Pidapalooza - OrgIDs for UK Research

OrgIDs for UK research
Christopher Brown
9 Nov 2016
PIDapalooza

Jisc?
09/11/2016 OrgIDs for UK Research 2
Jisc is the UK higher, further education
and skills sectors’ not-for-profit organisation
for digital services and solutions
Operate shared
digital infrastructure
and services
Provide trusted advice and
practical assistance for
universities, colleges and
learning providers
We…
Negotiate sector-wide deals
with IT vendors and
commercial publishers

Jisc is…
3
Under its own
oversight
Dedicated
entirely to the
sectors’
individual and
collective
needs
Not a vendor:
Jisc deals with
and/or works
with vendors
and publishers
on the
collective behalf
Not for profit:
every £ used
for the sectors’
benefit
Objective, but
not unbiased:
we put the
sectors’
interests
above all else
Of the sectors, by the
sectors, for the sectors
Championing the importance &
potential of digital technologies
for UK education and research
09/11/2016 OrgIDs for UK Research

Jisc does 3 main things
4
Shared digital
infrastructure
and services
Expert and
trusted advice
and practical
assistance
Sector wide deals
with IT vendors
and commercial
publishers
Current
examples:
Janet network,
shared data centre,
eduroam wireless,
geospatial services
Future
examples:
Learner analytics,
research data
management,
FE college
in a box
Current
examples:
Microsoft 365
email, Amazon
web services,
e-journals,
FE e-books
Future
examples:
Prevent web
filtering,Tableau,
new models for
digital publishing
Current
examples:
Financial x-ray,
cloud advice,
cyber
security/business
continuity
Future
examples:
FE mergers, open
access good
practice, national
monograph
strategy

The UK research landscape
5
» Many research performing institutions (HEIs)
» Many different systems employed by funders and publishers
» No shared national awarding or reporting infrastructure
» Partial implementation of some key standards in some systems
» Changing environment
› Mandates affecting research information and research data
› Increasing importance of external (non-governmental) funding
› Interdisciplinary and international focus

Some existing workflows in the UK RIM landscape
UK Research
Councils
Je-S
Internal
Systems
GtR
Research
Fish
CRIS
Finance/
HR/
Student
Third Parties
Bibliographic
Databases
Identifiers
University
Repository
Hefce/
Ref/HecBIS
Core
Other
funders
Konfer
Equipment.data
HESA
Researcher
Academia.net
Mendeley
Academia.edu
Research gate

Relevant Areas to Research
7
» Standards and Identifiers in Research
• ORCID
• OrgID
» Reporting Research
• OSIP (Overview of Systems Interoperability Project) – RCUK/Jisc
• RIOXX application profile and guidelines (Supporting RCUK and REF OA reporting)
» Open Access to Research Outputs
• Sherpa Services - Standardisation around publisherOA policies
• Publications Router
• Jisc Monitor - developing metadata profile for various use cases
• Discovering and accessing articles
• Research data discovery
» ‘Measuring’ Research and its Impact
• Usage and citation statistics of research articles and data

Jisc – How are we helping
8
» Support universities core business and help make research process more productive
› Developing shared services/infrastructure where appropriate
› Supporting implementation of key standards
› Providing a channel for universities requirements with funders, vendors etc.
› Getting everyone together
» Resolving issues:
› Lack of coordination and few shared structures
› Multiple Funder systems: Joint e-submission systems (JeS); Research Fish (a
research outcomes system), Research Outcomes System; Grants on the Web; REF;
HESA.
› Hard to get any meaningful statistics or analytics out of the systems and people are
still left keying in information multiple times in each institution.

