MAGHRENOV deliverable 2.3: Industrial internship programme

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological
development and demonstration under the grant agreement no. 609453.
DELIVERABLE
Project Acronym: MAGHRENOV
Grant Agreement number: 609453
Project Title: Convergence between EU and MAGHREB MPC innovation systems
in the field of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (RE&EE) –
A test-bed for fostering Euro Mediterranean Innovation Space
(EMIS)
D2.3 INDUSTRIAL AND INTERNSHIP
PROGRAM
Version: 1.0
Authors:
Josep BORDONAU (UPC), Àlber Filbà (UPC)
Internal Reviewers:
Olga Mackiewicz (KIC SE)
Claude Ayache (KIC SE)
Mikel Lasa (KIC SE)
Richard Biagioni (KIC SE)
Nadia Zeddou (IRESEN)
Abdelhak Chaibi (R&D MAROC)
Hélène Ben Khemis (ANME)
Dissemination Level
P Public X
C Confidential, only for members of the consortium and the Commission Services

D2.3 Industrial Internship programme
© MAGHRENOV Consortium Version 1.0 - 29/09/20142
Table of Contents
Table of Contents.............................................................................................................2
List of Figures .................................................................................................................3
Revision History...............................................................................................................4
Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................5
1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................7
2 Objectives and Hypotheses.............................................................................................8
3 Analysis of the Current Situation......................................................................................9
4 Design of a Survey and Analysis of the Results.................................................................... 10
5 Industrial internship programme .................................................................................... 22
6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 24
7 References .............................................................................................................. 25
8 Annex: existing internship programmes ............................................................................ 26
8.1 UPC BarcelonaTech – ETSEIB Internship programme ........................................................ 26
8.2 ENSTA ParisTech internship programme....................................................................... 28
8.3 Grenoble INP internship programme ........................................................................... 29
8.4 KU Leuven internship program.................................................................................. 31
9 Annex: survey .......................................................................................................... 34

List of Figures
Figure 1. Type of company or institution responding the questionnaire........................................... 10
Figure 2. Topics related to the surveyed companies and institutions (more than one topic could be
selected). .................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 3. Types of profiles of the internship candidates where we should focus (more than one profile could
be selected). ................................................................................................................ 11
Figure 4. Intensity of the specialization for professional profile. .................................................. 12
Figure 5. Intensity of the specialization for bachelor profile........................................................ 12
Figure 6. Intensity of the specialization for MSc profile.............................................................. 13
Figure 7. Intensity of the specialization for PhD profile. ............................................................ 13
Figure 8. Intensity of the specialization for post-doc profile........................................................ 14
Figure 9. Duration of the program for professional profile. ......................................................... 14
Figure 10. Duration of the program for bachelor profile............................................................. 15
Figure 11. Duration of the program for MSc level profile. ........................................................... 15
Figure 12. Duration of the program for PhD profile................................................................... 16
Figure 13. Duration of the program for post-doc profile. ............................................................ 16
Figure 14. Type of immersion for professional profile................................................................ 17
Figure 15. Type of immersion for bachelor profile.................................................................... 17
Figure 16. Type of immersion for MSc profile.......................................................................... 18
Figure 17. Type of immersion for PhD profile.......................................................................... 18
Figure 18. Type of immersion for post-doc profile. ................................................................... 19
Figure 19. Intensity of mobility for professional profile.............................................................. 19
Figure 20. Intensity of mobility for bachelor profile.................................................................. 20
Figure 21. Intensity of mobility for MSc profile........................................................................ 20
Figure 22. Intensity of mobility for PhD profile........................................................................ 21
Figure 23. Intensity of mobility for post-doc profile.................................................................. 21
List of Tables
Table 1. Proposal for the industrial internship programmes.......................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Revision History
Revision Date Author Organization Description
0.1 26/09/2014 Josep
Bordonau
UPC Initial draft
0.2 28/09/2014 Àlber Filbà,
Josep
Bordonau
UPC 1st
review
including
1.0 29/09/2014 Àlber Filbà,
Josep
Bordonau
UPC Final Version
Statement of originality:
This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise.
Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been made
through appropriate citation, quotation or both.

