euprio

Véronique ÉloyPaolo Pomati

a 25-yearsuccessstory

euprio

Véronique ÉloyPaolo Pomati

a 25-yearsuccessstory

TextsVéronique ÉloyPaolo PomatiLayout and compositionStefano BodaLeonardo D’AmicoRevisionLaura BlakeChristopher CoeMartin HerremaNic MitchellPrinting and bindingAtelijeur Půda, Prague, Czech Republic

Cover image: D. Sharon Pruitt

All rights reserved according to legislation in force© 2011, EUPRIOPrague, August 2011

3THE AUTHORS’ WORD

The task to collect a 25-year mass of information in an organic form was not easy and requiredabout two years. Enthusiasm is a great virtue, but when we started to wonder where we couldfind the documents of EUPRIO history, our smile turned into fear.!ere was no archive; if we were

lucky, the past presidents could have kept some documents. We began to call each of them and this wasanother di"cult task, because the majority were retired, with no institutional email to use. !e Internetsearch engines are definitely precious and e#ective; in reasonable time we contacted all of them and wethought that the worst was over. No such luck, however.

!e documents were extremely poor and scattered, with no logical thread. At least we got theConstitution Act, the first Network Bulletins, the first speech and press release; but we were far fromreconstructing the entire history. Véronique had a genial intuition: Professor Marcel de Cleene, the formernational representative of Belgium, should have kept some papers of the past.We called him and the (almost)complete collection of the Steering Committee’s minutes and of the Conferences’ brochures from 1990 to2005 appeared out of the blue. We were in the seventh heaven; we could go on working seriously.

After a systematic analysis of the papers, we decided the tone and the layout of the book. We realizedthat history and the outstanding personalities of the past presidents were deeply united; we therefore choseto divide the book into chapters corresponding to the various chairmanships and we asked the pastpresidents to write a personal intervention. Each chapter, therefore, consists of the historian’s angle, thepresident’s word and some other interesting contributions that we found here and there. In particular, weheavily quoted Alf McCreary’s essay Success Story.!e History of EUPRIO, published on theNetwork Bulletin,February 1999.

While passing these proofs for the press, we would like to emphasize that our intention is not onlycelebratory. For the members the 25th anniversary is time of joy and feast, but, re-reading the entire story,there are good grounds to reflect on the future of EUPRIO, an association which intends to be protagonistin Europe permanently.

Lastly, let us express our special thanks to many people who helped us during these two years.First, thanks to Lauris Beets, Anne Lonsdale, Inge Knudsen and Jean-Pierre Grootaers, for their kind

cooperation and encouragement to embark on such an ambitious project. Next, we thank all the formerpresidents for their enthusiasm to contribute to the book by writing down their memories: Ray Footman,Alf McCreary, Wim Janssen, Ingeborg Christensen, Rolf Guggenbühl, Peter Reader and Peter Van Dam.!en, a special thank to Martin Herrema, Laura Blake, Christopher Coe and Nic Mitchell for their carefuladvice and revision of the book. We are grateful to Stefano Boda and Leonardo D’Amico for the layoutand to Alexandra Hroncova for the contacts with the publisher. Millions of thanks to Marcel de Cleenefor his personal archive, to Alessandro Ciarlo for his pictures and to Edoardo Brioschi for his oral memories.And, finally, thanks to all those who helped us by sending pictures and papers of all kinds.

Happy birthday, EUPRIO!

VÉRONIQUE ÉLOY, Facultés Universitaires Saint-Louis Bruxelles, BelgiumPAOLO POMATI, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro”, Italy

4

THE LOGO

The name European UniversitiesPublic Relations and InformationOfficers Association and theacronym EUPRIO were proposedby Jean-Pierre Grootaers duringone of the association founders’informal night meetings layingthe foundations of the risingassociation.

After the group of founderssigned the agreement aboutEUPRIO in 1986, Jean-PierreGrootaers asked Philippe Le Roy,a member of his Press andInformation Department whoused to do a lot of design work forthe Catholic University ofLeuven, to make some proposalsfor a EUPRIO logo. The logo heproposed at that time still standsofficially for the association.

EUPRIO OR THE WAY OF SCIENCE COMMUNICATIONan introduction by

Jean Pierre GrootaersKatholieke Universiteit Leuven

n the home page ofEUPRIO’s Web site Ifound the followingquote:“Communication, in thebroadest sense, has thetask of supporting the

successful development of the highereducation system and helping to make itsperformances accessible and sustainable forthe society, hence to contribute to Europe as acompetitive and dynamic knowledge-driveneconomy in the global perspective. EUPRIOshares this mission.”

To understand better the reasons whywe took the initiative of funding EUPRIO,it is necessary to stress that in the seventies(of the last century) “communication” didnot matter at all at most of the Europeanuniversities. Most of them did not evenhave a “communication’’, or ”information“department as part of their generaladministration; or possibly just as a part ofanother department, very often under theumbrella of a broader and more seriousresponsibility. Communications, as anadult management discipline within theorganisation of a university (and even aprivate company) was not an importantissue as it is today.

6

Academic staff members, scientists,faculties or labs were not aware of theimportant role of communication. Theirscientific efforts and results, the outcomeof their work and research did not belongto the public forum – in their mind atleast! Science information as a mediadiscipline got little attention in most ofthe media so there was no need tocommunicate.

The general interest paid tocommunications as an importantmanagement topic even in the privatesector was very low. Communication andinformation matters, in most of theseorganisations (private and public) werepart of the work of the generaladministrator, the HR-department or, inthe best cases, the Public Relationsdepartment, a relatively new disciplinethat came over to Europe from the USA inthe beginning of the fifties, especially inthe private industry.

When I started my career at theCatholic University of Leuven as “directorof the Press and Information Office”, Ihad to prove the added value of this “new”management domain to the universitycommunity . So I contacted some Flemishcolleagues who were also in charge of a

O

7

more or less similar management domainwithin the field of information,communication, Public Relations.

This was the start of COVONU (Collegeof Information Officers of the Dutchspeaking universities in Belgium). Atabout the same time I became a memberas the only Belgian representative, at thesame “college” for the Dutch universities.And to be honest, I have to admit that myDutch colleagues at that time, weresomewhat advanced in this particularaspect of scientific communication andinformation matters, compared to thesituation in Flanders. And on the otherhand we were not aware of the situation inthis particular PR-Communications fieldat other European universities, although inthe UK and in some European countriesat that time our colleagues had a formalor informal organisation where they metand exchanged their needs, their views anddifficulties.

So we developed an informal networkof contacts, exchanges, experiences andpersonal friendships between the membersof the Dutch and the Flemish colleges.Friendship and good bi-lateral contactsbetween Lauris Beets and myself initiatedfruitful discussions. One of thosediscussions led to the idea to extend ourgood Dutch and Flemish contacts to abroader European perspective.

In order to feel the interest of otherEuropean colleagues, we contacted Anne

Lonsdale, Ray Footman and others. We(some Belgians) went to Edinburgh to seeRay Footman, and Lauris and myself wentalso to Oxford where we met AnneLonsdale and Cambridge. Ray and Annewere enthusiastic, our colleague inCambridge was not so much! Then ourBritish professionals invited us to theirregular meetings at the University ofReading. Lauris Beets and I explained ouridea for a broader European organisationto them. This was the real start of EUPRIO.It strengthened our conviction that we hadto continue our efforts. After somediscussions with the representative of theEEC (nowadays the EU) in Brussels, we getnot only the moral but also the financialsupport to our idea.

The official foundation of EUPRIO wasnot immediate however, but it was quiteusual in this kind of Europeancooperation at that time. I have tomention that at the beginning of theeighties some of the founding fathers (andmothers) also created the Coimbra Group,but this initiative has been taken over bythe academics and it is another story.

It was the beginning of the eighties:indeed a very fruitful period in terms ofinter-university European cooperation andthe start of a long way to the fantasticcommunication and information reality oftoday, not only at University but in thesociety as a whole.

22nd Annual Conference, 2010. The Rotunda Hall at Hotel Regina Palace in Stresa (Italy).

LEONARDO D’AMICO

1986LaurisBeets

Universiteit LeidenThe Netherlands

10

eeling the need for moreco-operation andcommunicationbetween those engagedin public relations,information andcommunication in

European higher education institutions,seven people from Belgium, France,Germany, Great Britain, Ireland and theNetherlands draw up a note in September1985 to start discussion and action in thisfield.

The seven signatures were LaurisBeets, head of Information Service at theUniversity of Leiden, Jürgen Bockling,head of Information at the University ofMunster, Jean-Pierre Dhoury,Information and Communication officerat the University of Compiègne, RayFootman, director of Information and PRServices at the University of Edinburgh,

Jean-Pierre Grootaers, director of PublicRelations at the Catholic University ofLeuven, Anne Lonsdale, Informationofficer at the University of Oxford andCharles O’Rourke, Information officer atthe University College of Dublin.

The paper issued by this group ofactive thinkers reflected their personalviews as well as informal discussions with awider number of colleagues.

It laid the foundations for thecreation of EUPRIO – an organisationwhere matters of interest to professionalsworking in higher education PublicRelations and information inside theEuropean Community could bediscussed and acted upon.

The starting point was that universitieshad been growing since the end of theWorld War II and needed to developexternal and internal communication and

FA view of Leiden (the Netherlands). The bridge between the Alkmaart and the Apothekersdijk.

PAUL

INE

SEIF

FERT

11

employ specialists to professionalise thedissemination of information.

The range of objectives and the varietyof activities to promote the differentaspects of universities had increased tosuch an extent that public relations andinformation staff understood they neededto professionalise their activities.

“Their objective in carrying outexternal communications programmesrange from an acknowledgment of socialresponsibility – to make the findings ofuniversity teaching and research availableto the wider community – through a needto effect science and technology transfer,thereby stimulating industry andemployment, to the achievement ofindividual institutional goals – such asstudent recruitment and the securing offinancial and community support for theiradvanced teaching, research andscholarship.” (from An association ofUniversity Information and Public RelationsOfficers for Europe).

To help the process ofprofessionalising the informationand PR role, people from a

number of countries began to meetinformally to exchange their experienceand discuss matters of interest for theirown institutions.

However, the context was beginning tochange.

Europe itself was still growing, but atthe time it was not possible to extend thePR work outside national boundariesbecause of a lack of knowledge of oneanother’s context and other educationalsystems. This made it almost impossible tocompare ways of promoting research orthe achievements of a member stateuniversity in the media.

These preliminary discussions betweenuniversity information specialists fromsome member states concluded that itcould be useful to establish some kind ofCommission-supported Community-wideuniversity public relations programme.

The overall aims would be:a. to establish a European Associationof individual universityinformation/PR offices to promoteexchange of ideas and techniquesbetween its members and those whomay consult it;b. to help facilitate intra-European

awareness of study programmes andscientific developments – includingthose sponsored by the Communityand, more generally, those of relevanceto industry and economic advance –across national boundaries;c. to promote dissemination ofinformation on – and thereby thestanding of – European highereducation, research and developmentbeyond the Community’s ownboundaries.The paper suggested the Commission

could help achieve these aims with modestsupplementary support.

At the time there was considerableinterest on communicating the scientificresults of universities in the media,particularly in the field of applied sciences.However, the tendency was for the press toconcentrate on research conducted bylocal institutions and by those in theirown country.

When they had to cover “foreign”science developments, they tended tofocus on more distant countries, such asthe USA rather than European research.

In order to reverse this tendency,the Commission was approachedto support the development of a

European network which would makebetter use of the existing public relationsand information staff and improve thepromotion of European study andresearch programmes.

So it was proposed to create anassociation of University Information andPR Officers, with a small unit devoted toits maintenance. The person in charge ofthis unit would be a professional in thefield of communication, have a goodbackground knowledge of universitystructures, and be acquainted withpublicising scientific research. Supportingstaff for translations were also needed.

The unit would act as a central clearinghouse for information. National PR andinformation officers would be encouragedto send the unit their written andphotographic material on thedevelopments of scientific research in theiruniversities, including research based onCommunity’s programmes.

The unit would maintain a list of themajor news media in European countriesand ensure the dissemination of research

12

to undertake by individual institutionsdue to lack of resources.

A last function of the unit would be tosponsor, from time to time, meetings ofPR staff to share knowledge andexperience of techniques in promotingscientific developments.

On 7th February 1986, just fivemonths after the original paperhad been issued, Jean-Pierre

Grootaers met Mr Bock from DG XII inBrussels, to discuss the possibility ofsetting up an association of universityPublic Relations and information officers.

Three months later, on 12th-13th May1986, the Steering Group of the futureassociation met in Brussels after aninformal meeting at the University ofLeuven the previous evening, whichallowed new members to meet each otherin more relaxed surroundings.

The Brussels meeting provided theopportunity to widen the group andwelcome new members from Denmark,Luxembourg, Spain, Portugal, Italy andGreece. Everyone was asked to give theirpoint of view on the aims of the associationas outlined in the paper issued by thefounder-members in September 1985.

to these media, encouragingthem to publicise theseinternational scientific results.

The unit was envisaged asproviding centralised supportfor individual university PRofficers who would rely on itto establish and publish a

European Directory ofUniversity Information and PR

services, to be used, among others, byEuropean media.

The unit would centralise informationon European media and key contactsamong European based offices of overseasmedia.

The visibility of European study andscience programmes, such as ESPRIT, was tobe increased by publishing a newsletter.This would tell universities about thepossibilities these programmes offered interms of developing science as well asencouraging media coverage of universityresearch carried out under theseprogrammes.

The unit would also undertake marketresearch in the field of scientific researchand research on the effectiveness of PRtechniques. At the time this was difficult

European Association of PublicRelations and InformationOfficers established.The formation of the association“European University PublicRelations and Information Officers”(EUPRIO) is announced today at aconference of Ministers ofEducation of the EuropeanCommunity and representatives ofthe Commission, under thechairmanship of Minister Deetman.EUPRIO’s aims are twofold: first, toserve as a professional associationfor colleagues from the HigherEducation Institutions of the EC;secondly, in an instrumental role, toassist the Commission to target andspeed up the information-flowabout programmes of research and

studentmobility, both fromBrussels to the universities andwithin the universities themselves.EUPRIO can also provide feedback onthe success of these programmes.The new association can also playthis instrumental role for theliaison-committee of rectors.EUPRIO as a professional organisationwill offer its members a network ofuniversity links throughout theCommunity. It will undertakeresearch in the field of PR-projects,and will publish the results atregular meetings to be held ontopics of common interest. The firstof these will be the coverage ofEuropean scientific achievements inthe press andmediawithin the ECandworldwide. The Europeanscientific tradition is exceptional,

which is too often obscured by themedia in the competition with thecoverage given to the USA or Japan.EUPRIO first chairman, Lauris Beets ofthe University of Leiden, said: “Weare grateful for the opportunity toannounce the formation of EUPRIO atthis conference of Ministers ofEducation. Universities have threeimportant functions: they are thekey innovators for the future, theguardians of the past and theinstructors of the next generation.We are sure that EUPRIO’s potentialfor advancing Europeanconsciousness in these keyinstitutions will justify theprominence it is being given today”.

13

An important task for this meeting wasdrafting a set of proposals to be sent to theEEC as well as to the nationalorganisations and governments ofparticipating universities. These proposalswere to set out the aims of the futureassociation, its management and structure,its role regarding the EEC, and othermatters of importance. Finally, themeeting would also cover plans for furtherdevelopments of the association and itsvaluable European dimension.

Activities planned included surveys ofdifferent methods of promoting universities

and proposals for a regular newsletter.A few days after this important meeting

in Brussels and Leuven, a press release wasissued, announcing the creation of theEuropean Association of University PublicRelations and Information Officers,EUPRIO.

At the same time, the creation ofEUPRIO was announced at a pressconference of the Education Ministers ofthe Community in The Hague (TheNetherlands), on 16th May 1986. LaurisBeets, the first chairman of EUPRIO, gavethe audience the first official speech.

I have the honour to announce to you that this week aEuropean association of University Public Relations andInformation O!cers has been established. "is association hasbeen formed by Public Relations and Information O!cers ofuniversities in the di#erent member states, who have agreed theaims and the organisation of the association.

Of course, this association is most relevant to those directlyconcerned: the public relations and information o!cers. We thinkhowever that this association, once started, will have much morefar-reaching e#ects. Why is an association for European UniversityPublic Relations and Information O!cers (EUPRIO) necessary?

Why EUPRIO?"e expansion of universities in the post-World War II period

has been accompanied by a growing realisation of the need bothto improve internal communications within enlarged universityinstitutions and to explain to a wider series of external publics theethos, objectives and achievements of university-based teachingand research.

In due course this has led to the employment of specialistcommunications sta# in most major institutions – and increasinglyalso at smaller ones – to try to ensure that internal and externaldissemination of information is e#ected professionally.

"e title and detailed remit of individual Public Relations /information o!cers – and the extent to which they focus uponparticular target audiences – can vary considerably from universityto university. However, at minimum, there is generally a commoncommitment to an improved internal information flow and toe#ective external communication of university activities –particularly through the press and media – to the general publicand sub-sections of it such as industry and commerce, localcommunities, environmental interests, government, schools, andso on. In the eighties, whatever the exact scope of individualPublic Relations / information o!cers’ responsibilities, a majorpart of their work is concerned – given in particular the

14

importance of economic considerations. "eir objectives incarrying out external communications programmes range froman acknowledgement of social responsibility – to make thefindings of university teaching and research available to the widercommunity – through a need to e#ect science and technologytransfer, thereby stimulating industry and employment, to theachievement of individual institutional goals – such as studentrecruitment & the securing of financial and community supportfor their advanced teaching, research and scholarship.

In trying to help achieve this wide range of objectives,individual Public Relations and information sta# have increasinglysought to professionalize their activities. A key role in this processhas been the growing informal co-operation between colleagues indi#erent university institutions who, in a number of countries,now meet together informally to brief themselves on relevantdevelopments, to exchange experience and professional PRtechniques and initiatives and to e#ect training programmesdesigned to improve internal and external communications fortheir colleagues within universities.

However, the context within which individual Europeanuniversity Public Relations / information o!cers operate has beenchanging."e formation and enlargement of the EC, followed bythe introduction of European-wide Community programmes inareas such as sciences and technology or joint study, has not yetbeen matched by a mechanism to permit the extension ofuniversity PR / information work across national boundarieswithin the EC. "ere is, at base level, a lack of knowledge ofcomparative systems of higher education within EC countries,matched by a lack of knowledge about, for example, how topublicise e#ectively the achievements of universities in onemember state in the press and media of another.

Science coverage in and outside Europe"e activities of EUPRIO will be concentrated on central themes.

"e fist theme will be “Science coverage in and outside Europe”.Although, as far as we can see, no research on a European scale hasbeen done on this subject (which means that there are no objectivefacts available), it is our impression that in Europe sciencecoverage is almost entirely national in character. "ere is nocommon infrastructure of universities to stimulate European-widecoverage of important scientific news. And the coverage ofEuropean scientific news in other parts of the world – USA, Japan,Developing countries – has not so far been a concern of theuniversities in Europe.

Europe has an exceptional scientific tradition, and one that isvery valuable – yet the valuable aspects of European Science seemto be too often obscured by the media in competition with thecoverage given to the USA or Japan. I believe that the universitiesin the member states of the European community have here animportant task, that can only be undertaken if they have the rightto professional skills. Here, EUPRIO can play an important anddecisive role.

EUPRIO Professional and InstrumentalEUPRIO is a professional association for colleagues from the

Higher Education Institutions of the EC. "is association ofprofessionals intends to publish a newsletter, undertake researchin the field of PR-projects, and organise meetings to discuss the

15

result of this research."e association hopes to set up a secretariat,where colleagues can obtain information, not only on universityPR and information, but also on other important developmentsof universities in Europe or on programmes of the Commission ofrelevance for universities.

Apart from this professional aspect, we propose to give EUPRIOan instrumental role as well. "e association can assist theCommission to target and speed up the information-flow aboutprogrammes of research and student mobility, both from Brusselsto the universities and within the universities themselves. EUPRIOcan also provide feedback on the success of these programmes.

"ere is, in Brussels, a lack of coordination between severalparts of the administration in sending of information to theuniversities. Several EC-institutions send information to di#erentpoints in the universities without a common strategy. Informationfrom the Commission in some cases has to be “translated” for itto be able to play its proper role.

We are sure that EUPRIO can be of real assistance to theCommission here. And EUPRIO can also, we think, play thisinstrumental role for the Liaison-Committee of Rectors to assistwith the information it sends to the universities and the generalpublic, and help with the setting up of a PR-programme.

We are grateful for the opportunity to announce the formationof EUPRIO at this conference of Ministers of Education.Universities have three important functions: they are the keyinnovators for the future, the guardians of the past and theinstructors of the next generation. We are sure that EUPRIO ’spotential for advancing European consciousness in these keyinstitutions will justify the prominence it is being given today.

It is for me therefore an honour to present to you, MrDeetman and Mr Marin Gonzales, an outline of our plans.

The Atomium in Brussels designed by AndréWaterkeyn, with its steel spheres.

LEONARDOD’AMICO

16

The association of EuropeanUniversity PR and InformationOfficers was formed on 12thMay 1986. It was announcedto the public at a pressconference of EducationMinisters of the EC at TheHague. It was founded withthe financial support of the EC,that was seeking acommunication networkbased in Brussels which wouldinform universities about ECprogrammes, especiallyERASMUS.However there was a certaincoolness from severalmembers of the Rectors’Conference who felt that thisupstart EUPRIO was meddlingwhere it did not belong.Happily, such medievalattitudes were ignored.The main objectives were topromote the exchange ofideas and to create a

framework to assist members intheir work, to facilitateawareness of studyprogrammes and scientificdevelopments across Europeand to further the reputation ofhigher education in Europe.Some twelve years later, theseobjectives had not changed.EUPRIO in those days wassomewhat exclusive ‒ itgranted full membership onlyto those directly involved full-time in PR and informationwork. Assistant membershipwas available “for thoseinterested but not directlyinvolved”, and those engagedoutside the EC on similaractivities were grantedassociate membership. Theannual subscription of only 35ECU was paid directly toBrussels.EUPRIO had some difficulty inestablishing itself. Money wasso scarce that the original

members of the Executive paidtheir own way to Europeanmeetings.In 1986 the EC funds helped topay for a study tour to Reading,where the UK universities wereholding their annualconference of SCUIO-theStanding Committee ofUniversity Information Officers.It took over two years for this“missionary” work to bear fruit.

—AlfMcCrearySuccess Story. The History of EUPRIO,in Network Bulletin, February 1999.

From May 1986 onwards, EUPRIO wasestablished as a network to help enhancethe role of people working in PublicRelations and communications in highereducation institutions in Europe.

In the beginning, it would focus strictlyon EC member states. Progressively, itextended to Europe as a geographic whole,including Central and Eastern Europe.

In the first years, membership was onlypossible on an individual basis andreserved to those principally concernedwith higher education information andPublic Relations.

Activities were co-ordinated by aSteering Committee includingrepresentatives from all major WesternEuropean countries. EUPRIO was holdingan annual conference and publishing a bi-annual newsletter, a membership andEuropean universities directory, and even adirectory of European media contacts. Ithad a Web site with directories and newson conferences.

EUPRIO had a purely professional roleamongst its own members, but wasplaying an instrumental role in relation tothe work of the Liaison Committee ofEuropean Rectors and the EuropeanCommission."e association was helpingdisseminate information on studyprogrammes and scientific developments,including those launched and sponsoredby the European Community, especially if

they were relevant to industry andeconomics. It was also involved withpromoting European higher education,science, research and development outsideEurope.

In July 1986 an agreement was signedbetween EUPRIO and the EuropeanInvestment Bank. According to thisagreement, EUPRIO would undertake todeliver a list of all university institutions inthe EC, as well as a list of nationaljournalists in EC countries dealing withfinancial and economics matters andcontact addresses. In return, the EuropeanInvestment Bank would undertake to pay3,200 ECU for these lists.

"e lists provided by EUPRIO enabledthe European Investment Bank toadvertise their “1987 EuropeanInvestment Bank Prize”, which wasattributed to the best dissertation on atopic of investment and its finance, bymeans of a mailing sent to academicinstitutions in the European Community.

"is was the first time EUPRIO had beeninvolved in such a project and the follow-up of the European Investment Bankmailing would be a test enabling theassociation to measure its e#ectiveness.

Page 17: the first president Lauris Beets,the first treasurer Jean-Pierre Grootaers,

the first secretary / second presidentAnne Lonsdale.

17

Back in the early eighties we started thinking about foundingan association for university PR and information officers.We being Anne Lonsdale (Oxford), Jean-Pierre Grootaers

(Leuven) and Lauris Beets (Leiden). In those days we were young,ambitious and beautiful.

In 1986, we became the first secretary, treasurer, and president.Soon after our first discussions, and before our election, othercolleagues, including Ray Footman (Edinburgh), CharlesO'Rourke (Dublin), Jürgen Bockling (Münster) and Jean-PierreDhoury (Compiègne) joined us.

Today, the three founders of those days are busy with othermatters, much, much older, some even retired, not so ambitious,and maybe not as beautiful.

With the help of the present president and chair of the historyworking group, we met again in July 2010 in Brussels, togetherwith Inge Knudsen, who represented Aarhus in the first meetingof the Steering group and today she lives in Brussels and works forthe Coimbra Group. It was great fun to meet again since we hadnot seen each other for a long time.

We were of course very much impressed and pleased that the“baby” we once created is not only still alive, but is doing verywell. Starting with a handful of members – in fact only themembers of the first steering committee – there are now morethan 600 paying-members, an active executive board, conferences,a Web site and even a legal charter.

And of course, the baby grew up, made its own choices in thelight of changed situations and the wishes of its members.

Anne, Jean-Pierre and Lauris met in 1985 and 1986 severaltimes in Brussels, Leuven and Oxford, preparing our foundation;and in close contact with Franz-Peter Kupper from theCommission. Ray Footman was also involved in thesepreparations. Thanks to the British colleagues, we also attended ameeting in Reading of their national group, SCUIO, which was alsohelpful.

One of the issues that kept us busy was to find a propername for the foundation. It was finally in a pub, late inthe evening, that Jean-Pierre created the acronym

EUPRIO. We agreed by loud acclamation. The logo that is still inuse was then made for us by a professional in Leuven.

The first informal meeting of the steering committee tookplace in Leuven by invitation of Jean-Pierre Grootaers. Thanks toFranz-Peter Kupper, most of the EU-countries were present. Annewelcomed all colleagues present with a beautiful speech, but hadto deplore the absence of the Greek colleague who was not allowedto leave his country for political reasons.

The next day we had our first official meeting in Brussels,where we decided to establish EUPRIO, agreed about our activitiesand chose the composition of the first executive board.

Why did we want to establish EUPRIO?The reason why we founded EUPRIO is still sharp in our

memories. We wanted, firstly, to expand our professional networkin order to share experiences better and to learn from each other:what dilemmas are we facing? what communication-techniquesdo we use?

18

Being mostly busy “at home” in our universities and having, atthe most, professional contacts with colleagues in the samecountry, it seemed to us useful to be able to share experiences withcolleagues all over Europe. One of our most important goals was,therefore, to create a clearing house.

In our first paper leading to the establishment of EUPRIO, wewrote the following: “The purpose of the clearing house is toprovide an information-base for information exchange within theuniversity system which can also act as a source of informationfor research work across such fields as access by the localcommunity to their universities, or the approaches of differentuniversities to the developing of contacts with industry. Thisaspect of its work will, we believe, be of use to the EC also. Weshould try to have somebody of our own in Brussels who canmaintain the activities of the clearing house. The role of theclearing house must be defined. It will have the following fields ofinterest, at least initially: schools, local community, industry,alumni, government, international relations within universitiesand the general public. (...) Each year the clearing house producesa report on one of the fields of interest.”

Another issue was science coverage in and outside Europe. Itwas our impression that research coverage in press was almostentirely national in character. There was no commoninfrastructure of universities to stimulate European-wide coverageof important research-news. And the coverage of this news inother parts of the world had not so far been a concern of mostuniversities in Europe.

To achieve a better European and global coverage of research-news, professional skills are needed: EUPRIO could play animportant and decisive role in this respect, or so we thought.

We furthermore thought that EUPRIO as an institutionshould be both professional and instrumental. As aprofessional association it intended to publish a

newsletter, undertake research in the field of PR-projects andorganise meetings. There should be a secretariat, where colleaguescould obtain information.

As an instrumental organisation, it should assist the EuropeanCommission to target and speed up the information-flow aboutprogrammes of research and student mobility, both from Brusselsto the universities and between the universities themselves. Andneedless to say: the instrumental role of EUPRIO would also be agood reason for the Commission to finance its activities.

Looking at the aim and goals of EUPRIO of 2010, one mightthink that nothing has really changed. The wording of the Missionof EUPRIO as published is very similar to what we were thinkingabout in the eighties! However, the same words sometimes hidedifferent realities...

Where are the differences? None of us three founders is todaystill involved in communications or information issues inuniversities, and we are therefore not capable of giving anauthoritative opinion about the evolution in the professional workof EUPRIO members nor to analyse the differences between thesituation in the eighties and today.

Seeing each other again after such a long time, we did, however,share our impressions about “us then” and “how it is now.”

19

The most obvious difference is probably a technical one: digitalways of communication like Internet, e-mail, etc. did not exist.We were in at the beginning of these new systems, but did notyet use them. But there is, for sure, much more to it than onlythe technical skills.

One major difference might be that we in those days – muchmore than today – were very keen to keep our own integrity in ourcommunication strategies. Only “clean” and factual informationwas allowed in our publications, “marketing” was almost a dirtyword – and some distance between us and the universitygovernment was therefore necessary.

Some of us were even trying to work under the umbrella ofour own unwritten agreements with our universities, such asjournalists have towards their editors in order to guarantee theintegrity of the messages they communicate. This drive toindependence and autonomy is, of course, to be seen in thecontext of the democratisation of universities in those days: thepower of students and the dominant role of democratic universitycouncils in the aftermath of the sixties revolutions.

As “oldies” and “children of our generation” we would becurious to know what communication principles are foremost inthe work of today's members of EUPRIO?

Our objectives in carrying out external communications werenot, in the first place, derived from the institutional strategy ofthe university – as they certainly are today – but were more of agoal in themselves.

Brussels, 2010. Ameeting of the authors of this book with the founders and first presidents.

EUPRIOARCHIVE

20

In the announcement of EUPRIO 's creation in May 1986the objectives of university public relations andinformation were described as follows: “The objectives (...)

range from an acknowledgement of social responsibility – tomake the findings of university teaching and research available tothe wider community – through a need to effect science andtechnology transfer, thereby stimulating industry andemployment, to the achievement of individual institutional goals– such as student recruitment and the securing of financial andcommunity support for their advanced teaching, research andscholarship.”

This wonderful sentence was written by Ray Footman andsubject to long and intensive discussions, where the majority atthe end – some with difficulties – accepted the last part aboutindividual institutional goals under the strict condition that theagreed main objective would be the acknowledgement of socialresponsibility. Is this still the communis opinio today? We do notthink so.

Regarding EUPRIO as an institution, we have the impressionthat the two “legs” of EUPRIO we described at the start – theprofessional and the instrumental one – are not in use any more.The “professional leg” has become predominant, and the“instrumental leg” in relation to the European Commissionseems to be almost non-existent. Membership of EUPRIO is alsoextended today to non EU-countries, and the close relation wehad with the European Commission has changed.

We hoped that through the financing of the “instrumentalleg” by the Commission, with the support of our “patron” Franz-Peter Kupper, the “professional leg” could be provided for free.Apparently this is certainly not the case today.

Looking at the size and the scope of today's EUPRIO, the leastone can conclude is that University PR and communications asa separate discipline still exists. In this respect there is nodifference with the situation in the eighties, and it is importantthat EUPRIO as a professional platform grew over the years to suchan extent. Let us hope the present generation, and thegenerations to come, will succeed in maintaining this disciplineas a separate one and will therefore continue to feel the need ofa strong and healthy EUPRIO!

— Lauris Beets, Anne Lonsdale, Jean-Pierre Grootaers

1987Anne

LonsdaleUniversity of OxfordUnited Kingdom

22

nne Lonsdale waschairman of EUPRIOfrom 1st January 1987to September 1987.

At that moment theassociation was based inBelgium because a bank

account had been opened at theKredietbank. It seemed also easier for thelegal status of the organisation to beestablished in Belgium. Therefore, it wassuggested that the next treasurer should bethe successor of Jean-Pierre Grootaers inthe Steering Committee, namely Fabiennede Strijker, from the University ofAntwerp. Fabienne de Strijker was the bestperson to carry on with the job as she hadbeen involved in EUPRIO since the verybeginning, when the idea of creating anorganisation such as EUPRIO was launchedat the time of the first Flemish UniversitiesInformation Officers’ visit abroad in 1983.

As a chairman, Anne Lonsdale set up aprogramme for the year 1987. It mainlyfocused on the relationships to beestablished between EUPRIO and theEuropean Community as well as variousEuropean institutions, on the funding ofEUPRIO, the communication of EUPRIO tothe public through a newsletter and thedifferent ways of recruiting members andsecuring enough members in the SteeringCommittee.

Between March and September 1987,EUPRIO was asked to join with the LiaisonCommittee of the Rectors’ Conference, aworking party set up by DG V of theCommission of the EuropeanCommunities. The theme of this workingparty was “Information Flows in relevantEuropean Programmes from theCommission to Member StatesUniversities”.

AA view fromOxford Cathedral, United Kingdom.W

WW

.TRA

VELJ

OURN

ALS.

NET

23

It was financed by the EuropeanCommission and was led by the LiaisonCommittee of European Rectors. It aimedat reporting on the methods by whichinformation could best be transferredbetween the Community institutions andthe higher education institutions in eachmember state and vice-versa.

They were expected to come up by thelate spring of 1987 with recommendationson the formulation of a systematicinformation strategy at the level ofCommunity institutions, LiaisonCommittee, National Rectors’Conferences and the universities.

EUPRIO agreed to cooperate with theLiaison Committee in this project becauseit reflected the kind of relationship theyhoped to continue to have with theRectors’ Conferences and they hoped thiswould be the beginning of continuedcooperation in which policy decisions oninformation strategies were taken by theRectors and implemented on their behalfby EUPRIO.

Among other matters, the resultsof the working party highlighteda lack of adequacy of the

information flow between theCommission and the universities.Information about Commissionprogrammes did not always reachuniversities of member States in the rightform and at the right time, so thatuniversity staff were not properlyinformed of the possibilities offered by theprogrammes.

A first draft report was prepared byInge Knudsen, following the analysis ofthe responses to a series of questionnairesfilled in by the Commission, Rectors’Conferences and individual institutions.The responses to the questionnaire showedthat the concern about inadequate

information flow was generally justified. Arevised draft was planned to be submittedto the Commission on 30th September,and to the Liaison Committee for its 20th

October Brussels meeting.An international colloquium on

“Science and the Public” was held inOxford in July 1987. This symposium wasan opportunity for researchers in the fieldof the public understanding of science todiscuss matters on informal learning aboutscience, science and the media, and publicperceptions of science and technology.

EUPRIO offered to cooperate in thiscolloquium and to join in some of thesessions which were of particular interestto the association. EUPRIO also took theopportunity to organise some sessions oftheir own in parallel, hoping that thiswould be a useful step in the definition oftheir first research topic on theimprovement of information flows aboutscience both within and outside theEuropean Community.

A subsidy from the EC was activelysought in order to enable EUPRIO membersto attend the meeting at lower cost. Sincethe subject was likely to interest all theinstitutions from which the membersdepended it was hoped that theuniversities would provide the rest of thefunding required. The chairman alsohoped that this symposium would givemembers of the Steering Committee theopportunity to meet and plan the work ofEUPRIO for the following year.

At the May 1986 meeting, it was notthought realistic to produce a professionalmagazine or journal without some centralstaffing and funding, which wereinexistent at the time. However, it wasdecided to try and produce a trial issue,that would take the shape of a periodicsimple A4 newssheet in English. The focus

When in 1987 EUPRIO was askedto join the project set up bythe Liaison Committee ofEuropean Rectors onInformation Flows betweenthe CEC and the institutions ofhigher education within theEC, we gladly accepted.One of the most importantfindings of the project was adefinition of the kind ofinformation needed ininstitutions of higher

education, summed up in whathas been called “The Four R’s”:Rapid, Regular, Relevant andReliable information.If universities are to joincooperation programmes,thereby contributing to theestablishing of the InternalMarket, “The Four R’s” areessential.If cooperation programmes inthe field of higher educationare to be extended to countries

outside the EC, informationnetworks are indispensable.

—Inge KnudsenNetwork Bulletin,March 1989

24

would be laid on short journalistic-stylearticles about Commission programmessuch as ERASMUS or ESPRIT, as well as onoccasional news about EUPRIOdevelopments and university informationfrom members’ countries.

This approach was likely to prove morepracticable and appealing to membersrather than a well designed and editoriallywide-ranging luxury magazine inmultilingual format. The result was thefirst EUPRIO Newsletter, which wasproduced by Ray Footman and CharlesO’Rourke in February / March 1987.

Regarding the organisation ofEUPRIO, some countries were notsufficiently represented in the

Steering Committee. Members wereneeded from Italy, Spain, Greece andFrance. In order to face this problem, aletter was sent to all Steering Committeemembers (26th February 1987) askingthem to approach potential members intheir countries, telling them the plans for1987 and showing them the immediatebenefits of membership, which were, atthat time, a newsletter, the possibility oftaking part in a working party encouragedby the International Rectors’ Conferencegroup (the Liaison Committee ofEuropean Rectors) and the EuropeanCommission – which could helpCommittee members in their relationswith their own Rectors in their ownuniversities – a cheaper price in attendinga conference on the public understandingof science and opportunities for informalcontacts between countries, as well asassistance to national groups that wouldlike to arrange international visits.

Anne Lonsdale reported that she wasexpecting little Commission support inthe long term if it was intended only formeetings. Nevertheless, EUPRIO was in realneed of some central funding in order tocontinue and develop in a more structuredway than simply setting up a series ofinformal international links. She thereforeproposed a list of initiatives, upon whichmembers showed their agreement. Shefirst suggested an approach to DG XII,with samples of the newly-updateduniversity PR and press contacts lists, tosolicit support for their subsequentupdating and distribution, in view of DGXII’s interest in further media coverage ofEuropean science.

Secondly, as it was anticipated DG Vwould show interest in trying to publicisethe next round of ERASMUS moreefficiently, she suggested to approach themshowing them the possibility for a EUPRIOnewsletter to help achieve their objective.A draft submission for Newsletter supportwas discussed and agreed on this basis.The submission also referred to theusefulness in the longer term of a well-edited and produced magazine that couldadvertise such programmes in Europeanuniversities.

Finally, she prepared an application tosupport two study visits, the first one toBenelux and Germany and the second tothe United-Kingdom and Ireland, for twodifferent groups of university PR stafffrom Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy.

Lists of university public relations andpress contacts had been prepared earlierfor a European Investment Bank contractin July 1986. There was a generalagreement on the necessity to update thoselists on an annual basis and to make themavailable to all registered members.

A study visit was carried through inGreece, with the help of an ERASMUSStudy Visit grant. Charles O’Rourke tookpart in this study visit, which indicatedlimited development of professionalpublic relations in the Greek universitysystem but allowed him to pick up a lot ofuseful information and potential contacts.The results of this study visit wereincorporated in the “Information FlowReport” of the Rectors’ LiaisonCommittee in October 1987.

19871989

IngeKnudsen

Aarhus UniversitetDenmark

26

ne of the highlights ofInge Knudsen’spresidency is theNetwork Bulletin. Thefirst issue is published inAarhus University inMarch 1989 thanks to a

grant from the ERASMUS Programme underAction IV. The Editorial Board iscomposed of Ray Footman, Alf McCreary,Charles O’Rourke and Inge Knudsen.

Five thousand print outs are issued.The first Network Bulletin is sent togetherwith a letter of introduction to the headsof institutions of higher education, askingthem to hand it over to people in chargeof information and PR.

For the production the cheapestpossible procedure has been adopted, firstof all by producing a tabloid-formatbulletin, leaving the setting up and thelayout to an experienced group of studentsin Aarhus University, using the printerswith whom they have a favourableagreement.

However, a new application form1989-1990 is sent to the ERASMUS Bureau

in Brussels in February 1989 in order toget a new grant for the continuedproduction of the Bulletin. Indeed,distribution costs have turned out to bemuch higher than anticipated. Also thequestion of distribution in itself turns outto be a far greater problem than foreseen.A solution is temporarily found withHEURAS in Brussels, to act as distributionoffice for EUPRIO. But distribution costsstill seem to exceed production costs. Inthe meantime, EUPRIO has introducedways of meeting the costs from their ownend, i.e. raising the membership fees forEUPRIO members and introducing fromthe second issue a special subscription forthe Bulletin alone.

Travels are also kept to a minimum butwith no office space, secretarial and otherkinds of help at their disposal, travels ofthe Editorial Board are needed in order tokeep a Bulletin of this sort going.

The Bulletin is published in Englishonly. The costs involved in translatingarticles into other Community languagesare far beyond budget at the time.

OAmsterdam, 1987. The EUPRIO Steering Committee. From the left: Charles O'Rourke, IngeKnudsen, Ray Footman, Maria Van Der Donk, Edoardo Brioschi and Filomena Carvalho.

ARCHIVEI.KNUDSEN

27

The year 1989 was pivotal. Thefirst Network Bulletin wasproduced in a wintry Aarhusby the editorial board of IngeKnudsen, the then chairman,Ray Footman, a foundermember, and a combination of“hands across the Irish border”‒ Charles O’Rourke from

Dublin, and Alf McCreary, thena newcomer, from Belfast. Thetitle was chosen with typicalpragmatism by Inge Knudsen,and the publication wasproduced in style by studentsat Aarhus University. The coverfeatured a drawing of leeringgargoyles (not the editorial

board) and a key article wastitled “I learned to playbasketball through Italian!”

