Cadmore media player playing video National PID Strategies
Video Player
Accessibility
Using forms mode, you can utilize keyboard shortcuts to make usability more efficient.
Space bar will play and pause the video. Pressing escape will close all displays and pressing it again will jump to the end of the player.
You can press A to open the Keyboard Shortcut Dialog which also provides an audio description of the player and all of its features.
Language
1x
Play Speed
Adjust Volume
Transcript
Search
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Re-center
Segments
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Name:
National PID Strategies
Description:
National PID Strategies
Thumbnail URL:
https://cadmoremediastorage.blob.core.windows.net/db7ba824-0eb7-402b-b095-174b0d0d3186/videoscrubberimages/Scrubber_1.jpg
Duration:
T00H26M06S
Embed URL:
https://stream.cadmore.media/player/db7ba824-0eb7-402b-b095-174b0d0d3186
Content URL:
https://cadmoreoriginalmedia.blob.core.windows.net/db7ba824-0eb7-402b-b095-174b0d0d3186/National PID Strategies.mp4?sv=2019-02-02&sr=c&sig=CsF4UMXpWDqJbKKbGovNQRzdiRq%2BsG%2B7ZgpETWwYgeE%3D&st=2025-01-15T09%3A43%3A08Z&se=2025-01-15T11%3A48%3A08Z&sp=r
Upload Date:
2024-03-06T00:00:00.0000000
Transcript:
Language: EN.
Segment:0 .
Well, welcome, everyone. We may have a few, few stragglers arriving as we go along, but I'll get going because I know our sort of presentation. It was a little longer than it was meant to be. Apologies for that, but it was such a great discussion. I couldn't bear to stop people. So I hopefully you on.
I realize I forgot to formally introduce myself in the session. So I think you're and I'm Alice Meadows I until early January was the Director of Community Engagement at nice so I'm now on a little nice 3 month sabbatical. So I'm dialing in from Brisbane, Australia and when I returned to work, I'll be working for the more brains co-operative, which we got some very nice shoutouts during those presentations.
Thank you to everybody for that. Just quickly, so this is going to be a pretty hopefully a pretty informal part of the discussion. We would really love for you to get involved in the discussion. John Asper, who was one of the speakers, is going to be with us for the whole part of this discussion. Linda, unfortunately, is going to have to she's about to get on a plane.
So kindly joined us from the airport, but is going to have to rush off at some point. Washington, unfortunately. Let me know, earlier today that he has a family emergency and is unable to join after all. And Christopher brown was never going to be able to join because it's the middle of the for him because he's based in the UK. So it's going to be a little we're going to be relying on you all basically to help keep the discussion going, I'm sure.
I hope you have questions for the speakers and all ideas to share. But since Linda, you have to leave in a few minutes time I'm going to suggest that we start by seeing whether there are any immediate questions for you from anybody here. And if not, Linda and I spent the afternoon together yesterday, so I'd quite like her to give you a little update as well on something that on the work that she's been doing.
But first of all, does anybody have a questions for Linda that we can answer while she's here? Actually, I did go for it. I really liked the last point you made at the end of the recording about the difficulties and the kind of tension, boundary tension, if you will, when you're talking about some of these issues, as they tread into policy questions and Government Relations issues.
And I think this is also true of kreskin. So I see Jason as well. Maybe you could jump in here as well, kind of thinking about these national policies. At what level or how do you engage the government? As a non-profit organization, how do you engaging the government at various levels in these development and the development of these policies?
And is there a way to leverage your relationships with those government agencies to. Have it and have the National policy, which is developed by non-profit organizations, be adopted by the federal agencies. It's a good question. Can you hear me? OK and apologies of this background.
Yeah so Australia is, whilst being very large, is small in terms of the number of people that are active in these spaces. So you often find that you have a network that you can leverage. So when I looked at who was on the working group to redesign our research evaluation exercise to be data driven, there was a colleague of mine that I'd worked with in the past.
So I could give them a call and tell them about what we were doing and how it related to the work of that committee. And so using all those networks to best advantage, to both inform but be informed by what they're doing. And we're kind of fortunate because we've got the all good governance already in place on the orca consortia committee is the chair of the Australian vice-chancellor's research group.
So again, I can talk to Susan and say, Susan, this is what we're doing, how does that fit with? And she'll say, well, I'm actually on the review of the Australian Research Council as well, so you can try and leverage your networks to really get it a shared view. I mean, it's not straightforward, it's not simple, it's complex, but for me it's a lot of relationship building and conversation and hearing what their burning platforms are and then trying to articulate how this adds value.
I mean, I talk to the CEO of one of our major collaborative research centers and digital health, and her initial response was, I can't see how this has got anything to do with what I do. And by the end of the conversation we're saying, wow, this could be really helpful. So it's really just listening and actively listening and engaging and using your networks. And through that, I people have connected me to other people and I've met people I've never met before that turn out to be really valuable and influential in terms of getting the government on board.
