Review of Standing Working Groups

The Review Procedure

The review process seeks to ensure that Standing Working Groups (SWGs) operated in line with the principles of EGOS and in the best interest of EGOS members. It provides SWGs with the opportunity to assess how well they are serving the needs of EGOS and of the SWGs' participants, and help identify areas in which improvements may be warranted.

As part of the review process, each SWG submits a report to the EGOS Board by November 1 of the third year of its formation. Please submit the report to the EGOS Executive Secretariat.

The Board of EGOS reviews the report of the SWG and decides, in line with the Principles Governing SWGs, whether the SWG should to be continued, merged with another SWG, or discontinued.

The SWG will be notified of the Board's decision early in the following year.
 

Guidelines for Preparing SWG Report

The report should be prepared and submitted by the SWG coordinators. It should contain detailed information on the activities of the SWG during the review period relating to the following items (where detailed statistical information is not available, the SWG is asked to provide a qualitative assessment):

I.        The SWG's research domain and academic aims

II.      The organizing of the SWG

1. List the names and tasks of scholars involved in the organization of the SWG (i.e. sub-theme convenors, organizers of additional workshops) and the period of time during which they performed these tasks.
2. Describe the processes that have been used in managing the SWG (mid-year meetings etc.).
3. Identify what you see as the most innovative practices that the SWG has developed with regard to its internal organization.

III.    Annual activities and program of the SWG

1. Pre-conference Activities. Please describe the SWG's involvement in the PhD workshop and other pre-conference activities.
2. The SWG's EGOS Colloquium Program. Please state for each year the number of abstracts submitted and accepted, and the final number of papers presented at the Colloquia. Describe the selection procedures and criteria applied. Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of different formats that the SWG has used to organize its sub-theme at the annual Colloquium (i.e. presentation by non-authors, poster sessions, panel discussions, traditional paper presentation).
3. Special events organized in addition to the EGOS Colloquia (i.e. workshops, PhD summer schools).
4. Networking. Please state any activities aiming at networking with other SWGs or other institutionalized research groups and assess their results.
5. Other activities, such as SWG newsletters, electronic communication services (i.e. websites, discussion forums) and exchanges on issues related to teaching and practice.

IV.    Participation in the SWG

1. How many scholars have participated in the SWG each year?
2. What was the distribution of participants in terms of
   – academic position
   – gender
   – geographical origin
   – academic discipline?
3. How many of the "founding" SWG participants are still taking part in its activities? How many new participants has the SWG been able to attract (on an ad-hoc or a more continuous basis)?

V.     Achievements of the SWG compared to aims

1. Collectively published book volumes and special journal issues.
2. Impact of the SWG's activities on teaching programs, text books, etc.
3. Other achievements.

VI.    SWOT conclusion

The report should conclude with an assessment of the SWG's overall status in terms of its Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats.

VII.   Suggestions for

• improvement of formation criteria for SWGs
• principles governing the SWGs
• EGOS Board and Secretariat activities that might help improve the workings of the SWG.