Rebecca Bryant https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2753-3881
Jan Fransen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0302-2761
Pablo de Castro https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6300-1033
Brenna Helmstutler https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5549-9935
David Scherer https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6244-4331
Date of this Version
Dublin, Ohio, United States: OCLC Research, November 2021
OCLC Research Report
OCLC Control Number: 1281710894
Research information management (RIM) is a rapidly growing area of investment in US research universities. RIM systems that support the collection and use of research outputs metadata have been in place for many years. Globally, the RIM ecosystem is quite mature in locales where national research assessment exercises like the United Kingdom’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) and the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) require institutions to collect and report on the outputs of institutional research. A pan-European community of practice is led by euroCRIS.
This report describes six discrete RIM use cases detailed in the companion report:
• Faculty Activity Reporting (FAR)
• Public Portal
• Strategic Reporting and Decision Support
• Metadata Reuse
• Open Access Workflow
• Compliance Monitoring
This report summarizes the findings and recommendations synthesized from the examination of RIM practices at five US institutions. It introduces the RIM System Framework to facilitate the conceptualization and comparison of RIM system components, documenting the flow of data from external sources into the RIM data store and out again to support numerous uses. This report also describes six discrete RIM use cases identified in the course of the project. It offers a unified definition of research information management that embraces the diverse and siloed practices within US institutions and provides concise recommendations for institutional leaders who are seeking improved workflows, decision support tools, and clear return on investment.
The second component of this report series, Research Information Management in the United States: Part 2—Case Studies provides the evidence that supports the findings in this report through in-depth narratives about the RIM practices at five US research institutions. We encourage readers to also review Part 2 as it documents the history, use cases, and RIM system components used at each institution, as well as the roles of different stakeholders. Examination of these detailed narratives can help readers deepen their understanding of the challenges of RIM in the United States.