DIASPORA NETWORK

Invite people whose relevant experience and documented work match a defined need. Residence abroad, a senior title or public visibility should not be enough. Membership or involvement must follow the person’s informed agreement.

Review relevant public work, qualifications where applicable, references or past contributions. Explain the limits of the review. An expertise check should support a particular role rather than create an unsupported claim that someone is qualified for every pillar.

They can contribute relevant experience where the institution agrees and supervision is clear. A named contact is not automatically a university partnership. Student welfare, research quality and permissions must be addressed before fieldwork begins.

A clear question, relevant experience and an agreed commitment are more useful than an impressive name. The mentee should understand what help is available and what is outside the mentor’s role. Mentoring must not be advertised as a job guarantee.

It can support learning about customer needs, standards and practical barriers. Businesses still need current, relevant professional advice and their own commercial checks. A workshop or introduction is not evidence that an export opportunity will succeed.

A recommendation may be influenced by a business, funding or personal connection. Declaring it helps others assess the advice. Disclosure alone does not solve every conflict; some roles or decisions may need a different arrangement.

Build local skills, document decisions and agree a practical handover from the beginning. The local institution should understand the work and its limitations. A contributor’s departure should not leave essential information or access unavailable.

Both sides should understand the purpose, responsibilities, costs, credit and use of information. Local knowledge should be recognised rather than treated only as a source of data. Agreements need to fit the actual institutions and work involved.

No. A person can be named as someone the owner hopes to invite without being associated with IFT. Any such list must say that clearly. Do not use their name or photograph to imply a role, partnership or endorsement that they have not agreed to.

Report agreed work and what the receiving team could use, together with limitations and unresolved issues. Contact numbers, invitations and meetings are activities. They should not be presented as proof of investment, employment or research impact.

Ask contributors and project owners to declare relevant business, funding or personal interests before work starts. Publish a suitable summary and agree how any conflict will be managed. What to check: Check whether recommendations favour a contributor’s own service and whether the local team can consider alternatives.

Require each short project to leave usable notes, training material and an agreed handover with the local team. Ask the receiving team to demonstrate how it will continue the work. What to check: Check whether the work can be maintained without repeated overseas assistance or a contributor-owned tool.

Create a jointly agreed question where both teams explain what they contribute and expect to learn. Set authorship, data access and use of the final work before research begins. What to check: Check that local knowledge and labour receive credit and that neither side assumes control over the other’s records. Confirm any cross-border data-sharing requirements before moving records.

Let contributors choose the kinds of requests they receive and whether their contact details can be shared for a particular introduction. Keep a record of consent and an easy withdrawal route. What to check: Check whether unsolicited requests or public listings continue after someone declines participation.

Review completed outputs, local use, time spent, unresolved problems and the experience of participating teams. Publish grouped findings and distinguish an introduction from completed work. What to check: Check whether the network helps less-connected institutions as well as established organisations and whether promised outputs were actually delivered.