Main areas for standardisation
Research Data
Management
Scholarly
Communications
Research
Information
Management
› CERIF
› ORCID
› DOIs
› CASRAI pilots
• Data Management Plans
• OpenAccess reporting
• Organisational Identifiers

Teaching &
Business Engaged
Libraries
Document
Delivery
Managing Print
Collections
Digitisation and
Preservation
Resource
Discovery
Benchmarking
Collections
Legal Deposit
Libraries
Academic
Research
Libraries
Specialist
Libraries
Availability Data
Usage Data
Copy
Cataloguing
OpenAccess
Book Directories
Identifiers
Standards
The National Bibliographic Knowledgebase
The National Bibliographic Knowledgebase (NBK) will aggregate and interoperate with a
collection of data sources that will describe where books are kept and in what formats and
under what conditions they are available to be accessed and used.

Open Access World
11
» For Gold OA, the payment of APCs and monitoring of these payments - all kinds
of points in those workflows where the easy use of agreed, common
institutional and funder IDs would make life so much more efficient. For
example:
› Researcher acknowledging research funding in a paper submitted to a journal
› Researcher noting their institutional affiliation when submitting a paper to a
journal
› Publisher invoicing the right institution
› Institution trackingAPC payments relevant to different funders with different
T&Cs for their APC funds
› Funder trackingAPC payments from different institutions
› Publisher providing funder / institutional affiliation metadata associated with
a research paper

Jisc Library Support Services
12
» Summer 2015 review of Jisc Library Support Services
» Looked at the 14 Jisc services offered in the LSS area
» Duplication across systems – orgs stored in 13 different
systems
» Report viewed positively by Jisc & the user community
(incl SCONUL & RLUK) and its findings /
recommendations are being taken forward over the next
year or two in a number of parallel streams (UI, UX, data
orchestration, technical optimisation, governance, etc).
»09/11/2016 OrgIDs for UK Research
“The library systems landscape remains diffuse, despite vendor developments such as unified
search and new generation LMS products. Open Access, research output tracking and further
challenges are adding complexity. Libraries are using combinations of local systems and
supply chain services along with shared services to cover the range of their work.”

Jisc CASRAI-UK pilot
13
» Jisc and CASRAI* set up 3 working groups on priority topics:
› Data Management Plans
› Organisational Identifiers
› Open Access Reporting
» Each group involved wide group of participants from universities,
funders, vendors
*Consortia Advancing Standards in Research Administration Information (CASRAI) - http://casrai.org/

Research/
requirements
Identify Use
case/issue
Consultation
Consensus
building
Develop
approach
Document Implement
Jisc – Standards Workflow
14
CASRAI example
CASRAI
Data
Dictionary
3 working groups
• OA Reporting
• DMP
• Org ID
Jisc-CASRAI Pilot
scoping
Post pilot
work
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-

OrgId Working Group - Objectives
15
» Identify main candidate sources of OrgIDs
» Subject them to common use cases which are relevant to universities and other
parts of the RIM and RDM workflow
» Produce a common statement about how the UK research community should
use OrgIDs and the policy requirement in order for harmonised OrgIDs to work
» Develop a sustainable process for maintaining authoritative lists of
organisations in the CASRAI dictionary
» Membership from ARMA, Research Councils, HEDIIP, BL, CrossRef,Wellcome
Trust, CRIS system vendors and UK HEIs

OrgId Working Group - Outputs
16
» Organisational Id Landscape Study – a report to inform theWorking Group on the
current use of organisational identifiers was commissioned and delivered (Sept 2013)
› http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/5381/
» Organisational Id Review – commissioned by theWorking Group to review a core set of
organisational identifiers (ISNI, Ringgold, Digital Science and UKPRN) (Dec 2014)
› http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/5853/
» Use cases – based on key use cases from the Research Lifecycle, these have been
identified by the Working Group and further developed under the OrgId Review (Dec
2014)

Landscape Study –Terms of Reference
17
» Interview representatives within the working group to establish what
authoritative lists of organisations involved in UK research are being, or could
be, used; determine use cases based on organisational identifiers used, the
problems encountered and the approach they are currently undertaking
» Produce a landscape review of organisational identifiers currently used, and
for what purpose, in the UK
» Look at “organisational” identifiers in its broadest sense.This would,
therefore, include “institutions”, as well as “funders” and other types of
organisation

