Are you interested in learning about how we host the ORCID Registry and APIs? Would like to know how we deal with high availability, scalability, and recovery in the event of a disaster? If so, then this post is for you!
We handle eight million page views each month on the ORCID Registry, but the bulk of our traffic is on the APIs, which currently receive over 100 million hits per month. One of our core strategies is to invest in developing a robust information infrastructure, so we need to be confident that the technology we use to support this usage is reliable and secure.
The Registry and the rest of the website on orcid.org are routed through a Content Delivery Network (CDN) -- a cloud service provider that has 150+ datacenters around the world. When your browser connects to orcid.org, the static parts of the site are served from a local datacenter near you, to enable faster load times.
The CDN has some other useful features, such as protection against distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, and real-time security scanning against hacking threats.
The Registry pages are hosted at our main datacenter, where traffic is load-balanced across a cluster of app servers, while the Registry data are stored in a cluster of three powerful database servers, on encrypted file systems. One is a master database, where updates are made and two are replica servers, which receive a copy of the data in real time. The replica servers are used for most of the “read” operations of the Registry and APIs, but are also hot standby servers meaning they can be promoted to be the master in the event of a failure.
We have an assortment of other servers supporting the production system, which shuffle data around to build search indexes, keep an up to date dump of public data in a different data center, and run scheduled tasks such as email reminders.
We automatically backup the database twice daily, encrypt the dump, and push it to another cloud service provider on a different continent so that, in the event of a disaster at our main datacenter, we can use the database backup to restore the system. We regularly test that this process is working using a temporary offline server.
This is a solid base. However, ORCiD keeps growing and we are increasingly relied upon as part of the research information infrastructure. So we need to do more to ensure the community can continue to depend on us.
What would we like to improve?
We’d like to have app servers and database replicas in multiple locations, so that we don’t have to rely on the somewhat lengthy database restore process, or lose data since the last backup. We’d like to be able to provision new servers in a matter of minutes, rather than hours, in case of sudden increase in demand.
We are considering separating the most critical parts of the system such as registration, sign in, and authorization to an isolated system, and would also like to ensure that public API traffic problems do not impact the Registry and Member APIs.
Let us know what you think about our plans! How do we compare with your own organization and other services you rely on? Is there more we could or should be doing? Do you have any advice for us based on your own experience? Contact us with your input and feedback!Blog
PLOS has been an enthusiastic supporter of ORCID since joining as a member in 2013. They recently adopted our peer review functionality, enabling their reviewers to get credit and recognition for the important work they do. In this interview, their Publisher and Executive Editor and ORCID Board Chair, Veronique Kiermer, tells us more about PLOS and ORCID.
Please can you tell us a bit about PLOS and your role there?
PLOS is a nonprofit Open Access science publisher. Our mission is to empower researchers to accelerate progress in scientific communication by ensuring the discoverability, accessibility, and recognition of their work. We publish seven journals with varying scopes and criteria.
I am the Publisher and Executive Editor at PLOS. Among other things, I work with the editorial and publishing teams across all journals to set the editorial direction and develop policies and programs that promote Open Science practices. We see Open Science as a critical ingredient to ensure the rigor and integrity of the content we publish, and also as an important element of how science is increasingly conducted. We work with researchers to facilitate best practices and to help them receive credit.
When and why did you get involved with ORCID personally?
I first became involved with ORCID in the early days of the organization. At the time, I was working as Executive Editor at Nature Publishing Group, which was one of ORCID’s founding organizations. I immediately became a champion because I saw ORCID as a wonderful collaborative community initiative that tackles a central question for researchers and scholars: getting due credit for their work. Credit is central to academic success and yet the infrastructure to provide credit is suboptimal.
As an editor I also knew how hard it can be to identify potential reviewers with common names, and I had spoken to many researchers who, having changed their name at some point in their career, were worried about their bibliographic record turning up incomplete.
I knew ORCID was addressing an important problem and I liked the principles of openness and researcher control that they baked in at the beginning. ORCID is also a demonstration of how multi-stakeholder, cross-industry collaborations can work. I have volunteered in various capacities over the years to help the organization succeed in its mission and since 2017 I have served as Chair of the ORCID Board of Directors.
And what about PLOS and ORCID - when, why, and how have you been engaging with us?
PLOS is a long-time member of ORCID. We first offered authors the option to enter ORCID iDs in the Editorial Manager submission system in 2013. We added ORCID sign-in in 2014, and in 2016 became one of the first publishers to sign the open letter committing to implement ORCID according to their best practices for publishers across our entire portfolio. Later that year, we began requiring ORCID for all corresponding authors at initial submission.
Last week, we were very excited to extend ORCID to our peer reviewers as well. PLOS will automatically update the ORCID record for reviewers who give permission, confirming that the individual has completed a review.
Reviewers deserve credit and recognition for the work they do in assessing and improving manuscripts--but this activity has so far been mostly kept behind the scenes. At PLOS we use single-blind review as a standard, but allow reviewers to sign their peer review comments if they wish. Last month, PLOS started offering authors the option to publish the peer review history of their manuscript alongside their published article. If the peer reviewers have chosen to sign their comments, their names will appear in the published peer review history. We see this as one step towards elevating peer review to a scholarly output in its own right.
For various reasons, however, many reviewers prefer to remain anonymous. The ORCID integration allows all reviewers to get credit for performing reviews regardless of their preference about revealing their names, or the authors’ preference about publishing reviews. Thanks to the new ORCID integration, researchers can now keep track of their peer review contributions, establish a profile (which is especially important for early career researchers), and receive some much-deserved credit for their work.
What impact has ORCID had in your community?
We require ORCID for corresponding authors as part of submission. When authors give us permission, we automatically update their ORCID record with their newly published article. This allows authors to treat their ORCID record as an authoritative professional record, which can then be used to update university web pages, fill out grant applications, and more.
We also encourage coauthors to link their ORCID iD to their account so they can have the same benefits as corresponding authors. We have adapted our online display so ORCID iDs are linked to each author name, alongside their affiliations and contributions through the CrediT taxonomy terms. There are now over 185,000 ORCIDs registered in our submission system.
Anecdotally we’ve had some very enthusiastic feedback from authors who use ORCID, especially after the article is published.
What more can we do to improve our support for you and your community?
ORCID is increasingly present in many systems that researchers use, but the experience of using your ORCID iD on different platforms can vary, and is not always as seamless as it could be. I think it would be helpful if ORCID could work with various stakeholders and system providers to create seamless optimized experiences for researchers. We want ORCID to feel easy and efficient for the researchers who rely on it. Assuming researchers provide permission, we should be able to take needed information from ORCID records without researchers having to fill out forms!
Another request that I often hear from researchers is to have easier ways to populate their ORCID record with their previous publications. A mid-career researcher may have dozens of publications and works that predate ORCID, and gathering all these publications in their official record can be time consuming.
What's your favorite ORCID success story?
My favorite success story is still in the making: the ORBIT project. Led by major funders, this initiative aims to allow researchers to use ORCID records to facilitate the completion of grant applications and grant reports. I like it because, when completed, this project will be a great demonstration of the benefits of ORCID in the full loop of the research cycle. By linking their ORCID iD to their publication, researchers can automatically have their ORCID record updated, and then by using ORCID to fill in their grant reports, this in turn decreases the administrative burden.
On a more personal note, I also love that ORCID has provided a solution for the many researchers who have changed their name at some point in their career. Changing one’s name is a deeply personal decision, yet I know many researchers for whom this decision is also influenced by what will happen to their bibliographic record. Before ORCID, changing your name meant that half of your career would disappear from online searches. ORCID provides a solution to that, and I’ve seen several smiles and grateful emails when I’ve proposed this as a solution to someone with this dilemma.
