Subscribe to ORCID News feed
Updated: 1 hour 38 min ago

New Feature Alert! Verifying your Email

Mon, 24 Apr 2017 - 00:00 UTC

Verifying the email address(es) connected with your ORCID record is important.    A valid email is required for you to be able to log into your account, share your information, and manage who can access your record.  It is important also for us to be able to contact you in the rare event that we need to send an urgent service announcement.

We recently sent out a message to all ORCID record holders providing instructions on how to verify your email, and around 100,000 have already responded.  In case you missed that email, here is a description of the verification process.

To ensure that you and only you (or those to whom you have granted permission) can access and manage your record, as of last week, a verified email address is required to access key features of your ORCID record. You must verify your primary email address to:

Verification is not required to:

  • Add and edit your name and name variations
  • Change your account settings
  • Update your email addresses
  • Connect your ORCID iD to other systems and authorize them to read and update your ORCID record
  • Delete data that other systems have added to your ORCID record

If you have problems verifying your email or have any questions about this change, see our verification page on our KnowledgeBase. If you have problems verifying your email, our ORCID Community team is ready to help out - please contact us at support@orcid.org.

Have a suggestion to improve the Registry?  Please send it to the ORCID iDeas Forum for community discussion and voting to determine whether it gets added to our roadmap.


ORCID on the Road in the US and Europe!

Fri, 14 Apr 2017 - 13:36 UTC

ORCID is starting its 2017 US roadshow series in Chicago in April, followed by a series of European workshops in May. These events bring together the cross-sector ORCID community and provide an opportunity to share stories, technology and outreach approaches, and meet directly with ORCID staff. Registration is always free - and we provide lunch.  More details and registration information for the workshops are available on our events page, where you also can check on events we are planning later in the year.

US Roadshow

The first stop of our US roadshow will be on April 27 at the Big Ten Conference Center in Rosemont, IL, conveniently located near Chicago O’Hare International Airport. The event’s theme is “ORCID for Researchers and Organizations - Why, What, How?” In addition to presentations from ORCID staff, members, and ambassadors, representatives from ORCID’s community and technical teams will be holding open office hours.  Stay tuned for information about our Texas and Atlanta events later in the year.

European Workshops

On May 16 we are hosting a workshop at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden. The workshop coincides with our Board meeting, and we are delighted that several ORCID directors and Board members will be presenting, along with representatives from ORCID member organizations Stockholm University, Peerwith and PLOS. The workshop will include a consortium panel discussion featuring representatives from Sweden, Denmark, and Finland.

On May 22, we are hosting a workshop at the Czech Technical University in Prague, Czech Republic. The program will focus on why uniqueness matters in research and will include speakers from Tomas Bata University, EuroCRIS, and Project THOR.

On May 25, we are hosting a workshop at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest, Hungary. Program details are being finalized and will be published soon on our events page.

Bookmark our events page for the latest information on ORCID events!


The ORCID Open Letter: One Year On

Wed, 12 Apr 2017 - 16:57 UTC

The impetus for the ORCID open letter was, to quote Stuart Taylor of The Royal Society, the realization of several publishers and societies “that we could achieve more in terms of driving ORCID adoption if we worked together… By getting as many publishers as possible on board, we hope to get across a powerful message to the community that ORCID is of great benefit. Those benefits are only fully realized at high levels of adoption and when ORCID support is built in to all the systems researchers use (whether applying for grants, publishing datasets, acting as peer reviewers, applying for appointments etc).”  

The eight original signatories have since been joined by 19 more, including two organizations that had been requiring iDs since 2014 - JMIR Publications and ScienceOpen. There were a total of 25 signatories at the end of 2016 and today there are 27, with Springer Nature and Journal of IMAB signing in March.

Since the open letter is the first of it’s kind in relation to ORCID, we wanted to find out what impact it’s had in terms of ORCID registrations and usage, what sort of response there has been from authors, and what lessons have been learned - positive and negative. Our ORCID Open Letter: One Year On report, published today, includes feedback from many of the signatories, as well as our own data and analysis.

