New from JISC: “Institutional ORCID Implementation and Cost-Benefit Analysis Report”

The following report was shared on the JISC repository today.
Title
Institutional ORCID Implementation and Cost-Benefit Analysis Report
Authors
Helen Henderson, Rob Johnson, Hazel Woodward
From the Findings

Eight pilot institutions participated in the JISC-ARMA ORCID Project: Aston University; Imperial College London; Northumbria University; University of Southampton; Swansea University; University of Kent; University of Oxford; and University of York. The majority of institutions had project teams comprising representatives from the Library, the Research Office, IT Services and academic departments and project management was kept ‘light touch’.
Key to the success of the projects was early engagement with senior management, involvement and engagement with key stakeholders across the institution and early consultation with Legal Services and Human Resources. The HEIs found it helpful to secure advice from their legal services departments at the outset of their projects in order to ensure that any personal data processing was lawful. Perhaps surprisingly, technical issues were not the major issue for most pilot institutions.
A range of technical solutions to the storage of researchers’ ORCID iDs were utilised during the pilots. Four institutions used their institutional research information system (CRIS): two used Pure; one Symplectic; and one Converis. Two other institutions developed in-house systems, one used Agresso Business World and one the student portal of SITS e:Vision. Of the eight pilot institutions, only one chose to bulk create ORCID iDs for their researchers, the others opted for the ‘facilitate’ approach to ORCID registration.
Most pilot institutions found it relatively easy to persuade senior management about the institutional benefits of ORCID but many found it difficult to articulate the benefits to individual researchers. Several commented that staff saw it as ‘another level of bureaucracy’ and it was also noted that concurrent Open Access (OA), REF and ORCID activities can make the message confused, as they overlap.

Direct to Full Text Report (Incl. Executive Summary)
48 pages; PDF.
Also Released Today (as a Separate Document)
Institutional ORCID Implementation and Cost-Benefit Analysis Report: Appendix C: ORCID checklist for Higher Education Institutions
11 pages; PDF.

Filed under: Academic Libraries, Data Files, Libraries, Management and Leadership, Open Access, Resources