised". At a regional level, its influence has depended on the relationships 
established with other regional bodies by and on behalf of the particular UETP. 
There has been a good synergy with national and regional activities. COMETT II is 
sufficiently flexible and sensitive to subsidiarity issues to adapt to local needs. However, there 
is some concern that its effects may be constrained only to those actors directly involved. 
The main overall impacts of COMETT II have been a contribution to 1) The Europeanisation 
of HEI institutions, curricula and activities, student culture and enterprise culture, commerce 
and technology, 2) Régularisation and systématisation of international student placements, 3) 
The improvement of the quality of high level technical training provision 4) The improvement 
of higher education / industry institutional culture and interface structures at a regional, 
sectoral, national and European level. 
A number of points have limited COMETT IPs impact 1) It has had a relatively small budget, 
2) In regions where the higher education / industry relations are well developed, its impact 
is sometimes limited to Europeanisation of activities, 3) In some States, Authorities 
themselves have made little attempt to exploit the Programme. 
Turning to the UETPs 
The main contributions of the regional UETPs have been 1) The development of a local / 
regional network of HEIs, technology and training related institutions and enterprises and 2) 
the integration of this local / regional network, along with those of other regions, into the first 
operationally effective trans-European network for information, student and staff mobility, and 
training development and delivery in high level technologies.. 
However, the regional impact of UETPs has been variable. There are indications that its added 
value has been greater in Less Favoured Regions. There are also indications that its 
effectiveness has depended on its institutional location: greater within a technology transfer 
setting, weaker within a solely training or student mobility setting. Their flexibility has been 
important in their acceptability and subsequent development. 
Many regional UETPs have had major difficulties in undertaking effective training needs 
analysis (TNA). Some question their direct, enterprise level role in this area. 
All recognise the effects of UETPs in stimulating a transnational outlook in HEIs (on training 
methodologies, teaching systems, etc.) and firms (European dimension of technology / R&D 
/ training / markets, etc.) 
Sectoral UETPs have contributed more directly than regional UETPs to technology transfer 
and training development to a better defined, more homogeneous network. There is no 
judgement, however, on whether regional or sectoral UETPs are "better" for overall 
COMETT II activities. 
133 
The major strengths of the UETPs have been their structured European and local / regional 
networks of partners. The major weaknesses have been their poor financial structures and the 
difficulty in gaining industrial involvement in their activities. 
Turning to Mobility Activities 
The student mobility activities have been the major success of COMETT II. For firms, they 
have brought a European dimension and potential technical and commercial contacts, often 
providing SMEs with their first contact with European programmes. For students, they have 
brought languages, cultural and technical broadening and better professional prospects. For 
HEIs, they have brought new teaching approaches and potential technical contacts. Overall, 
they have contributed to a more flexible and better integrated and trained European technical 
labour market. 
Placement policies and practices have changed, particularly in firms, with greater 
régularisation in the acceptance of students and systématisation within their placement period 
reported. HEIs seem to have moved at a somewhat slower pace. 
Turning to Training Course Development 
Collaborative approaches between HEIs and enterprises have seen 1) Greater participation of 
firms in planning and developing courses, 2) Internationalisation of the development process, 
opening up new sources of expertise, 3) The development of flexible networks to create and 
deliver such courses. 
The improvement in the quality has been the main benefit indicated. This improvement 
derived mainly from access to a wider pool of technical expertise, comparison of state-of-the-
art in different regions, and a move from supply driven to demand- sensitive course 
development. 
While the variety of courses offered and their accessibility to peripheral areas has increased, 
the quantitative impact of COMETT II courses has been small. There is also concern over the 
length of time taken to develop the courses. 
COMETT II training initiatives are seen to complement national efforts in 1) The 
internationalisation of HEIs, firms and other institutions, 2) The development of higher 
education / industry interfaces, 3) The general improvement of technical training, particularly 
for SMEs. 
134 
THE COMETT II PROGRAMME 
The action programme COMETT is the European Union programme on co-operation between 
higher education institutions (HEIs) and industry regarding training in the field of technology. 
COMETT II was launched by the Council Decision 89/27/EEC of 16th December 1988 and 
was in operation for five years, from 1990 to 1994. The first COMETT Programme, 
COMETT I ran for four years, from 1986 to 1989. COMETT II has been open to participation 
by EFTA States since 1990. 
The objectives of COMETT II as laid out in its vademecum are : 
"7b improve the contribution of in particular, advanced technological training at the various 
levels concerned and thus the contribution of training to the economic and social development 
of the Community. 
To foster the joint development of training programmes and the exchange of experience, and 
also the optimum use of training resources at Community level, notably through the creation 
of transnational sectoral and regional networks of, in particular, advanced technology 
training projects, 
To respond to the specific skill requirements of small and medium sized businesses, 
To promote equal opportunities for men and women in initial and continuing training in, in 
particular, advanced technology, 
To give a European dimension to co-operation between universities and industry in initial and 
continuing training relating to technologies and their applications and transfer. " 
Operationally and in brief, COMETT II consists of four strands : 
• Strand A : University - Enterprise Training Partnerships (UETP) which are network 
organisations set up through COMETT to further transnational co-operation between HEIs and 
enterprises. They can be either sectoral or regional in nature. 
• Strand B : Transnational Exchanges which provide grants for : 
1 ) Students undergoing periods of from three to twelve months' training in industry in another 
participating State. 
2) Persons who have completed their initial training, either enrolled at a HEI or after 
graduation and as a transition between study and a first employment, taking up placements 
of six months to two years in a business undertaking in another participating State for the 
purpose of taking part in an industrial project 
3) Personnel seconded from HEIs and industry to industry and universities in another 
participating State for the improvement of training activities 
• Strand C: Joint projects for continuing training in, in particular, advanced technology and 
for multimedia distance training : 
1 ) Support for crash training courses with a European dimension in, in particular, advanced 
technology designed for the rapid dissemination - by and in HEIs and by and in industry -of 
the results of research and development in the field of new technologies and their 
applications, as well as for the promotion, particularly for small and medium sized businesses, 
of the transfer of technological innovation to sectors in which it was not previously applied. 
2) Support for work on devising, developing and testing, at a European level, joint training 
projects 
3) Support for distance learning utilising new training technologies and / or resulting in 
transferable training products 
• Strand D : Complementary promotion and back-up measures. 
135 
SECTION A : FULFILMENT OF THE COUNCIL DECISION 
This section examines, within the limitations of the information available from the Final 
National Evaluations, the extent to which COMETT II has fulfilled the objectives of the 
Council Decision (89/27/EEC) setting up the Programme. In brief, the objectives as set out 
in Article 3 of the Decision and elaborated in its Annex are : 
1. Improving the contribution of advanced technology training to the economic and social 
development of the Community, including cohesion. 
2. To foster joint development and the optimum use of training and in particular training 
based on Community research. 
3. To respond to the specific skill requirements of small and medium sized businesses, 
including technology and skills transfer. 
4. To promote equal opportunities for men and women. 
5. To provide a European dimension to higher education / industry co-operation in training 
and European value added. 
1. Improving Economic & Social Development and Cohesion 
1.1 Improving The Contribution of Training 
The Final National Evaluations of the COMETT II Programme see COMETT as having been 
an undoubted success in terms of the improvement of technological training's economic 
contribution. This has been achieved most strongly through the development of the 
experiential learning practices associated with student placement. These practices have made 
a major contribution directly to enterprises, as well as through improved understanding 
between higher education institutions and industry. Traditional technical training's contribution 
has also seen an improvement in the quality of courses - mostly due to transnationalisation 
and industrial involvement - and their wider availability. 
However, the limited size of the COMETT II budget, in comparison to States' private and 
public sector spending in the area of continuing education and training, has meant that the 
direct and catalytic effects of COMETT have not been as large as States might have wished. 
Also, in some States where higher education 7 industry policy and continuing training 
practices were more developed, COMETT tended to have less impact. Conversely, COMETT 
has had a very positive impact on cohesion within Europe, advancing the development of 
higher education / industry relations in the Less Favoured Regions. 
1.2 Regional Structuring & Development 
The National Evaluations point to the COMETT II Programme as having provided a 
structuring effect leading to an improved potential for economic development at two levels; 
the local - regional level and the European level. At these two levels, the Programme has 
improved higher education / industry interfaces and relationships, brought new partners 
together and linked with and provided synergy with other national and European programmes. 
At the local - regional level, COMETT has provided what one State called "a framework and 
a legitimate forum for public debate". Mostly through the activities of the regional UETPs, 
the local, and sometimes national, social and economic partners have been brought together 
to discuss and develop higher education / industry activities, particularly high level, 
continuing technical training. This has resulted in increased co-operation and co-ordination 
136 
of the activities of these mostly regional partners. The activities include working and liaising 
with and between regional firms and higher education institutions, undertaking training needs 
analysis, developing training materials, organising and / or delivering training, placing 
students, etc. 
In some regions, COMETT UETP activity has also provided a useful and occasionally quite 
important contribution to policy development for continuing technical education and for 
higher education / industry relations. They have also occasionally undertaken wider based 
regional development activities which were not that closely linked to COMETT. The most 
important and the most common of these activities is that of a fuller-spectrum technology 
transfer facility, linked to EC Programme research, contract research and patent and licensing 
activity. Indeed, as we shall see below, there are some indications that UETPs which achieve 
(either by initial location or self development) such integrated activities are "most successful" 
and are the paradigm intuitively sought by most National Evaluations. 
The extent of these structuring* effects were, however, uneven. The main parameter of this 
variability seems to have been the already existing level of debate and higher education / 
industry infrastructure. Where it was well developed, there was less structuring action at a 
local / regional level. The second important parameter in the effectiveness was the 
institutional positioning of UETPs. The positioning was linked by various Evaluations to 
issues such as ability to obtain additional finances, credibility and effectiveness with industry 
and access to regional policy making. Indeed, some of the financial and other frailty of the 
UETP system may be associated with the positioning weakness. 
1.3 Improving Economic & Social Cohesion 
COMETT II contributed to economic and social cohesion through three main effects. 
1. The regional structuring effects discussed above were most evident in the less favoured 
regions of the Union. Again the activities of the UETPs have been central to the success of 
these processes. Where university / industry relations were least advanced, COMETT II 
contributed most to development, raising the institutional infrastructure towards current 
European views of best practice in the area. 
2. COMETT II also has had a strong integrative effect, drawing all regions into closer 
working relationships with each other and providing the less favoured regions with concrete 
projects and modes of co-operation with the core EU economic regions. A concomitant of this 
integration has been the improved diffusion of technical knowledge and skills as well as best 
practice in the pedagogics of training development and delivery. 
3. Social cohesion is terms of a wider understanding and respect of different participating 
States' culture was commonly indicated in the Evaluations. 
137 
2. Optimum Use of Training 
2.1 Linking research, training & technology transfer 
The core motivation of EFTA and EU Member States' interest in the development of higher 
education / industry co-operation is technology transfer : the 'transfer of science and 
technology developed in its higher education institutions into a domain in which it can be 
effectively commercialised so as to contribute to economic development. A second, but 
perhaps less unanimously proclaimed, motivation is to redirect activity in higher education 
institutions so as to be more responsive to wider industrial and commercial needs. 
In terms of straightforward technology transfer, mechanisms for commercialisation can be 
seen as a continuum ranging from setting up campus or joint venture companies, to contract 
research, to consultancy, to simple information activities. The ability of higher education 
institutions to offer companies a full continuum of technology transfer mechanisms, along 
with the possibility of an incremental path along the continuum, is seen by many as 
important, if not essential, in effective technology transfer. 
Until COMETT, high level technical training was a particularly weak link in this technology 
transfer continuum. As many of the National Evaluations report, COMETT has focused 
attention on the training element of higher education / industry co-operation and has improved 
its visibility, and indeed acceptability, in higher education institutions' interaction with 
industry. Here, COMETT has certainly contributed to the "optimal use of training" and to 
more effective technology transfer. In this context, the institutional location of UETPs may 
be of importance. There are some indications that UETPs which were based in a technology 
transfer organisation were more effective than those in a solely education / training location 
or those concerned essentially with student placement activities. 
COMETT II has also contributed to "the optimal use of training" tlirough the broadening of 
institutional, particularly higher education institutions', horizons through student placements. 
COMETT activities have given industrial placement an increased respectability in traditional 
universities, often tlirough the bottom up pressure of lecturers and students wishing to avail 
of such placements. Allied to this, is an increasing recognition (in traditional universities' 
eyes) of the workplace as a legitimate place of technical learning as well as experiential 
learning as a valuable, even necessary, adjunct to academic studies. Such placement activities 
and changing attitudes in higher education institutions and industry provide for a firmer base 
for future technology transfer; in both directions ! 
2.2 The Improvement of Quality 
Within the training course strand of COMETT II, the Evaluations point continually to the 
improvement in quality of projects, due to transnational co-operation and industrial 
involvement during their development. (Quantitative increases in courses available are rarely 
mentioned and seen as marginal in comparison to the volume of continuing technical 
education and training on offer. Increases in the variety of specialist courses, however, and 
their availability in peripheral regions are remarked upon.) 
The Evaluations show clearly the value added to be gained in quality from working at a 
European level. The ability to access high level expertise across participating States, to 
compare methodological approaches, to see different delivery technologies in operation, to 
138 
examine different institutional settings, etc. all issue forth in a quantum leap forward in 
participants' quality horizons. Naturally, there is some increase in the organisational 
complexity, but it seems to be far outweighed by the quality improvement. Indeed, working 
at a European level is also reported as lowering the barriers-to-entry for course development 
and participation by providing a larger, consolidated European market accessible through the 
UETP network. 
On the industrial side, the Evaluations indicate additional course improvements through the 
integration of industrial user requirements and concerns early in the course development 
process. Movement from supply-dominated to demand-responsive training has been one of 
the features of COMETT II developed courses. However, the quantitative Evaluations point 
to the improvement still necessary in higher education institutions working with industry in 
this area. Indeed, the need for development of a market information / development / delivery 
interface by higher education institutions, perhaps through work and co-operation with 
professional training organisations / consultants / technology transfer organisations is 
remarked upon under a number of guises. 
One major criticism of this activity is the time required for course development. Firms are 
reported as only using COMETT II for non-critical, longer time horizon training. Equally, 
their was some question about UETP ability to undertake training needs analysis. The 
quantitative survey which addressed this issue indicated that firms saw UETPs as an interface 
for communicating needs to suppliers, rather than the actual undertakers of needs analysis. 
3. SMEs and Innovation 
The student placement activities of COMETT has been the major, direct contributor of the 
Programme to the needs of SMEs and industry more generally. For SMEs, the small scale and 
short time horizon of placements (compared to Pilot and Joint Training Projects) have suited 
their type of activity. Indeed, for some it has been their first contact with European 
Programmes and sometimes with Europe in a wider context. 
Staff placements have been particularly useful to SMEs when they have occurred. However, 
numbers have been limited. Many participating States point to the need to rethink the nature 
of these placements if they are to develop into a significant activity for the development of 
SMEs. 
From the Evaluations, it is difficult to judge the effects of training courses on SMEs. 
Certainly, the consistent mention of improvements in the quality of training developed will 
have had a positive impact on recipient SMEs. 
There has been some concern expressed, however, at the closeness and integration of 
COMETT IPs UETP and more traditional training activities with industry, and SMEs in 
particular. The two States which carried out a quantitative survey found a much lower interest 
and appreciation of UETP and training aspects of COMETT from industrialists than from 
higher education institutions or placements. There were complaints from companies of the 
long time horizons accepted in working with the large projects and indications that companies 
used such training only in a peripheral way. One evaluation questioned the extent of the use 
and reuse of such training material outside the very narrow development group. Equally, the 
remoteness of UETPs from direct contact with firms was seen as an issue. 
139 
4. Equal Opportunities 
Within the written National Final Evaluations of COMETT II, there has been little or no 
allusion to or evaluation of the effects of the Programme in promoting equality of opportunity 
between men and women. This is not to say that there were no effects, either great or small, 
simply that they were not mentioned. 
5. The European Dimension & Value Added 
5.1 European Value Added 
The major benefits of COMETT II are to be seen in the value added, over and above the 
initial financial investment, which it has achieved from its Europeanisation of activities. 
Areas of value added include : 
• Increased economic and social cohesion within Europe. 
• The effective launch of a European-wide higher education / industry co-operation in 
technical training activities 
• Broadening of the European technical and commercial horizons of firms through receiving 
students from abroad. And with this, a longer term integration of markets. 
• A contribution to the development of a more integrated and effective European labour 
market for highly qualified, technical graduates. 
• Innovative changes in higher education institutions based on contact with HEIs abroad. 