The open letter not only commits organizations to requiring iDs for authors, but also - critically - to adhere to several best practices, as recommended by ORCID: collecting authenticated iDs; including iDs in the publication metadata sent to Crossref, so that authors can benefit from having their ORCID record automatically updated; and using standard guidelines for displaying iDs in the published articles. Complying with these best practices helps ensure a positive author experience.

And it seems like, overall, this has very much been the case. Sixteen organizations have gone live with requiring ORCID iDs for their authors so far.  These organizations have generally followed our best practice guidelines, and since the open letter was published, over 250,000 articles have included ORCID iDs in their Crossref submission.  We see evidence of author delight when they report just how fast their new publications are processed to their ORCID account.  Further, authors are not reporting any substantive issues.  For example, as of mid-January, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) has had just two substantive complaints out of more than 23,000 post-mandate submissions, while the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) had only received one complaint out of over 18,000 submissions. This backs up the strong support by researchers for requiring ORCID, from our 2015 community survey.

Unsurprisingly, all signatory organizations have seen an increase in ORCID registrations and usage on their manuscript submission systems. The chart below shows the pattern for several early signatories, whose requirement came into effect at different times during the year (note that there is no overall data available for The Royal Society until June 2016, six months after they started their requirement).

There are still some issues around the use of ORCID iDs in journal publishing workflows that need improvement, in particular in terms of managing duplicate records, addressing author confusion about Crossref, and verifying affiliations.  We need to do more to articulate the value of engaging with persistent identifiers, for both authors and editors, which will help with all of these issues.

We are working to address all of these areas - for example by streamlining our login and password reset processes -  and will be updating our best practice guidelines and providing more information on members.orcid.org over the coming months.

We welcome your comments and questions about the report.  If you or your organization are interested in signing the open letter, you can do so here.

We’ll leave you with some community feedback on the use of ORCID best practices in publications workflows.

First, these words from a Wiley journal editor as a reminder of the value of using ORCID iDs:

“YES!!!! Please, in the name of all that is holy and to keep me from going blind disambiguating names when doing scientometric work - we absolutely agree to require ORCID IDs for submission!”

And, from Roger Schonfeld of Ithaka S+R:

“We at Ithaka S+R are in love with the auto-updating for ORCID records every time we deposit a new DOI. Wonderful to see an alert from ORCID sometimes come in even before a report is published.”




Mon, 10 Apr 2017 - 21:18 UTC



株式会社アトラス (since 2013)

日本地球惑星科学連合 (since 2016)

科学技術振興機構 (since 2013)

日本消化器外科学会 (since 2016)

慶應義塾大学 (since 2015)

物質・材料研究機構 (since 2015)

国立情報学研究所 (since 2013)

株式会社サンメディア (since 2016)

東京工業大学 (since 2016)

筑波大学 (since 2017)

ちょうどORCID登録者数が100万人を達成した2014年に、アジアで初のORCIDアウトリーチミーティングが東京で開催されました。名寄せの問題に強い関心が寄せられ、日本の研究コミュニティからたくさんの方が参加されました。このミーティングで開発が発表された物質・材料研究機構のNinjaプロジェクトは、満を持して今年度より本格実装となります。そのほか、東京工業大学のT2R2 (Tokyo Tech Research Repository)や、日本地球惑星科学連合のMyJpGUなど、ORCIDメンバー機関によるシステム実装が進んでいます。





Japan Now Has 10 ORCID Members!

Mon, 10 Apr 2017 - 21:15 UTC

Interest in ORCID is high among researchers in Japan, and we are pleased that the Japanese research community is responding.  With the recent addition of University of Tsukuba, Japan now has 10 ORCID member organizations, a mix of universities, national research institutes, funders, scholarly societies, and system vendors. The diversity of ORCID membership in Japan reflects the wide range of community support needed to seamlessly connect researchers with all of their contributions.