Executive Summary
A survey on the concept of the internship programme and MSc programme has been prepared, taking into
account the conclusions of the WP2 held last June 2014 in Barcelona.
The main conclusion of the workshop was to work towards the preparation of an ERASMUS+ proposal
comprising both concepts integrated on a global perspective and coordinated with KIC InnoEnergy
educational programmes, industry & research partners, as well as business creation activities.
The articulation of the proposal is being made with a taskforce composed of:
• A representative of KIC InnoEnergy EDU.
• A representative of the Moroccan Universities.
• A representative of the Tunisian Universities.
• Representatives of WP2 partners (UPC, KIC InnoEnergy, IRESEN R&D Maroc, ANME).
This is an initial inherent assumption in the sense that the future industrial internship programme and the
MSc programme will be structured as mobility programmes, based in international cooperation and with an
additional scope for the symmetry in the participation of EU and MPC (Maghreb Partner Countries).
However, there are still a number of variables to be considered in the detailed design of such programmes.
These variables have been explored with the answers of the experts consulted by means of the survey.
The main findings are summarized below.
Internship
• Focused to MSc students.
• The content should be quite specialized from the technical point of view.
• Duration of the internship according to the level of the candidate:
o 3 months for a professional internship.
o 3-6 months for a Bachelor internship.
o 6 months for a MSc internship.
o 1 year for a PhD internship.
o > 1 year for a post-doc internship.
• Type of immersion: industry and/or research centre.
• Mobility is welcome at all levels (from professional to post-doc).

Approaching the KPIs
The transition phase from the current situation to the future internship and MSc programmes is determined
by the application to the ERASMUS+ proposal to be done in 2015, as agreed in the Workshop held in
Barcelona last June 2014.
This means that, in practical terms, the MAGHRENOV partners and associated partners are going to work
towards a smooth transition.
The first actions are oriented, as suggested by the MAGHRENOV application and relevant organisations like
the UfM (Union for the Mediterranean), to bidirectional collaboration focusing on a symmetry scheme EU-
MPC.
Accordingly, the current programmes running in EU (especially in KIC InnoEnergy, but not restricted to) and
the current international programmes running in Morocco and Tunisia are taken into consideration for the
period 2014-2015. This is going to be done for the different levels considered in the MAGHRENOV proposal:
industrial internship, MSc, PhD and post-doc.
In practical terms, the results of the MAGHRENOV project, as the new industrial internship program will be
able to be fully evaluated in 2016.

1 Introduction
The main objective of this document is to define an industrial internship programme according to the vision
of the MAGHRENOV project.
In order to do so, different actions have been done and are explained in the document. The document
explains the different actions and the main findings.
The sections of the document are the following ones, with a short description of the content:
• Executive summary.
o As usual in the state of the art, this summary provides a short description of the main
findings and conclusions of the document.
• Objectives and hypothesis.
o The list of general and particular objectives of the task as well as the working hypothesis
are described here.
• Analysis of the current situation.
o This section analyses some current experiences in terms of similar programmes.
• Design of a survey and analysis of the results.
o A survey has been prepared to incorporate the opinion of experts in the field, with
different affiliations, in order to assess the main choices for the design of the industrial
internship programme.
• Industrial internship programme.
o This is the main section of the document, detailing the programme, according to the results
described in the previous sections.
• Conclusions.
o Methodologically, a section listing the conclusions of the work.
• References.
o References to the websites being analysed.
• Annex: survey
o Content of the survey that has been distributed among the actors.
• Annex: description of existing programmes.