So it's really just building out that network. It's just a whole lot of legwork. And I mean, said this to us yesterday, I think one of the things that helped with the awkward consortia in Australia was we put a lot of effort into that first before we actually got to make it happen. So it's kind of like the foundations for your house. It's doing all that work as a foundational piece to build on and then you get the buy in more readily.
Yeah, I think Canada's taking a similar approach and is sort of a similar situation, very big country. But in terms of the number of institutions, not small but kind of manageable, right, John and jason? I think so. I think the UK is a small country with a relatively large number of institutions. I think the situation is quite different in the us, for example, where it's a large country with a huge number of institutions, which makes any kind of collective efforts a bit more challenging, doesn't it?
Did that answer your question? Oh, sorry, please. Oh, no. I mean, if we want to ask questions. Well, Linda's here. That's totally fine. I can jump back to this after. Did that answer your question from Linda's perspective? Todd and.
Yeah, that was a great answer. I think you also summarized the challenge that the US is in. Yeah, if I can just. Well, Linda's here very briefly. Not a question, but a big thank you, because when we were getting our ORCID consortium started, it was the hard work of the Australians and Linda's team and all of them that kind of inspired us and, and provided a lot of that foundational work.
So I just wanted to get in that, that thank you for the hard work she described before she left. Oh, thank you. And I'm going to be thanking you guys because the work that John and others are doing over there is going to be really helpful for me as well, because we're on a pretty tight time iframe here and talking, having the opportunity to talk to John about some of what you've got and try and really help me think through what I need to make sure I'm delving into my conversations at this point in time.
So thank you. But this is where I think the national, international thing comes in really nicely, doesn't it, that, you know, yes, there's these national approach is happening, but they are also you're all also either formally or informally joining things up the more globally, which which is fantastic if there aren't any other specific questions for Linda. Linda, I was just if you've got time, I was going to say it would be great if you could, because one of the things that I think is maybe also an answer to your question a bit, Todd, that's a little unique about what you're doing in Australia.
Is this sort of focus on innovation? And as part of that you've set up some working groups and things and I thought it might be interesting for people. Just have a quick update on that because I know you were you were in this meeting yesterday and it was quite I was anyway quite interested in what you were saying about some sort of the updates from last and again might be a good sort of learning thing for others or something for us to discuss as part of the board saying go to gate, but they haven't called the flight yet.
So we'll see how we go. It's a very short walk the Yeah. So I guess a couple of things have happened. We've now got it's now a task force that's assisting with advising on the strategy and the road map. And we've got some really senior stakeholder buy in, like the CEO of the Australian Research Council and the task force, which is a great first sign of how this might develop.
But through the connections I ended up talking to the biodiversity community. So it's, it's state and federal government research sector and some of the private providers and they, they got really excited about pids for particular things they care about which aren't in the five. And so, you know, on the fly I was able to say, well, do we want to set up a working group? Let's have a look at that, see if it's something that's got legs, if it makes sense to have a persistent identifier, is there one internationally that we can draw upon?
How do we develop this further? So I think the intention is to have a number of working groups around either business process that we want to re-engineer, like collecting data from universities around the grants or whether it's around a particular identifier like equipment because that's looming is an issue here and get them to look at what's happening globally, what's happening locally, what's the use case to articulate that.
And then that will probably be an the taskforce on the road map over the five years. But that ability I said to this community yesterday, if you've got at least two people that want to stand up and be part of such a working party, we'll find a way to make that work. So if the client community sees the value. So it's well done.
Thank you so much, Linda. And safe journeys. Yeah please get in touch if you want to know more. Yeah yes. If anybody does have other questions or wants to know how to get in touch with Linda, please pop it in the chat and we'll make sure that we follow up after this. But now we have about 10 to 15 minutes left, and I'd like to open this up a bit wider.
John, I don't know whether you wanted to add anything to the question that Todd asked, or we can just sort of open it up and see whether anybody has any questions for you or more generally, we do want to try and come out of this with or at least consider whether we want to come out with any kind of recommendation that miso might take forward in terms of helping support, you know, national strategies and approaches. And the speakers, when we had our planning recording session, did have one idea that we'd like to kind of sound you all out about.
But yeah, Pablo. Yep thank you. Yeah, we had a question at another nice Plus 2023 session yesterday from Nigeria. The speaker was not identified, so he didn't say what kind of stakeholder he was talking from, but he was asking, where do we start putting together our national strategy in Nigeria, where we are not really aware.
