Among the setbacks which Covid19 has imposed on people can be considered travelling. Though not the most concerning and dangerous matter compared to a pandemic, however local and above all international mobility was restrained and interrupted for some period. This has heavily affected the implementation of EU projects, especially concerning activities where the movement was not an option. We all had to find alternatives to transnational Partners’ meetings, training activities, and focus groups, to research events that implied gathering or meeting people. This is when we came up with digital tools which enabled substantially not to interrupt the project (eventually asking for procrastination of some activities) and transform gatherings, educational, and research events into digital encounters. This has lasted for several months (years?) and all project managers have found ways to cope with the new “online working method” that the virus has imposed on us.
Not travelling and sublimating the expected mobility with digital tools has made our professional activity frustrating, less effective with regards to meetings, and exhausting, but at the same time also convenient due to the critical aspects of travelling which have been quoted in a recent article.
When the travelling restrictions were lifted getting back to “normal mobility” was difficult and many project managers have procrastinated the moment to get back on a plane. Meetings have still dealt with digital tools from a distance, and training has been discovered being also effectively done remotely since in the last few years everything became digital, educational paths included.
Two trends about travelling for project events
As an outcome, we feel that a couple of trends have been developed, and we do not agree with them.
EU executive authorities and transnational agencies have realised that the hindrance of travelling has not stopped projects to be finalised and products to be delivered. Therefore, an implicit message has been conveyed about the opportunity to reduce, if not almost abolish, the travelling for meetings and other gatherings which were not considered so fundamental anymore. Besides having perceived this during info days, the way new budget schemes are due now (we refer to E+ in this case) transmits the idea that there are no relevant costs available for transferring people for onsite meetings.
A second unfortunate trend is that the Covid experience has convinced many organisations to avoid travelling and ask to transfer, at the time of final reporting, the budget for mobilities in staff costs. In the case of lump sums and in particular for countries in which the staff cost is quite small transferring the potential expenses of a trip into salary might be convenient.
What are the consequences of these choices?
The outcome is that despite travelling having gone back to normal and meetings or training having been scheduled on-site, several project managers decide not to travel, thus unavoidably transforming partners’ onsite gatherings into blended ones. Thus, for working gatherings, we have people in a room, and others on…. Zoom.
Useless to say, this complicates on one side the fruitful and pleasant outcome of joint working moments along with the loss of the necessarily extended presence time typical for effective team building and quality professional life. These elements put extra effort into project managers: on the one attending on-site encounters by addressing a double-shaped working group, and dialectic discussions with people in remote, technical matters that do not always support smooth communication. For the ones who stayed at home, this might be tackling their attention span, on distractions or deflections, that might play a role in concentration, creativity, and productivity.
What are possible solutions?
We like to support the allowance for mobilities to happen in practice, despite the efforts involved. Every organisation shall feel committed to attending onsite events (meetings, training, research actions) for the sake of the quality work of consortia along with the quality of the project products. If partners feel the challenges of the expected mobilities, possible solutions could be to send only one representative (instead of possibly two) to the event, perhaps alternating project managers working on a project. Furthermore, we might propose to arrange ahead of time reservations and bookings to be able to spend the least time on means and be absent the minimum time from the office. Well-in advance planning of trips may possibly save money and be less of a financial burden for partners. Finally, scheduling meetings close to weekends can allow travellers to spend extra time at their destination for sightseeing and tourism purposes, which might compensate for the extra discomfort imposed by mobilities. Some project managers like, at times, to be accompanied by their partners and enjoy their free time abroad while not being on duty, thus killing two birds with one stone.
So, for us, the Shakespearian Hamletic doubt has an answer. No matter which option you prefer, emphasise the onsite presence to project works even if this implies dealing with the hassles of travelling and missing from the office. We strongly believe that project managers profit from life encounters and consequently projects benefit from the quality of the team working process.