SPEC Kit 334: Research Data Management Services · 87
services to message that sent out by Sponsored Projects when researchers receive grant award (going forward in 2013).
Directly contact researchers with new grant awards (received in 2012). Work with librarians who interact regularly with
faculty to let them know about our services.
Marketing value of our service to researchers. Because proposals with poor data management plans are funded and
data sharing via a publicly accessible repository is not mandated, selling the value of our service has been a challenge.
We try to find ways to personalize how our service impacts them. For example, we discuss how good data management
will allow them to find and understand their own data in five years time. Also, we discuss the how deposited data in the
data archive receives DOIs with their data for citation by others and as a research product to list on future NSF grants.
(also Faculty Engagement)
Promoting awareness of services to faculty and university administration, particularly getting faculty to embed the
services into their research workflow. (also Faculty engagement)
Providing consistent and effective outreach to inform the research community about the library’s RDM services.
Measures to overcome this challenge: provide a monthly standing research-data working group that includes academic
department IT and research liaisons to use as referral mechanisms for researchers.
Research awareness/receptivity. Measures tried: A variety of outreach/promotional efforts, including websites,
presentations, print materials, emails, news announcements, etc. Also, providing internal training to subject librarians to
increase outreach skills around RDM. (also Faculty engagement)
Staff Training
Infrastructure: capacity building can be expensive toolkit development and/or adoption of existing tools (growing but
still relatively few).
Lack of domain knowledge of librarians (i.e., STEM)
Lack of experience /knowledge in IT areas also lack of experience working with research data. Measures include
partnering with campus IT and OSP, and doing pilot projects to learn about research data, just about to embark on
pilots. But this effort is a first in collaboration of this kind with OSP and central IT so we are learning as we go. (also
Collaboration campus-wide)
Interest and expertise among already existing staff. Some have agreed to take it on but have many other responsibilities
that limit their ability to focus on RDM services.
Educating librarians on research methods.
Ensure staff who support RDM services have appropriate knowledge and skills. We have begun to support staff to
attend RDM workshops organized by professional associations. Staff who have attended these workshops have begun
to share their knowledge with colleagues upon their return.
Education and training of liaison librarians.
Lack of specialized training in data management issues—specifically the use and sharing of data as it relates to
individual subject areas. Those involved in RDM services have tried to attend training sessions to increase their
knowledge in this area.
Lack of awareness around actual research processes (i.e., subject liaisons uncomfortable, RDM staff need to gain deeper
knowledge of processes, etc.) Measures: data interviews, embedding ourselves in research processes when possible,
exposure to as much research practice as possible, workshops with Q&A as new data points.
services to message that sent out by Sponsored Projects when researchers receive grant award (going forward in 2013).
Directly contact researchers with new grant awards (received in 2012). Work with librarians who interact regularly with
faculty to let them know about our services.
Marketing value of our service to researchers. Because proposals with poor data management plans are funded and
data sharing via a publicly accessible repository is not mandated, selling the value of our service has been a challenge.
We try to find ways to personalize how our service impacts them. For example, we discuss how good data management
will allow them to find and understand their own data in five years time. Also, we discuss the how deposited data in the
data archive receives DOIs with their data for citation by others and as a research product to list on future NSF grants.
(also Faculty Engagement)
Promoting awareness of services to faculty and university administration, particularly getting faculty to embed the
services into their research workflow. (also Faculty engagement)
Providing consistent and effective outreach to inform the research community about the library’s RDM services.
Measures to overcome this challenge: provide a monthly standing research-data working group that includes academic
department IT and research liaisons to use as referral mechanisms for researchers.
Research awareness/receptivity. Measures tried: A variety of outreach/promotional efforts, including websites,
presentations, print materials, emails, news announcements, etc. Also, providing internal training to subject librarians to
increase outreach skills around RDM. (also Faculty engagement)
Staff Training
Infrastructure: capacity building can be expensive toolkit development and/or adoption of existing tools (growing but
still relatively few).
Lack of domain knowledge of librarians (i.e., STEM)
Lack of experience /knowledge in IT areas also lack of experience working with research data. Measures include
partnering with campus IT and OSP, and doing pilot projects to learn about research data, just about to embark on
pilots. But this effort is a first in collaboration of this kind with OSP and central IT so we are learning as we go. (also
Collaboration campus-wide)
Interest and expertise among already existing staff. Some have agreed to take it on but have many other responsibilities
that limit their ability to focus on RDM services.
Educating librarians on research methods.
Ensure staff who support RDM services have appropriate knowledge and skills. We have begun to support staff to
attend RDM workshops organized by professional associations. Staff who have attended these workshops have begun
to share their knowledge with colleagues upon their return.
Education and training of liaison librarians.
Lack of specialized training in data management issues—specifically the use and sharing of data as it relates to
individual subject areas. Those involved in RDM services have tried to attend training sessions to increase their
knowledge in this area.
Lack of awareness around actual research processes (i.e., subject liaisons uncomfortable, RDM staff need to gain deeper
knowledge of processes, etc.) Measures: data interviews, embedding ourselves in research processes when possible,
exposure to as much research practice as possible, workshops with Q&A as new data points.