• Improved course development from exposure to the state-of-art of technical and training 
expertise across a number of countries. 
• Increased variety and availability of specialist technical courses due to consolidation of a 
European market. 
5.2 European Networking 
An essential developer of this value added, despite difficulties in industrial interaction, have 
been the UETPs. They have provided some of the support for both student placement 
activities and training activities. They are the visible legacy, structurally relatively stable, of 
COMETT I and II. They are the framework across which directed and enduring networking 
can take place. Regional UETPs' have provided a local / regional interface within the 
European network of UETPs. The Evaluations recognise this to have been carried out, more 
or less, well by all UETPs. UETPs develop, to some extent formalise and then maintain 
across Europe these networks of information and contacts on higher education institutions, 
continuing technical training and industry. Sectoral UETP have developed narrower, 
technology-defined, networks across Europe along which many of the value added activities 
discussed above have been put in place. 
This dedicated UETP network across Europe was the "backbone" of most operational 
activities. For the first time, across Europe (and indeed within some participating States), a 
system of information and liaison dedicated to higher education / industry relations 
development was set up on an operational regional basis. Essentially, it provided the main 
lines along which information, training material and people were migrated across Europe. 
140 
5.3 European Integrating Effects 
While UETPs may be the most visible European-wide structure deriving from COMETT, 
placement activities have had an important integrating impact on individual participating 
students, higher education institutions and enterprises. They have brought an increased 
European awareness to higher education institutions, motivating them to further broaden their 
co-operative activities outside their own State, obtaining benefits through comparison of ways 
of teaching, curriculum structure, and modes of working with industry. 
Students have worked in another European culture, improved'their language abilities and 
taken the first step in becoming part of a future, highly qualified European labour Torce. 
Firms, many of them SMEs participating in their first European venture, have become aware 
of other cultures, markets and sources of expertise. There is little doubt but that participating 
States see this area as the major success of COMETT II. 
The development and delivery of COMETT II European-wide courses has had, perhaps, a less 
pronounced - at least less remarked upon - integrative effect, and perhaps one more restricted 
to the developers and delivers themselves. 
SECTION B : THE HORIZONTAL SYNTHESIS 
1. The General Overview 
1.1. Stimulating the Debate 
The main contributions of COMETT II to stimulating the higher education / industry debate 
have been : 
1. To draw participants attention to issues involved in and the benefits to be derived from 
transnational co-operation in this area. All participating States recognise this and its 
operational implementation as the chief benefits derived from COMETT II. 
2. To stimulate the debate on the technology training aspects of the higher education / 
industry debate. 
3. To stimulate the debate on the academic nature of higher education and, what Germany 
terms, "its stronger reorientation towards the requirements of praxis in the professions and 
industry". 
4. To contribute to a wider debate on training and qualification in industry. 
However, for most States and many regions, the debate on higher education / industry 
relations was well developed before the advent of COMETT. This meant that COMETT was 
not saying anything particularly new within the context of purely national or regional debates. 
Thus, given COMETT's restrained financial resources, compared to national and regional 
training budgets, it could add little to the ongoing debate at these levels. Naturally, in States 
and regions in which this debate was less developed, COMETT II has contributed more to 
stimulating a discussion. In this context, it has had a positive impact on cohesion throughout 
the Union and other participating States. 
This said, COMETT II has generally provided what Austria called "a framework and a 
legitimate forum for public debate". Even in the More Favoured Regions where the debate 
141 
was well advanced, it provided another channel for co-ordination and communication. In Less 
Favoured Regions, this framework was more visible and useful. 
1.2. Fostering HEI / Enterprise Relationships 
In most States, the major contribution of COMETT II, the strongest and most consistent 
positive relationship fostered, has been the development and formalisation of transnational 
higher education / industry student placements. Firms, as did HEIs, explicitly recognised this 
most positive aspect of the Programme. To a lesser extent, the transnationalisation of training 
course development and delivery was also a recognised beneficial development from 
COMETT. 
This said, COMETT IPs contribution has varied depending on the preceding level of higher 
education / industry interaction. In States and regions with well developed interaction, Sweden 
for example, the effects of COMETT II have been largely confined to the actual participants, 
with relatively little wider catalytic effect. However, even in such developed regions / States, 
COMETT II has been linked to developing particular aspects of their structures. For example, 
the non-technical HEIs in Finland, or the hogescholen placement system in the Netherlands. 
Although, in such cases, it has had a supporting rather than a leading role. 
These limitations are in contrast to other States / regions with less developed higher education 
/ industry interactions. In this situation, COMETT has had a much wider and more profound 
effect. Here, COMETT has helped crystallise out and formalise a much broader range of 
higher education •/ industry relationships, ranging from assisting firms in their first contact 
with Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), to instigating formal training needs analysis 
(TNA), to providing the first regional or national interface for higher education / industry 
interaction in the area of training, etc. 
From the States which carried out quantitative surveys, Belgium (Fr) and the UK, there 
appears to be some difference among the various actors in the importance attributed to 
COMETT II in improving higher education / industry relations. Firms were least impressed. 
Only 17 % of Belgian and 36 % of UK firms felt relations were improved with HEIs. In the 
UK most HEIs surveyed were positive while, again in the UK, 70 % of UETPs were positive. 
This gradient of enthusiasm should be kept in mind when some of the more fervent 
statements on COMETT are read. It may be that some of the more qualitative National 
Evaluations are disproportionately informed by UETP inputs. 
1.3. Influence in Formulating Policies 
In Portugal and%Greece COMETT IPs channels to national policy making seemed to be more 
direct and to have some policy influence. The placement of the Portuguese 
COMETT Information Office in the CESE - the government office dedicated to higher 
education / industry development - seems to have been particularly effective. However, for 
the most part, at the national level, COMETT has had little or no direct influence on 
formulating policy, particularly where higher education / industry co-operation is taken for 
granted. A number of States do, however, indicate that the debate on policy has been 
"Europeanised" through COMETT. 
Nonetheless, a number of specific if rather administrative national level outcomes could be 
seen, such as The Austrian Ministry of Science and Research making better legal provision 
142 
for the recognition of COMETT II placements abroad and the Ministry of Social Affairs and 
Employment waiving work permit requirements for COMETT placements. In Luxembourg, 
COMETT activities have highlighted the lack of national co-ordination in the collaboration 
of domestic firms and foreign HEIs. 
At the regional level, COMETT II has been somewhat more influential, particularly through 
the activities of the UETPs. In Norway, COMETT II has helped provide a framework for 
regional policy in this area, as well as being an instrument of its implementation. This 
influence could also be quite variable within a State. In the UK, for example, the specific 
relationship between the UETP and the local Training & Enterprise Council (TEC) could be 
of importance. In other States, the regional influence was small. 
1.4. Relationships / Synergy with National / Regional Programmes 
There seems to have been a good level of operational synergy between COMETT II and 
national / regional programmes. National programmes seeking to promote international 
activities (Switzerland, Finland, Germany) find a natural partner in COMETT II. National 
programmes for internal training or technology transfer development such as the Austrian 
"Scientists for the Economy", the Danish "Act on Continuing Education", the Italian Law 
67/1988 indicating 10 % of R&D to be spent on training or the Swiss national plan for 
developing continuing education in the universities and federal polytechnics or again the 
Norwegian technology transfer and training programmes, all find support in COMETT. 
Naturally, where there is no national programme or orientation, synergy cannot be said to 
exist, even though the Programme may be all the more useful. The very close development 
of COMETT and Portuguese policy in this area and allied areas through the national CESE 
is again worthy of note. 
Even at a more general level than technology and training, Luxembourg's interest in 
developing their national firms' international activities finds a response in COMETT. In 
Ireland, the two sectoral UETPs have been established in areas of designated national S&T 
priority. In Portugal, the spread of UETP activities to other EU programmes was seen as a 
positive development, as well as the more direct synergy from working with national 
programmes. The provision of Government funds for either the development of UETPs (as 
for example in the Netherlands, Germany, Portugal and Spain) or courses (from Iceland's 
Training Assistance Scheme) also indicated a certain level of synergy was being achieved. 
The Programme's synergy with regional activities has been strongly dependent on the activity 
of the local UETP. This is the position in the Spanish regions, particularly the autonomous 
regions with control over education and training. In Germany, Lander policies to Européanise 
their HEIs has found a strong synergy with COMETT activities. In addition, the nature of the 
local regional development structure has been an important factor in the potential for synergy. 
In France, the close linkage between UETPs and the Regional Chambers of Commerce has 
been important. In the UK, the relationship to the work of the Training & Enterprise Councils 
has varied from region to region with more or less synergy. However, synergy with 
developing regional continuing education structures has been more uniformly strong in 
Norway. 
Quantitatively, in Belgium (Fr) over one-third of COMETT participating firrris had also taken 
part in similar regional or national programmes. In the UK, half the universities and about 
70 % of UETPs were similarly involved. The variety and flexibility of activities within 
143 
COMETT has probably been an important element in this synergy, permitting each region / 
participating State to adapt the Programme to local requirements. 
There can be, of course, some conflicts between COMETT and national or regional activities. 
This is the case in the clash of COMETT student placement with national, regional or 
individual HEI student placement where the ability of local industry to absorb students is 
limited. Equally, there can be some drift apart and loss of synergy over time. This was noted 
in the French Evaluation, where national and regional economic and political change could 
leave COMETT needing readaptation. 
1.5. Overall Impact of COMETT 
Participating States see the COMETT Programme itself as quite successful. However, in 
national terms, the overall impact of COMETT has been restrained due to the relatively small 
amounts of funding involved. The impact has been even more restrained in some participating 
States where higher education / industry relations were already well developed. -
This said, the participating States point to the following positive contributions of COMETT : 
1. The Europeanisation of Activities 
This has taken place at a number of levels. HEIs have become more international not only 
in an institutional sense but also in terms of student culture (via the placements) and in some 
cases through curricular change. Some States indicate that it has been the smaller HEIs which 
have benefited most through using the smaller scale, easily accessible, COMETT activities 
as one of their first steps into Europe. Firms have benefited particularly from student 
placement which has opened up a wider European view of business and, in some cases, 
participation in new markets. At a national and regional level, COMETT's Europeanising 
effect has been more variable. It has, however, been particularly helpful to the EFTA States 
in gaining experience and understanding of the operation of EU Programmes, as well as 
building a base for future activities. 
2. The Impact of Student Placements 
This activity has had, perhaps, the most direct and strongly felt positive impact. For a number 
of States, it was explicitly the major benefit of COMETT. On the firms' side, it opened up 
new skills and a much greater awareness of the EU market. It provided direct information 
about other systems of education and training and of technical resources. It also increased 
industrial awareness of the benefits of graduate recruitment. For the student, it provided 
language improvement and a most valuable experience for their transition to working life. 
3. Improvement in Technical Training Provision 
COMETT has had a strong impact in orienting HEIs towards a greater role in continuing 
education and the need to market their services to industry. One State noted an improvement 
in TNAs undertaken. 
4. Improvement in Institutional Culture and Structures 
COMETT has had a positive influence on the development of not only the specific Higher 
Education / Industry interface but also the interface between all parties involved in sectoral 
training at a regional and sectoral level both through projects and UETP activities. In addition, 
the UETPs have improved the transparency of EU Programmes. In some cases, the 
infrastructure created has linked into the Structural Funds as well as providing the structure 
144 
to participate in future Programmes. 
5. Other Impacts 
The impact and use of COMETT in Norway seem particularly interesting in that it explicitly 
formed part of a larger "Technology transfer and training" activity, rather than, more 
commonly, part of a continuing education and training effort. This seemed to increase the 
catalytic power of the Programme. However, other States did stress the links to R&D 
activities and the general innovation element that developed from COMETT. 
There were certain reservations about the Programme. States warned of the bureaucratic load, 
the need for further decentralisation and the need for better links to other programmes; 
particularly R&D Programmes. 
2. The UETP Networks 
2.1. Contribution of Regional UETP Networks 
Participating States see regional UETP's main contributions along two axes of regional 
development : 
1. They have developed information / organisational / management interfaces between HEIs, 
State and other institutions involved in regional and national development (particularly, but 
not exclusively in education and training) and domestic enterprises at a local level. This has 
taken place through information events, workshops, training courses, projects, etc. In 
particular, they have acted as information and management structures for EU Programmes. 
In the Netherlands, COMETT has assisted in a wider role in industrial cluster development 
strategies. In some States, such as Norway, UETPs, as a group, have managed to develop 
some activities at the national level 
2. Their most acclaimed contribution has been then to integrate the above activities with 
similar and parallel activities in the regions of other participating States, forming international 
co-operative partnerships. UETPs have provided not only international training and placement 
activities but also as Spain states "an international vision on technology training". Ireland 
points to their effect in internationalising purely regional projects. 
The primacy of the UETP's contribution as the development of the trans-European interface 
seems to hold for both regions in which there is already a strongly developed higher 
education / industry interface, as well as the less experienced regions. The latter regions, of 
course, have benefited to a relatively greater extent from the UETP's effect on domestic 
infrastructure. However, within a participating State, the effectiveness of UETPs could vary 
greatly from one region to another. Italy, for example, emphasises their effectiveness in the 
South. 
The Danish Evaluation differentiates between the objectives of two types of institution which 
housed the UETP : 
1. Institutions where the objective was to transfer R&D to industry. Here, there has been a 
direct working, contact with local industry. This has improved the perception of HEIs1 
graduates, created interest in HEI research and researchers and opened effective channels for 
firms to HEIs. 
145 
2. Institutions whose prime objectives were research and education. These have had more 
focus on student placement but also more difficulties due to the lack of a stable structure of 
industrial involvement. (Other parameters of such UETP variety are discussed in Section 2.5.) 
The contribution of UETPs can go well outside their traditional "Technology training and 
Placement" activities, as in Portugal, where they have been used as a base for Business 
Innovation Centres and in one case transformed into a technology transfer consortium for 
SMEs. 
The generally positive attitude to UETPs must however be tempered in noting, as does 
Sweden, that their contribution outside the HEIs and companies directly involved may be 
small. This message is further reinforced by the quantitative data from the Belgian (Fr) survey 
which indicates that only 30 % of firms saw UETPs as giving value added as against 42 % 
which saw no added value. The UK firms were somewhat more positive in judging the impact 
as worthwhile within their own company, but still felt the overall impact of COMETT was 
small. 
2.2. Articulation of Industrial Needs 
Participating States' Evaluations point to this as being a very problematic area for regional 
UETPs. In the Belgian survey only 9 % of firms were positive towards UETPs' training needs 
analysis (TNA). 35 % were expressly negative. (24 % of firms saw the UETPs' role as a 
conveyor of information, linking firms to HEIs and advising on EU projects as opposed to 
undertaking direct intervention) Similarly, the Danish Evaluation does not see the regional 
UETP as an appropriate body for TNA; it was more an in-company activity. One of Norway's 
UETPs indicated that they assisted firms in TNA but did not undertake it themselves : "help 
towards self-help" as they put it. 
Most UETPs, however, seem to have carried out TNA as their main approach to assisting in 
the articulation of industrial needs. How effective this work has been is questioned by the' 
finding that 54 % of UK UETPs themselves thought little had been achieved in this area. 
Over half the HEIs thought little or nothing had been achieved in this area. However, Austria, 
whose UETPs carried out a number of very specific TNAs, indicates that the work had a 
positive effect but was highly constrained by lack of available time and funding. Spain points 
to UETPs having acted as a sort of "clearing house", drawing existing studies together, 
defining methodological approaches, choosing training options, etc. as well as consolidating 
and articulating the demand from SMEs. Germany notes that the implementation of TNA has 
been the foundation for concepts of a regional continuing education strategy. 
As opposed to traditional TNAs, the Netherlands indicates the use of a system of "round 
tables" as an effective method of making known industrial demand requirements. 
2.3. Stimulating Transnational Outlook in Partners 
All participating States recognise the effects of UETPs in stimulating a transnational outlook 
among the partners. This has taken place along two main axes : 
1. For HEIs as an exchange on training methodologies and teaching systems as well as 
contacts with firms abroad hosting their students. 
146 
2. For firms as wider access to the European training potential and a greater awareness of the 
European dimension of R&D and technology. A number of States, such as Spain and Ireland, 
indicate the specific benefit of the integration of SMEs into European programmes for the 
first time via student placements and the location of partners abroad. Such firms became much 
more aware of the potential benefits of collaboration in Europe, not only in terms of training, 
but also in R&D programmes and business generally. Both the UK and Belgian quantitative 
Evaluations bear out the other States' Evaluations. The Belgian Evaluation indicate that 57 % 
of industrialists and 78 % of students felt that the European dimension in the enterprise's 
culture had been improved. 