—AlfMcCrearySuccess Story. The History of EUPRIO,in Network Bulletin, February 1999.

E for European. Our main arena is the twelve Members States of the European Community, butwe also look wider afield, particularly to our colleagues in other European countries.

U for University. But also comparable non-university institutions.P for the series of Publicswith whom we seek to communicate on behalf of our universities.R for Relationswe try and help establish between our universities and between them and their

various publics.I for Information, the essential commodity in which we all deal.O for the Officerswe are ‒ professionally engaged across the Universities of the European

Community in Public Relations and Information.So what is the need for yet another association or network of university PR people?In many of the countries of the EC there are already well-established national groups of university PRprofessionals, who have found that regular contact between them is a useful means of improving theireffectiveness. The sharing of experience in university information and PR problems, and successfultechniques, gives members access to a personalised data bank of expertise.Inmost cases, however, that expertise stops short at national boundaries.We shouldwithin our countriesknow who or where to turn to for information or advice on media contacts, alumni relations, industrialexhibitions, developments in higher education policy, or how to set up press conference facilities in thecapital city. But if we, on behalf of our universities and their members, try to look wider afield, it is not atthe moment so easy and as European integration moves forward, we increasingly need familiarity withthe “European dimension” and sources of information across Europe, whether from the Commission,other EC institutions or on practices in particular countries, which touch on our Universities’ interests.EUPRIO is designed to try and provide that framework for thoseworking professionally in information andPR and those they serve across the Universities of the European Community, with links also beyond theCommunity’s boundaries.This is the first main issue of EUPRIO’s Network Bulletin, which is intended to come out quarterly in thefuture, with occasional special supplements for “hot new items”. For the funding of our initial issues, weare indebted to the ERASMUS Programmeof the EC. For its contents,modest though they are, we have hadto rely on the part time services of some of our founding members in between their own professionalcommitments. The focus on this issue is somewhat North European; this reflects not bias, but thebackgrounds of those who have helped to get it off the ground. The next issue intends to look firmlysouthwards across the Community. It will also be featuring a survey of the various EC programmes ofparticular interest to universities.We also, mainly on resource grounds, will publish only through the medium of English, atleast for initial issues. If you have articles or other contributions for the next issue, contact anymemberof the Editorial Board.

Editorial, Network Bulletin, 1, March 1999.

28

Committee member’s country, particularlythose which have a national informationofficers association. Everybody is asked tolet Ray Footman know how many copiesthey would need for a direct mailing to allmembers of their national group. SteeringCommittee members are asked to write acovering letter and arrange a circulation,encouraging further membership.

The University of Aarhus studentsconfirm they can take on production ofthe fourth issue.

As a result of the recent mailing ofthe Network Bulletin newmembers are joining EUPRIO. The

membership fee has been set at 35 ECU.Membership is extended to PRO’s ininstitutions of higher education othersthan universities. Therefore the item“university institutions” is changed into“universities or comparable institutions” inthe presentation of the association. TheERASMUS Bureau definition of suchinstitutions will be used to decide onwhich institutions are eligible. Amembership application form has beendrafted and is sent to all SteeringCommittee members, who are asked touse it when recruiting new members.

Sometimes, membership requests arisefrom more distant countries, bringingalong their lots of questions. TamasKozma, professor of Educational Researchat the Hungarian Institute for EducationalResearch sends Inge Knudsen a letter inApril 1989, to stress their engagement forcooperating with EUPRIO. The Institutewould like to be a member of EUPRIO and

The second issue is published in June1989 in Aarhus, then sent to Brussels(HEURAS) and then to members and peopleon the HEURAS list. The publishing of thissecond issue brings some problems tolight: deadlines have not been observed ascarefully as the Editorial Board shouldhave liked, which means that some of theSteering Committee members will seetheir articles or information in a slightlydifferent form than expected. This hascaused some problems in Aarhus becauseof the printer’s deadline that had to berespected. The late time of arrival of agreat part of the material also means thatproofreading has not been taken care of byEditorial Committee members withEnglish as their native language. Anotherproblem regards the illustrations: it isimpossible to make lively articles withoutillustrations and in many cases they haveto do with what they find in Inge’s officeor home in Aarhus. Besides, colourpictures don’t make good black and whitepictures.

Nevertheless, the third issue continuesto be prepared by students of theUniversity of Aarhus. The print run hasbeen reduced to 2500. The HEURAS officein Brussels is supplied with a set of labelsby the secretary Fabienne de Strijker sothat a copy can be sent directly to allEUPRIO members. The central theme forthis third issue is Southern Europe and itincludes articles based on the study visitsto Portugal, Spain and Italy, which are dueto take place in April/May.

It is agreed to institute a membershipdrive for early 1990 in each Steering

ARCH

IVE

I.KNU

DSEN

Above:Leuven, 1989.The Director of

the IrishInstitute inLeuven,

Malachy Vallely(second fromthe right)

introduces IngeKnudsen and

Alf McCreary tothe Irish harpistwho providedentertainmentat the galadinner.

29

intends to submit shortly an article aboutthe Institute, which is a full-profileresearch organization concentrating mainlyon higher educational issues. This requestraises a few questions: how can theproblem of the status of Hungary besolved, Hungary not being a member ofthe EC? Are there any solutions to theproblems of weak-currency countries? Arethey allowed to pay the fees in their owncurrency? Are there counter-institutions inthe network which the Institute could getin touch with in order to collect data onhigher educational systems and research?

Together with the grant from theERASMUS Programme under Action IV,enabling EUPRIO to publish the NetworkBulletin, EUPRIO receives funding for oneof their study visit projects, which is tosend colleagues from the North of the ECto the South. The study visits areorganised in April / May 1989. Theobjective is to gain firmer contacts inSouthern Europe and members from thosecountries. Four Steering Committeemembers are allowed to make a study visitto Italy, Spain and Portugal.

The first point worth noting isthat communication betweenuniversities in Northern andSouthern Europe is not alwayseasy. This is partly because theSouthern universities do nothave the same network ofInformation Officers as in theNorth, where communicationin professional and personalterms is now well-developed.However, our Italiancolleagues were extremelycharming and hospitable, andin our visits to Siena and Romethey showed a keen interest inthe practical advantages of anefficient Information andPublic Relations system withina university network.(…)Despite the wide spread ofuniversities and studentnumbers, only a handful of

institutions in Italy have anInformation Officer or PublicRelations Department. Forexample, there is a Director ofInformation at the Universitiesof Bologna and Milan and nofewer than two Public RelationsOfficers in the PrivateUniversity LUISS in Rome. Thereis also a Public Relations Officerin another private university,the Bocconi in Milan, but,generally speaking, PublicRelations and Information inItalian universities is in itsinfancy.(…)However, the Italianuniversities are now very awareof the potential and challengesof international relations,through Erasmus and otherEuropean Community schemes.(…)

All these developments pointto the need for a professionally-organised and well-staffeduniversity Public Relations andInformation network, as eventshave dictated elsewhere inEurope and particularly in theNorth.At the moment this is not onthe major agenda in Italy, but itis being talked about, and inthe long-term there is nothingquite so engaging as an ideawhose time will come.

—AlfMcCrearySuccess Story. The History of EUPRIO,in Network Bulletin, February 1999.

ARCHIVEI.KNUDSEN

K.U. Leuven Director of Information (centre) with Inge Knudsenand EUPRIO colleagues visiting the town of Æbeltoft near Aarhus.

30

number of Italian colleagues with thelonger term objective of setting up aEUPRIO conference in Italy the next year.The Italian colleagues they meet –mainlyEdoardo Teodoro Brioschi from CatholicUniversity of Milan, the first Italianrepresentative – show a keen interest inthe practical advantages of an efficientInformation and Public Relations systemwithin a European university network.Public Relations and Information in Italyare still in the beginnings.

Ray Footman is also planning to attendthe meeting of the Spanish InformationOfficers in the Baleares at the end ofDecember, 1989. A session is set aside forEUPRIO and they hope to encouragefurther membership. Besides, he isexploring the possibility of an applicationunder Erasmus for a visit by a group ofSpanish colleagues to northern Europe.

An agreement is signed betweenEUPRIO and HEURAS (Secretariatof European Associations in

Higher Education), located in Brussels.EUPRIO will make use of HEURAS’ servicesfor a certain amount of money. HEURASwill spread EUPRIO information wheneverpossible, will they promote theorganisation and send out the NetworkBulletin. HEURAS will undertake themailing and administration ofmembership (payment of fees, handingout of membership cards and directory tomembers) and deal with general inquiriesabout EUPRIO. They will also help

Dietmar Schmidt, from Germany, visitsthree Portuguese universities: Universidadede Porto, Universidade de Coimbra andUniversidade Classica de Lisboa. There isno national organization of universityinformation and press officers in Portugalat the time and some of them do not evenknow each other personally. Lookingforward to Europe after 1992, DietmarSchmidt has the impression thatuniversities in Portugal will be wellprepared.

Ray Footman travels to Spain to meetsome information officers colleagues fromMadrid (Madrid ComplutenseUniversity), Cordoba and Barcelona.Information and PR officers in Spanishuniversities are newly created jobs. Theyhave already been appointed in mostuniversities and have begun to meetinformally on a national basis over the lastthree years. Ray Footman’s visit brings tolight a considerable interest from theSpanish universities both in enhancedlinks with the university system in otherparts of the European Community and inbetter contacts with opposite numbers inother European Universities.

Fabienne de Strijker (University ofAntwerp) and Alf McCreary (Queen’sUniversity Belfast) visit Siena and Rome.The purpose of their visit is to gatherinformation on the Italian universitysystem for an article in the EUPRIONetwork Bulletin. They also want to giveEUPRIO a “human” face and to meet a

The Berlaymont Building in Brussels that houses the headquarters of the European Commission.

EC.E

UROP

A.EU

31

establishing contact with countries inorder to make EUPRIO better known (e.g.Greece, via the Greek Embassy). They willeven draft a project for EUPRIO which willresult in obtaining an ERASMUS grant of10,000 ECU.

However, in December 1991, RayFootman writes a letter to HEURAS to putan end to the arrangements they have hadover the last two years. In comparinglimited income with future commitments,the Steering Committee have come to thedecision that they would better revert toadministering their own membership andcovering their mailing arrangementsthrough their national networks, ratherthan centrally through Brussels. It istherefore asked to pass on to Fabienne deStrijker, the treasurer, any futureapplications or membership inquiries thatHEURAS should receive.

One of the main problems EUPRIO hasto face is the lack of active members,which has been the main reason forjoining HEURAS. None of the SteeringCommittee members has got time to runEUPRIO full time and now that EUPRIO hasbeen launched full scale they need a postbox, a “clearing house” and a place wherepeople can get information and material.

To that purpose, Inge Knudsen visitsthe ERASMUS Bureau in Brussels inNovember 1988 to discuss the possibilityof setting up some kind of mail boxservice in Brussels for EUPRIO. It turns out

that the Erasmus Bureau has got itsformer building back at its disposal andwill use it for the various associationsfunded by the ERASMUS Bureau under theAction IV of the ERASMUS Programme.EUPRIO is welcome there as well but willhave to pay for the services. No decision istaken so far.

Inge Knudsen has also been in contactwith the General Secretary of the LiaisonCommittee of the European Rectors,Harry Luttikholt. The Liaison Committeehas welcomed the EUPRIO folder, andfurther cooperation is discussed betweenHarry Luttikholt and Inge Knudsen, oneof the issues being a follow-up on theInformation Flow Report from 1987,another being a promise from HarryLuttikholt to give a speech at the Leuvenconference in April 1989 on InformationFlows and Communication between theCEC and the Liaison Committee /Institutions of higher educationthroughout the EC.

The EUPRIO Directory of InformationOfficers in Universities in the EuropeanCommunity is launched under IngeKnudsen’s presidency. This directory hasbeen prepared for the information ofEUPRIO members. It does not have acomprehensive listing of all institutions ofhigher education in the member states ofthe community, but seeks to list all relevantinstitutions with a designated person oroffice responsible for PR / information.

ARCHIVEI.KNUDSEN

Above:Leuven, 1989.HarryLuttikholt,secretary-general of theLiaisonCommittee ofRectors'Conferences,giving apresentationat the firstEUPRIOConference.

32

Inge Knudsen is the first EUPRIOpresident to chair a conference. Thefirst conference is held in Leuven

and Brussels, some sessions being held atthe Irish Institute in Leuven and others atthe Berlaymont, the headquarters of theCEC in Brussels.

The first day session aims at providinga layman’s guide to the structure of theCommission and to show how it inter-relates with higher education, as well as abrief explanation on Information Flows toand from Brussels. After the morningsession, lunch is offered by theCommission at the restaurant at the top ofthe building. The early afternoon is takenup with an analysis of the highereducation activities of the Commissionand the session ends by a reception at theBerlaymont and dinner at the IrishInstitute in Leuven.

The second day session is devotedmainly to the ERASMUS programme and

The information on which thedirectory is prepared has been supplied vianational information or PR groups or,where they do not exist, has been drawnfrom various reference sources. Incountries where there are separatelydesigned sectors of higher education, e.g.universities and polytechnics/colleges,these are listed by country in separatesections. In other countries, there is asingle list. This directory will be updatedperiodically and will be complementedfrom 1990 on by a EUPRIO Directory ofMedia Contact in Member States of theEuropean Community.

All these actions, visits andinterventions show that EUPRIO issearching for notoriety. Following thesame idea, Inge Knudsen sends a letter tothe directors and presidents of Europeanuniversities and higher educationinstitutions.

Dear Sir/Madam,I hope that you will enjoy reading the first edition of EUPRIO Network Bulletin which

is sent to you with this letter. I should be very grateful if you could also pass this to thestaff member responsible for Public Relations/Information in your institution.

You will see that we are breaking new ground in the field of European cooperationin our special area of interest, i.e. the interchange of information between all highereducational institutions in the Community. A full explanation of the aims and objectivesof EUPRIO can be found on page 2 of the Bulletin.

Having created this effective means of communicating information, we now rely onthe participation of all institutions involved in higher education to ensure its futuregrowth and effectiveness. Higher education should not lag behind the economic andbusiness integration which is now developing so rapidly between our countries.Membership of EUPRIO via your institution’s information officer should offer furtheropportunities of making important contacts in Community countries and institutions,and will help to ensure that you keep abreast of changes in Community higher educationplans and programmes.

Specifically, I would ask you to:~ encourage whoever is the appropriate member of your staff to become a memberof EUPRIO;~ contact your national representative of the Steering Committee or myself, if youhave any suggestions about how we can help to improve information flows to andfrom your particular institution; and consider the submission of an article from yourinstitution for our next edition.EUPRIO’s first international conference on “Information Flows in Europe and

1992” at Louvain in Belgium from 6-9 April 1989 is already heavily booked. This isfurther indication that the aims of EUPRIO are meeting a long-felt need among highereducation institutions in the Community and for many others as well.

Yours sincerely,

Inge KnudsenChairman of EUPRIO

33

information flows between the CEC andinstitutions of higher education of the EC,the social programme being improvisedthat evening: a regular sing-song developsspontaneously with everyone still sitting attheir places in the dining hall.

Saturday morning consists ofpresentations from delegates ofparticipating countries, including theNordic countries, on their own nationalhigher education systems. This is a uniqueopportunity to study the way similarproblems are tackled in countries otherthan one’s own, and to compare andcontrast national developments in thepublic relations and information areas.After lunch, a historical visit to theKatholieke Universiteit Leuven isorganised, including a walking tour to theBegijnhof, 13th century religious housesnow used as university residences.

The conference dinner of that eveningis the highlight of the conference. An Irishharpist plays during the meal, which is,according to all, of high standard regardingthe food and its presentation. After theusual speeches, the delegates move to “TheWink” night club, where they dance until alate hour.

The closing speech of this firstconference is given by Inge Knudsen onSunday 9th April 1989. The title shechooses is “The Way Forward – AnEvaluation and Proposals for the Future”.

The question of the SteeringCommittee membership is also discussed

in the first years of EUPRIO. SteeringCommittee members should be appointedby national bodies where in existence.From countries not having a national body,the steering committee appoints membersfrom among persons suggested to them.Following EC practices the full steeringcommittee consists of two members fromthe larger countries and one from thesmaller member states. If SteeringCommittee members are unable to attenda meeting they should arrange areplacement from their country.

At the end of her presidency(November 1989), Inge Knudsen, regretsto see that some Steering Committeemembers are not even members of EUPRIO.EUPRIO folders are enclosed in the letter shesends to all Steering Committee members.An updating of the folder is planned earlyin 1990. She sincerely hopes to see notonly Steering Committee members butalso more members from EC countries aspaying members of the association.

For the year 1989 EUPRIO intends tomount regular research programmesleading to European conferences onmatters of professional interest. Theactivities of EUPRIO have to be self-financing but the management plans toobtain sponsorship from universities andtheir national bodies, the EC as well ascommercial and industrial organisations.The association communicates by means ofthe Network Bulletin, news sheets and,more informally, by means of privateexchanges of information.

ARCHIVEI.KNUDSEN

Amsterdam, 1987. Harry Luttikholt (left), Giovanni Finocchietti from ICU (Italy) and Inge Knudsen.

34

Iwas asked to take over the chairmanship of EUPRIO whenAnne Lonsdale retired from the post in September 1987.During her chairmanship I was involved in the study for

the European Commission, the “Information Strategy Project”,carried out by a working group bringing together members ofEUPRIO, representatives from Rectors’ Conferences and theirLiaison Committee, and representatives from the Office for Co-operation in Education, later the ERASMUS Bureau.

The study provided important input to information policiesand we received excellent feedback from almost all target groups– except the European Commission. The print above adorned thefront page of the study report – do remember that at the timethere were twelve Member States of the European Communities– so here are eleven of them pulling the load while the twelfth islooking on – guess who…

The important thing about the study was that itshowed the strength of the EUPRIO network, but it alsomade us aware of the importance of our own internalcommunication needs, something which had to bebalanced by a considerable lack of funds, of course.EUPRIO members throughout Europe had functioned asunique sources of information and willing respondentsto the questionnaires and had also succeeded in bringingnational Rectors’ Conferences on board.

One memorable meeting was in Amsterdam in 1987when the working group met up to mull over theconclusions and the wider use of the study in a EUPRIOsetting. In the next page are two Steering Committeemembers, Filomena Carvalho, our Portuguese anchor,and Edoardo Brioschi from Milan mulling over a coldglass of Dutch beer.

We were hosted in Amsterdam by Maria van derDonk, a long-time Steering Committee member andconstant contributor to EUPRIO. Another of our Dutch

Above:the front page of the“Information StrategyProject”, 1987.

ARCH

IVE

I.KNU

DSEN

Inge Knudsen

35

hosts in Amsterdam was Harry Luttikholt, the secretary-general ofthe Liaison Committee of Rectors’ Conferences, who contributedto the study as well as to EUPRIO activities in the years to come.And it was Anne Lonsdale’s last meeting as EUPRIO Chair.

I was not completely certain that my university would beoverjoyed when I returned from Amsterdam to tell them the“good news”, but to my delight they backed the choice made bymy EUPRIO colleagues and even contributed to activities by leavingme sufficient space to invest time and energy in the new activitieswe had discussed.

With a lack of funds creativity became the mostimportant contribution in the months ahead. Withthe assistance of a small grant from the new ERASMUS

Programme and from the Student Union at Aarhus Universitywe launched the very first issue of the “Network Bulletin” inMarch 1989. The collaboration with the Student Union providedus with first-class editing tools and with highly creative youngpeople – and it was a truly low-cost enterprise.

One thing one should remember isthat we are talking about 1987-88 – therewere no e-mails, desktop publishing hadonly just been introduced by printingcompanies, the main forms ofcommunication were telex (anyoneremembers the telex machines?) or fax,quite a modern solution at the time. TheStudent Union were the proud owners ofa modern machine which made itpossible to work with photo montageand printing on normal paper fornewspapers which made it a highly cost-saving option. Furthermore, it providedour members with a recognisable tabloidformat bulletin – anyone remember thatthe tabloid format was the height ofmodernity in the late eighties?

Amsterdam, 1987.Edoardo Brioschi and Filomena Carvalho

at the Steering Committeemeeting.

ARCH

IVE

I.KNU

DSEN

Below:the Editorial Board of

the first EUPRIONetwork Bulletin: Ray

Footman,Inge Knudsen andCharles O’Rourke.

ARCHIVEI.KNUDSEN

36

We had formed a small working group, the “Editorial Board”as we later called it, in 1988 to create the Bulletin, being keenlyaware of the need to communicate directly with colleaguesthroughout Europe. In the previous page are Ray Footman, mysuccessor as EUPRIO chairman, and Charles O’Rourke from

Dublin hard at work in my office inAarhus – the fourth Editorial Boardmember, Alf McCreary (and fifth EUPRIOChair) took the photo.

The first issue consisted of basicinformation about EUPRIO –our mission statement, a list of

Steering Committee members, theeditorial outlining our main priorities, apresentation of higher education inIreland and one on Italian ERASMUSstudents in Ireland – one of the reasonswe succeeded in obtaining a grant fromthe ERASMUS Programme was to informabout the Programme and ERASMUSstudent experience.

The first issue also contained apresentation of the Irish Institute forEuropean Affairs in Leuven, the venuefor the very first EUPRIO Conference, andthe preliminary conference programme.

The Network Bulletin was one way to reach colleagues, it waslow-cost – so we could produce several issues a year – and itbrought identity. But we needed to talk to people,needed to provide members with an opportunityto learn from each other, exchange experience,meet and discuss, something that a bulletin couldnot provide however many we produced. The ideawas to organise a conference – and we thenstarted to look for ways in which to fund it.

We knew that individual informationofficers would be able to fund their travels,probably also room and board if theprogramme was sufficiently interesting. Topof the list of European items in the lateeighties was the “1992 agenda” – probablynobody remembers the informationcampaigns undertaken by Jacques Delors’sCommission to promote the Single EuropeanAct? Except perhaps those among us whocame from Denmark, the country that voted“no” to the “package” as it was called –remember the summer when the Danishfootball team won the EuropeanChampionship, celebrated the Queen’s silverwedding anniversary and voted “no”?When theDanish Foreign Secretary arrived at thesummit in Lisbon with supporterscarf and portable television andsaid to Helmut Kohl, “if you can’tjoin them, beat them”? Well,

Above:the first issue of theEUPRIO NetworkBulletin, March 1989.Right:the statue of Erasmusin Mechelsestraat,Leuven.

37

pardon me for getting ahead of myself,but “1992” was top of the agenda and sowas the Erasmus Programme.

We managed to obtain support fromthe Information and CommunicationsDirectorate-General of the EuropeanCommission to arrange a full day inBrussels on 1992, with the second andthird days in Leuven with presentationson the ERASMUS Programme, the Rectors’Conferences – and finally a session aboutand for ourselves. The conference tookplace on 6-9 April 1989, and here is thehappy bunch outside the Irish Institute onthe last day of the conference. All was ofcourse documented in the next issue ofthe Bulletin.

Other funding opportunities had presented themselves toEUPRIO members as the study visit programme within the newERASMUS Programme provided opportunities for SteeringCommittee members to undertake fact-finding missions andestablish contacts to colleagues in other European countries(within the European Communities, as it was still called at thetime).

One such visit also provided the venue for the next conferenceas Alf McCreary from Belfast and Fabienne De Strijker fromAntwerp visited Italy where they were met with hospitality andgenerosity – the second EUPRIO conference took place at theUniversity of Siena’s lovely Certosa di Pontignano conferencecentre on 27-29 April 1990.

But by then I had left Aarhus, Denmark and EUPRIO –knowing that EUPRIO was in good hands and could walk on itsown. Happy Anniversary!

Inge Knudsen and Alf McCreary

ARCHIVEI.KNUDSEN

Below:Leuven, 1989.

A session duringthe first EUPRIO

Annual Conference.

ARCHIVEI.KNUDSEN

The 1992-process and how to follow itWilliam MartinHead of 1992-Unit

The Commission Offices anddecentralisation of informationHank BeereboomHead of Offices Unit

Universities and 1992Jacqueline Lastenouse & Peter DixonHead of Unit Higher Education and DG X

The ERASMUS ProgrammeSandra PrattTask Force on HumanResources, Education,Training and Youth.

TThheemmee: Information Outreach 1992VVeennuuee: The Irish Institute for EuropeanAffairs, LeuvenLLaanngguuaaggeess: English, French andGerman, with translations of plenarysessions.NNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss: 60, amongwhom an Australian Information Officerfrom the University of Sydney (SusanneAinger). Representatives from EUPRIOand United Kingdom, Irish and Nordicuniversities are also taking part

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssThe Commission and how it worksNiels Jørgen Thøgersen Director

38

Leuven (Belgium), the City Hall.

IWAN BEIJES

Present Situation and InformationFlows between the CEC and Institutionsof Higher Education of the ECHarry W. LuttikholtSecretary General of the LiaisonCommittee of Rectors’ Conferences ofMembers States of the EuropeanCommunity.

19891991

RayFootman

University of EdinburghUnited Kingdom

40

s president, RayFootman aimed tomaintain and increasethe dynamism theorganisation had gainedover the past couple ofyears.!is included a

determined membership drive and acontinuous search for adequate funding,not only in Brussels but also in areas wherea strong European network of universityinformation was considered necessary.

Ray Footman was determined to keepup the level of association activity,including the annual conference and threeissues of!e Network Bulletin. Anotherpriority of his presidency was thedevelopment of relationships in theinformation sector between universities inNorthern and Southern Europeancountries.!e year 1989 would be theyear of the “move South”.

In the summer of 1989, Ray Footmanspent five weeks in the USA, during whichhe attended the National Assembly of theCouncil for the Advancement andSupport of Education (CASE) inWashington as well as a CASE SummerInstitute on communications at Notre-Dame University, Indiana.

Ray Footman organised the secondand third conferences in EUPRIO’shistory.!e second one, the

Siena Conference, took place in April1990. It was intended for sta" inEuropean higher education institutionsprofessionally concerned with informationand public relations.!e conferencefocused more particularly on theorganisation of university informationservices and their roles in relation toEuropean Community educationprogrammes such as ERASMUS and LINGUA

AA view of Edinburgh, the University town of the fourth president Ray Footman.

FING

ALO

41

in southern European countries. Topicsand sessions welcomed Commissionspeakers on ERASMUS and LINGUA, as wellas various contributions on informationsystems in all member states, with moreemphasis being given to Italy, Greece,Portugal and Spain.!e maximum capacity for the Siena

conference was settled at 62, which meantthat a number of places had to beallocated to each country. Since southernEurope was the focus, the suggestion wasto allocate ten to twelve places to SteeringCommittee members, fifteen to Italy, tento Spain, two to Portugal, two to Greece,three to Germany, France and!e UnitedKingdom, two to Belgium, Denmark, theNetherlands and Ireland, one to theNordic countries and three to speakers. Allthese places were put on o"er.

Since demand was unlikely to exceedsupply, any national representative whowould not receive enough applications forthe places available for their country wasasked to let the president know so that theplaces could be reallocated to othercountries where there was more demand.!e Siena conference was notable forseeing the first representative from Greeceand the first from a university in theGDR who, enrolling as a member atSiena, had the distinction of becomingEUPRIO’s first member from eastern /central Europe.

As far as recruitment was concerned, ithad been especially successful over the pastsix months in several countries – and notonly in the South.!e Leuven conferencehad generated enthusiasm for membershipfrom countries outside the EC, such asSweden, Norway and Finland, whichraised the question of non-ECmembership. Steering Committeemembers agreed they should try and getmembers from non-EC countries, sincemembership was open to all professionalsin Europe. It was decided that membersfrom non-EC countries would be welcomebut would have no voting rights.!e Austrian and Swiss university

information o#cers organisations werecontacted. Contact was also made withEast Germany, Poland andCzechoslovakia. It was agreed that easternand central European colleagues whowanted to become members would paythe full rate but in their local currency.

Ray Footman was invited to representEUPRIO at a very important meeting ofSpanish colleagues in Palma de Mallorcain December 1989. His objective in takingpart in this meeting was to try and attractnew members and to encourage Spanishcolleagues to register to the SienaConference. He was also invited to theDanish association annual meeting. Asmall brochure was produced for furtherrecruiting needs.

CHRI

STIA

NBI

CKEL

University of Edinburgh, St. Leonard’s Hall.

42

As1990 began, EUPRIO wouldcontinue to search for newmembers. A letter was sent to

that purpose by all national representativesto all university or polytechnicinformation o#cers in their country whowere not already members.

Assuming a membership of at least 300by the end of 1990, EUPRIO would be ableto cover half of the running costs frommembership fees. For 1990, the gapbetween income and expenses was largelybridged by an ERASMUS grant for theBulletin. But EUPRIO would face problemsin the future if it did not come up withproposals for either extra income or costcutting – especially as raising membershipfees seemed a bad idea at a time when alle"orts were on recruiting new members.

At the Berlin Steering Committeemeeting in October 1991, the chairmanstressed that some minimum requirementshad to be met if the association was to stayfinancially sound in the future:membership levels had to be constant toprovide a sound financial basis and EUPRIOhad to continue o"ering its members anannual conference and a news bulletin,even if the last ERASMUS grant to fund theBulletin (10,000 ECU) had already beenpaid by the ERASMUS Bureau.

Since University of Aarhus studentshad been doing a very good job at a veryreasonable production cost, it was decidedto continue producing the NetworkBulletin there. It was agreed to limit thenumber of issues of the Bulletin to threeper year and to distribute it in the future

Dear Colleague,Some of you may have heard about the establishment of EUPRIO, an organisation

designed to encourage closer contacts between those professionally concerned with, orinterested in, university information and public relations activities in Europe’s universitiesand other institutions of higher education.

As a member of the EUPRIO steering committee, I hope you will be prepared toconsider joining the organisation both as a useful body through which you can promoteyour own professional interests within the European university scene and through whosenetwork of contacts you will be able to assist your own institution’s information and PRwork in Europe.

EUPRIO’s newspaper, the Network Bulletin, is currently published 3 or 4 times a year,with the support of the ERASMUS Bureau in Brussels, and a copy of the most recent issueis enclosed. As well as providing you with useful information, it is also intended to serveas a source on which individual information o#ces may wish to draw for their ownmagazines and newsletters.

EUPRIO is also publishing this month a Directory of Information O#cers inEuropean Universities and Polytechnics (mailed free to members). Later this year it willbe compiling and distributing a directory of press and media contacts across the countriesof the European Community.

EUPRIO has also begun to organise a series of annual conferences, the first of whichwas held in Spring 1989 in Leuven. It will be followed by a conference for southernEurope to be held at Siena in April 1990 and EUPRIO will be co-sponsoring a majorconference in Berlin in the spring of 1991.

An application form, which gives details of the di"erent categories of membership,is enclosed.!e membership fee for 1990 is 35 ECU (xxx in local currency). I hope youwill be prepared to join us by completing the form and sending it with your payment forthat sum to the O#ce of the European Associations (HEURAS) in Brussels, whichadministers our membership and deals with membership enquiries.

If, in this country, I can help with further information, please let me know.

Yours sincerely,

Ray Footman

43

only to members and a limited number ofinstitutions and key figures (rectors’conferences or equivalent organisations) aswell as to hand out a number of copies toall Steering Committee members forrecruiting purposes.!e print run wouldtherefore be brought down to 2,500.!ere was discussion on co-operation

with several EC agencies such as HEURAS,EAIEA, FEDORA, CASE, Liaison Committeeand the European Student Fair.!e latterhad o"ered a free stand at the Brussels andBarcelona fairs in exchange for anadvertisement in the Network Bulletin.But as the European Student Fair visitorswere not potential EUPRIO members theo"er was not accepted by EUPRIO. EAIEAwanted to participate in the NetworkBulletin whereas CASE were thinking ofmoving into the European market andasked EUPRIO to announce the first twoEuropean training courses they organisedin the Bulletin, which was accepted.

Arevision of the constitution wasfelt to be necessary in order toallow the association to become a

formal organisation under Belgian law.But final decisions regarding thisconstitution were postponed until co-

operation discussions with HEURAS werecompleted. Indeed, HEURAS in Brusselshad agreed to provide administrative andmembership services at 1,000 UK poundsper year, which included, among otherthings, the distribution of the NetworkBulletin.

Moreover, EUPRIO had agreed toparticipate in a joint HEURAS / EUPRIOproject, the “Directory of Directories”, i.e.a reference manual of all HigherEducation reference books in all Europeancountries, which would include up to 15titles per country. One reason for EUPRIO’scooperation with HEURAS was that it waslocated in Brussels and it was thought thatit would be a good thing for EUPRIO to belinked in some way with Brussels.Unfortunately, since membershipadministration was not working well, itwas decided not to continue the contractafter 1991. From that time on,membership administration would betaken on by one Steering Committeemember in each country and paymentswould be made by them directly to thetreasurer.

In the end of 1990, Alf McCrearyvisited the Technical University of Berlin,which would lead to the organisation of

In professional terms, RayFootman has long experienceas a committee man and areputation for steeringconstituent bodies to which hebelongs into areas of newopportunity and outreach. Assuch he is well placed toidentify the challenges facingEUPRIO and to help guide it pastthe more difficult obstacles.In personal terms, Ray is acharming companion with apenchant for malt whisky andan eye for the latestbestselling books near the topof the British charts. Hisinterests include highereducation, the theatre andcinema and he is also a skier ‒of sorts!Some time ago he had abruising encounter on a ski-slope but he recovered withcharacteristic good humourand tenacity.Ray is very much a clubbableman, but at heart he is verymuch a private person. He hasput a great deal of thoughtand energy into the post ofChairman of EUPRIO and he will

face squarely all the challengesthat arise. All his colleagues onEUPRIO wish him well.

—AlfMcCrearyNetwork Bulletin, December 1989.

In 1990, the SteeringCommittee took an importantdecision to try to extendEUPRIO’s influence to SouthernEurope.With EC money, study tourswere arranged by SteeringCommittee members to Spain,Portugal and Italy and as aresult a Conference in Sienawas organised for April 1990,particularly with the help ofProfessor Valerio Grementieri,who was a good friend ofEUPRIO.The Siena Conference wasbased in a delightful formermonastery in the Tuscancountryside, and its theme was“Higher Education InformationFlows in Europe ‒ a Southern

Perspective”. Significantly alarge number of colleaguesfrom Southern Europeparticipated for the first time, inan atmosphere of hard work,plus excellent social contacts ina beautiful setting.The Steering Committee waskeen to alternate suchgatherings between North andSouth, and in 1991 theConference was held in Berlin,with the theme “HigherEducation and PR Competitionwithin the EuropeanCommunity”.It was one of the more cerebralconferences and, of necessity,the members had to stay in far-flung accommodation acrossthe city, but it was neverthelessa memorable experience at aperiod shortly after the fall ofthe Berlin Wall.

—AlfMcCrearySuccess Story. The History of EUPRIO,in Network Bulletin, February 1999.

44

EUPRIO’s third conference in Berlin inOctober 1991.!is Conference was organised by the

Technical University of Berlin, togetherwith the Universities Rectors’ Conference,the German Universities Association ofPress and Public Relations O#cers andEUPRIO. A press conference opened theconference.!ree main workshops were organised:

“Science writing and public image”, whichwas about examining the role of mediascience journalists in relation to highereducation in Europe, “PR and the EC”,which focused on the development of thisdiscipline within the EuropeanCommunity and “PR and the competitionbetween universities”, which focused onthe role of PR, press and publicity in asingle market where students, teachingand research sta" from all member stateswere beginning to be more and moremobile and discerning about theinstitutions they were considering, incompetition with others right across theEC. Round-table discussion between

Ray Footman representedEUPRIO at the Conference on‘Higher Education and 1992:planning for the year 2000’,organised by the Commission ofthe European Communities andthe Italian Ministry of theUniversity and ScientificResearch, in cooperation with

the European Parliament, at theUniversity of Siena.Nearly two hundred people tookpart in this conference, whichwas novel in that it broughttogether delegates fromdifferent backgrounds: executiveheads from over 80 universitiesand other higher education

editors, science writers and journalistsabout science writing and informationflows in the EC were also provided.

By 1992, Steering Committee membershad to be appointed by their nationalorganisations when possible. Tworepresentatives were allowed for largercountries and one for smaller ones. In caseof one member it was advisable for thenational organisation to appoint asubstitute member who would be allowedto take the representative’s place when shewas unable to attend. Since not allcountries had national organisations yet,the formulation of this paragraph in thenew constitution had to be written withcarefully chosen words.

institutions, civil servants fromeducation ministries,representatives of variousnational higher educationorganisations and Europeaninternational groups, as well as asmaller number of membersfrom industry and parliament.

University of Edinburgh, Old College.

IPOH

KIA

45

Ofcourse, I’ve been out ofit – that is to say retiredfrom the university PR

scene – for nearly ten years now.!elast – of some 13 – EUPRIOConference I attended was inBarcelona. !en, out of the blue,nearly a decade later comes anapproach from EUPRIO asking forreminiscences.!e pleasurable thing about that

is, if I am to be reminded at allabout aspects of my old – pre-leisure– life of professional practice, thenEUPRIO would be a side of that lifeabout which I am entirely happy tobe reminded. For while, like anyactivity, it had its downside, that was minimal. Most of EUPRIOconsisted of mixing with interesting people from diversebackgrounds, talking and learning about their circumstances,experiences and ways of approaching issues that were usually notcompletely the same as, but often really quite like, those I dealtwith, in settings which were invariably impressive, frequentlystimulating and often beautiful as well.

So I will mostly settle on people and places.

People first; recollections about people are di#cult,particularly when your group covers hundreds ofindividuals over some ten years, (the length of time

approximately I was more actively associated with EUPRIO), so Iam resisting the – strong – temptation to mention particularpeople, whether Presidents, national reps, speakers, organisers orConference attendees (several of whom went on to become, andstill remain, good personal friends); so many played a part inmaking EUPRIO the lively and collegiate body I found it became.But perhaps my own thoughts go back particularly to the groupof Flemish-speaking University Information O#cers who, in themid eighties, had the idea of a European association in the firstplace and the energy and drive first to involve others in inNorthern Europe and then beyond.!en I remember the handfulof “builder colleagues” who in the first three or four years turnedan ambitious aspiration into an institutional reality. Andthereafter, so many contributors from across the Continent.

Policy next: it was not, I guess, immediately obvious that thenotion of a EUPRIO would necessarily come to fruition. It had toappeal to information o#cers across various countries, gainacceptance in o#cial circles, become financially viable, be able toclaim a truly European membership, and to meet the needs of adiverse constituency; it also had to address a number of politicallycomplex issues in the early years that will be familiar to anyone, Iguess, who knows something of trying to get an internationalorganisation going.!eWestern Europe of the mid eighties, as EUPRIO started out,

was, albeit diverse, much smaller and less various than today’sentity, for the Iron Curtain would not finally go up and the BerlinWall would not go down for another three years.

Also from an initial UK perspective, the “o"shore” Brits were,if anything, looking westwards – rather than east – for new

Ray Footman

46

patterns of professional practice. For this was the decade when!atcherite cutbacks pushed British universities to seek additionalsources of income and associated initiatives in FR & AR(fundraising and alumni relations).

I was to have a foot in both camps – I had undertaken a twentyNorth American universities study tour in the early eighties andby the end of the decade was already involved in helping developUS-style training institutes in Britain. So while serving as thepresident of a EUPRIO which was still developing its own identity,and modes of operation, rather than as a whole looking forcorporate links with North America (with a few exceptions,continental European interest in AR & FR took a little longer todevelop) in part, thanks to my dual role, I was able to help keepEuro-colleagues in touch with such Transatlantic developments.

As for places, I have already acknowledged how special manyof these were and perhaps this is the right place in which to anchorrecollections around my period as EUPRIO president.!is, for me,is the tale of an Island and four Cities, all with great memoriesattached.

One of my first tasks, having undertaken a study ofSpanish higher education, was to help bring Spanishinformation o#cers more closely into a relationship

with EUPRIO which involved my attending what may have beenone of the early Spanish national professional meetings, inMallorca.!e welcome was warm and the style distinctive and itwas the only conference I ever attended in my working life wherea presentation was given on a tourist bus, between desirabledestinations... but our Spanish colleagues were soon on board.

Involving southern Europe was also a function of the secondannual EUPRIO Conference held at the University of Siena, for themost part in the University’s former monastery study centre upin the hills outside the city.!e qualities of the setting did muchto pull the di"erent national groups together with our host –entirely appropriately in musical Italy - dragooning at least onerep from each country to deliver a song from their homeland.

Also memorable from this period was the progressive inclusionof colleagues from eastern Europe whose institutions’ previous PRpractices had proved not always totally relevant to changedcircumstances. And as in many examples of EUPRIO’s working, thiswas very much a two-way process where western informationo#cers also had a steep learning curve. A very useful element inthis process involved a Steering Committee held in Budapest.

In line with the new policy of alternating north and southvenues, the third EUPRIO conference was welcomed to theTechnical University of Berlin, organised very e"ectively andstylishly in the heart of that lively city which, as a great admirerof Berlin, I was more than delighted to chair.

Of course, hosting a EUPRIO Conference, as well as furtheringprofessional education, knowledge and understanding, alsoprovided an opportunity for the host institution and city topromote their profiles… and very e"ectively they did it too in theCity gatherings I was involved in.!ereafter, having also become directly involved with

professional training via the international Washington DC-basedCouncil for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE),I determined to step down as EUPRIO president, but failed to escape

47

entirely since, as a true swan song, three years later, I was called into provide a venue and Programme for the next Conference, inEdinburgh, my own University. “Europe 2000.!e Challenge ofthe Market” was the result with, up till then, the largest-ever (205)attendance for a EUPRIO gathering. After a very tight-packed andserious programme, we allowed our delegates a rather specialevening o" which, in the intervening period when I have met aformer colleague attendee, I am always reminded of. Managingto get our dates overlapping with the end of the EdinburghInternational Arts Festival, we closed the show with a single maltcask whisky tasting and Festival fireworks over the Castle, whichsince then, I am sure, has produced a continuing boost for one ofScotland’s main non-academic exports…

And if my recollections are mostly social and personal, ratherthan directly work-related, it is not because these events werewithout substance. Professional education and informationsharing was the consistent theme and, of course, the meat in theconference sandwich, but, strangely enough, 15-25 years on it isthe memories of people and places that particularly endure; Iwonder why…

TILM

ANDR

ALLE

Edinburgh, Arthur’s Seat.