Which three words best sum up ORCID for you?
Trust, efficiency, and, increasingly, credit.
Over the past 18 months, the ORCID ORBIT project has been working with the funding community to ensure researchers and funders get the maximum benefit from ORCID during the funding application process. The project started with a survey of data requirements and an assessment of process pain points. Next, the project launched a number of pathfinder projects. We are now pleased to share an update on some of the exciting integrations developed during the project.Altum’s ProposalCENTRAL
Altum’s grant management/tracking system, proposalCENTRAL, is used by over 100 research funding organizations. At the project start, Altum already had a basic ORCID integration, available to all funding organizations using their platform. During 2018, 17 of those funders required iDs from their researchers as part of the grant application process and 12 requested them. Twenty-three of the funders using the proposalCENTRAL are now requiring iDs, and 47% of all grant applicants on the platform have an iD. During the ORBIT project, Altum implemented additional workflows to further support both funders and researchers during grant application and reporting.
Researchers can now pull all their ORCID data (publications, awards, degrees, affiliations) into their proposalCENTRAL profile, and use this data in their Applications and Progress Reports by selecting from a list rather than re-typing. proposalCENTRAL also uses ORCID to help funders stay connected to their researchers’ accomplishments after a grant ends, and to use ORCID data to evaluate the impact of programs long after individual grants have ended. Together, these improvements save researchers time and provide funders with accurate work metadata to help them during the application process, progress reporting, and impact assessment as shown, for example, in the dashboards below.
Importantly, proposalCENTRAL also posts information about awarded grants back to the ORCID records of the awardees. This allows the researcher to get recognition for their grants, as well as enabling them to share this information with other organizations and individuals. For example, these funding records can be associated with future publications, making it possible to automatically track outputs associated with grants.Wellcome Trust, NIHR, and CC Grant Tracker
Wellcome and NIHR have been long-time supporters of ORCID, with Wellcome being one of the ORCID launch partners back in 2016. Both are signatories of the ORCID funder open letter (NIHR via UKRI), and both use CC Grant Tracker, a grant management platform from CC Technology. For the past five years, these organizations have used CC Grant Tracker’s ORCID integration to make it mandatory for Lead applicants to use an authenticated ORCID iD. Through the ORBIT project, which CC Technology is also participating in, all three parties have collaborated to reduce the burden on applicants and also improve metadata quality to support reporting and integration.
Until last month, researchers applying for funding through CC Grant Tracker had to provide publication information by typing it directly into a textbox on the application form. More often, they copied and pasted from a list of their publications they kept elsewhere, formatting that list specifically to each funder’s specifications. This could be a tedious and time-consuming task for applicants (especially if they didn’t have a research assistant to do it for them!). It impacted funders as well, resulting in inconsistent formatting that made applications hard to read. The multiple ways that researchers can cite publications also created inconsistent metadata, hindering analysis. Inconsistent methods of providing research outputs were getting in the way of answering questions such as whether there is a relationship between where a researcher publishes and the success of their grant application.
In April 2019 CC Grant Tracker was updated with a new, improved ORCID integration. Wellcome have now gone live with the changes, and NIHR plan to do so shortly. Now, when a researcher completes an application form, they can import publication information that they have previously connected to their ORCID record directly into CC Grant Tracker. Formatting is done automatically to the funder’s specification; applicants no longer need to spend time doing this themselves. This ensures consistency across application forms, making them easier to read for grants advisors, committee members, or anyone reviewing the application.
But that’s not all – researchers can also give permission for data about their successful applications to be added to their ORCID record. When a grant is awarded, the lead applicant’s ORCID record is automatically populated by CC Grant Tracker with details of the grant. Crucially, as this assertion is made by the funder (in this case Wellcome or, soon, NIHR) – and this assertion is explicit – anyone who views that ORCID record can be certain that the grant information was added by the funder themselves, not a third party.Learn more
For more information about ORCID in funding workflows, please visit our funder web pages and funding submission systems workflow documentation -- and look out for information about several upcoming webinars about the use of ORCID by funders, featuring speakers from Altum, CC Technology, and ORCID funding organization members.Related blog posts: Blog
As part of our 2019 Year of the Researcher celebrations, we invited researchers to tell us why they would like to join us for our annual ORCID staff retreat. Out of an excellent candidate pool we are delighted to announce that Dr Andre Leon S Gradvohl (pictured), a professor at the School of Technology at the University of Campinas, and ad hoc consultant in the Brazil Ministry of Education and São Paulo State Council of Education, will be joining our team for a day.
In his application, Andre told us: “I have known ORCID for some time. In fact, well before my institution joined ORCID. At that time I was looking for a way to concentrate all the information about my intellectual production, including papers in scientific journals or conferences, and data repositories, in a single place. Since then, ORCID has been very useful for me, especially in recent times with the integration with some data repositories (Zenodo in particular), as well as other bibliographic databases that automatically update my ORCID registry. In particular, I like two ORCID features. The first is the possibility of having a reliable repository on the web that concentrates all the information about my academic life, my intellectual production - including other productions besides the papers - as well as prizes, affiliations and projects funding, among others. Another feature I really like is the automatic update of the Registry. This saves us time and, in parallel, provides reliable information from an authorized source.”
As well as spending time with the whole ORCID team, Andre will also be interviewed by our UX Designer, Mallory Robertson, as part of our ongoing efforts to improve the ORCID user experience; and by the communications team, to help us craft more effective messaging for researchers.
While all the applications we received were of a high quality, three others in addition to Andre’s really stood out: Dr Paula Carina Araujo (Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil), Dr Lasith Gunawardena (University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka), and PhD candidate, Emma McGrath (University of Dublin, Trinity College, Ireland; and Notre Dame University, USA).
One of our questions for applicants was what they liked most about ORCID. Lasith responded that:“My first name and, especially, surname are rather common in Sri Lanka and there are others in diverse fields, including some who have more illustrious research profiles. [ORCID] helps me stand out and be uniquely identified without ambiguity ... One of the features which I highly desire and often refer during these presentations the ability to re-use information stored in the ORCID profile in other platforms.”
Emma’s response was: “I like the idea [of ORCID] because science involves a global community and we only progress as a society through collective knowledge. Consolidating the contributions of individual researchers through a single platform is vital as a step in removing barriers to information and connecting scientists and organizations.”
We also asked what applicants like least about ORCID, and Paula told us that, although she believes ORCID is “part of a new paradigm in scholarly communication,” she would “suggest some improvement on the data visualization on ORCID ... in the Works section, for example, it would be better if the user could see the different types of works separately.” Great feedback, which have added to our new public User Feedback Trello board.
And, of course, we asked everyone why they wanted to join us at our staff retreat: what they hoped to get out of the day, and what they would contribute to it. Here are a few of the responses:
- “I want to understand if such tools [as ORCID] are useful for my students who will not continue to be involved with research but as professionals will be "consumers" of research.” (Vanessa Yingling, California State University - East Bay, USA)
- “I would love to have an inside look at how those who work with ORCID everyday talk about it. Because I talk about it so regularly in my work I would really appreciate more language and knowledge from experts. Help me learn to convince others to not only set it up but also use it in innovative ways.” (Kortney Rupp, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, USA)
- And, in the words of our winner: “I strongly believe in ORCID's potential as a trusted and universal repository for academic records. Therefore, I think I can contribute to the discussion about the features that ORCID implements now and other features that you can implement in the future."
Our thanks to all who participated for your interest and support. We are looking forward to our Day with a Researcher!