ORCID members in Japan

Atlas (since 2013)

Japan Geoscience Union (since 2016)

Japan Science and Technology Agency (since 2013)

Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery (since 2016)

Keio University (since 2015)

National Institute for Materials Science (since 2015)

National Institute of Informatics (since 2013)

Sunmedia (since 2016)

Tokyo Institute of Technology (since 2016)

University of Tsukuba (since 2017)

Back in 2014, when we hosted our Fall 2014 ORCID Outreach Meeting in Tokyo, the ORCID Registry was about to reach 1 million iDs. The meeting was full of participants from the Japanese research community with strong interest in name disambiguation. It was at this meeting that the NIMS Ninja project was first presented, and we are thrilled for its full rollout later this year. More ORCID integrations are underway by other members, including T2R2 (Tokyo Tech Research Repository) and MyJpGU.

Today, we have more than 3.2 million iDs registered globally, over 58,000 of which are from Japan. Of those, nearly one quarter are affiliated with RU11 (a group of top research universities in Japan), three of which (Keio University, Tokyo Institute of Technology, and University of Tsukuba) are now ORCID members and supporting their researchers through ORCID integrations in their systems. An increasing number of tweets from Japanese researchers are asking for more support from the community to integrate ORCID into research systems and reduce the time researchers spend managing their research information.

Following our ORCID workshops in Tokyo and Fukuoka in 2016, we are planning to return to Japan later this month to host an ORCID member meeting where organizations implementing ORCID - and those interested in learning more - can share experiences and challenges. Please contact Nobuko Miyairi n.miyairi@orcid.org, ORCID Regional Director for Asia Pacific for more information about membership and forthcoming events in Japan.


ORCID Elections 2018

Wed, 05 Apr 2017 - 00:00 UTC

The ORCID Board boasts a wide range of expertise and a diversity of professional and cultural backgrounds. Every year, we hold Board elections, giving our members the opportunity to participate directly in the organization’s governance.  

I am a new Board member and have been appointed by the ORCID Board to chair the 2017 ORCID Nominating Committee. I am looking forward to developing a slate of candidates for our next election in close consultation with my colleagues on the Committee:

As part of our charter, we are seeking member recommendations for new Directors. All ORCID members are eligible to have representatives serve as ORCID Directors. In addition, we are also seeking nominations for researchers, who need not be affiliated with an ORCID member to serve. I am currently the only unaffiliated researcher on the ORCID Board; my expertise is in the physical sciences, so we will be looking for a researcher with complementary expertise in a different subject area. We will draw up a slate based on member recommendations, taking into account balance by sector, region, skills, and non-profit status requirements, as established in the ORCID bylaws.

Board Directors serve for a period of three years, starting from our February 2018 Board meeting. They are expected to attend each of our three annual Board meetings in person and play an active role in ORCID activities during the course of their term. For more about the roles and responsibilities of ORCID Board Directors, please see our Elections webpage.

This is your opportunity to take a leadership role in the governance of ORCID. Please send us your recommendations using this form. We will consider all recommendations received before 1 August 2017.

ORCID members will be presented the slate in mid-October, after our Board meeting. At that time, the community will have the choice of either voting on the slate or proposing additional candidates. If the latter, 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 15 November 2017. Note that the group may not include more than one member per consortium (for specific details, see Article III Section 2b). We will send notifications and open the election by electronic ballot in December.

The entire process is summarized in the table below:

ORCID will be sending proxies to each main contact listed on ORCID membership agreements. If you would like to update your membership contact information, please contact ORCID Support.

We look forward to receiving your recommendations over the coming months. Please contact us with any questions.