We see so much work going on in the advanced countries, but when you're only just starting, how do you start with? And the other session we were in was presenting a notice exchange report on paddy or the paddy landscape so that it was perhaps not the ideal discussion for this to be addressed. But I was wondering if Chris asylum is on the call now, whether perhaps the very recent funding calls that ORCID has put out in developing countries might perhaps offer a starting point for putting together some collaborative networks.
I wonder. And I'm burnt. It's a pity Chris Brown is not in the discussion now. I'm also calling from the UK, by the way. But yeah, not everyone can, can stay up that late. So, so Thanks for any, any input from other attendees to the call. Thanks Chris. I'll let you answer that part, the ORCID part, if I may.
Sure hi, everybody. Pablo, I think I missed your question. And just to give everybody else context. We launched what we call a global participation fund last year, which is a grantmaking program with two goals. One is to provide grants for capacity building around the use of ORCID in countries that are currently kind of underrepresented in the community.
And the other program is around improving technical integration for open source systems that make use of ORCID. So we just completed our first cycle of awards, so we would have five grants at the very end of last year, four on the capacity building and one on the technical integration side. And all four of those capacity building grants have gone to organizations in Africa.
And in fact, last week we had our kind of kick off among the awardees because, you know, part of our goal of the program is not just to provide some resourcing, but to help people who are interested in developing their use of ORCID and other pids make connections, make contacts, build a network. And, you know, a, we're facilitating that through the grant program. But b, it was immediately obvious that many of the aims of our four days from this cycle were similar.
And definitely there's, I think, potential for collaboration and, and maybe taking some common approaches. So it's early days. Like I said, we just had our first kind of kick off meeting with our first cycle of awardees last week. But we certainly already see the potential. And, you know, I think that facilitating discussions with, for example, again, in the ORCID context, our existing social leads and, you know, helping them convey some of their experience to the countries that are starting out is something that we can do as well.
And I should say, we scope this originally as orchid, but I've always said, you know, we're open to the idea of pursuing additional sources of funding and broadening the program out to other bids, and not just ORCID as well. But in fact, data site is about to roll out a sort of somewhat similar program, I think, aren't they? Not quite the same, but they're trying to, in the same way, support pet adoption and implementation in countries that are less well resourced.
And I would also suggest, Pablo, that, you know, if people are interested in, you know, talking about discussing, thinking about developing a national approach or strategy, that RDA group would be a great place to start. I think even if you're they're not actively doing anything at the moment, that would be a great resource and I'm sure they would be welcome to participate in the discussions and learn from what's already happening in other countries.
So that would be another option I think. Yeah maybe just to jump in there on this specific question, because I think part of it is, is ORCID has this program that's particularly helpful and I think it's a great place to start. But the general question about sort of where do we start with kids at the National level? I think it's the community of practice and ORCID in particular enables that, especially with this new global participation fund.
And it seems like it's going to do something like that. But having a community to coalesce around something is the point that will kick start it. And it doesn't really matter if it's top down or bottom up. I know my understanding of the ORCID consortium in France is that one of their ministries required decided that this was what they were going to do. They required it, and then it sort of grew the community from the top.
And there are other places where the community has evolved from the University level, from the or from scholars, so, so from the bottom up. So it doesn't really matter which direction it comes from. As long as there is a community of practice in one area of pids, you can start to build out into other areas. I mean, the way that we did it was we had ORCID as a community.
That's something we'd supported for five or six years, as Jason mentioned, built on top of the work done by Australia. And then we took over a data site consortium that already existed in Canada but was separate from us, and this started to build up our sense towards a national strategy. I think if you're going to start somewhere, it's got to be somewhere that you can build.
A community of practice and ORCID and data site are ripe for that because of their membership models. But there are, I'm sure, other ways to do it too. That's just, I think, a helpful place to start. Chris Yeah. Just to build on what John said. You know, I think one of the things that people tend to underestimate is how important community building is to achieve adoption and critical mass around pets.
And people can tend to think, well, it's just about technology, build, build a system and they will come. But I think the experience of ORCID and data side and crossref as has told us otherwise. Right and without that kind of focused and dedicated resourcing and people to help build community know you won't get traction and you won't get adoption. And I think one of the great things about ORCID in the earlier years is the realization that a central organization couldn't do that on its own, and building this kind of Federated model through our consortia, lead partners and jyske, aif, etc., three of whom you've heard from this evening, really enables us to kind of get a multiplier in our ability to kind of build and develop those communities.
So I think in terms of looking at approaches to, to, to, to try that idea of Federation is quite important. But also dedicated resources for community building won't come as any surprise to the site. 110% agree on the community building side. I think very definitely if you build it, they won't necessarily come. I think we've not got very long after.
And interestingly, Todd, what you put in the chat about sort of either a framework in place for pillar palooza and/or a sort of Federation. That's a version of the question that we also wanted to put to this group, which was, you know, there is a bit of a void now with Peter palooza having gone. We don't I think we didn't necessarily feel we needed to replicate that. But we did want to sound this group out about whether there's feel there is a need for some kind of place forum for kind of cross-sector international.