2 Objectives and Hypotheses
The main objective is the development of an industrial internship programme. In order to do so, two partial
objectives have been defined:
• Definition of the working hypothesis or, equivalently, the boundary conditions for the new
programme.
• Definition of a strategy for elaborating the industrial internship programme and to run it
accordingly until the end of the project.
The working hypotheses are as follows:
1. The programme should be implementable in EU countries and Maghreb countries, in order to keep
the concept of symmetry, as stated in the MAGHRENOV proposal and by relevant institutions like
the Union for the Mediterranean.
2. The programme should be defined in such a way to be compatible with existing internship
programmes in partners or associated partners to MAGHRENOV.
3. The programme should be defined as being part of an application to the ERASMUS+ programme in
2015.
4. The programme should be used as a tool to improve the cooperation EU-MPC in the field. This
means that the existing programmes (at the time being, 2014) should converge to the new one in
the medium term and long term.
5. The programme implementation should be sustainable in the long term, even when the eventual
ERASMUS+ funding is over.
6. A contingency plan must be done to cover the eventuality that no ERASMUS+ funding is achieved in
2015.
Similarly, the strategy for the elaboration of the proposal is based on a methodology starting on the
establishment of a working group, with relevant representatives from the different actors:
• A representative of KIC InnoEnergy EDU.
• A representative of the Moroccan Universities.
• A representative of the Tunisian Universities.
• Representatives of WP2 partners (UPC, KIC InnoEnergy, IRESEN R&D Maroc, ANME). These are the
regular representatives in WP2.
The role of the three representatives is to interact with the partners in each area and to be the speaker of
the different messages in the taskforce. The partners and associated partners have agreed in such a
scheme.
Once the taskforce has been defined, the meetings of the taskforce have been oriented to the development
and analysis of the results of the survey for a new industrial internship programme (an Annex is included
with this information). In previous meetings (December 2013 and June 2014 in Barcelona) and in the
meetings of the new taskforce, different existing programmes have been reviewed. An annex is also
included with this information.

3 Analysis of the Current Situation
Different industry internship programmes have been analysed, showing common features and also
differences.
The details of the different cases analysed are shown in Annex 8.
The different models show as common features, the international perspective making possible the
internship in a country different than the country where the University is located.
Another common feature is the duration, being one month a minimum lapse of time and being
recommended durations of some months.
The list of academic requirements and boundary conditions for the internship is also described in all the
programmes.
Finally, the last common feature is the active participation of an academic advisor from the University and
the need for an advisor in industry.
There are some differences in the flexibility of the approaches, being the one of UPC-BarcelonaTECH
(ETSEIB) the one more open to different concepts, since it can be done during the regular academic year or
out of the regular academic year. It can be done as curricular or extracurricular, with different durations
(with an upper limit), thematically fully open, while the concept falls into the courses of the School of
Engineering.
On the other side, some Universities orient their programmes with certain focuses. For instance, Grenoble
INP Internship is very focused on research, with different programmes and durations and having always a
strong participation of INPG Enterprise SA, a spin off of INP Grenoble.
ENSTA-ParisTech is offering a typical programme for professional development working in tasks in industry
(production and sales, preferably) different than the ones directly related with the programme.
KU Leuven organizes a programme specifically intended to be done in the summer in between year 1 and
year 2 of the programmes. The rest of the features are quite common with the rest of the programmes.
MSc RENE in KIC InnoEnergy structures the internship as aligned with the MSc thesis, making possible a 6
month stay in company, as a curricular activity and aligned with the specialisation taken by the student.

4 Design of a Survey and Analysis of the Results
The survey has been designed by the taskforce defined in Section 2. The survey is shown with all detail in
Annex 9.
This Section 4 includes the results of the survey in a graphic and quantitative fashion and with comments
on the results.
Figure 1 shows that the number of answers is relatively limited, being, however, very relevant in terms of
the variety of institutions that are represented: industry associations, private and public companies,
research centres, universities and governmental agencies.
Figure 1. Type of company or institution responding the questionnaire.
Private company, 2
Public company, 1
Public University,
4Private University,
0
Governmental
agency, 2
Research center, 2
Industry
Association, 2
Other, 0
Type of institution or company