Measuring Progress: ORCID 2016 Annual Report

Mon, 03 Apr 2017 - 00:00 UTC

I’m delighted to announce that our 2016 annual report is now available. This year, we’ve taken a different approach to reporting on our progress, structuring the narrative on our values and including key performance indicators. Our goal is to provide our community with a clear understanding of how our values and principles inform everything we do, from hiring to workshops to APIs.

Highlights include:

  • Growing ORCID usage and adoption: 165 new members and 8 new national and regional consortia

  • More places for researchers to use their iD: over 300 ORCID integrations launched in 2016

  • Statistics on our services and infrastructure: 99.9% API and Registry uptime and 93% of user questions answered within 24 hours

  • New programs: Launch of Trust and Collect and Connect

  • Continued community engagement: 14 workshops, two outreach meetings, PIDapalooza, and over 60 presentations at meetings around the world

We hope you find our annual report a useful resource and warmly invite you to reuse the content, including images - like all our resources, they’re freely available under a CC-0 license. Please share the report with others in your community and let us know what you think.


From Tiny Acorns... ORCID in Latin America

Fri, 31 Mar 2017 - 00:00 UTC

Latin America is well represented within the ORCID team. Three of our developers (Manuel Calvo, Angel Montenegro, and Jeffrey Perez) are Costa Rican; our regional Community Support Specialist - Ana Cardoso - is Mexican; while Ana Vera Wynne, who’s responsible for the US and Canada, and based in Boston, MA is Brazilian, and Gabriela Mejias, responsible for the Middle East & Africa, based in Berlin is Argentinian. And, I am writing this post from Mexico City, where I’m living for the next few months. So, Latin America  is close to our heart!

ORCID has engaged with the community in Latin America since before we launched the Registry.  Conversations about national and international research information management naturally included Lattes, the CNPq platform for managing researcher profiles used in Brazil and some neighboring countries and seen as a model for similar funder-managed platforms in the US and Europe.  ORCID was seen as a way to connect information across these platforms, and both ease reporting burden for researchers and improve the information available to the systems.

Less than a year after the launch of the Registry, we made the Registry interface available in Spanish, and Portuguese followed about a year later.  These local language interfaces were and are supported by our community, to ensure the information is presented in a meaningful way.   Brazilian usage of the Registry has been among the top 10 of all countries since our launch, and Spanish and Portuguese-speaking users, combined, make up our second-largest group of users after English users. In 2016, Latin America accounted for 8% of total usage of the ORCID Registry; Brazil was the sixth highest user of the Registry; and our Spanish (7%) and Portuguese (5%) interfaces were the second and third highest non-English language interfaces, driven in large part by researchers in Latin America.

We first started engaging directly in Latin America in 2015, with visits to Peru and Brazil. Shortly after, we were very happy to welcome on board a staff member based in Latin America, a Brazilian researcher who knew the region first-hand and who started the work getting organizations integrating ORCID.  In 2015, we welcomed our first member from Peru, CONCYTEC, the National Council of Science and Technology, who have been working to integrate ORCID into their national CV system.

Last year we held regional workshops in Brazil and Colombia and presented at several local and regional conferences. These, together with the help of our supporters and partners in the region, are helping to build an ORCID community of users.

As part of this growth, we welcomed three major Brazilian universities as ORCID members: Universidade Estadual Paulista, Universidade de Campinas, and Universidade de São Paulo. UNICAMP and USP are about to launch their first ORCID integrations, and 2017 promises more opportunities in Brazil, including an exciting opportunity to work with a federal agency.

In Mexico, Redalyc, a database of peer-reviewed open access Spanish and Portuguese language journals, has been a member since 2014.  In early 2016, they launched a very effective integration that both allows researchers to connect their iD to their Redalyc profile, and to easily exchange data between it and ORCID - a great example of interoperability. There are now 15,000 ORCID iDs in their system, 10,000 of which were registered via Redalyc. We also welcomed two new members, El Colegio de México and Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, this past year.

And we were also happy to welcome our first three Colombian members: Universidad del Norte, Universidad del Rosario, and most recently, Universidad de los Andes.

