Researchers repeatedly cite career advancement as a key incentive for their practices and behaviours. This is critical to understanding the pace of change in scholarly communications, as those researchers inclined to innovate or experiment with new forms of research outputs, methodologies, or communication styles risk being penalised by the evaluation system used by many research institutions that are slow to […]
Incentivising open practices
While some studies have shown that researchers share data because it’s the right thing to do , direct benefits clearly have a tangible impact too. Several research papers have demonstrated a boost in citation rates across a range of disciplines when underlying data are shared . There have also been repeated calls over the years for good practice to be recognised as part of tenure or promotion criteria, though few concrete examples of doing so have arisen to date.
In his keynote at the Repository Fringe conference earlier this month, Dr Paul Ayris, Pro-Vice-Provost, reported that UCL have done exactly that – there is now explicit recognition of open practices in the Academic Careers Framework.
“All research outputs are available through Open Access wherever possible”
This means that academics will be rewarded for open practices, whether that be making their published works available open access, sharing research data, or undertaking work in an open way. The addition is intentionally broad to recognise any contributions towards open scholarship. The provision is a threshold criterion, which is expected of all academic colleagues embracing the new Framework. Academic colleagues are free to submit examples of their Open approach to sharing their research outputs and the impact that this sharing has.
What was particularly encouraging to hear was that the University didn’t receive any resistance to this change. Typically the difficulties in updating policy and mandating openness are put forward as a barrier, but in their year-long consultation with Faculty, this provision was accepted.
Mirroring policy structures on a European level, the University has also established its own Open Science Policy Platform to coordinate work across all areas of open scholarship and ensure the institution leads developments in this field.
Another impressive development at UCL is the introduction of the first fully Open Access University Press. Paul noted how this has transformed monograph publishing and distribution, citing examples of textbooks with over 100,000 accesses, whereas 400 copies is considered a good level of sales for the traditional publication route. Authors also explained their choice in opting for the Press over other routes, considering openness to colleagues in developing countries a key factor.
The progress made at UCL to recognise and support open practices will undoubtedly help speed forward the culture change. It should also inspire other institutions to follow suit. If you have policies requiring the management and sharing of research outputs, recognising and rewarding those who act on these should also follow.
For the full presentation Paul gave with Tiberius Ignat of Scientific Knowledge Services in Switzerland, see the University of Edinburgh ERA repository.
 The 2016 Jisc DAF study of 1,185 UK researchers found that the highest reason cited as a motivation for sharing data was that “Research is a public good and should be open to all”. See slide 20 at: https://www.slideshare.net/JiscRDM/daf-survey-results-research-data-network The e-Infrastructures Austria study of 3026 Austrian researchers found that 54% of respondents considered research data to be a relevant scientific output, noting this as the fourth highest incentive to share. See question 16 in the full report at: https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/detail_object/o:409318?SID=10009269
 For example see the references in the SPARC Europe briefing paper on “The Open Data Citation Advantage” at: http://sparceurope.org/open-data-citation-advantage
The digital scholar and the academic job market: Including hyperlinks in your CV can make a big difference.
How can academics ensure their job application stands out from the rest? Patrick Dunleavy advocates going fully digital , where clearly clickable and open-access hyperlinks are provided for all your publications, writings and alternative outputs. Alongside the ease this provides the selection committee, adding digital links to all your recent top research articles will reassure UK selectors that your research falls under the HEFCE […]
Sharing is caring, but should it count?
The following is a guest post by Shea Swauger, Data Management Librarian at Colorado State University. Shea and I both participated in a meeting for the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries on 11 July 2014, where he presented survey results described below. It shouldn’t be a surprise that many of the people who collect and generate research data […]
The lack of reward mechanisms for public scholarship severely limits the future of public engagement in the academy.
Scholars are increasingly expected to consider the wider public in their teaching and research activities, but with little to negative promotion incentive. In fact, finds Christopher Meyers, much of what academics do does not fit into the standard boxes of teaching, scholarship and service. Perhaps it’s time to replace these categories with a single holistic and qualitative standard: High quality teacher-scholars, wherein all of one’s professional activities are […]