Your thoughtful and honest appraisal will be most helpful. We appreciate your input and will try to implement as many of your ideas as possible. Continue comments on the back if necessary.

Each Fellow works with one mentor who is Soros foundations network-affiliated (usually Open Society Institute and Central European University) and one or two ‘external’ mentor(s) who are experts in the field working outside the Soros foundations network. Mentors should: 1) Work with Fellows to devise a brief policy paper in their field(s) of expertise based on a lengthy research paper written over the course of the fellowship year, 2) Maintain contact with Fellows at least once every six weeks or so by telephone, fax or e-mail to discuss the development of projects, 3) If feasible, meet with Fellows at least once during the fellowship year to discuss the project, 4) Facilitate Fellows’ contact with other relevant experts and participation in appropriate meetings (IPF has discretionary funds to support Fellow attendance at relevant events), 5) Complete brief mid-term and final critique forms supplied by IPF to provide the program with feedback regarding the Fellow’s progress.

Your name, position dr. Mária Ladó, director general

Name of Fellow you have assisted: : Dragan Djuric

1. What, in your opinion, have you and your Fellow/program/project gained from your cooperation thus far?

Better understanding of social dialogue both in SEE countries (investigated by the Fellow) and CEE (researched by myself). Similarities and differences of the two regions are equally striking – and this could contribute to a more realistic and objective assessment of the state of affairs in both regions. Considering the two groups of countries from the perspective of the European integration, obviously, more distinct than common features can be identified. Nevertheless, CEE countries having already qualified as future EU Member States have a rich experience also in the field of social dialogue that can provide practical inspiration for countries of SEE. The co-operation with the Fellow can be considered as a form of sharing best practices of various countries.

2. Do certain areas of this Fellow’s work need improvement? Which areas?

The Fellow’s ability to describe complex situations is fairly developed. Yet, he could improve his skills to analyse and explain the explored empirical evidences in a more abstract manner, particularly by putting the cases into the broader theoretical context.

3. In your opinion, does your Fellow’s project make a significant contribution to the field?
 
Certainly YES, as investigations and publications on SEE countries’ social dialogue and tripartism are rather limited. The overview of the SEE countries, and especially the case studies on Croatia and Montenegro enrich our basic knowledge in this field.
 

4. Would the project be important to other countries in the CEE/fSU region?
 
YES, as a source for comparison. Probably more for the countries of fSU than those of CEE, as the latter ones understandably focus their attention to the countries of EU.

5. Could the proposed policy research make an impact on the policy environment in specific countries or regions? (Policy makers, experts and policy research community)
 
YES, with certain limits. The Fellow’s policy proposals are of two different nature. He has formulated general policy proposals for all SEE countries, that could serve as a starting point for policy debates in the countries concerned. These proposals, however, need considerable further elaboration and adjustment to the countries’ specific conditions. The Fellow has also developed specific policy proposals for Montenegro. These are already in the process of implementation.
 
6. Is the timetable for the project realistic?

YES, witnessing the results achieved.

7. Could the project benefit a large number of people?
 
YES, if the circle of government officials and social partners engaged in tripartite co-operation can be considered as “a large number of people”. Beyond these practitioners, the Fellow’s research findings could be interesting for students specialised in industrial relations or political sciences.
 
8. Does the Fellow show evidence that he/she can think strategically about the relevant project and/or field?
 
YES, to the extent that the Fellow has outlined key strategic priorities based on adjusting creatively the arrangements widespread in CEE countries or EU Member States. As regards original, never-tried solutions, the Fellow is less innovative.
 
9. If the Fellow were to re-apply for continued OSI funding for follow-up work associated with the project, would you support continued funding?

YES, if the Fellow intends to carry out detailed case studies in other SEE countries than Croatia and Montenegro (investigated in the framework of this project). The aim of these  investigations could be to develop further country specific policy recommendations.

10. Are there other appropriate funders that may support the project?

I am not familiar with funding possibilities.