In 2017 we will continue to engage with the Latin American community, through workshops, one-on-one conversations, and through our support desk.  We look forward to seeing you!


The OI Project Gets Underway: Planning an Open Organization Identifier Registry

Thu, 30 Mar 2017 - 20:06 UTC

At the end of October 2016, Crossref, DataCite, and ORCID reported on collaboration in the area of organization identifiers. We issued three papers for community comment and after input we subsequently announced the formation of The OI Project, along with a call for expressions of interest from people interested in serving on the working group.

We had a great response and are happy to report that the Working Group has now been established, and is already underway with work to develop a plan for an open, independent, not-for-profit, sustainable, organization identifier registry. There is information about the OI Project Working Group on the ORCID website including a list of the 17 Working Group members. They represent a broad range of scholarly communications stakeholders.

The initial goal of the Working Group is to create a thorough and robust implementation plan by the end of 2017. Our scope of work includes three separate but interdependent areas:

Please take a look at the website for more information. We will be providing updates throughout the course of the year.

Want to know more? Contact us with any questions or comments. 


Here We Grow Again: ORCID in the US and Canada

Thu, 30 Mar 2017 - 01:48 UTC

As Director of Membership for ORCID, Douglas Wright manages our team of Regional Directors around the world, as well as having specific responsibility for ORCID membership in the US. Here are his reflections on the US and Canada in 2016, and his predictions for the upcoming year.

Can you give us a picture of ORCID in the US in 2016?

2016 was a busy year for us in the US, with lots of opportunities to meet with all sectors of our community. We hosted a roadshow in California, attended a variety of meetings, and held an outreach meeting in Washington, DC, hosted by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). We were delighted to welcome Marcia McNutt, President of the National Academy of Sciences, as our keynote speaker, as well as 150 people from across the research community for a day of panels, lightning talks, small group discussions, and networking.

Building on the work of the Sloan-funded Adoption and Integration program, we have seen growing understanding of ORCID and implementation in university systems in the US.  Over the last year, this has bloomed into four regional ORCID consortia: - CIC (now the Big Ten), GWLA (Great Western Library Alliance), NERL (NorthEast Research Libraries), and Lyrasis.  In addition, joining early federal agency adopters DOE, NIH, and FDA, we welcomed USGS, DOT, EPA, and NASA, as well as the Smithsonian. We’ve also grown our membership in other sectors, so that the US now represents a quarter of all ORCID members.

In terms of community adoption, in January, eight publishers and societies signed an open letter committing to implementing best practices for ORCID integration, and ultimately for requiring ORCID iDs for journal authors. As of the end of 2016 there were 25 signatories, including several of our US-based members - AAAS, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, INFORMS, PLOS, Rockefeller University Press, ScienceOpen, and Wiley - as well as Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery and JMIR Publications (Canada). Usage also continued to increase - to well over two million Registry sessions.

And it was a good year for ORCID integrations. In 2016 over 60 US universities began  embedding  ORCID in their research information management/CRIS systems, data and thesis repositories, identity management systems, and more. It’s really exciting to see these projects go live and begin to provide real value to the scholarly community.

What about Canada?

Very early on, to support our users in Canada, we decided to provide the Registry in French.  There are now over 58,000 registrants in Canada and over a quarter of a million Registry sessions. The success of the French language Registry was the impetus for us to support other communities in local language, and we now support 14 languages in the Registry interface. We have been talking with organizations in Canada all along, and in 2016 interest grew as other Commonwealth nations - UK, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa - began adopting ORCID at scale. We were invited to three ORCID workshops - in Toronto, Ottawa, and Vancouver - where we were able to both share approaches to ORCID from around the world and learn about the needs of the Canadian community.  We were excited to welcome Canadian Research Council, Carleton University, Ifremer, the Journal of Rheumatology, Perimeter Institute, Process Pathways, and the Public Knowledge Project (PKP) as ORCID members during 2016, and we hope that they will soon be joined by many more Canadian organizations as part of a planned national ORCID consortium in 2017 - see the Joint Statement of Principles EN|FR.