This is such an exciting time in the evolution of ORCID! With well over 1,000 members and more than 6.5 million users, ORCID expects to reach financial break-even this year. We’re therefore at a pivotal moment, when the organisation needs to move out of its start-up phase and into a mode where it can run as a self-sustaining, mature operation while losing none of the creative spark and innovative DNA that have characterised its first seven years.
This is a point, then, where it’s more important than ever that the ORCID Board provides the guidance needed to ensure that ORCID continues to make strong progress towards achieving its mission. It's also important that the Board is as representative as possible of the ORCID community, and this is why the Board elections process is so critical. The Nominations Committee needs to select a slate of candidates that is balanced and diverse, taking into account different sectors, regions and skills, as well as the non-profit status requirements as established in the ORCID bylaws.
This year we would be particularly interested to hear from candidates who have expertise in the areas of research policy and management, finance, or risk management (with legal, privacy, identity, and/or security focus). We would like to maintain the strong representation that we have in the Asia-Pacific region, to strengthen our representation from Africa and mainland Europe, and to secure excellent candidates from Latin America. Our aim is to maintain a diverse group of people and viewpoints.
The Board meets three times a year so you will need to ensure that you can be available to travel to in-person meetings. There is financial support available to those for whom this could prove a barrier via our new Board Meeting Attendance Fund. The deadline for applications is 1 August 2019, and you can find more information about the Nominating Committee, the timetable and process, and Board member responsibilities on our Elections web page.
The application process is straightforward and the experience of serving on the ORCID Board is both exciting and extremely rewarding. You will have a real opportunity to influence the future direction of this important organisation, to help realise our vision of a world in which everyone who participates in research, scholarship, and innovation is uniquely identified and connected with their works and affiliations across disciplines, borders, and time. So please do consider joining us!
We look forward to hearing from you, and please contact me if you have any questions.Blog
Last year we launched the Research Information Platform Engagement (RIPEN) project, which brings together a number of projects and themes we have been working on since our launch, including researcher control, authentication, and auto-updates. The project relates to all four of our core strategies:
- Improving researcher workflows. Allowing researchers to authenticate once and ensure that their ORCID record is updated
- Developing a robust information infrastructure. Extending systems and workflows with project partners to establish clear workflows
- Developing strategic relationships. Building relationships with key partners to extend RIPEN into the community
- Increasing trusted assertions. Improving data quality and transparency with a simplified flow for making assertions to ORCID records
RIPEN aims to reduce the technical burden of integrating authenticated ORCID iDs into workflows, while streamlining the process for researchers. At the same time, we are introducing better visibility of the source of information on ORCID records to clarify who added the data, and whether they are the original source or acting on behalf of another organization.
Since our last update, we have made good progress, proving and testing the RIPEN workflow internally, using our own customer relationship system system (Salesforce) to assess the feasibility of using JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) to enable permission-sharing between ORCID members. All Board and ORCID staff members participated in the pilot, which used our new "Assert-o-Matic" service to update their ORCID records with an assertion of their affiliation with ORCID, as shown below.
Now that we have proved out the concept internally, we are moving to the next stage of the project -- and engaging with our community to collaboratively test out the approach in a variety of workflows. We are delighted to be partnering with the following organizations in this second phase:
- Airiti (Taiwan) - publishing workflows; asserting works
- SABINET (South Africa) - publishing workflows; asserting works
- Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US) - research resources workflows; asserting use of facilities
- Altum (US) - funder workflows; asserting awards
- ePIC (Europe) - research institution workflows; asserting affiliations
Together, we will be developing and testing the streamlined assertion mechanism in partner systems and workflows with up to five of their customers. Partners will also help us analyze the technical and financial feasibility of implementing RIPEN across our global community.
We will be back with another progress report later this year. In the meantime, if you are interested in learning more about the RIPEN project, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org.Related Posts Blog
To achieve our vision of a world where everyone who participates in research is uniquely identified and connected with their affiliations and contributions, we need to establish and maintain meaningful channels of engagement with our diverse community. This includes engaging with researchers about when, how, and why you use your iD and your experience of doing so, as our UX Designer, Mallory Robertson recently explained. We also listen to what you have to say on social media, at events and workshops, and elsewhere. And we actively seek to gather information about users via our regular community surveys and through other research, such as the THOR Study of ORCID Adoption across Disciplines and Locations.
With 2019 being our Year of the Researcher, we have a great opportunity to focus even more of our efforts on understanding your needs, which is why we recently launched our Academia & Beyond project. Working with a global task force of individual researchers and representatives from relevant research organizations, we are focusing first on the arts and humanities community.
We are taking an evidence-based approach to understanding how these communities work, what makes them tick, and how we can better meet their needs -- including challenging some common assumptions! For example, the THOR analysis mentioned above showed that proportionately more arts & humanities scholars have an iD than expected based on publication activity; at the same time, these same scholars have proportionately fewer works connected to their ORCID record compared with researchers in other fields. We’d like to better understand how to support the interest in ORCID the arts and humanities community is demonstrating.
During the first phase of Academia & Beyond, we are developing maturity models for ORCID adoption and use in this broad community. This includes identifying the key tools and services they use that have either already integrated with ORCID or could in future; assessing awareness of ORCID among researchers in these fields; and understanding the context for wider ORCID adoption, including major challenges and opportunities.
We are fortunate to be supported in this work by a group of invited participants and community volunteers who have agreed to share their experience and expertise. The Arts & Humanities Task Force, which I am chairing, was launched in May, with the following members:
- Anne Boddington, Kingston University, UK
- Katherine Burton, Taylor & Francis, UK
- Grace Cho, Artrepreneur, USA
- Peter Cornwell, Data Futures, France
- John Cussans, Independent Researcher, UK
- Milena Grass Kleiner, University of Colombia, Colombia
- Siobhann McCafferty, Australian Research Data Commons, Australia
- Poul Melchiorsen, Aalborg University Library, Denmark
- Pierre Mounier, OpenEdition, France
- Jefferson Pooley, Muhlenberg College, USA
- Ellie Porter, Art 360 Foundation, UK
- Karin Wulf, Omohundro Institute/College of William & Mary (ORCID Board member), USA
They are helping us to:
- Recruit researchers in their communities for the user journey project
- Identify appropriate conferences and other events for worthwhile ORCID engagement
- Develop and implement improved messaging about ORCID for their communities
- Identify and address barriers to the use of ORCID in their communities, including making recommendations for new features if needed
- Implement/improve ORCID integrations and/or messaging at their own organizations
For more information, please see the Academia & Beyond Task Force web page.Get involved!
Based on what we learn from this approach, we plan to launch a second task force later this year, which will focus on clinical medicine/science; please let us know if you’re interested in participating. You can also help by sharing information about key systems and platforms used by arts & humanities scholars that could or should implement ORCID, or whose current integration could be improved. And everyone is welcome to join the conversation on our Friends of ORCID Slack workspace!
We look forward to sharing more with you as this project progresses - and thank you!Blog
Consortia are fundamental to ORCID -- they enable broad adoption of ORCID with attention to local context. They help us maintain a small staff and in turn we can pass on low membership costs. Together, our consortia lead organizations support about 70% of our members, and help us better understand an address community challenges and opportunities.
At our recent consortia workshop in Atlanta, USA, we were delighted to recognize the contributions of six consortia lead organizations that have significantly helped grow and support the ORCID community.