Cross stakeholder discussions of metadata and pids overall and that could be a sort of a next stage on from Peter palooza. It could be something completely different. It could be there's such lots of metadata content in my surplus this year is my surplus or the right home for it. But anyway, we really wanted to see whether people felt this, this, this was a void from their perspective as well that we should be looking at plugging in which case, we can hand it over to nice so to, to, to lead the way on thinking about it.
But what do people think? I mean, should we maybe just a very simple show of hands about whether people feel this is having some kind of forum for talking about pids and metadata globally and across would be valuable and is missing at the moment. Can you? I mean, thumbs up or thumbs down maybe, or something like that.
So a few people. I think yes. No no's, but a few yeses. OK well, thank you. Well, at least there's some level of enthusiasm there. I mean, I would say it looks like about a third of the people on this call think this is something that's needed, which is perhaps enough to at least take the conversation forward for a bit more for a bit more consideration.
But Todd and Mary Beth and Jason, I'll leave that leave that with you. Is there anything else that people would like to talk about before we. I'm sorry, Amanda, I just seen your point. Yes oj's is a massively important in terms of sort of making a level playing field in which, you know, journals and organizations of all shapes and sizes can, can, can, can use have access to that.
They're great systems. Is there anything else that anybody would like to ask, comment on? Say before we end. If nobody else wants to say anything. I guess the only other thing I'd suggest is of sequencing is really important in building the case for peds.
And I think one of the really great things that happened in Australia was the integration of ORCID into the LC grant submission process, because that's something everybody has to do, whether they like it or not, if they want funding and is a pain, right. So reducing the kind of burden the admin overhead at that pain point really then builds the case for, hey, maybe we could do something similar and help people in a further way.
So my other bit of advice to anybody looking at building a national strategy is identify the biggest pain points where peer adoption can help and try and get some implementation there first because then that will just naturally build the case for further adoption and get people saying, hey, you know, this is great because it saved me a bunch of time and effort or improved quality data or whatever. Yeah, and that's interesting though, because of course, at first RC was there was a degree of resistance within AOC to implementing all kids in its grant system.
So I think that really speaks to what both Linda and John have said about relationship building and really not persisting, persisting with persistent identifiers to really try to make some of those key integrations happen that really will then have an impact. And then, yes, how it is then then that's a success story that can be shared. And I agree course is also doing great work in this area and thank you for the reminder and offer about the course forums as well, because that's another great place for these conversations to be happening.
Yeah, I think building on what Chris said. Something that Tom dumervil said yesterday, I believe at some point was. Changing building systems that make it easy. Like we are all focused in on interoperability and we are all focused on persistent identifiers. Most researchers aren't going to care. They're not going to remember their six digit number.
They are not going to remember they're raw. But if we can make the systems interoperable based on APIs and. Focus on the user interface for those systems that these things exist in the background and they make the systems work better and save them time. That's the goal. It isn't that people are going to remember their six digit ORCIDs.
It is that these identifiers make functionality work that saves them time and they shouldn't care. The raw should facilitate a dropdown list that people can go in and say, oh, OK, well, this is my institution. And then in the background that becomes a that is modeled to an.
A persistent identifier. I'm going to let you have one quick thing. And then we do need to wrap up because we're a little over time. But please do. Please I just I just wanted to agree with what I was just saying. However, it is really important that the pipes all fit together.
I mean, it's true. The researcher just wants to use the pipes. They just want to turn on the spigot and let the water come out and make it work for them. Right but it is really key. And this is why we're all here, to make sure the pipes can talk to each other and everything just works seamlessly as possible. But you're right, the researcher doesn't really need to understand pids.
They just need to make sure that when they do their research and when they use the tools that they do, that they are actually fueling other things to happen. Great thank you. Well, that sounds like a very good note to end on since yes, I think we were all in our various different ways, plumbers and keepers of the pipes or helping to keep the pipes flowing.
Thank you for a really good discussion. I've really enjoyed it. And thank you again to the speakers. John, you're the only one left. Thank you to you. But big Thanks also to Linda and Christopher and Washington. I have really enjoyed and learned a lot from the presentations and the discussion. So thank you, everyone.
Thank you, Alice. Thank you. We'll see you all in about 15 minutes.
Segment:0 .
Well, welcome, everyone. We may have a few, few stragglers arriving as we go along, but I'll get going because I know our sort of presentation. It was a little longer than it was meant to be. Apologies for that, but it was such a great discussion. I couldn't bear to stop people. So I hopefully you on.