48

TThheemmee: HHiigghheerr eedduuccaattiioonn iinnffoorrmmaattiioonnflfloowwss iinn EEuurrooppee.. AA ssoouutthheerrnnppeerrssppeeccttiivveeVVeennuuee: Collegio “Mario Bracci” diPontignano, SienaLLaanngguuaaggeess: English and French.

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssOOppeenniinngg SSppeeeecchhLuigi BerlinguerRector of the University of Siena

SSoouutthheerrnn PPeerrssppeeccttiivveessEdoardo BrioschiUniversity “Cattolica del Sacro Cuore”of Milan

SSppaanniisshh PPrreessss OOfffificceerrss aanndd tthheeiirrNNaattiioonnaall OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnCarlos MirazUniversity of Cordoba

TThhee BBrruusssseellss VViieeww oonn EERRAASSMMUUSS MMaatttteerrssPhilip ClistInformation Officer at the ERASMUSBureau

HHooww tthhee UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff SSiieennaa hhaannddlleessiittss vveerryy ssuucccceessssffuull EERRAASSMMUUSSppaarrtteecciippaattiioonnValerio GrementieriUniversity of Siena

IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn ttoo LLIINNGGUUAA aanndd TTEEMMPPUUSSPPrrooggrraammmmeessSandra PrattCommission’s Task Force

OOvveerrvviieeww ooff pprreessss aanndd iinnffoorrmmaattiioonnoofffificceerrss iinn tthhee UUnniitteedd KKiinnggddoommRay FootmanUniversity of Edinburgh

TThhee ggrroowwtthh iinn tthhee nnuummbbeerr ooffuunniivveerrssiittiieess iinn tthhee IIrriisshh RReeppuubblliiccRuth McDonnellUniversity of Cork

DDaanniisshh PPRR aanndd iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn oofffificceerrssaanndd tthheeiirr lliinnkkss ttoo tthhee NNoorrddiicc ggrroouuppMichael von Bülow

OOuuttlliinneess ooff tthhee PPRR aanndd ppuubblliicciittyyppoossiittiioonnss iinn TThhee NNeetthheerrllaannddss aannddGGeerrmmaannyyMaria van der DonkUniversity of AmsterdamDietmar SchmidtLudwig Maximillian University inMunich

HHiigghheerr eedduuccaattiioonn iinn FFrraanncceeAnnie-Claude GuisseFédération Universitaire de Lille

TThheemmee: HHiigghheerr EEdduuccaattiioonn aanndd PPRRCCoommppeettiittiioonn wwiitthhiinn tthhee EEuurrooppeeaannCCoommmmuunniittyyVVeennuuee: Technical University of BerlinLLaanngguuaaggeess: English, German withsimultaneous translations.

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssSScciieennccee wwrriittiinngg aanndd ppuubblliicc iimmaaggee

PPRR aanndd tthhee EECC

PPRR aanndd tthhee CCoommppeettiittiioonn bbeettwweeeennUUnniivveerrssiittiieess

University of Siena, Complesso San Niccolò.

ERICA DONOLATO

UNIV

ERSI

TY P

RESS

OFF

ICE

/ BÖC

K

Technical University of Berlin.The Nike statue in the hall of University’s main building.

19911993

AlfMcCreary

Queen’s University BelfastUnited Kingdom

50

lf McCreary chaired twoconferences during hispresidency: Granada inOctober 1992 andStockholm in June 1993.

!e GranadaConference focused on

four main topics: information on Spanishhigher education, which was changingrapidly, information on universities inother Spanish speaking countries, thetransatlantic flow, and short country-by-country presentations centred onimportant issues facing higher educationPR. !e latter presentations were given bytwelve speakers from each EC country.!e social programme included a nightvisit to the Alhambra and an optional visitto the Universal Exhibition of Seville.

After the Granada Conference,decisions on new directions for futureconferences were taken at the CoimbraSteering Committee meeting (March1993). Workshop sessions would be moreinteractive in the future and would requirethe participation of delegates. !e newrules included the fact that workshopsleaders would be asked to make sure theiropening contribution was no longer thanfive minutes, and to produce a paperbefore the opening of the conferencelisting the issues that would be discussedduring the workshop. Papers would thenbe copied in su"cient number for all theparticipants, who could then choosewhich workshop they wished to attend,with the result that some might be full andothers poorly attended. Workshops wouldbe conducted in one language but a

ABelfast, Queen’s University, which expressed the fifth president of EUPRIO.

WW

W.T

HEBA

DGER

ONLIN

E.CO

.UK

51

balance of languages other than Englishwould be made available. !e success ofthe sessions would be evaluated at the end.An informal briefing for all workshopleaders was organised just before theopening of the Stockholm Conference toensure that the new rules were understoodby everyone.

It was also decided that the final sessionof future conferences should be devoted toEUPRIO business matters to make sure thatmembers were involved as fully as possiblein the forward planning of the association.!ese business sessions would include abrief written financial report from thetreasurer and a written policy report fromthe chairman.

Finally, a discussion was held aboutestablishing new directions for futureconferences to take into account thedi#erent needs of members. In particular,it was suggested that it would be good toprovide alternative sessions for experiencedand less experienced members. !isimplied a need to diversify the contents ofgroup sessions and make sure membersparticipated, as well as ensuring lectureswere organised for to larger audiences.

!e application of this new conferencestructure could be seen at the StockholmConference: three Spanish sessions, fourFrench sessions, two German sessions and

fifteen English sessions were programmedfor the workshops. !e delegates wereasked to attend three of them. About halfof the workshops were given twice toincrease the delegates’ choice. And, asdiscussed, an evaluation form was given tothe participants in the StockholmConference.

At the Stockholm Conference delegateswere invited to a reception at the RoyalAcademy of Sciences. A presentation ofenvironmental research connected to theRoyal Academy of Science andinformation and PR-activities related tothe Nobel Prize were on the agenda.Informal discussions were also organised,giving an opportunity for groups to meettogether to discuss issues identified by thedelegates themselves.

Membership was a relevant matterthroughout Alf McCreary’s presidency. In1992, EUPRIO counted 180 members fromEC countries and about a score from nonEC countries. !e total number ofmembers increased to 264 in 1993. !emembership fee was 45 ECU and did notincrease in 1993 or 1994, as the financialsituation was considered to be satisfactory.

Recruitment or renewal of membershipwas conducted by national representativesin their own country and this systemseemed to work very well. National

Granada was the venue of the 4thConference.A visit to the Alhambra (here: the Patio of the Lions) was organised.

XISK

YAVA

LLAD

ARES

52

representatives were sent a series of leafletsand membership cards to use as they re-enrolled or enrolled new members. Afterpaying their fees, members would receivetheir “benefits package”, consisting of acompleted membership card, a copy of thelatest EUPRIO Directory, a copy of thelatest Network Bulletin and nextconference details, if available.

Budget forecasts showed that if EUPRIOwere able to register at least 150 membersa year, two copies of the NetworkBulletin, an annual directory and minimalother costs could be covered bymembership fees only.

!ree kinds of membership existed:“Full Membership” was open to all thoseprofessionally engaged in universityinstitutions in the European Community,in the fields of press, public relations andinformation. !e term “university”referred to all types of higher educationinstitutions regardless of designation in theindividual member states. “AssistantMembership” was open to individuals inuniversities within the EuropeanCommunity who were interested ininformation and public relations but werenot themselves directly professionallyinvolved. And finally, “Associate

Membership” was open to colleaguesoutside the European Community andalso engaged in those activities in non-university institutions within the EC.

In the end of the eighties, a draftconstitution had been started but nottaken further, mainly because EUPRIO hadto face more immediate priorities. By1993 is was time to try and agree on themain shape of the new constitution. Anupdated draft was circulated amongSteering Committee members who wereasked to send their comments so that adefinitive version could be adopted to takee#ect from autumn 1993 onwards. Somemembers rea"rmed their will to maintainthe links that had originally beenestablished with the Commission and theLiaison Committee of the EuropeanRectors’ Conference, while expressing thewish to be as flexible as possible as regardsa wider membership across Europe. It wasalso suggested that membership eligibilityshould be left in its current form and notto have restrictions on the eligibility of PRprofessionals, since the exact jobspecification in di#erent countries couldvary considerably from one institution toanother. Finally, it was suggested that itwould be better for future SteeringCommittee members to be nominated by

Still on track, the SteeringCommittee guided the nextConference to Granada onOctober 1992, where thetheme was “New Horizons”.The highlights included asession on Corporate andVisual Identity, a lively finalsession attendedunexpectedly by a deputyRector, a visit to the Alhambraand, for those who had thetime, a day-trip to Expo-92 inSeville. The early absence oftransport was more thancompensated by the warmand generous hospitality ofour Spanish hosts.

(...)

In 1993, EUPRIO returned Northto a splendid Conference inStockholm, with the theme“Communications and theresponsible University”.Membership of EUPRIO hadreached 264 and the SteeringCommittee appointed aNordic representative ‒Christer Hjort. The keynotethemes and conclusions from

Stockholm were prophetic ‒the difficult time facing alluniversities which were nolonger “sacred cows”, the needfor change, and the danger oflosing core idea of a universityin the scramble for funding.Socially the StockholmConference was outstanding,and the highlights included thedinner when members fromvarious countries gaveimpromptu and unforgettablecontributions in song, and alsoverse. When Irene from St-Petersburg sang a Russianfolk-song, the internationalsense of solidarity across all thebarriers of history and politicswas tangible. The other majorhighlight was the final sessionin the Golden Room ofStockholm Town Hall, and thearrival of bag-pipes to heraldthe next Conference in ‒ whereelse? ‒ Edinburgh.

—AlfMcCrearySuccess Story. The History of EUPRIO,in Network Bulletin, February 1999.

Since I returned, life at Queen’shas been very busy, andsomewhat difficult. Some daysago terrorists murdered a 29-year-old law student, while, onthe same day, the leader of ourAir Squadron was killed, and astudent badly injured, in an aircrash. Otherwise I would havewritten to you a little sooner.”(…) “I enclose, somewhatbelatedly, a memo from theExecutive Director of EAIE, whichis holding a conference inBerlin on 5-7 November.EUPRIO has been given acourtesy waiver of theconference fee, so if any of youwish to attend please let meknow. I suspect, however, thatafter Granada you have used upall your University time andfinance available for this year’sconference round.

—AlfMcCrearyFrom a letter written to the Steering

Committee members after theGranada Conference.

53

national bodies after discussion with theEUPRIO chairman. As new countries hadjoined in the EC and more and morecountries were present in conferences(17 countries in Stockholm), it wasconsidered necessary to think aboutenlarging the Steering Committee. It wassuggested that the constitution should bemodified in such a way as to allow newrepresentatives to join the SteeringCommittee, especially Scandinavianmembers.

A little later, changes in the constitutionwere presented for approval. !eyconcentrated on a number of issuesregarding, among others, the aims ofEUPRIO as well as the programme,membership and Steering Committeematters. As for the programme, thenumber of issues of the Network Bulletinhad to be determined with the Directoryediting becoming annual. Membership feesshould be discussed every year by theSteering Committee and collected bynational representatives. !e total number

of Steering Committee members should bechanged. At the chairman’s discretion theSteering Committee would from then onbe allowed to co-opt up to five membersfrom other non EC countries. No onewould be allowed to sit in the SteeringCommittee for more than two periods oftwo years. Any country which had twomembers in the Steering Committeewould not change them at the same timein order to ensure continuity. SteeringCommittee meetings would be held at leasttwice a year. !e posts of chairman, deputychairman, secretary and treasurer wereassigned for two years. EUPRIO could endits activities if proposed by at least fiftypercent of the national bodies.

Bearing in mind the establishment ofrelationships with Eastern Europe, twoEUPRIO members represented theassociation at the TEMPUS Conferenceorganised in Hungary, on 31st May. AlfMcCreary established contacts with DrLajos in Budapest, who expressed hisenthusiasm for a possible seminar

In a note published in May 1993,Klaus H. Grabowski pointed outthat the functions of EUPRIO’sNetwork Bulletin were to bedefined in three dimensions:within the profession, within thesystem of higher education, andbeyond this system, servingpartners and potential partnersof the system.Membership had increasedconsiderably during the lastyears; on the other hand, only alimited number of memberswere taking part in EUPRIO’s majoractivities; the word “Europe”wasreferring to more and morecountries; for all these reasons,the objectives of EUPRIO couldonly be achieved with thesupport of efficient and simplecommunication between EUPRIOmembers and an increasedsupport for EUPRIO’s work frompartners and potential partnerswithin the system of highereducation and beyond.“The situation of EUPRIO withinthe new map of Europe and thecompetitive situation of thesystem of higher education(competing for limited budgetsand funds with other parts andsubsystems of society) seems toindicate that we will have tosolicit support from a broader

public, and especially fromopinion leaders and decisionmakers within the public”,Grabowski said. The best policyin this situation would be toclearly define the functions ofEUPRIO’s publication.To that purpose, Grabowskiproposed the following moves:EUPRIO’s publication shouldinterest opinion leaders anddecision makers; it should beobvious to EUPRIO’s “natural”partners that communicationwas necessary for the survival ofan efficient and creative systemof higher education; everybodyin the profession should beconvinced that you couldn’treally be in the profession if youwere not a member of EUPRIO, andfinally, all the members whowere not able to attend meetingsand conferences regularly shouldbe kept informed on what wasgoing on within the association.To achieve these objectives, thefront page, the editorial and atleast one substantial article in theNetwork Bulletin ought to bewritten with the aim ofinteresting opinion leaders anddecision makers beyond highereducation. The Network Bulletinshould also address colleagueswithin the profession by offering

experience sharing articles,presenting case studies andsubstantial opinions. At last, theNetwork Bulletin would be aforum where formal and informalcommunications of memberscould be exchanged. “Thesefunctions have been served tosome extent in the previousissues of the publication but notformally. It has been very difficultto find out which function hasbeen served in which issue of theBulletin. And if we continue thatway we will, instead of reachingnew readers, lose more and moreof them because nowadayspeople are very impatient whendealing with the media”,Grabowski added as aconclusion.At the same time, the need tofind an editor was put forward.The editor could be a member ofEUPRIO who could dedicate his orher professional skill and policyto the Bulletin for two years atleast, beginning from 1994. Thenew editor was felt to have agood knowledge of English, tobe a member of the SteeringCommittee (or at least attendmeetings) and to have thesupport of an Editorial Board.

54

My journey to the chairmanship of EUPRIO was slightlyunusual because it began with a long career in dailyjournalism. As an editorial writer, columnist, and

senior feature writer with the Belfast Telegraph, and many otherpublications, I was closely involved in reporting the long conflictin Northern Ireland at the height of what we called “!eTroubles”. I interviewed and wrote about many of the perpetratorsand victims of the violence, and after some 22 years reporting onthe pain and loss of so many people, I decided on a career switch.

At that time, in 1984, Queen’s University in Belfast wasadvertising for its first Information Director and Head ofInformation Services. !is was a senior management post, but Ihad no direct experience of management. However, I had a deeployalty to my old university, as well as over 20 years of experienceas a communicator in front-line journalism, so I applied for theQueen’s job.

Somewhat to my surprise I was appointed, and I joined therarified atmosphere of university life. I soon discovered that some

of the top-flight academics, who were also blessed withuncommon common sense, were extremely impressive, andthat they were also good colleagues with whom to work. Ialso discovered that many other academics were unbearablyarrogant, and also extraordinarily poor communicators,outside their own discipline, with poor people skills.

It was against this background that I tried to sell Queen’sUniversity to the wider world, and also to the universityitself – which was the di"cult bit.

It was obvious that most academics were primarily loyalto their own disciplines, then to their peers worldwide, andthat the University came third. Perhaps they did not realisethis, but it became very clear to any outside observer likeme who was never really allowed to become an academic“insider”. !e university, like all similar institutions, was runby academics with largely Government money (as well as itsown specially-raised funding) and outside specialists like mewere basically hired hands.

Steering Committee members wishedto increase study visits from the South tothe North. But money had to be found forthat purpose. In Scandinavian universitiesinformation o"cers were already used tovisiting other services for short periods.!ey would be asked whether they wouldalso be interested in welcominginformation o"cers from other Europeancountries.

Scholarships were beginning to bediscussed in 1993. !ree to four peoplecould be given scholarships for theEdinburgh Conference.

involving Steering Committee membersand representatives of Hungarian as well asother East and Central Europeanuniversities. !e objective would be toshare information and techniques on howinformation o"ces were operating inEuropean universities. As a result of theestablished contacts, a Steering Committeemeeting was organised in Budapest inSeptember 1993, together with a seminarduring which a number of EUPRIOmembers gave a presentation of their workto an audience of Hungarian journalistsand university PR o"cers. A guided tourof Budapest followed by a journey to LakeBalaton completed this joint meeting.

Alf McCreary

55

!is was not a personal relationship, and it was important toaccept the professional background to the then new idea ofappointing outside advisers, even if leading academics did notalways accept their advice. We gradually established a new andmore professional attitude to presenting the good news aboutacademia in general and about Queen’s University in particular.

Within a relatively short period, I had become chairman of theUK-based public relations and information group, known asSCUIO, and around 1988 I became a member of the then newly-formed EUPRIO.

My early memories are those of the dynamic leadership of IngeKnudsen from Denmark, who became and remains a good friend,and also of Ray Footman, then of the University of Edinburgh,who became one of my closest colleagues in the United Kingdomuniversities circuit.

One of our most successful conferences was held in theIrish Institute in Leuven, which as one of the biggestgatherings in the history of EUPRIO. It was a

considerable professional and social success, and the forerunnerof many similar conferences. Inge was succeeded as chairman byRay Footman, and we worked together closely as the two UKrepresentatives on the Steering Committee.

Towards the end of Ray’s term, we held a Committee meetingin Paris, and again much to my surprise, I was elected as EUPRIOchairman. I was surprised because it seemed unusual to appointtwo UK-based presidents in a row, but I was glad to have beengiven such an opportunity to serve in this way.

One of the key roles was to continue with the publication ofEUPRIO News, the magazine which was established some yearsearlier by Inge, Ray and myself, together with Charles O’Rourkefrom Dublin. During my time the magazine was one of theunifying factors within the wider EUPRIO network.

My first annual conference as chairman was held in Spain,which was a great social success, although there wereorganisational di"culties. Ray and I roomed together, and on thesecond day he said “You run the conference and the plenarysessions, I will organise the transport!”

My second major as chairman was held in Stockholm with thehelp of a number of very good Swedish colleagues, and once againthere was a record turn out. !e conference dinner wasparticularly impressive with a great sense of a shared Europeanidentity and personal camaraderie.

Altogether I served for about four years as chairman, duringwhich there were two major themes facing EUPRIO. One was thecontinuing problem of communicating information aboutuniversities to the outside world, and also to the universitiesthemselves. A second major problem was in trying to construct apractical model to serve the needs of all universities within theEuropean network.

In practice the “Northern” universities, including those in theUK, Germany and Scandinavia, had more advanced systems ofdisseminating university information, and better funding, thanour colleagues in the “Southern” groups, including Spain, Italyand Portugal.

56

TThheemmee: NNeeww HHoorriizzoonnssVVeennuuee: University of GranadaLLaanngguuaaggeess: English, French andSpanish with simultaneous translations.NNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 150 -Attendance was allowed to EUPRIOmembers only, up to a maximum of 15from larger countries and 7 fromsmaller countries, excluding SteeringCommittee members, plus Spanishmembers. Countries not taking up theallotted number of places were to makethem available for people from othercountries.

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssCCoorrppoorraattee IIddeennttiittyy -- UUKK aanndd tthhee UUSSAAeexxppeerriieenncceessRay FootmanDirector of the Information and PublicRelations Service at the University ofEdinburgh

TThheemmee: CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnss aanndd tthheerreessppoonnssiibbllee uunniivveerrssiittyyLLaanngguuaaggeess: English. Plenary sessionstranslated into French and Spanish.NNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss:: limited to200. Places reserved for EUPRIOmembers only.

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssTThhee eesssseennttiiaall rroollee ooff ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnssiinn aann eeffffeeccttiivvee aanndd rreessppoonnssiibblleeuunniivveerrssiittyyBarbro BergHead of Information, National Agencyfor Higher EducationInge JonssonRector of Stockholm UniversityBjarne KirsebomUnder-Secretary of State, Ministry ofEducation

CCoorrppoorraattee iiddeennttiittyy –– aa SSoouutthheerrnn aapp--pprrooaacchhEdoardo BrioschiUniversity “Cattolica del Sacro Cuore”of Milan

IInntteerrnnaall ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn –– HHooww?? WWhhyy??NNeeww ttoooollss……A Spanish speaker and a SouthAmerican speaker

EEuurrooppee:: aa ccoommmmoonn llaanngguuaaggee??EEuurrooppeeaann ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn aanndd ppeeooppllee::aann oovveerrvviieewwDomenico LenarduzziTask Force “Education, Training, Youth,Human Resources” of the EuropeanCommunity

EEuurrooppee:: bbrraanncchhiinngg oouutt –– EEuurrooppee aannddtthhee wwoorrlldd:: nneeww wwaayyss ooff ccoollllaabboorraattiioonnAntonio Marín RuízDirector of the Communication andDocumentation Service at the Universityof Granada

PPrreesseennttiinngg aanndd ppuubblliicciissiinngg uunniivveerrssiittyyrreesseeaarrcchh ttoo tthhee ccoommmmuunniittyy,, wwiitthhppaarrttiiccuullaarr rreeffeerreennccee ttoo eennvviirroonnmmeenntt--rreellaatteedd iissssuueessAnna-Greta DyringHead of Information, Swedish Councilfor Planning and Communication ofResearchHenrik MickosPhD, Stockholm University

TThhee ffuuttuurree ooff hhiigghheerr eedduuccaattiioonniinnssttiittuuttiioonnss iinn EEuurrooppeeThorsten NybomHead of the Council for Studies ofHigher EducationMadeleine von HelandThe Institute for Research on Businessand Work Life Issues

My recollection is that EUPRIO, and its successive SteeringCommittees, tackled these problems, but with limited success.!is was partly because the Governments of various member-states kept changing the national rules about university education,and overall the universities had an ever-increasing need for greaterfunding.

In the mid-nineties I had another major career change, and Ileft Queen’s University to pursue a career in full-time writing. Itwas a decision which I have never regretted, and during the pastdecade and more I have not had to work for committees oruniversity presidents, but merely for my latest publisher or editor!

However, I look back on my university days as one of the moredi"cult and challenging parts of my career, but on the positiveside I made many great friends and met some wonderful people.

19931997

WimJanssen

Rijksuniversiteit GroningenThe Netherlands

58

im Janssen’spresidency can becharacterised bytwo majordevelopments: anew constitutionfor the association;

and the opening of EUPRIO to non-EUcountries, especially from Northern andEastern Europe. !e first developmentpaved the way for the second.

A new constitution had been discussedat the Prague Steering Committee meetingand was approved in its final version at theZurich Steering Committee meeting inAugust 1995. !e new constitution

removed the di"erence between EU andnon EU members, with each country nowbeing allowed one representative and onedeputy on the Steering Committee. Bothrepresentatives can attend SteeringCommittee meetings, but each countryonly has one vote. No distinctions are tobe made any longer between full, associateand assistant members while ExecutiveCommittee members, including president,past-president, secretary and treasurer, areto be elected for a two-year term,renewable once. !e new constitution wasunanimously approved in Zurich andpublished in the next issue of the NetworkBulletin. It was never been registered,though.

WEdinburgh, 1994. Official reception of the 6th Annual Conference at the Town Hall.

ARCH

IVE

W.J

ANSS

EN

59

Wim Janssen was the first president toremain in post for four years. During histerm, he chaired four conferences:Edinburgh in 1994, Zurich in 1995,Rotterdam in 1996 and Strasbourg in1997.

The Edinburgh Conference tookplace during the EdinburghInternational Arts Festival, which

sees hundreds of theatre, opera and dancecompanies, symphony orchestras, jazzbands, comedians, artists, singers, authorsand film makers gathering every year.Several other outstanding cultural eventswere also taking place in Edinburgh at thesame time: the Edinburgh Military Tattooat the Castle, the International FilmFestival, the International Jazz Festival andthe Edinburgh Festival Fringe, whichbrings hundreds of dance, music, theatre,comedy performers and companies tosmaller and larger venues across the city.

No need to tell the reader that thisconference’s social programme was at avery high level. It began on the firstevening with a whisky tasting session,where the participants were provided withexplanations of the intricacies, variety andquality of Scotland’s numerous single maltwhiskies. After that, guides took

participants to the city centre to take partin the Festival Fireworks and Concert infront of Edinburgh Castle.

Following a reception, there was aScottish evening o"ering traditionalScottish music, and a demonstration ofScottish country dancing, with theopportunity to join in. On the secondevening there was a night-time guidedtour around parts of the City where the19th century serial killers searched forvictims before supplying their bodies tothe anatomy lecture theatre where DrKnox taught his medicine students. Areally thrilling evening that still haunts thenightmares of all who took part!

!e Edinburgh Conference wasplanned to be the beginning of a moresystematic involvement by colleagues fromEastern and Central Europe. !e Swedishhad already supported the participation ofa Russian colleague, and the presidentindicated he would also like to see at leastone representative from Bulgaria, theCzech Republic, Poland, Romania,Slovakia and Ukraine attendingconferences. Once those people wereidentified in their own country and hadshown their their willingness to attendconference they would receive hardcurrency subsidies so that the conference

ARCH

IVE

W.J

ANSS

EN

Edinburgh, 1994. Wim Janssen (right) with some EUPRIO colleagues.

60

fees could no longer be a reason for nottaking part.

!e academic part of the programmebegan with group briefings and discussionson the theme: “Trends in higher educationand public relations across Europe andbeyond”. A selection of nine countries wasproposed, with participants having tochoose one country to study the universitysystem and PR practice. Each session wasintroduced by a higher education PRo#cer from the considered country andthere was an opportunity for thoseattending to raise questions and discussissues. !e areas chosen were: France,Germany, Italy, Benelux, Scandinavia,Spain, Russia, United Kingdom andNorth America.

Case studies followed, whereparticipants were able to choose between

two successful European universities: theUniversity of Siena – a university from theRenaissance – and the University ofWarwick – a university from the sixities.

Workshops on “Aspects of theuniversity in the market place” took placeon the second day. Participants had tochoose topics in which they were mostinterested. Each session was introduced bya PR o#cer but the larger part of thesession was devoted to examining anddiscussing how the approach presentedcould be applied.

Group briefings and discussions on thetheme “!e media and higher educationin Europe – How to penetrate particularnational media markets” filled in theafternoon programme. Participants wereasked to choose between several regionswhere they were most interested in the

In 1993 the SteeringCommittee widened itshorizons with a seminar inPrague, and a meeting inHungary at which WimJanssen of the University ofGroningen took over aschairman, and the title wassubsequently changed topresident. Wim instituted anumber of importantdevelopments during his termof office, and he became theonly president to serve for fouryears, after which he handedover to Ingeborg Christensen‒ a most appropriate choice.Incidentally this was a raredistinction for the Universityof Aarhus, which has suppliedtwo women presidents ‒Ingeborg and in 1987 IngeKnudsen.

The Edinburgh Conference of1994 was one of the mostmemorable, with its theme“Europe 2000, the Challengeof the Market”. Intellectually itwas robust, with anexamination of, among otherthings, the Higher EducationSystem in Scotland, the ECSummit in Scotland in 1992,and Marketing Science.Socially, it was unforgettablewith visits to concerts as partof the Edinburgh Festival, awhisky tasting and astupendous fireworks displaywhich the sophisticatedEuropeans from EUPRIOwatched with the awe of

enjoyment of children. It waschoreographed to classicalmusic, and those present willremember it for the rest of theirlives.

In 1995 EUPRIO moved slightlySouth to Zurich for a delightfulConference organised by ourSwiss colleagues. The theme“Threats to Universities,Challenges to PR” tackled withimportant topic of how we dealwith a university of the worldthat is no longer campus based.The Conference became veryaware of the challenges facingPR and informationprofessionals in the age of newtechnology.Socially it was a goodConference, with warmhospitality in a beautiful city,and memories of a wonderfulAlpine evening where, amongother things, we said farewellto Phil Radcliffe, an oldcolleague from Manchester.

By 1996 the SteeringCommittee was very aware ofthe difficulty of staging aConference in Southern Europe,for financial and other reasons.So the 1996 Conference washeld in Rotterdam andpresented with typical Dutchstyle and hospitality by ourcolleagues from TheNetherlands. Under the themeof “Communication and theChanging University” weconsidered the impending

changes in European HigherEducation. The talk at thefarewell breakfast waschallenging ‒ the president ofthe University of Amsterdam DrJankarel Gevers asked thequestion “Communication inHigher Education ‒ Sense orNonsense?”, and in so doing hepointed to values beyondfinance and other generallyaccepted criteria of success. Amajor highlight was the 10th

anniversary of the founding ofEUPRIO, with most of the formerchairmen and presidentssharing in a reception at thetower building in Rotterdam.

In 1997 EUPRIO finally made it toFrance, and the Conference washeld at Strasbourg, courtesy ofour hard-working Frenchcolleagues, and particularlyMonique Mizart. The themewas timely “The Impact of NewTechnologies on theCommunication of Universitiesin Europe”, and the social lifewas uniquely geared to thedistinctive role of Strasbourg,with visits to the EuropeanParliament and otherinstitutions ‒ and for the low-brow, an afternoon at theKronenbourg brewery.

—AlfMcCrearySuccess Story. The History of EUPRIO,in Network Bulletin, February 1999.

61

media: Scandinavia and the LowCountries, the English Language media,the French Language media, the GermanLanguage media and the MediterraneanEuropean media: Spain and Italy. Eachsession was introduced by a small panel ofhigher education PR o#cers from theconsidered countries and there was anopportunity for those attending to raisequestions and discuss issues.

The Zurich Conference o"eredboth the traditional plenarysessions and an outdoor

workshop, taking participants to researchinstitutes in the outskirts of Zurich. Awide variety of workshops featuredpractical topics. !e fifth plenary session,chaired by Alf McCreary, took place onSunday morning and was followed by abusiness meeting and the closing of theconference.

!e University of Utrecht and the VrijeUniversiteit Amsterdam organised pre-conference visits before the RotterdamConference, which were only open to alimited number of members. !e subjectof the pre-conference master class inUtrecht was “Universities and publicunderstanding of science”. !e objectivewas to present national and local activitiesin the considered subject and to discussnew ideas and strategies with participants.It was sponsored by the University ofUtrecht in the context of its 360th

anniversary.

!is was the presentation of theRotterdam Conference by the organisingteam:

“Higher education in Europe is under alot of pressure. In various Europeancountries there are discussions about thequality and organisation of highereducation and the institutions within.New demands from within society oftengo hand in hand with simultaneouscutbacks in budgets. Strong fluctuations inthe number of students and on the jobmarket for graduates have their e"ect onthe institutions of higher education. !esedevelopments lead to huge changes foruniversities: changes in educational andresearch programmes and changes withinthe organisation. !e university as asanctuary of academic values is beingforced to operate more and more like abusiness. !e university finds itself caughtbetween being an ivory tower andbecoming a business. !at gradual changetakes some time getting used to.Communication can fulfill an importantrole in the process of change thatuniversities are going through. At astrategic level communication helps set thecourse of action that the organisation willtake and at a practical level it e"ectuatesthe communication policy and goals.”

!e welcome address by Wim Janssen,chairman of EUPRIO, Doctor Henk J. vander Molen, president of the ErasmusUniversity and Hans den Oudendammer,alderman of the Municipality of

PresidentWim Janssen prepares the Zurich Conference with the Swiss colleagues.On the left, Heini Ringer (University of Zurich).

ARCH

IVE

W.J

ANSS

EN

62

Rotterdam was followed by a boat trip onthe ship Friesland through Rotterdam’sharbour and included an informal dinneron board.

As one of the aims of the conferencewas to learn from each other’s experiencesand expertise in the area of highereducation communication, a presentationof papers took place at the beginning ofthe conference. Participants were given theopportunity to meet colleagues withsimilar interests in groups of up to 25 andgive presentations based on papers thathad been specially prepared for theconference about subjects related to theconference theme. After selection by theorganising team, the best papers werepresented during a plenary session and allthe papers published in a conferencereport.

In the afternoon, outdoor visits wereorganised to di"erent places in town: theCommunication and MarketingDepartment of the Port of Rotterdam, theRotterdam Philharmonic Orchestra, theMuseum Boymans-Van Beuningen, andthe Feijenoord football stadium.

“EUPRIO Master classes incommunication” took place on the secondday. !ey constituted an opportunity forparticipants to take part in a master classlecture given by top class professionals incommunication on subjects related to theconference theme. Each master class lasted75 minutes and was repeated twice.

At lunchtime, participants had anopportunity to present posters on “!eEUPRIO market of good project and goodpractical experiences or: How to steal yourcolleagues’ good ideas without any risk!”Posters were produced containing practicalcommunications information and a jurychose the best poster(s) which wereawarded a prize.

And, finally, the closing brunch waschaired by Jankarel Gevers, president ofthe University of Rotterdam, who gave aspeech on the theme: “Communication inhigher education: sense or nonsense?”

It was decided before the StrasbourgConference that proposals from membersof the Baltic countries who were willing tocome to the next conferences would becollected. !e members were to be chosenfrom among those with whom EUPRIOalready had links and would have to fulfiltwo conditions: be fluent in English; andwork in the field of PR orcommunication.

!ey were to be sent a questionnaire tomeasure their motivation. Up to sixmembers were to be invited to come toStrasbourg and four scholarships were tobe o"ered to members of the universitiesof Bucarest, Ostrava and Latvia. !ey weresupposed to meet the ExecutiveCommittee there to discuss the beststrategy to attract more members fromEastern countries. !ey were also to behelped in creating and professionalising

Zurich, 1995. FrankMunnichs announces the Rotterdam conference withWim Janssen and Rolf Guggenbühl, while Dutch cheese is being served.

ARCH

IVE

W.J

ANSS

EN

63

Network BulletinEditorial BoardAfter a discussion at a meeting ofthe Network Bulletin EditorialBoard in Amsterdam, in May1994, Andrea Rayner, BenHerbergs and Wim Janssen madesome proposals.They suggested a restructuringwith the Bulletin being dividedinto sections: policy discussions,good practice presentations,case studies and “how to” articlesand lists of services to members.The front page should attract thereader’s attention with a strongleading article and with headlinesummaries of the Bulletin’scontent. So far, it had beendevoted to pictures. Each issueshould also contain a page ofshort news items on highereducation and PR topics fromeach country represented on theSteering Committee. EachSteering Committee memberwould therefore be asked tosend the editor one or two shortnews items about PRdevelopments in their owncountries to be published in eachissue of the Bulletin.In order to make the NetworkBulletin more accessible andinteresting to those whose firstlanguage was not English,contributors were invited tosubmit articles in French as wellas in English. Summaries in

French were also to be providedfor articles in English and vice-versa. It was hoped that thisinnovation might stimulate moreparticipation in the Bulletin fromItalian, Spanish and Frenchmembers of EUPRIO.Andrea Rayner accepted aninvitation to be editor of theNetwork Bulletin for the years1994-1996. In actual fact, shecontinued in the role to theautumn 1997 issue. BenHerbergs was her deputy. Theplanned number of issues wasthree or four a year, withpublication in January, April,September and December. The1994 spring issue contained anarticle on the EdinburghConference, and others aboutthe Italian situation, the GermanPR experience in smalluniversities, the CampusInformation System, the Greeksituation, and about Dutchuniversities and theparliamentary election.The biggest problem the editorhad to cope with was collectingarticles, rather than findingsubjects. She therefore invitedSteering Committee members todedicate more time to theNetwork Bulletin and remindedthem to regularly send all theirnational short items that may be

of interest to readers.The 1996 spring issue wasconsidered to be very good. Afew problems in relation withdistribution cropped up,particularly in Italy. The systeminvolved copies being sent inbulk to national representativesto distribute to members and itsometimes didn’t work very well.The 1996 autumn issuecontained articles about the pastconference in Rotterdam and thepre-conference event in Utrecht,an overview of the Italian press,and a report of the result ofdemonstrations that took placein Paris the previous winter.The 1996 winter issue wasunanimously approved for itsinteresting content.However, the 1997 spring issuewas not published due toparticular circumstances. Theeditor suggested producing theautumn issue with the samecontent as planned for the springissue, including a report of theStrasbourg conference.The next editor, Tony Scott,begans his two-year term withthe 1998 spring issue. Heproposed a change in the format,quality of paper and design ofthe Bulletin.

their national networks. Christer Hjortand Marja Sadeniemi were placed incharge of contacts with the Baltic Statesand the Eastern countries.

!e Strasbourg Conference began witha visit to the European Parliament and aboat tour of the old parts of the city. !esocial programme for the next daysincluded outdoor visits to Alcatel,Kronenbourg, the Human Rights Buildingand the Cybergalerie in the town, before atrip along the “Route des vins” of Alsace,wine-tasting and, at last, an Alsacianevening.

!is conference also saw the creation ofan annual prize of 500 ECU, which wasattributed by a jury to the author of anarticle on the conference theme.

!e conference was closed by a speechfrom Inge Knudsen, from theConfederation of European Rectors’Conferences.

Strasbourg was the last conferenceof the current executivecommittee, with the chairman, the

treasurer, the secretary and the deputychairman all stepping down together afterthe conference. !e Steering Committeeelected unanimously Ingeborg Christensenas the next chairman, Rolf Guggenbühl asthe next treasurer, Marc Permanyer as thenext secretary and Wim Janssen as thenext deputy chairman at the CambridgeSteering Committee meeting inSeptember 1996. All of them would begintheir two-year period in o#ce after theStrasbourg conference in September 1997.

After Strasbourg, EUPRIO entered aperiod of uncertainty with the venue ofthe next conference still unknown. Sincethe Greek representative had retired fromher position at the University of Athens,the possibility of a conference in Greecebeing organised no longer existed. Otherpossibilities were discussed, but it was alsoconsidered that there would be noconference in 1998 if there were no o"ersto organise it.

64

!e financial situation of EUPRIO wasquite satisfactory during these years,although the expenses were felt to be alittle too high in comparison to theassociation’s anticipated income, especiallyduring 1994. From 1995 on, the problembecame more worrying for a few years.Treasurer Wolfgang Mathias made anumber of proposals to cope with thefinances in the future: the costs of theNetwork Bulletin could be lowered, partof the bank charges could be spared ifevery country transferred membership feesin one transaction, and membership feescould be raised to 50 ECU from 1995. Itwould be the first rise since EUPRIO begancollecting membership fees. !e treasureralso suggested that the press directory andthe scholarships should be financed withEU money. He even planned to visitBrussels in November 1995 to discuss thismatter. His last idea was to try to raisemoney from EUPRIO ’s conferences, askingconference organising teams to pay acertain amount of money to theassociation itself.

Eventually in 1996 finances improved,due both to increased membership feesand lower expenditure. As a result, someprojects were considered for a grant fromthe general fund. !ere were a number ofideas: granting more scholarships to enablemore delegates from Eastern Europe and

the Baltic States to attend conferences,providing funds to help national groupsorganise themselves, e.g. the PragueSeminar, enabling exchange visits bymembers, lowering conference fees,instigating a EUPRIO Prize, facilitatingmore o#cial languages at conferences,defraying the cost of production of theEUPRIO Press Directory and creating aEUPRIO Web site.

Among all those ideas came the rapidlaunch of the new EUPRIO Web site. It wasdesigned and implemented by theUniversity of Groningen, which wascongratulated for its design and thecontents. !e two directories (EUPRIOmembers and press) were maintained bythe University of Aarhus Web team. OnlyEUPRIO members were to have free accessto the press directory, using the password“Europe”.

Between April 1994 and August 1995,close relationships were established withBrussels. In the first instance with HEURAS;in the second with DAAD (DeutscheAcademische Austauchs Dienst); third,with the Coimbra Bureau, a newlyestablished network of some thirtyprestigious universities, most of whichwere members of EUPRIO. Last, with theLiaison Bureau of European Rectors,where Inge Knudsen, the former presidentof EUPRIO, was working as director.

Strasbourg, 1997. Executive Board’s change. A toast betweenWim Janssen,Ingeborg Christensen, Rolf Guggenbühl andWolfgangMathias.

ARCH

IVE

W.J

ANSS

EN

65

In August 1995, the deputy presidentAlf McCreary met Inge Knudsen inBrussels. !ey came to the followingagreement: the Liaison Committee ofRectors’ Conference were to o"er EUPRIOtheir Brussels o#ce as an o#cial address, tobe used when necessary. !is service waso"ered free of charge to EUPRIO. In return,EUPRIO o"ered a regular section in theNetwork Bulletin to disseminate matters ofimportance and of interest to members.EUPRIO was also to provide access to thedatabase when necessary. Moreover, theLiaison Committee of Rectors’ Conferenceo"ered EUPRIO conference facilities at theBrussels o#ce, although this was notcompletely free of charge. Other optionalservices, such as a mail-shot of the EUPRIOBulletin or the collection of membershipfees, was be charged to EUPRIO on a pro-rata basis.

A Steering Committee meeting wasorganised for Prague in March 1995 at thesame time as a EUPRIO Workshop on PublicRelations, intended for university rectorsand PR professionals in the CzechRepublic and Slovakia. !e theme was“Behind the headlines – !e challenge ofuniversity information and publicrelations”. !e seminar was conducted byWim Janssen, Alf McCreary, WolfgangMathias and Edoardo Brioschi, all ofwhom were senior EUPRIO representatives.Topics included PR strategy, dealing withthe media and internal communication.Since the financial situation was quitegood, the president proposed to o"er the

Czech and Slovakian participants at theEUPRIO Prague Workshop a membershipfree of charge for 1995.