Landscape Study- Summary
18
» Examined the landscape of organisational identifiers in the UK and identified
23 different IDs
» Based on interviews with key individuals
» Lots of detail on use cases for publishing, funders and institutions
» Stakeholders interviewed for this study typically described identifying
organisations as “a nightmare”, specifically disambiguation and deduplication
» Benefits from effective unique identifiers are truly realised when data is
shared
» Key aspects of identifiers that support the widest range of uses:
› Governance,Trust,Transparency,Temporal, Appropriate Metadata
› Of these, the “temporal” information is perhaps the most challenging to address

Landscape Study – Key Recommendations
19
» None of the identifiers investigated fulfils the role of being an “authoritative list” of
organisations involved in research.They are all constrained in scope
» ISNI and UKPRN both have traction, and warrant particularly careful consideration by
the working group.,
» The role of the registration agency in ISNI is crucial, and whether the existing agencies
offer appropriate services for this domain will need to be considered
» The Research Councils, as major funders of research in the UK, should be closely
involved in the development of any new identifier system.At present, ROS,
ResearchFish and Gateway to Research all use their own identifiers
» Given the range of existing identifiers, any new identifier system should only be
developed and introduced if there is clear evidence of demand, and sufficient buy in to
ensure that it is universally adopted
» The authority can remain separate from the identifier (for example, it would be
feasible to establish an authority list with appropriate metadata but using the ISNI as
the identifier)

OrgID Review –Terms of Reference
20
» Clarify a representative but not comprehensive set of use cases for the UK research
community to use organisational identifiers
» Survey and interview a small number of well-informed people in the field in order to
create and prioritise a list of desirable features for the provision of OrgIDs and potential
services built around them
» Check the use cases and these required features against four* possible candidate OrgIDs
and their providers
» Inform theWorking Group of the review’s conclusions and, if appropriate, make
recommendations for adoption by the UK research community
*Four candidates = ISNI, Ringgold, UKPRN, Digital Science

OrgId Review – Use Cases
21
» UC1 - Researcher applying for funding As a Researcher applying for funding, I need to list multiple organisations related
to my proposal in order to enable the target funder to uniquely identify previous employers and other funders, collaborators or
industry partners and beneficiaries.
» UC2 - Funder: minimising conflicts of interest As a funder preparing to find referees or reviewers, I need to be able to
identify suitable people in order to minimize conflicts of interest (through potential co-location at host institution).
» UC3 - Funder - tracking published outputs As a Funder, collating outputs in end-of-research reports, I need to be able
to track published outputs in order to understand our contribution & successful collaborations.
» UC5 - Researcher or research manager - reporting academic impacts to funders As a research producer,
I need to report academic impacts to different funders with different requirements.
» UC6 - Researcher - tracking organisations across time As a researcher I need to preserve the historical integrity of
organisational names at the time of data creation, collection or deposit (and other, specified times); it is similarly important, however,
to record and retain the links between these differing names, so that any user can see which data came from which organisation, even
if the organisation name has changed.
» UC7 - Repository manager - populating repositories, managing automation As a repository manager I
need to be able to uniquely identify my repository, whether or not its location or URL changes; this will enable me to control semi-
automated population of repository records.
» UC8 - Developer - directory services As a developer for research funders, I need to link an OrgID within my application to
a directory service.This will allow an end user or a machine to verify identity and contact details.
N.B. UC4 was deleted early in the review

OrgId Review – Candidate check against use cases

OrgId Review - Recommendations
4 candidates:
UK PRN
Digital Science
ISNI
Ringgold
One single candidate would not fulfil all the criteria it would be useful to separate the infrastructure
element (the provision and maintenance of the OrgID itself) and the service element (the services
offered both to registrants and to end users of the services).