I realize I forgot to formally introduce myself in the session. So I think you're and I'm Alice Meadows I until early January was the Director of Community Engagement at nice so I'm now on a little nice 3 month sabbatical. So I'm dialing in from Brisbane, Australia and when I returned to work, I'll be working for the more brains co-operative, which we got some very nice shoutouts during those presentations.
Thank you to everybody for that. Just quickly, so this is going to be a pretty hopefully a pretty informal part of the discussion. We would really love for you to get involved in the discussion. John Asper, who was one of the speakers, is going to be with us for the whole part of this discussion. Linda, unfortunately, is going to have to she's about to get on a plane.
So kindly joined us from the airport, but is going to have to rush off at some point. Washington, unfortunately. Let me know, earlier today that he has a family emergency and is unable to join after all. And Christopher brown was never going to be able to join because it's the middle of the for him because he's based in the UK. So it's going to be a little we're going to be relying on you all basically to help keep the discussion going, I'm sure.
I hope you have questions for the speakers and all ideas to share. But since Linda, you have to leave in a few minutes time I'm going to suggest that we start by seeing whether there are any immediate questions for you from anybody here. And if not, Linda and I spent the afternoon together yesterday, so I'd quite like her to give you a little update as well on something that on the work that she's been doing.
But first of all, does anybody have a questions for Linda that we can answer while she's here? Actually, I did go for it. I really liked the last point you made at the end of the recording about the difficulties and the kind of tension, boundary tension, if you will, when you're talking about some of these issues, as they tread into policy questions and Government Relations issues.
And I think this is also true of kreskin. So I see Jason as well. Maybe you could jump in here as well, kind of thinking about these national policies. At what level or how do you engage the government? As a non-profit organization, how do you engaging the government at various levels in these development and the development of these policies?
And is there a way to leverage your relationships with those government agencies to. Have it and have the National policy, which is developed by non-profit organizations, be adopted by the federal agencies. It's a good question. Can you hear me? OK and apologies of this background.
Yeah so Australia is, whilst being very large, is small in terms of the number of people that are active in these spaces. So you often find that you have a network that you can leverage. So when I looked at who was on the working group to redesign our research evaluation exercise to be data driven, there was a colleague of mine that I'd worked with in the past.
So I could give them a call and tell them about what we were doing and how it related to the work of that committee. And so using all those networks to best advantage, to both inform but be informed by what they're doing. And we're kind of fortunate because we've got the all good governance already in place on the orca consortia committee is the chair of the Australian vice-chancellor's research group.
So again, I can talk to Susan and say, Susan, this is what we're doing, how does that fit with? And she'll say, well, I'm actually on the review of the Australian Research Council as well, so you can try and leverage your networks to really get it a shared view. I mean, it's not straightforward, it's not simple, it's complex, but for me it's a lot of relationship building and conversation and hearing what their burning platforms are and then trying to articulate how this adds value.
I mean, I talk to the CEO of one of our major collaborative research centers and digital health, and her initial response was, I can't see how this has got anything to do with what I do. And by the end of the conversation we're saying, wow, this could be really helpful. So it's really just listening and actively listening and engaging and using your networks. And through that, I people have connected me to other people and I've met people I've never met before that turn out to be really valuable and influential in terms of getting the government on board.
So it's really just building out that network. It's just a whole lot of legwork. And I mean, said this to us yesterday, I think one of the things that helped with the awkward consortia in Australia was we put a lot of effort into that first before we actually got to make it happen. So it's kind of like the foundations for your house. It's doing all that work as a foundational piece to build on and then you get the buy in more readily.
Yeah, I think Canada's taking a similar approach and is sort of a similar situation, very big country. But in terms of the number of institutions, not small but kind of manageable, right, John and jason? I think so. I think the UK is a small country with a relatively large number of institutions. I think the situation is quite different in the us, for example, where it's a large country with a huge number of institutions, which makes any kind of collective efforts a bit more challenging, doesn't it?
Did that answer your question? Oh, sorry, please. Oh, no. I mean, if we want to ask questions. Well, Linda's here. That's totally fine. I can jump back to this after. Did that answer your question from Linda's perspective? Todd and.
Yeah, that was a great answer. I think you also summarized the challenge that the US is in. Yeah, if I can just. Well, Linda's here very briefly. Not a question, but a big thank you, because when we were getting our ORCID consortium started, it was the hard work of the Australians and Linda's team and all of them that kind of inspired us and, and provided a lot of that foundational work.
So I just wanted to get in that, that thank you for the hard work she described before she left. Oh, thank you. And I'm going to be thanking you guys because the work that John and others are doing over there is going to be really helpful for me as well, because we're on a pretty tight time iframe here and talking, having the opportunity to talk to John about some of what you've got and try and really help me think through what I need to make sure I'm delving into my conversations at this point in time.