In addition, UETPs have helped purely national projects to become European. This has led 
to the development of strong international networks of HEIs, institutes and enterprises around 
short courses and training projects. 
The Italian Evaluation points out that UETPs have achieved this change in outlook through 
different modes of transnationality; some emphasising specific technological sectors, others 
involving a very broad spread of organisations from their region, while still others have 
concentrated on developing their HEIs as catalysts. In all, COMETT has contributed to 
"developing a collective transnational approach to education and training". 
2.4. Contribution of Sectoral UETP Networks 
The National Evaluations indicate that sectoral UETPs have had less identity problems than 
regional UETPs and have contributed, on average, more directly and in greater measure to 
technology transfer and industrial training development. Their clientele were seen as much 
better defined and, by and large, a more homogeneous group with more similar technical 
requirements. This and the more focused expertise of the UETP personnel have made 
technical development activities both more relevant to UETP activities and easier to 
undertake. 
For similar reasons, the development of the industrial base of the sectoral UETP network has 
also been easier to construct. Some have managed to develop not only a strong network but 
to have become, to some extent, a voice for the sector in European level education and 
training issues. A number have also developed recognised European-wide training 
programmes and had, as Finland notes, a more visible impact on training. The Netherlands 
notes that such specialised, high level courses fit in better with the advanced education 
system. The UETPs have also become effective organisers of mobility programmes and co­
ordinators of other non-training EC Programmes. However, the overall magnitude of their 
contribution should not be over exaggerated : COMETT is a small programme^Equally, 
Evaluations do not make any overall judgement that sectoral UETPs are better or more 
valuable to COMETT objectives that regional UETPs. 
2.5. Major Strengths and Weaknesses of UETPs in Participating States 
The strengths and weaknesses of UETPs as seen by the participating States' Evaluations are : 
Strengths : 
1. The European dimension of UETPs is their greatest strength. This European dimension 
ranges from UETPs direct contact with the Commission and knowledge of Commission 
Programmes, to expertise in applying for and managing European projects, to their core 
147 
strength as part of a well structured, dedicated European operational network. The UETP may 
also benefit from links to other EU networks and information sources. 
2. The second axis of UETP strength lies in their network of domestic, regional or sectoral 
members. UETPs now have an accepted role (some much stronger, some much weaker) in 
the domestic higher education / industry interface and indeed in the wider skills supply / 
demand interface. The initial positioning of the UETP is quite important in this context. 
Strong positioning includes links to HEI Extension Centres (Austria), contract research 
institutes (Norway), Regional Chambers of Commerce (France), etc. The benefit of 
supplementary funding can be a function of the strong positioning and / or regional or 
national network created. The full geographic coverage of a State by UETPs was also seen 
as important in some Evaluations (Germany, Greece). Some UETPs have moved towards 
becoming regional development agencies (Italy, Portugal). 
3. At a lower level, UETP strength resides in factors such as the dedication of its managers, 
its well motivated personnel, its reputation, its independent status as a base for. democratic 
partnership (Austria), its technical credibility, its links to R&D programmes, etc. The recent 
introduction of recruitment activities (e.g. Belgium (Fr)) has improved the position of some 
UETPs. 
Weaknesses : 
1. The weakness and insecurity of the financial base of most UETPs is seen as the main 
weakness. This entails a sub-critical size for the UETP and limited numbers of staff as well 
as difficulties in realistic, long term planning. The near total dependence of some UETPs on 
EC funding and their inability to generate other funds further compounded this insecurity. 
This said, part of the problem may be self-inflicted; as Germany notes, "Of the 27 UETPs in 
Germany, only one has a legally independent status : a prerequisite for self-sufficiency. " 
2. The lack of involvement by industry and difficulty in retaining industry's interest in 
projects is cited as the other core difficulty. These issues can be compounded in the Less 
Favoured Regions by the weak industrial base and the non-innovative, traditional nature of 
many companies. SME involvement is a particular difficulty. The UETP itself may have little 
actual technical or industrial knowledge. 
3. The HEI base may also cause problems in some regions. This could arise when the HEIs 
are weak or have a weak technical base. Some HEIs are mainly interested in student 
placement, with little participation in training development. 
4. Other weakness include the poor development of networks and poor co-ordination with 
other national and local training bodies (Italy); the turnover of UETP staff, over large regions 
to be covered (Netherlands), a disinterested attitude by central government (Denmark, 
Ireland), etc. Poor planning, a lack of marketing strategy, and the lack of time for self-training 
in a complex area were also stated as weaknesses seen in some UETPs. The time required to 
become known and accepted is also a difficulty. The fact that there are few quantitative 
indicators of UETP performance available was seen as a problem in upgrading their work. 
5. An additional weakness in EFTA countries is that their UETPs currently cannot access as 
easily the synergy between COMETT and other EC Programmes in comparison with EU 
Member States. This difficulty will pass. 
148 
3. Mobility & Exchange Actions 
3.1. Contribution of Mobility Actions to Innovations in HEI / Enterprise Co-operation 
Nearly all Evaluations are positive on the contribution and effectiveness of the mobility 
actions. A number of participating States point to the mobility programmes, essentially the 
student placement element, as the major success of the COMETT programme. 
The placement activity is seen as having a direct and beneficial effect : 
1. On enterprises, often involving SMEs for the first time in a European programme. Austria 
reports a) the adoption of a "placement culture" by enterprises, providing better facilities, 
supervision and professional guidance for students and b) The systématisation of placements 
on a project basis with a clear work plan and an improvement in the possibilities of academic 
recognition for the work. France and Germany indicated that they have been a base for new 
commercial relations and a base for future partnerships, particularly in RDT Programmes. 
2. On the students. The Spanish Evaluation sees students who have undertaken such 
placements as being themselves potentially better innovators in industry. Increased language 
abilities and cultural understanding in students as well as improved professional prospects are 
widely reported in the students. 
3. On HEIs. The COMETT placement activity is reported as having assisted in updating 
teaching methods in HEIs and catalysed the development of placement requirements and 
mechanisms. Spain indicates that COMETT has provided a comparative aspect to European 
higher education / industry co-operation as well as bringing the debate into a labour market 
context through a concern for professional placement. One Dutch UETP had set up "Local 
Strategy Committees" to oversee exchanges and influence course content. 
4. More generally, placements have helped in developing new modes of technology transfer 
in knowledge, techniques and models. They are also seen as providing a new form of human 
resource updating and recycling. 
Only two participant States indicated strong positive experiences with staff placements : 
Austria and Finland. Denmark noted that when they did occur, they were very successful. 
However, France indicated that they were not successful and should be rethought. Germany 
pointed to legal difficulties, problems with the content of practical training, financial barriers 
and the long release period for employees. 
In the quantitative Belgian (Fr) survey, placement drew a nearly 100 % positive response for 
enterprises, students and HEIs. Smaller HEIs used placements as a first step in 
internationalisation. In the UK, two thirds of enterprises felt that they had benefited from 
having the placement; breaking down national barriers and opening up possible marketing 
opportunities as well as the specific technical element contributed. 
3.2. Modification of Policies and Practices to Facilitate Exchanges 
In participating States where industrial placement is a well established activity, COMETT has 
had a positive, operational effect rather than playing a strategic / innovatory role in the 
modification of policies and practices. In the Netherlands, for example, attention has moved 
on to operational issues such as housing, the structuring of the contacts (a policy of 
149 
networking instead of informal contacts) and the planned provision of student intern projects 
as part of the operation of businesses. Similarly, France points to the normalisation and 
systématisation of placements abroad and the specification of quality parameters. Luxembourg 
and Norway point to similar trends. In the same vein, many Evaluations report the change in 
enterprises' attitude to placements. Belgium (Fr) indicates that industry has moved from 
looking on placements as "a favour" to being an equal contract with both sides gaining : 
enterprises now propose regular placements. Similar trends are noted in Finland. 
Some participating States have instituted legal changes. Austria has introduced legal provision 
for the academic recognition of COMETT placements abroad and waived domestic work 
permit regulations for placements. Sweden and Norway have simplified work permit and 
residence procedures. 
Despite this generally positive position, some Evaluations point to little real change, 
particularly within the HEIs (Spain) and difficulties based on a youth culture with poor 
foreign language abilities and social pressures on women (Italy - the South), continued rigidity 
of HEI curricula and lack of recognition for placements. Ireland and Iceland report that the 
moves of the HEIs to formalise and recognise placements have been much slower, with 
informal arrangements persisting . However, three quarters of the UK UETPs report 
modifications such as increased flexibility in course design, assistance to lecturers in visiting 
students abroad, insurance policies, better language preparation, etc. 
4. Training Course Development 
4.1. Generating Innovative Modes of Collaboration in Training Course Development 
The major areas of collaborative innovation have been : 
1. The preparatory work where there is now a greater participation of enterprises in planning 
and developing courses (e.g. Sweden). This has occurred both through direct enterprise 
involvement and through the development of platforms and study groups with industrial 
involvement. Such developments are helping to move training development from being supply 
driven to demand driven (e.g. Netherlands). 
2. The internationalisation of the development process which has opened up new sources of 
training provision, expertise and paths for collaboration. This internationalisation has also 
brought a comparative aspect to national systems of training development, highlighting 
differences in approaches, including different modes of collaboration. Courses have also been 
developed from the beginning for a European market and with a European dimension (e.g. 
Norway). 
3. The developmept of flexible networks to undertake such work. Here the UETP network has 
played an important role. Denmark notes "the broker" role of UETPs in presenting interesting 
European courses to industry and recommending specific EU HEIs for particular tasks. 
However, Denmark also notes the need for improved and innovative distribution channels for 
non-professional training organisations, such as HEIs. 
4. Some Evaluations report particular innovations with collaborative implications such as the 
consistent use of TNA for planning (Spain) and the development of interactive TNA (Austria), 
the development of an IT network now looking towards in-situ training for industry (Sweden), 
150 
new links between training and R&D (France, Norway), etc. 
Denmark notes differences in effectiveness based on project management : 
• Projects for particular organisation / network needs have worked well, but have been 
difficult to market afterwards. 
• Educational institution run projects have faced weaker demand than foreseen. 
• Consultancy company-based projects, founded on their own expertise, have been most 
successful. 
Despite the above developments and their demonstration effect to others, the sample of UK 
enterprises surveyed showed that 70 % thought COMETT provided little or no innovation in 
this area. UK regional UETPs were more pessimistic : only 16 % thought that some or a great 
deal had been achieved. However, to the same question 57 % of sectoral UK UETPs thought 
some or a great deal had been achieved. Equally, in the Belgium (Fr) survey, 45 % of 
responses saw innovative effects in COMETT course development. 
4.2. Contribution to Improvement in Supply of Technology - Related Training 
Most participating States think that the COMETT contribution to improving quality of supply 
has been more marked and perhaps more important than the contribution to quantity. Quality 
improvement has come about largely through the transnational opening up of course 
development to a wider pool of expertise across Europe. Course developers can now compare 
much more easily their own methods with state-of-the-art in a number of States. Regional 
poles of competence in Europe have become better known. This opening up has also been 
important in focusing attention on quality assurance in delivery, to the extent that the 
Netherlands reports the appointment of quality inspectors to a particular course. Denmark also 
points out that training was changing towards in-company and tailor-made training; some 
UETPs were managing to follow this trend. COMETT has also been bringing high level R&D 
results to a technical audience. However, the French Evaluation points out how long it takes 
for the courses to be developed. Also the Belgian (Nl) Evaluation points out that there has 
been no systematic evaluation of quality, just the assumption that better correspondence to 
industrial needs implied quality. 
Improvement in the quantity of training seems to have had a much more limited impact. 
However some States report a greater variety of courses now available. Austria notes that 
internationalisation has also lowered the threshold to organise or to participate in courses. 
Ireland finds that COMETT courses help avoid trainees travelling abroad for training. In the 
context of this increase in quantity, another State points out the leverage effects of COMETT 
in obtaining moneys for training course development. Finally, within the context of improving 
the supply, Italy and Ireland note the acceleration in the use of open, multimedia and distance 
learning activities but Iceland still finds it insufficient. 
The quantitative Belgian (Fr) Evaluation indicates that 68 % of respondents felt that the 
quality and level of training had improved, 57 % that a European dimension had been added 
and 49 % that there was access to a much greater richness of information. However, it was 
pointed out that COMETT was minuscule in terms of national continuing education and 
training spending. 
151 
4.3. Complementing / Strengthening Training Initiatives at National Level 
Participating States Evaluations are quite varied in their interpretation of this question. The 
most frequently mentioned complementarity with COMETT is to be seen in efforts of HEIs, 
firms and other institutions to internationalise activities (Both parts of Belgium, Netherlands, 
France). Germany points to its contribution to the realisation of an EU-home market, as well 
as to specific plans in areas such as environmental protection. 
The next most frequently mentioned complementarity involves the improvement of the higher 
education / industry interface. Austria notes complementarity with its Extension Centres as 
well as the possible founding of Fachhochschulen with obligatory training placements. Italy 
notes its catalytic effect in the area generally. 
Other States point to complementarity in the area of improving training; SME training in 
particular, but also, more generally, the regional authorities' own training efforts. COMETT 
also has a complementary "gap-filling" function in servicing a high level specialist training 
needs. In the UK 59 % of firms felt that COMETT complemented their own training 
activities, while sectoral UETPs were more positive on their contribution than regional 
UETPs. However, Sweden and Denmark note that at a national level, the effects of COMETT 
had not been that large. 
4.4. Other Points Raised 
"Other Points Raised", by and large, capture the specific conditions affecting the operation 
of COMETT in the particular participating State and specific information from the Evaluation, 
especially that of Belgium (Fr). However, a number of themes do arise mostly related to 
participating States' wishes towards future EC programmes in the COMETT area. 
Retention of the COMETT Identity 
A number of participating States would like to see the COMETT identity retained. Over the 
last decade, it has built up a brand name for quality and a certain type of activity among HEIs 
and firms. This should not be lightly thrown away. Germany calls for a specific programme 
component under LEONARDO. 
The Retention and Development of UETPs 
Again, the infrastructural development achieved by the UETPs should not be thrown away. 
Funding should be guaranteed either directly or through task oriented co-financing where the 
UETP would take an overhead on tasks and programme elements administered. The UETPs 
are too valuable as a meeting ground for HEIs, research institutes, industry and government 
to be let disappear. Generally, some stability in their funding was sought. 
A structured extension of their remit to R&D functions as well as their extension into Central 
and Eastern Europe in co-operation with TEMPUS was suggested. A clearer separation 
between sectoral UETPs (course production and supply) and regional UETPs (organising 
demand at a local level) was suggested by one participating State as a way of developing an 
integrated production and delivery of COMETT type technical training. 
Co-operation with other Programmes 
Participating States see the possibility of enhancing both future COMETT activities and other 
EU Programmes through increased co-operation between such Programmes. Perhaps most 
obviously, a better vertical integration / synergy is sought between COMETT type activities 
152 
and 1) upper vocational training activities as seen for example in parts of FORCE and PETRA 
and 2) Doctoral / Postdoctoral training activities as seen in the Human Capital and Mobility 
Programme. Horizontal co-operation / synergy might also be found in supporting and working 
with other S&T Programmes of the 4FP. In addition, it is suggested, particularly in the 
context of working with SMEs, that much might be learned from the experience of the 
CRAFT Programme. 
Programme Development 
A number of suggestions are made for the improvement of COMETT type activities. These 
include 1) Greater flexibility and speed in dealing with applications, 2) Greater flexibility in 
the mobility programmes. The staff mobility programme is singled out : it requires shorter 
placement periods. 3) A system of sanctions and after-the-fact reporting would improve the 
effectiveness of the placement activity, 4) A COMETT Certification System for students was 
also suggested. A first, easy, non - controversial step might be a participation certificate. 
153->\5S 
SYNOPTIC TABLES 
SUMMARIES OF THE FINAL NATIONAL 
EVALUATIONS 
OF 
THE COMETT II PROGRAMME 
1990-1994 
155 .^4 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
AUSTRIA 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate Yes, particularly the UETP system. 
1.2 Fostering University / Specific working relations stimulated by COMETT include: 
Enterprise Relationships Major increase in transnational student placements along with 
improved project oriented design of placements and fetter aca­
demic recognition. 