Figure 2 shows how the thematic distribution of the answers is. Again, the relevance of the results is clear,
having a strong alignment with the thematic of MAGHRENOV, renewable energy and energy efficiency. It is
also remarkable the amount of actors being involved in innovation, another one of the main vectors in
MAGHRENOV.
Figure 2. Topics related to the surveyed companies and institutions (more than one topic could be
selected).
Figure 3 is highlighting the relevance of an industrial internship programme at a MSc level and showing also
the relevance of PhD and post-doc internships.
Figure 3. Types of profiles of the internship candidates where we should focus (more than one profile
could be selected).
Renewable Energy,
9, 21%
Energy efficiency,
7, 16%
R&D, Innovation,
11, 25%
Entrepreneurship,
5, 11%
Management, 4,
9%
Higher education,
8, 18%
The area of your company or institution is close to
one or more of these topics
Professional level,
4, 10%
Bachelor level, 4,
10%
MSc level, 13, 33%
PhD level, 9, 23%
post-doc level, 8,
21%
Other (Engineer),
1, 3%
Types of profiles where we should focus

Figure 4 is interesting, because it shows the intensity of technical content in the internship for a
professional level internship. The option preferred is a high technological content, being the second choice
a combination of technical, innovation and management content. This is an interesting result.
Figure 4. Intensity of the specialization for professional profile.
Similarly, Figure 5 shows how a more transversal focus of the internship is preferred for a Bachelor level
internship.
Figure 5. Intensity of the specialization for bachelor profile.
5
1
0
1
3
3
Technical, very specialized
Technical transversal
Tech transversal & innovation
Tech transversal & management
Tech transversal, innovation &
management
N/A
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Professional level: Intensity of specialization
2
5
4
0
0
2
management
N/A
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Bachelor level: Intensity of specialization

Figure 6 is concluding that for a MSc level internship, more transversal options are preferred and an
innovation focus is specially welcome. In fact, this is one of the initial MAGHRENOV hypothesis.
Figure 6. Intensity of the specialization for MSc profile.
Figure 7 is showing the results for the PhD internship. In this case, it is quite clear the technical focus as
the preferred option, with a certain relevance of the innovation character.
Figure 7. Intensity of the specialization for PhD profile.
3
2
4
0
4
0
management
N/A
0 1 2 3 4 5
MSc level: Intensity of specialization
5
0
4
1
3
0
management
N/A
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
PhD level: Intensity of specialization

Figure 8 is interesting, because it is showing a result relatively different than the usual focus for post-doc
approaches. Instead of an intensification of the scientific and technical content, a focus on innovation is
preferred, probably influenced partly because the answers are coming from actors interested in the results
of MAGHRENOV, so sharing the interest in innovation-based approaches. This is not seen as a limitation, but
as a modern focus, also aligned with the recent strategies of the EU and the concept of actions with highet
TRL (technology readiness level).
Figure 8. Intensity of the specialization for post-doc profile.
Figure 9 is showing that a relatively short internship (3 months) is the option more interesting.
Figure 9. Duration of the program for professional profile.
3
1
4
0
5
0
management
N/A
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Post-doc level: Intensity of specialization
3 months, 5, 39%
6 months, 3, 23%
1 year, 2, 15%
more than one
year, 0, 0%
N/A, 3, 23%
Professional level: Duration of the program

Figure 10 is also aligned with the previous result. The duration for the internship in Bachelor level is also
months.
Figure 10. Duration of the program for bachelor profile.
Figure 11 stands an interesting position, relatively different than the traditional approach for the industrial
internship in a MSc programme. It is relevant to say that the preferred 6 months approach is compatible
with the typical duration of the MSc thesis, so an alignment of both actions make sense, as it is the
proposal in KIC InnoEnergy MSc programmes (as RENE, the master on renewables, for example).
Figure 11. Duration of the program for MSc level profile.
3 months, 5, 39%
6 months, 4, 31%
1 year, 2, 15%
more than one
year, 0, 0%
N/A, 2, 15%
Bachelor level: Duration of the program
3 months, 0, 0%
6 months, 9, 69%
1 year, 3, 23%
more than one
year, 1, 8%
MSc level: Duration of the program