So thank you. But this is where I think the national, international thing comes in really nicely, doesn't it, that, you know, yes, there's these national approach is happening, but they are also you're all also either formally or informally joining things up the more globally, which which is fantastic if there aren't any other specific questions for Linda. Linda, I was just if you've got time, I was going to say it would be great if you could, because one of the things that I think is maybe also an answer to your question a bit, Todd, that's a little unique about what you're doing in Australia.
Is this sort of focus on innovation? And as part of that you've set up some working groups and things and I thought it might be interesting for people. Just have a quick update on that because I know you were you were in this meeting yesterday and it was quite I was anyway quite interested in what you were saying about some sort of the updates from last and again might be a good sort of learning thing for others or something for us to discuss as part of the board saying go to gate, but they haven't called the flight yet.
So we'll see how we go. It's a very short walk the Yeah. So I guess a couple of things have happened. We've now got it's now a task force that's assisting with advising on the strategy and the road map. And we've got some really senior stakeholder buy in, like the CEO of the Australian Research Council and the task force, which is a great first sign of how this might develop.
But through the connections I ended up talking to the biodiversity community. So it's, it's state and federal government research sector and some of the private providers and they, they got really excited about pids for particular things they care about which aren't in the five. And so, you know, on the fly I was able to say, well, do we want to set up a working group? Let's have a look at that, see if it's something that's got legs, if it makes sense to have a persistent identifier, is there one internationally that we can draw upon?
How do we develop this further? So I think the intention is to have a number of working groups around either business process that we want to re-engineer, like collecting data from universities around the grants or whether it's around a particular identifier like equipment because that's looming is an issue here and get them to look at what's happening globally, what's happening locally, what's the use case to articulate that.
And then that will probably be an the taskforce on the road map over the five years. But that ability I said to this community yesterday, if you've got at least two people that want to stand up and be part of such a working party, we'll find a way to make that work. So if the client community sees the value. So it's well done.
Thank you so much, Linda. And safe journeys. Yeah please get in touch if you want to know more. Yeah yes. If anybody does have other questions or wants to know how to get in touch with Linda, please pop it in the chat and we'll make sure that we follow up after this. But now we have about 10 to 15 minutes left, and I'd like to open this up a bit wider.
John, I don't know whether you wanted to add anything to the question that Todd asked, or we can just sort of open it up and see whether anybody has any questions for you or more generally, we do want to try and come out of this with or at least consider whether we want to come out with any kind of recommendation that miso might take forward in terms of helping support, you know, national strategies and approaches. And the speakers, when we had our planning recording session, did have one idea that we'd like to kind of sound you all out about.
But yeah, Pablo. Yep thank you. Yeah, we had a question at another nice Plus 2023 session yesterday from Nigeria. The speaker was not identified, so he didn't say what kind of stakeholder he was talking from, but he was asking, where do we start putting together our national strategy in Nigeria, where we are not really aware.
We see so much work going on in the advanced countries, but when you're only just starting, how do you start with? And the other session we were in was presenting a notice exchange report on paddy or the paddy landscape so that it was perhaps not the ideal discussion for this to be addressed. But I was wondering if Chris asylum is on the call now, whether perhaps the very recent funding calls that ORCID has put out in developing countries might perhaps offer a starting point for putting together some collaborative networks.
I wonder. And I'm burnt. It's a pity Chris Brown is not in the discussion now. I'm also calling from the UK, by the way. But yeah, not everyone can, can stay up that late. So, so Thanks for any, any input from other attendees to the call. Thanks Chris. I'll let you answer that part, the ORCID part, if I may.
Sure hi, everybody. Pablo, I think I missed your question. And just to give everybody else context. We launched what we call a global participation fund last year, which is a grantmaking program with two goals. One is to provide grants for capacity building around the use of ORCID in countries that are currently kind of underrepresented in the community.
And the other program is around improving technical integration for open source systems that make use of ORCID. So we just completed our first cycle of awards, so we would have five grants at the very end of last year, four on the capacity building and one on the technical integration side. And all four of those capacity building grants have gone to organizations in Africa.
And in fact, last week we had our kind of kick off among the awardees because, you know, part of our goal of the program is not just to provide some resourcing, but to help people who are interested in developing their use of ORCID and other pids make connections, make contacts, build a network. And, you know, a, we're facilitating that through the grant program. But b, it was immediately obvious that many of the aims of our four days from this cycle were similar.
And definitely there's, I think, potential for collaboration and, and maybe taking some common approaches. So it's early days. Like I said, we just had our first kind of kick off meeting with our first cycle of awardees last week. But we certainly already see the potential. And, you know, I think that facilitating discussions with, for example, again, in the ORCID context, our existing social leads and, you know, helping them convey some of their experience to the countries that are starting out is something that we can do as well.