Transnational higher education / industry personnel exchanges 
which did not exist at all before COMETT 
Enrichment of the national market for advanced training technol­
ogy tlirough the international scope and European dimension of 
courses developed. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating The Ministry for Social Affairs and Employment waived work 
Policies permit requirements for COMETT students. The Ministry for 
Science and Research provided financial support and made better 
legal provision for academic recognition of COMETT placements 
abroad. 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy COMETT complements the regional and national programme 
with National / Regional "Scientists for the Economy" which promotes higher education / 
Programmes industry staff exchanges. Flexible secondment provisions for 
university staff have been extended to COMETT Be exchanges. 
Co-funding of national and regional COMETT projects has been 
forthcoming due to their contribution to improved Austrian 
training activities 
1.5 Overall Impact of COMETT has enhanced the international dimension of training. It 
COMETT has linked HEIs and industry, supported the development of 
continuing education at HEIs, catalysed the development of TNA, 
provided experience in the international management of pro­
grammes and projects, improved the institutional management of 
higher education / industry interfaces, extended networks to other 
forms of co-operation, increased industry interest in highly 
qualified personnel, etc. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional The provision of a regional platform for training & technology 
UETP Networks issues while raising regional and national consciousness of these 
issues. The provision of partners and of a European dimension to 
technology training: they act as a regional focus-Of European 
initiatives. The integration of regional SMEs and other partners 
into European projects and issues. The provision of short courses 
and personnel exchanges as well as spin-off companies from such 
activity. Synergy of research and training. Motivation and 
sensibilisation to international technological development. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial Yes, but restrained by lack of experts with time and money. A 
Needs number of specific TNAs have been carried out as well as constant 
evaluation of industry needs. Discussions on course concepts and 
marketing are organised. 
157 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
AUSTRIA 
Subject Summary Response 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Yes, but at varying levels in the UETPs, through the active 
Outlook in Partners participation of European partners, placements and the influx of 
foreign students into Austrian firms. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral EuroLaser aims at the rapid dissemination of R&D results (cur-
UETP Networks rently restricted by lack of qualified personnel) by mobility 
activities, training and education. It has integrated and built upon 
regional, national and international networks and its members 
(researchers, developers, producers, consultants and users) have 
been active and contributed to all COMETT activities. It has 
carried out a " State of Art" Survey which will act as the basis for 
a TNA. It organises Summer schools. Its strengths are similar to 
sectoral UETPs. Its weaknesses include not yet having a legal 
status, members' heterogeneous interests, different levels of 
involvement of sectors and countries, lack of money and full time 
personnel, as well as difficulties caused by uncertainty of CEC 
financial support, etc. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: 1) Secure, legal and independent status as a base for a 
Weaknesses of UETPs in democratic partnership, 2) High acceptance and good regional 
Member State support and financial commitment of public and semi-public 
institutions, 3) Skills in managing European training projects, 4) 
Closeness to firms and technical credibility, 5) Links to other EC 
networks, 6) Links to universities and the strength of existing 
university "Extension Centres" in Austria, 7) Well motivated 
personnel and lean and efficient structure 
Weaknesses: 1) Weakness in linking COMETT to other EC 
projects with Austria as an EFTA member, 2) Lack of marketing 
and sales strategies, 3) Limited numbers of staff, 4) Some regions 
with weaker universities and technical studies base, 5) The time 
taken to develop a specific profile, 6) The lack of time for self-
training for a complex area, 7) COMETT projects are too short to 
create an "international training philosophy", 8) Annual reduction 
of financial support, 9) Uncertainty in transfer to LEONARDO. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility COMETT has brought 1) Systematised placements on a project 
Actions to Innovations in oriented basis with a clear work plan and defined provisions for 
University / Enterprise academic recognition, 2) Enterprises are adopting_a_"placement 
Co-operation culture" and providing better facilities and professional guidance 
for students, 3) Be exchanges provide considerable feedback and 
linkages between universities and enterprises. They are, however, 
very difficult and time consuming to organise, particularly for 
longer periods. 
3.2 Modification of Policies See Section 1.3 for formal changes. Academic recognition of 
and Practices to Facilitate periods abroad has progressed well. Enterprises acceptance of 
Exchanges students has become easier and more formalised. 
158 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
AUSTRIA 
Subject Summary Response 
4.1 Generating Innovative Yes, in developing projects together with potential users and 
Modes of Collaboration in international partners and with higher quality. Interactive TNA has 
Training Course Develop- also been developed. Multi-location delivery of courses. 
ment 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- Improvement in the quality (more than the quantity) due to a 
ment in Supply of Tech- wider exchange of expertise and views including, as a further 
nology - Related Training quality factor, the opportunity to compare the state of art in 
different countries. Improved international marketing and access to 
courses. 
4.3 Complementing / UETPs have complemented university Extension Centres. The 
Strengthening Training threshold to organise or participate in courses has decreased. 
Initiatives at National Providing training for SMEs has become more attractive. In the 
Level future, it is envisaged founding Fachhochschulen with obligatory 
placements. 
4.4 Other Points Raised Austrian continuing and vocational training is quite developed and 
differentiated. Thus, "COMETT can only be an added value 
bringing in the European dimension... as a niche providing very 
specialised and/or transnational course offers." 
The Austrian Evaluations requested that; 
The decentralised structure of UETPs be developed and 
strengthened and greater flexibility and speed be imparted to 
applications, 
The scope of COMETT be reconsidered, either adhering more 
strictly to technology issues or broadening to all areas, 
COMETT should concentrate on SMEs as initially intended. 
Import some experience from the CRAFT Programme for SMEs, 
Obtain greater synergy from other TFHR and 4FP programmes. 
There should be an early call for LEONARDO to avoid insecurity. 
The Austrian evaluation indicated that "The statements and conclusions (of the 1993 evaluation) are still 
valid and can be fully adopted". Thus, this table draws on both evaluations. 
The 4 regional UETPs replies were provided in a disaggregated form in the Austrian National Evaluation. 
They are synthesised in this synopsis. — 
There is only one sectoral UETP in Austria. All its responses to the evaluation are synopsised in this 
section. 
159 
BF FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
BELGIUM (French) 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate 
1.2 Fostering University / Only 15 % of enterprises felt they had changed their comportment 
Enterprise Relationships towards universities. However, 40 % had used the work as part of a 
strategy of internationalisation. Firms thought COMETT should be 
much more widely promoted; it was too little known. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating The Programme forms part of the ongoing debate. 
Policies 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy 35 % of enterprises had participated in national or regional pro-
with National / Regional grammes similar to COMETT. However, only 6 % indicated that 
Programmes they had linked the programmes. 
1.5 Overall Impact of 96 % of those on placement and 80 % of those undertaking training 
COMETT were satisfied. The internationalising impact on universities (particu­
larly small and specialised ones) was important. 
54 % of enterprises thought COMETT had a positive impact on their 
internationalisation, 35 % on their technology, and 28 % on quality 
of work. Of enterprises, 32 % thought COMETT had a regional 
benefit and 18 % a national benefit. 
In total, COMETT made participants aware of the possibilities in 
Europe and the potential of international collaboration. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional Difficult to define. Stagieres were rather negative. At a regional 
UETP Networks level, 30 % of enterprises thought they added value, while 42 % felt 
that there was no added value. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial Only 9 % of enterprises were positive; 35 % negative. 24 % thought 
Needs of the UETP as a help in conveying training needs to trainers. 
Industry sees the role of the UETP as an adviser in European 
projects and link to universities. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational This is one of the strong points. 30 % of respondents felt more 
Outlook in Partners aware of the benefit of international partnerships, 37 % stimulated to 
participate in European projects. 57 % of industrialists and 78 % of 
students felt COMETT improved the European dimension in the 
enterprises' culture. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral Compared to regional UETPs, they are seen as better equipped to 
UETP, Networks undertake TNA and work on mobility and recruitment-(a new UETP 
service). 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: Provision of regular information, mobility activities and 
Weaknesses of UETPs in advice on European projects, responsiveness to requests and their 
Member State role as a university / enterprise interface. 
Weaknesses: Not well enough known / poor marketing resources, 
poor abilities in TNA, little actual knowledge of the technologies. 
160 
BF FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
BELGIUM (French) 
Subject Summary Response 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility 
Actions to Innovations in 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation There was nearly 100 % positive response from industry, universities 
and students. Smaller universities, in particular, used placement as a 
first step in internationalisation and making themselves known in 
Europe. They were helped to bring their teaching up to date and 
offer more attractive possibilities to potential students. Staff mobility 
was under exploited. 
3.2 Modification of Policies 
and Practices to Facilitate 
Exchanges Industry moved from looking on placements as "a favour" to being 
an equal contract with both sides gaining. Enterprises now propose 
regular placements. Conditions of placements, work programmes and 
duration have improved. 
4.1 Generating Innovative 
Modes of Collaboration in 
Training Course Develop­
ment 45 % of responses were positive. The added value of the interna­
tional dimension was very important. The innovative COMETT 
criteria catalysed innovative reshaping of projects including use of 
multi media and training of trainers. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve­
ment in Supply of Technol­
ogy - Related Training 68 % of respondents indicated that quality and level of training 
improved and 57 % that a European dimension had been added to 
the enterprises culture. 49 % pointed to access to a much greater 
richness of information for course development, 46 % to better 
access to technologies and 40 % to improvements in work quality. 
COMETT improved not only quality but also variety of training 
offered. 
4.3 Complementing / 
Strengthening Training 
Initiatives at National Level The UETPs have worked with and created synergy with most 
institutions of economic and university life assisting in collaboration 
while also working on regional and national projects. 
4.4 Other Points Raised 42 % of students found placements within a month; 87 % within 3 
months. But this was the most difficult issue for the student. 
COMETT / UETPs should be more helpful. A listing of companies 
to contact in each country might be provided. Linking ERASMUS 
placements to a search for a future COMETT placement was 
suggested. Having students find their own enterprise might, however, 
be more effective and be a better match than that by COMETT / 
UETPs. 
Administrative formalities were a problem for students. 6-12 month 
placements were most effective. Clearer initial understandings of 
what was expected on both sides would be helpful. Universities are 
an important intermediary, but too often passive. 
Of the students, 78 % received funding from their enterprise; of 
these, 45 % received it as a complement to the COMETT award, but 
only 27 % as a salary. From 10-20,000 BEF/month was received by 
42 % of the fund receivers. But such benefits were very variable as 
was the local cost of living and difficult to allow for in the planning. 
A COMETT certificate was called for. 
Based on a mail survey with 85 replies out of 270 contacts for students and 94 out of 2270 for firms and 
universities. 75 % of institutions were Belgian. 
161 
BFL FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
BELGIUM (Flemish) 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate There were already some organisations active in the improvement 
of university-industry contacts, but COMETT resulted in a better 
overall co-ordination and communication on the following levels: 
Organisations who were active as partners in COMETT projects 
Organisations who came into contact with COMETT information 
in an indirect way 
At the Flemish Ministries, the consciousness for the need of 
higher education-industry co-operation increased. 
1.2 Fostering University / The COMETT application rounds proved to be a good tool to 
Enterprise Relationships create co-operation (it is easier for partners to find each other 
around a concrete project). 
The number and internationalisation of higher education-industry 
contacts have largely increased. At the education side, especially 
the non-university higher education institutions improved their 
number of contacts. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating On the government level, the impact of the COMETT Pro-
Policies gramme was restricted to the Ministry of Education and influ­
enced some basic policy options taken: 
Growing consciousness of continuing education and quality of 
education 
Attention paid to higher education-industry co-operation 
Interest in European educational development. 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy The reports suggest that from a COMETT point of view it is 
with National / Regional easier to foster complementarity among different European 
Programmes programmes than among national/regional initiatives. The way 
the COMETT model operates makes it difficult to adapt to 
specific national situations. 
On the one hand, there is the example of a private organisation 
which organises continuing education in co-operation with HEIs 
and industry. Synergy with the COMETT programme allowed 
them to work on a more international level. 
On the other hand, it is felt that a lot of problems were encoun­
tered in the field of student exchanges, because of the fact that 
COMETT didn't take into account the specific Flemish problems 
in this field, nor the existing international student exchange 
initiatives. 
162 
BFL I FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
BELGIUM (Flemish) 
Subject Summary Response 
1.5 Overall Impact of 
COMETT The impact is greatest in the HEIs.- The consciousness to co­
operate was somewhat more difficult to stimulate in industry. 
Especially in the SMEs, the COMETT impact was rather small. 
Overall, and taking into account the economic situation, 
COMETT can be considered to be a moderate success. A lot of 
new links and relations were forged. However, COMETT did not 
succeed in creating institutional links with research programmes. 
The networks created by COMETT lead to a number of services 
in the framework of other European programmes. 
A recommendation for the future is to increase the co-operation 
and communication among different European programmes. It is 
noted that often the same players are in those different pro­
grammes. 
Given the actual level of financial support, a better link with 
regional programmes is necessary for the COMETT projects to 
survive. 
Parallel to tackling the industrial aspects of technology, it would 
be useful to pay more attention to the effects of cultural differ­
ences in technology development. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional 
UETP Networks The networking has two dimensions: 1) the regional basis and 2) 
the European COMETT network. Through the UETP, regional 
networks are in contact with the European network and with 
regional networks in other regions. 
The main tasks can be summarised as information dissemination 
and setting up of training projects. Partners could gain from the 
network on three levels 1) Content and technology 2) General 
level, TNA, etc. and 3) Administrative level making it easier to 
set up project proposals. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial 
Needs 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational 
Outlook in Partners One of the most visible results obtained by the UETPs is the 
internationalisation of training activities. The UETP stimulated 
and assisted the projects. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral 
UETP Networks The impact of sectoral networks on the Flemish region is rather 
limited, whereas the impact of some Flemish partners on sectoral 
networks is big. In other words, the export of knowledge was 
bigger than the import. Sectoral networks are considered to be 
important, because they are more flexible in setting up training 
initiatives compared to the educational institutions. 
2.5 Major Strengths and 
Weaknesses of UETPs in 
Member State Strengths: Growing consciousness for the need of HEIC; impact 
on internationalisation of training initiatives: Role in stimulation 
of initiatives in difficult domains: Export of know-how: Bringing 
international expertise into regional training activities. 
Weaknesses: Long incubation time before the UETP could 
position itself on the regional level; limited impact on SMEs; 
impact on regional policy rather limited. 
163 
BFL 
CH FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
BELGIUM (Flemish) 
Subject Summary Response 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility In general, the uptake of exchanges has been better in non-
Actions to Innovations in university higher education because of stronger exchange culture. 
University / Enterprise Co- In universities the exchange is mostly the initiative of the 
operation exchange student and not integrated in the curriculum. 
The COMETT scenarios for exchanges did not always suit the 
companies who are not familiar with exchanges and do not see 
the advantages. 
3.2 Modification of Policies It is regretted that COMETT exchanges have not taken into 
and Practices to Facilitate account the activities of the already existing organisation for 
Exchanges international exchanges. 
4.1 Generating Innovative In Flanders, there was already a rich experience of HEIC and 
Modes of Collaboration in government for setting up training and education. The interna-
Training Course Develop- tional aspect is added by COMETT. 
ment 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- The COMETT programme has clearly increased the number of 
ment in Supply of Technol- programmes available. The quality of the projects has not yet 
ogy - Related Training been evaluated in a systematic way. It is assumed that the quality 
has improved the sense that courses respond more to industrial 
needs. 
It is suggested that COMETT is a good tool to bring scientific 
results obtained from European research projects to a broad 
technical audience. 
4.3 Complementing / There is an increasing internationalisation of activities for most 
Strengthening Training institutions active in continuing education and connected to one 
Initiatives at National Level or more COMETT projects. 
Training activities in fields that are less obvious from marketing 
and sales point of view could be set up. 
4.4 Other Points Raised 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
SWITZERLAND 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate The near simultaneous launch of special federal measures on 
continuing education and COMETT has meant that the latter has 
contributed to the national debate. 
1.2 Fostering University / 
Enterprise Relationships 
1.3 Influence in Formulating 
Policies 
164 
CH FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
SWITZERLAND 
Subject Summary Response 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy A six year federal plan has provided the cantonal universities and 
with National / Regional the federal polytechnics with continuing training mechanisms. The 
Programmes UETPs have worked very closely with and reinforced and enlarged 
these structures. It has also reinforced federal policies for a 
stronger internationalisation of HEIs. 
Regional policy is not as yet fully formulated, however, it seems 
quite possible that bodies such as the UETPs may form an import­
ant part of this policy. They have worked well with other EC Pro­
grammes. 