Figure 12 shows again an interesting result. The answers are quite focused to a long duration of the
internship (1 year), so this means that an active implication of PhD students and industry is welcome.
Figure 12. Duration of the program for PhD profile.
Figure 13 is consistent with the results shown in Figure 12. A duration for the internship longer than one
year is the preferred choice. Again, an ambitious integration of the post-doc candidates and the industry is
seen as extremely positive.
Figure 13. Duration of the program for post-doc profile.
3 months, 1, 8%
6 months, 3, 23%
1 year, 7, 54%
more than one
year, 2, 15%
PhD level: Duration of the program
3 months, 1, 8%
6 months, 1, 8%
1 year, 3, 23%
more than one
year, 8, 61%
Post-doc level: Duration of the program

Figure 14 shows that the concept of industrial internship is seen from a flexible perspective, considering
research centres as good choices for the internship as well.
Figure 14. Type of immersion for professional profile.
Figure 15 is showing for the Bachelor level even a more clear result on the view of industry and research
centres as similar entities for the internship.
Figure 15. Type of immersion for bachelor profile.
4

0

6

0

3

Industry
only

Research
center
only

Industry
&
research
center

Another
lab
in
the
University

N/A

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Professional
level:
Types
of
immersion

3

1

7

0

2

Industry
only

Research
center
only

Industry
&
research
center

Another
lab
in
the
University

N/A

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Bachelor
level:
Types
of
immersion

Figures 16, 17 and 18 are also showing the same view for the recipient institutions for the interns. It is a
consistent result, showing that the type of training is considered to be similar.
Figure 16. Type of immersion for MSc profile.
Figure 17. Type of immersion for PhD profile.
0

2

11

0

0

Industry
only

Research
center
only

Industry
&
research
center

Another
lab
in
the
University

N/A

0
2
4
6
8
10
12

MSc
level:
Types
of
immersion

0

3

10

0

0

Industry
only

Research
center
only

Industry
&
research
center

Another
lab
in
the
University

N/A

0
2
4
6
8
10
12

PhD
level:
Types
of
immersion

Figure 18. Type of immersion for post-doc profile.
Figure 19 is starting the analysis of mobility options. For the case of a professional internship, mobility is
quite welcome, but not specially preferred. This makes sense, taking into account that the professional
internship has been identified as the option with the shortest internship, 3 months.
Figure 19. Intensity of mobility for professional profile.
0

1

11

1

0

Industry
only

Research
center
only

Industry
&
research
center

Another
lab
in
the
University

N/A

0
2
4
6
8
10
12

Post-‐doc
level:
Types
of
immersion

2

4

4

3

No
mobility

Mobility
is
welcome

Both
opGons
are
possible

N/A

0
1
2
3
4
5

Professional
level:
Intensity
of
mobility

Figures 20, 21, 22 and 23 show increasing orientation to the mobility concept for Bachelor, MSc, PhD and
post-doc. This is considered as an expected result, taking into account the international focus of
MAGHRENOV and the international perspective of the actions, aligned with relevant durations of the
internships.
Figure 20. Intensity of mobility for bachelor profile.
Figure 21. Intensity of mobility for MSc profile.
3

5

3

2

No
mobility

Mobility
is
welcome

Both
opGons
are
possible

N/A

0
1
2
3
4
5
6

Bachelor
level:
Intensity
of
mobility

0

9

4

0

No
mobility

Mobility
is
welcome

Both
opGons
are
possible

N/A

0
2
4
6
8
10

MSc
level:
Intensity
of
mobility

Figure 22. Intensity of mobility for PhD profile.
Figure 23. Intensity of mobility for post-doc profile.
0