Above, left to right: Award-winners Sheila Rabun and Celeste Feather of LYRASIS (center), Wesley Barrey of TENET (left), and Pål Axelsson of SUNET (left)IUCC (Israel): For Excellence in Fostering ORCID integrations among Consortium members
In just eight months, IUCC supported four research institutions (representing 40% of the consortium) in building out the primary ORCID use case for this sector: collecting authenticated iDs and posting affiliation data into ORCID records. Consortium lead, Dror Berger, has guided consortium members through the integration process (including meeting Collect & Connect badging requirements), facilitating the launch of new systems where researchers can use their iD. This has included regularly following up with members, providing them with detailed information, and keeping up-to-date with their integration plans.Jisc (UK): For Excellence in Investing in Supporting Infrastructure
For their collaboration with EPrints to develop a new plug in using the member API. This allows ORCID members using the EPrints repository to collect ORCID iDs from repository users and add employment affiliation (or education where appropriate) to the user ORCID record. It further enables users to manage ORCID permissions, and import and export publications seamlessly between ORCID and EPrints. Reporting features for repository administrators are also available. Adam Vials-Moore, UK ORCID Senior Community Engagement and Technical Manager collected this award on behalf of the Jisc team.ORCID-DE (Germany): For Excellence in Strategic Advocacy
For their legal analysis of ORCID Data Privacy and their “ORCID Position paper” to promote ORCID in German-speaking communities. ORCID DE have hosted three well-attended workshops and use their blog to actively promote every new consortium member, the adoption of iDs in Germany, and other milestones. Their outreach efforts have led to constant growth, with 14 new members onboarded during 2018, and four so far in 2019. In addition, two of their members have created exemplar integrations that are in the top 20 for adding works to records: DataCite (129,568 works added) and Bielefeld University Library (BASE - 89,615 works added). Head of PID Services, Britta Dreyer, accepted this award on behalf of the ORCID-DE team.SUNET (Sweden): For Excellence in Strategic Advocacy
The second award in this category went to Swedish consortium lead, SUNET. Pål Axelsson and his colleagues have continued to lead ORCID advocacy in Sweden, in particular providing valuable guidance around ORCID’s role in the Federated Identity Management (FIM) community.TENET (South Africa): For Excellence in Bringing together Identifiers and Identity
As the first ORCID consortium in Africa, TENET has focused on establishing ORCID within their trust and identity services. The consortium continues to grow as a result of their continued advocacy, and they are currently working to establish a national tool to better support South Africa consortium members. System Administrator for TENET, Wesley Barry, accepted the award on behalf of the team.US Community Consortium lead LYRASIS: For Excellence in Motivating Communications
For bringing four distinct and far-flung communities together and developing a successful community of practice in the US, through webinars, online resources, and the US Community online forum (open to non-members and members alike). Our special thanks to Sheila Rabun, Community Lead for the consortium, for her active engagement and enthusiasm in building the US ORCID community.
Please join us in congratulating these organizations and individuals -- and in thanking all our consortia leads for their help growing and supporting ORCID adoption in their communities. Your support is invaluable!Blog
Our second consortia workshop, co-hosted with LYRASIS in Atlanta, US on May 19 - 22, was attended by ORCID consortia leads, Board members, and staff from around the world -- from Australia to Brazil and beyond! Through a program of sessions based on direct input from the four consortia in the Americas (Brazil, Canada, and two in the US), we got to listen and learn from each other, and share our ORCID knowledge and experiences.
ORCID Integrations Through the Eyes of… Board members Richard de Grijs, Veronique Kiermer, Daisy Selematsela, and Chris Shillum shared their experiences of ORCID from the perspective of (respectively) a researcher, an author and publisher, a grant applicant and funder, and a database platform. It’s always good to “see yourself as others see you” -- the good and the bad -- and our Product Director, Tom Demeranville and UX Designer, Mallory Robertson came away with lots of feedback! They’ll be updating our Product Roadmap and User Feedback Trello boards with planned improvements in the coming weeks and months.
Where Will We Be In 2025? A future-gazing session with ORCID Executive Director, Laure Haak, Board members, Linda O’Brien and Chris Shillum, and consortia leads, Poul Melchiorsen and Steve Pinchotti. After the speakers shared their own views on the topic, we broke into four small groups and spent time discussing:
- Services. What services would be most helpful for consortia leads? What member self-service functionality would be really helpful for consortia?
- Managing costs. Can we be more efficient in managing service costs while continuing to deliver excellent services? What are major cost drivers for consortia leads?
- Measuring progress. What metrics will help monitor progress? Is the Collect & Connect badging program useful? What would be useful measures of progress/success?
- Assessing value. What evidence would be appropriate for assessing consortium lead maturity?
Keynote: Karin Wulf. Since 2019 is our Year of the Researcher, we wanted to make sure that the researcher perspective was represented in the workshop. Board member, historian, and Director of the Omohundro Institute, Karin Wulf, provided a great start to the event with her keynote on the challenges and opportunities of using ORCID as a humanities scholar.
We also had a special guest -- former scientist, funder, and PID enthusiast, Carly Strasser, now Director of Academic Alliances and Data Strategy at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. In her own inimitable style, her presentation summed up what she learned at the workshop, by drawing parallels between ORCID and the city of Atlanta, including:
Problem-solving. Just as Atlanta helped address civil rights issues, so ORCID is helping solve problems for researchers, including reducing the need to manually enter data (for example when applying for a grant with the Australian Research Council); providing a portable identifier that they can use to connect with their tools wherever they work; and eliminating static CVs.
Diversity. Atlanta embraces diversity, and so does ORCID. Our community includes individuals and organizations across all sectors, regions, and disciplines -- ORCID users and non-users, members and non-members. Ensuring that we understand and meet the different needs of these communities is essential to achieving our shared vision.
Growing. Atlanta is known as the city in a forest, with trees growing in 48% of its land. The ORCID community is also growing, in part as a result of the advocacy efforts of our consortia leads and their members. These include an initiative by the University of Texas Southwest Medical Center that resulted in 2,000 students registering for an iD in just six months; consortia lead Altum’s work on the career impact of funding programs; and Macquarie University’s systematic program of encouraging ORCID registration for all faculty and updating their records with affiliation information.
Misunderstandings. There are no fewer than 26 streets named Peachtree in Atlanta, after the Creek Indian village near what is now the Buckhead area of the city. But some experts believe that peachtree is actually a corruption of pitch tree. Our consortia leads shared with us some of the ORCID myths and misconceptions they encounter in their communities, such as “ORCID Is just another profile system”, “I want my privacy”, “Librarians will manage my profile”, and more. We need to help address these misunderstandings through better messaging for researchers.
The journey. The American historians among you will know that Atlanta is famous for, among other things, being the starting point for General Sherman’s march to the sea. A key theme of our consortia workshop was the user journey, including an interactive session, led by Mallory Robertson, on how we are engaging with users to help improve the UI.
Our thanks to everyone who attended the workshop, and shared their experiences and expertise. You can find all the presentations, posters, and videos in our repository. Like all ORCID resources, they’re available under a CC0 license, so feel free to download and use them in your own community!Blog
ORCID was founded on principles of openness, transparency, inclusion, and collaboration. These principles define our organizational culture, focus our passion, and guide everything we do, from community engagement to staff training to governance.
ORCID has a broad user and member community. Our more than 6.5 million users are from every country in the world, while our 1,000+ members are from over 40 countries and every sector of the research community. We need deep engagement from this community in order to succeed, which means that we must be inclusive.
We are a fully virtual organization, with staff in 12 countries speaking at least as many languages, to help us understand local challenges and provide appropriate support for implementation. We work actively to live and breathe inclusiveness in how we work, actively engaging within and across communities, and doing lots and lots of listening.
Community engagement also includes governance. We have a Board of about 15 Directors from member organizations as well as up to two researchers who need not be aligned with a member organization. Our Directors are driven first and foremost by the ORCID mission, and they represent a variety of stakeholders, have credibility in their sector of the community and beyond, and are able to contribute to our development through personal and organizational knowledge, as well as through their networks of influence.