!e idea of the “Scandinavianmeetings” appeared in Edinburgh, wherepeople realised that work conditions inEuropean countries were very di"erent,depending on the system of education andthe cultural environment. It was decidedtherefore that, beside the annualconferences, members sharing moresimilar systems would be o"ered theopportunity to meet and work in smallergroups. People from !e Netherlands,Norway, Denmark and Belgium wereinvited to meet in Aarhus, Denmark, on2-3 September, 1996. A first meeting hadalready been organised previously inAntwerp and Gent, Belgium.

!e Aarhus meeting programmeincluded discussions about theorganisation of an external relations o#ce,a talk from Denmark and Norway aboutthe present and the future titled “What dowe do and what do we want to do”, aguided tour through Aarhus ending up inthe Quartier Latin, and a visit to theScience Park and the Steno Museumsituated in the University Campus Park.

Wim Janssen left the academic world in2001 after attending twelve conferences asa member of EUPRIO and chairing four ofthem. During his presidency, EUPRIO tooka new turn, that will be followed up andstrengthened under the leadership of thenext president, Ingeborg Christensen.

Rotterdamwas the venue of the 8th Conference. In the picture the Blaak Station.

EN.W

IKIP

EDIA

.ORG

66

It is a cold but sunny Friday morning in April. I am walkingalong the Boulevard St. Michel in Paris on my way to theÉcole des Mines, where in half an hour's time the meeting

of the Steering Committee of EUPRIO will start. I have alreadyattended conferences of this club in Leuven in Belgium and inSiena in Italy. Today I feel privileged to be the representative of theDutch universities at this illustrious gathering. Last night I tookanother close look at the Constitution; after all, you want to bewell-prepared for such a meeting. “EUPRIO was established on 12th

May 1986 in Brussels with support of o#cials of the EuropeanCommunity...” reads the first sentence of this Constitution. Itdi"erentiates between full members, assistant members andassociate members, and between big and small countries. Whenthe Steering Committee takes decisions, big countries have twovotes, small countries one.

During the meeting I keep a low profile; when you are newyou must not be loud. But then I take a deep breath and ask aloaded question: “What is it that makes a country big? Its size?!e average intelligence quotient? !e number of universities?!e number of EUPRIO members?” !e chairman, Alf McCreary,is nonplussed. !e other representatives do not react either. Ofcourse, I know the answer: we are governed by the rules andregulations of the EU; large EU countries have two votes, smallones one. Representatives of universities from non-EU countriescan only become associate members and non-EU countries haveno vote. !en and there I make up my mind: if I ever get a say inthis club, there'll be changes. To my surprise, at the end of themeeting I am appointed treasurer of EUPRIO.

At the end of Alf McCreary’s term as president, theSteering Committee chooses me as his successor. In aninterview with me in EUPRIO’s Network Bulletin, no. 9

(Autumn 1993), Andrea Rayner from Bristol noted: “Finally hehopes for more members from the Nordic countries and especiallyfrom Eastern Europe. !e EUPRIO Steering Committee will meetin Budapest in September and will gain its first contacts there.Our new chairman believes that colleagues from the formerEastern bloc countries will play an important role in EUPRIO inthe future.” My (hidden) agenda is to transform EUPRIO from anorganization within the EU, guided by EU regulations, into aEurope-wide club of universities: “from European Union PublicRelations and Information O#cers Association tot de EuropeanUniversities Public Relations and Information O#cersAssociation”, an organization for the whole of Europe notdi"erentiating between large and small countries and between fulland associate membership.

At the university of Groningen I switched on my PC anddrafted a new Constitution for EUPRIO. It took a lot of persuading,many one-on-ones with representatives of large countries (whichwould lose votes) and a number of meetings of the SteeringCommittee before the new Constitution was passed in 1995.

Before I left the academic world in 2001, I attended twelveconferences as a member of EUPRIO. It was my privilege to chairfour of these – in Edinburgh (1994), in Zurich (1995), inRotterdam (1996) and in Strasbourg (1997). !at is way back,but fortunately I can rely on my editorials in the EUPRIO NetworkBulletins.

Wim Janssen

Looking back to the successful conference in Edinburgh Iwrote in December 1994: “…Many things are still in thedark, but two things are evident: even in PR and

Information O#ces, we are talking more and more about marketsand about the European dimension. !e Edinburgh Conferencehas helped us to develop a strategic vision at our home base: tothink about, to talk about and perhaps to decide what positionour university should adopt in a changing world. And – this isour main responsibility – to think about the development of ourown profession and the place and function of the PR andInformation O#ce in a university.” In that same editorial Isounded a warning. “In the seventies and the first half of theeighites, the place and function of the university were undisputedand there was growth: the Leitmotiv of PR and InformationO#ces was ‘!e Public Right to Know’ and ‘UniversityExtension’. From the second half of the eighites onwards , studentrecruitment became an important issue in a number of Europeanuniversities because of the post-war bulge and PR activitiesbecame more focused on protecting the universities’ own interests.!e nineties bring to the universities a focus on the market. !elanguage of the market is definitely taking hold of our PRdepartments. A couple of years ago we were still talking abouttarget groups: now we talk market segments. Our Leitmotiv ofthe ‘!e Public Right to Know’ is threatening to change into ‘thechallenge of coping with the markets’. We should not let thesechanges creep unnoticed, and we should take constant care that‘!e Public Right to Know’ is not consigned to the dustbin.”

67

Themain building of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, which expressed the 6th EUPRIO president.

CHRI

STO

SPYK

ER

68

“Communication and the Changing University” was thetheme of the Rotterdam Conference two years later. Iremember that this theme was embraced by the first and lastkey-note speakers: “Wim Deetman, former Minister ofScience and Education in the Netherlands and now (in 1996)chairman of the Dutch Parliament, and Jankarel Gevers,president of the University of Amsterdam. !ey asked, whatis the core business of the university, or as they put it: ‘Whatis the heart of the university?’ Core business sounds much toobusinesslike; the core business of a university is that it is nota business! Wim Deetman stated in his opening speech thatuniversities should lead the way, and should enter the socialdebate. !e university is not like a normal business; it is – orrather should be a beehive of creative scholars and scientists.Deetman lamented the non-visibility of top researchers indebates on national and international themes and problems.Whatever the future may bring for universities, he said, thissocial function will be the most important one. Jankarel

Gevers touched on the same theme from another point of view:he more or less concluded that the university does not exist at all.!ere is something approaching a communal view of what theuniversity was in the past and what it will be in the future. !ereare hundreds of ideas about what the university is or should be atpresent. !is has led to confusion. Jankarel Gevers came to thesame conclusion as Wim Deetman: the university is a beehive ofindividual scholars and scientists.”

“Does this mean” – I wrote in my editorial – “that we ascommunication professionals should put our ideas on corporatecommunication in the dustbin? I don`t think so. We have learnedin recent years to devote a lot of our attention (and budgets) tocorporate communication, but perhaps the pendulum will swingback the other way. We may have to devote more attention toindividual scholars and scientists, to persuade them to enter thesocial debate. In this way we will get back to the heart of theuniversity. We must make the university more open andtransparent and allow the world a view of our best men andwomen within the ‘black box’ of corporate communication.”

Introducing Wim Deetman I reminded the audience how asEducation Minister in the early eighties he had made deep cuts inthe Dutch unversities' budgets. !ey would be announced at nineon a Monday morning. On the preceding Sunday an envoy of theMinistry delivered the sealed proposals for the cuts to thechancellors of the universities. !at evening the three membersof the Board of the University of Groningen and I ascommunication professional met to discuss the impact of thesecuts on our university. No other executive – not the finance o#cernor the personnel chief – had been invited. Only thecommunication professional was asked to join this importantcabal. I thanked Deetman: “Your financial intervention has putmy profession in the limelight.”

Ishould like to conclude this trip down memory lane withtwo anecdotes. In March 1995 the Steering Committee metin Prague and convened a workshop for Czech and Slovak

universities. !is was the first time all universities of these twocountries had gathered to exchange views about communication.Among them were three military academies which tried tocooperate in matters regarding communication. When I walked tothe conference hotel in the morning, I was struck by the number

69

EEuurrooppee aanndd tthhee mmeeddiiaa

PPrroommoottiinngg sscciieennccee bbyy cceelleebbrraattiinnggsscciieennccee?? TThhee EEddiinnbbuurrgghhIInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall SScciieennccee FFeessttiivvaallaapppprrooaacchh

Suggested topics• how universities are adjusting to thefree market• playing the league table game;competing for students – strategies andtechniques• the student as customer and theconcept of customer service• student charters – what are they andwhat are they for?• PR payment by performance; therole of advertising in higher educationmarketing• why governments want value formoney and accountability fromuniversities• design in university marketing –using outside agencies and internalunits

TThheemmee: EEuurrooppee 22000000:: tthhee CChhaalllleennggee oofftthhee MMaarrkkeettVVeennuuee: University of EdinburghLLaanngguuaaggeess: simultaneous translationsbetween English, French and Spanish. NNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss: 180 peoplecoming from all across the WesternEuropean countries, along with a numberof colleagues from other parts of thecontinent and beyond (a small groupfrom Central/Eastern Europe plus acolleague or two from North Americaand even Mexico).

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssAAcchhiieevviinngg EEuurrooppeeaann ppoossiittiioonniinngg iinn tthheehhiigghheerr eedduuccaattiioonn mmaarrkkeett

HHiigghheerr eedduuccaattiioonn iinn SSccoottllaanndd aanndd tthheeUUnniitteedd KKiinnggddoomm

EEuurrooppeeaann CCoommmmuunniittyy ppoolliiccyy ffoorruumm

WWhhaatt ddooeess iitt mmeeaann ffoorr aa uunniivveerrssiittyy ttooeenntteerr tthhee mmaarrkkeett ppllaaccee aass aaccoommmmeerrcciiaall ccoonncceerrnn??

• professional education and trainingfor modern PR practice• taking on board alumni relations andfund-raising

Workshops• corporate and visual identityprogrammes• university magazines and theexternal audience• the electronic media for mediainteraction• desktop publishing and print buying;• making use of radio• use of market research in publicrelations• running internal TV trainingprogrammes• crisis planning for PR• campus wide electronic informationsystems• university newsletters• readership and other feedbackstudies on university publications

of military vehicles parked at the entrance. In the conference hallI met military personnel in military dress. After speeches by AlfMcCreary, Wolfgang Mathias, Edoardo Brioschi and myself, andthe usual question and answer game, one of the militaryapproached me. “We would very much like to shed our oldimage,” he told me; “would you have suggestions how to?”Without thinking I answered: “If I were you, I would start byputting on a di"erent suit.”

As chairman of EUPRIO I made it my habit to o"er a present, onbehalf of my university in Groningen, to all prominent speakers atconferences; it was a Delft blue bottle of Dutch gin. In my speechesI referred to these gifts as the “spirit of EUPRIO.” Once, at Zurichairport, I was stopped by customs. !ey went through my luggageand found four bottles of Dutch gin. “One is for the Minister ofEducation, one for the Governor of Kanton Zurich, one for theMayor of Zurich and one for the Rector Magnificus of theuniversity,” I sternly told the o#cial on duty. He did not knowwhether I was kidding, he did not know whether I was trying tofool him, he did not know what to do. He let me pass.

TThheemmee: TThhrreeaattss ttoo UUnniivveerrssiittiieess::cchhaalllleennggeess ttoo PPRRVVeennuuee: Swiss Federal Institute ofTechnology and University of ZurichLLaanngguuaaggeess: English, German and Frenchwere the official languages of theconference with simultaneoustranslations for the plenary sessions.

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssAArree uunniivveerrssiittiieess ffaalllliinngg aappaarrtt??Martine Brunschwig-GrafMinister of Education, Canton of Geneva

TThhee uunniivveerrssiittyy –– AA ppeerrssoonnaall vviieewwFranz HohlerWriter and satirist

TThhee uunniivveerrssiittyy aass aa tteeaamm:: fificcttiioonn aannddrreeaalliittyyHelga NowotnyUniversity of Vienna

SScciieennccee aanndd tthhee mmeeddiiaa –– TThhee mmiissssiinngglliinnkkRosmarie WaldnerPresident European ScienceJournalists’ Association

Hans Peter PetersForschungszentrum Jülich GmbH

SScciieennccee aanndd tthhee mmoorraall ddiimmeennssiioonn Walter ZimmerliBamberg

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssCChhaannggeess iinn EEuurrooppeeaann hhiigghheerr eedduuccaattiioonnFrans van Vught

FFrroomm ppuubblliicc ttoo pprriivvaattee eenntteerrpprriissee’’:: tthheettrraannssffoorrmmaattiioonn ooff RRooyyaall PPTTTT NNeeddeerrllaanndd((KKPPNN))Philip van Tijn

CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn aass ppaarrtt ooff tthhee ssttrraatteeggyy ooffCCoorrnneellll UUnniivveerrssiittyy,, UUSSAASusan Murphy

TThheemmee: CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn aanndd tthhee cchhaannggiinngguunniivveerrssiittyy

VVeennuuee: University of Rotterdam

LLaanngguuaaggeess: English; Plenary sessions aresimultaneously translated in German andFrench.NNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss: more than 160.

70

TThheemmee: IImmppaacctt ooff nneeww tteecchhnnoollooggiieess oonn tthheeccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn ooff uunniivveerrssiittiieess iinn EEuurrooppeeLLaanngguuaaggeess: French, English and Spanish.Simultaneous translations were provided forplenary sessions.

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssNNeeww tteecchhnnoollooggiieess:: IInntteerrnneett,, mmuullttiimmeeddiiaa,,hhyyppeerrtteexxtt,, ee--mmaaiill,, CCDD--rroomm,, wwhhaatt aarree wweettaallkkiinngg aabboouutt?? TThhee iinnttrroodduuccttiioonn ooff nneewwtteecchhnnoollooggiieess iinnttoo uunniivveerrssiittiieess rraaiisseennuummeerroouuss qquueessttiioonnss:: WWhhoo iiss tthhee wweebbmmaasstteerr??SSeerrvviinngg tthhee pprreessss vviiaa tthhee WWeebb?? GGrraapphhiiccpprreesseennttaattiioonn ooff tthhee wweebb?? QQuuaalliittyy ccoonnttrrooll??FFiinnaanncciinngg tthhee WWeebb?? CCooppyyrriigghhtt??Rolf Guggenbühl

FFrroomm ppaappeerr ttoo oonn--lliinnee:: ttrraaiinniinngg aannddpprrooffeessssiioonnss,, iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn aanndd sseeccuurriittyy,, lleeggaallffrraammeewwoorrkk aarree ttaakkeenn iinnttoo aaccccoouunntt

TTeecchhnnoollooggyy wwaattcchh aanndd tthhee IInntteerrnneett:: tthheeaammoouunntt ooff mmaatteerriiaall aavvaaiillaabbllee oonn tthhee IInntteerrnneettiiss eennoorrmmoouuss.. WWee nneeeedd ttoo lleeaarrnn hhooww ttoo ppiicckk iittoouutt aanndd ttoo eexxppllooiitt iitt eefffificciieennttllyyMichèle Van HollebekeCité des Sciences et de l’Industrie, Paris

WWhhaatt aarree wwee ddooiinngg iinn EEuurrooppeeaann uunniivveerrssiittiieess??session shared by France and Denmark

NNeeww tteecchhnnoollooggiieess aanndd ssoocciieettyyPhilippe BretonCNRS, Strasbourg

Picture of the group of the 9th Conference in Strasbourg.

ARCH

IVE

W. J

ANSS

EN

19971999

IngeborgChristensenAarhus Universitet

Denmark

72

or the second time inthe history of EUPRIOthe University ofAarhus allowed awoman the opportunityto become president ofthe association. After

Inge Knudsen, who chaired from 1987 to1989, Ingeborg Christensen was electedten years later for a two-year term, from1997 to 1999.

Two conferences marked IngeborgChristensen’s presidency: the Heidelbergconference on innovation and challengesin the communications of Europeanuniversities and the Danish / Swedishconference on transnational universityinformation systems.

The Heidelberg conferenceopened on Thursday 3rd

September 1998 with a welcomespeech by Ingeborg Christensen, JürgenSiebke, Rector of the University ofHeidelberg, and Joseph Bricall from theConférence des Recteurs Européens. Thenext morning, the Rector of theUniversity of Heidelberg and Ingeborg

Christensen chaired the opening sessiontogether, giving a speech on “TheUniversity of Heidelberg reorganizingmanagement and communication”.

In the afternoon the workshops tookplace in various research institutions inthe Heidelberg area, among which theCenter for Molecular Biology, theInterdisciplinary Center for ScientificComputing, the European MolecularBiology Laboratory, the German CancerResearch Center, Springer-VerlagHeidelberg, the European Institute forResearch and Strategic Studies inTelecommunications, the EuropeanMedia Lab of the Klaus TschiraFoundation and the Technology ParkHeidelberg.

The 1998 EUPRIO Prize was attributedto the University of Oulu (Finland), afterlong deliberations by the jury, headed bythe president Ingeborg Christensen. Up to52 brochures were submitted for thecontest, which was about universitypublications. The winner’s name wasannounced during the dinner at the castleof Heidelberg:

F

ARCH

IVE

I.CHR

ISTE

NSEN

Alnarp (Sweden), 1999. Ingeborg Christensen hands over the presidency to Rolf Guggenbühlon a carriage leading them to the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.

73

“The winning brochure tells about tenfictional stories about life at the Universityof Oulu, mainly from a student’s point ofview. It is aimed at prospective studentsand is written in an informal andhumorous style. The brochure is the resultof a joint project of the Press and PR Unit,Students’ Union, Students’ AccomodationFoundation and a company which runsstudents restaurants. It is part of the 40th

anniversary of the University’spublications.”

Both the contents and the socialprogramme satisfied the needs and thetastes of the audience – Alf Mc Crearycommented on the Network Bulletin:

“The Conference included amemorable debate (the first such in thehistory of EUPRIO) and a number ofchallenging addresses in the beautifulGreat Hall of the University ofHeidelberg. Socially it was a wonderfulexperience just to be in Heidelberg in latesummer, and the icing on this Europeancake was the Conference dinner in theCastle of Heidelberg. The next eveningthere was a stunning fireworks displayviewed from the River Neckar, a ‘riverboatshuffle’ complete with a jazz band. Whenthey played the last number ‘Bye, Bye,Blackbird’ they created many a fondmemory not only of this Conference butalso of the many splendid moments ateuprio over the past ten years.”

After Heidelberg, since EUPRIO waswilling to support universities in Centraland Eastern Europe as well as in otherupcoming European countries to helpthem develop their public relations, theSteering Committee invited colleaguesfrom those countries to the followingconference with the aim of discussing withthem the possibility of giving themsupport and involving them in the EUPRIOnetwork.

Information officers from suchuniversities taking part in TEMPUS or otherEU-financed programmes were asked tofinance their participation through theseprogrammes. To other colleagues, whowere strongly interested in joining theEUPRIO activities, the Steering Committeedecided to offer a limited number ofscholarships.

The amount of 3,000 ! was decided tosponsor five EUPRIO delegates fromupcoming countries to go to Copenhagen.Finally, nine participants from upcoming

countries received scholarships for theconference.

Regarding cooperation with upcomingcountries, the Universities of Lund,Helsinki, Odense, Bochum and theBusiness School of Copenhagen created anetwork with the money received from agrant from the TEMPUS programme. Withthis grant they would arrange seminars tohelp upcoming countries professionalizeand create their national networks in theirown countries.

The directory of members and thedirectory of press contacts were publishedboth on the Web site and on paper by theUniversity of Aarhus. However, since themaintenance of the two directories hadbecome onerous for Aarhus, it was takenover by the University of Groningen, atleast for one year.

Tony Scott, the editor of the NetworkBulletin, reported at the SteeringCommittee meeting in April 1999 that atotal of 1,000 copies were sent out inMarch 1999. The cost of that issueamounted to 2,500 DM, which was lessthan the previous issues. The followingissue was due to come out at the end ofOctober 1999, a month after theCopenhagen conference. It would beprinted in another colour. The next issuewas planned for March 2000, with theLecce conference as main topic.

At the same Steering Committeemeeting, the treasurer recommended a10% rise in the number of fees to increasethe budget. The number of membersshould not drop any more and lessrepresented countries were encouraged toraise their membership figures in order tocope with future financial problems.

Future possible co-operation with CASEEurope was discussed at a first informalmeeting between Ingeborg Christensen,Arne Abrahamsen, Rolf Guggenbühl fromEUPRIO, and Ray Footman and ColinBoswell from CASE Europe. This meeting,called on the initiative of EUPRIO, tookplace on 26-27 March, 1999. It aimed atexploring the likely future developmentsof both organisations and the potentialfuture relationships between them,including possible opportunities for co-operation and collaboration.

EUPRIO, which was – and still is –organised entirely on a voluntary basis,had established itself as an informal

74

European university PR network, but wasnot at that time in a position to expand itsactivities. On the other hand, CASE wasextending its activities across continentalEurope, thanks to a permanent secretariatin London, which made it possible. CASEwas focusing more and more on Europeanprofessional practice, though drawing onNorth American expertise. Among factorsseen as relevant to the future by thoseattending the meeting were the increasingprofessionalization of their job, anincreasing demand for lifelong learningand a likely increasing financial pressureon higher education institutions.

After EUPRIO and CASE representativescompleted the meeting, it was suggested asmall joint group was established toundertake a more detailed examination ofthe areas where co-operation might beparticularly relevant to both EUPRIO andCASE and to prepare proposals of co-operation. Among other ideas, theyexamined the possibility of publicisingeach other’s activities, of CASE offeringinitial discounts to EUPRIO members atselected CASE events, of someadministrative services that could beoffered to EUPRIO via the CASE office, ofsome activities that could be jointlyundertaken or sponsored by the twobodies, and of each organisation

nominating a representative at each other’sprincipal annual event. Whatever theoutcome of this project would be, a firststep had been made connecting the twoinstitutions and the link would be keptopen to make sure that, for example thereshould be no clashes of dates in anyforward planning.

The second and last conferenceIngeborg Christensen had thehonour to chair was the joint

Danish / Swedish conference, organised inMalmö, Copenhagen and Lund at the endof August 1999.

A special optional pre-conferencetraining seminar took place on the islandof Hven from 24th to 26th August, justbefore the opening of the conference. Thisseminar was organised for newcomers inthe profession. It was based on activeparticipation in group work led by fourexperienced informants from variousEuropean universities. The aim of theseminar was to help participants formulatea university’s internal and externalcommunication strategy.

“Four groups will be formed takingeach university’s size, age andgeneralisation / specialisation intoconsideration. The group’s task is toformulate a plan of action for internal

Having read the archives andhaving lived through andtaken a sometimes pivotal rolein many of the developmentsof EUPRIO, I personally amdelighted at all that has beenachieved from such humbleand hopeful beginnings. Tomymind these are among themajor successes:1. remaining loyal to thecentral purpose ofcommunication, networkingand professionalism;2. retaining a largemembership ‒ the numbersare now circa 250-275;3. remaining financially viable.Our estimated income isaround 31,000 ECU. This wasnot always so, and I recall anearly Steering Committeemeeting in Brussels where wefeared bankruptcy;4. helping others ‒ using ourresources to providescholarships, etc.;

5. moving with the times ‒including the establishment ofa Web site, running aConference on IT, widening ourmembership (all members arenow equal), new initiatives withEastern Europe;6. maintaining a (fairly) regularbulletin;7. providing regular services forour members, including ourdirectories;8. continuity of management inwhich tribute is due tohardworking chairmen /presidents and SteeringCommittees who have takenmuch of their own valuabletime to do their work;9. maintaining a high level ofcontent and attraction for ourannual conferences. Againmany thanks are due to ourcolleagues in all countries whohelped stage these gatheringsat no little cost in time, effortand money;

10. maintaining a delightfuland unique camaraderie andalso a professional attitudethroughout.Finally, as I write this article ona grey Saturday afternoon inBelfast I am reminded of all thesunshine, friendship and fun (aswell as the hard work andcreativity) of EUPRIO, which willalways remain close to myheart like a special child. I hopethat you who carry on the workwill remember this ‒ take EUPRIOseriously, but not too seriously,and, above all, do not takeyourselves too seriously at all! Iwish you well.

—AlfMcCrearySuccess Story. The History of EUPRIO,in Network Bulletin, February 1999.

75

communication, national andinternational study information, andpublic relations. Each plan should includethe purpose of each stated main point,short and long term goals, strategies forimplementation, suggestions for activitiesand forms of evaluation. Work during theseminar will be carried out in project-form: thus achieving one of the aims, i.e.giving all the participants the skillsrequired for project-oriented work.”

The actual conference began by a boattrip on the canal, followed by a walk tothe University of Copenhagen, where theVice-Chancellor of the University ofCopenhagen, Kjeld Mollgaard, andEUPRIO president Ingeborg Christensenwelcomed the delegates. A dinner wasoffered in the Ceremony Hall of theUniversity with musical performance bythe Copenhagen University Choir.

The next day the conference took placeat the Copenhagen Business School andthe afternoon sessions were followed by adinner offered at the Tivoli garden inCopenhagen.

The 1999 EUPRIO Prize was awarded tothe university which provided the bestuniversity gift article. The jury wascomposed of Ingeborg Christensen,Alessandro Ciarlo and Elmar Hein.

On Saturday 28th August theconference moved to Sweden. Malmö,Lund and Alnarp were visited by thedelegates, who were invited on a boat tripfrom Copenhagen to Malmö. Theprogramme included a presentation ofMalmö University by Vice-ChancellorPer-Olof Glantz, a presentation of LundUniversity by Vice-Chancellor BoelFlodgren and a presentation of theSwedish University of AgriculturalSciences at Alnarp by Vice-ChancellorThomas Rosswall.

A traditional Swedish dinner followedbefore a bus ride back to Copenhagen.When sending the minutes of theCopenhagen Steering Committee meetingIngeborg Christensen wrote:

“I think you will agree with me that thecrawfish dinner in a tent in a park in theSwedish countryside in Alnarp was anevent which it will be difficult to beat”.

The total number of members in 1999amounted to 232. Membership fees werefixed to 55 ! in 1999 and did not changein 2000. Payment for 1999 had to bemade on a Swiss bank account because thetreasurer, Rolf Guggenbühl was Swiss.Iceland had one member (depending onDenmark).

ARCH

IVE

I.CHR

ISTE

NSEN

Heidelberg, 1998. Plenary session of the10th Annual Conferencein the Old Hall of the University.

76

Verweile doch! Du bist so schön!(O stay! Thou art so fair!)

JohannWolfgang von Goethe, Faust

“What did you think of the conference?” This was a questionasked to Italian Edoardo Brioschi at the end of the 1995 EUPRIOconference in Zurich, professionally and efficiently organised byRolf Guggenbühl, where the catchword during the three days hadbecome “sharp”. “We will meet at such and such a place at threeo’clock,” Rolf would announce, whereupon we would all sing outhappily, “Shaaarp.” “Well,” replied Edoardo pensively, “I think itwas a little too sharp for me. You see, they think in minutes. Wethink in centuries.”

I love both of them dearly and, since then, this story has beenone of my party pieces whenever the conversation has touched ondifferences between the north and south of Europe. For me,EUPRIO meant the entry into other European countries, regardednot as amorphous landscapes, but as real people of flesh and blood– as well as intellect, wit and humour.

The first EUPRIO conference I attended was in Granada in1992, where I did not know a single soul and was feeling a bitlost. On the first evening of the conference, I felt somewhat leftout when all the other guests seemed to recognise each other in thecrowd. They all knew one another and were obviously pleased tomeet old acquaintances. And then I was saved by Klaus Grabowski– a man who had spent his early childhood years in Denmark, ina camp for German refugees at the end of the war. He came up tome and started talking about my country, and introduced me toothers – and we have continued to talk ever since. At laterconferences, I used to say to newcomers, “Don’t despair. Klauswill come and save you. Or, if he’s got too much to see to,somebody else will.”

When I look at the European countries, I connect Norwaywith Torny, Arne and Anne Katharine. Sweden with Ulla, Anette,Lena and Christer, and Finland with Marja and Irma. For theNetherlands, I think of Joop, Jacques andWim, while Belgium isdefinitely represented by Marcel. For Germany, I think of Klaus,Bernt and Heidi, and for Switzerland, it is Rolf. Then, of course,there is Austria with Christian, and Italy with Edoardo, Alessandroand Paola. Great Britain is personified by Ray Footman – theEuropean university information officer – along with Peter, Alfand Nic, and Ireland for me is Tony. France is, of course,Monique, while Spain has Marc, Carlos and Victoria, andPortugal has Ana Bela.

Being given the opportunity to meet these people, all of whombecame friends, has been one of the highlights of my career. It hasbeen an incredible boon to make the acquaintance of peoplerepresenting so many different nationalities, and to learn wherethe differences between us lie. Of course, there are manysimilarities – not surprising when you consider that we all workwithin the same field, albeit in different countries, and underdifferent systems.

For us, the explicit aim of EUPRIO and its renowned conferenceswas to share our experiences, to learn new tricks, and to borrow– and perhaps steal – one another’s ideas. To meet old friends,make new friends, and strengthen professional and personal

Ingeborg Christensen

77

relationships. Here we could find the enthusiasm other colleaguesat our universities did not exhibit, and here we could find ashoulder to cry on – something our day-to-day colleagues did notprovide.

I chaired two EUPRIO conferences, one in Heidelberg in 1998and one in Copenhagen, Malmö and Lund in 1999. Flashbacksfrom Heidelberg, the oldest university in Germany, include alearned disputatio in the old Great Hall at Heidelberg University,a formidable banquet at the city’s medieval castle and a cruise onthe Saturday night along the Neckar, complete with sensationalfireworks that re-enacted the razing of the castle on 6th September1693.

The disputatio – debate – was carried out between two Brits,the proposer of the motion Frank Albrighton, then Director ofPublic Affairs at the University of Birmingham, and the opposerJohn Izbicki from The Independent. The thesis was The JournalisticView. Serious Science Doesn’t Sell. A debate on media coverage in theage of paparazzi. Frank Albrighton argued eloquently for themotion that science is boring and that scientists are boring, closelyfollowed by John Izbicki taking the opposite view. The votes forthe more convincing argument went to the proposer with a totalof 79, while the opposer was given 47 votes. Nevertheless, we allwent home and continued to try and “sell” serious science. Ichhab’ mein Herz in Heidelberg verloren, goes the old song (I lost myheart in Heidelberg). Perhaps not, but to Heidelberg, certainly.

At Bridging the Gap, the Danish–Swedish conference in 1999,the rain came down in torrents the very afternoon we hadorganised a Copenhagen canal cruise in open boats, and the hotelrooms were miniscule and cramped. In Marianne Mörck,however, the Swedish actress, singer and stage manager, wemet a fantastic performer. One of her aims is to makeopera available to everybody, and to take away itsflavour of being high-brow and difficult to understand.She wants the audience to experience a totality of time,music, emotions, mind, and spirit, and told us whatshe does to achieve these aims, demonstrating with gustothe means she uses. She was met with thunderous andwell-deserved applause.

ARCH

IVE

I.CHR

ISTE

NSEN

Heidelberg, 1998. Musical entertainmentin the Königssaal closing the 10th Annual Confernce.

78

Not less heartfelt was the applause given in a tent in the Alnarpparkland the next night to the Malmö Högskolas Old Boys, alively band that led us through all the intricacies of a Swedishkräftkalas, the traditional midsummer crayfish party, withschnapps, paper hats, and more or less organised lusty singing ofnative songs by the different nationalities. This was a party thattook off with a panache that is still talked about. But was it allpartying? Well, no, of course not, but partying was an essentialand important part of our getting together. When we are all ableto let our hair down, it is easier to head a conference workshop thenext morning and be confident of getting a friendly welcome bythe participants.

The 1999 Copenhagen conference made a profit, which wasused to establish a EUPRIO scholarship fund for the so-calledupcoming Eastern European countries, to be known as TheBridge Fund. For the 2000 conference in Lecce, the scholarshipswere published in 37 universities in Eastern Europe, all of whichwere working with other universities. Eleven applications werereceived with nine offers made and accepted. Most of the scholarshad previously taken part in EU programmes and bilateraltraining periods.

This was the time when we were advancing into cyberspace.EUPRIO’s Web site was based at my office until 1999, with mycolleague Nils-Jørgen Rasmussen in competent charge. It providedhim with quite a lot of entertaining challenges, but fortunatelyWim Janssen from the University of Groningen agreed to takeover theWeb site. In 1999, all members received a directory of thepeople involved in PR in European universities. For the first time,this information was also made available on EUPRIO’s Web site.

In 1999, it was reported that the use of email between theconference organisers and the national representatives had been asuccess. That same year, I held a talk in Bologna, stating scenariosthat now seem self-evident and pathetically naïve:

“We have always had to be well versed in areas such ascommunication, journalism, written proficiency and layout. Now,we need to have skills in other areas that were irrelevant to mostof us only a few years ago. And even though do not have to masterthese skills ourselves, we must at least know how these areas workto be able to navigate: marketing, technical know-how, proficiencyin written English, proficiency in oral English, knowledge ofcomputer programs in word processing, desktop publishing,spreadsheets and email systems. This poses the question whetherwe have the kind of staff we need. In other words: Can the staffwe have change? Or do we have to change our staff?”

There is no doubt that we have all changed, and that thecircumstances we find ourselves in have changed as well. The partplayed by the universities has also changed, and their need forinternational cooperation has changed beyond our wildest dreams– quite substantial changes in little more than ten years.

But EUPRIO remains.

79

The view from industry – Efficientuniversities – the basis forcompetitiveness in global marketsFriedrich ReutnerFRIATEC AG, Mannheim

The view from politics 11 – Sciencepolicy and communication of theUniversities of Baden-WürttembergKlaus von TrothaMinister of Science, Research and Artsof Baden-Württemberg

The BioRegio concept in the Rhine-Neckar-triangleUlrich AbshagenHeidelberg Innovation GmbH

The Amsterdam knowledge networkDave D. SimonsStichting KennisKring, Amsterdam

A virtual company for collaborativeR&DClaudio CarrelliEURESCOM, Heidelberg

On the way to a global expert networkDan ForbushProfNet, USA, Barry Jackson,ExpertNet, UKJochen BrinkmannClausthal University of Technology, IDW,Germany

The journalistic view: serious sciencedoes not sell – a debate on mediacoverage in the age of paparazziJohn IzbickiThe Independent, London,Frank AlbrightonUniversity of Birmingham.Debate chaired by Ray Footman.

TThheemmee: The networking university oftomorrow – Innovation and challengesin the communications of EuropeanuniversitiesVVeennuuee: University of HeidelbergLLaanngguuaaggeess: English, French andGerman, with translations of plenarysessions.NNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss: Almost 250delegates attended the conferencecoming from 23 countries across Europeand from the US. Delegates came fromAlbania, the Czech Republic, Latvia,Lithuania, Moldavia, Poland andRomania thanks to the EUPRIOscholarships.

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssThe view from politics 1 – Informationsociety and education in EuropeJimmy JamarCommission for Science, Research andDevelopment of the European Union

The view from academia – Newmanagement structures at universities– their impact on university publicrelationsKlaus LandfriedPresident of the German Rectors’Conference

80

TThheemmee:Trans national co-operation –Trans national university informationsystems.The theme was chosen because of thenew bridge between Denmark andSweden, which was at that time underconstruction and was planned to beopened in the year 2000.VVeennuuee: The conference was organisedby the Öresund University, a regionaluniversity network for research andlearning. Its originality lay in the factthat it took place both in Denmark andin Sweden, the delegates being drivenfrom one country to another accordingto the programme.All the participants were staying in thesame hotel, the Cab-Inn Hotel.

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssThe importance of cooperating acrossboundariesAlbert HammDirector of “Le Centre d’Innovation del’Enseignement supérieur d’Alsace”

Danish/Swedish museum co-operation– About the effect on nature in theOeresund region as a result of theOeresund fixed linkOle E. Meyer, Associate Professor, The ZoologicalMuseum, University of Copenhagen

Communicating with or withoutsingingMarianne MörckOpera singer

The role of the European universitiesthrough the centuries, and theirposition in society todayUffe OstergaardUniversity of Aarhus

ARCH

IVE

I. CHR

ISTE

NSEN

A pause during some Steering Committee works. Alessandro Ciarlo,Heidi Neyses, Tony Scott and Wim Janssen toast the future of EUPRIO.

19992003

RolfGuggenbühl

ETH ZürichSwitzerland

82

olf Guggenbühl, fromETH Zürich was electedpresident during theSteering Committeemeeting in Copenhagenon 26th August 1999.During the gala dinner

of the annual conference just three dayslater Ingeborg Christiensen presented himwith the virtual keys of the association.Rolf would go on to chair EUPRIO for twoyears. After a 13-year history with sevenpresidents from just three Nordiccountries (UK, the Netherlands andDenmark) this was the first time that thepresidency had gone to the middle ofEurope. As former treasurer of EUPRIORolf was determined to keep EUPRIO andits accounts in order. He also wanted toprovide EUPRIO with a much longer terminspiring vision.

Alessandro Ciarlo from BocconiUniversity in Milan became the newtreasurer. Whilst he was reassured that

EUPRIO’s financial situation was stable hewas surprised to see that, for someinexplicable reason, membership levelsfrequently went up and down and back upagain. During Rolf’s presidencymembership levels went from 231 (1999)to 207 (2000) to 251 (2001) and to 312(2002). There were always fifteencountries represented with Sweden, Italyand Denmark constantly having the mostmembers. At this time EUPRIO wasfortunate to have the “Bridge Fund”which had been set up using the ! 20,000surplus from the Copenhagen conference(1999). The Steering Committee plannedto keep this fund going for five-ten yearsand to use it to enable EUPRIO to offer a adiscounted conference fee to enablemembers from emerging Europeancountries to attend the annual conference.

It was hoped that the SteeringCommittee meeting in Ghent (7th April2000) would prove to be a turning pointin EUPRIO’s history. Rolf presented his

RLecce, 2000. Rolf Guggenbühl opens the 12th Conferencewith the Italian authorities and Antonio Lezzi, the local organiser.

ARCH

IVE

AICU

N

83

vision for the next five years which set outhis personal priorities. He stressed that theannual conference, the Web site andNetwork Bulletin, EUPRIO ’s newsletterwere important and should be continued.He also suggested that the associationshould look at organising a series of smallseminars during the year which wouldenable members to network morefrequently. Rolf also talked about settingup an online discussion board or chatroom where members could share ideas atany time and he suggested that it would bea good time to undertake some research tolook at the state of communications acrossEuropean universities. These were not newideas, in fact they had been discussed formore than ten years, but even though thenew president was talking about these asimportant initiatives which would supportmembers. The members of the SteeringCommittee were not quite ready to takethe plunge and move these ideas intoaction.

Indeed, at the same meeting ChristerHjort's proposal that EUPRIO organise aseminar jointly with Lund University tolook at “The Communicative University”did not attract much interest. AlthoughEUPRIO did not get involved in theorganisation of this seminar we did at leastdonate ! 1,000 to support this event.

By now Rolf was inundated withEUPRIO work and suggested that it wascritically important that individualmembers of the Steering Committee takeon more work themselves to support him

and EUPRIO as an organisation. SteeringCommittee members stepped forward.Marcel de Cleene volunteered to re-establish the lost links with France, whilstFinn Kjeruff Hansen agreed to become thelink between EUPRIO and EUadministrators. Wim Janssen continued tobe responsible for the Web site and TonyScott for producing the Bulletin.Alessandro Ciarlo and Peter Reader (thenew secretary), agreed to take care ofadministrative and financial matters. But,despite this, Rolf continued to drown inwork.

Those who attended the annualconference in Lecce remember itas one of the friendliest and best

organized conference in EUPRIO ’s history.The conference was co-promoted byAICUN, the Italian association of universitycommunicators, and by the localUniversity, whose head of communicationwas Antonio Lezzi. Antonio’s hard work

ARCHIVE AICUN

ARCHIVEAICUN

Above:Lecce, 2000.Paola Scioli,Alessandro Ciarloand VictoriaFerreiro,during a roundtable chaired byRay Footman.Below:a group pictureat the sameConference.

84

and enthusiasm played a key part in thesuccess of this conference. It opened at theCity Hall with excellent seafood,incredible views, tons of pasta and mostimportantly lots of fine Italian hospitality.The theme was “Universities’Communication – Torn betweenAcademia and Business?” and wasintroduced by Edoardo Brioschi thepresident of AICUN. Over the four daysparticipants discussed this topic duringplenary sessions and a range of workshopswhich ranged from marketing to strategicthinking, from case studies to newtechnologies. We were fortunate to receivefinancial support from Regione Pugliawhich enabled us to publish all theabstracts.

The 2001 Spring Steering Committeemeeting took place in Dublin on 10th

March. Members were delighted to hearthat membership levels had risen to 251and that France was back, not only withmembers but with Monique Mizart astheir national representative. Thecommittee voted for a small rise inmembership fees from 55 to 60 Euros. Astudy on expenditure on communicationand advertising across Europeanuniversities was launched as a part of the“Future of EUPRIO” programme.Relationships with CASE were improvingall the time and during a joint meetingrepresentatives from CASE expressed howimpressed they were by our conference

plans. During this meeting it was notedthat, although the EUPRIO constitutionstated that “membership is on individualbasis”, in practice many institutions werepaying fees for several individuals whichactually penalised institutions whoencouraged their staff to join ourassociation. It was proposed to change themembership from an individual to aninstitutional basis but sadly no firmdecision was taken and this issue wouldremain on the agenda for many years tocome.