1.5 Overall Impact of COMETT has been a good success. 
COMETT 
2.1 Contribution of Regional They have opened up a dialogue between the diverse actors in 
UETP Networks technology transfer and training. They also respond to regional 
priority issues. They bring SMEs together with both public 
research institutions and international organisations for co-operative 
work. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial 
Needs 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational 
Outlook in Partners 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral 
UETP Networks 
2.5 Major Strengths and 
Weaknesses of UETPs in 
Member State 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility 
Actions to Innovations in 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation 
3.2 Modification of Policies 
and Practices to Facilitate 
Exchanges 
4.1 Generating Innovative 
Modes of Collaboration in 
Training Course Develop­
ment 
4.2 Contribution to Improve­
ment in Supply of Technol­
ogy - Related Training 
4.3 Complementing / 
Strengthening Training 
Initiatives at National Level 
165 
CH FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
SWITZERLAND 
Subject Summary Response 
4.4 Other Points Raised Despite the negative vote on EU entry in Dec 1992, it is a priority 
objective of science and education policy to participate fully in all 
education, training and youth programmes as well as the 4FP. 
Bilateral negotiations will be opened. However, the uncertainties 
surrounding programmes in the coming year are demotivating and 
disillusioning for participants and our partners abroad: two UETPs 
are even considering moving to an EU Member State. 
D FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
GERMANY 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate A marked revival of the debate between university and industry has 
taken place. COMETT played some part. The central themes were: 
Future requirements on HEIs in view of European integration; 
Concepts of co-operation between HEIs and enterprise for mutual 
advantage; 
New teaching concepts in the light of rising numbers of students; 
Restructuring of the academic system with regard to the reduction of 
study periods; 
Stronger orientation of third level education towards the require­
ments of praxis in the professions and industry; 
Improvement in the recognition of study periods abroad and the 
qualifications received abroad; 
Significance of HEIs in continuing education. 
1.2 Fostering University / Technology transfer centres and facilities of further training are 
Enterprise Relationships already at the interface between HEIs and industry. In technology 
transfer centres COMETT stimulated transnational co-operation in 
Europe. 
Through co-operation of UETPs and centres of technology transfer, 
it is possible to link research and development with_£ontinuing 
education especially benefiting SMEs. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating To facilitate COMETT, the relevant ministerial departments at 
Policies - Lander level took various measures to secure financial support 
through continuous or once-off subsidies. 
166 
D FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
GERMANY 
Subject Summary Response 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy Synergistic relationships exist with regard to the trainee programme 
with National / Regional of the Carl-Duisberg-Gesellschaft and the IAESTE-programme. 
Programmes The Federal Ministry for Education and Science and the ministries 
of the Lander promote the European co-operation of HEIs. This is 
also the source of support subsidies for the UETPs. 
The Federal Ministry for Education and Science secures the basic 
financing of the activities of the COMETT- Information Centre 
regarding AiF and DAAD. 
The Federal Ministry for Research and Technology supports the 
programme "Research Co-operation" (part-programme research / 
personnel exchange) 
SMEs send their personnel to research institutes or take in research 
personnel from such institutes on a temporary basis and also 
promotes the transnational exchange. 
1.5 Overall Impact of 
COMETT 
2.1 Contribution of Regional Regional UETPs ensure a continuous co-operation"between univer-
UETP Networks sities, associations and enterprise which is further complemented by 
a specific European alignment. 
COMETT enables industries of the region to have access to other 
European education and training programmes and S&T programmes. 
The regional UETPs create important pressure towards a more 
committed engagement of HEIs in continuing training. 
Further development of third level and continuing education courses 
and availability of short courses. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial Yes, especially SMEs have benefited because they lacked finance 
Needs and experts. The UETP has helped with project initiation, financial 
development advice, project management, administration of EC 
subsidies, transfer of results and presentation of success results. 
The implementation of TNA has been the foundation for concepts of 
a regional continuing education strategy. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Regional UETPs play an important role with regard to questions of 
Outlook in Partners education and further training in the field of technological develop­
ment and technology transfer for the strengthening of the regions. 
Trans-national co-operation of COMETT projects promotes the 
information exchange amongst the partners of the various regions. 
UETPs mediate between suitable European partners in regard to 
transnational projects. 
167 
D FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
GERMANY 
Subject Summary Response 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral There are eight sectoral UETPs: microelectronics, aluminium 
UETP Networks technology, sewage control systems, animal medicine, software 
technology, telecommunications and surface technology. The 
conditions of a closer connection between S&T in the European 
context are more favourable in these UETPs. In comparison to the 
sectoral UETP, the regional UETPs are more active in regard to 
continuing education. They co-ordinate European pilot projects and 
carry out larger development projects for third level and continuing 
education courses. 
Through the establishment of telecommunications UETP, greater 
know-how transfer has been achieved. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: Coverage involves participation by partners from all parts 
Weaknesses of UETPs in of Germany. Sponsorship, mediation and care of students who 
Member State undertake the practical training in their specialised field in a Euro­
pean enterprise. UETPs enable medium-sized enterprises access to 
European co-operation on a regional basis with justifiable expense 
and assessable time frames. They promote growing co-operation by 
European partners. Through regular information bulletins and 
participation at relevant trade fairs (Hannover trade fair, CEBIT and 
Media-Net) interested parties and potential applicants were made 
aware of COMETT. All UETPs carry out Ca-courses (short 
courses). Co-ordination for larger transnational projects. In some 
projects there is a definite synergy with research and development 
projects. 
Weaknesses 1) Of the 27 UETPs in Germany only one has a legally 
independent status: a prerequisite for "self-sufficiency" Little 
progress has been made in this respect. 2) Although most SMEs 
were getting involved through special measures, more is required. 3) 
Development of special education and further-training programmes 
linked with R&D for SMEs is a necessity. UETPs should make this 
easier. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility COMETT offers students, as well as industry, a number of advan-
Actions to Innovations in tages. Young people at the beginning of their professional careers 
University / Enterprise Co- have positive impressions from their European practical training 
operation experience which acts as multiplier for co-operation between 
university and enterprise. Those students will later facilitate the 
introduction of innovative ideas, especially in SMEsr—While the 
realisation of practical training in industry between HEIs and 
industry is favourable, the personnel transfer (Be) is still underdevel­
oped. 
168 
D FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
GERMANY 
Subject Summary Response 
3.2 Modification of Policies The practical training for HEI students is mostly home-based, 
and Practices to Facilitate although some is taking place abroad. Sponsorships and counselling 
Exchanges of trainees is facilitated at many universities and is sometimes an 
obligation for the course. The willingness on the part of the students 
to complete their practical training abroad has considerably 
increased. 
Enterprises have had positive experiences with trainees from 
European universities. This will ensure the willingness of industry to 
offer practical training places in future. 
On account of the difficult economic situation in the new Lander 
only a few enterprises are in a position to offer practical training 
places. 
The personnel transfer between universities and industry is made 
difficult, not only because of a number of legal framework condi­
tions, but also the design of the content of the practical training. 
The personnel transfer is financially unattractive to practitioners in 
industry, and on account of the need for longer releases of 
employees, it is almost negligible. 
4.1 Generating Innovative Co-operation of university with industry in the area of education and 
Modes of Collaboration in further-training is still underdeveloped. 
Training Course Develop- For the development of education and further-training courses 
ment COMETT benefits from the importance of European model experi­
ments. 
The increased share of German facilities in the co-ordination of 
European courses and pilot projects shows an increasing acceptance 
of the COMETT approach. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- In respect of quantitative evaluation no direct effects can be 
ment in Supply of Technol- expected from the additional COMETT bid. 
ogy - Related Training 
4.3 Complementing / COMETT projects complement meaningfully existing plans in 
Strengthening Training specific areas like environmental protection etc. 
Initiatives at National Level COMETT initiatives in the Germany broaden the available offer of 
training especially in regard to themes that concern the realisation of 
the EU-home market. 
169 
D FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
GERMANY 
Subject Summary Response 
4.4 Other Points Raised The COMETT programme should be retained as a specific pro­
gramme component under LEONARDO. 
Universities, research institutes and industrial enterprises must be 
allowed to apply for COMETT on an equal basis. 
It is also important that sponsorship, mediation, and care of the 
transnational exchange of trainees in European enterprise be 
acknowledged by the UETPs, as it is a large central contact area 
between universities, research institutes and industry to be used 
effectively. 
The UETP Network has existed for seven years and it has proved 
itself. The "brand name" COMETT should be retained. 
The financing of UETPs must be guaranteed. If not, then task-
oriented co-financing of individual programme components has to 
take its place. This could be achieved most easily by a higher 
overhead-share. The marker would be the currently estimated level 
of 20 % for EC research and development programmes. 
DK FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
DENMARK 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate Yes, particularly in the universities; the technical colleges were 
more aware of the issues. The main focus has been the need for 
upgrading of qualifications in industry and the importance of high 
level technological training. 
1.2 Fostering University / Beyond doubt, certain relationships have formed due to COMETT 
Enterprise Relationships but results are not sufficient to rely on development without further 
support. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating COMETT is only one among several government tools. 
Policies 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy The Danish "Act on Continuing Education" for levelsrfrom skilled 
with National / Regional worker to university graduate both supports and is supported by 
Programmes COMETT projects. The Danish "Industry Researcher Programme", 
which supports PhDs undertaken with industry, may work with Bb 
activities. 
1.5 Overall Impact of Specific national commitment and support has been "very modest". 
COMETT This has impacted on COMETT activities. A Ministry should take 
ownership, and clear lines of responsibility be developed, as well 
as an information centre established. 
70 
DK I FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
DENMARK 
Subject Summary Response 
2.1 Contribution of Regional 
UETP Networks This is dependent of the objectives of the host organisation; i.e. 
transfer of R&D to industry vrs research and education of students. 
Those working with local industry has improved the acceptance of 
UETP members' graduates, created interest for university 
researchers working in industry, implemented training programmes 
and opened channels for firms to access university knowledge as 
well as developing wider HEI co-operation. UETPs focused only 
on student placement and without a stable structure of industrial 
involvement have proved much weaker but have been beneficial to 
the student and firm. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial 
Needs TNA has not been undertaken by regional UETPs. Firms either do 
not feel UETP staff appropriate or feel it should be an in-company 
activity. One of the sectoral UETPs has carried out extensive TNA 
as a base for activities. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational 
Outlook in Partners To a limited degree. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral 
UETP Networks They seem to give better value added because of specialisation and 
a more focused approach. They have a better mix of partners. 
2.5 Major Strengths and 
Weaknesses of UETPs in 
Member State Strengths: Membership of the European inter-UETP network for 
co-operation is important but strong to the North and weak to the 
South of Europe. 
Weaknesses: There is still the lack of a meaningful and economi­
cally viable concept: they still need COMETT support. Most 
UETPs have only reached industry indirectly with only occasional 
contacts and do not directly serve as a tool in improving meaning­
ful collaboration. Insecurity has meant staff turnover increasing, 
weakening the networks. Industrial commitment is low and often 
on an ad hoc basis. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility 
Actions to Innovations in 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation Student exchanges have largely resulted in companies becoming 
more open, although better quality control on students may be 
needed. Employee exchange, when it has occurred, has been very 
successful 
3.2 Modification of Policies 
and Practices to Facilitate 
Exchanges International companies maintain the same policy for incoming 
students and employees. No changes of policy are reported. 
171 
DK FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
DENMARK 
Subject Summary Response 
4.1 Generating Innovative The broker role has been noted where the UETP presents interest-
Modes of Collaboration in ing European courses to industry and recommends specific univer-
Training Course Develop- sities for well defined tasks. 
ment The project manager role where the partner works on a project 
requiring new technology and knowledge. From this can work to 
develop training material. 
Innovative methods to develop training more quickly in fast 
moving fields are required. 
Improved and innovative distribution channels are required, 
particularly for the non-professional training organisation. 
Training projects developed by organisations with a specific 
training need have worked well and have strengthened relationships 
with partners. It has not been possible to market the courses 
outside the group of partners. For educational institutions, once 
launched, the demand for training was smaller than expected. 
Consultancy companies' projects within their own areas of interest 
have been most successful due to a) the projects are bigger with 
greater European collaboration b) the managers have a competence 
and reputation in training c) they work more closely with the end-
user. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- Training demand is changing; companies are dismantling training 
ment in Supply of Technol- departments and moving from general training to more job specific 
ogy - Related Training and company oriented training with a much more result oriented 
approach. Training is becoming tailor made, in-company. One 
UETP has moved to developing training after R&D contact giving 
closer co-operation with the company. 
The volume increase is small compared to the overall market. One 
respondent claimed short, stand alone courses to be of more benefit 
to the developer than industry. One company used COMETT only 
for non-acute training needs. COMETT quality is high. 
4.3 Complementing / The volume of COMETT activities is small. However, at a 
Strengthening Training regional level, authorities are increasingly supporting continuing 
Initiatives at National Level education and training for economic development. COMETT has 
played some role in this shift. 
4.4 Other Points Raised 
172 
E FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
SPAIN 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate COMETT has increased debate on issues such as 1) 
Transnationality, 2) Skill Needs Analysis, 3) New Training Technol­
ogies 
In certain regions, COMETT has initiated the first formal university 
/ industry debate and co-operation. In others, it has brought an 
• international aspect to the debate. 
1.2 Fostering University / COMETT has increased industry / university relations in the 
Enterprise Relationships following specific areas: 
Linking Training Needs Analysis to developing training for enter­
prises 
Improving enterprises' decisions through better information on 
advanced training 
Assisting companies, particularly SMEs, in their first contact with 
universities. 
Understanding the impact of training actions on companies 
COMETT has a fundamental influence on higher education / 
industry relations, particularly with certain universities seeing the 
academic value of training periods in industry and the use of courses 
in technology transfer to firms. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating Yes. At a National level it has "Europeanised" the debate and has 
Policies provided institutions with a model for certain forms of training. It 
has also been the instigator of higher education / industry planning 
of short courses, while the UETPs have become involved in devel­
oping regional policy. However, the influence is very variable across 
Spain. 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy The Ministry of Education and Science provides an annual subsidy 
with National / Regional to UETPs to develop activities complementary to those of 
Programmes COMETT. Otherwise there are not many overlaps with other 
programmes. 
In each region the pattern varies, particularly in the autonomous 
regions with control over education and training. 
1.5 Overall Impact of Strong. 
COMETT 
2.1 Contribution of Regional The regional UETPs acted as: 
UETP Networks Information and management structures for EC -programmes, 
especially in human resources, education and training. 
Organisers of international training periods for university students 
Providers of an international vision on technological training, 
training periods in companies, new and dynamic training material, 
etc. 
173 
E FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
SPAIN 
Subject Summary Response 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial Yes, UETPs have helped industry define their training needs, 
Needs particularly in; 
Launching and defining the methodological approach. 
Defining their training plans and choosing between training options. 
Drawing together the various company studies and later developing 
closely aligned training provision. 
These activities have been particularly important in the context of 
the SME structure of Spanish industry. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Very important, particularly in establishing contact with firms and 
Outlook in Partners technological parks. Often, this has been the firs* transnational 
experience for the associates of the UETP, especially the SMEs. 
Firms have also been given access to European level training 
products and to a wider international vision through hosting foreign 
students. 
In universities, COMETT has stimulated, at a European level, an 
exchange on training methodologies, teaching systems, as well as 
training tools and materials. It has also catalysed university partici­
pation in new R&D programmes. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral Sectoral UETPs have provided: 
UETP Networks A transnational vision to participants. 
European Working Groups. 
Official and European - level training programmes and third level 
courses. 
An analysis of sectoral technology and training supply and demand 
as well as an international comparative study of the situation in 
Spain. 
A communication network and a data base of training and technol­
ogy. 
A means of advancing the technological level of firms in the UETP. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: Quality of services, experience in knowledge and manage-
Weaknesses of UETPs in ment of European training projects, promotion of national and 
Member State international contacts, European image of the UETPs, knowledge of 
regional and sectoral firms' needs, relations with regional govern­
ments, and diversification of services 
Weaknesses: Insufficient personnel, reduced financial resources, lack 
of uniformity in legal structure, differences in academicregulations 
concerning training periods in firms (only some recognise these 
periods), non-innovative industry leading to weak demand for 
services. 
174 
E FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
SPAIN 
Subject Summary Response 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility The mobility programmes have been very important. They have 
Actions to Innovations in Made COMETT widely known and have assisted in the develop-
University / Enterprise Co- ment other European projects. 
operation Developed a new higher education / industry formula for students 
and have improved their professional future. Such students "will be 
an important source of innovation in Spanish firms. 
Developed new modes of technology transfer in knowledge, tech­
niques and models. 
Reinforced the UETP network. 
Brought higher education / industry relations into a labour market 
context through a concern for professional placement. 
Helped in giving a comparative aspect to European higher education 
/ industry relations. 