Our Board is, per our bylaws, majority non-profit, and to ensure inclusive representation we seek balance by region, community sector, research discipline, skills, and demographics. This balancing act is carried out by our Nominating Committee, who have the task of creating an election slate from among many highly-qualified nominees.
To ensure the deep engagement we need to achieve our vision, we ask our Board Directors to commit to attending three in-person meetings each year. This can be costly, given the global scope of both our Board membership and meeting locations, which may hinder prospective candidates from indicating their interest in serving. We have always reimbursed attendance costs for our researcher Directors and, this year, the Board has decided to create a Board Meeting Attendance Fund to reduce barriers to participation for member-affiliated Directors who need financial support.
We encourage you to consider participating in our governance! You can nominate yourself or (with their permission) someone else from an ORCID member organization who you consider to be qualified for the role. More information about our elections and the nominations process is available here. Nominations are due by 1 August.Related Posts and Pages
- Nominations Now Open for ORCID Board Elections 2020
- Listening to Our Community
- ORCID: We Won’t Be Sold
- ORCID Vision, Mission, and Values
- The O in ORCID
- ORCID Principles
The past year has been busy for the ORCID Asia-Pacific community. During the second half of 2018, a new APAC Engagement team was born: Brian Minihan, based in Hong Kong, and Camillia Lu and Estelle Cheng in Taiwan. We each have responsibility for specific countries across the region, and we also act as regional liaisons for communications and outreach (Brian), technology and product management (Estelle), and building and maintaining organizational partnership relationships (Camillia).
The new team’s first priority was to establish communications across various APAC community groups through regionally focused roundtable meetings, workshops and blog posts. We recently held our first in-person APAC Engagement team strategy meeting in Hong Kong to reflect on the past and look forward to the future. So now is the perfect time to share with our broader community more on our progress to date and our plans for the rest of this year!
We have identified three different stages of ORCID adoption in research workflows across our region:
Involvement -- organizations that are working to get researchers and institutions involved in linking ORCID iDs to their research works and making them shareable and discoverable through identifiers.
Engagement -- organizations that are communicating with partners with similar interests to build strength through numbers and reduce barriers in sharing research information.
Consolidation -- members who are actively expanding existing connections and integrations in the community.
Asia-Pacific makes up 14% of ORCID’s total membership and 32% of ORCID Registry usage. That usage is represented in the image below by shading - the more users in a country, the darker it appears on the map.
We’re keenly focused on helping our community link research through ORCID and other identifiers. For example, Airiti,a prominent e-publishing platform for Chinese-language works, leverages its work registering DOIs and other activities in the persistent identifier community to engage with researchers and other institutions in Taiwan. Their search and link wizard -- recommended for those with Chinese-language publications -- enables users to quickly and easily import metadata from Airiti Library, including journal papers, proceedings, dissertations, and books. They are building the foundations to eventually link researchers, publishers, institutions, and funders through ORCID integration.
We are proud that our region has one of the highest ORCID member integration rates -- roughly 70% of APAC members have at least one integration, with third-party system integrations accounting for about 45% of these.
(106 ORCID integrations in Asia-Pacific by vendor system)
Integration examples via ORCID-enabled systems include:
Custom-built integrations from across the region include:
Social Science Academic Press (China)
CSIRO ORCID Integration (Australia)
A significant number of initiatives by organizations to consolidate existing connections with ORCID are underway or in the planning process in our region.
The Australian ORCID Consortia Lead organization, Australian Access Federation, a National Research and Education Network (NREN), is undertaking an effort to define success in maturity several years after ORCID adoption nationally. They’re hoping to share their experience and leadership with emerging federated technology organizations, such as in Hong Kong, communicating AAF’s efforts in providing connections, as well as communication and technical resources. Royal Society Te Apārangi, the New Zealand ORCID Consortium Lead organization, works with other global organizations seeking to learn from its centralized NZ Hub ORCID integration, which supports New Zealand researchers looking to connect their funding and publications, and adding that metadata to NZ Hub users’ ORCID records.Next Steps
In 2019, we’re planning ORCID staff visits to Northeast Asia including China, Japan, and Korea, following a visit to Australia and New Zealand in April/May. We will be holding our next ORCID members Town Hall Meeting on May 31 (morning hours in Asia Pacific). If you’re affiliated with an ORCID member organization, join us to hear more about our regional strategy, financials, and details from the Nominating Committee Chair for the next Board Election. Also look for us at the 6th World Conference on Research Integrity on June 2-5 in Hong Kong and the Crossref Live Kuala Lumpur event on July 8 at the Ministry of Education in Putrajaya, Malaysia.
Building on our success working with publishers and funders, reaching out to research administrators in Asia-Pacific is also a key strategy in 2019. Look out for details of our webinar about ORCID and research management later this year.
We also warmly invite you to participate in our working groups and other community initiatives, including volunteering to help test our user interface -- read more in Friends of ORCID.Blog
We are pleased to announce the release of our new 3.0 ORCID API. We’re excited about the new features it contains, including several new affiliation types, a new research resources section, token delegation to enable permission sharing between members, and improved transparency about the source of information in ORCID records.New affiliation types
With the help of the community, we have expanded our affiliation section so that researchers can be associated with -- and get recognition for -- a wider range of professional activities. The ORCID Registry now supports seven types of affiliations in four sections:
- Education and (new) qualifications: the formal education relationship between a person and an organization, either in a higher/tertiary education program, a professional or vocational training program, a certification, or a continuing education program
- Employment: a work relationship between a person and an organization
- Invited positions and distinctions (new): formal relationships outside of employment between a person and an organization, such as serving as a visiting researcher, an honorary fellow, or being distinguished with an award or honorary degree
- Membership and service (new): membership in an organization, or donation of time or other resources in the service of an organization
The API represents all of these affiliations in a similar way, so expanding an integration to use them is straightforward. They have been available in the user interface for several months now, and researchers have already been busy adding them to their records themselves, with 39,855 distinctions added as of this week, 34,685 invited positions, 94,302 memberships, 107,894 qualifications, and 30,832 service affiliations.
Our new research resources section connects people with the facilities and equipment they have been granted access to use. Last year our User Facilities and Publications Working Group helped define how these should appear within our API. Since then, several working group members have started adding research resources with our beta API, which was announced in Research Resources Now Live!
It’s great to see this evolve from an initial conversation with one member, to a community working group that developed a recommendations working paper, then on to a pilot implementation phase, and now into our production API. In addition, the working group helped establish requirements for tagging research resources in journal articles that are now incorporated into NISO’s recently released JATS 1.2 standard. More information is available in our research resource workflow documentation and there is a research resources API tutorial as well.
Blazing the trails of research resource acknowledgement are the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE), with several others in development. Publishers are also participating, with Wiley piloting the inclusion of research resources used in the production of submitted manuscripts in a unique acknowledgements section.
See the Source
Transparency is a core value of ORCID. We have been working to enable more transparency about the sources of information posted to the ORCID Registry, and API 3.0 now distinguishes between the source of the ORCID iD → item connection, and the source of the item → ORCID record connection. See Assertion Assurance Pathways: What Are They and Why Do They Matter for more information on why being able to see the source is so important to us.
Ensuring researcher control is a key facet of “See the Source", including assurance that researchers have given permission to use their iD and also including organization identifiers to clarify source identity.
Items in records now display information about the member that made the connection between the iD and the item (the assertion origin), as well as the member that used the API to add the item (the source). Learn more in Where can I see the source of information in my ORCID record?