Another sparkling annualconference was celebrated duringRolf ’s presidency. Marja

Sadaniemi and Irma Kuukusjärvi, withtheir teams, organized a packed conferencein Rovaniemi with 194 participants from24 countries. At this time the way ofcommunicating could be expressed as inan Italian teleoperator’s advertisementslogan, as: “Parla. Wappa. Clicca”.Changing technologies and new ways ofcommunicating were providing challengesfor us all and universities were rapidly“going virtual” on global, national andregional levels. So, “The Challenge ofChange” was chosen as the main themefor this conference. The keynote speeches,round table and workshops providedparticipants with ample opportunities todiscuss the challenges they were facing.

A view of Rovaniemi, venue of the 13th Annual Conference.

MATT

ISIN

ISAL

O

85

A quote from Learning to beCircumpolar by Richard Langlais sums upthis conference wonderfully: “We share adream with many others of a circumpolarArctic community. In that world, ourneighbours are at least as much to theWest and East of us as they are to theSouth, and it makes good sense to learnfrom each other about how to thrive in thelands of long winters and brilliant,intensive summers”. With the midnightsun, the wonderful countryside and thefree spirit of Lapland the conference wasopened on the 15th of June. Our hosts puttogether a fantastic social programme,with the highlight undoubtedly being theinformal evening spent outdoors at atraditional reindeer farm.

During the parallel SteeringCommittee meeting, Rolf Guggenbühlwas re-elected president and AlessandroCiarlo treasurer for a second year. Off therecord, somebody commented that it wasabout time EUPRIO had an Italianpresident, as Italy was always first orsecond when it came to the number ofmembers However, despite the title of theConference, the Steering Committeedecided not to embrace that particularchange.

During 2002 Euprians flocked tothe Iberian Peninsula. TheSpring Steering Committee

meeting took place in Aveiro on 15-16March and the annual conference inBarcelona. For the meeting in Aveiro AnaBela Martins prayed to all the Portuguesesaints for a warm Spring welcome formembers and organized a spectacularsocial programme for us in the streets ofAveiro. The atmosphere was so magicalthat members were able to work their waycalmly through a mountainous agendawhich included revising EUPRIO’sConstitution.

Peter Reader, as secretary, was asked toreview the Constitution and to prepare aproposal that would allow for bothinstitutional and individual memberships.The new Constitution was approved. Itgave more power to the SteeringCommittee and clearly set out the rolesand responsibilities of the nationalrepresentatives. This Constitution, defacto, remained for five years , but did notsolve the main problem EUPRIO faced, howto gain professional and legal status.

Rolf lamented the fact that the word“change” remained at odds the everyday

Barcelona, Casa de la Convalescéncia de l’Antic Hospitalde la Santa Creu, venue of the 14th Annual Conference.

BLOG

S.SA

PIEN

S.CA

T

86

realities of running EUPRIO. The trendtowards electronic media was movingapace and members were increasinglycoping with the challenges posed byworking in a more competitive world.EUPRIO members believed that it wasimportant for the association to gainprofessional and legal status but thoughtthat this would be beyond the capabilitiesof EUPRIO at that time. However, thedesire to achieve these never went away.

The conference in Barcelona wasbrilliantly promoted through differentmedia. Four newsletters were prepared toannounce, launch and describe theprogramme and to sum up the results. Thefocus for this conference shifted to strategyand quality and the plenary sessions,workshops and round table provided

ample opportunities for participants todiscuss communications from a muchwider perspective. Speakers came fromMexico, Cuba and Canada, which gave aspecial international feel to the conference.It was definitely a huge, well-prepared andprofessional conference, thanks to MarcPermanyer and Victoria Ferreiro Serranosupervision. Barcelona will be rememberedas both the most popular (260participants) and the emptiest conferencein EUPRIO’s history! Barcelona’s attractionsproved far too tempting for manyparticipants and a lot of the workshopswere empty. On the bright side howeverEUPRIO’s membership had expanded to312 members and the financial situationwas healthy.

The Spirit of Barcelona is aliveMost Polish people associateBarcelona with the 1992Olympic Games, with artistsGaudí and Picasso, and as alively seaport. The city streetshave a lively spirit of their own.When I received a scholarshipfrom the EUPRIO SteeringCommittee to attend thisconference I felt like a lotterywinner. I was to go toBarcelona to see how the bestEuropean universities createtheir policies to help them tobe the latest centres ofeducation and research; andto see how they make theirmark and build their image.Four days for “spying”!I must say that theconference’s organizershelped me to meet theobjectives I had set myself.They had prepared a verydetailed programme of

lectures and meetings, fromopen-for-all panels and lecturesto small task group meetingsfor specific topics.(…) The Conferenceprogramme followed a simplerecipe: link the best topics tothe best lecturers to providegreat lessons in PR andcommunication.But the job of a good spy is notonly listening to lectures, butalso talking with other people. Ihad the opportunity to talkwith many of the participants,mainly frommy own region. Asa result, I know we are in bettersituation than we were fiveyears ago, when the first PRoffice was opened in ouruniversity.

We changed our thinking aboutuniversities, learnt the tools ofmodern day PR, and so builtour mark which is recognizedall over the world. But we stillhave much to do in this respectwhen compared to our Westerncolleagues.Events such as EUPRIO affordgreat opportunities to buildprofessional relationships(even if you are a shy Polemeeting shy Finns). And weenjoyed the spirit of Barcelonaat every step ‒ its music, dance,tolerance, art and the sea.

—Arthur LompartNetwork Bulletin,March 2003.

ARCHIVE EUPRIO

A plenary session in Barcelona.

87

The last year of Rolf ’s presidencybegan in Oslo, with the SteeringCommittee meeting held on 22nd

March 2003. Since Barcelona members ofthe Steering Committee had been thepossibility of forming a strategicpartnership with HEIST, a marketingservices agency whose activities focused onhigher education HEIST was particularlyinterested in obtaining support fromEUPRIO to develop both its EducationMarketing magazine and annual awardsfor Educational Marketing. After muchdebate members decided that EUPRIOshould not sacrifice its independence andconcerns were voiced that the HEISTmagazine would eclipse the NetworkBulletin. Members did discuss thepossibility of a sponsorship deal butnegotiations did not lead anywhere. Sadlythe retirement of Tony Scott coincidedwith the last issue of EUPRIO’s NetworkBulletin.

During 2003 EUPRIO continued toprovide support to the Baltic countries. Arequest was received to organize a“EUPRIO-badged” seminar in Riga in Mayfor 20-30 participants from academies anduniversities across Latvia. The event wassponsored through the Bridge Fund.

Durham was chosen as the venue of the15th annual conference and was organisedby a panel of UK universities, led by NicMitchell from Teesside University. Thisconference focused on how to effectivelycommunicate a key message: Universitiesrepresent a valuable resource of skills andexpertise which supports the economicand social regeneration of Europe. Thisissue was of particularly importance forthose working in Universities based in

areas hit by the decline of traditionalindustries, such as coal, steel andshipbuilding who were seeking to build astrong knowledge-based economy. ThisEurope-wide issue was also closely linkedto where the Bologna process was going intrying to implement the European HigherEducation Area. The North East ofEngland proved to be an excellent casestudy of a region seeking renewal.

Some 200 people from 20 countriesflocked to enchanting Durham for a rainyconference (an umbrella was mostdefinitely needed and we found it in ourConference bag!). It wasn’t all rain, we didhave some wonderful sunny spells whichallowed participants to make the most ofwonderful social events at Durham Castle,Hartlepool Historic Quay, the Centre forLife in Newcastle and the Baltic Centre forContemporary Art in Gateshead. Theplenary sessions and seventeen workshops(a record) sketched a challenginglandscape which would force us all torethink the role universities should beplaying in their local areas and howEUPRIO could be supporting them. Manyparticipants told us later that they hadsuccessfully imported many of the modelsof working to their own universities andcountries.

At the gala reception dinner at theCentre for Life in Newcastle RolfGuggenbühl handed over the presidencyto Peter Reader from the UK. Peter hadbeen elected in Barcelona the previousyear. So, a new chapter was opening butRolf remained involved and committed toEUPRIO and, when the new Charter wassigned a few years later, he was appointedas a member of the Auditors’ Board.

Durham, venue of the 15th Annual Conference: the University courtyard.

JEAN

-ETI

ENNE

MINH

-DUY

POIR

RIER

88

GREAT YEARSWITH EUPRIO

Time runs......and time also runs with EUPRIO.When Véronique

Eloy asked me on the shores of Lago Maggiore inStresa in September 2010 to contribute to the 25-yearhistory of EUPRIO, a wave of memories struck mymind. I wondered where I should begin with mymemoires and I ended up with a sheet of paper, full ofnotes, indicating happenings during my years withEUPRIO, starting in Berlin 1991 and ending in Malta2004 after a good time with the “Euprians” from allover Europe. So let me dwell on these memories...

Lecce ‒ Lecco ‒ LuccaIt was the Italians’ turn to organize the annual

conference in Y2K. And everything seemed to go well;at the Steering Committee our dear Italian colleaguescame with the proposal to have the conference atLecce, a place they described as very pleasant,charming, historically interesting and just waiting forthe chance to host such an important association as

EUPRIO. There was practically no resistance to the plans and, asusual, everybody in the Steering Committee was happy to havesomeone happy and willing to organize the event. As President, itwas my task to present the Italian plans to the Steering Committeeand I did that with calmness, great pleasure and with a convincingtone in my speech because Lecce would really be a splendid placeto go. When I was a boy, I learnt at school that Lecce was inNorthern Italy, on the slopes of the Alps, near a beautiful lake andnot far away from Switzerland. An excellent location also for Swisscolleagues to join the conference. So these convincing argumentshelped to support the plans. To be truthful, I was absolutelyastonished when my secretary got me an airplane ticket to go tothe conference - in the very South of Italy. I had mixed up Lecce(near Brindisi and Bari), Lucca (Northern Tuscany) and Lecco,close to Switzerland. I had thought that Lecce was just across theSwiss border. It wasn’t. But it was a great conference! And, sincethen I know where Lecce, Lecco and Lucca are...

Beer in AmsterdamHow do you organize a congress? This introductory lecture was

given to me, when it was clear that I should take over thepresidency of EUPRIO. The Executive Board met in Amsterdamon a cold January day to check and evaluate the proposal fromthe Dutch Section of EUPRIO to host the forthcoming conferencein Rotterdam. Their suggestions about the hows and thewhereabouts were very satisfying. Everybody seemed to be happyand the successful day finished with a nice meal which ended atabout 9 o’clock. Then it was decided by the Irish, Scottish andDutch members that there should be a final beer. No final beer,no conference. So we walked and looked for a pub. No pub. Andwe walked and we walked. And it was cold. Chillingly cold. Wewalked along the Grachten, the beautiful channels of Amsterdam,along the boats towed to the walls, through the cold Amsterdamair. Till we finally we found the pub. The conference could takeplace!

Rolf Guggenbühl

89

Nobel-PrizesI think it was in 1992, one year after Richard Ernst of ETH

Zurich, my university, had won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry.The EUPRIO Conference took place in Stockholm. We visited theNobel Prize Committee and its premises. I was still rememberingwhat happened the year before. Our press office had some sort ofreliable hint that Professor Ernst might be the next winner aboutone hour before the official announcement. We had to do a hellof a lot of work to prepare media releases and find ways to bringErnst into the print and electronic media – not helped by Ernstbeing on an airplane somewhere between Moscow and New Yorkand not in Zurich. So, in the lecture hall of the Nobel PrizeCommittee I complained very strongly about the way the NobelPrize committee handles this information. The visit over, someEuprians told me that I had exaggerated and they would haveloved to have my problems at their universities and to be overrunby the mass media in the same way I had been. At that timenobody knew that the Internet would change communications insuch a radical way as it did. Today, you can expect, that four hoursafter the Nobel Prize announcement, nobody will bother the pressoffice anymore, because all the information would be available viathe Web.

Learning for presidentsAs president of EUPRIO you can learn a lot of things. You get to

know a lot of friendly, communicative people, you learn that theyall cook with water and you learn a lot about the European Systemof Higher Education. And you learn that money is the centraldiscussion point everywhere. Or you learn that a change of thePresident/Rector may have a dramatic impact on thecommunication offices. Or you can learn how to behave whensuch changes take place. In addition, I also learned about thelanguage of animals: a cow says “Moooh”, the horse says“Weeheehee”, the duck “Weeek”; in Rovaniemi, Finland, I learntthat rendeers say “Öööh”... and that Santa Claus is still alive andlives there.

Rolf Guggenbühl and Peter Reader, incoming and currentpresident in 2003, enjoy the party at Hartlepool Historic Quay.

ARCH

IVE

R.GU

GGEN

BÜHL

90

Does science sell?This topic has accompanied EUPRIO for several years. Quite

clear: sex sells in the media. But science? It was never quite sure ifthis would be the case. The discussion was opened during theStockholm conference by a Swedish lady, who asked everybody ifit was wrong to give away the results of science practically for free.In the honourable University hall of Heidelberg that controversywas still going on. Since we have Internet, the question is stillopen – but there might one day be a chance that some secretchannels will only open if we pay for the excellent results ourresearchers put in front of the general public. Perhaps. Perhaps?No, probably not.

Local politicians and scienceWhat struck me during all these years is the fact that whenever

we had the opening ceremony of any conference, the localpolitician stressed the great importance of communication fromthe University to the general public and the crucial role played bythe press and communication offices. We have never heardanything other than words of praise. To say the truth, no Euprianever objected or pointed to the fact that most press officesexperience major problems being accepted in the University’skingdom.

Sheltered talksThe EUPRIO conference is an excellent place for an isolated

European University press officer to evaluate himself and to ratehis / her personal work in the light what he / she hears from othersin the same position somewhere else. Consequently theconference is always very well attended and the social events arejust the background for talks, which, had they been held at home,could have been disastrous and eventually even end in a dismissal.But in the well-sheltered surroundings of the conference,everybody is equal and can find out and learn what he could dobetter next time. Just because the knowledge fundus of theConference participants is very, very rich.

The best timeThe best time for the President is when the Conference is

under way, when the opening ceremony with all the authorities isover and the professional discussions, working groups and lectureshave started. The absolute highlight is certainly the conferencepicture, when he is in the middle of his crowd of friends. Then hecan relax and enjoy the fruits of the long time of preparation of theprogramme. But even the so-called best time is not always withoutclouds: I remember cases of theft – even in safe Zurich, a caraccident, some unexpected health problems of participants. Thebigger the congress, the greater the chance of accidents. One of themost memorable accidents happened in Vilnius: some friendswent to the airport to find out that their flight was one day later.They had booked the wrong date to fly home...

91

CChhaannggiinngg ttaasskk ooff iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn ooffffiicceerrssKenneth EdwardsPresident of CRERolf GuggenbühlPresident of EUPRIO

Rosanna SantonocitoJournalist, “Il Sole-24 Ore”

WWoorrkksshhooppssMMaarrkkeettiinngg aa UUnniivveerrssiittyy.. AAccoommpprreehheennssiivvee aapppprrooaacchh ffrroommpprroossppeeccttiivvee ssttuuddeennttss ttoo eemmppllooyyeerrssEdoardo Teodoro BrioschiUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore,Milano, ItalyRoberto PiovanUniversità di Firenze, Italy

SSttrraatteeggiicc tthhiinnkkiinngg iinn UUnniivveerrssiittyyccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn.. TThhee sstteeppss ttoo ttaakkee ttoobbee ssuurree tthhaatt wwhhaatt yyoouu ddoo iiss rreeaallllyy wwhhaattyyoouurr iinnssttiittuuttiioonn nneeeeddssAlessandro CiarloUniversità Commerciale “L. Bocconi”,Milano, Italy

AAnn eexxaammppllee ooff aaffffiinniittyy pprrooggrraammmmee::BBooccccoonnii UUnniivveerrssiittyy AAlluummnnii AAssssoocciiaattiioonnCCrreeddiitt CCaarrddLucrezia F. CosentinoUniversità Commerciale “L. Bocconi”,Milano, Italy

HHooww ttoo oorrggaanniissee aann eeffffeeccttiivvee pprreessss ooffffiicceeAntonella MaravigliaUniversità di Firenze, Italy

SSttuuddeenntt rreeccrruuiittmmeenntt:: wwhhaatt iiss lliikkeellyy ttoowwoorrkk aanndd wwhhaatt iiss nnoottArne AbrahamsenUniversitetet i Bergen, Norway

TThheemmee:: UUnniivveerrssiittiieess’’ CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn::ttoorrnn bbeettwweeeenn AAccaaddeemmiiaa aanndd BBuussiinneessss??VVeennuuee:: University of LeccePPaarrttiicciippaannttss:: approximately 200

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessRolf GuggenbühlPresident of EUPRIO

Angelo RizzoRector, Università di Lecce, ItalyAdriana Poli BortoneMayor of Lecce

KKeeyynnoottee ssppeeeecchheess aanndd rroouunndd ttaabblleessUUnniivveerrssiittiieess’’ ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn:: ttoorrnnbbeettwweeeenn AAccaaddeemmiiaa aanndd BBuussiinneessss oorrppuulllliinngg tthheemm ttooggeetthheerr??Edoardo Teodoro BrioschiPresident of AICUN

CChhaalllleennggeess ffaacciinngg HHiigghheerr EEdduuccaattiioonnLuciano GuerzoniItalian Ministry of University andScientific Research

WWhhaatt lliieess iinn UUnniivveerrssiittiieess’’ ffuuttuurree??CCooooppeerraattiioonn oorr ccoommppeettiittiioonn??Luciano ModicaPresident of Italian Universities RectorsConference (CRUI)Ingeborg Christiensen Vice-President of EUPRIO

Domenico Lenarduzzi Deputy Director, DG Education andCulture, European Commission

MMaarrkkeettiinngg tthhee UUnniivveerrssiittiieess,, aa sseeaacchhaannggee iinn ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn?? TThhee vviieewwffrroomm ddiiffffeerreenntt EEuurrooppeeaann ppeerrssppeeccttiivveessRound table moderated by Ray Footman,past-president of EUPRIO, University ofEdinburgh, UK

HHooww ttoo ddeevveelloopp aann eennttiicciinngg WWeebb ssiitteePeter McKiemanUniversity College Dublin, Ireland

TThhee UUnniivveerrssiittyy mmaaggaazziinnee:: aa uusseeffuullddiinnoossaauurr iinn tthhee mmooddeerrnn ddiiggiittaall wwoorrllddElmar HeinUniversität Kaiserslautern, Germany

UUssiinngg IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn TTeecchhnnoollooggiieess,,iinnnnoovvaattiivveellyy,, ttoo ccoonnnneecctt wwiitthhpprroossppeeccttiivvee ssttuuddeennttss aanndd wwiitthh AAlluummnniiVito CovielloCILEA, Milano, Italy

AA ssuucccceessssffuull eexxaammppllee ooff mmeerrcchhaannddiissiinnggpprrooggrraammmmeeGianni MontemagnoUniversità di Catania, Italy

HHooww ttoo mmaaiinnttaaiinn aa WWeebb ssiittee oonnccee yyoouuhhaavvee ccrreeaatteedd oonnee.. PPrroobblleemmss,,rreessppoonnssiibbiilliittiieess,, hhooww ttoo ggeett eevveerryybbooddyyiinnvvoollvveeddBrunella MarchioneUniversità di Parma, Italy

HHooww ttoo ccoommmmuunniiccaattee tthhrroouugghhppiiccttuurreess:: iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn aanndd eemmoottiioonnssFederico BrunettiPolitecnico di Milano, Italy

EEssttaabblliisshhiinngg 2211 ppiieecceess ooff aarrtt dduurriinngg 2211yyeeaarrss aass aa mmaajjoorr ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn ttoooollWim JanssenRijksuniversiteit Groningen, theNetherlands

TThhee ggrroowwiinngg rroollee ooff aaddvveerrttiissiinngg iinnUUnniivveerrssiittiieess ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn ddeeaalliinnggwwiitthh aadd aaggeenncciieessRoberto CarcanoUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore,Milano, Italy

ARCHIVE AICUN

92

TThheemmee:: TThhee CChhaalllleennggee ooff CChhaannggeeVVeennuuee:: Lapin yliopisto (University ofLapland), Rovaniemi, FinlandPPaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 193 from 23 countries

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessRolf GuggenbühlPresident of EUPRIO

Esko RiepulaRector, Lapin yliopisto, Finland

KKeeyynnoottee ssppeeeecchheess aanndd rroouunndd ttaabblleessNNeeww tteecchhnnoollooggyy,, ffuuttuurree aanndd ccuullttuurraallvvaalluueess:: cchhaalllleennggee ffoorr ssoocciieettyy aanndduunniivveerrssiittyySam InkinenVaasan yliopisto, Finland

IIss ccoonntteemmppoorraarryy UUnniivveerrssiittyy iinn rruuiinnss oorriiss tthhee RReennaaiissssaannccee ooff hhiigghheerr eedduuccaattiioonnuunnddeerr wwaayy??Professor Tapio VarisTampereen yliopisto, Finland

SSttrraatteeggiicc aapppprrooaacchheess ttoo tthhee iinntteerrnnaallaanndd eexxtteerrnnaall ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn ooffuunniivveerrssiittiieessElisa JuholinHelsingin yliopisto, Finland

OOrrggaanniizzaattiioonnaall ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn aannddcchhaannggee mmaannaaggeemmeenntt:: iinncceennttiivveess aannddssttrraatteeggiieess ffoorr UUnniivveerrssiittiieessPertti HurmeJyväskylän yliopisto, Finland

@@--eennvviirroonnmmeenntt ffoorr oorrggaanniizzaattiioonnaallccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn:: ffrroomm sseennddiinnggiinnffoorrmmaattiioonn ttoo tteelllliinngg ssttoorriieessProfessor Pekka AulaHelsingin yliopisto, Finland

WWhhaatt iiss tthhee rroollee ooff tthhee PPRR aannddccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn ooffffiiccee iinn ffoorrmmiinngg aannddiimmpplleemmeennttiinngg tthhee ssttrraatteeggiicc ggooaallss oofftthhee uunniivveerrssiittyy??Round table chaired by IngeborgChristensenAarhus Universitet, Denmark

WWoorrkksshhooppssVViirrttuuaall ccaammppuusseess.. FFuuttuurree oorr jjuusstt aatteemmppoorraarryy pphhaannttoomm??Albert Sangrá Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain

CCoommppeettiittiioonn iiss ggeettttiinngg hhaarrddeerr.. HHooww ttooddiiffffeerreennttiiaattee ffrroomm ccoommppeettiittoorrss??Merja LankionenCIMO, Finland

CChhaalllleennggee aanndd cchhaannggee ssttaarrtt yyoouurr oowwnnccoommppaannyy aanndd hhaavvee yyoouurr uunniivveerrssiittyy aass aacclliieenntt.. AA DDuuttcchh eexxaammppllee..Veronica Gieben3G Communicatie, the Netherlands

DDeevveellooppiinngg aanndd mmaannaaggiinngg aann oonnlliinneenneewwss sseerrvviicceePeter Reader & Jonathan Cole,University of Southampton, UK

PPaaiinnttiinngg aa ssttuuddeenntt pprrooffiillee hheellppss ttaarrggeettffuuttuurree rreeccrruuiittmmeenntt eeffffoorrttssLisbeth Wester Leandersson& Leif Bryngfors

Lund universitet, Sweden

IImmpprroovveedd ssttaattuuss oonn tthhee gglloobbaall mmaarrkkeettppllaaccee tthhrroouugghh eeffffiicciieenntt pprreessss ccoonnttaaccttssBrigitte FournierNoir sur Blanc, France

IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall aauuddiittss,, aa ppllaagguuee oorr aacchhaalllleennggee?? TThhee rroollee ooff tthheeccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnss ddeeppaarrttmmeennttTimo Niitemaa & Jaana PuukkaTurun yliopisto, Finland

IInntteeggrraatteedd ooffffiiccee –– ffrroomm ffrriieennddrraaiissiinnggttoo ccoorrppoorraattee sseerrvviiccee –– aallll uunnddeerr tthheeuummbbrreellllaa ooff mmaarrkkeettiinngg aannddccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnssTiina LaitinenHelsingin kauppakorkeakoulu, Finland

FFrroomm sscceennaarriiooss ttoo rreeaalliittyy.. SSttrraatteeggiiccppllaannnniinngg aatt LLuulleeåå UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooffTTeecchhnnoollooggyyEva Moe & Erik HöglundLuleå tekniska universitet, Sweden

MMaakkiinngg ffrriieennddss aanndd iinnfflluueenncciinngg ppeeooppllee::aa ccrraasshh ccoouurrssee iinn ccrriissiiss mmaannaaggeemmeennttPeter Slee & Keith SeacroftUniversity of Durham, UK

Part of the campus of the University of Lapland, in the Finnish city of Rovaniemi.

JOHN

KIR

RIEM

UIR

93

Salvador CardúsUniversitat Autónoma de Barcelona,SpainMesa redonda moderada para CarlesTarga, Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain

MMaannaaggiinngg iinnssttiittuuttiioonnaall cchhaannggeettoowwaarrddss eexxcceelllleenncceeAlberto Jorge AcostaUniversidade de Matanzas, Cuba

TThhee rroollee ooff iinntteerrnnaall ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnffoorr uunnddeerrssttaannddiinngg cchhaannggee aanndd ffoorrppeeooppllee’’ss iinnvvoollvveemmeennttSusan Bloch-NevitteUniversity of Toronto, Canada

TThhee UUnniivveerrssiittyy ppoorrttaall.. SSttrraatteeggiieess iinn aagglloobbaall mmaarrkkeett.. TThhee UUnniivveerrssiiaa ccaasseeAndrés PedreñoUniversia.net, Spain

TToo ccoommmmuunniiccaattee,, ttoo ttrraaiinn aanndd ttoo lleeaarrnniinn aa gglloobbaall wwoorrlldd.. TThhee nneeww cchhaalllleennggeessooff tthhee uunniivveerrssiittyyGabriel FerratéRector, Universitat Oberta deCatalunya, Spain

WWoorrkksshhooppssCCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn aanndd tthhee ccrreeaattiioonn ooffddiissttiinnccttiivvee vvaalluueessRamön GuardiaChairman, Valores & Márketing, Spain

TToowwaarrddss tthhee gglloobbaalliissaattiioonn ooff tthheerrbbrraannddPeter ReaderUniversity of Southampton, UK

MMaannaaggiinngg rriisskk ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn aannddccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn bbrreeaakkddoowwnnssMiguel López-QuesadaWeber Shandwick Ibérica, Spain

TThheemmee:: University Communication: aStrategy to Achieve Quality.VVeennuuee:: Barcelona, Casa deConvalescénciaPPaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 260 from 25 countriesLLaanngguuaaggeess:: Spanish and English

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessRolf GuggenbühlPresident of EUPRIOLluís FerrerRector, Universitat Autónoma deBarcelonaMarc PermanyerPresident of the Organizing Committeeof Barcelona 2002Andreu Mas-ColellGeneralitat de Catalunya

KKeeyynnoottee ssppeeeecchheess aanndd rroouunndd ttaabblleessLLaa ccoommuunniiccaacciióónn ccoommoo iinnssttrruummeennttooppaarraa aallccaannzzaarr llaa ccaalliiddaaddUlrich SanderInstituto Tecnológico de Monterrey,México

IInnddiiccaaddoorreess ddee ccaalliiddaadd ddee llaaUUnniivveerrssiiddaaddJoan CortadellasUniversitat Politécnica de Catalunya,Spain

LLaa UUnniivveerrssiiddaadd ddee ccaalliiddaadd.. EEll ppuunnttooddee vviissttaa ddee llooss aaggeennttss llooccaalleessGemma RauretAgencia per a la Qualitat del SistemaUniversitari a Catalunya, SpainRamon OlléPresident ejecutivo, EPSON Europa yEPSON Ibérica, SpainCarlos ArroyoPeriodista, Instituto Universitario dePosgrado, Spain

CCoommppeettiittiivvee MMaarrkkeettiinngg

Susan Bloch-NevitteUniversity of Toronto, Canada

TThhee ssoocciiaall ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn ooff sscciieenncceeaanndd tteecchhnnoollooggyy

Luis Ángel Fernández HermanaJournalist, en.red.ando, Spain

TThhee sscciieennttiiffiicc ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnoobbsseerrvvaattoorryy:: aa bbrriiddggee bbeettwweeeennsscciieennccee aanndd ssoocciieettyy

Raimundo RobertsBiomedia Scientific CommunicationObservatory, Pompeu Fabra University,Spain

AAcchhiieevviinngg QQuuaalliittyy iinn ccoorrppoorraatteeppuubblliiccaattiioonnss

Ray FootmanUniversity of Edinburgh, UK

OOnnee bbiigg hhaappppyy ffaammiillyy.. SSttrraatteeggiicciinntteerrnnaall ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnss

Eleanor Harwood & Keith SeacroftUniversity of Durham, UK

FFuunnddrraaiissiinngg aass wwaayy ooff eexxttrraa iinnccoommeeffoorr SSppaanniisshh uunniivveerrssiittiieess

Ricard VallsSpanish Fundraising Association, Spain

SSttrraatteeggiicc ppllaannnniinngg aass aa mmooddeell ffoorrmmaannaaggiinngg tthhee cchhaannggee aanndd ffoorriimmpprroovviinngg tthhee ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn aattuunniivveerrssiittiieess

Alberto Jorge AcostaUniversity of Matanzas, Cuba

ARCH

IVE

EUPR

IO

94

TThheemmee:: UUnniivveerrssiittiieess aanndd tthheeiirr RReeggiioonnss..TThhee ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn cchhaalllleennggee ffoorr tthhee2211sstt cceennttuurryyVVeennuuee:: University of DurhamPPaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 184 from 22 countries

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessSir Kenneth CalmanVice-Chancellor of University of DurhamJohn BridgeChair of NorthEastKeith SeacroftHead of PR, University of Durham

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssTThhee rreeggiioonnaall rroollee ooff tthhee uunniivveerrssiittiieess::CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn iissssuueessProfessor John GoddardDeputy Vice Chancellor, University ofNewcastle upon Tyne, UK

UUnniivveerrssiittiieess aanndd rreeggiioonnss:: TThheeEEuurrooppeeaann PPaarrlliiaammeenntt ppeerrssppeeccttiivveeBarbara O’TooleMember of the European Parliament forNorth East England, UK

TToowwaarrdd aa vviissiioonn ffoorr hhiigghheerr eedduuccaattiioonnffoorr tthhee 2211sstt cceennttuurryySir Howard NewbyChief Executive, Higher EducationFunding Council for England, UK

NNHHSSUU:: AA nneeww kkiinndd ooff ccoorrppoorraatteeuunniivveerrssiittyyProfessor Bob FryerChief Executive of the National HealthService University, UK

UUnniivveerrssiittiieess aatt tthhee hheeaarrtt ooff tthhee NNoorrtthhEEaasstt ooff EEnnggllaanndd’’ss eeccoonnoommyyPhil ShakeshaftHead of Strategy, One NorthEast, UK

WWoorrkksshhooppssDDeevveellooppiinngg aann AAlluummnnii CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnssSSttrraatteeggyyAdrian BeneyDeputy Director of development andAlumni Relations, University of Durham,UK

1100 YYeeaarrss ooff UUnniivveerrssiittyy CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnDDeevveellooppmmeenntt:: tthhee ccaassee hhiissttoorryy ooff IIttaallyyPaola Claudia ScioliCentennial Coordinator, UniversitàBocconi, Milano, ItalyAlessandro CiarloCo-Director Bocconi Comunicazione,Università Bocconi, Milano, Italy

BBeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg yyoouurr mmaarrkkeettiinngg pprraaccttiisseeDave RobertsChief Executive, HEIST, UK

TTrreennddss aanndd GGoooodd PPrraaccttiissee iinn UUKKHHiigghheerr EEdduuccaattiioonn WWeebbssiitteess

Zoe WhitbyDirector, HEIST, UK

SStteepp bbyy sstteepp –– WWiiddeenniinngg ppaarrttiicciippaattiioonniinn aa wweellffaarree ssyysstteemmKristine LyngbøIngeniørhøjskolen Odense Teknikum,Denmark

GGeettttiinngg ttoo GGrriippss wwiitthh yyoouurr AAuuddiieenncceess::RRee--BBrraannddiinngg tthhee UUnniivveerrssiittyy aannddrreeffooccuussiinngg tthhee MMaarrkkeettiinngg mmeessssaaggeeSean FiggisHead of PR and Communication,Northumbria University, UKChris WattsHead of marketing, NorthumbriaUniversity, UK

MMeetteeoorr PPrroojjeeccttPat WhiteAssistant Director, Centre for LifelongLearning, University of Teesside, UK

CCrreeaattiinngg aa PPuubblliicc FFaaccee ffoorr tthhee EEuurrooppeeaannRReesseeaarrcchh AArreeaaPeter GreenAlphaGalileo Foundation, UK

TThhee SSttoocckkhhoollmm uunniivveerrssiittiieess aanndd tthheerreeggiioonnaall pprrooggrraamm ffoorr eeccoonnoommiicc ggrroowwtthhMichel Wlodarczyk & Maud BergmanStockholms Akademiska Forum, Sweden

MMaakkiinngg tthhee WWeebb WWoorrkk:: MMaannaaggiinngg tthheeUUnniivveerrssiittyy’’ss WWeebb PPrreesseenncceeSean FiggisHead of PR and Communication,Northumbria University, UKNigel BradleyWeb Development Manager,

Northumbria University, UK

HHooww aarree wwee ddooiinngg?? EEvvaalluuaattiioonn aannddbbeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg ooff ccoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnssOlle AlexanderssonSenior consultant StrategicCommunication, The CommuncativeUniversity Forum and ARC ABArne AbrahamsenCommunications Adviser, Argument,Bergen, NorwayChrister HjortFormer Head of Information, LundUniversity, Sweden

TTeecchhnnoollooggyy ccaann mmaakkee aa ddiiffffeerreenncceeJanice WebsterChief Executive, Virtual Reality Centreat Teesside Limited, UK

MMeeddiiaa aanndd tthhee RReeggiioonnGed HendersonEditor, The Journal, Newcastle, UK

SSlliimmee,, ssppaacceemmeenn aanndd ffrroozzeenn bbaannaannaassSue ReeceHead of Student Recruitment andAdmissions, University of Sunderland, UKAlison SteelHead of Corporate Affairs, University ofSunderland, UK

The Durham Cathedral.

MART

IN B

ROOK

S

20032005

PeterReader

University of BathUnited Kingdom

96

eter Reader’s presidency,as he describes it in the“President’s Word”, wastroubled by manycircumstances. Hechanged job, movingfrom the University ofSouthampton to Bath

just six months after stepping in aspresident. Management methods neededupdating to cope with the changing highereducation landscape.!e conference atMalta, though attractive, did notmagnetize enough participants andmembership levels had fallen again.However, the major problem EUPRIO wasfacing came to the fore again: thepresident was overwhelmed with work andan association run by volunteers began toshow its limitations; but this wouldcontinue to be a problem for EUPRIO’spresidents.

Let’s not be too gloomy though.!erewere great things happening as well duringPeter’s presidency. Firstly we mustmention the conference in Krems, Austriain 2005.!is was probably one of the bestof the decade and provided participantswith an excellent programme delivered byfirst rate speakers. Secondly we launchedthe updated EUPRIO Web site which finallyincorporated the much talked aboutdiscussion forum.

At the Steering Committeemeeting held in Graz on 20th

March 2004, hosted by ChristianReiser, the future of EUPRIO was againdebated at length. Challenges includedhow to strengthen the membership base,provide more comprehensive services tomembers that went beyond an annualconference and market EUPRIO to a morediverse audience. Helge Kjøllesdal

P

ÖZER

ÖZBE

Y

La Valletta, 2004, venue of the 16th Conference. The Lighthouse on the harbour.

97

summed up these new challenges forEUPRIO with the slogan “Build capacity,competences and networking”. Butsomething didn’t quite work and historyshows us that these discussions, asimportant as they were, were notsu"ciently supported by either a truestrategic vision or by enough peoplevolunteering to support their achievement.

A proposal was accepted to change howthe Bridge Fund was used. It wasestablished that this fund, which wascuriously growing like the overall balance,would also support the development ofworkshops akin to the one held in Riga theprevious year. Whilst no seminar wasorganized, a limited number of scholarshipswere o#ered to support attendance at theconference. Steering Group members weredelighted that Lithuania and Poland wereable to reach the minimum number of fivemembers to allow them to nominatenational representatives to join the SteeringCommittee.

The conference at the Universityof Malta (2-5 September) wasnot as bad as many veterans tend

to describe.!e main reason why thenumber of participants (130) was so lowwas the high cost of accommodationwhich was due to the conference beingheld during the high season in Malta.!econference was well organised, peoplewere delighted with the social programmeand there were no major problems.!egeneral theme was focused andstimulating; “Communicating acrosscultures” and could well have been akeynote presenting EUPRIO’s vision for thefuture.!e venue was wonderful.Unfortunately the speeches and theworkshops were locally oriented and acouple of speakers were probablydelivering a speech for the first time intheir life.!is was EUPRIO’s fault and welearnt a lesson in time for Krems – do notleave the entire organisation of an annualconference to a local team. PatriciaCamilleri did her best but other membersof EUPRIO did not support her to find awider range of speakers.!is issue was debated at length during

the next Steering Committee meeting inBath on 23rd April 2005. After the Maltaconference a task force was set up with theremit of supporting the local organizingteam and providing quality control of thecontents to ensure that they would be

relevant to all members. It was decidedthat for the workshops, value would beadded by having presenters from at leasteight di#erent countries.!e Bridge Fundcontinued to enable EUPRIO to o#er a 50%discount to delegates from emergingcountries and even with this commitmentthe overall balance was still increasing (abalance of $ 102,000). Whilst it could beargued that EUPRIO was in a very healthyfinancial situation, it could also be stressedthat having such a large balance was not agood sign, that it clearly highlighted thelack of investment being made for thefuture. Worse still membership levels hadmysteriously crashed down to 240 people.Relationships with other organizationswere at a standstill, except from someexchange of correspondence with CASE,whose activities we kept a close eye on.

The conference at Krems was ahighlight of Peter’s presidencyand also gave us another great

president in EUPRIO’s history.!oughDurham would be used as an example ofan excellent conference for many years,Krems was the first conference where theprogramme moved away from looking atcommunications from regional and localangles to concentrating on looking at akey issue from a much wider perspective.!is was achieved by including speakersfrom sectors other than higher education.

Below:Austria, 2005.Gabriele Pfeiferwelcomes theparticipants on theboat gliding acrosstheWachau valleyduring the17th AnnualConference.

ALES

SAND

ROCI

ARLO

98

Some words that had previously been“taboo” in universities started to appear inthe titles of workshops: branding foruniversities; lobbying as a communicationtool; marketing of higher education;managing corporate channels;campaigning for lifelong learning; theimportance of benchmarking. Every sectorof higher education communications wasexamined from di#erent standpoints andthe best practices across Europe werepresented.!e majestic landscape and theoutstanding social programme (but let’s

say that EUPRIO has always been famous inthis respect) were memorable; JudithBauer and Gisela Gruber got many roundsof applause.!e boat trip on the Danubefollowing the Wachau valley, the galareception dinner at Schloss Grafenegg,where Peter Reader concluded his spresidency provided the cherries for thetop of the cake.!e 175 participantscongratulated Peter Van Dam as theyelected him President for 2005-07. At thattime he could not know what the fate hadin store for him.

Having previously been the Secretary of EUPRIO,and also having been heavily involved inorganising the very successful conference held

in Durham, England, in September 2003, becomingpresident should not have been a shock for me. But it was.

Why? Because running an international organisationon a few hours a week stolen, in e#ect, either from “theday job” or from personal time is a huge challenge. In twoyears, there were to be two conferences and four SteeringCommittee meetings, all in di#erent locations, withendless correspondence and emails to answer. And alwaysa nagging doubt that I could do more, if only there wasthe time. But no support and no secretariat. Nor anyfunds to pay for this support. It probably didn’t helpeither that I changed job, moving from one university toanother, just six months into my two years as president.!e inheritance from Rolf Guggenbühl was, well,

interesting. We all have our own ways of doing things;let’s just say Rolf had his own particular way. And, as Rolfhad been president for four years, the way Rolf did thingshad become the norm for EUPRIO. Don’t get me wrong.

!is isn’t a criticism – I’m well aware of the huge amount of timeRolf so generously gave to EUPRIO – but it did mean that anychange was always going to be di"cult.

It was inevitable then that my term of o"ce would start withconsideration of the future direction for EUPRIO. At the firstmeeting of the Steering Committee I chaired as president,

in Graz in Austria, we reflected not only on our past achievements,particularly on a succession of successful conferences, but also onthe limitations of an organisation run entirely by volunteers.!erewas a dilemma: the employment of professional sta# wouldchange the organisation, yet not to employ such sta# ran the riskof EUPRIO being marginalised, as a club for those “in the know”.Was there a middle course, perhaps?

From this discussion came the impetus to widen themembership and, once achieved, to develop more services and tobecome more professional. !e acknowledged risk was thatwithout doing so EUPRIO would be no more than an annualconference.

Peter Reader

99

So, change just had to happen. And, on reflection, I am pleasedabout the changes we made whilst I was president as they helpedEUPRIO to become a stronger organisation.

One change was setting up the conference Task Group.We didnot realise until too late that the programme for the 2004conference in Malta, the first of my conferences as president, hadtoo much of a local focus. No-one should fault the team fromMalta; they had not been given enough support and help byEUPRIO itself. But many members voted against the conference inthe simplest possible way, by not attending. Okay, the distancebetween Malta and from where most of the then members came,Scandinavia and northern Europe, didn’t help either. But, witharound 130 delegates only, Malta is still one of the smallest EUPRIOconferences ever held.

