User guide
This guide follows the real order of things: you enter through an application and leave through a company. Each stage says who acts, what they need, and what would stop them moving on.
The journey, stage by stage
The journey has 11 stages. They are crossed in order, and never backwards: a file is not sent back, it stays where it is until the missing condition is met. Only four stages are gated — the others are crossed as soon as the work is done.
The application has just been submitted and its email address is not yet confirmed. Nothing can move forward until the candidate has clicked the link they received: that gesture, and it alone, proves the address belongs to them.
The application is complete and awaits examination. It carries a project title and a statement of purpose, entered by the candidate themselves, with no account created beforehand. Other students may join the project later, by invitation.
The admissions commission is seized. Its members read the file, then vote. The vote is attributed to the seat, never to the person: that is what makes it possible, years later, to demonstrate who sat without having to dig out a letter.
The commission has accepted the application. Its decision becomes binding the moment the minutes are sealed, and the candidate is informed at once.
The admission certificate is issued. It carries a verification code: anyone receiving it can check its authenticity on the university website, without having to telephone anyone.
The team follows the support training. Each member enrols themselves — enrolment covers the whole project — and each scans their own badge. Training is complementary: a missed session does not stop them, but the training attended will appear in the file and be highlighted on the day of the defence.
The proof-of-concept commission examines the feasibility of the project. If it agrees, prototyping begins. If it refuses, the file does not move backwards: it stays at this stage, and the commission will be seized again, possibly after remedial training.
The student carries the prototype, the business model and the business plan together: the three co-evolve, because what the prototype reveals forces the other two to be reworked. Each is submitted, revised and accepted separately, as many times as needed; only the supervisor accepts, and an accepted deliverable can be reopened with a stated reason. The institution chooses whether the order prototype → model → plan is enforced at submission. The file leaves this phase only once all three are accepted: that is what opens the scheduling of the defence.
With the three deliverables accepted, the defence date can be set. This is also when the jury for that defence is constituted, then appointed.
The defence has taken place. The jury deliberates, the mark is recorded, and the minutes are sealed. No official document is issued before that sealing.
The students have graduated. The project is shared, but the title is personal: each member of the team receives their degree, in their own name, and each carries their own verification code.
Who does what: the granted roles
6 roles are distributed from the permissions screen. They describe trades, not people: one person may hold two of them, and a role may be held by nobody for a while without the scheme stopping.
- admin-univ — undefined permission(s)
- The instance administrator. They create staff accounts, distribute roles and monitor the licence. They examine no application and sit on no body: administering the tool and deciding a student's fate are two trades, and merging them into one account would amount to authorising oneself.
- direction-univ — undefined permission(s)
- The university management. It seals the minutes, which makes decisions binding, and issues official documents. It is the signature of the institution.
- direction-hadhinat — undefined permission(s)
- The incubator management. This is the broadest role, because it carries the support work: opening a file, composing the bodies, appointing supervisors, maintaining the training catalogue, opening sittings and drafting the minutes.
- scolarite — undefined permission(s)
- The registrar's office. It records the files, marks attendance, sets defence dates, records marks and issues certificates. This is the daily work of the scheme.
- formateur — undefined permission(s)
- The trainer. They open their session, scan badges at the door and consult the attendance of their own course. Nothing else: they have access neither to the files nor to the deliberations.
- encadrant — undefined permission(s)
- The supervisor. A teacher — often also a trainer — who follows the work on an application and rules on ITS deliverables: accepting the prototype, the business model or the business plan, or asking for a revision. Their scope is deliberately narrow: they do not move the application forward and do not appoint themselves. The host structure appoints them, scope by scope, and the software refuses an opinion coming from anyone but the appointee.
The roles that are never granted
Three capacities appear in no list of roles, and this is the least intuitive point of the model: they follow from a fact. Granting them by hand would amount to being able to give the right to vote to someone who does not sit.
- Student
- A student is anyone who is a MEMBER of a file. The role is not granted: it arises from submitting the application, or from an accepted invitation. Whoever submitted holds no right the others do not have.
- Supervisor
- A supervisor is the person APPOINTED to a specific file. They may accept the deliverables of that student, and of no other. The right does not follow the person, it follows the appointment.