And I should say, we scope this originally as orchid, but I've always said, you know, we're open to the idea of pursuing additional sources of funding and broadening the program out to other bids, and not just ORCID as well. But in fact, data site is about to roll out a sort of somewhat similar program, I think, aren't they? Not quite the same, but they're trying to, in the same way, support pet adoption and implementation in countries that are less well resourced.
And I would also suggest, Pablo, that, you know, if people are interested in, you know, talking about discussing, thinking about developing a national approach or strategy, that RDA group would be a great place to start. I think even if you're they're not actively doing anything at the moment, that would be a great resource and I'm sure they would be welcome to participate in the discussions and learn from what's already happening in other countries.
So that would be another option I think. Yeah maybe just to jump in there on this specific question, because I think part of it is, is ORCID has this program that's particularly helpful and I think it's a great place to start. But the general question about sort of where do we start with kids at the National level? I think it's the community of practice and ORCID in particular enables that, especially with this new global participation fund.
And it seems like it's going to do something like that. But having a community to coalesce around something is the point that will kick start it. And it doesn't really matter if it's top down or bottom up. I know my understanding of the ORCID consortium in France is that one of their ministries required decided that this was what they were going to do. They required it, and then it sort of grew the community from the top.
And there are other places where the community has evolved from the University level, from the or from scholars, so, so from the bottom up. So it doesn't really matter which direction it comes from. As long as there is a community of practice in one area of pids, you can start to build out into other areas. I mean, the way that we did it was we had ORCID as a community.
That's something we'd supported for five or six years, as Jason mentioned, built on top of the work done by Australia. And then we took over a data site consortium that already existed in Canada but was separate from us, and this started to build up our sense towards a national strategy. I think if you're going to start somewhere, it's got to be somewhere that you can build.
A community of practice and ORCID and data site are ripe for that because of their membership models. But there are, I'm sure, other ways to do it too. That's just, I think, a helpful place to start. Chris Yeah. Just to build on what John said. You know, I think one of the things that people tend to underestimate is how important community building is to achieve adoption and critical mass around pets.
And people can tend to think, well, it's just about technology, build, build a system and they will come. But I think the experience of ORCID and data side and crossref as has told us otherwise. Right and without that kind of focused and dedicated resourcing and people to help build community know you won't get traction and you won't get adoption. And I think one of the great things about ORCID in the earlier years is the realization that a central organization couldn't do that on its own, and building this kind of Federated model through our consortia, lead partners and jyske, aif, etc., three of whom you've heard from this evening, really enables us to kind of get a multiplier in our ability to kind of build and develop those communities.
So I think in terms of looking at approaches to, to, to, to try that idea of Federation is quite important. But also dedicated resources for community building won't come as any surprise to the site. 110% agree on the community building side. I think very definitely if you build it, they won't necessarily come. I think we've not got very long after.
And interestingly, Todd, what you put in the chat about sort of either a framework in place for pillar palooza and/or a sort of Federation. That's a version of the question that we also wanted to put to this group, which was, you know, there is a bit of a void now with Peter palooza having gone. We don't I think we didn't necessarily feel we needed to replicate that. But we did want to sound this group out about whether there's feel there is a need for some kind of place forum for kind of cross-sector international.
Cross stakeholder discussions of metadata and pids overall and that could be a sort of a next stage on from Peter palooza. It could be something completely different. It could be there's such lots of metadata content in my surplus this year is my surplus or the right home for it. But anyway, we really wanted to see whether people felt this, this, this was a void from their perspective as well that we should be looking at plugging in which case, we can hand it over to nice so to, to, to lead the way on thinking about it.
But what do people think? I mean, should we maybe just a very simple show of hands about whether people feel this is having some kind of forum for talking about pids and metadata globally and across would be valuable and is missing at the moment. Can you? I mean, thumbs up or thumbs down maybe, or something like that.
So a few people. I think yes. No no's, but a few yeses. OK well, thank you. Well, at least there's some level of enthusiasm there. I mean, I would say it looks like about a third of the people on this call think this is something that's needed, which is perhaps enough to at least take the conversation forward for a bit more for a bit more consideration.
But Todd and Mary Beth and Jason, I'll leave that leave that with you. Is there anything else that people would like to talk about before we. I'm sorry, Amanda, I just seen your point. Yes oj's is a massively important in terms of sort of making a level playing field in which, you know, journals and organizations of all shapes and sizes can, can, can, can use have access to that.
They're great systems. Is there anything else that anybody would like to ask, comment on? Say before we end. If nobody else wants to say anything. I guess the only other thing I'd suggest is of sequencing is really important in building the case for peds.
And I think one of the really great things that happened in Australia was the integration of ORCID into the LC grant submission process, because that's something everybody has to do, whether they like it or not, if they want funding and is a pain, right. So reducing the kind of burden the admin overhead at that pain point really then builds the case for, hey, maybe we could do something similar and help people in a further way.