Alesson was learnt, my second and last conference aspresident, was in Krems, Austria. Planning for thisconference had started as early as 2003, and showed

through in much greater attention to the quality of theprogramme than in previous years, with some outstandingspeakers. Considerable added value came too from the workshoppresenters, with contributors coming from eight countries,making it a truly European conference.!e Task Group also had far greater input into the programme

for the Vilnius conference, being planned for 2006. !e samedanger of a relatively remote location existed as for Malta. ButNic Mitchell and Lars Holberg were heavily involved. !eyvisited Vilnius, met key supporters like the Deputy Vice-Chancellor and the Deputy Mayor, gained university and civicsupport, and shaped the “academic” programme. In fact, thingsonly changed when things moved from a conference in X or Yorganised by X or Y to a EUPRIO conference organised by EUPRIO.But it is for my successor to report on the conference itself.

Malta, 2004. The welcome of themusicians at the gala reception at Castello Zamitello in Mgarr.

ALES

SAND

ROCI

ARLO

100

Another change was incommunication. But here it wasone step forward and one stepback. Tony Scott, the long servingeditor of EUPRIO’s printedNetwork Bulletin stood down,and retired too, with the finaledition of the Network Bulletinbeing published in January 2004.With Tony’s retirement, theNetwork Bulletin ceasedpublication. !is was EUPRIO’sonly printed publication and itwas not until late in 2005 that theabsence of any printed materialwas remedied.

In its place, EUPRIO turned toe-communication, with mixedsuccess. !e Web site wasdeveloped by Cynthia Mars, who,as editor-in-chief, had managedtheWeb site since May 2003, and

by Peter Van Dam. !e new site went live in December 2003providing much richer content than previously, with both openaccess and members-only sections. As President, I alsoexperimented with writing, usually monthly, an e-bulletindistributed initially to Steering Committee members, for onwarddistribution. !is was less successful than the Web site, withSteering Committee members not always having the time to addlocal content or to distribute to their national members.

Growing EUPRIO and having more members was arecurring issue throughout my two years as president.Again, a dilemma; we needed to grow the membership

but we had no-one who could concentrate on this work.Membership had been falling from a peak in 2002 but the tidewas turning. Not only did the number of members begin to grow,but with the help of the Bridge Fund, more members wereattracted from Eastern Europe. Bridge Fund scholarshipscontinued to be o#ered, through the sterling work of LarsHolberg, with scholarships being o#ered to PR sta# fromuniversities in a growing number of countries.!is sowed the seeds for the growth in membership in the years

after my term of o"ce as president. Indeed, at my last SteeringCommittee meeting in September 2005, it was noted the numberof members from Poland had exceeded the threshold then set inEUPRIO’s constitution for nomination of a member of the SteeringCommittee. Yet when I had taken over as president, there wereno members at all from that country.!ey say an organisation isonly as good as its membership; how true.

So what do I remember most about my time as president? Ofcourse, the professional knowledge I gained was unrivalled.Nowhere other than through EUPRIO could I learn so much insuch a short time, and from first-hand experience too, aboutcommunication and PR issues in European universities. EUPRIObenefits too from the hard work of its Steering Committeemembers; thanks to all. I also remember the social side – Euprianssure know how to party – but above all it was the friendships,some very special, I will always treasure.

PAOL

OPO

MATI

Above:Krems-an-der-Donau, 2005.A cruise on theDanube. In theforegroundVéronique Éloy,Marcel de Cleeneand AndersFrølund.

101

TThhee iinnflfluueennccee ooff nnaattiioonnaall ccuullttuurree oonnssttrraatteeggiicc ppuubblliicc rreellaattiioonnss.. TThhee MMaallttaaeexxppeerriieenncceeLaura Mifsud BonniciCommunications Coordinator for theMinister for the Family and SocialSolidarity, MaltaMary Anne LauriLecturer in Social Psychology, Faculty ofEducation, University of Malta

TThhee PPoowweerr ooff tthhee BBBBCC ((BBrraannddiinngg,,BBeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg aanndd tthhee CCoommppeettiittiivvee eeddggee))Peter Slee & Sean FiggisNorthumbria University, UK

CCoonnttrroovveerrssyy,, CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnss aannddCCaammbbrriiddggee Susannah Baker & Nick ChampionUniversity of Cambridge, UK

DDeessiiggnniinngg wweebb ssiitteess ffoorr mmaaxxiimmuummiimmppaaccttChris HarrisExecutive Director, HERO, UK

TThhee iimmppoorrttaannccee ooff iinnssttiittuuttiioonnaallbbrraannddiinngg aanndd tthhee rroollee ooff aa hhoouussee ssttyylleeJolanda van den BroekHead office of Public and External Affairs,Tilburg University, the Netherlands

TThhee rroollee ooff jjookkeess iinn ttrraannssccuullttuurraallaaccaaddeemmiicc aaddmmiinniissttrraattiioonn:: TToowwaarrddss aaQQuuaalliittyy AAuuddiittPeter Serracino InglottFormer Rector of the University of Malta,Malta's representative at the Conventionof Europe

TThhee iinnflfluueennccee ooff nnaattiioonnaall ccuullttuurree oonnssttrraatteeggiicc ppuubblliicc rreellaattiioonnss:: TThhee MMaallttaaEExxppeerriieennccee Laura Mifsud BonniciCommunications Coordinator for theMinister for the Family and SocialSolidarity, Malta

WWoorrkksshhooppssPPuubblliicc DDiissccuussssiioonn ooff ''DDiifffificcuulltt'' SScciieennttiifificcTTooppiiccssRolf GuggenbühlPublic Relations Officer at ETH, Zurich

AA EEuurrooppeeaann PPuubblliicc RReellaattiioonnss DDiimmeennssiioonn::tthhee EE..BB..OO..KK.. eexxppeerriieenncceeCarmel BonelloPR Manager, BPC Advertising

CCoommmmuunniiccaattiinngg iinn ttwwoo ccuullttuurreess ––uunniivveerrssiittiieess wwiitthhoouutt wwaallllssUlrike ReimannDeutsch-Französische HochschuleAlessandra SalettiUniversità di Trento, Italy

TThheemmee: CCoommmmuunniiccaattiinngg AAccrroossss CCuullttuurreessVVeennuuee: University of MaltaNNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 130 from 20countries.

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessRoger Ellul-MicallefRector of the University of MaltaLouis GalesMinister of Education, Malta

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssCCoommmmuunniiccaattiinngg EEuurrooppee:: CCoommmmoonn VVaalluueessAAccrroossss CCuullttuurreessCharis XirouchakisResponsible for Public Relations, Council ofEurope

TThhee sseeaarrcchh ffoorr aa ccoommmmoonn ggrroouunndd iinnEEuurrooppeeaann HHiigghheerr EEdduuccaattiioonnCésar Álvarez-AlonsoExecutive Secretary, Santander GroupSecretariat, Spain

AAnnttii--rraacciissmm aaddvveerrttiissiinngg:: wwhhaatt ddooeess iitt ttaakkee??Biljana ScottUniversity of Oxford , UK

CCoommmmuunniiccaattiinngg iinn ttwwoo ccuullttuurreess:: TThheeFFrraannccoo--GGeerrmmaann UUnniivveerrssiittyy,, aa uunniivveerrssiittyywwiitthhoouutt wwaallllssaanndd ttwwoo ccoouunnttrriieess aass aa jjooiinnttccaammppuussUlrike ReimannDeutsch-Französische Hochschule

Thomas HoferKovar & Köpple Public Affairs Consulting,Vienna, Austria

DDoo''ss aanndd DDoonntt''ss ffoorr AAddvvaanncceedd.. WWhhaattJJoouurrnnaalliissttss RReeaallllyy ddoo EExxppeeccttJan-Martin WiardaDie Zeit, Hamburg, Germany

TThhee CChhaalllleennggee ooff IInntteeggrraatteeddCCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn.. AA CCaassee SSttuuddyy ffrroommFFiinnllaannddJorma LaakkonenUniversity of Helsinki, Finland

FFrroomm SSttrraatteeggyy ttoo IImmpplleemmeennttaattiioonn.. PPRRCCoonncceepptt DDeevveellooppmmeennttNicola StanischInterbrand, Zurich, Switzerland

FFrroomm TThheeoorryy ttoo PPrraaccttiiccee.. MMaannaaggiinnggIInntteeggrraatteedd CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnKarin KirchnerGeneral Motors, Zurich, Switzerland

MMaarrkkeettiinngg ooff HHiigghheerr EEdduuccaattiioonn.. AA DDuuttcchhAApppprrooaacchhPaul SchottNUFFIC, the Netherlands

AAccaaddeemmiicc EEdduuccaattiioonn ffoorr SSaallee?? TTuuiittiioonnFFeeeess:: AA EEuurrooppeeaann CCoommppaarriissoonnNic MitchellUniversity of Teesside, UKJosef KönigRühr-Universität Bochum, Germany

GGeettttiinngg PPrreeppaarreedd ffoorr tthhee WWoorrsstt CCaasseeSScceennaarriioo.. AAnn IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn iinnttoo CCrriissiissCCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnPeter ReaderUniversity of Bath, UK

CCaammppaaiiggnniinngg ffoorr LLiiffeelloonngg LLeeaarrnniinngg.. TThheeDDaannuubbee UUnniivveerrssiittyy KKrreemmss –– AA EEuurrooppeeaannPPiilloott PPrroojjeeccttGisela GruberDonau-Universität Krems, Austria

HHooww ttoo GGeett tthhaatt GGoooodd?? RRiissiinnggIImmppoorrttaannccee ooff BBeenncchhmmaarrkkiinngg ffoorrUUnniivveerrssiittiieessMarkus LangerCHE Center for Higher EducationDevelopment, Gütersloh, Germany

MMeessssaaggeess ffrroomm tthhee CCoommmmaanndd BBrriiddggee??GGuuiiddeelliinneess ffoorr UUnniivveerrssiittyy SSppookkeessppeerrssoonnssPeter Van DamTU-Eindhoven, the Netherlands

TThhee CCoouunnsseelllliinngg FFaaiirr.. AA CCaassee HHiissttoorryy ooffaann IInntteeggrraatteedd CCaammppaaiiggnn ooff CCoouunnsseelllliinnggaanndd CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnPaolo PomatiUniversità degli Studi del PiemonteOrientale, Vercelli, Italy

PPrroommoottiinngg RReesseeaarrcchh EExxcceelllleennccee bbyy TTVV.. AASSuucccceessss SSttoorryy ffrroomm GGrreeaatt BBrriittaaiinnIan RowleyUniversity of Warwick, UKKevin JohnsonResearch-TV, UK

TThheemmee: IInntteeggrraatteedd CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn ––FFaacctt oorr FFiiccttiioonn??VVeennuuee: Donau-Universität KremsNNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 176 from 20countries

WWeellccoommee ssppeeeecchhAda PellertVice-Rector, Danube University of Krems

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssIInntteeggrraatteedd CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn –– aannOOvveerrvviieewwKarin KirchnerGeneral Motors, Zurich, Switzerland

PPRR aanndd MMaarrkkeettiinngg:: BBrrootthheerrss iinn aaiimmss?? Dejan VercicUniversity of Ljubljana, SloveniaMarkus LangerCHE Center for Higher EducationDevelopment, Gütersloh, Germany

AA VViissiioonn ooff UUnniivveerrssiittyy CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnInga PerssonONPACT, Munich, Germany

WWoorrkksshhooppssTThhee SSeeccrreett ooff EEmmoottiioonnaall CCoonnnneeccttiioonnss..BBrraannddiinngg ffoorr UUnniivveerrssiittiieessPeter BaumgartnerSiemens Austria, Vienna, Austria

GGeettttiinngg SSuuppppoorrtt aanndd FFiinnddiinngg SSttrroonnggFFrriieennddss.. LLoobbbbyyiinngg aass aa CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonnTTooooll

102

Thomas Hofer

Christian Reiser

J. König & N. Mitchell

Ada Pellert

Kevin Johnson

Peter van Dam

Peter Reader

Karin Kirchner

Paul Schott

Jan-Martin Wiarda

Inga Persson

Peter Baumgartner

Jorma Laakkonen M. Langer & D. Vercic

Paolo Pomati

Gisela GruberJudith Bauer

Nicola Stanisch

CRED

ITS:

DAN

UBE

UNIV

ERSI

TY K

REMS

.

20052008

PeterVan Dam

Technische UniversiteitEindhoven

The Netherlands

KarinCarlsson

Uppsala UniversitetSweden

104

either saints nor martyrs:it was an intriguingcomment aboutuniversitycommunicators made bythe author of this chapterduring the conference in

Stresa, 2010. If we went back through thelist of EUPRIO presidents, as historians dowith emperors, kings, popes and bishops,we surely couldn’t resist the temptation toenvision Peter Van Dam with a little haloover his head, if not a saint, at least verynear to.

As an academic working in a scientificuniversity (Technische UniversiteitEindhoven), Peter ferried EUPRIO acrossthe eras. He chaired EUPRIO for threeyears, looking after an association,somewhat tied to the past, yet lookingforward to professionalization andreorganization.!e first two years wentsmoothly but the third year was moreproblematic, but more about that later.Peter sailed through his presidency, neverraising his voice and steadfastly ploughing

his way through mountains of paperwork.He replied to each and every email he wassent; so neither a saint nor a martyr butcertainly a gentleman.

Peter was installed as presidentduring the farewell party in Kremsand his first task was to chair the

Spring Steering Committee meeting inone of the most iconic cities in the world,Paris. No other meeting had been held insuch a spectacular venue and even now,glancing at the programme, one canremember the “live and let live”atmosphere that the capital of Franceexudes. Members were welcomed andworked at ParisTech Grignon in the 5e

arrondissement, stayed in a boutique hotelnear the Luxembourg Gardens, lunched inthe Rue Mou"etard, dined in a“dauphinois” restaurant.!e socialprogramme included a trip by bateau-mouche from Place de l’Alma and aninformal dinner at the organiser’s home,just three steps away from the Sacré-CoeurBasilica at Montmartre.

N

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

105

Monique Mizart, the French nationalrepresentative, who could speak a dozen oflanguages fluently, certainly lived up to herreputation as an outstanding host andmanaged to transform a heavy agenda intoa light and achievable programme. JacobJensen, the new secretary, kept suchexcellent minutes that we can still go backand understand what was happening forEUPRIO at that time.

EUPRIO was facing a problem withmembership levels which had dropped forno apparent reason. Many Europeancountries were still either not representedor represented poorly. Collectingmembership fees was a big problem and itappeared that many people were justregistering their name on the Web sitewithout paying the fees. It was stressedagain that the national representativesmust take responsibility for collecting thefees and transferring the money to thetreasurer within the deadline set. It washoped that setting tighter deadlines wouldsolve the problem of the Web site statingthat there were 400 members and thebank account showing fees received fromless than 200. It was also decided that feeswould need to rise from # 60 per year to #90 and that this would be done gradually,# 75 in 2008 and # 90 in 2009.!is wasnot a decision that members took lightlyand was only taken after protracted andsometimes heated arguments.

The president proposed that a newworking group should be createdto specifically come up with

ideas for some new EUPRIO initiatives.Ingeborg Dirdal, Uwe Steger, KarinCarlsson volunteered to participate andAndrea Costa was invited to join.!eworking group created a forum onlinewhere they could discuss ideas with othermembers and present a list of initiatives.

Plans to develop new initiatives werefurther developed during the SteeringCommittee meeting which took place inVilnius just before the start of the annualConference. Karin Carlsson presented aworking paper looking at how to betterdefine what the nature of EUPRIO ’sbusiness should be. It was clear thatEUPRIO served all Europe and should bemore concerned with major issues facingEuropean universities such as how to raisefunds and how to increase studentmobility and Europe.!e ideas from theworking group included formalising the

two task groups (Conferences and NewInitiatives) and providing them with abudget to support their activities. It wasrecognised that, to more tangible productsneeded to be o"ered to members such asexclusive surveys on key relevant topicsand enhancing the Web site. Costs forthese initiatives were estimated between #15,000 to # 40,000 and it was decided tofinance these through raising membershipfees, obtaining support from participatinguniversities, using EUPRIO capital andgetting EU support.

!ese proposals resulted in a lot ofcomments and, after taking note of them,the president decided on three things,that:

• EUPRIO should remain an informalvolunteer-led network for communicationprofessionals working in or for Europeanhigher education institutions;

• the main mission should be tostimulate the professional development ofits members and to encourage them toexchange knowledge and experiences witheach other;

• the two task groups would beformalised. Ulrike Reimann wasappointed as chair of the Conferencegroup and Karin Carlsson as chair of theNew Initiatives group.!e latter was tocontinue its work on updating the missionand vision for EUPRIO and preparing asurvey on a relevant professional issuewhich would be presented at the 2009Conference. # 50,000 from the capital wasallocated.

History tells us that this should haveled to a transformation for EUPRIO butperhaps too little money was spent. At theend of the meeting Karin Carlsson waselected vice-president of EUPRIO with aview to her succeeding Peter Van Dam in2007.

Vilnius University, the oldestuniversity in the Baltic statesand, founded in 1579, one the

oldest in North Eastern Europe was thevenue for the 18th Conference in 2006.Nijol$ Bulotait$, Edita Kirlyt$ and theirteams were complimented by delegates fortheir outstanding organisational skills.Due to some sponsorship the team hadobtained this conference made a healthyprofit. After a guided walk through the oldtown 174 participants from 21 countrieswere welcomed by the Rector of theUniversity and by the Mayor of Vilnius.

In theprevious page:Stresa, 2007.Peter VanDamwelcomes themembersof the SteeringCommittee.From left to right:Paola Scioli,Anne Fuynel andPasqualeMastrodomenico,headofadministrationofUniversity ofPiemonteOrientale.

106

!e Conference programme was quitetraditional: a welcome speech, fourplenary sessions, a panel of sixteenworkshops around the central theme of,“Communications in a changing Europe:the implications for higher educationPublic Relations”. One of the plenarysessions was turned into a lectio magistralisfrom Marcel De Cleene, from GhentUniversity, one of the veterans of theSteering Committee, who was going toretire. Out of interest Marcel was probablythe only person who retained all EUPRIO’sdocuments from 1990 and without hispersonal thanks to his spontaneous archivethis book would never have been written.

!e highlight of the social programmewas undoubtedly dinner at Trakai Castlewhich is set on an island on Lake Galv$and dates back to the 15th century. TrakaiCastle is one of the main centres of theGrand Duchy of Lithuania. Fish directlyroasted on spits, rivers of wine and beermade the rather windy evening not onlyvery comfortable but also unforgettable.

!e next Steering Committee meetingtook place in the little town of Vercelli,North-Western Italy, place of the young,competitive University of PiemonteOrientale, on 31st March 2007. PaolaScioli and I intended to showcase thisarea to the members of the Committee, sowe could put Stresa forward as the venuefor the 2010 conference. Once again the

beauty of the landscape with thewonderful lakes and mountains helped“lighten the load”.!e collection ofmembership fees was still problematic andPaola Scioli was lamenting that manycountries were incredibly late withpayments with some having nottransferred fees from 2006,!ediscrepancy between members listed onthe Web site and fees collected was stillenormous. Peter Van Dam exercised all hisvirtues (patience, calmness, à plomb) toconvince some rather reluctant nationalrepresentatives that they should behave ina more responsible way; and the Piedmontwine and the gran fritto misto broughteverybody together at the end.

Since the last Steering Group meetingthe New Initiatives group had held threeconstructive meetings. Karin Carlssonexplained that they had decided that thefirst step should be to send out aquestionnaire to all members to find outwhat benefits they wanted from theirmembership of EUPRIO.!e group hadalso decided to undertake a benchmarkstudy which would run parallel to thesurvey and would be undertaken by aprofessional company at a cost of #20,000.

Beautifully situated on the Drac andIsère rivers and surrounded by mountains,lively Grenoble hosted the 19th conference.It was intended to be a Franco-Swiss

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

Grenoble, 2007. Lunch at the Congress Centre during the 19th Annual Conference.

107

event, but then it was decided to leave theorganisation to the French. Anne Fuynel,Mary Zaccai and Monique Mizartconvinced everybody that the venue wasworth a visit, by welcoming theparticipants with a mouthwatering bu"etof wines and cheese.!e charismaticRector of Grenoble École de Management,!ierry Grange, opened the Conferenceand then stayed and participated in theplenary sessions and workshops. UlrikeReimann and the task force had preparedsessions on ranging from politicalinstitutions, the business community,young minds and future scientists and themedia. Members of the SteeringCommittee were appointed as sessionmoderators (Jorma Laakkonen, KarinCarlsson, Nic Mitchell and Paolo Pomati).14 workshops provided the 176participants from 22 countries with theopportunity to learn about best practicesand innovative techniques.!e socialprogramme included a dinner at theMuseum of Art and the gala dinner washeld the city’s Bastille with wonderfulviews of Mont Blanc. At the end of thedinner Peter Van Dam handed over thechair of the association to Karin Carlsson.He appeared somewhat relieved andhappy, but he didn’t know what was aboutto happen.

Karin Carlsson’s is the shortestpresidency in the history ofEUPRIO; it lasted only eight

months and the only event that shechaired was the Steering Committeemeeting in Cordoba on 16th February2008, which will sadly be remembered as adisaster. Yet everything started out sopositively.!e New Initiatives task force,which Arwin Nimis and Jorma Laakkonenhad since joined, had been working hardand put forward five proposals looking atthe future development of EUPRIO:enabling the Executive Board to workmore proactively and e%ciently;developing a new Web site, ensuring thatEUPRIO’s activities are better targeted tomembers’ jobs by segmenting themaccording to function; further enablingmembers to be able to exchange skills andexperience; systematically repeating themembership survey to ensure thatmembers had a regular forum to air theirviews. It was hoped that this clear view ofwhere EUPRIO was headed would ensurethat Karin’s time as president would provefruitful.

!e chink in the armour proved to bethe candidacy of the future president ofEUPRIO. Karin, without consulting theExecutive Board, suddenly introduced twocandidates, one from the South of Europe(Paolo Pomati) and one from the North(Jorma Laakkonen), emphasising thatboth candidates were excellent. Afterasking Paolo and Jorma to leave the roomKarin asked the committee to come to adecision. Anna-Maria Raudaskoski, whowas now secretary, reports in the minutesthat this break with procedure prompted agreat deal of criticism and that memberswere unhappy that the Executive Boardhad not been involved or consulted. Outof respect for the two candidates membersfelt that they needed to take a decisionthere and then. Peter Van Dam proposedthat members voted for the Italiancandidate because it would be the firsttime in EUPRIO’s history that a presidenthad come from Southern Europe. Peteralso proposed to change the byelaws toenable the Finnish candidate to join theExecutive Board as an extra member. Aftera somewhat confusing discussion, KarinCarlsson decided in the end not to goahead with voting and postponed theelections. Karin was probablydisappointed that members had expressedunhappiness at her break from the usualprocedure and neither the outstandingsocial programme which had been

Grenoble, 2007. Karin Carlsson takesthe presidency from Peter Van Dam’s hands

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

108

Skjelbred-Knudsen prepared an interestingprogramme focusing on “Challenges andsolutions: communication strategies forthe future”. As Stavanger was theEuropean Capital of Culture in 2008, theMayor o"ered to host the welcomereception at the National PetroleumMuseum and the town provided a wealthof cultural activities for guests. MaryMiller, director of Events for StavangerCapital of Culture, delivered the openingspeech which looked at issues aroundculture and the role of universities. Aseries of plenaries on student recruitment,research and internal communication werefollowed by workshops.!e midnight sunof Norway heralded a new beginning of anew chapter for EUPRIO. During theSteering Committee meeting Paolo Pomatipresented his vision and strategy for thefuture of EUPRIO and was unanimouslyelected as new president. Paolo wasinstalled at the end of the conference byPeter Van Dam, EUPRIO’s Guardian Angel.

prepared by Carlos Miraz Suberviola andVictoria Ferreiro Serrano nor the warmweather could break the chilly atmosphere.One week later members received Karin’sresignation by email. Karin’s resignationwas probably not only prompted by theoutcome of the Cordoba meeting. She wasalso due to retire from the Universitybefore the end of her term as presidentand was aware that the president ofEUPRIO needed to be actively working inhigher education.!is was a pity, becauseKarin could have gone on to be a goodpresident but history, alas, cannot dealwith “ifs” and “buts”. An incontrovertiblefact was that Peter Van Dam, in light ofhis sterling work as both president andvice-president was called back in again tochair the association and try to resolvedi%cult issues in time for the conferencein Stavanger.

With the support of Nic Mitchell,Anne Fuynel and Ulrike Reimann thelarge from Stavanger University led byIngeborg Dirdal, Anne Selnes, Hege

STEF

ANO

BODA

Above:Stavanger,

2008. The newExecutive Board

after theelection. Fromright to left:

Ingeborg Dirdal(Webmaster),Paola Scioli(treasurer),Arwin Nimis

(vice-president),Paolo Pomati(president) andAnna-MariaRaudaskoski(secretary) atthe NationalPetroleumMuseum.

109

NINETEEN YEARS IN EUPRIO!In the past nineteen years EUPRIO and its members have

certainly conquered my heart. I also have warm memoriesabout the eighteen conferences (especially the socialprogrammes) that I have attended since my first conference inGranada in 1992. I hope you will forgive me for singling outone conference, but the conference in Rotterdam in 1996holds a special place in my heart, perhaps because I was amember of the organising team led by our host, FrankMunnichs of the Erasmus University. I have only missed oneconference, regretfully the one in Lecce in 2000.

From operational to strategicOver the years I have learned a lot from more experienced

colleagues who were also willing to share their expertise andexperiences with me.!is was especially true for the first tenyears of my membership of EUPRIO.!e networks I made andthe knowledge I gained gave me more confidence to meet thedemands of a demanding job as communications manager atthe Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands.Somewhere along the way I began to notice that I had become“the more experienced colleague” and that I was havinginteresting discussions with well educated young colleagueswho brought with them new ideas. At the same time newmedia was emerging and university communications andmarketing were becoming more professional and more strategic.We can see the development mirrored very clearly in the changingthemes of successive conferences which had gradually shifted fromthe operational to the more strategic. Indeed many universitycommunication managers are now respected advisers andmembers of academic boards. !is change is more than I couldever have dreamt of when I started as a university communicationsmanager in Eindhoven in 1989.

Third Dutch PresidentIn March 2001 I had the honour of being invited to become

the National Representative for the Netherlands within EUPRIO,succeeding Adriana Esmeijer. My first Steering Committeemeeting was on June 14th, 2001 in Rovaniemi when RolfGuggenbühl was president. Since that time I have attendedSteering Committee meetings in Aveiro, Barcelona, Oslo,Durham, Graz, Valletta, Bath, Krems, Paris, Vilnius, Vercelli,Grenoble, Cordoba and finally Stavanger; 15 meetings in all, 5with Rolf Guggenbühl, 4 with Peter Reader and 1 with KarinCarlsson as President. I was later elected as Vice-President for2004-2005 and 2007-2008. At the end of conference in KremsPeter Reader handed over the Presidency to me (2005-2007) Iremember how proud I felt to become the third Dutch Presidentof EUPRIO, following on from my dear former colleagues LaurisBeets and Wim Janssen.

E(UPRIO)-mailsAs the manager of the Web site, with my colleague Cynthia

Mars, I had experienced working for EUPRIO but I had idea aboutthe sheer amount of much time the presidency of EUPRIO wouldtake (and fortunately neither did the Executive Board ofEindhoven University of Technology). Looking back I have toconfess that I sometimes thought that the “e” in “e-mail” stood for

Peter Van Dam

110

EUPRIO because there were many weeks when I exchanged over100 e-mails with EUPRIO colleagues. Nevertheless being presidentof EUPRIO was an experience I would not have missed. I learned alot during my years as president and, in particular, gained valuableinsights into how people from di"erent countries needed di"erentapproaches. So, whilst I might be able to argue my point with aGerman colleague, I might need to take a di"erent approach to acolleague from the UK. Southern Europeans have a completelydi"erent temperament to Scandinavians and the academic year inFrance starts at a di"erent time to the academic year in Poland.It was also an extremely valuable experience to preside over anorganisation run on a voluntary basis by communicationsprofessionals. I knew that all members had great ideas but aspresident I was fortunate enough to be able to realize mine. But,as we all know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions!

From Paris to CordobaAs president I chaired a total of four Steering Committee

meetings. At the first one in Paris, April 1st 2006, I was able toannounce the completion of the new EUPRIOWeb site which thathad been developed in conjunction with Cynthia Mars. Duringthis meeting we also started a discussion about the future ofEUPRIO and members all expressed the view that EUPRIO shouldo"er its members more than just one annual conference and aWeb site. It was felt that the association needed to o"er more valueto members.

In my second meeting as president on August 24th 2006 inVilnius we were pleased to see that the support o"ered to theorganisers of the Vilnius Conference had resulted in an excellentprogramme.!is was the first EUPRIO conference to be hosted byan Eastern European country and was a great success. I washonoured to be invited to give the opening speech. I spoke aboutthe future position of European universities and the changing roleof communication o%cers within the universities: “We have tohelp our universities to become more communicative, moreresponsive to their stakeholders, more open for partnerships withthe business community and other potential partners in society,more transparent, more accountable and more attractive”.

Vilnius, 2006. Picture of the group at the 18th Annual Conference.

VILN

IUS

UNIV

ERSI

TY

111

At the third Steering Committee meeting, which took place inVercelli on 31st March 2007, we decided to hand overresponsibility for the EUPRIO Web site to a di"erent university atthe end of 2007. At this point the Eindhoven University ofTechnology had managed the Web site for nearly five years aftertaking the task over from Groningen University in 2003. !ecommittee also decided to stop using the Bridge Fund to o"erreduced conference fees to new members. To encourage peoplefrom countries who were currently unrepresented within EUPRIOit was decided to sue this fund to o"er reduced conference fees topeople from specific eastern European countries.!e committeealso approved a proposal from the New Initiatives task group toconduct a survey of all members to find out what membershipbenefits they would value.

My fourth and last Steering Committee as president was heldin Grenoble on June 7th 2007.!e committee were pleased withthe final programme for the Grenoble Conference and discussedplans for future conferences (Stavanger in 2008, Aveiro in 2009).In my opening speech at Grenoble I highlighted that universitieswere experiencing heightened international competition, amongstthemselves, for students, scientific sta", partners, funds, politicalsupport and, last but not least, attention from the media and thepublic: “Reputation is the most determinant factor in thiscompetition. !e growing attention for international universityrankings shows that a global reputation race between universitiesis going on. Good performance as we all know is the primarydriver for a good reputation. But it is also obvious that well-managed communications can help a university to perform betterand to get more credit for its good performance. A goodreputation comes frommaking sure that what you do is what youraudiences want you to do, from doing the right things well andfrom communicating this to your stakeholders”.

At the Steering Committee meeting in Grenoble we gratefullyaccepted Ingeborg Dirdal’s (University of Stavanger) o"er to takeover responsibility for the Web site from the end of that year. On

Grenoble, 2007. Anne Fuynel closes the 19th Conferencewith a representative of the townmunicipality.

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

112

behalf of the New Initiatives task group Karin Carlsson presentedthe results of the survey. Perhaps the most notable result was thatmembers were much more willing to become active members ofEUPRIO than I had expected.

!e next meeting of the Steering Committee took place inCordoba on February 16th 2008 with Karin Carlsson as president.Sadly whilst travelling on the Madrid Metro towards this beautifulSouthern Spanish city with its rich history I was robbed of mywallet which contained all my personal credit cards and a lot ofmoney. Never a dull moment in the life of a EUPRIO globetrotter!At the meeting in Cordoba Jorma Laakkonen, on behalf of theNew Initiatives task group, presented five interesting proposalsconcerning the future of EUPRIO. !e reaction from committeemembers was very positive and this work resulted in a EUPRIOpolicy paper which was delivered by the Executive Committee atthe next meeting in Stavanger.

Acting President and Stavanger!ere was also meaty discussion about the procedure that

president Karin Carlsson had set out for the election of a new vicepresident / president. It appeared that she had invited two SteeringCommittee members to present themselves as candidates andwanted to delay the actual election till the next committeemeeting in Stavanger.!e majority of the committee were not atall happy with this approach. As a result of this and within a weekafter this meeting Karin Carlsson felt obliged to step down aspresident and as a member of the Steering Committee. It was thenthat one of the senior members of the committee asked me if Iwould be willing to serve as acting president up to and includingthe Steering Committee meeting in June 2008. Members of the

Cordoba, 2008. Picture of the Steering Committee in front of the University Rectorate.

UNIV

ERSI

TYOF

CORD

OBA

113

Steering Committee put their trust in me and supported thisinvitation, so I agreed and stepped forward to lead EUPRIO throughthis di%cult situation. Well, that is what I tried to do. !e firstthing I did was to let Karin know that I respected her decisionand to thank her, on behalf of EUPRIO for her valuablecontributions to the development of the organisation.

!e last Steering Committee I chaired, this time as actingpresident, took place on June 12th, 2008 in Stavanger in advanceof what was to be a very successful event. In my opening speechto the conference I again argued the necessity for universitycommunication managers to move up to the boardrooms and toact as respected senior advisers to Executive Boards. I describedsome “archetypes of communications managers” and I introduced“a new role of the communication manager as a so calledboardroom editor who coordinates policy making processes ininteraction with di"erent groups of stakeholders and is responsiblefor the formulation of position and policy papers”.!e questionI put forward was: “Is a boardroom editor still a communicationprofessional or has he/she become a general senior adviser to theExecutive Board?” For myself this question still has not beenanswered in a satisfactory way.

Policy paper, Paolo Pomati & Arwin NimisSteering Committee members agreed with my proposals for

the presidency and the vice-presidency of EUPRIO by electingsuccessively Paolo Pomati andArwin Nimis. Both know howgrateful I was (and still am) thatthey were willing to take overfrom me. Members also agreedwith the Policy Paper that I hadpresented to them in April. !emost critical objectives wereincluded in the new president’smandate.

At the end of the StavangerConference I laid theresponsibility to realize thevision and plans for EUPRIO intothe hands of the new presidentPaolo Pomati and the new vice-president Arwin Nimis. Lookingback I can see that my trust inthem has been justified. So farthey have done very well.

Just an enjoyingmemberAfter the Stavanger Conference I experienced a feeling of great

emptiness. No more plans to make, no e-mails and telephone callsto respond to, no more inspiring contacts with other SteeringCommittee members, no conflicts to smooth, etc. But after a fewdays I recovered and took hope from the thought that it would begreat to participate in the next conference as just an ordinarymember. And that's precisely what I did at the successfulconference in Aveiro and what I intend to do for many years tocome. Because I can't imagine how life would be without all myEUPRIO friends...

Below:Stavanger, 2008.Peter Van Damhands over thepresidency toPaolo Pomatiduring the galadinner at hotelRadisson.

STEF

ANO

BODA

114

TThheemmee:: Communication in a changingEurope - The implications for highereducation Public RelationsVVeennuuee:: University of VilniusNNuummbbeerr ooff PPaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 174 from 21countries

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessBenediktas JuodkaRector of Vilnius UniversityPeter Van DamPresident of EUPRIO

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssCommuniticating in the new EuropePeter GreenDevelopment Director, AlphaGalileoFoundation, UKBettina GneiszVice President CorporateCommunications of OMV AG, AustriaSaulius VengrisVice-rector of Vilnius Academy of FineArts, former secretary of Ministry ofEducation, Lithuania

The Brain DrainCharles Woolfson University of Glasgow, UKLinas !ekanavi"iusVilnius University, Lithuania

European University RankingGero FederkeilCHE - Centrum für Hochschule-Entwicklung, GermanyJohn O’LearyEditor of the Times Higher EducationSupplement, UKAndrea CostaBocconi University, Italy

Communication by NatureMarcel De CleeneUniversity of Ghent, Belgium

WWoorrkksshhooppssHow to Handle The Change of theRector, Principal or Vice Chancellor Wolfgang MathiasUniversity of Cologne, Germany

How to implement a name change andnew corporate identity. Willem HooglugtRadboud University Nijmegen, TheNetherlandsIngeborg DirdalUniversity of Stavanger, Norway

How to be more creative in gettingyour university into the media John O’LearyEditor of the Times Higher EducationalSupplement, UKNic MitchellUniversity of Teesside, UK

Finding out what the customers ofhigher education think:

Communicating with students Chris HarrisHERO, UKMarek ZimnakWroc!aw University of Economics,Poland

Promoting science and research viathe Web to the press and public – theGerman and Swedish experiencesthrough IDW and ExpertAnswer. Josef KönigRühr-Universität Bochum, GermanySylvia TrärisIDW – Universität Bayreuth, GermanyIngemar BjörklundSwedish Research Council, Sweden

International student recruitment:Attracting international students fromoutside the European Union. Piet BoumaUniversity of Groningen, The NetherlandsAnne FuynelGrenoble École de Management, France

Evaluating Higher Education PublicRelations Bernt ArmbrusterUniversity of Kassel, Germany

How can industry and highereducation work better together in thenew Europe? Including industry viewon public relations in new EU memberstates. Bettina GneiszOMV AG, Austria

Working together with PR-agencies Hans ten BrinkeABP, The Netherlands

Do’s and Don’ts of InternalCommunication Rolf GuggenbühlGuggenbühl Communications,Switzerland

Communiqué - support for pressoffices in European universities Peter GreenDevelopment Director, AlphaGalileoFoundation, UK

Friendraising to fundraising: the roleof effective communication indevelopment Anna MundellIain More Associates, UKPeter ReaderUniversity of Bath, UK

How to deliver good media training Arwin NimisHanzehogeschool Groningen,the Netherlands

How to promote more exchanges ofstudents, scholars and scientistsbetween East and West Europeanuniversities? Charles WoolfsonUniversity of Glasgow, UK Raimonda Markevi"ien#Vilnius University, Lithuania

Abandon the paper for the WebAnn-Christine Nordin & Åsa EkvalChalmers University of Technology,SwedenAna Bela MartinsUniversity of Aveiro, Portugal

The use of Weblogs in PublicRelations and communicationmanagement Philip YoungUniversity of Sunderland, UK

Peter Van Dam and rector Benediktas Juodka chair the 1st plenary session.

VILN

IUS

UNIV

ERSI

TY

115

TThheemmee:: Future Issues for EuropeanUniversitiesVVeennuuee:: Grenoble Congress CentreNNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 176 from 22countries.

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessThierry GrangeDean of Grenoble École de ManagementPeter Van DamPresident of EUPRIO

Christina UlleniusVice-president of EUA

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssHow to communicate with andinfluence political institutions?Sheree Anne KellyDirector, Public affairs council,Washington DC, USALouise SimpsonManaging Partner, The KnowledgePartnership, UKJorma LaakkonenCommunications director, University ofHelsinki, Finland

How to communicate wit and influencethe business community?Thierry GrangeDean of Grenoble Ecole de Management,FrancePierre PageFounder and CEO of the TKS Group,FranceNic MitchellPress and Public Relations Manager,University of Teesside, UK

How to communicate with andinfluence young minds and futurescientists?Dianne StilwellPublic Relations Manager, Institute ofPhysics, London, UKMatteo MerzagoraFreelance science journalist, TRACES -Advisors in science communication, Paris,FranceKarin CarlssonHead of Information Office, University ofUppsala, Sweden

How to communicate with andinfluence the media?Alan ThomsonNews Editor, Times Higher EducationSupplement, UKIvor GaberUniversity of London, UKPaolo PomatiUniversità degli Studi del PiemonteOrientale, Italy

WWoorrkksshhooppssCommunicating with companiesDieter LeonhardPresident of the Franco-GermanUniversityAlessandro CiarloDirector of Career Service and AlumniRelations, Università Bocconi, Milan, Italy

Innovate marketing towardsinternational recruitment Matt SymondsDirector of QS, UKDamien RouxDirector Promotion & InternationalDevelopment EM LYON Grande Ecole,France

Science at school – science for thechildrenMichael SeiffertHead of Public Relations Department,University of Tübingen, GermanyColin WilkinsonSector Manager – Engineering, NorthEast Higher Skills Network, University ofTeesside, UK

Adapting press relations to differentcountriesMary ZaccaiInternational Press Officer GrenobleEcole de Management, FranceEoin BedfordPress and PR Manager, Imperial college,London, Tanaka Business School, UK

Communicating with womenAmelia LakeResearch Fellow, University of Newcastle,UKBeckie LangExternal Affairs Officer and Press Officer,Association for the Study of Obesity, UK

La communication événementielle auservice de la scienceMarie CollinCommunication office at INRIA, FranceMonique MizartCommunications officer at InstitutNational Agronomique Paris Grignon,France

How to effectively promote aninnovative local environment to attractresearchers?Catherine BlancProject Manager, Promotion, AEPI, FrancePedro OlivasResponsable de la communicationGrenoble Universités, France

FundraisingYaëlle Aferiat,Director of the “Association Françaisedes Fundraisers”, FranceMonique RubichonHead of Communication at ENSAM,Paris, France

Ethics in public relationsPhilip YoungSenior Lecturer in Public Relationsspecialist, University of Sunderland, UKAlbert HammProfessor in English Linguistics,University Marc Bloch in Strasbourg,France

Science on the street Ingeborg DirdalCommunication consultant, Universityof Stavanger, NorwayJoachim LerchPresident of the Foundation “Scienceand technologie”, active member of theEuropean Science Event Association

New trend in communicationMichael MurtoughHead of Business Development,Research Media, University ofWarwick, UK

Research in the mediaJudith MoorePress officer, Home Office, UKIvor GaberMedia consultant and trainer,broadcaster and journalism professor,University of London, UK

National initiatives to promotescience and research at largeGrégoire PoletDeskman, Brussels Studies, FacultésUniversitaires Saint-Louis, Brussels,BelgiumAndrei MogoutovEditor in Chief, Technology ReviewFrance

Lobbying – How to influence yourpolitical governmentSheree Anne KellyDirector, Public affairs Council,Washington DC, USAFlorent GotCommunications Manager, INPG, France

116

Best practice in internalcommunication. Example of a GrandeÉcole and its networksChristine Legrand & EmmanuelleAlmendraCPE Lyon, France

Communicating change - maximisingthe potential of the University Web siteMartin HerremaMedia relations manager, University ofWestminster, UK

The role of Universities in CulturalRenewal Sanna HolmqvistUniversity of Malmö, Sweden

Cultural renewal – lessons for the UKfrom the ‘Swedish model’ Natasha VallUniversity of Teesside, UK

WEB – Extreme make-overMonique JippingDirector of Communication Services,Utrecht University, The Netherlands

Market Research for UniversitiesAndrea CostaBocconi University, Milan, Italy

Targeting your message for theinternational pressAndrew MillerDeputy Director of Communications, EUA,Brussels, Belgium

The UK track record of AcademicEnterpriseMarcus GibsonGibson Index Ltd., London, UK

Who talks to whom? Internalcommunications. Perceptions vs/ realityDavid PenneyOxford Brookes UniversityLouise SimpsonThe Knowledge Partnership, UK

UNIV

ERSI

TY O

F ST

AVAN

GER

TThheemmee:: Challenges and solutions:communication strategies for thefutureVVeennuuee:: University of StavangerPPaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 215 from 21 countries

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessAnne SelnesDirector of strategy and communication,University of Stavanger, NorwayPeter Van DamActing president of EUPRIO

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssCulture and the universityMary MillerDirector, Stavanger 2008, EuropeanCapital of Culture, NorwayDaniel HanssonArtistic director and Conductor, MalmöUniversity, Sweden

Why students stay away from STEM:how teenagers’ values and self imageclash with the image of scienceUrsula KesselsResearcher and lecturer at the FreieUniversität Berlin and HSU Hamburg,Germany

Promotion and marketing. Keycomponents of an internationalisationstrategyBernd WächterDirector, ACA, Belgium

Risks and pitfalls in communicationwith the mediaOle Didrik LærumUniversity of Bergen, Norway

Making sense of organisationalchange: the role of communicationInger StensakerNorwegian School of Economics andBusiness Administration, Norway

WWoorrkksshhooppssAnniversaries as PR and MarketingInstruments – The 550th Anniversaryof the University of FreiburgEva OpitzUniversity of Freiburg, Germany

Embedding Widening Participation toobtain Equity in HE: CommunicationstrategiesIda Marie AndersenHead Communication Adviser, OsloUniversity College, Norway

The Academic Community Meets theDigital Community – How do theyrelate?Asbjørn Bartnes, Lasse Knutsen& Bente SchøningUniversity of Tromsø, Norway

University of Bologna - UniBo PortalSystem Luca Garlaschelli & Andrea Paolo CianiUniversity of Bologna, Italy

The impact of heritage and how touse it Nijol# Bulotait#University of Vilnius, LithuaniaPaolo PomatiUniversità del Piemonte Orientale“Amedeo Avogadro”, Italy

Merger of the 3 universities ofStrasbourg in 2009: an opportunity torethink the organisation of acommunication device and itsstrategy Anne GoudotUniversité de Strasbourg, France

Who Talks To Whom? AnalysingNetworksLaura Blake,National Primary Care Research andDevelopment Centre, Universities ofManchester / York, UK

20082012

PaoloPomati

Università degli Studidel Piemonte Orientale

“Amedeo Avogadro”Italy

118

es, that summer’smorning in Stavangerheralded the start of a bigadventure for the authorof this chapter which bynecessity coincides withthe “President’s Word”.