“Seei the Source” also makes it clear when one member has enabled another to act on their behalf by sharing permissions. We’ve updated our service provider workflow to reflect these changes, as well as creating a token delegation API tutorial, which provides more detail on these workflows.Other changes
Normalizing identifiers. We’ve introduced a new system-generated field, which expresses external identifiers (DOIs, PMCID, PMID, ArXiv, Bibcode, ISSNs, and ISBNs) in a normalized format for the purposes of matching and grouping. Normalization is done based on the rules of the identifier type, and may include setting all alpha characters to lowercase, or transforming spaces, dashes, periods and other characters that can be treated as equivalent. It also adds standard prefixes and suffixes as appropriate. For example, http://doi.org/10.1/123, 10.1/123, and https://dx.doi.org/10.1/123 will all appear in this field as https://doi.org/10.1/123. The existing identifier value is unmodified.
New work types. In response to community feedback, we’ve added or modified several work types, including:
- Adding ‘preprint’ and ‘software’ to the list of supported work types
- Migrating ‘dissertation’ to the more general ‘dissertation-thesis’
- Improving the way we manage work types in API 3.0, enabling us to add new work types without requiring schema changes
Other work types under consideration for adding to the Registry in future include annotations and physical objects (specimens, samples, etc).
New ID relationship type. As announced in New Features Alert! Improvements to Adding and Grouping Works, we’ve also added a new identifier relationship type of ‘version-of,’ to clearly show where one work is a version of another. This can be used to relate multiple versions of a dataset together, or to group preprints with the published version of a paper.Upgrading
We learned a lot during the transition from API 1.2 to API 2. This time we’ve made the upgrade much easier to manage. API 3.0 adds new functionality while only modifying existing functionality when absolutely necessary. This means integrators should be able to switch to the new API with a minimum of fuss. It also means that, although we recommend you start to plan your upgrade as soon as possible so that your organization and researchers can benefit from the new features, you have a lot of flexibility in deciding when to update to 3.0.
The small list of potentially breaking changes are in our API release notes here and here. There are a few changes around optional/mandatory fields, JSON enumerations have been modified slightly, and we also have a small refactoring of our XML schemas, adding some new fields to contain the metadata required for the new functionality.Sunsetting older versions
API 3.0 will be the default API version from September 1, 2019, when we will also remove all API 2.0 release candidate versions. However, we will continue to support API 2.0 and 2.1 for the foreseeable future, and will provide at least 12 months notice before switching off those versions.Documentation
- User documentation is available for the new affiliation types and the research resources section, as well as for seeing the source of information on ORCID records
- Full technical documentation, including new and updated workflows, is available on our API Resources pages
- Detailed API documentation, including schemas, is available on GitHub
A big thank you to our beta testers for their feedback, to ORCID staff -- especially the Technical Team -- for their hard work developing our API 3.0, and to everyone in our community for your suggestions and support. If you have any questions or concerns about this new version of our API, please share your comments by joining the ORCID API User Group.Blog
Earlier this year we carried out our third community survey. An impressive 11,201 of you responded, with 8,163 (72.9%) completing all the questions. Please see ORCID Community Survey 2019 for the full report.
As a researcher-centric organization, listening to our community is essential in order for us to improve our services and messaging through a better understanding of what you know about ORCID; of how, when, and why you’re using your iD, and of what you do and don’t like about ORCID. Surveys are a great tool for this and, as with previous surveys, we will be using your feedback to inform our strategic decision-making, and to improve our technology and communications.
Perceptions of ORCID remain overwhelmingly positive overall, though with variations by demographic, with librarians, respondents from Latin America & the Caribbean, and Interdisciplinary researchers the most enthusiastic. The vast majority (84.4%) agree or strongly agree that an ORCID iD is essential for researchers, and your support for requiring iDs is equally high -- 84% of respondent overall support this.
One noticeable change in your perceptions of ORCID is that we’re no longer considered the new PID on the block! With well over 6m ORCID iDs registered, we are moving out of our startup phase.“New” has been replaced by “Widely used” in the top five attributes you associate with ORCID, and the number of respondents who have had an iD for three or more years, which has grown from 13.9% in our 2015 survey to 35.3% in 2019.When, how, and why you use your ORCID iD
- You’re already actively using our newly introduced features -- additional affiliation types (17.5%) and the new research resources section (7%)
- You’re connecting more information to your ORCID record than ever before (which aligns with our own Registry statistics), with early career respondents the most active users
- You’re still most likely to use your iD when publishing an article, and to add publications to your record. But well over half of you now also want to be able to add anything you make public with your name associated to your record - a significant change from previous surveys
- Editing your record is still prevalent; only about 25% of you have given your trusted parties permission to update your record, although our Registry statistics show that a much higher number -- around 75% -- have done so for at least one organization
- Disambiguation, recognition, and discoverability continue to top the list of reasons why researchers register for an iD
- Better communications about how to make the most of your ORCID record, in particular, authorizing trusted organizations (ORCID members) to update ORCID records. We’ll be working on our messaging on this and, in the meantime you can learn more in Six Ways to Make your ORCID iD Work for You!
- Easier ways to manage your record, especially in terms of adding funding information, works, and managing visibility settings. We are working with the funding community to tackle adding funding information through our ORBIT project; we recently introduced an option to add works by identifier; and we are committed to improving our user interface further
- Help with connecting anything you make publicly available to your record. Our Person Citations and Academia & Beyond projects will help us explore with researchers how ORCID can better support your needs
- Improved understanding of the changing needs of researchers throughout their careers, from start to finish. To help with this, we are working on some in-depth user journey mapping, starting with the most highly used workflow - publishing a journal article
- Better support for researchers in regions and communities with low membership and few opportunities to use their iD. For example, there is huge support for ORCID in Latin America, but very few members or integrations, and only one consortium (in Brazil). We are working with our consortia partners -- our regional experts -- to capitalize on this enthusiasm and grow our member community in these regions
As we become a more mature organization we have an ever greater responsibility to understand -- and address -- the needs of our users. We are lucky to have such an engaged and active community (a full 40% of respondents volunteered to get involved in UX testing and/or ORCID working groups!), and are hugely grateful to everyone who took the time to provide us with such valuable and interesting feedback.
Thank you again for your participation and feedback!
2019 is ORCID’s Year of the Researcher, and a key element of this is improving the user experience. It’s also the focus of my new role as ORCID’s first User Experience (UX) Designer. I onboarded in early February, and have started to work closely with our researchers as a user advocate and design strategist. Over the next couple months, you’ll notice changes in the user interface (UI) as we evolve the ORCID website.
But what is user experience? And how do we design for it?
The user experience encompasses every interaction you have with ORCID -- not just the UI (our site, and what you see on the screen), but also anything from interaction design, the language we use on the site, the way we structure our information architecture, and how easy or difficult all of that is to use and understand. With 6.5m users already -- and 5,000 more registering every day -- it’s critical that we make the ORCID UX the best it can possibly be.
UX design differs from UI design in that we incorporate research as a basis for our design and technical decisions. This is vital because it takes assumptions out of the product development process, and ensures that we are capturing needs and expectations of people who are using the ORCID Registry.
We kicked off our first research initiative at the National Postdoctoral Association conference in mid-April, which generated really useful feedback and insights. Thank you to everyone who swung by our booth and helped us with usability testing and our five-second testing! It was so uplifting and motivating to chat with such passionate, opinionated people who are enthusiastic about ORCID’s mission. As part of that event, we got some first impressions on a new homepage that we’ve been working on, and the feedback thus far has been great.
I wanted to give a sneak peak of that new homepage with you all now.
The homepage is, in most cases, the first page that people see, so it’s important that we make a good impression. On our old homepage, our message was strong, but it had elements that competed for attention. We’ve restructured the content so that it follows a strong page hierarchy, in turn telling more of a story.
Our goal was to evoke a mood and feel that represents what we strive to be as an organization:open, transparent, and community driven. We hope we hit the mark!