So my other bit of advice to anybody looking at building a national strategy is identify the biggest pain points where peer adoption can help and try and get some implementation there first because then that will just naturally build the case for further adoption and get people saying, hey, you know, this is great because it saved me a bunch of time and effort or improved quality data or whatever. Yeah, and that's interesting though, because of course, at first RC was there was a degree of resistance within AOC to implementing all kids in its grant system.
So I think that really speaks to what both Linda and John have said about relationship building and really not persisting, persisting with persistent identifiers to really try to make some of those key integrations happen that really will then have an impact. And then, yes, how it is then then that's a success story that can be shared. And I agree course is also doing great work in this area and thank you for the reminder and offer about the course forums as well, because that's another great place for these conversations to be happening.
Yeah, I think building on what Chris said. Something that Tom dumervil said yesterday, I believe at some point was. Changing building systems that make it easy. Like we are all focused in on interoperability and we are all focused on persistent identifiers. Most researchers aren't going to care. They're not going to remember their six digit number.
They are not going to remember they're raw. But if we can make the systems interoperable based on APIs and. Focus on the user interface for those systems that these things exist in the background and they make the systems work better and save them time. That's the goal. It isn't that people are going to remember their six digit ORCIDs.
It is that these identifiers make functionality work that saves them time and they shouldn't care. The raw should facilitate a dropdown list that people can go in and say, oh, OK, well, this is my institution. And then in the background that becomes a that is modeled to an.
A persistent identifier. I'm going to let you have one quick thing. And then we do need to wrap up because we're a little over time. But please do. Please I just I just wanted to agree with what I was just saying. However, it is really important that the pipes all fit together.
I mean, it's true. The researcher just wants to use the pipes. They just want to turn on the spigot and let the water come out and make it work for them. Right but it is really key. And this is why we're all here, to make sure the pipes can talk to each other and everything just works seamlessly as possible. But you're right, the researcher doesn't really need to understand pids.
They just need to make sure that when they do their research and when they use the tools that they do, that they are actually fueling other things to happen. Great thank you. Well, that sounds like a very good note to end on since yes, I think we were all in our various different ways, plumbers and keepers of the pipes or helping to keep the pipes flowing.
Thank you for a really good discussion. I've really enjoyed it. And thank you again to the speakers. John, you're the only one left. Thank you to you. But big Thanks also to Linda and Christopher and Washington. I have really enjoyed and learned a lot from the presentations and the discussion. So thank you, everyone.
Thank you, Alice. Thank you. We'll see you all in about 15 minutes.
Form Title Download
Transcript
Form Title Bookmark
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Share
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Accessibility and Keyboard Shortcuts
The cadmore media player is a professional video and audio player experience designed to deliver media as well as relevant transcript, segmentation, and metadata. On the screen is a traditional html video player with buttons such as play, pause, forward, captioning, language and play speed selection and more. Adjacent to the video player are generally tabs, one of which shows a scrolling transcript of the video and the other shows any segmentation of the media, sometimes referred to as chapters. At the top of the video is a menu bar containing an Explore button and Tools button. The Explore button allows you to dig deeper into the video by opening up an explore dialog which contains tabs for a visual navigation of the video using thumbnails, an about tab which contains rich metadata about the media, a segments tab which contains further information about the video, and a related tab which contains links to other media related to this media. The tools button opens a menu with options for sharing the media on social media, creating bookmarking links, creating embed codes for your website, generating citations, and more.
Keyboard Shortcuts
Keyboard shortcuts only work while you are in forms mode. By entering forms mode, you will be able to quickly access portions of the media player with single key commands.
Spacebar: Play/Pause Toggle
I: Info Menu,
O: Tools Menu
T: Transcript Tab,
S: Segments Tab
F: Forward 15,
R: Rewind 15
L: Languages,
P: Playspeed
M: Mute Toggle,
V: Volume Bar
N: Video Only Toggle,
B: Full Screen Toggle
C: Captions Toggle
Escape: Closes dialogs and menus / Exits Player
Z: Next Transcript Chapter
X: Previous Transcript Chapter
Q: Next Transcript Paragraph
W: Previous Transcript Paragraph
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Embed Size
-
You Size - Responsive
-
We Size - Responsive
-
Picture Overlay Popup
-
400 x 225
-
512 x 288
-
400 x 700
-
768 x 1024
-
1024 x 512
-
1280 x 608
Form Title Cite
No citation provided.
Info
Segments
Related
Thumbnails
Exit Clip Mode
You have requested to see a portion of the video outside of the clip.
Click OK to switch to the full video or click if you would like to stay inside the clip. You can always go back to the clip with Tools and Clip Mode