My time as president has not finished yet soit is quite di!cult to write, at the sametime, an impartial report about what hashappened and what is yet to come. Forthese reasons, I will try to keep to the factsand will explain the vision which supportedthe unexpected candidacy of an Italianrepresentative during those turbulentmonths at the beginning of 2008.

As I reported in the previous chapter,the Steering Committee meeting inCordoba concluded without an electedpresident and was followed by theresignation of the current one a week later.Furthermore, Jorma Laakkonen, one ofthe two candidates, decided to retire hiscandidacy. Peter Van Dam as vicepresident took on the role temporarily andasked me not to withdraw my candidacy.His appeals to me were at all levels, to mysense of responsibility, my a"ection forEUPRIO, the honour attached to bringingthe presidency to a southern country forthe first time in the history of EUPRIO andso on.

To be honest, I was not excited at theprospect of becoming president. I knewthat the entire association wanted majorchanges and that the direction EUPRIOneeded to be taking was still unclear.However, AICUN, the Italian association ofuniversity communicators, put me under

siege albeit in a pleasant way. I found itimpossible to refuse and managed to say arather feeble “Yes”. I was steadfast in onepoint however. I was adamant that theSteering Committee should not elect mejust to avoid the danger of a prolongedvacancy; the members’ vote should bebased on what was best for EUPRIO interms of the strategic direction it shouldbe taking.

I decided that my motto would be:“Care. Share. Dare”.

It was quite evident to me thatmembers were determined that EUPRIOshould become more professional, acquirelegal status, be acknowledged by Europeaninstitutions, enlarge its horizons andprovide more tangible benefits tomembers. An association based only on acommon job friendship and on a yearlyjourney to some part of Europe had

YL'aventure commence l'aurore,

à l'aurore de chaque matin;l'aventure commence alors

que la lumière nous lave les mains…— Jacques Brel

Paolo Pomati

119

become out of step with the times. I wasalso aware of another issue facing theassociation, that nobody had previouslyfelt it necessary to either register theassociation in a specific country or to havean o!cial bank account; the pro temporetreasurer was the holder.#is does notmean that one way is better than another,but, purely and simply, times had changedand it was now critically important toensure EUPRIO became the professionalassociation that its members wanted andneeded.

#e first verb which came into mymind when I was thinking about mymotto (and my strategy) was “to care”.For me this represented paying closeattention, ensuring good maintenance andproviding watchful oversight and supportto current and future activities. I wasprobably influenced by that beautiful JohnUpdike’s quotation: “Any activity becomescreative when the doer cares about doingit right. Or better”.#e first priority wasclear, to equip the association with a newCharter, legal status and a registered placeof business, possibly in Belgium but mostcertainly near to the most importantEuropean institutions. I had alreadystarted to plan how these might beachieved before the extra SteeringCommittee meeting in Leuven, where thedelegates would be voting for the articlesof the new Charter which would formallyreconstitute the association. History tellsthe story and thanks to the e"orts ofRonny Vandenbroele, the board ofKatholieke Universiteit Leuven acceptedto host the o!cial seat of EUPRIO.#eCharter, written in Dutch and translatedin English, would be voted by the GeneralAssembly and become e"ective in 2009.

At that point EUPRIO would become anot-for-profit association under theBelgian laws and would acquire rules andprofessional management. It was clear thatthis would mean we could not delaytaking a decision about our investments. Abank balance of over $ 170,000, anembarrassing gift from previouspresidents, could not be maintained as anot-for-profit organisation should alwaysbreak even, not be in profit. So it wasdecided to use this money wisely and toprovide ongoing funds for: IT services anddevelopments; organising a new-lookConference; supporting working groups tomeet their goals and objectives. We allrecognised that although it was important

to obtain professional status this should beachieved without the association losing thethings that made it great, its informality,spontaneity and its friendly “human”character.

Under the umbrella of “care” there wasalso the urgent need to update the Website.#is issue had been highlightedpreviously by Peter Van Dam. A workinggroup, chaired by Ingeborg Dirdal andcomposed of Ann-Elin Andersen, Nijol%Bulotait%, Paola Scioli, Ingrid Stenslandand Marek Zimnak, was set up.#ey wereasked to define what was needed and tofind the best people to set up the new Website. A team from Norway were selectedand the new site was launched on 3rd

March 2009. Over time it became clearthat technology was changing rapidly andthis, combined with Ingeborg starting anew career outside higher education, ledto a decision in 2011 that it was time onceagain to restyle the site. MaastrichtUniversity have now stepped in toundertake this important job.

Another tricky challenge we werefacing at that time was how to revampfuture Conferences. A working group,chaired by Chris Coe and composed ofAnn-Elin Brattebø Andersen, Laura Blake,Anne Fuynel, Sanna Holmqvist, Marie-Catherine Mouchot and Ingrid Stensland

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

Below:Aveiro, 2009.Anna-MariaRaudaskoski,Uwe Stegerand JosefKönig sign thenew Charter.

120

met in Oslo and proposed a new way ofrunning the annual conference.#eyproposed that conferences should be moreproactive forums where members couldobtain information and discuss trends incommunication and education policies inEurope.#eir vision was to provideopportunities for members to attendpractical master classes, workshops,matchmaking and speed-working sessionsat levels appropriate to their role.#is newformat was accepted and was taken up bythe group organising the Conference inStresa for September 2010. I will talkmore about this later.

Robert Louis Stevenson told readers to“Keep your fears to yourself, but shareyour courage with others”.#e verb “toshare” was added to my motto. For methis means to relate experiences, topromote participation, to recognise andsupport cooperation. EUPRIO had to movefrom having a “seasonal” responsibility tomembers to having an “everyday”responsibility. It became important thatSteering Committee members took onmore responsibility to ensure that thepresident was not left alone to drown inwork. A series of working groups were setup and some of them were open to allEUPRIO members, not just those from the

Steering Group.#ese groups were given aclear remit.

#e EUPRIO History working group,chaired by Véronique Éloy, was set up andtheir work has resulted in this book. Greatexpectations were held for theRelationships working group who weretasked with supporting new members andfurther developing links with relevantlocal, European and internationalorganisations. We then launched a bigcampaign to improve entries fromcountries whose memberships were low orunsteady. Little by little the membershipfigures rose from 386 (end of 2007) to609 (end of 2010) and the number ofcountries from 17 to 25. EUPRIO not onlystarted to be acknowledged by severalEuropean institutions and associations,like the DG Communication of theEuropean Commission, EUA, ESMU; wealso began to develop meaningfulpartnerships with them.

As any self-respecting Italian, I studiedLatin at school and a third issue was at thefront of my mind. In his Epistulae Morales(104. 26), Seneca declared: “Non quiadi!cilia sunt non audemus, sed quia nonaudemus, di!cilia sunt”, which means:“It’s not because things are di!cult thatwe do not dare. It’s because we do not dare

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

Left:Aveiro, 2009.Participants at

the firstplenary session

of the 21stAnnual

Conference.Right:

Aveiro, 2009.Rector HelenaNazaré opensthe 21st AnnualConference.

121

that they are di!cult”. “To dare”, then,became the third part of my motto, So, inwhat way could Euprians dare? Whilstremaining up-to-date is important it is notenough. Euprians should be constantlyenlarging their horizons, being creative,making grand plans, hoisting the sails andgoing where the sea is bluest; ducere inaltum (= put out into the deep) as PopeJohn Paul II taught, following Luke, 5:4.

These were the foundations onwhich I both built my candidacyand based my motto – “Care.

Share. Dare”. I was also careful to look atways we could sensibly manage thechanges needed, so I proposed a gentle re-organisation over time, nothing too new.#e Steering Committee seemed to likemy plans and I was elected as president forthe term 2008-10. I was later re-elected,this time by the General Assembly, for theterm 2010-12. I proposed the members ofthe Executive Board – Arwin Nimis asvice-president, Paola Scioli as treasurer –and confirmed Anna-Maria Raudaskoskias secretary, who would later step down infavour of Laure Schönenberger Rü!eux.A sparkling ensemble to which I owe somuch.

Before focusing on the events that havehappened so far, let me just say that the

work undertaken to increase the tangiblebenefits to members proved beneficial.Times of crisis and financial cuts wouldforce members to justify to managers howexactly membership of EUPRIO wouldbenefit their university. Without o"eringwhat individuals and their organisationsneeded it is unlikely that we would be heretoday celebrating our 25th anniversary.With the first two steps taken (theacquisition of an o!cial legal status, withcharter, mission statement and apermanent seat in Leuven; the newconference format) EUPRIO was ready forthe third and final phase which wasplanned to smoothly coincide with mystepping down.

We set up a special “New StrategiesWorking Group”, chaired by AndreaCosta and composed formerly of ArwinNimis, Denis Ancion, Chris Coe, AchimFischer and Petra Ljung, and laterly joinedby Uwe Steger, Marie-CatherineMouchot, Alexandra Hroncova and AnitaByström.#is group were tasked withoutlining the priorities for the 2010-2012presidency. Di"erent scenarios wasoutlined and the Steering Committeedecided that the one which felt like thebest “fit” for EUPRIO was to become a sortof an “outside-in association”. To achievethis it was decided that we would:

LEONARDOD’AMICO

TheMayor of Aveiro Élio Maia welcomes president Paolo Pomati at CasaMajor Pessoa.

122

they had been to date to being theculmination of a 18-month process whichwould involve members and nationalorganisations. Members themselves woulddecide on the general themes and area ofbest practice to be covered.#is wouldhappen only after strategic discussions atboth national and international level, withthe consistent involvement of associationsand partners.

Thinking about the events whichdotted the period from myinstallation in Stavanger to the

Conference in Prague, which will celebratethe 25th anniversary of EUPRIO’sfoundation, I cannot help but describe thepositive development of the associationand not only in terms of its membership.On Friday 31st October 2008, from 3 to 8pm, at the University Hall of KatholiekeUniversiteit Leuven, twenty-two nationaland deputy national representatives wrotethe course of EUPRIO’s history. Everyarticle of the new Charter’s text was read,discussed and voted and at the end theCharter was approved in its entirety. Anew era which began serendipitously theday before a EUA-meeting ofcommunication professionals took place inBrussels. It was the first time that the EUAhad invited the president of EUPRIO tochair a round table and it was heartening

• focus on subjects that were importantin Europe and in higher education andexamine their implications forcommunication;

• formalise systematic, institutionalisedcontact with key relevant Europeanorganizations and associations and/oruniversities who led the field in a certainsubject;

• concentrate on giving members thetools to enable them to keep up withtrends in communications, with the Website being the most important medium touse, e.g. providing relevant links groupedby subject on current trends;

• strengthen the role of thecommunicator within the complexorganisational worlds of universities;

• ensure that the starting point forconferences would no longer beCommunication per se but highereducation issues and their consequenceson communication. Conferences wouldfocus on the communications issues forone key higher education issue and mightbe hosted by universities who led the fieldin this subject.

So, we moved out focus onto futureConferences.#e Steering Committee, onthe basis of a detailed proposal from theConference Working Group, decided totransform the Conferences from a series ofindependent and unconnected events, as

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

Above:Aveiro, 2009.

The ceremony ofEUPRIO Awards.From left tothe right, the

winners:Achim Fischer(1st prize),

Uwe Steger,Gudrun Pichler,

LaureSchönenberger,Jens Fink-Jensen

andMarekZimnak (2nd prize

ex aequo)and Vicky

Rabensteiner.

123

to note that many participants were eithermembers of EUPRIO’s Steering Committeeor were EUPRIO members.#e wall (or, atleast, the lack of communication) wasdefinitely down. Ulrike Reimann certainlyplayed an important role in thedevelopment of our relationship with EUA.

An icy Wroc&aw was the venue of thenext “Spring” Steering Committeemeeting, the first time that Poland hadhosted EUPRIO. Marek Zimnak, the Polishrepresentative, o"ered us all a friendly andwarm welcome on 27th February 2009. Iwas in particularly high spirits thatevening because my second niece had justbeen born. We had a huge amount ofwork to get through, in particular goingback over the Charter to ensure it wouldconform to Belgian law. During thediscussion it was stressed that the deadlineof paying fees was compulsory and thatthe same strict policy should be used whiledealing with members and non-membersat conferences. Véronique Éloy was nicelysurprised to hear an Italian presidentbarking “A deadline is a deadline”. Noprivilege for nobody.

#e University of Aveiro, consistentlyranked as one of the best in Portugal,hosted the 21st Annual Conference.#eRector Maria Helena Nazaré, who wouldlater be elected president of EUA, deliveredthe opening speech, followed by my firstone as EUPRIO president. One of myobjectives has always been to get clarity on

the role of the “European UniversityCommunicator”. Mission impossible, youwill say and I am afraid you are quiteright, because after various years in EUPRIOI still haven’t made much headway.Salaries, positions, titles, profiles,strategies, budgets all di"er from onecountry to another; many presidents andrectors consider the communicationfunction as a big basket into which theycan throw everything. So who is guilty?#ose in charge?#e system?#e globalfinancial crisis? Or is it our fault, theuniversity communicators who still do notshare a common view of communication?I think that this is the problem. We do notmake it clear enough that we are not hereto sell courses, set up red tape, provide thecushion between the university and theoutside world, we are not here to deal withcomplaints and we are certainly notresponsible for operating call-centres.

What people do not understand is thatthe university communicator is a trueknowledge worker, a strategist whoworks in knowledge networks.#ecommunicator should be the key figure inthe university, because he / she is the onewho can understand the nuances andmessages that pass from one to anotherand make them work; he / she is the onewho understands the hierarchy ofdecision-making, he / she is the one whocan write a communication plan, which isnot a list of things to do, but a vitalstrategic document which enables the

GIOR

GIO

SAMB

ARIN

O

Stresa, 2010. Participants cross-pollinate ideas during the European Café.

124

institution to deliver its mission.#eknowledge workers are the holders ofcontent which has to be developedappropriately for diverse audiences. Wecannot develop communications strategiesif we do not understand the nuances,networks, processes, routines and theirtechnological management. We cannotdevelop information services, assistance,counselling to students if we do not trulyunderstand the dynamics of external andinternal communication.

In Aveiro I told the audience that foruniversity communication it was thetime of some “digital neo-

humanism”, according to a theory ofElisabetta Zuanelli. Today we have got thelink between the period in which liberalarts and mechanical civilization began towork together thanks to the insights ofLeonardo da Vinci, and the contemporaryworld, in which liberal arts are created andchannelled digitally. We live in the worldof “virtual artifacts”, where a book, adrawing, a piece of music become an e-book, e-photo, a “mp3”.#e universitycommunicator must be up-to-date, butwithout making a Copernican revolution.Humanism puts the person at the centreof the world: the person, who declares hisdignity, his liberty, his capacity. Rules nolonger matter; what matters is the criticalconsciousness of the human condition.Humanists claimed the value of

eloquence, of the “verbum”, of the words,of the speech.#is then is the modernuniversity communicator of today: a neo-humanist, a knowledge worker, whoconsiders language to be the foundationfor all his work.

We live in a world that is fast,interconnected and overwhelmed by thecult of the image. We put techniques andtools at the centre of our world and weforget people. To paraphrase EdwinSchlossberg, true interactivity is not justabout clicking on icons or downloadingfiles, it’s about encouragingcommunication between people andbuilding relationships. Putting peoplewhere they belong, at the centre of thesystem, requires a radical change in howwe view communication. It meansreturning to the essence of things, taking astep back, leaving hierarchies anddevoting ourselves to the essential. Wedon’t belong to an association like EUPRIOto get benefits. On the contrary we belongbecause it’s the most e"ective way we cancreate networks, build relationships, anddevelop convergence and participation.#e verb “communicare” in ChristianLatin, means “to break the bread together”and implies the highest gift that a personcan give to his equal.

So, we found ourselves in the strangeposition of having changed how wethought about things whilst remaining in

GIOR

GIO

SAMB

ARIN

O

Stresa, 2010. Picture of the group of the 22nd Conference in front of Hotel Regina Palace.

125

a context which had not changed yet. Wedecided that the new Conference formatwould not start until 2010 so in Aveiroplenary sessions and workshopstraditionally filled the days and aspectacular social programme brightenedthe evenings. Ana Bela Martins, a veteranof the Steering Committee, planned tostep down from the committee and leavethe communication sector after theConference. Her tears at the farewell partyreleased the tension she had accumulatedduring organising the conference andshowed the true a"ection she felt for anassociation to which she had given anextraordinary contribution. It was atAveiro that we held the first GeneralAssembly of the revamped association.Arwin and I were given a new mandate.#e Charter was definitely signed. EUPRIOwas moving forward towards a new future.

At the two day Steering CommitteeMeeting in Mannheim, 12th-13th March2010, we had barely enough time to workthrough the twelve points of the agendabut this meeting was perfectly hosted byAchim Fischer. My loose tongue oftenleads me astray… but I have to tell myreaders that Achim would have been agood candidate for the next presidency.But sadly he left the university world for acareer elsewhere and we had to startsearching again for new candidates.Financial cuts and the global crisis were

hanging over members’ heads but theykept working hard. We were very happybut not surprised to see that so manye"orts were tangible benefits. Lots ofassociations and institutions had contactedEUPRIO to establish relationship but weplayed it cool and they requested again!#e new strategies developed by theworking group were being developed andthe members of the Auditors’ Board werefinally appointed: Rolf Guggenbühl,Alessandro Ciarlo and Anna-MariaRaudaskoski were asked to join theassociation again and to take onprominent roles; and they accepted.

No words can begin to describemy ‘pre’ and ‘post’ feelingsabout the Conference in Stresa,

which, through the support of myUniversity (Piemonte Orientale “AmedeoAvogadro”) and of AICUN, returned toItaly. Paola Scioli, the EUPRIO treasurer,and my indefatigable colleagues StefanoBoda and Leonardo D’Amico (the former“babies”, later promoted to “boys”) helpedto make our dreams become reality. Anambitious conference took place in theglittering Hotel Regina Palace, facing LakeMaggiore. I leave you for now with thewords of Jay Rubin, a professor from NYUwas one of the distinguished speakers ofthe fifteen master classes, which markedthe big change in EUPRIO’s conferences.

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

Stresa, 2010. The Orchestra of Università del Piemonte Orientalewelcomes the participants during the opening ceremony of the 22nd Conference.

126

Jay Rubin hit the mark twice: noticingboth the “metaphor e"ort” we made indeveloping the Conference, and mypersonal intention to carry on withshaping the portrait of the Europeanuniversity communicator. 2010 was acrucial year for Universities; financialcutbacks had decimated the budgets formany higher education institutions.Communicators were in the middle ofperhaps the most important crisis facingtheir sector.

#is situation led me to go beyond thefigure of the “digital neo-humanist”,enriching it without the Jungian archetypeof theWounded Healer: the person whohas gone through su"ering, and bytranscending it, he is led to a path ofservice, he becomes a source of greatwisdom and inspiration for others. Jungsaid: “#e doctor is e"ective only when hehimself is conscious that he can fall sick.Only the wounded physician heals. Butwhen the doctor wears his personality likea coat of armour, he has no e"ect”.#eWounded Healer is the teacher who is ableto self-empower others to trust themselvesto the extent that they finally givethemselves permission to feel that whichbefore had been too painful for theemotional body to cope with and feel.

As communicators we have the abilityand perseverance to go beyond our issues,problems and troubles and our job hasbecome something similar to theWounded Healer’s therapies. Whilst wecount our wounds day by day on our skin,

The Inherent Metaphorsof EUPRIOThe tangible skills-buildingopportunities provided forEUPRIO members at Stresa werestellar. I hope the attendeesfound the contributions of themaster class coaches andspeakers, to be close to the barof excellence that the scientificcommittee set by example.Throughout the conference, Iwas struck by the subtlemessages - the inherentmetaphors - reflecting theunderlying transformationEUPRIO is seeking for the role ofthe university communicatoracross Europe. During thewelcoming remarks, I shalladmit, I thought that talking

about “poor EUPRIO members”suffering the wounds of SaintSebastian seemedquestionable, as they weresitting in the majesty of thegilded Hotel Regina Palace.Until, that is, I released thenecessity of the surroundingglitter as ego-buildingammunition towardempowerment.I found it hard to believe thatpast EUPRIO conferences offeredthe constant reinforcingmetaphors that university PRfolks are as deserving as theirbosses and in right place to beheard. An actor making acameo to read to them? Aworld renowned philosopherand parliamentarian respectingthem enough as important

professionals to share his time?Master class teachers from bothsides of the Atlantic?Conscious or not, these andmore confidence-building cuesduring EUPRIO 2010 had to sinkinto some extent. Maybe thepace of the conference was theclearest medium/messagesignal. By avoiding thecounterproductive never-enough-time herding ofattendees to this session orthat, EUPRIO gave itsconstituents a taste of the moreleisurely meetings, most oftenreserved for rectors, deans andsenior executives.

—Jay A.Rubin

we will not surrender. We provide helpful,tangible, positive responses to our Rectorsto enable them to solve e problems.Because of this we ourselves are part of thewounds, we experience the e"ects of them,we overcome them and we can extract thegood from them, for all our futures. Wecan o"er so much, a portfolio ofprofessional skills, contacts to share, theability to sustain productive relationshipswith diverse audiences, to speak in public,to solve problems, to manage crises. Inexchange, yes, we would all love to havebetter salaries and more senior positionswithin our organizations but most of allwe need to be given respect for the jobthat we do and a recognition of our role.Respect and recognition are consideredfundamentally important across allcultures. I must say that we found a healerof our communicators’ wounds in theConference itself. Please read in the “IpseDixit” box what Professor Jean-MarcRapp, president of EUA and keynotespeaker, declared during the Conference.

Euprians discussed the guidelinesdescribed by the President of EUA in alively and productive European Café, atool that was introduced for the first time:an innovative, yet simple conversationalprocess for hosting conversations aboutquestions that matter; people were movingbetween groups, cross-pollinating ideasand discovering new insights into theissues that had arisen.#is was followedby a series of intensive master classeswhich were delivered by leadinginternational experts on a wide range of

127

Towards 2020 with StrategicCommunicationThe next decade will be a perioddevoted both to completing theimplementation of the reformsalready agreed and setting quitespecific targets for the future. Inorder to frame this process webelieve that, looking forward, it isreally important that the BolognaProcess focuses on creating aclear vision of what we expectfrom higher education in thefuture and what type of graduateswe need for the future rather thanconcentrating purely onmeasurements or the moretechnical aspects of the tools.Only in this way will universitiesand their staff and students beinspired to continue thechallenging reform process weare all involved with and onewhich is so important for thefuture of our societies.One key aspect in this continuingprocess will be improvingcommunication about thereforms so that all stakeholdersunderstand both the purpose andthe benefits of Bologna. AsMinisters noted earlier this year,“protests in some countries, partlydirected against developmentsand measures not related to theBologna Process, have remindedus that some of the Bologna aimsand reforms have not beenproperly implemented andexplained”.“At national level, we also strive toimprove communication on andunderstanding of the BolognaProcess among all stakeholdersand society as a whole. Werecognise that amore supportiveenvironment for the staff to fulfiltheir tasks, is needed. We commitourselves to working towards amore effective inclusion of highereducation staff and students inthe implementation and furtherdevelopment of the EuropeanHigher Education Area. We fullysupport staff and studentparticipation in decision-makingstructures at European, nationaland institutional levels.”This is the first time that theimportance of communicationhas been so specifically addressedin a Ministerial communiqué ‒and it is an element that EUA aswell as its individual Rectors’Conference members haveunderlined and also believe willbe crucial to success in the future.However, given the complexity of

the reform process it is easy to seewhy communication has been aproblem. Its fair to say that thereforms haven’t been properlycommunicated to student andtheir parents or to university staff.This is partly due to the initial focusbeing placed, understandably, ontrying to develop the necessaryand rather technical basis of thereforms rather than actuallyexplaining to those directlyconcerned why reform isnecessary. Moreover, for thoseimplementing the reforms it hasvery much been a period of“learning by doing”.While governments andtechnocrats, as well as universityleaders across Europe and theEuropean student unions, haveunderstood the need for, andwholeheartedly backed theBologna reforms, this has notalways been the position of otherkey stakeholders. Efforts have beeninsufficient to either persuadeacademic staff or to communicatethe purpose of the reforms toemployers, young people and theirfamilies. It will be important toexplain that Bologna is actually apackage of reforms that makesense when seen as a whole.Communications should explainthe relationship between thestructural reforms introduced andthe overall goal of improving thequality of our study programmesthat can only come about throughadapting and rethinking curriculaat each level using the learningoutcomes based approach, that isat the centre of the concept of“student centred learning”.In terms of communication,another issue is that in manycountries the Bologna reformshave often been packaged bynational policy makers along withother national Higher Educationreforms or global developments.This has led to mixed and, at thevery least, confusing messagesbeing developed.One example of this concerns thelink often made between theBologna process reforms and theprivatisation/commercialisation ofhigher education, not to mentionthe introduction or increase oftuition fees. If one looks closely atthe Ministerial Communiqués overthe years, and indeed at what hasbeen achieved, it becomes clearthat Bologna is, on the contrary, aprocess that seeks to improve theattractiveness of European highereducation while underlining very

clearly the public responsibility ofnational authorities across Europefor higher education. Bologna istherefore Europe’s response toglobalisation, the creation of acommon framework for HigherEducation that at the same timewould allow Europe to maintainand uphold its varied traditions.Over the last few years this has alsomeant an increasing diversificationof Higher Education Institutions inEurope, with each institutionpaying more attention to definingits own specific mission, profile andstrengths. Here again,communication professionals havea key role in communicating thespecific mission of each institutionand ensuring that its profile andstrengths (in teaching andresearch) are clear to all keyaudiences (students, parents,employers, staff and of coursepublic authorities).In my opinion, this all means thatuniversity communicators willneed to play an increasinglystrategic role both within andoutside the university communitythrough their contribution to thedevelopment of communicationsstrategies in line with the overallaims and missions of theuniversity. A modern Universityneeds a communication strategyand highly qualified experts tocommunicate and disseminate thisstrategy in a way which supportsthe interests of the university as awhole. And the University systemitself has the same needs.

—Jean-Marc Rapp

Jean-Marc Rapp

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

128

disciplines and topics. Delegates learnedhow to build an e"ective Web site with auser-centred design, how to write anddeliver a persuasive presentation in goodEnglish, how to handle crises, how tounleash creativity, how to adapt the oldrules of PR writing for newcommunication mediums. Newtechniques were presented to enableparticipants to organize a special event, tospread scientific messages, to raise funds,to successfully manage branding in thecomplex world of marketing, to lobbye"ectively. Over the conference it becameclear that communicators must be sociallyresponsible for developing their own rolesand that higher education institutionswould need to significantly change theirattitude towards communication.

It is not my place to comment aboutthis Conference but the results ofthe evaluation questionnaires speak

for themselves. Participants wereunanimously enthusiastic. Many positivecomments were made concerning thequality of the master classes and manysuggestions were made about how nextyear’s conference could be furtherimproved.#e working group, composedof Laura Blake, Anne Fuynel, SannaHolmqvist, Ulrike Reimann and IngridStensland should be happy with the result.

#ere was no time to rest though withthe Spring Steering Committee meetingalready knocking at the doors. It was avery challenging time because we had todecide which strategy to follow for thenext presidency. I have already talkedabout the strategic direction which EUPRIO

will shortly be following.#e Conferencein Prague, where we will celebrate our 25th

anniversary and where this book will bedistributed, will be yet another newdeparture point for our organisation.

My “Care Share Dare” programme wasentirely inspired by the words of President#eodore Roosevelt: “Far better it is todare mighty things, to win glorioustriumphs, even though checkered byfailure, than to rank with those poorspirits, who neither enjoy nor su"er muchbecause they live in the gray twilight thatknows neither victory nor defeat”. So itseems that EUPRIO is taking new steps andmaking news starts all the time – we areCaring Sharing and Daring. So, was Iright? Are we moving in the rightdirection? Ai posteri l’ardua sentenza,wrote Alessandro Manzoni – only thosethat come after us will decide.

Above:Stresa, 2010.The openingand closingspeeches aredelivered by:

BrunellaMarchione,presidentof AICUN;

prof. GianniVattimo,

philosopher andmember of the

EuropeanParliament;prof. FabiolaSinigaglia,

vice-rector forInternationalRelations ofUniversità delPiemonteOrientale.

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

LEON

ARDO

D’AM

ICO

129

WWoorrkksshhooppssHeading for a communication plan forthe Spanish Conference of RectorsEsther Huerta GarcíaCRUE, Spain

How did I become a topcommunications professional?Arja SuominenSenior Vice President ofCommunications, Nokia Corporation,Finland

How to bring 30 thousand youngstersto campusMargarida AlmeidaUniversity of Aveiro, Portugal

The theory of merging a University vs.the practical possibilities and all theproblems which could appear in theprocess. The example of the mergingprocess of the Universities of Essenand Duisburg, in GermanySabine ZixUniversität Duisburg-Essen, Germany

Branding in the 21st centuryKatrin AndroschinEmbassy, Berlin, Germany

The University in the Second LifeCarlos Santos & Luís PedroUniversity of Aveiro, Portugal

Creating, managing and developing auniversity design programmePete Burke, Jens Fink-Jensen& Signe Lund-SørensenUniversity of Copenhagen, Denmark

A creative campaign for high schoolstudentsAlexandra HroncovaCVUT Prague, Czech Republic

Overcoming Geographic and linguisticbarriers in branding a small countryuniversity onlineAukse Balcytien!University of Vytautas Magnus, Kaunas,Lithuania

New tricks: how social media isrevolutionising the role of the PRprofessionalTracy PlaylePickle Jar Communications Ltd., UK

Managing and developing a universitybrandChristine AyreKing’s College London, UK

Marketing or communications? Laure SchönenbergerUniversité de Fribourg, Switzerland

The unique experience of Polish PRIO:how to build a model of CommunityPromotionMarek ZimnakWroc!aw University of Economics,Poland

A Rhetorical and Semiotic Approachof the Actual Modality to PromoteNational and Local Identity inRomaniaOdette Arhip University of Ia!i, Romania

TThheemmee:: How to manage thecommunications functionVVeennuuee:: University of AveiroNNuummbbeerr ooff ppaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 184 from 22countries.

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessHelena NazaréRector, University of AveiroPaolo PomatiPresident of EUPRIO

PPlleennaarryy sseessssiioonnssWhat are universities for and how docommunications reflect that?Júlio PedrosaPresident of the Portuguese Council forEducation, PortugalJoão Paulo OliveiraPresident Bosch Thermotechnology S.A.,PortugalLuis Fagundes DuarteMember of the Portuguese Parliament

Role of Communications / How tomanage the communicationsfunction?Arja SuominemSenior Vice President ofCommunications, Nokia Corporation,FinlandCharlotte LindsayVice-Director of Communications,International Committee of the RedCross, Switzerland

Developing a global brand for auniversityChris NorthChairman of Fishburn Hedges, BrandConsultants, UK

The farewell speech of Ana Bela de Jesus Martins.

LEON

ARDO

D’A

MICO

130

TThheemmee:: University Communicatorsestablish thier roles towards 2020VVeennuuee:: Hotel Regina Palace, StresaNNuummbbeerr ooff PPaarrttiicciippaannttss:: 245 from 25countries

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessFabiola SinigagliaVice-Rector for International Relationsof Università del Piemonte OrientalePaolo PomatiPresident of EUPRIO

KKeeyynnoottee ssppeeeecchhJean-Marc RappPresident of EUA

LLeeccttiioo mmaaggiissttrraalliissFrom communication to solidarityGianni VattimoPhilosopher, former professor ofTheoretical Philosophy (Università diTorino), member of the EuropeanParliamentChaired by Edoardo Teodoro BrioschiUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore,Milano, Italy

EEuurrooppeeaann CCaaffééFacilitator: Pepe NummiGrape People International, Helsinki,FinlandChairs: Euprio National Representatives

MMaasstteerr CCllaasssseessUsage centered design and sitesarchitecture. Guidelines and practicefor University digital communicationElisabetta ZuanelliFull Professor of Glottodydactics andDigital communication, Università diRoma Tor Vergata, Italy

Persuasive presentation: buildingpowerful presence and gravitasRaleigh E. MayerPrincipal, Raleigh Mayer Consulting,New York; Adjunct Professor, New YorkUniversity & Columbia University, USA

What makes a great UniversityWebsiteAndrew CrispFounder & Director, Carrington Crisp,London, UK

What we can learn from teachers:learning to communicate well inspoken EnglishPaul SeligsonFreelance author, trainer and consultant,Brighton; formerly at British Council,London, UK

Keeping trust in a crisisHelio Fred GarciaExecutive Director, Logos Institute forCrisis Management & ExecutiveLeadership, New York; Adjunct Professor,New York University, USA

Public Relations Writing. Adapting oldrules to a new ageJay A. RubinPrincipal, Jay Rubin & Associates, NewYork; Adjunct Professor, New YorkUniversity ,USA

Managing your brand and engaging itsambassadors in a new, empoweringconversationSaralie R. SlonskySRS Strategic Communications; AdjunctProfessor, New York University, USA

All you need to know about creativityAndy GreenFellow of the Chartered Institute of PR;Partner, Green Communications,Wakefield, UK

How to get the media interested innon-easy subjectsAnja C. AndersenAssociate Professor at Dark CosmologyCenter, Niels Bohr Institute; KøbenhavnsUniversitet, Denmark

The successful event management.The new protocol, trends andstrategies in EuropeGiuseppe GattinoFormer spokesperson of the XX WinterOlympic Games, ItalyCarlos Fuente LafuentePresident of the Escuela Internacionalde Protocolo and of the AcademiaInternacional de Protocolo, Madrid,Spain

Fundraising. More resource for yourUniversityMichael UrselmannProfessor of Social Management,Fachhochschule Köln, Germany

Lobbying the European Parliamentafter Lisbon: changes and challengesWilhelm LehmannEuropean Parliament, Brussels, Belgium

The strategic role of branding ininternational marketingElisabeth Tissier-DesbordesProfessor, Brand & CommunicationsDirector of ESCP Europe, Paris, France

Communicating change withininstitutions of higher educationWalter KühmeVice-President, Jade HochschuleWilhelmshaven / Oldenburg / Elsfieth,Germany

Communication and SocialResponsibilityNicole D’AlmeidaFull Professor in French Universities,Paris-Sorbonne, France

SSppeecciiaall wwoorrkksshhooppAll the world’s a stage: sharing thebest practice in building a globalbrandJohn Cavani & Robert TomlinsonUniversity of Edinburgh, UK

Standing ovation at the Gala dinner at Hotel Regina Palace.

LEON

ARDO

D’A

MICO

John Cavani Robert Tomlinson Giuseppe Gattino

131

Elisabetta Zuanelli

Nicole D’Almeida

Jay A. Rubin

Walter Kühme

Saralie R. Slonski

Paul Seligson

Andrew Crisp

Raleigh E. Mayer

Andy Green

C. Fuente Lafuente

Anja C. Andersen

Michael Urselmann

Helio Fred Garcia

E. Tissier-Desbordes Wilhelm Lehmann

132

TThheemmee:: Communicating knowledgetransfer from reasearch to practiceVVeennuuee:: Czech Technical University,PragueNNuummbbeerr ooff PPaarrttiicciippaannttss:: approx. 220

LLeeccttiioo mmaaggiissttrraalliissTransparency instruments:communicating research and highereducationFrans Van Vught (10)President of ESMU

OOppeenniinngg ssppeeeecchheessLauris Beets (15)Director of International Affairs,Ministry of Social Affairs andEmployment, the Netherlands. Founderand first President of EUPRIO

Paolo PomatiPresident of EUPRIO

EEuurrooppeeaann CCaaffééFacilitator: Arwin NimisHanzehogeschool, Groningen, TheNetherlands

MMaasstteerr CCllaasssseessAre there laws in the scientificproduction?Daniele Archibugi (14)Research Director, Italian NationalResearch Council, IRPPS, and Professorof Innovation, Governance and PublicPolicy, Birkbeck College, University ofLondon, UK

Generation Y: They don´t dare to ask!How to communicate with Generation YKathryn Havlová (5)Graduate of the University of Economics,Prague, Czech Republic

Raising your university profile bycommunicating ERC-funded researchMassimo Gaudina (19)Head of Communication Unit, EuropeanResearch Council, Brussels, Belgium

Angels, Demons and Black Holes –turning threat to opportunity inscience communicationJames Gillies (6)Head of Communication, CERN, Geneva,Switzerland

Science Communication for Children –especially in Children’s Universities!Pia Schreiber (8)Scientific Assistant, Lecturer andDoctoral Candidate at BremenUniversity of Applied Sciences, Germany

When PR tends to fail: Sciencecommunication during crisissituationsGerhard Schmücker (2)Head of Press Office, Nürtingen-Geislingen University, Germany

Michael Londesborough (22)Science researcher at the Institute ofInorganic Chemistry, Academy ofSciences of the Czech Republic andscience populariser / communicator onCzech Television, Czech Repulic

The Role of Design in Education andvice versaJan Kremlá!ek (18)Experience designer and creativecoach, Prague, Czech Republic

How to make university related issuesappealing to a TV journalistAlessandro Baracchini (13)TV journalist and anchorman, Rai -Radiotelevisione Italiana, Rome, Italy

Mission to Carbon City: how toattract young people to scienceSophie Suc (20)Project Manager / Axelera, theChemicals and Environmentcompetitiveness cluster, France

Digital Public Engagement: Movingfrom Communication to EngagementRobin Hamman (9)Director of Digital at Edelman(London) and Visiting JournalismFellow at City University London, UK

Understanding of science by use ofsimple experimentsPer-Olof Nilsson (1)Professor at Chalmers University ofTechnology, Gothenburg, Sweden

Hope and Hype: Science andEngineering in the National NewsMediaTom Sheldon (21)Press Officer, UK Science MediaCentre, London, UK

How to reach half a million potentialstudents. Viral Marketing of HigherEducation, the Case of SLUJonathan Sohl & Marie Halling (16)Student Recruitment Officers at SLU,the Swedish Agricultural University inUppsala, Sweden

The Elevator Talk: training researchersin the art of being conciseCarolyn Gale (4)Founder, Clear Communication Group;Instructor at Stanford University, PaloAlto, USA

Knowledge Transfer as a profession inthe UK. Support and communicationchallenges for managing the processof turning technology, know-how,expertise and skills into innovativeproductsSue Gunn (17)Director, Research and Enterprise, CityUniversity London, UK

Cultural Exchanges in the Arts andHumanities. Partnerships andKnowledge TransferChristopher Megone (12)Professor of Inter-Disciplinary AppliedEthics, University of Leeds, UK

Developing the next generation ofleaders: the challenges faced bycolleges and universities worldwideKathryn Kolbert (11)Professor of Leadership Studies;Director of the Athena Center forLeadership Studies, Barnard College,Columbia University, New York, USA

WWoorrkksshhooppssThe eruption of volcanoEyjafjallajökull – complications forthe whole world, but fuel forUniversity PR!Jón Örn Gu"bjartsson (7)Director of Marketing andCommunication, University of Iceland,Reykjavík, Iceland

Promoting the benefits of doingresearch on a national andinternational levelAndreas Archut (3)Head of Press and Communication,University of Bonn, Germany

Adrenaline Teaching: Appealing to allour Senses – How to communicatescientific knowledge to Generation Yin a way they will never forget

WW

W.W

ORLD

CITY

PICS

.COM

133

1 2 3 4

5

6 7

8

9 10

11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22

19th Annual Conference, 2007. The Gala reception at La Bastille, Grenoble (France).