We have a lot more improvements planned in the upcoming months. As we prioritize our research initiatives, I invite anyone interested to sign up to help with ORCID UX research. This may include one-on-one interviews, quick preference tests, usability testing, and many other types of research. If you’re interested, please email email@example.com.
You can also share your suggestions for new ORCID features and functionality (and vote on other users’ ideas!) on our iDeasForum.Blog
I am delighted to announce the start of this year’s search for dynamic and enthusiastic individuals from across the research community to join the ORCID Board.
Every year the ORCID Board nominations process gives the ORCID membership a direct voice in the organization’s governance. The Board’s composition and annual elections are an important part of ORCID’s charter, and the election process is a fantastic opportunity to ensure that ORCID grows and develops in close partnership with its members.
As this year’s Chair of the Nominations Committee, I look forward to working closely with the other Committee members, who represent an excellent variety of organizations, member types, and regions. They are:
- Heath Marks, Australian Access Federation (Australia)
- Daisy Selematsela, UNISA (South Africa)
- Simeon Warner, Cornell University (USA)
- Karin Wulf, College of William & Mary (USA)
- Shouguang Xie, Social Sciences Academic Press (China)
- Kazutsuna Yamaji, National Institute of Informatics (Japan)
The role of the Nominations Committee is to select a ‘slate’ of candidates that is balanced and diverse, taking into account different sectors, regions, skills, and non-profit status requirements as established in the ORCID bylaws, and we are also seeking to make the Board more representative of our community’s demographics. New Board members should ideally offer perspectives that are not represented (or fully represented) on the ORCID Board, and you can see the make-up of the current Board here.
Other than two unaffiliated researcher member positions (one of which will be open for this year’s election process), ORCID Board members must be from current ORCID member organizations, all of which are eligible to nominate representatives to serve on the Board. New Board members will serve for a period of three years, starting from the February 2020 Board meeting. They are expected to attend each of three annual Board meetings in person, and to play an active role in ORCID activities during the course of their term. To help achieve our goal of broad representation across sectors and regions, from 2020 we are introducing a Board Meeting Attendance Fund, to reduce financial barriers to participation in Board governance. For more information about the roles and responsibilities of ORCID Board Directors, please see the Elections web page.
Please send us your recommendations for new ORCID Board members using this form. You can nominate yourself or (with their permission) another individual, Please be sure to tell us what strengths you would bring to the Board, and why you’re interested in serving. We will consider all recommendations received by August 1, 2019.
The slate will be presented to the current Board for approval at our September meeting, after which it will be announced publicly. The community has the choice of either voting on the slate or proposing additional candidates (within 30 days of the slate being announced), in which case the election will become a plurality vote by candidate. To propose additional candidates, a group of 20 or more members must submit a nomination in writing to ORCID before October 22, 2019. Note that the group may not include more than one member per consortium (for specific details, see Article III Section 2b of ORCID's Bylaws). We will send notifications and open the election by electronic ballot later in October.
The full process is summarized below:
ORCID Board 2020 Election Key Dates
May 2, 2019
Call for Board member recommendations
August 1, 2019
Closing date for Board recommendations
September 17, 2019
Nominating Committee presents slate for Board approval
September 23, 2019
Slate made public
October 22, 2019
Closing date for alternative nominations
October 23, 2019
November 22, 2019
Voting closes, results announced at virtual Member meeting
January 1, 2020
Elected members start their term
February 11-12, 2020
Board meeting, London (UK)
We look forward to receiving your recommendations over the coming months.
Please contact the nominating committee with any questions, or feel free to reach out to me directly. When voting opens, ORCID will be sending proxies to each main contact listed on ORCID membership agreements. If you would like to update your membership contact information at any time between now and then, please contact ORCID Support.Blog
Privacy is a fundamental concern for ORCID. One of the bedrock principles that guide our operations is that "Researchers will control the defined privacy settings of their own ORCID record data" -- they decide what information they share, and who they share it with. We are committed to this principle even though the information in ORCID records is often available publicly from other sources.
Every year we review our privacy and security practices to ensure that they remain in line with this important principle and the other values outlined in the ORCID Trust Program. We also ensure that these practices reflect global best practices. We make any needed adjustments and then submit them for evaluation by a third party. This year our policy and practices were reviewed against assessment criteria of the EU-U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Verification Program; TRUSTe has provided a letter of attestation of this review.
- Clearer release policy for government data requests. Our policy has always indicated that we may share information with regulators, enforcement agents, courts and/or other government entities if legally required to do so. In our most recent review, we decided that the language we used in this statement was ambiguous, leading to a lack of clarity about the conditions under which your data may be shared. We therefore removed the conditions of public safety or public policy, leaving only the legal requirement as a condition under which we would share data (section 6.4)
- Stronger privacy protections for deactivated accounts. While email addresses have always been protected in our database, we have decided to provide additional privacy protections for addresses belonging to individuals who have decided to deactivate their account. We maintain email addresses so that, in future, users can reactivate their ORCID iD if they wish. However, these addresses are now stored in a cryptographically-masked form that enables the iD to be matched to the email if the owner chooses to reactivate the account, but is not otherwise visible or accessible under any circumstance, including by ORCID staff (section 7.0)
- Greater security for data “at rest”. ORCID data are now even more secure. They have always been encrypted when displayed on a webpage or sent, with your permission, to another system. Now data are also encrypted “at rest”, ie, stored in an encrypted filesystem. This means that even if a bad actor were able to get direct access to the hard drives in our data centre, they would still not be able to read any Registry data. This closes off a potential attack vector, and complements the many other security measures we have in place. (section 10.0)
- Clearer policies for GDPR complaint handling. Under the European General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), organizations are expected to handle complaints about the data they hold on individuals in a specific way. Our policy now clarifies these methods and provides a reference to the local Data Protection Agencies that can help with resolving complaints if needed (section 11.0)
Thank you for your continued trust in ORCID!Blog
Tomorrow would have been the fifth anniversary of my first day working for ORCID. Sadly, today is my last day, but five years is a nice round number. That said, the real number is eight, and still counting. Let me explain…
I was working with ORCID well before it launched, starting in 2011 when my boss Neil casually asked if I’d mind leading Jisc’s ‘Researcher Identifier Task and Finish Group’. That was optimistically named as it turned out: they still haven’t finished. (I might be being a little bit facetious there - since then we’ve moved on from asking ‘should we adopt an identifier for researchers, and if so, which one?’ to deepening the integration of iDs and working with the members of the group, system vendors and the team at Jisc to innovate and create new tools to take advantage of the connections iDs have enabled. So, definitely not ‘finished’, but that’s actually a very good thing.)
One of my last tasks for Jisc was to deliver a keynote at the ORCID registry launch in Berlin in 2012, then I was off to CERN. While there, I was still working with ORCID as a member of the then Outreach Steering Group, and engaging with publishers and repository staff as we collected ORCID iDs for the authors who published in the High Energy Physics journals which participated in SCOAP3.
When I joined ORCID on May 1st 2014, at the time I thought my itinerary for the first month was crazy. I didn’t realise how well it prepared me for what was to come. I was straight off to Rome for CRIS 2014, which was basically part one of my induction, watching Laure work the room and getting to know the team at Cineca who would go on to form the first of our ‘modern’ national consortia. (With a pleasing symmetry, my last trip as an ORCID staffer was also to Italy, starting in Rome to meet the team at ANVUR, then to Bologna to visit Cineca, and finishing with a visit to the 4Science offices in Milan.)
