1. www.emmeleonardo.eu Final Conference Catania, Italy 25 May 2010

2. Short presentation of the National Council of Small and Medium Sized Private Enterprises in Romania (CNIPMMR) 1992: The oldest organization of SMEs in Romania  Represents over 55.000 enterprises nation wide  Has the headquarter in Bucharest and 98 branches in all the development regions  Has representatives in the social dialogue commissions of all the ministries

3. The experience of the transfer (the methodology adopted)  Through focus groups participation the stakeholders and managers expressed a variety of opinions when comparing the MF model adopted in Italy with managerial profile in Romania. The first step focused included the deliver of the model and an individual attention was giving to the adaptation of the model to the national context.  The second step centered on gathering information from the managers and entrepreneurs, which encompassed financial concerns, training needs and evaluation of competences.  The results of the transfer of the model were included in the national report of Romania.

4. Panel  Number of managers and stakeholders: nearly 600 managers, entrepreneurs and stakeholders;  Sector: All sectors of activity with a specific focus on industry;  Functions: Entrepreneurs, general and executive managers, administrators, department’s chiefs, coordinators, other types of managers;

5. Desk research - Main results -  1 st Focus Group main results:  The E.M.M.E model was considered the best way to improve the competitiveness of Romanian SMEs;  The model is viable in Romania only if there are taken into account the real necessities of the managers, their profile, their need for training and last but not least their exigencies;  The Romanian managers must understand that training is important also because it helps in reducing costs associated with hiring professionals from outside;  The questionnaire was appreciated with some minor suggestions to improvement;  2 nd Focus Group (Competences needed in the field of finance management) main results:  The general manager or the entrepreneur is in charge with the financial aspects and the finance manager’s background and heterogeneity vary greatly in Romanian SMEs;  In Romania a finance manager is often seen as an accountant;  External financial consultancy is risky and sometimes less productive because a SME needs a permanently finance manager;

6. Field research - Main results of focus groups -  SMEs do not consider developing employees as their duty, because their most important aim is to make profit;  44.46% of the SMEs have training activities lasting 1 to 5 days per year; 35.04% of the SMEs had no training activities; 11.44% of the SMEs had training activities lasting 6 to 10 days per year; 9.06% of the SMEs had training activities lasting longer than 10 days per year;  There is a big difference between education of managers of large enterprises and SMEs  The large enterprises have developed system of education of its managers while SMEs struggle with different reasons for their non-participation in educational process;  The most preferred methods of learning are “learning from peers, other managers” and “learning as you go”;  In Romania approximately 50% of SMEs managers had no prior managerial experience when they started the job, their work is based on one skill; and approximately 50% have no post-school formal education;  More than three thirds of SMEs managers admit they do not have appropriate skills and competences, mainly in following areas: communication skills, team work, problem solution, interpersonal skills, personal development, carrier development, goal setting, motivation, organizational development, IT skills, critical way of thinking, etc.;

7. Evaluation of the of the overall adopted methodology Points of weakness and strenght of the model  Main criticalities encountered:  Some of the companies were reticent in filling in confidential data as the turnover or other elements they considered as highly important;  Points strength of the model:  The model used qualitative methods and quantitative methods (survey research and statistical analysis);  The model was designed to gather as many details as possible;  The model is well structured and contains relevant questions;  Points of weakness of the model:  The length is to be considered a weak point as well as the language used;

8. Suggestions in order to improve the model  The model adopted was successfully delivered in Romania therefore we do not any suggestions in order to improve it;  We consider that the model was efficient and reached the objectives of the project;

9. The potential future diffuseness of the model The future diffuseness of the project will be realized through:  Monthly newsletters containing information about the model sent to CNIPMMR’s members and branches;  CNIPMMR will enssure informative sessions about the model in all the events coordinated and organized;  There will be future meetings organized at the local CNIPMMR’s branches in which the model will be presented;  Promotional materials (e.g flyers, etc.);  Articles in CNIPMMR’s publications and other magazines;

10. Thank you for your attention! National Council of Small and Medium Sized Private Enterprises in Romania (CNIPMMR) 1-3 Walter Mărăcineanu Square, 1 st floor, district 1, Bucharest, Romania Phone: +40 (0) 21 312.68.93 Email: office@cnipmmr.ro Internet: www.cnipmmr.ro, www.smeprojects.rowww.cnipmmr.rowww.smeprojects.ro