LEON

ARDO

D’A

MICO

APPENDIX

19862011

136

Paolo PomatiPPRREESSIIDDEENNTTItaly

Arwin NimisVVIICCEE--PPRREESSIIDDEENNTTthe Netherlands

Laure SchönenbergerSSEECCRREETTAARRYYSwitzerland

Paola Claudia ScioliTTRREEAASSUURREERRItaly

EXECUTIVE BOARD

Rolf GuggenbühlSwitzerland

Alessandro CiarloItaly

Anna-MariaRaudaskoskiFinland

Atticus Mullikinthe Netherlands

AUDITORS’ COMMITTEE WEBMASTER

Uwe StegerAustria

Gabriele PfeiferAustria

Véronique ÉloyBelgium

Isabel PaemeBelgium

STEERING COMMITTEE

Pieter KnapenK. U. Leuven

Alexandra HroncovaCzech Republic

Søren ToftDenmark

Jens Fink-JensenDenmark

Eeva LehtinenFinland

Marianne MustonenFinland

Marie-CatherineMouchotFrance

Christine LegrandFrance

Josef KönigGermany

Nijol! Bulotait!Lithuania

Denis Ancionthe Netherlands

Ann Elin AndersenNorway

Marek ZimnakPoland

Isabel FrançaPortugal

Victoria FerreiroSpain

Anita ByströmSweden

Tina Zethraeus Sweden

Marcus MoserSwitzerland

Ergün YolcuTurkey

Nic MitchellUnited Kingdom

Christopher CoeUnited Kingdom

137

Country

AustriaBelgiumCyprus

Czech RepublicDenmarkFinlandFrance

GermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandItalyLatvia

LebanonLithuania

LuxembourgMalta

NetherlandsNorwayPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSpain

SwedenSwitzerland

United Kingdom

TOT

2000

518002512115300628000001480400163499

207

2001

514003012017300634000011930050011321814

251

2002

61800312302110065300001208070033402915

312

2003

61900242432210044000001211403006492912

278

2004

6200019124190000430010121140100345238

240

2005

12200030200210000380020122051003452317

260

2006

02400222602200003200600260010030026

188

2007

625134749525000018008002827030010442562

386

2007

625134749525000018008002827030010442562

386

2009

21301376492425020024016103244680014282382

500

2010

24481118840223703122441800364855127518258

609

138

Members from all over Europe

The global target of EUPRIO covers 30 countries.

EUPRIO has 18 countries officially represented in theSteering Committee (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic,Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania,the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain,Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom).

Other 8 countries have members: Cyprus, Hungary,Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Lebanon, Romania and Russiaand University communicators from Estonia,Luxembourg, Malta and Slovenia attend the annualconferences as well.

Currently (2011), EUPRIO has members from theseuniversities and higher education institutions:

AUSTRIADonau-Universität KremsTechnische Universität WienUniversität GrazUniversität InnsbruckUniversität SalzburgUniversität Wien

BELGIUMEuropean University AssociationFaculté universitaire des sciences agronomiquesFacultés universitaires Saint-Louis BruxellesHaute Ecole Blaise PascalHaute Ecole de NamurHaute Ecole Léonard de VinciHaute Ecole Libre MosaneHowest University College West FlandersIES Parnasse Deux-AliceInstitut Libre Marie HapsKarel de Grote-HogeschoolKatholieke Hogeschool Brugge-OostendeKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenUniversité Catholique de LouvainUniversité de LiègeUniversité de MonsUniversité libre de BruxellesUniversiteit AntwerpenUniversiteit GentUniversiteit HasseltVrije Universiteit Brussel

CZECH REPUBLIC"eské Vysoké U#ení Technické v PrazeMasarykova univerzitaMinisterstvo skolstvi, mladeze a telovychovyUniverzita Palackého v OlomouciUniverzita Pardubice

CYPRUS$%&'()*+,-). /0(1.2

DENMARK Aalborg universitet Aarhus universitet Copenhagen Business School - HandelshøjskolenDanmarks biblioteksskoles bibliotek Danmarks tekniske universitet DTUDanske Universiteter ‒ Universities Denmark Fróðskaparsetur Føroya - University of the Faroe IslandsIlisimatusarfik - University of Greenland

Ingeniørhøjskolen i KøbenhavnKøbenhavns universitetSFI- Det nationale forskningscenter for velfærd

FINLANDAalto-yliopistoHanken - Svenska HandelshögskolanHelsingin yliopistoItä-Suomen yliopisto Jyväskylän yliopistoLapin yliopistoOulun yliopistoTampereen teknillinen yliopisto Turun kauppakorkeakouluTurun yliopistoÅbo akademi

FRANCECELSA Paris SorbonneCPE LyonEHESPENIBESCP Europe (Paris)EURECOMGrenoble École de ManagementINP ToulouseINP-ENSEEIHTINSA LyonINSA RennesTélécom BretagneTélécom Ecole de ManagementUniversité de Cergy PontoiseUniversité de Haute-AlsaceUniversité de Strasbourg

GERMANYAlbert-Ludwigs-Universität FreiburgBrandenburgische TU CottbusChristian-Albrechts-Universität zu KielDeutsche Sporthochschule KölnDeutsch-Französische HochschuleFachhochschule FlensburgFachhochschule KielFachhochschule Köln - Cologne University of AppliedSciencesFern Universität HagenFolkwang Universität der KünsteHochschule der MedienHochschule EsslingenHochschule für Film und Fernsehen PotsdamHochschule für Wirtschaft und Umwelt Nürtingen-GeislingenHochschule Ravensburg-WeingartenHochschulrektorenkonferenzInternationales Hochschulinstitut ZittauLudwig-Maximilian Universität MünchenRuhr-Universität BochumRuprecht-Karls-Universität HeidelbergRWTH AachenTU BraunschweigTU KaiserslauternUniversität BonnUniversität BremenUniversität Duisburg-EssenUniversität HohenheimUniversität KasselUniversität KonstanzUniversität MannheimUniversität Trier

139

HUNGARYBudapesti Kommunicációs és Üzleti FöiskolaKereskedelmi és Idegenforgalmi Továbbképz3

ICELANDHáskóli Íslands

IRELANDDublin City UniversityDublin Institute of Technology

ITALYAICUNAlma Mater Studiorum Università di BolognaLibera Università di Bolzano ‒ Freie Universität BozenUniversità Bocconi MilanoUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore MilanoUniversità degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “AmedeoAvogadro”Università degli Studi di Bari “Aldo Moro”Università degli Studi di ParmaUniversità degli Studi di PaviaUniversità degli Studi di TriesteUniversità per Stranieri di PerugiaUniversità Politecnica delle Marche

LATVIALatvijas UniversitāteRīgas Tehniskā Universitāte

LEBANONUniversité Saint-Joseph de Beyrouth

LITHUANIAVilniaus UniversitetasKauno technologijos universitetasMykolo Romerio Universitetas - Vilnius

THE NETHERLANDS3G CommunicatieFontys HogescholenHanzehogeschool GroningenHBO-RaadHogeschool InHollandHogeschool RotterdamHogeschool van AmsterdamHogeschool van UtrechtHogeschool voor de Kunsten UtrechtMaastricht University ‒ Universiteit MaastrichtOpen UniversiteitRadboud Universiteit NijmegenRijksuniversiteit GroningenTechnische Universiteit DelftTechnische Universiteit EindhovenUniversiteit LeidenUniversiteit TwenteUniversiteit UtrechtUniversiteit van AmsterdamUniversiteit van TilburgVrije Universiteit AmsterdamVSNUWageningen Universiteit en Research Centrum

NORWAYHolberg Prisen (Universitetet i Bergen)Høgskolen i AkershusHøgskolen i BergenHøgskolen i Bodø

Høgskolen i OsloHøgskolen i Sør-Trøndelag Høgskolen i VestfoldNHH Norges HandelshøyskoleNMH Norges MusikkhøgskoleNVH Norges VeterinærhøgskoleNTNU Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet UHR Universitets- og høgskolerådetUMB Universitetet for miljø- og biovitenskapUniversitetet i Agder Universitetet i OsloUniversitetet i StavangerUniversitetet i TromsøUniversitetssenterert på Svalbard

POLANDUniwersytet Ekonomiczny w PoznaniuUniwersytet Ekonomiczny we WrocławiuUniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w PoznaniuUniwersytet Warszawski

PORTUGALUniversidade de AveiroUniversidade Tecnica de Lisboa

ROMANIAUniversitatea din Bucure4ti

RUSSIA56789:; <68=>?@8ABCDDE; =D:BC@8:ACA

SPAINUniversidad Autónoma de MadridUniversidad Complutense de MadridUniversidad Nacional de Educación a DistanciaUniversidad Politécnica de MadridUniversitat Politécnica de Catalunya

SWEDENBlekinge tekniska högskolaBorås universitetChalmers tekniska högskola (Göteborg)Göteborg universitetKarlstads universitetKarolinska institutet (Stockholm)Linköpings universitetLinnéuniversitetLuleå tekniska universitetLund universitetMalmö universitetMittuniversitetKungliga tekniska högskolanStockholms universitetUmeå universitetHögskolan Väst (Trollhättan-Uddevalla)World Maritime University

SWITZERLANDBerner FachhochschuleBundesamt für Berufsbildung und Technologie Eawag: Das Wasserforschungs- Institut des ETH-Bereichs, DübendorfEidgenössische Forschungsanstalt für Wald, Schneeund Landschaft WSL, BirmensdorfEmpa, Swiss Fed Lab Mat Testing & ResÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneETH-Rat, ZürichETH Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichFachhochschule Nordwestschweiz

140

Fachhochschule OstschweizFonds national suisseHochschule LuzernPaul Scherrer InstitutSAMW Schweizerische Akademie der MedizinischenWissenschaften BaselSATW Schweizerische Akademie der TechnischenWissenschaften, ZürichSchweizerische Akademie der Geistes- undSozialwissenschaftenSCNAT Akademie der Naturwissenschaften / SwissAcademy of Sciences, BernScuola Universitaria Professionale della SvizzeraItalianaSWITCH ‒ The Swiss Education and Research Network,ZürichTA-SwissUniversità della Svizzera italianaUniversität BaselUniversität BernUniversität LuzernUniversität NeuchâtelUniversität St. GallenUniversität ZürichUniversité de FribourgUniversité de GenèveUniversité de LausanneZürcher Hochschule ZHAW

TURKEYAtatürk Üniversitesi ErzurumFstanbul Üniversitesi

UNITED KINGDOMAston UniversityEurope Unit (at Universities UK)Goldsmiths University of LondonHigher Education External Relations Association(HEERA)Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE)King’s College LondonNorthumbria UniversityOxford Brookes UniversityTeesside UniversityUniversities UKUniversity of Edinburgh University of GlasgowUniversity of KentUniversity of Leeds University of PlymouthUniversity of UlsterUniversity of WarwickUniversity of York

We have or have had contacts also with theseinstitutions:

ESTONIATallinna Ülikool

GREECEGH&)IJ&I%) /%(.K)*+1)%IJ& $%&'()*+,-).&LHM&N&

LUXEMBOURGUniversité du Luxembourg

MALTAL-Università ta' Malta

SLOVENIAUniversa v Ljubljani

141

LAURIS BEETSUniversiteit LeidenANNE LONSDALEUniversity of OxfordINGE KNUDSENAarhus UniversitetRAY FOOTMANUniversity of EdinburghALF McCREARYQueen’s University BelfastWIM JANSSENRijkuniversiteit GroningenINGEBORG CHRISTENSENAarhus UniversitetROLF GUGGENBÜHLEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichPETER READERUniversity of Southampton, then BathPETER VAN DAMTechnische Universiteit EindhovenKARIN CARLSSONUppsala universitetPAOLO POMATIUniversità del Piemonte Orientale “AmedeoAvogadro” Alessandria Novara VercelliVice-President: ARWIN NIMISHanzehogeschool Groningen (until 2011)

1986

1987

1987-1989

1989-1991

1993-1997

1997-1999

1999-2003

2003-2005

2005-2007 and 2008

2007-2008

1991-1993

2008-2012

The Netherlands

United Kingdom

Denmark

United Kingdom

The Netherlands

Denmark

Switzerland

United Kingdom

The Netherlands

Sweden

United Kingdom

Italy

The Netherlands

142

JEAN-PIERRE GROOTAERSKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenFABIENNE DE STRIJKERUniversiteit AntwerpenWIM JANSSENRijkuniversiteit GroningenWOLFGANG MATHIASUniversität zu KölnROLF GUGGENBÜHLEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichALESSANDRO CIARLOUniversità Commerciale “L. Bocconi” MilanoPAOLA CLAUDIA SCIOLIAICUN Milano

1986-1987

1987-1991

1991-1993

1993-1997

1997-1999

1999-2004

2004-2012

Belgium

Belgium

The Netherlands

Germany

Switzerland

Italy

Italy

BRUNELLA MARCHIONE Università di ParmaMARC PERMANYERPompeu Fabra UniversitatPETER READERUniversity of SouthamptonVIRGINIE BORELUniversité de NeuchâtelJACOB JENSENAarhus UniversitetANNA-MARIA RAUDASKOSKIOulun YliopistoLAURE SCHÖNENBERGER-RÜFFIEUXUniversité de Fribourg

1993-1997

1997-1999

1999-2002

2002-2005

2005-2007

2007-2009

2009-2012

Italy

Spain

United Kingdom

Switzerland

Denmark

Finland

Switzerland

* Due to the scattered documentation, these lists could not be considered exhaustive.

143

AUSTRIACHRISTIAN REISERUWE STEGERGABRIELE PFEIFERBELGIUMJEAN-PIERRE GROOTAERSFABIENNE DE STRIJKERMARCEL DE CLEENEISABELLE POLLETVÉRONIQUE ÉLOYISABEL PAEMECZECH REPUBLICALEXANDRA HRONCOVADENMARKINGE KNUDSENINGEBORG CHRISTIENSENFINN KJERULFF-HANSENSVEND-AAGE MOGENSENLARS THORSENANDERS RENDTORFFJENS FINK-JENSENJACOB JENSENSØREN TOFTFINLANDMARJA SADANIEMIIRMA KUUKASJÄRVIJORMA LAAKKONENANNA-MARIA RAUDASKOSKIEEVA LEHTINENKARI HIPPIMARIANNE MUSTONENFRANCEJEAN-PIERRE DHOURYMONIQUE MIZARTMONIQUE RUBICHONCATHERINE FLECHNIAKOSKAANNE FUYNELMARIE-CATHERINE MOUCHOTCHRISTINE LEGRANDGERMANYJÜRGEN BOCKLINGDIETMAR SCHMIDTJOSEF KÖNIGWOLFGANG MATHIASHEIDI NEYSESFELICITAS VON ARETINULRIKE REIMANNACHIM FISCHERGREECESOFIA MANOUSSAKA-POLITIANNA GEORGIA HELMIIRELANDCHARLES O’ ROURKETONY SCOTT

ITALYEDOARDO TEODORO BRIOSCHIBRUNELLA MARCHIONEALESSANDRO CIARLOPAOLA CLAUDIA SCIOLIPAOLO POMATILITHUANIANIJOLO BULOTAITOthe NETHERLANDSLAURIS BEETSWIM JANSSENMARIA VAN DER DONKADRIANA ESMEIJERPETER VAN DAMARWIN NIMISDENIS ANCIONNORWAYARNE ABRAHAMSENHELGE KJØLLESDALMORTEN THORESENINGEBORG DIRDALARVID ELLINGSENANN-ELIN ANDERSEN BRATTEBØASBJØRN BARTNESPOLANDMAREK ZIMNAKPORTUGALFILOMENA CARVALHOANA BELA DE JESUS MARTINSISABEL FRANÇASPAINMARC PERMANYERCARLOS MIRAZ SUBERVIOLAVICTORIA FERREIRO SERRANOSWEDENCHRISTER HJÖRTLARS HOLBERGULLA NORDLINDERKARIN CARLSSONANITA BYSTRÖMPETRA LJUNGTINA ZETHRAEUSSWITZERLANDROLF GUGGENBÜHLVIRGINIE BORELMARCUS MOSERLAURE SCHÖNENBERGER-RÜFFIEUXTURKEYERGÜN YOLCUUNITED KINGDOMANNE LONSDALERAY FOOTMANANDREA REYNERALF MC CREARYNIC MITCHELLPETER READERCHRISTOPHER COE

144

IIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIIXXXIXIIXIIIXIVXVXVIXVIIXVIIIXIXXXXXIXXIIXXIIIXXIV

198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012

LEUVEN/BRUSSELSSIENABERLINGRANADASTOCKHOLMEDINBURGHZURICHROTTERDAMSTRASBOURGHEIDELBERGCOPENAGHEN/LUND/MALMÖLECCEROVANIEMIBARCELONADURHAMLA VALLETTAKREMS-AN-DER-DONAUVILNIUSGRENOBLESTAVANGERAVEIROSTRESAPRAGUEGOTHENBURG

BelgiumItalyGermanySpainSwedenUnited KingdomSwitzerlandThe NetherlandsFranceGermanyDenmark/SwedenItalyFinlandSpainUnited KingdomMaltaAustriaLithuaniaFranceNorwayPortugalItalyCzech RepublicSweden

NDNDNDNDNDNDNDNDND23NDND2325222020212221222524

60NDND150200180ND160ND250ND200193260184130176174176215184245200 ca.

PARTICIPANTS COUNTRIES

Leuven-Brussels (BE)The Hague (NL)Amsterdam (NL)Leuven (BE)Rome (IT)Brussels (BE)Siena (IT)Berlin (DE)Paris (FRA)Granada (ES)Coimbra (PT)Stockholm (SE)Balaton (HU)Milan (IT)Edinburgh (UK)Poitiers (FR)Prague (CZ)Zurich (CH)Rotterdam (NL)Cambridge (UK)Barcelona (ES)Strasbourg (FR)Heidelberg (DE)Milan (IT)Copenhagen (DK)Ghent (BE)

12.05.198616.05.198619.09.1987

198810.05.198920.10.198927.04.199011.10.199127.03.199204.10.199219.03.199309.06.199318.09.199315.04.199431.08.199401.10.199418.03.199530.08.199513.06.199628.09.199628.02.199704.09.199703.09.199817.04.199926.08.199908.04.2000

Lecce (IT)Dublin (IE)Rovaniemi (FI)Aveiro (PT)Barcelona (ES)Oslo (NO)Durham (UK)Graz (AT)La Valletta (MT)Bath (UK)Krems-an-der-Donau (AT)Paris (FR)Vilnius (LT)Vercelli (IT)Grenoble (FR)Cordoba (ES)Stavanger (NO)Leuven (BE)Wrocław (PL)Aveiro (PT)Mannheim (DE)Stresa (IT)Maastricht (NL)Prague (CZ)Brussels (BE)Gothenburg (SE)

07.09.200010.03.200114.06.200116.03.200205.09.200222.03.200304.09.200320.03.200402.09.200423.04.200501.09.200501.04.200624.08.200631.03.200707.06.200716.02.200812.06.200831.10.200828.02.200925.06.200912.03.201001.09.201025.03.201101.09.2011

20122012

145

Nic MitchellTeesside UniversityUNITED KINGDOM21/23

Josef KönigRuhr-UniversitätBochumGERMANY20/23

Pilar Cuena BotránUniversidadAutónoma de MadridSPAIN19/23

Paola ClaudiaScioliAicun, MilanITALY19/23

Peter Van DamTechnische Universiteit EindhovenTHE NETHERLANDS19/23

Klaus H.GrabowskiKommunikation für Kunst& Kultur, Wissenschaft &ForschungGERMANY17/23

Uwe StegerUniversität InnsbruckAUSTRIA14/23

Lisbeth WesterLeanderssonLunds universitetSWEDEN14/23

Nijol!! Bulotait!!Vilniaus universitetasLITHUANIA13/23

Michael WintherIngeniørhøjskolen iKøbenhavnDENMARK13/23

Edoardo TeodoroBrioschiUniversità Cattolicadel Sacro Cuore di MilanoITALY12/23

Victoria Ferreiro SerranoUniversidad Politécnicade MadridSPAIN12/23

Giampiero ViezzoliUniversità di TriesteITALY12/23

146

University of OuluUniversity of MannheimUniversity of Economics of WrocławUniversity of GrazUniversity of FribourgUniversity of CopenhagenUniversity of InnsbruckTELECOM BretagneGrenoble Ecole de ManagementRWTH Aachen

1998

2009

2010

FINLANDGERMANYPOLANDAUSTRIASWITZERLANDDENMARKAUSTRIAFRANCEFRANCEGERMANY

1st

1st 2nd2nd2nd2nd2nd

1st2nd3rd

147

PREAMBLE

1. The Association “European University PublicRelations and Information Officers” (EUPRIO) wasestablished in Brussels on 12th May 1986 with thesupport of the European Community (now EuropeanUnion) and it was announced to the public at a pressconference of the Education Ministers of theCommunity in The Hague on 16th May 1986.2. During the first twenty-two-year history, theEuropean Ministers of Education, starting from theConvention signed in Lisbon in 1997 and especially inthe Declaration signed in Bologna in 1999, affirmedthat higher education is a public good and a publicresponsibility for the present and future prosperity ofEurope. In this context communication, in the broadestsense, has the task of supporting the successfuldevelopment of the higher education system andhelping to make its performances accessible andsustainable for the society, hence to contribute toEurope as competitive and dynamic knowledge-driveneconomy in global perspective. EUPRIO shares this visionand considers it while updating its mission and aims.3. The present Memorandum re-establishes theAssociation, which formerly had no legal structure,remaining loyal to its history and its mission.

TITLE I. Name, status, seat and official language

Article 1. Name.

1. The Association is called “European University PublicRelations and Information Officers”, thereafterabbreviated “EUPRIO”.2. In this Charter the terms “European” and “Europe”are defined as the geographical area which includes allthe Council of Europe’s Member States, who are theStates candidates for membership and the Statesobservers to the Committee of Ministers of the Council.

Article 2. Status.

EUPRIO is an non-profit association under the BelgianNPA-act of 27th June 1921.

Article 3. Seat.

1. EUPRIO’s registered office is established c/o theKatholieke Universiteit Leuven, at 13, Oude Markt, 3000Leuven, Belgium.2. It may be moved by decision of the SteeringCommittee.

Article 4. Language.

The official language of the association is Dutch. OtherEuropean languages can be used for business affairsupon necessity.

TITLE II ‒ Mission, activities and duration

Article 5. Mission.

1. The aims of EUPRIO are:• to promote exchange of ideas, techniques andexperiences amongst its members, both within thewhole communication field and particularly from theinstitutions of higher education’s perspective;• to encourage and promote collaboration andpartnership between European institutions of highereducation and research in the field of communications;• to create a network to assist members in their tasks asprofessional communicators within their institutions;• to promote the professional excellence of all membersin their work;• to professionalise higher education information,public relations, marketing, and other forms ofcorporate communications by sharing “best practice”and holding conferences, workshops and the like;• to represent European higher educationcommunication in other organisations;• to represent the interests of higher educationcommunication in national and international policymaking;• to encourage and enhance cooperation betweenEuropean members and professionals in and outsideEurope.2. The association may carry out all activities directly orindirectly connected with its aims. It may in particularassist with or be involved in any activity similar orcomplementary to its aims.

Article 6. Duration.

The association is formed for an unspecified period.

Article 7. Activities.

1. To pursue the aims as described in Article 5, theAssociation may:• organise conferences, workshops, meetings,exhibitions and every other initiative that will provideupdating experience or lifelong learning for itsmembers;• organise an Annual Conference during which theGeneral Assembly will take place;• prepare and distribute promotional stuff;• maintain a Web site, newsletters, audiovisuals, andthe like;• produce consulting services in the field ofcommunications;• build a network to assist higher education andresearch institutions or other European organisationsin communications programmes.2. Every year it updates the directory of the members,making it accessible to all of them.

THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION OFEUROPEAN UNIVERSITY PUBLIC RELATIONS AND INFORMATION OFFICERS

Non Profit Association

148

TITLE III ‒ Membership, resources and financial year

Article 8. Membership.

1. Members are persons who come from the countriesstated in Article 1. The members vary from a minimumof three to an unlimited number.2. Membership is articulated into four categories:• individual members;• institutional members;• associate members;• honorary members.3. Individual membership is open to all professionalswho are engaged in the field of communications (pressofficers, public and external relations, marketing,information, Web, protocol, counselling, internal andexternal communication, etc.) in higher education andresearch institutions situated in Europe.4. Institutional membership is open to highereducation and research institutions situated in Europe.Institutions, though, are not members; eachinstitutional membership entitles groups of up to fouremployees engaged in the field of communications atthe same institutions to register as members, savingmoney and increasing memberships. One institutioncan subscribe several institutional memberships. Thesemembers have the same rights and duties as individualmembers.5. Associate membership is open to:• professionals who are engaged in the field ofcommunications but not employed in higher educationand research institutions;• companies that are involved in higher education andresearch communications, but are not universities orrelated organisations.6. Honorary membership is awarded to persons whohave attained acknowledged excellence in the field ofcommunications and/or higher education and/or havemade major contributions to EUPRIO.

Article 9. Admission.

1. Candidates to individual and institutionalmembership must present an admission form to theNational Representative of their country. If theirapplication meets the criteria set out in Article 8., theSteering Committee gives them the status of Membersof EUPRIO and they commit themselves to respect theCharter and the Regulations of the association.2. Should the National Representative be vacant or thecountry have not reached the sufficient number tohave a Representative, candidates may present theadmission form to the President.3. Candidates to associate membership present anadmission form to the Executive Board. If accepted,they acquire the status of Associate Members of EUPRIOand they commit themselves to respect the Charter andthe Regulations of the association.4. Candidates to honorary membership must beproposed and recommended to the SteeringCommittee by at least two members. Each nominationshould be accompanied by a curriculum vitae of thenominee and letters of endorsement.

Article 10. Subscriptions.

1. All categories of members are required to payannual fees, except from the Honorary Members, whoare exempt.

2. Members will pay the fees to their NationalRepresentative or, if vacant, or if the country have notreached the sufficient number to have aRepresentative, directly to the Treasurer. The NationalRepresentatives, after collecting the fees, will sendthem to the Treasurer with a complete and detailed listof the memberships. The Treasurer will issue a receipt.3. The amounts of the annual dues are fixed by theSteering Committee each year, will not be higher thanfive thousand Euros and shall be paid not later thanthirty days before the General Assembly.4. Members who have paid the due subscriptions areentitled to attend the Annual Conference, to vote inGeneral Assembly and to enjoy all rights derived fromthe membership. Associate companies have only onevote.5. A member, person or institution, who fails to pay thesubscriptions, will be reminded by a Treasurer’s letterand an e-mail within a month. If no answer is given amonth, he/she shall be deemed to have resigned anddeleted from the membership list.6. Only new members who join the association after the31st May will pay reduced annual dues scaled to theeffective period of their membership.

Article 11. Exclusion.

1. Members who are no longer deemed to besupporting the aims of the association may beexcluded from the association by a resolution of theGeneral Assembly, voting by a two thirds’ majority.2. The excluded member or the rightful claimants of anexcluded or deceased or voluntarily resigned membershall assert no claim on the association’s assets.

Article 12. Resources.

1. The association lives on the annual subscriptions andother proceeds from annual conferences and the like.2. It may receive grants, gifts, endowments, bequests orother forms of donations from public or privatesources, whether or not allocated to specific purposescovered by its aims.3. Any bank account in which any part of the assets ofthe association is deposited shall be operated by thePresident, by the Vice President, by the Treasurer or bythe Secretary and shall indicate the name of theassociation. Cheques over five hundred Euros need twosignatures.

Article 13. Financial year.

The financial year of the association shall run from 1stJanuary to 31st December.

TITLE IV ‒ Structure

Article 14. Bodies.

EUPRIO has the following structure:• the General Assembly;• the Steering Committee;• the President;• the Executive Board;• the Auditors’ Committee.

149

Article 15. The General Assembly.

1. The General Assembly is the supreme governingBody of the association. It shall:• elect the President and the Vice President on the basisof the candidacy or candidacies proposed by theSteering Committee;• ratify and dismiss the members of the SteeringCommittee;• decide on the exclusion of Members;• have the power to dissolve the association;• review and amend the Charter of the association;• approve the annual accounts, the budget for theforthcoming year, receive the reports of the President,Vice-President, the Secretary and the Treasurer on theactivities of the past year and plans for the future;• discharge yearly the Steering Committee• approve the Regulations proposed by the SteeringCommittee;2. The General Assembly comprises all the Members ofEUPRIO: individual, members listed in an institutionalmembership, associate and honorary.3. Each member, individual or listed into aninstitutional membership, has only one vote; voting byrepresentative or by proxy is not admitted.4. The General Assembly shall meet at least once peryear, during the Annual Conference.5. The place, the time and the general theme of theAnnual Conference shall be announced during theprevious Annual Conference. The programme shall beavailable on the Web site at least three months beforethe Conference. The Members shall receive the agendaof the General Assembly by e-mail three weeks beforethe Conference. If it is proposed to table resolutionsamending the Charter or to discuss the dissolution ofthe association, sixty days’ notice shall be given. Theaccidental omission to give notice of a meeting to, orthe non-receipt of notice of a meeting by, any personentitled to receive notice shall not invalidate theproceedings at the meeting.6. The President shall preside as Chair of the meeting.7. A quorum of 10% of the total membership isrequested to validate the General Assembly.8. The General Assembly may decide upon its mode ofvoting: show of hands, secret ballot, acclamation,electronic voting, etc..9. The President’s election shall be decided by secretballot. The secret ballot is requested wheneverpersonal affairs or conflict cases occur.10. When a poll is taken, the President shall appointscrutineers and fix the time and the place for declaringthe results.11. Decisions shall be made by simple majority of themembers present. In the case of an equality of votes,the President has the casting vote.12. Decisions for excluding members need two-thirdsof the number of votes.13. Extraordinary meetings may be convened by thePresident or by the Steering Committee or by a formalrequest in writing from at least one-tenth of theMembers.14. The decisions of the General Assembly shall be keptat the head office and published on the Web site.15. Interested third parties can ask the executive officeto see the Minutes.

Article 16. The Steering Committee.

1. The Steering Committee is the ordinary governingBody of the association. It has all the powers notattributed to the General Assembly by the Statutes orthe Law. It shall among other• be the principal forum for discussion of theassociation’s policy positions; it may make statementson behalf of the association, taking initiatives orparticipating actively in the international debateregarding communication issues;• recommend the strategic direction of EUPRIO to theGeneral Assembly;• develop priorities and guidelines on policy issues andon services to members;• appoint its members normally on recommendation ofthe relevant national organisations;• examine the candidacies for the Presidency, whichshall be accompanied by a general policy statement;• propose a short-list of candidates, from one to threenames, to the General Assembly for the President’selection;• appoint the Treasurer and the Secretary;• appoint the Auditors;• approve the programme and the venue of the AnnualConference and of any other initiative and supportorganizers in setting the content, by finding possiblespeakers and themes;• establish and dissolve working groups as it sees fit;• propose the level of the annual membership fees;• receive and approve the annual accounts and thebudget prepared by the Executive Board and the reportof the President on the activities of the past year andplans for the future, for submission to the GeneralAssembly;• decide on the admission of Individual andInstitutional Members when the NationalRepresentative is vacant, of Associate Members and ofHonorary members;• receive and approve agendas for meetings of theGeneral Assembly prepared by the President;• propose reviews and amendments of the Charter andof the Regulations to the General Assembly.2. The Steering Committee is composed of:• the President;• the National and the Deputy NationalRepresentatives.3. Each European country that has at least fiveMembers can propose a National Representative to theGeneral Assembly that approves. It can propose aDeputy National Representative to the GeneralAssembly that approves when it has at least twentyMembers. Where national membership has collapsedor does not exist, the Steering Committee can proposeto the General Assembly that approves, a member forco-optation for a period of two years to build or rebuildthe national membership.4. Where possible, the candidate NationalRepresentatives are nominated by their nationalorganisations. When this latter is missing, the NationalRepresentative is proposed by the informal group ofMembers of the same country.5. Both the National Representatives and the DeputyNational Representatives can attend the same meetingof the Steering Committee, with peer rights and duties.

150

6. All the members of the Steering Committee areappointed by the General Assembly for a two-year termand can be re-appointed the General Assembly for amaximum of two further two-year terms. A nationalrepresentative would be required to have theendorsement of his/her national members to continuehis/her for another term.7. The National Representatives, assisted by the DeputyNational Representatives, are the link with their ownnational associations, where present, and areresponsible for all EUPRIO matters in the countryconcerned, including:• membership recruitment and retention;• collection of the annual membership fees and transferof fees to the Treasurer;• promoting the Annual Conference and the otherEUPRIO initiatives;• organising meetings of EUPRIO members and otherinterested parties in that country, where appropriate.8. The Steering Committee shall meet at least twice ayear; one meeting coincides with the AnnualConference. The President shall convene and chair themeeting and prepare the agenda.9. The quorum for which a meeting is valid shall beone-half of the members plus one of the SteeringCommittee.10. Decisions shall be made by a simple majority ofthose present and voting; in case of equality, thePresident has the casting vote.11. The members of the Steering Committee who fail toparticipate to three successive meetings of the sameBody without reason shall be excluded. The Presidentshall immediately contact the national organisation tosubstitute the representative.12. A member of the Steering Committee, for validreasons, can resign sending a letter and an e-mail tothe President.

Article 17. The President.

1. The President is the figurehead of the Association.He/she leads, represents it and acts as thespokesperson for it to third parties for all activities.2. He/She shall:• convene and chair the meetings of the GeneralAssembly, of the Steering Committee and of theExecutive Board; arranges the agenda and provides forthe enforcement of the decisions;• see that order and running are kept;• guarantee the observance of the Charter and of theRegulations;• draw up or rescind contracts, agreements, insurancepolicies, leases; open and close accounts;• appoint a paid employee, who shall work directlyunder his/her instructions;• prepare the annual report on the activities of the pastyear and plans for the future for submission to theGeneral Assembly;• exercise every other function and competencepursuant to the Law.3. The President is assisted by a Vice-President whilecarrying out his/her duties. The Vice-President shalldeputise for the President in his/her absence.4. The President must be a Member of the associationand work in a higher education institution.

5. He/She shall be elected by the General Assembly ona short-list of candidates (1 to 3) proposed by theSteering Committee.6. The elected President shall have received the simplemajority of votes. The ballot will be repeated in thecase of an equal number of votes; if equality persists,the winner is the eldest candidate.7. The President shall hold office for two years and shallbe eligible for one re-election.8. The President shall be elected one year before thestart of his/her term as President and shall serve asVice-President for this period and for one year after theend of his/her Presidency.9. The President shall cease to hold office and will bereplaced by the Vice President if he/she:• becomes incapable by reason of illness;• resigns his office spontaneously;• is absent without reason from two successivemeetings;• is directly or indirectly interested in any contract andfails to declare the nature of that interest; no longerworks in the field of higher education communicationsand is therefore not eligible for membership.

Article 18. The Executive Board.

1. The Executive Board is responsible for theimplementation of the policy of the association, for theplanning of its activities and for the management ofthe day-to-day affairs. It shall, among other:• prepare discussion papers;• prepare proposals for the annual budget for approvalby the Steering Committee and then by the GeneralAssembly;• be responsible for the implementation of the budget;• arrange programmes for the exchange of informationand experience on matters of common interest toindividual and collective members and to identify anddisseminate good practice in institutions of highereducation and research.2. The Executive Board consists of the President, theVice-President, the Secretary and the Treasurer.3. Each member must be a Member of the Association.The President and the Vice-President are elected by theGeneral Assembly; the Secretary and the Treasurer areappointed by the Steering Committee.4. Executive Board members shall serve in a personalcapacity, not as representative of any country or Body.5. The members of the Executive Board may be paid allreasonable travelling, hotel and other expensesproperly incurred by them in connection with theirattendance at meetings.6. The Secretary shall:• make a written account of the meetings;• publish a record of the decisions taken;• monitor the membership and the composition of theSteering Committee;• monitor membership’s applications where no nationalrepresentative exists, in collaboration with thePresident.7. The Treasurer shall:• prepare the budget and accounts;• collect the membership fees from the NationalRepresentatives and/or the other Members;• manage the bank accounts and investments;

151

Dated 27th June 2009

Signed by:

Denis ANCIONMaastricht University, NederlandAnn Elin ANDERSEN BRATTEBØUniversitets- og høgskolerådet, Oslo, NorgeAsbjørn BARTNESUniversitetet i Tromsø, NorgeNijol! BULOTAITOVilniaus universitetas, LietuvaAnita BYSTRÖMLuleå tekniska universitet, SverigeChristopher COEKing’s College London, United KingdomVéronique ÉLOYFacultés Universitaires Saint Louis Bruxelles, BelgiqueVictoria FERREIRO SERRANOUniversidad Politécnica de Madrid, EspañaJens FINK-JENSENKøbenhavns Universitet, DanmarkAchim FISCHERUniversität Mannheim, DeutschlandAnne FUYNELGrenoble École de Management, FranceJosef KÖNIGRuhr-Universität Bochum, DeutschlandEeva LEHTINENAalto yliopisto, SuomiPetra LJUNGChalmers tekniska högskola, SverigeAna Bela de Jesus MARTINS,Universidade de Aveiro, PortugalNicholas Peter MITCHELLUniversity of Teesside, United KingdomMarcus MOSERUniversität Bern, SchweizMarie-Catherine MOUCHOTTELECOM Bretagne, FranceGabriele PFEIFERUniversität Salzburg, ÖsterreichPaolo POMATIUniversità degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale“Amedeo Avogadro”, ItaliaAnna-Maria RAUDASKOSKIOulun yliopisto, SuomiPaola Claudia SCIOLIAssociazione Italiana dei Comunicatori di Università,Milano, ItaliaLaure SCHÖNENBERGER RÜFFIEUXUniversité de Fribourg, SuisseDaniel SOBOTKAMinisterstvo školství, mládeže a tělovýchovy, Praha,"eská RepublikaUwe STEGERUniversität Innsbruck, ÖsterreichRonny VANDENBROELEKatholieke Universiteit Leuven, BelgiëMarek ZIMNAKUniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wrocławiu, Polska

• recommend the level of the membership fees.8. The Executive Board shall meet at least three timesper year. The President shall convene and chair itsmeetings and prepare the agenda.9. Decisions shall be made by a simple majority of thosepresent; in case of equality, the President has thecasting vote.

Article 19. The Auditors’ Committee.

1. The Auditors’ Committee is the Body which shall:• examine the correspondence of the annual accountsto the account books;• check the general management of the association;• make appropriate cash and property assetsinspections;• assess the regularity of the account books.2. The Auditors’ Committee is composed of threemembers nominated by the Steering Committee,preferably among former members of the association,who have not been excluded nor have resigned.3. The Auditors can participate to the SteeringCommittee meetings without right to vote.4. The Auditors hold office for two years and shall beeligible for another appointment.5. The Auditors can use, within reasonable limitations,paid external financial expertise, if necessary.

TITLE V ‒ Amendment of the Charter and Dissolution of the Association

Article 20. Amendment of the Charter.

1. A proposal to amend the Charter may be made bythe Steering Committee on its own initiative or actingon the initiative of the President or upon a request of atleast 1/20 of the Members.2. The Charter may be amended by a decision of theGeneral Assembly at which at least two thirds of theMembers are attending the meeting. If this condition isnot met, a second meeting may be convened, whichshall deliberate validly, irrespective of the number ofthe Members present.3. Amendments shall be adopted only with a majorityof two thirds of the vote of the General Assembly.

Article 21. Dissolution of the Association.

1. A proposal to dissolve the association may be madeby the Steering Committee on its own initiative oracting on the initiative of the President or upon arequest of at least ten percent of the Members.2. The association may be dissolved by a decision of theGeneral Assembly at which at two thirds of theMembers are attending the meeting. If this condition isnot met, a second meeting may be convened, whichshall deliberate validly, irrespective of the number ofthe Members present.3. The decision to dissolve the association shall beadopted only with a majority of four/fifths of the vote.4. In the event of dissolution, the assets of theassociation shall be transferred according to a decisionmade by the General Assembly. This allocation shall benecessarily made in favour of an association whoseaims are similar to those of this association.

152

contents

The Authors’ Word

The Logo

Euprio or the Way of Science CommunicationAn introduction by Jean-Pierre Grootaers

1986 ‒ Lauris Beets(V. Éloy)

1987 ‒ Anne Lonsdale(V. Éloy)

1987-1989 ‒ Inge Knudsen(V. Éloy)

1989-1991 ‒ Ray Footman(V. Éloy)

1991-1993 ‒ Alf Mc Creary(V. Éloy)

1993-1997 ‒ Wim Janssen(V. Éloy)

1997-1999 ‒ Ingeborg Christensen(V. Éloy)

1999-2003 ‒ Rolf Guggenbühl(P. Pomati)

2003-2005 ‒ Peter Reader(P. Pomati)

2005-2008 ‒ Peter Van Dam / Karin Carlsson(P. Pomati)

2008-2012 ‒ Paolo Pomati(P. Pomati)

Appendix

Contents

3

4

5

9

21

25

39

49

57

71

81

95

103

117

135

152

153

154

euprio

Véronique ÉloyPaolo Pomati

a 25-yearsuccessstory