11

2

0

No
mobility

Mobility
is
welcome

Both
opGons
are
possible

N/A

0
2
4
6
8
10
12

PhD
level:
Intensity
of
mobility

0

11

2

0

No
mobility

Mobility
is
welcome

Both
opGons
are
possible

N/A

0
2
4
6
8
10
12

Post-‐doc
level:
Intensity
of
mobility

5 Industrial internship programme
The integration of the results in the previous sections makes possible the design of the new industrial
internship programme.
The action considered as the most relevant one is the internship in the MSc programmes. It has also been
identified as 6 months the preferred duration of the internship. Similarly, on the hypothesis side, a
programme designed to be as more compatible as possible is the best approach.
Another obvious boundary condition for all the industrial internship programmes is the thematic, focused
on renewable energy and energy efficiency as the technologies identified in MAGHRENOV.
Integrating all the boundary conditions and the results of the analysis of the existing situation and the
survey, the Table 1 is a good summary of the design.
Type of
programme
Duration Content Recipient Remarks
MSc 6 months Technical,
innovation/management
Industry &
research centres
Integrated with
MSc thesis (6
months in intl.
prog.)
Professional 3 months Technical Industry
Bachelor 3 months Technical,
Industry &
research centres
PhD 1 year Technical,
Industry &
research centres
Post-doc > 1 year Technical,
Industry &
research centres
Table 1: Proposal for the industrial internship programmes
In all the cases, international mobility is welcome, being the case of the professional internship the one wit
the lowest priority.
The MSc programme is chosen as the first one, since this is the highest priority and it is also the natural
programme to be integrated in the future ERASMUS+ proposal.
Anyhow, it is remarkable to say that the approach for the programme does not need an specific
contingency plan, since it can run independently of the funding for the educational programmes. Of course,
all the funding sources will be taken into consideration for making more aggressive the results of the
program, significantly:

• ERASMUS+.
• KIC InnoEnergy.
• National and regional funding.
• Industry and research centre-based funding.
• Self-paying students.
On this point it is relevant to mention the synergy with an internal KIC InnoEnergy project, working towards
the sustainability of KIC InnoEnergy educational programmes. Accordingly, this is a remarkable coincidence,
since such a project, expected to be finished at the end of 2014, may provide good results for MAGHRENOV
as well.

6 Conclusions
The conclusions of the report about the industrial internship programme can be summarized as in:
• Thematic oriented to renewable energies and energy efficiency in all cases.
• Focused to MSc students.
• The content should be quite specialized from the technical point of view.
• Duration of the internship according to the level of the candidate:
o 3 months for a professional internship.
o 3-6 months for a Bachelor internship.
o 6 months for a MSc internship.
o 1 year for a PhD internship.
o > 1 year for a post-doc internship.
• Type of immersion: industry and/or research centre.
• Mobility is welcome at all levels (from professional to post-doc).
• In the case of the MSc internship, this action will be aligned with the MSc thesis for making it
compatible with all international MSc programs, where the duration of the MSc is 6 months.

7 References
http://www.etseib.upc.edu/en/university-companies/3013-practiques-externes
http://www.ensta-paristech.fr/en/becoming-engineer/internships-and-projects/industrial-immersion-
internship
http://www.grenoble-inp.fr/business/finding-the-appropriate-working-relationship-25841.kjsp
https://www.esat.kuleuven.be/education/master/ee/students/industry

8 Annex: existing internship programmes
This annex lists industrial internship programmes of various institutions from Europe.
8.1 UPC BarcelonaTech – ETSEIB Internship programme

Source: http://www.etseib.upc.edu/en/university-companies/3013-practiques-externes

8.2 ENSTA ParisTech internship programme
Source: http://www.ensta-paristech.fr/en/becoming-engineer/internships-and-projects/industrial-
immersion-internship

8.3 Grenoble INP internship programme

Source: http://www.grenoble-inp.fr/business/finding-the-appropriate-working-relationship-25841.kjsp

8.4 KU Leuven internship program

Source: https://www.esat.kuleuven.be/education/master/ee/students/industry

9 Annex: survey

MAGHRENOV deliverable 2.3: Industrial internship programme

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to MAGHRENOV deliverable 2.3: Industrial internship programme

Similar to MAGHRENOV deliverable 2.3: Industrial internship programme (20)

More from Maghrenov

More from Maghrenov (15)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

MAGHRENOV deliverable 2.3: Industrial internship programme