Provided new forms of human resource updating and recycling. 
Improved language competences, thus facilitating other forms of 
transnational higher education / industry co-operation. 
3.2 Modification of Policies There has been little real change even if some universities have 
and Practices to Facilitate adopted co-validation and acceptance of training periods. Generally, 
Exchanges universities have not established mechanisms for academic recogni­
tion of training periods. Equally, firms need a clear legal base for 
co-operating in such academically recognised training periods. 
4.1 Generating Innovative The COMETT framework for training actions (transnationality, 
Modes of Collaboration in evaluation, quality, etc.) have spread to other UETP actions and 
Training Course Develop- sometimes to regional actions. Equally, innovation has taken place 
ment in planning training actions based on needs analysis, in the teaching 
staff coming from the university, industry and international scene, 
and in the use of new training systems. Also innovation has been 
seen in training evaluation and impact analysis as well as its 
internationalisation. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- The increase in the quantity has been limited. However, in 
ment in Supply of Technol- COMETT II the course quality was significantly better. This was 
ogy - Related Training based on better definition of demand through needs analysis. 
4.3 Complementing / COMETT has helped cover a high level specialised need in technol-
Strengthening Training ogy training. And in some cases it has helped promote training 
Initiatives at National Level actions at a regional level as well as levering matching finance for 
further training actions. 
4.4 Other Points Raised 
-175 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
FRANCE 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate 
1.2 Fostering University / 
Enterprise Relationships 
1.3 Influence in Formulating 
Policies 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy There has been strong regional synergy with local bodies subscrib-
with National / Regional ing financially to projects and creating their own programmes. At 
Programmes the start, national policy and programmes were closely allied to 
COMETT. However, with economic and political cliange the two 
have now become more distant: COMETT is a bit "dated". 
1.5 Overall Impact of The importance of COMETT to the regions has been far greater 
COMETT than the simple amount in ecus. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional 
UETP Networks 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial 
Needs . 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational 
Outlook in Partners 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral 
UETP Networks 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: They have acted as a co-ordination and reference point 
Weaknesses of UETPs in for programme users. They have turned new ideas into actual 
Member State European projects: the network of European partners has been most 
important here. 
Weaknesses: Their frail financial structures which are due to their 
small size and the absence of pluri-annual budgeting. They have had 
limited human resources. Their visibility has been low. Quantitative 
indicators of performance have been weak / absent. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility The usefulness and simplicity of student placements have been of 
Actions to Innovations in major benefit to enterprises, particularly SMEs. They have created a 
University / Enterprise Co- European perspective, added new competences to the enterprise and 
operation raised awareness of human resource issues, as well as providing 
expertise for specific projects such as technology transfer. The 
. placement assists the student in obtaining employment and improves 
language ability. 
The placements become sources of new commercial relations and 
-the bases of future partnerships, particularly for R&D programmes. 
However, the delays in selection procedures are too long. 
The staff placements have not been successful and should be 
rethought. 
176 
3.2 Modification of Policies The COMETT policies and practices have contributed to the 
and Practices to Facilitate normalisation and systématisation of placements abroad, particularly 
Exchanges by the specification of quality parameters: length of stay, rights of 
both parties, etc. 
4.1 Generating Innovative COMETT has provided a transnational dimension and value added 
Modes of Collaboration in to the work. It has often strongly integrated the human factor into 
Training Course Develop- technological training. New links have been developed between 
ment training and R&D. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- COMETT has opened a European market for technical training as an 
ment in Supply of Technol- integral part of improving technology transfer. It has also helped 
ogy - Related Training create awareness of regional poles of competence. However, the 
time to launch training initiatives has been too long and financial 
support too small. 
4.3 Complementing / COMETT has permitted HEIs to obtain foreign partners and to 
Strengthening Training diversify their markets. It has also been particularly helpful to 
Initiatives at National Level SMEs, integrating them into international networks. 
4.4 Other Points Raised Placements in the South of Europe have been difficult; the teaching 
of the languages of the South should be become more developed. 
GR FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
GREECE 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate Participation in training activities, within the framework of 
COMETT, has been remarkable; this participation while limited 
during the first years and concentrated around public services, bank 
and local administration, has now become impressive. 
The bureaucratic load on projects should be kept to a minimum. 
The UETP network must continue to operate and should be 
strengthened. 
1.2 Fostering University / The COMETT programme is considered as one of the most 
Enterprise Relationships successful programmes. 
Collaboration between higher education institutions and enterprises 
has been strengthened considerably within a national and interna­
tional context. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating COMETT has given rise to legislative regulations and communica-
Policies tion mechanisms among universities and industry. 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy There is no national programme or orientation for training activ-
with National / Regional ities. 
Programmes Collaboration of higher education and industry is mainly focusing 
upon research. 
1.5 Overall Impact of COMETT has contributed to the change of mentality towards Euro-
COMETT pean programmes and created an infrastructure for the transitional 
collaboration and the development of training initiatives. 
177 
GR FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
GREECE 
Subject Summary Response 
2.1 Contribution of Regional 
UETP Networks 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial 
Needs 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational The development of transnational collaboration, through UETPs 
Outlook in Partners and other COMETT projects is considered to be the most positive 
experience for Greek organisations. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral Sectoral UETPs are based on the active participation of industry, 
UETP Networks especially in the sectors of food, chemicals, textile and metal 
products. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: extensive geographic coverage (with the exception of the 
Weaknesses of UETPs in Aegean Islands); encouraging participation of industry; develop-
Member State ment of a new collaboration mode between university and industry; 
contribution to transnational collaboration and exchanges. 
Weaknesses: difficulties in achieving financial self-sufficiency; 
UETP co-ordinators have acted as training users and very rarely as 
training suppliers; participating universities are mainly concerned 
by student placements and rarely participate in the development of 
training packages. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility 
Actions to Innovations in 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation 
3.2 Modification of Policies 
and Practices to Facilitate 
Exchanges 
4.1 Generating Innovative 
Modes of Collaboration in 
Training Course Develop­
ment 
4.2 Contribution to Improve­
ment in Supply of Technol­
ogy - Related Training — 
4.3 Complementing / 
Strengthening Training 
Initiatives at National Level 
4.4 Other Points Raised The report includes information about the main areas in which 
training is provided (such as industrial automation, production 
management, new production metnods, product design) and the 
sectors that consist the primary users of training (such as food, 
textile, furniture, metal and chemical products, services providers). 
178 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
ITALY 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate Due to historical and cultural reasons, as well as a lack of specific 
legislation, debate between University and Enterprise is a relatively 
recent phenomenon in Italy. The COMETT Programme has been 
largely responsible for creating a quality-based framework for public 
debate between university and industry in the country. 
1.2 Fostering University / In Italy, COMETT has created, through the UETPs, clear channels 
Enterprise Relationships for systematic rather than episodic co-operation between local 
Universities and SMEs, Trades Associations, Chambers of Com­
merce and Local Government. 
Due to COMETT the working relationship between Universities and 
Industry has concentrated on supplying the established training needs 
of industry through courses and placements. 
COMETT has given the relationship a transnational dimension. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating Not in any formal ways. 
Policies 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy The growth in influence of the COMETT Programme in Italy has 
with National / Regional coincided with important and complementary modifications in 
Programmes national legislation. For example: 
Law 67 of 1988 established a framework according to which 10 % 
of R&D budgets to be spent on training. Recent developments of the 
same law encourage transnational placement in industry and centres 
of excellence as a vehicle for training. 
Law 391 of 1990 established the means by which Italian Univer­
sities could participate in joint initiatives with third parties as well as 
hold short vocational-based courses. 
179 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
ITALY 
Subject Summary Response 
1.5 Overall Impact of COMETT has encouraged and diffused forms of collaboration and 
COMETT exchange between the national system of post-secondary education 
and industry. 
The COMETT Programme has made an important contribution to 
developing a European dimension to university curricula and student 
culture (especially through the exchange opportunities offered by the 
Programme). 
The COMETT Programme offers a vali,d role model to mould future 
training policy for initial and continuing education. COMETT will 
encourage national policies to develop a decentralised and flexible 
education and training system through direct dialogue between 
university and industry partners as well as active co-operation in 
joint projects. 
COMETT, through stimulating debate between universities, industry 
R&D organisations and local and national government, has launched 
a forum for the discussion of education and training policy with 
both a national and European dimension. 
The model and experience supplied by the COMETT Programme in 
UETPs across the country will influence local policy - this is 
especially important in S. Italy. 
The work of the National COMETT Information Centre, located in 
the MURST, has been crucial in involving all the principal actors in 
the Programme and ensuring the quality standards of the Pro­
gramme. The Information Centre has been especially influential in 
encouraging the acceptance and recognition of student exchange 
systems in Italy. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional The 13 regional UETPs in Italy have made particular progress in the 
UETP Networks dissemination of a quality approach to training and education across 
the country - especially S. Italy. 
The regional UETPs have made concrete contributions to the 
understanding of training needs of enterprise - and particularly local 
SMEs - in the country. 
Within the regional UETPs an entrepreneurial approach to training 
has developed which should ensure the long term effects of the 
Programme on the quality of training in Italy. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial The COMETT UETPs have systematically analysed the training 
Needs needs expressed by both industry and universities. The-TNA has 
Permitted specific methodologies to be tested on the spot. 
Helped companies to reflect more systematically on problems 
Developed debate on the need for regualr use of TNA. 
Helped develop short courses. 
180 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
ITALY 
Subject Summary Response 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational 
Outlook in Partners COMETT has been responsible for developing a collective and 
structured transnational approach to education and training which 
was largely absent in Italy before the launch of the Programme. 
The regional UETPs have developed different models of 
transnationality. Some have emphasised specific technology sectors, 
others have sought to involve a broad number of organisations from 
their region in transnational projects, others have concentrated on 
developing the role of Universities as catalysts of advanced level 
transnational training. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral 
UETP Networks The 6 sectoral UETPs have made an important contribution to the 
development of high quality training initiatives in their specific 
sectors. 
The sectoral UETPs represent leading technology areas in Italy such 
as automation and involve many of the principal organisations in the 
country. 
2.5 Major Strengths and 
Weaknesses of UETPs in 
Member State Strengths: high quality of personnel, team work, project creation and 
management; the transnational dimension; participation by SMEs; 
entrepreneurial ability of the UETPs; general strategy of the UETPs 
to become regional development agencies. 
Weaknesses: difficulties in carrying on discussions with local 
authorities, limited financial resources, lack of recognition for 
industrial placements in university curricula; weak role of univer­
sities in the decisions concerning UETP strategy; lack of integration 
of the work carried out by COMETT UETPs with that national and 
local agencies responsible for vocational training. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility 
Actions to Innovations in 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation The principal contribution of the COMETT Programme to Italy has 
been the creation of the model and procedures for student exchange 
- previously non-existent in Italy - which have been largely respon­
sible for setting up a practical framework for contact between 
Universities and enterprise. Personnel exchange improved. 
3.2 Modification of Policies 
and Practices to Facilitate 
Exchanges The value of mobility has slowly been accepted by universities, 
enterprise and students. In particular, since COMETT I, Italian 
industry has come to appreciate the value of stagiaires to the extent 
that demand for incoming students surpasses that of outgoing 
students by 25 %. 
Youth culture has been slow to accept transnational placement due 
to poor foreign language knowledge, social pressures (especially in 
S. Italy and for women), poor appreciation of the employment 
benefits of industrial experience, military service, rigidity of the 
university curriculum and lack of recognition of the placement. 
4.1 Generating Innovative 
Modes of Collaboration in 
Training Course Develop­
ment The COMETT Programme in Italy has been influential in develop­
ing innovative models of training course development in the 
national context through the encouragement of universities to work 
on joint projects and the development of a transnational dimension 
in project design. 
181 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
ITALY 
Subject Summary Response 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- COMETT has had particular impact in Italy in that it has stimulated 
ment in Supply of Technol- production of highly qualified training resources (including multime-
ogy - Related Training dia and distance learning materials), co-operation with DELTA and 
contributed to a broader awareness flexible education systems. 
4.3 Complementing / The role played by COMETT UETPs in Italy has been especially 
Strengthening Training influential in complementing and strengthening national training 
Initiatives at National Level activities and policy. 
COMETT has acted as a catalyst in Italy to create an institutional 
system for collaboration between universities and enterprises. 
4.4 Other Points Raised COMETT has been successful in developing a trade mark with a 
clear quality standard within the Italian context. 
Co-operation with the Programme frequently leads partners to 
involvement in other EC initiatives. Italian UETPs have strong links 
with FORCE and TEMPUS. 
The success of the Programme has encouraged many universities to 
review their constitutions in order to recognise industrial placements 
formally. 
The COMETT Programme has also an important multiplier as 
regards acting as a vehicle for the transfer of technology which 
consolidates the role of the UETPs as effective developing agencies 
participating in training, R&D and development programmes for the 
EC and national authorities. 
IRL FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
IRELAND 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate The debate on higher education / industry co-operation has been 
ongoing since the early 1970s. COMETT has fostered the debate 
by adding issues involved in the training dimension and the 
transnational focus. 
1.2 Fostering University / UETPs have added an extra dimension as an infrastructural 
Enterprise Relationships network. The National COMETT Liaison Committee has been 
effective in bringing together, for the first time, all those (govern­
ment, universities, enterprises, trade unions, etc.) with an interest 
in higher education, and scientific and technological training. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating Assisted in bringing a EU dimension to national policies in the 
Policies area. 
182 
IRL FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
IRELAND 
Subject Summary Response 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy Links have been established with activities under The Operational 
with National / Regional Programme for Industrial Development (1989-93) in areas con-
Programmes cerning higher education / industry co-operation. 
Training needs analysis has been carried out in conjunction with 
regional and national institutions involved in S&T. 
Strong supporting relationships have been formed with the Indus­
trial Liaison function in HEIs as well as in national S&T priority 
development areas, (e.g. Timber & Forestry, Marine & 
Aquaculture, Biotechnology. ) 
1.5 Overall Impact of 
COMETT 
2.1 Contribution of Regional Their contribution has included developing; 
UETP Networks Expertise in European collaborative projects 
A EU dimension in regional activities 
A National Association of UETPs. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial All UETPs have undertaken TNAs, organising short courses and 
Needs involving Irish firms in international training projects. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Yes. UETP activities have led to strong networks being developed 
Outlook in Partners around short courses and training projects often integrating and 
being supported by mobility activities. For small firms, it has 
often been the first link into transnational activities. They are 
supported by UETPs as they take part in larger projects. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral Only two sectoral UETPs have been co-ordinated from Ireland. 
UETP Networks Both are active in providing European wide short courses and in 
developing mobility programmes. They have entered and co­
ordinated other EC programmes (LINGUA, TEMPUS, FORCE, 
etc.) for their members. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: 
Weaknesses of UETPs in Good reputation, expertise and skills developed 
Member State Links to other EC Programmes and networking established 
Weaknesses: 
Lack of industrial participation due to working in a region with a 
low geographical density of firms, at a low technological level and 
dominated by SMEs 
No government department has taken "ownership" of UETPs 
Uncertainty and lack of finance. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility Student placements have 1) Introduced a transnational element to 
Actions to Innovations in HEIs already undertaking industry placements 2) Catalysed the 
University / Enterprise Co- development of placement requirements and mechanisms in HEIs 
operation not already involved in such activities, 3) Increased student 
language competences, 4) Acted as the base for stronger co­
operation and joint projects, 5) Provided some firms with a 
cultural learning experience. 
183 
IRL 
IS FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
IRELAND 
Subject Summary Response 
3.2 Modification of Policies Mostly, colleges not already undertaking placement activities have 
and Practices to Facilitate modified policies at an informal level to facilitate exchanges. 
Exchanges Some Departments have formally modified structures. 
4.1 Generating Innovative Innovative collaboration has taken place through: 
Modes of Collaboration in The direct involvement of companies in planning and developing 
Training Course Develop- courses 
ment The internationalisation of the development process 
The development of flexible networks to undertake such work. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- COMETT has improved supply by encouraging HEIs to develop 
ment in Supply of Technol- and supply technical training, particularly in areas where travel 
ogy - Related Training abroad would have been necessary. Access to international expert­
ise has improved quality. Also open, multimedia and distance 
learning activities have been accelerated by COMETT. 
4.3 Complementing / COMETT has complemented ongoing activities. 
Strengthening Training 
Initiatives at National Level 
4.4 Other Points Raised Staff mobility programme is too rigid and the three month period 
is too long. 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
ICELAND 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate COMETT has strongly stimulated the debate. It has provided an 
acceptable European forum for a debate which had previously been 
fraught with mutual suspicion and has helped legitimised in 
industry's eyes much of the HEI expertise existent in Iceland. It has 
provided part of the basis for a dialogue on higher education / 
industry relations. 
