SPEC Kit 334: Research Data Management Services · 83
Staff Roles 8 17%
Institutional commitment 7 15%
Faculty Education 5 10%
Evaluating demand 4 8%
Policy 3 6%
Scaling services 3 6%
Agency ambiguity 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Collaboration Campus-wide
Buy-in from various constituencies (i.e., research administration workflows, researchers, graduate students). Measures:
lots of information sessions, one-on-one meetings to make pitches of value, training workshops, boot camps.
Collaborating with the office of research. Successfully worked with OR on joint web pages on DMPs and on presenting a
panel at a Research Development network meeting
Collaboration with campus units.
Communicating with non-science researchers about how their work is a part of RDM.
Decentralized campus IT and data-related services. Science Data Services Librarian has made many connections
between various players, initiating coordinated activities, attending meetings, and bringing various units together to
work on solutions. New CIO with a renewed focus on research IT support is also bringing about positive changes.
Decentralized nature of the university. Thinking strategically and cultivating relationships with stakeholders across
campus to make mindful recommendations about services to develop or improve.
Interest and support from potential collaborators. We’ve received some assistance from the Center for Computational
Science but haven’t been able to develop anything sustainable.
Potential collaborators (e.g., division of research) have not yet recognized the value of RDM. (also Institutional
commitment)
Some issues related to primary responsibility/leadership for certain RDM service roles and responsibilities between
library and other units (campus IT, technology transfer). New CIO and reorganized campus IT has addressed most of the
IT-related issues, but there is a need for ongoing coordination at administrative and operational levels to keep everyone
on the same page.
The largest challenge we have has been silos within the institution. The office of research, campus IT, and high
performance computing have all had stakes in this and were for a while working in a vacuum from one another. We
have now established some cross-divisional working groups to help alleviate the problems. It is not totally fixed, but is
better.
Trying to partner with campus IT department (some meetings have taken place).
We have moved too slowly and the rest of campus is launching disjointed services.
Funding
Addressing costs of research data management: value of services, costs for preservation, incentive structure for
researchers. Measures: carrot (make services available and easy) and stick (information sharing about requirements and
Staff Roles 8 17%
Institutional commitment 7 15%
Faculty Education 5 10%
Evaluating demand 4 8%
Policy 3 6%
Scaling services 3 6%
Agency ambiguity 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Collaboration Campus-wide
Buy-in from various constituencies (i.e., research administration workflows, researchers, graduate students). Measures:
lots of information sessions, one-on-one meetings to make pitches of value, training workshops, boot camps.
Collaborating with the office of research. Successfully worked with OR on joint web pages on DMPs and on presenting a
panel at a Research Development network meeting
Collaboration with campus units.
Communicating with non-science researchers about how their work is a part of RDM.
Decentralized campus IT and data-related services. Science Data Services Librarian has made many connections
between various players, initiating coordinated activities, attending meetings, and bringing various units together to
work on solutions. New CIO with a renewed focus on research IT support is also bringing about positive changes.
Decentralized nature of the university. Thinking strategically and cultivating relationships with stakeholders across
campus to make mindful recommendations about services to develop or improve.
Interest and support from potential collaborators. We’ve received some assistance from the Center for Computational
Science but haven’t been able to develop anything sustainable.
Potential collaborators (e.g., division of research) have not yet recognized the value of RDM. (also Institutional
commitment)
Some issues related to primary responsibility/leadership for certain RDM service roles and responsibilities between
library and other units (campus IT, technology transfer). New CIO and reorganized campus IT has addressed most of the
IT-related issues, but there is a need for ongoing coordination at administrative and operational levels to keep everyone
on the same page.
The largest challenge we have has been silos within the institution. The office of research, campus IT, and high
performance computing have all had stakes in this and were for a while working in a vacuum from one another. We
have now established some cross-divisional working groups to help alleviate the problems. It is not totally fixed, but is
better.
Trying to partner with campus IT department (some meetings have taken place).
We have moved too slowly and the rest of campus is launching disjointed services.
Funding
Addressing costs of research data management: value of services, costs for preservation, incentive structure for
researchers. Measures: carrot (make services available and easy) and stick (information sharing about requirements and