- Member of a body
- A member of a commission or a jury is anyone holding an ACTIVE MANDATE on one of its seats, on the date of the sitting. You do not tick a "jury member" box: you appoint someone to a seat, and the right to vote follows from it.
The collegiate bodies and their seats
A seat represents an organisation or a function, never a person. A person occupies a seat through a mandate, which carries a start date and, when the day comes, an end date. Revoking a mandate erases nothing: the minutes signed two years ago still name whoever sat then.
Commission de labellisation
It examines applications and rules on admission to the scheme.
Decision rule: 3 votes in favour. Quorum: 4 seat(s) present.
- Rectorat
- Vice-président
- CDE
- Centre de Développement des Entreprises
- Service IA
- No detail of function.
- Service CATI
- No detail of function.
- Service Hadhinat
- Structure porteuse du dispositif
- Les Œuvres Sociales (optional)
- Les Œuvres Sociales
Commission du POC
It judges the proof of concept and gives, or withholds, the go-ahead for prototyping.
Decision rule: 2 votes in favour. Quorum: 2 seat(s) present.
- Hadhinat
- Représentant de la Hadhinat
- Encadrement
- Formateur encadrant
- Prestataire externe (optional)
- Fournisseur de service — le cas échéant
Jury de soutenance (template)
It is not standing: a jury is constituted for EACH defence from this template, then completed if needed.
Decision rule: simple majority. Quorum: 3 seat(s) present.
- Président du jury
- Enseignant de rang magistral
- Encadreur
- Directeur des travaux
- Examinateur
- No detail of function.
The jury is constituted for each defence
The members of a jury vary from one defence to the next: a rapporteur, an examiner, sometimes an invited industry figure. There is therefore no standing jury. For each file, a jury is constituted from the regulatory template, its holders are appointed, and only then is the sitting opened.
Order matters, and the software enforces it. Scheduling sets the date; opening the sitting freezes the assembly. Appointing a member after the opening would not let them in: the sitting reads the mandates as they stood on its date. That is what makes the minutes binding, and it is why the screen refuses to open while a mandatory seat is vacant.
The team of a project
A project may bring together up to six students, who defend together. They are equal: whoever submitted the file holds no right the others do not have. The software keeps the trace of the submission, but makes no leader of it.
A member is added by their email address. They receive a personal link, complete their details, collect their badge, and then follow the project and its training. Until they have done so, the screen says it — otherwise they would be thought ready when they have no badge, and would count absent at the first class.
The project is shared, but the title is personal: each member receives their admission certificate and their degree, in their own name. A single document "to the project" would leave five people with nothing to show a bank or an employer.
The team freezes as soon as the defence is scheduled: the minutes will name its members, and adding one afterwards would mean signing a document in the name of someone who was not there. A departure, by contrast, is not erased — it is dated.
Labelling, which runs alongside the journey
The label request does not come after the degree: it goes out as soon as the three deliverables are accepted — prototype, business model and business plan — because that is the file the ministry receives. It is exactly the moment when the defence can be scheduled: the two paths therefore advance at the same time.
A project can thus be "awaiting defence" and "label requested" on the same day, which a chain of stages made impossible. The request, the reply and the registration are dated facts, bearing the date on the document received — never the date of entry.
If the label comes back in time, it is presented at the defence on the same footing as the deliverables. It is not produced by the student — it is obtained — and the screen distinguishes it for that reason. A refusal is recorded like a grant: keeping quiet about it would suggest a request without a reply, and nobody would know whether to follow up.
Attendance in training
A project is enrolled, therefore its whole team, in a single gesture — a member may do it themselves from their space, without going through the registrar. Since training is complementary, making enrolment depend on a third party would add a delay nothing justifies.
Each student has a personal badge, presented at the door of the room and scanned by the trainer. The resulting record is exact, but it gates nothing: training is complementary, and an absence interrupts no journey. It is read at the defence, where diligence supports the file.
Verifying the documents
Every certificate and every degree carries a verification code. By entering it on the university website, an employer or an administration checks the authenticity of the document without having to reach anyone — and without the university having to confirm by telephone something it has already signed.