New process of delegation for research contracts
Previously, the process of delegation for research contracts at KTH was perceived as unclear, mainly by researchers and support staff but also by decision-makers. However, following a revision, the new process is set to increase clarity and optimise the process, as well as facilitate decision-making.
Before, the signing of almost all research related contracts was delegated by the President to the Vice-President for Research, who would then sub-delegate separately, while some contracts were directly delegated to school principals. This process was perceived to be unclear, and you were forced to consult and compare several documents before you got it right. The newly drawn-up process of delegation now specifies a direct delegation from the President to the Vice President for Research, to the Head of the Research Support Office (RSO) or to a school head, who in turn all have the possibility of sub-delegating certain tasks to the Prefect.
Annika Stensson Trigell, Professor and Vice President for Research has experience of working with both the old and the new delegation process.
“The hope is that it’ll be both clearer and easier to manage research contracts because now everything is in one document. The process of delegation has a new structure with a clearer table of contents and numbered sections, all of which provides a better overview and facilitates referrals.”
Can you name something that is new or has been changed in the new process of delegation? “We have raised the amount for sub-delegation from school head to prefect for contract research to five million. In order to prevent contracts being signed without preparation or a legal review, we have created an administrative system that describes the administration procedures for research contracts, and included that as an addendum to the delegation,” says Annika Stensson Trigell.
As part of the update, you’ve also focused on contracts of ‘principle importance’. Tell us more! “Yes, this is about how we should manage questions of ‘principle importance’ and define what ends up within that framework. By contracts of ‘principle importance’ we mean, for example, contracts that may be of strategic importance for the university’s research, education or collaboration and contracts that may incur a high security or economic risk, or which could jeopardize the university’s reputation or the KTH brand. Contracts that may be of principle importance for KTH are to be submitted to the President. The important thing is that everyone has the responsibility to ask someone who is more acquainted with the subject if you are unsure.”
Text: Annelie Englund