1.2 Fostering University / Due to the SME nature of Icelandic industry, COMETT has had to 
Enterprise Relationships work with industry and professional associations at an administrative 
level. Specific firm contact takes place during projects and place­
ments. 
The direct contact nature of Icelandic society has meant that 
COMETT may initiate contacts but then ceases to be an intermedi­
ary. The programme has catalysed various training, research and 
placement activities. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating There has been no direct influence, but national policy makers have 
Policies been aware of COMETT activities and philosophy. 
184 
IS FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
ICELAND 
Subject Summary Response 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy The Ministry of Social Affairs' Training Assistance Scheme has 
with National / Regional • supported individuals taking COMETT courses. COMETT has also 
Programmes conducted several surveys for the training of craftspersons in close 
co-operation with the Ministry of Education. 
1.5 Overall Impact of It has; 
COMETT Accelerated contacts with universities and firms across the EEA. 
Had a strong effect in focusing HEIs on the need to market their 
education, training and research to industry. 
Developed better industrial awareness of university graduate recruit­
ment 
Improved quality and accelerated development particularly in the 
aquaculture and fisheries industry. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional There is only one UETP in Iceland. It has undertaken TNA and has 
UETP Networks developed and run courses to alleviate these needs. It has promoted 
conferences on higher education / industry relations. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial This has been particularly strong in the fish processing industry. 
Needs 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Iceland has always been very internationally minded with a tradition 
Outlook in Partners of seeking technical education and training abroad. COMETT acted 
as a conduit for this ready made market. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral Iceland has only one regional UETP, although it has specialised in 
UETP Networks the fish producing and processing industry. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: Participation of the industrial and professional associations 
Weaknesses of UETPs in with direct access to firms and the strong moral and financial support 
Member State of the University of Iceland. 
Weaknesses: A lack of direct contact with firms and a very insecure 
financial base. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility Difficult to ascertain. 
Actions to Innovations in 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation 
3.2 Modification of Policies Icelandic universities and enterprises only formalise policies and 
and Practices to Facilitate practices after an extended trial period. They have been open to 
Exchanges COMETT but have not formalised mechanisms. 
4.1 Generating Innovative COMETT has pioneered the practice of undertaking TNA and then 
Modes of Collaboration in discussing the best means to alleviate the needs with industry 
Training Course Develop- It has also pioneered the extensive preparation of quality training 
ment programmes with international university experts and enterprise 
leaders. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- Quality training courses have been developed. However, not enough 
ment in Supply of Technol- courses have been available nor have new modes of training delivery 
ogy - Reiated Training been sufficiently exploited. 
The training of trainers has also been emphasised. 
185 
IS FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
ICELAND 
Subject Summary Response 
4.3 Complementing / COMETT has added a new dimension to training (rather than simply 
Strengthening Training complementing it) through TNA, high quality course preparation and 
Initiatives at National Level training of trainers. 
4.4 Other Points Raised Institutional separation of research centres from the university and 
then the lack of graduate courses until 1991 limited the potential for 
co-operation. 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
LUXEMBOURG 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate Higher education / industry relations had been developed before 
COMETT. However, COMETT has had an indirect, catalytic effect 
on higher education / industry relations. It has drawn attention to the 
, importance of transnational co-operation. 
1.2 Fostering University / COMETT is becoming better known. Its good administration has 
Enterprise Relationships encouraged firms to participate in further EC programmes. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating COMETT activities drew attention to the lack of national co-ordina-
Policies tion in the area of collaboration between national firms and foreign 
universities and have encouraged the development of common 
actions in the Sarr-Lor-Lux region. 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy The UETP has supported the QUALIF programme on quality 
with National / Regional management of informatics projects between firms and national 
Programmes bodies. 
1.5 Overall Impact of COMETT has had a concrete, initiating role in developing SITec as 
COMETT a central role within the CRP-Henri Tudor. SITec is a platform for 
new techniques in intensive courses. 
The UETP has brought together technical innovation bodies with an 
interest in training. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional Luxembourg has only one regional UETP covering-the whole 
UETP Networks country. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial Yes, sectoral TNA studies have been undertaken. 
Needs 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Yes, through giving courses an international element. Also through 
Outlook in Partners alerting firms to the European dimension of R&D as well as 
training. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral No sectoral UETP exists. 
UETP Networks ^^_ ' 
186 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
LUXEMBOURG 
Subject Summary Response 
2.5 Major Strengths and 
Weaknesses of UETPs in 
Member State Strengths: Its partners have included the professional associations 
which has make for credibility and ease of approach to firms. Other 
partners have included the ITS, CU and the CRPs. All partners have 
been active in national and EU R&D and thus permit the UETP to 
link training and research. 
Weaknesses: 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility 
Actions to Innovations in 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation COMETT has created higher education / industry links. Often for 
SMEs, it has been their first contact with a European programme 
and has encouraged them to move onto R&D programmes. 
3.2 Modification of Policies ' 
and Practices to Facilitate 
Exchanges Placements in firms have become more systematic. 
4.1 Generating Innovative 
Modes of Collaboration in 
Training Course Develop­
ment Yes, most notably in the development of SITec as a platform for 
short courses. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve­
ment in Supply of Technol­
ogy - Related Training Under COMETT, the CRC-CU has developed short courses for 
industry, as has the Chambre des Metiers: the latter particularly for 
SMEs 
4.3 Complementing / 
Strengthening Training 
Initiatives at National Level Currently, higher education is undergoing reform and enlargement. 
Following such reform it is expected that LEONARDO will comple­
ment in even larger degree the national training effort. 
4.4 Other Points Raised The full cycle of third level education is absent from Luxembourg 
with only 1' Institut Supérieur de Technologie (1ST) and le Centre 
Universitaire du Luxembourg (CUL). Thus, firms tend to look 
abroad for higher education / industry co-operation. 
Since the economic difficulties of 1992, students have become more 
interested in training placements and firms more careful about their 
relevance. 
50 % of work force is from abroad. Only since the establishment of 
Centres de Recherche Publics (CRP) in 1987 has new and high 
technology training become available 
187 
NL FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
NETHERLANDS 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate COMETT has never played a major part in any national debate on 
higher education / industry co-operation. This is due to COMETT's 
modest budget and the rich tradition of post-tertiary continuing 
education for industry. Equally, before COMETT there Was a great 
deal of contact between universities, hogescholen and companies. 
On top of this, there is a comprehensive set of measures for the 
development and dissemination of new technologies particularly to 
SMEs. 
1.2 Fostering University / COMETT plays a supporting rather than a leading role. 
Enterprise Relationships 
1.3 Influence in Formulating Not as yet. 
Policies 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy It has not yet resulted in the formulation of new national or 
with National / Regional regional policies or links with complementary national or regional 
Programmes programmes. However the Ministry has provided financial support 
for the UETPs 
1.5 Overall Impact of Weak due to already developed higher education / industry 
COMETT structures and modest financial resources, but has contributed to 
European dimension of training. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional Experience is still limited and variable from UETP to UETP. 
UETP Networks COMETT / UETPs help with industrial "cluster" strategies. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial The "round tables" have been particularly helpful. TNAs have not 
Needs always been carried out. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Particularly for the hogescholen, with the universities it was more 
Outlook in Partners a case of co-ordination of existing activities. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral Appear to be successful when they grow from a basis of existing 
UETP Networks co-operation. They fit in well to advanced education system. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: Regional UETPs - a close relationship with other inter-
Weaknesses of UETPs in mediary organisations, provincial authorities and companies -
Member State concrete and visible results from international co-operation -
knowledge of European expertise and ability to tap as required. 
Sectoral UETPs - Adding the international dimension.^. 
Other strengths include the supranational character of COMETT 
and links to the Commission as well as spin-off benefits to other 
programmes and activities. 
Weaknesses: Lack of funding for activities, Regions too large, 
Industrial partners not committed enough, Industry has low 
awareness of COMETT, Rapid turnover of UETP staff, Difficulties 
in industrial contact greater in the regional UETPs. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility One UETP has set up "Local Strategy Committees" with partner 
Actions to Innovations in industries to oversee exchanges and influence course content. Here 
University / Enterprise Co- course and placements have been integrated. Others point to a 
operation much more modest scale of innovation. 
NL FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
NETHERLANDS 
Subject Summary Response 
3.2 Modification of Policies More attention is now devoted to such practical matters as housing, 
and Practices to Facilitate the structuring of the contacts (a policy of networking instead of 
Exchanges informal contacts) and the planned provision of student intern 
projects as part of the operation of businesses, etc. 
4.1 Generating Innovative COMETT has internationalised a number of training course 
Modes of Collaboration in activities and has helped orient trainers to training at an interna-
Training Course Develop- tional level. More demand-driven courses have been developed due 
ment to company involvement. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- Quality has improved in course development through interchange 
ment in Supply of Technol- of ideas. European level quality guarantees have been developed by 
ogy - Related Training preventing major discrepancies in the different universities and 
establishing a common core curriculum (on which exchanges are 
based). Inspectors have been appointed to monitor quality. 
The range of courses available has grown, both in the Netherlands 
and Europe as a whole along with courses delivered in a greater 
variety of ways. 
4.3 Complementing / This has been achieved through making training activities more 
Strengthening Training international in nature and increasing interest and participation of 
Initiatives at National Level SMEs 
4.4 Other Points Raised Call for simplification of regulations and procedures surrounding 
mobility schemes. Sanctions and reporting after-the-fact could also 
greatly improve the efficiency of the programme. 
Call for better co-ordination of EC technical education / training 
programmes offered by many EC Programmes. 
The strict separation between higher level education / COMETT 
and upper vocational level is seen as unproductive. 
The Netherlands delegation indicated that their evaluation would be identical to that undertaken in 1993. 
This, the 1993 evaluation is used, along with their submission "Comments for 1994 to be added to those 
given for 1993" . 
N FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
NORWAY 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate The debate on university-enterprise collaboration has gradually 
intensified, but it would be out of proportion to say that COMETT 
has been instrumental in the discussion; the debate was well under 
way ... At the same time, numerous new higher education / industry 
working relationships have been some of the tangible results. 
189 
N FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
NORWAY 
Subject Summary Response 
1.2 Fostering University / Yes, many new working relationships. 
Enterprise Relationships 
1.3 Influence in Formulating Not strong at a national level, but important at the regional policy 
Policies and planning level. 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy At a national level: 
with National / Regional The 1991 White Paper on Higher Education argued for closer 
Programmes internal collaboration between the educational institutions in an 
integrated "Norwegian Network" as well as collaboration with 
external institutions, but there has been no national programme. 
The Norwegian Research Councils have university / industry 
technology transfer programmes. The Ministry of Industry wishes 
better collaboration between research institutes and universities. 
The Norwegian Long Term Plan 1994-97 seeks "to spread available 
technology and competence to companies., (and a) More rapid 
updating and renewal of technical and professional skills.." 
The 1993 National Budget noted "International collaboration in 
higher education must be strengthened including participation in 
international education programmes.." 
Thus there has been a close similarity between the objectives of the 
COMETT Programme and national objectives. 
At a regional level: 
The role of COMETT in the development and implementation of 
regional and county strategic plans in Norway should be stressed. 
Where these had already been prepared, for example in Western 
Norway, COMETT has become an important tool for implementa­
tion; in other cases COMETT's objectives are being adopted as part 
of the premises for plans currently in preparation. 
1.5 Overall Impact of Membership of COMETT has provided technology transfer and 
COMETT training with a European aspect which would otherwise have been 
lacking or would have had to be laboriously constructed, using 
national resources and on purely national terms; hardly the optimal 
point of departure for the creation of an international programme of 
co-operation. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional They have encouraged regional co-operation between regional 
UETP Networks business interests and the established education and training system. 
They have brought a European dimension to a university's traditional 
industrial liaison and continuing education functionsrThey have 
developed a nation-wide information distribution network through 
technical journals and newsletters as well as annual conferences on 
technical skills. They have also development of courses and 
arranged student placements. They have moved from training co­
operation to RTD projects and developed sectoral activities. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial The activities of the UETP have varied from direct TNA and 
Needs subsequent course development to support to industry in its own 
efforts: as one UETP put it; "Help towards self-help". 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational This has been a major success of all UETPs. Sectoral UETPs have 
Outlook in Partners from the start been transnational. Regional UETPs have, however, 
also been successful. 
190 
N FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
NORWAY 
Subject Summary Response 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral 
UETP Networks The two sectoral UETPs have been based at the Norwegian Institute 
of Technology (NTH) in Trondheim with very close connections to 
SINTEF, the large contract research institute on the same site. The 
UETPs have added to the international character and activities of 
this large technology complex'through international TNA, short 
courses, student and staff exchanges and have gone on to ^develop 
larger RTD projects outside COMETT. 
2.5 Major Strengths and 
Weaknesses of UETPs in 
Member State Strengths: The strong European network developed. The support of 
the Norwegian government and regional authorities. The active 
commitment and support of the NTH for three of the UETPs. The 
active support and participation of the Norwegian Society of 
Chartered engineers (NIF) and the Federation of Norwegian Engin­
eering Industries (TBL). 
Weaknesses: Budget allocation requirements were underestimated. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility 
Actions to Innovations in 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation Mobility actions have been used by partners in larger COMETT and 
other projects as a means of both cementing and developing co­
operation. 
3.2 Modification of Policies 
and Practices to Facilitate 
Exchanges The Norwegian government have made granting of work and 
residence permits to COMETT students de facto. Agreements with 
Student Accommodation Offices greatly facilitated incoming 
students. Agreements with the Universities gave COMETT students 
full student rights (travel rebates, student activities, etc.). The TBL 
recommended student placements to its members. Improvement in 
student placement practices. 
4.1 Generating Innovative 
Modes of Collaboration in 
Training Course Develop­
ment Courses have been developed from the start for a European audience 
and with a European dimension. Some courses have developed from 
other EU investment (e.g. ESPRIT II). Extensive use of new 
techniques, software programmes and simulation tools have been 
incorporated. COMETT activities have been both a practical 
instrument and a catalyst. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve­
ment in Supply of Technol­
ogy - Related Training The emphasis has been on quality improvement. COMETT has 
introduced a number of "quality partners" into the development of 
courses and continuing education activities who would, otherwise, 
not have been available in Norway. 
4.3 Complementing / 
Strengthening Training 
Initiatives at National Level The close similarity between the objectives of COMETT and 
national objectives in the field of technology transfer and training 
have ensured complementarity. 
4.4 Other Points Raised The 1991 White Paper on Higher Education argued for closer 
internal collaboration between the educational institutions in an 
integrated "Norwegian Network" as well as collaboration with 
external institutions, but there has been no national programme. 
The Norwegian Research Councils have university / industry 
technology transfer programmes. The Ministry of Industry wishes 
better collaboration between research institutes and universities. 
.191 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
PORTUGAL 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate To a certain extent, COMETT has contributed to the stimulation of 
the debate, developing new ideas and suggestions and increasing the 
awareness of the importance of technology transfer. 
1.2 Fostering University / COMETT has contributed to the improvement of national and 
Enterprise Relationships international contacts between universities and enterprises in training 
and technology transfer. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating The establishment of the COMETT Information Office in the 
Policies Conselho para a Cooperaçào Ensino Superior Empresa (CESE - the 
office in charge of the proposal of procedures and policies to 
improve higher education / industry co-operation) has been critical 
to COMETT's success in Portugal. There is a proposal to integrate 
similar higher education / industry co-operation into other national 
programmes based on the COMETT experience. 
1.4 Relationships /Synergy The CESE recommended the public support of UETPs to establish 
with National / Regional better synergy with national programmes. In parallel with COMETT, 
. Programmes it has also organised two major higher education / co-operation 
conferences each year. COMETT activities have also inspired CESE 
to launch a national training placement programme for degree level 
people into enterprises and organisations in other EU & EFTA 
States. It will use much of the information and skills acquired from 
the COMETT Programme. 
1.5 Overall Impact of Certain pre-established R&D and technology transfer consortia have 
COMETT spread out into training. 
Setting up higher education / enterprise interfaces devoted to 
technical training 
The integration of transnational industrial placements into course 
structures. 