OrgId Review - Recommendations
24
» A hybrid approach with ISNI as the backbone. Institutions and others needing to register and use
OrgIDs should use a solution which relies on and feeds the minimum data set curated by ISNI
» In considering registration solutions and value-added services, organisations should bear in mind
that, in the short term, Ringgold is the most developed agency conforming to the above
» Other service providers should be encouraged to deliver value added services on top of ISNI, for
example, Digital Science could be a registration agency for ISNIs in a similar way to Ringgold
» Jisc should investigate the possibilities and costs of a bulk deal for UK academic institutions for
value added services with Ringgold and (in time) with other service providers
» CrossRef should consider creating and maintaining a crosswalk or table of equivalence between
FundRef IDs and ISNI
» UK stakeholders (BL, HEFCE and others) to consider the need for a UK-based registration agency
(like Bibliothèque nationale de France) and how bulk creation/checking of ISNIs (and bulk
registration and/or the creation of a table of equivalence for UKPRNs) might take place for UK
academic institutions and other organisations involved in research
Input into…….

PT-CRIS
25
The PTCRIS programme from the FCT|FCCN aims to ensure the creation and sustained
development of a national integrated information ecosystem, to support research management
according to the best international standards and practices.

OSIP
26
Overview of Systems Interoperability Project (OSIP)
› Joint RCUK-Jisc project with input and support from the Association of Research
Managers and Administrators (ARMA)
› Explore ways to maximise the value of information researchers provide, and reduce
administrative effort
› Provide RCUK with advice on how to take advantage of advancements in research
information standards, and the potential for automatic movement of information
between systems (i.e. interoperability).
› Recognising that this is a complex landscape which needs greater co-ordination
› Project led to the commitment of RCUK to the introduction of both ORCID and
OrgIDs throughout their systems
› RCUK joined the ORCID consortium in December 2015
http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/publications/policy/osipreport/

OCLC Report
27
» Report published May 2016:
› Examples
› Use cases
› How ISNI addresses the challenges identified
› Outreach document for academic administrators
on the importance of organisational identifiers
and the benefits of ISNI membership
“Addressing the Challenges with Organizational Identifiers and ISNI”
» Working group (OCLC, Jisc, US universities,Australia)
» Jisc OrgID report, recommendations and use cases as input

ORCID, CrossRef, DataCite
Review the current work on organization identifiers and define use cases as
consumers of these identifiers
» Jisc OrgID work fed into report and discussion, which has resulted in 3 papers:
› Organization Identifier Provider Landscape
› Technical Considerations for an Organization Identifier Registry
› Organization Identifier Project: AWay Forward

2016 update
29
» Revisited report and recommendations
» Met with stakeholders involved in original working group
» What’s changed/new:
› British Library an ISNI registration authority
› British Library and RCUK working on test project
› Digital Science GRID launched (beta test during review)
› ORCID, DataCite,CrossRef work
» Not just a UK solution

2016 update
30
» Recommended ISNI+ as a solution only if the following concerns are addressed:
› Sustainability
› Efficiency
› Support
› Governance
› Openness
» The world has moved on and it seems possible that another solution will emerge and
we are keeping a watching brief
» The issues are important for any new proposed service so they can be presented as
universally, generically applicable
» A solution will only be adopted when key stakeholders have been persuaded to adopt
it and integrate it with their existing systems
» Establishing the benefits are key to selling any solution, but to achieve a consensus
requires community engagement

Find out more…
31
Christopher Brown
Senior Co-design Manager,
Jisc
christopher.brown@jisc.ac.uk
@chriscb
Except where otherwise noted, this
work is licensed under CC-BY-NC-ND

Pidapalooza - OrgIDs for UK Research

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Pidapalooza - OrgIDs for UK Research

More from Christopher Brown

Recently uploaded

Pidapalooza - OrgIDs for UK Research

Editor's Notes