After that first trip, I got home for a weekend, and then headed back out - this time to Chicago for my first board meeting, my second ORCID outreach meeting, and my first face-to-face meeting with ORCID team. At the same time, this was when I started to get to grips with the ODIN project, starting with a phone call at some insane hour of the night (whilst jetlagged to bits) with colleagues at the British Library. We started writing a report that is still shaping conversations now. I remember that particularly, because one of the other people on that call was Tom “Amazing” Demeranville, who later joined us to work on the THOR project and is now our Product Director. (Just for the record, I now have almost as many photos of Tom on my phone as I have of my own children. Make of that what you will.)
During that call, I was watching the sun come up over Chicago and Lake Michigan, until a river of clouds flowed in and gradually devoured the Chicago skyline. As you can see from this photo of the view taken during the call, it wasn’t at all distracting:
After that first month at ORCID, things really started to speed up. Over the years, these are some of the things I have learned:
- Packing: there is no way you can travel from 30℃ heat in Qatar to -10℃ cold in New York without somehow being dressed wrongly for both climates, but you can go an incredibly long way for several weeks on one small backpack’s worth of clothes.
- Bureaucracy: is totally unpredictable. Who could ever have guessed that applying in Switzerland for a Saudi visa as a British citizen whilst living in France would be anything other than straightforward? (It wasn’t. I didn’t go to Saudi Arabia. My apologies again to our friends at KAUST.)
- A conversation that begins ‘Could you pass by Tokyo on your way home from Sweden?” tells you that several weeks of your life are about to be used up. (I’m still not sure how they got used up, they just vanished into a blur of jetlag and waking up from unplanned naps and trying to work out which airport I was in from the language on the signs.)
- When your monthly expense report reaches 90 pages, you could climb Schiehallion in the time it takes to annotate all the receipts.
- When your plane catches fire, you’re going to be late for your workshop. Possibly even 33 hours and four planes worth of late… (I still made it though.)
If we’re going to talk numbers, here are a few more: since joining ORCID I have visited 29 countries, some of them many, many times (cough, looking at you France…). I have helped to launch 10 consortia, and to lay the foundations for several more. Between all the various projects and integrations over the years, I have worked directly with colleagues from 40 countries that I can think of without looking it up - so the real number is probably higher.
As well as ODIN, I’ve helped to write the final report from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation-funded Adoption and Integration Program, support the projects in the Jisc-ARMA ORCID pilot, design and deliver the THOR and Freya projects, and develop the bid that led to our biggest ever grant, from the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust (that one followed from a call in which Laure asked me what I would do with a million dollars, which piqued my interest just a little). I chaired the program committee for the first three PIDapalooza festivals. Most recently, I’ve been lucky enough to work with a group of several dozen brilliant funding bodies on the ORBIT project. These collaborations have taught me that while ORCID is a vision and an infrastructure, it is above all a community: a global network of members, integrators, policy makers, contributors and researchers which taken all together makes that vision possible.
The experience of working with this global community has been one of the greatest privileges I can imagine. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve arrived at a meeting prepared to present a ‘solution’ only to listen to what the folks in the room had to say and think “actually, that’s a much better idea”. The travel and the work have been exciting, but the real adventure has been meeting so many brilliant, brilliant, minds. From Lima to Oslo to Singapore, the invention, energy, and commitment to making research better that I have encountered has been an inspiration. To everyone who has made the last eight years so electrifying, thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Here’s to the future.Blog
Each year our project roadmap focuses on a specific sector and 2019 is the Year of the Researcher. So we are delighted to announce three new features that have recently been developed to help researchers to add and manage works on their ORCID record -- adding works by identifier, the new preprints work type, and a new way of grouping works.Adding works by identifier
You can now easily add works to your ORCID record using a DOI (Crossref, DataCite, and mEDRA only), PubMed ID, or ArXiv ID. This feature is available from within the works header on your ORCID record.
By selecting this option, you simply need to add the relevant ID, and the works data will be automatically populated, saving you the time and hassle of manually entering this information.
Please be sure to review the imported data before saving it to your record!
Please see Adding works by identifier for more information.Preprint added as a new work type
In response to requests from our community, we are delighted to announce that preprints -- versions of a paper made publicly available before formal peer review and publication -- are now available as a work type. Preprint items can be added to ORCID records using this work type, allowing them to be easily distinguished from other publication types.New work relationship - version of
The same work may be added to ORCID records from different sources. Works will be grouped together, based on shared identifiers (such as DOIs, ISBNs, etc.). We have added a new grouping method version of so that alternate versions of works can be linked together, for example a pre-print might include the published versions DOI, or an older dataset might refer to a newer version.
There are now three types of identifier relationships for works:
- A “part-of” identifier, such as an ISSN. Refers to the journal -- the article is “part of” the journal
- A “self” identifier, such as a DOI.Refers to the individual work itself
- A “version of’ identifier, such as an updated DOI.Refers to an alternate version of the work
For more information please refer to our KnowledgeBase article.Watch this space!
We are currently working with our user community on testing new features that will allow users to manually group works together.
We greatly value feedback from our community and we encourage you to add any iDeas for how we can improve our registry or API to our iDeas Forum.
ORCID is a simple concept that can be surprisingly difficult to explain. I know. I’ve been working at it for seven years now. With over 6m users and 1000 members around the world, we rely on our community to help explain what we are, how ORCID works, and why it matters. We need to make it easier for you, too!
We are open infrastructure, built by and for the research community, that enables researchers to distinguish themselves online.
We have used all sorts of infrastructure imagery - roads, bridges, buildings, plumbing - to illustrate how ORCID helps to make connections between pieces of information. We host regular webinars with stakeholders to share real-life examples of ORCID in action (learn more about the next one in What’s New at ORCID?), and this year we are working to create a repository of demonstration videos.
We also created our “circle diagram” to illustrate the how each of our stakeholders - researchers, employers, funders, and publishers - must take action to help build and use this infrastructure for everyone to benefit.
Our new infographic, created in collaboration with IDC, continues our effort to support community understanding of our mission. It provides clear statements of the community needs that drove the founding of ORCID, statistics on how ORCID is being used to make connections between researchers and their contributions and affiliations, and information about the benefits for and impact of ORCID on researchers and organizations. The infographic is available in Chinese, English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish.
Download the PDFs here to use the infographic today -- and let us know what you think!
- Diving right in: ORCID plans for 2019
- ORCID Annual Report for 2018 now available
- More outreach resources
- Celebrating ORCID@5 with the launch of new resources
This post was co-authored by Chris Erdmann, Library Carpentry Community & Development Director and Alice Meadows, ORCID's Director of Communications
We are delighted to announce that Library Carpentries and ORCID are co-hosting a webinar on What’s New at ORCID. Registration is free -- just add your name here -- and there will be plenty of opportunity for questions and discussion.
This webinar, at 10am ET on Thursday, May 16, will focus on ORCID’s new API v3.0, launching in May, which includes some valuable new features for researchers, their organizations, and the wider community alike:
- New affiliation types. Enabling researchers to be recognized for more of their contributions:
- Qualifications, such as continuing medical education and other certifications
- Membership of an association, society, or other organization
- Service, for example serving on a Board, as a reviewer, or other volunteer activity
- Invited positions, such as a visiting fellowship
- Distinctions, including prizes and awards
- Research resources. To connect information about the use of facilities and equipment, special collections, and other resources to ORCID records
- Schema changes. To ensure everyone can see the source of information on ORCID records
We’re especially pleased that we will be joined by some special guests from the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory (EMSL) at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), an ORCID member organization and early adopter of our API 3.0. Their Deputy for User Services, Terry J Law, and her colleagues Nathan Tenney (Developer) and Courtney Carpenter (Data Analyst) will share their experience of implementing the new API, including adding information about EMSL’s resources to their researchers’ records (see example below).
We warmly invite anyone who’s interested in learning more about ORCID’s new API v3.0 to join us on May 16!Blog