An innovative dialogue between HEIs and enterprises leading to 
more "tailor made" courses. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional The contribution has been 1) The development of dedicated regional 
UETP Networks HEI / industry interfaces, but dominated by universities. 2) The 
addition of an international dimension to these interfaces, previously 
very weak. 3) Expanded activities to other EU and National pro­
grammes (PEDIP, PRODEP, etc.). Two UETPs have moved to work 
with regional authorities in regional development. One-UE-TP has set 
up as series of technology transfer centres across its region. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial COMETT support for studies on training skills requirements, 
Needs ' particularly SMEs, contributes usefully to this issue. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational The UETPs / COMETT have strengthened links to HEIs and 
Outlook in Partners industry abroad giving new R&D and training partners. Similarly for 
firms, it has brought international contacts and potential markets as 
well as being a door to other European Programmes. However, 
firms, particularly SMEs, have a poor input to programme develop­
ment. 
192 
FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
PORTUGAL 
Subject Summary Response 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral The six sectoral UETPs (textiles, agribusiness, mining, telecomms, 
UETP Networks biotech) have produced courses, training material, books, directories, 
etc. and have exchanged students and strengthened links across 
Europe. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: The transnational dimension of UETP activities. The 
Weaknesses of UETPs in development of a professional management structure. Specialisation 
Member State in international technology training 
Weaknesses: UETPs still largely depend on vulnerable financial 
support. Most sectoral UETPs have a confused legal status. Lack of 
public awareness and recognition of their potential within the new 
EC education and training programmes. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility Increased student interest in placement abroad. Added European 
Actions to Innovations in dimension to student training. Mobility has also contributed to 
University / Enterprise Co- development of a European university / enterprise technology 
operation transfer network. However, there is still a lack of recognition of 
student placements within academic curricula. Also, a lack of real 
supervision of training work by universities and enterprises. 
Personnel exchanges, especially enterprise to university, still difficult 
due to problems for enterprises in matching personnel training needs 
to university training methods and release for long periods. 
3.2 Modification of Policies Weak. More university participation and responsibility for student 
and Practices to Facilitate exchanges needed. Also consistent structural and curricular recogni-
Exchanges tion of transnational industrial placement required. 
4.1 Generating Innovative A strengthening of transnational development of and participation in 
Modes of Collaboration in training activities. 
Training Course Develop­
ment 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- An improvement of quality and quantity of training materials on the 
ment in Supply of Technol- market. However, impact limited due to low level of demand (and 
ogy - Related Training supply) of technology related training in Portugal. 
4.3 Complementing / Although impact limited, final results will depend on the synergy 
Strengthening Training and complementarities between specific COMETT training issues 
Initiatives at National Level and national, regional and local programmes. 
4.4 Other Points Raised 
193 
sw FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
SWEDEN 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate Marginally on the national level, some on the regional and local 
level. The Programme is small. Also the economy has been 
depressed. 
1.2 Fostering University / Little, apart from those directly involved. Universities already have 
Enterprise Relationships strong continuing education units. However, the fostering of 
international relationships for Swedish universities and companies 
has been new. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating None on the national level. Some on the regional level. 
Policies 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy Not very much. Some synergy between university continuing 
with National / Regional education programmes and UETPs. 
Programmes 
1.5 Overall Impact of The overall impact has been small. Strand B has been the true 
COMETT success, particularly for the larger SMEs. Networks developed will 
be used for other projects. COMETT has also improved under­
standing of EU. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional Contribution outside of the companies and universities directly 
UETP Networks involved has small. These UETPs have had an identity crises. 
However, indirect contributions include 
Diffusion of information 
Increased marketing for technology & training 
European arena for co-operation and political pressure (sectoral) 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial Most UETPs have tried. However, many organisations are active in 
Needs this field. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Yes, to a certain extent, mainly through demonstration. 
Outlook in Partners 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral Fairly little, apart from the effects of courses given and students 
UETP Networks placed. But they have functioned well. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths have been the devotion of UETP people and the ability 
Weaknesses of UETPs in to work in a trans-European perspective and to support other pro-
Member State grammes 
Weaknesses have been the lack of involvement of industry, 
especially SMEs, and the inter-regional transfer of experience. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility No, there has been nothing fundamentally new in student place-
Actions to Innovations in ments. The other placements have hardly been used. 
University / Enterprise Co­
operation 
194 
sw FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
SWEDEN 
Subject Summary Response 
3.2 Modification of Policies 
and Practices to Facilitate 
Exchanges Increased dedication to finding places for students in bigger 
companies. Some of these have used COMETT to try out potential 
employees in subsidiaries abroad. 
Some SMEs have experienced foreign students for first time. 
Increased sensitivity to cultural differences. 
Swedish Foreign Office has licensed a fast / simplified way for 
student work permits and residence. 
4.1 Generating Innovative 
Modes of Collaboration in 
Training Course Develop­
ment Marginally. 
The innovation has been contained in the preparatory work -
discussions and negotiations around the application and the 
formulation of the "order" to university teachers. The rest has been 
normal. 
With sectoral UETPs, the influence of industrial branches has been 
stronger in training development. 
An IT network has been set up (initially for information and 
partner search) and is looking towards use for in-situ training for 
industry. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve­
ment in Supply of Technol­
ogy - Related Training Marginally. However, quality control has become an important and 
conscious issue as courses have to be given by different teachers in 
different countries. 
4.3 Complementing / 
Strengthening Training 
Initiatives at National Level Marginally. 
4.4 Other Points Raised COMETT has been in operation too short a time to judge it. Its 
scale has been too small for a major impact. 
Perhaps a clearer differentiation between UETPs is necessary. For 
example, sectoral UETPs specialise in course production and 
supply to regional UETPs organising demand at a local level. 
Reuse of courses developed has been very low. 
UETP network should be saved and networks secured. 
SF FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
FINLAND — 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate Because there has been a strong higher education / industry tradition 
of co-operation, exchange and placements in Finland, COMETT is 
not seen to have had any significant impact at a regional or national 
level on the debate, higher education / industry relations, or formu­
lating policies. 
#. The innovative effects have been at the transnational level. 
195 
1.2 Fostering University / Established tradition in university / enterprise co-operation gave a 
Enterprise Relationships good starting- point for the implementation of the programme. 
Experience in the European context has been gained. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating Regional and national policies already take for granted the import-
Policies ance of higher education / industry relations. 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy There has been strong synergy with the National Programme to 
with National / Regional increase the transnational activities of the Institutes of Technology. 
Programmes Two thirds of outgoing Ba students have been from such Institutes. 
The Ministry of Education has provided special bonus moneys to 
academic universities which increase their transnational activities. 
Participation in COMETT is now one of the criteria for such 
awards. 
1.5 Overall Impact of Experience in co-operating in an EU context, both for authorities as 
COMETT well as for organisations participating in the Programme. 
A solid base of successful participation in an EC Programme as a 
base for future work. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional They have bridged the gap between Brussels and participating 
UETP Networks Finnish organisations, particularly for enterprises. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial All UETPs have undertaken SNA leading to the formulation of new 
Needs projects. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational They have stimulated and assisted international co-operation, very 
Outlook in Partners often turning a national project into a European one. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral The two sectoral UETPs have had a visible impact on training in 
UETP Networks their respective sectors. 
2.5 Major Strengths and Strengths: Close co-operation between UETPs and with Information 
Weaknesses of UETPs in Centre, supplementary funding to UETPs to prepare for 
Member State LEONARDO 
Weaknesses: Not full UETP coverage of the country, economic 
recession has limited extension of industrial partners. Because 
COMETT was the only programme in which Finland was able to 
participate, UETPs have been restrained to working mainly with 
COMETT. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility There has been a long tradition of student placement abroad. Thus 
Actions to Innovations in COMETT has provided a new channel rather than a full innovation. 
University / Enterprise Co- However, particularly for the Institutes of Technology, COMETT 
operation has provided an efficient means to increase high quality placement. 
Expert exchanges (Be), while not new, have been appreciated as one 
of the most useful activities in COMETT. In 1994, Finland was the 
second biggest sending country in COMETT! 
3.2 Modification of Policies The decentralised nature of COMETT has encouraged individual 
and Practices to Facilitate officers in universities taking care of international affairs to take 
Exchange's initiatives and more responsibility in arranging placements. Previous­
ly most work was centralised. 
Enterprises have moved from an approach of charity towards 
accepting students towards recognising their real added value. 
4.1 Generating Innovative 
Modes of Collaboration in 
Training Course Develop­
ment 
196 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- COMETT has not had any major impact at a national level due to 
ment in Supply of Technol- the small number of projects. However, courses which would have 
ogy - Related Training been only national have been made European. Courses have been 
held in English for foreign participation. Material produced has been 
recognised as useful by industry. 
4.3 Complementing / COMETT has effectively contributed to increasing European co-
Strengthening Training operation and has helped create new contacts and new forms of 
Initiatives at National Level collaboration. 
4.4 Other Points Raised 
UK FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
UNITED KINGDOM 
Subject Summary Response 
1.1 Stimulating the Debate Universities generally believed COMETT had added some impetus 
to the debate on higher education / industry collaboration. How­
ever, many noted that the debate had gone on long before 
COMETT. 
43 % of enterprises thought COMETT successful in this area. 
36 % disagreed. 
58 % of regional and 71 % of sectoral UETPs though that 
COMETT had made a worthwhile contribution. 
1.2 Fostering University / Most universities believed that COMETT had made a worthwhile 
Enterprise Relationships contribution. It had increased links both locally and across Europe. 
Some enterprises thought that COMETT had produced only 
minimal new collaborative ventures. Some thought that COMETT-
developed university / industry links had introduced new ideas into 
the workplace. 
70 % of all UETPs felt that they had made a worthwhile contribu­
tion in this area. Areas ranged from student placement to creating 
new transnational links, to SNA and TNA at regional and sectoral 
level, to issues of graduate employment. 
1.3 Influence in Formulating 49 % of universities thought COMETT did not influence policy; 
Policies most policy was already well developed. 
36 % of firms thought COMETT has had some or considerable 
influence on their policy towards universities. 
Only 25 % regional and 14 % sectoral UETPs -thought that 
COMETT had some or considerable influence. However, many felt 
that the indirect influence had been important. COMETT comple­
mented and enhanced existing models of higher education / 
industry collaboration 
1.4 Relationships / Synergy Half the universities were involved in national / regional policy 
with National / Regional similar to COMETT. Some were members of TECs. 
Programmes For firms, the main examples of COMETT benefits were access to 
providers of European expertise and a greater awareness of 
European training issues. 44 % were involved in similar activities. 
77 % regional and 60 % sectoral UETPs reported establishing links 
between COMETT and other national / regional policies sharing 
complementary aims. 
197 
UK FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
UNITED KINGDOM 
Subject Summary Response 
1.5 Overall Impact of Universities generally believed COMETT to have little impact, 
COMETT even locally. However, the international aspects were seen to give 
credibility to EU training policies. Some thought it had improved 
technology skill in local companies. 
Half the firms felt that COMETT had made a worthwhile impact 
on their own company particularly through the student placement, 
opening up new skills and awareness of the EU market. Companies 
felt that the overall regional impact of COMETT was small. 
UETPs felt that impact was limited by insufficient funding being 
available to generate large scale interest and participation. 
2.1 Contribution of Regional Universities thought UETPs most relevant at a regional rather than 
UETP Networks national level. UETPs were effective at marketing COMETT. 
Newsletters, meetings, placements, short courses were all useful. 
Generally, companies recognised the need for university - enter­
prise networks and saw UETPs as one of the catalysts in this area. 
All UETPs saw a need for higher education / industry networks 
which would develop transnational links and provide information 
on EU training opportunities. 
2.2 Articulation of Industrial Over half the Universities believed that UETPs had little or no 
Needs effect in helping enterprises communicate their needs: many other 
routes existed. 
For firms, UETPs helped in TNA and in raising the profile of 
training in the company. 
UETPs provided little clear evidence that they themselves had been 
helpful in this area: 54 % of regional UETPs though little had been 
achieved. 
2.3 Stimulating Transnational Universities believed UETPs helped them to look beyond national 
Outlook in Partners boundaries establishing links with other universities and enterprises 
across Europe. 
For enterprises, UETPs found partners abroad and provided EU 
students for placement. 
61 % of regional and all sectoral UETPs thought they had contrib­
uted some or a great deal to encouraging transnational co-oper­
ation. 
2.4 Contribution of Sectoral Sectoral UETPs' contribution was not strongly differentiated from 
UETP Networks regional UETPs. They did, however, seem to have closer and more 
frequent contacts with companies. 
198 
UK FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
UNITED KINGDOM 
Subject Summary Response 
2.5 Major Strengths and Universities believed UETPs strengths lay in their extensive 
Weaknesses of UETPs in contacts with other UK & EU UETPs, universities and enterprises. 
Member State Also, their commitment to industrial development and catalytic 
stimulation of university / industry interaction. Weakness lay in 
insufficient funding and sometimes in not being firmly enough 
linked into their own regional structures. 
For enterprises, UETPs' strengths lay in their ability to bring 
European organisations together and provide the latest on EU 
technology training activities. Also, the provision of European 
placement opportunities. The weakness lay in the lack of 
communality between sectoral and regional UETPs and the funding 
process which made long term planning difficult. Communication 
through promotion and publicity was poor. Low awareness of 
UETP existence. 
Regional UETPs saw their strengths as: networking, expertise in 
mobility programmes, links with the Commission, project manage­
ment, an access point for all to HEIs, enterprises and EC Pro­
grammes. Weakness were insufficient funding , dependence on EC 
funding and inability to generate other funding, difficulty in 
retaining industry's interest, being all things to all, etc. 
Sectoral UETPs strengths included; a clear mission, good support 
from HEIs, industry and EC. expertise in EC funding and project 
management. Weaknesses included; relatively poor industry links 
and a poor commercial orientation as well as poor links with some 
countries. 
3.1 Contribution of Mobility Just over half the Universities believed student placements had 
Actions to Innovations in contributed to such innovation. 
University / Enterprise Co- Two thirds of enterprises felt that they had benefited from having 
operation the placement; breaking down national barriers and opening up 
marketing opportunities as well as the specific technical element 
contributed. 
85 % of regional UETPs felt that student placements had contrib­
uted to innovation: establishing new links, increasing interest and 
demand for students, linking companies to new markets, benefiting 
universities and linking enterprises to a large pool of well moti­
vated students, etc. 
3.2 Modification of Policies Half the universities modified policies or practices ranging from 
and Practices to Facilitate greater academic recognition for placements to modification of 
Exchanges placement procedures. 
Half the firms surveyed had made modifications. 
About three-quarters of UETPs thought universities and enterprises 
had made such modifications: flexibility in course design, assist­
ance to lecturers in visiting students abroad, insurance policies, 
better language preparation, etc. Enterprises had become more 
flexible in planning and defining work programmes, etc. 
199 
UK FINAL NATIONAL EVALUATIONS OF THE COMETT PROGRAMME 
UNITED KINGDOM 
Subject Summary Response 
4.1 Generating Innovative Universities were evenly divided as to whether COMETT had 
Modes of Collaboration in made innovative contributions. 
Training Course Develop- 70 % of firms thought COMETT had made little or no impact in 
ment innovation. 
Of UETPs, only 16 % of regional and 57 % of sectoral UETPs 
thought that some or a great deal had been achieved. This failure 
was due to insufficient Strand C funding and lack of availability of 
SME staff time. 
4.2 Contribution to Improve- Universities were evenly divided as to whether COMETT had 
ment in Supply of Technol- contributed. 
ogy - Related Training In terms of quantity or quality of training, enter prises felt that 
COMETT had made little or no contribution. 
About half the UETPs felt that COMETT had made a contribution 
to quantity and quality through access to a wider group of experts, 
adding European value, levering other funding, etc. 
4.3 Complementing / Universities were evenly divided as to whether COMETT had 
Strengthening Training contributed. 
Initiatives at National Level 59 % of firms felt that COMETT complemented their own training 
activities. 
Sectoral UETPs were more positive than regional UETPs: 57 % 
thought some or a great deal had been contributed. 
4.4 Other Points Raised Conclusion: ... the COMETT programme (has) generally been 
successful in helping to increase awareness of Europe in education 
and training... (but) has been very modest in scope when compared 
with complementary regional and national actions.. The main value 
added by COMETT has been to open up the practice of placements 
to a wider range of companies.... It has also helped to establish 
new contacts between universities in this country and companies in 
other Member States or in EFTA countries. 
The UK Government's Final Evaluation Report was undertaken by surveying and reporting separately the 
views of universities, enterprises, UETPs and pilot project co-ordinators. The Survey response is given as 
three separate responses 1. = Universities, 2. = Enterprises, 3. = UETPs. 
200 

ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(96) 410 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 16 15 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-408-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-07788-7 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg 
5.1