And what do things look like for 2017?

We are very much looking forward to engaging with the community during our first ever US roadshow. Between April and September, we will be visiting Chicago, Atlanta, and Dallas, where we will be hosting ORCID community events. We’re delighted that a number of our local ambassadors will be attending and speaking. We’ll also be back in Canada this year, of course - more news on that when the consortium officially launches. And we are starting new initiatives to understand how ORCID may be able to improve connections between researchers and their inventions and patents, and at commercial research organizations. Look for us at professional and industry meetings throughout the year.   

We welcome your input!


Are You Kim, Lee, or Park? ORCID in Asia Pacific

Tue, 28 Mar 2017 - 21:29 UTC

When considering ORCID’s role in Asia-Pacific, it’s important to understand why the need for researchers to be able to differentiate themselves is particularly acute here. Throughout Asia, in particular, name disambiguation is a well-known challenge. Across Korea, China, and India there are a lot of researchers with similar or identical names. In Korea, for example, the surnames Kim, Lee, and Park account for about half the entire population. In China, the most common 100 surnames account for more than 80% of the population. Transliteration is another common problem in many Asian countries, often resulting in names that are different in their original script being spelled the same in the Roman alphabet. And although English is the language of the international research community, particularly in the sciences, many researchers publish in their own language too, and these publications are often not covered in international databases. This makes managing their research portfolio rather complicated, requiring referencing both international and local databases as well as doing repeat author searches for multiple spelling possibilities..

So institutions, publishers, funders, and researchers themselves need to realize that ORCID is really important for them. We’ve already had some success with non-English language publishers; for example, the Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors (KAMJE) has adopted ORCID for their journals, and also recently launched KoreaMed search & link wizard. These integrations ensure that Korean medical researchers can easily connect their already published works, as well as having forthcoming publications automatically added to their ORCID record via Crossref auto-update. The sheer volume of local publishers is difficult to reach, however, so this year I will meet with more journal publishers in the region to explain how their international peers are using ORCID, and the benefits of integrating ORCID into their publishing process.

One of the big challenges of my role is the diversity of the countries in the region, from Australia and New Zealand which are very Western countries, to Singapore, which has a huge science sector (though in land mass it’s actually smaller than Tokyo), to Indonesia, which has over 4,000 universities. So, as in the rest of the world, community engagement is a priority for ORCID in Asia Pacific.

During 2016, we held our first outreach meeting in Australia, to coincide with the launch of their national ORCID consortium, comprising 40 research institutions. Over 130 people attended the meeting in Brisbane, including representatives from consortium lead, the Australian Access Federation, and many consortium members. We also ran an ORCID roadshow in western Australia, to meet with members and potential members unable to attend the outreach meeting.  In April, five Taiwanese universities formed a consortium, and the New Zealand national ORCID consortium launched in October with 34 members. The Australian consortium has been very active, both inside their country and also internationally, sharing their approaches and policies as other nations consider adopting ORCID at scale.  In New Zealand, the national lead of the ORCID consortium is piloting a module that organizations with few or no IT resources can use to integrate ORCID. 

Other events included workshops in Singapore, Tokyo and Fukuoka, Japan, Hong Kong, and Indonesia. I also received a lot of invitations to meetings and conferences to talk about ORCID; there is a real appetite to find out more about who we are, what we do, and how we are helping researchers. Thankfully ORCID has 15 volunteer ORCID ambassadors across the region who help to spread the word about the benefits of name disambiguation.

Usage of ORCID in Asia-Pacific continues to grow and now represents 26% of overall Registry use, with China (second highest globally) and India (fourth) especially significant. The ORCID website is available in Chinese and Japanese - and Chinese-language usage, at 11% of the total, is second highest after English. I’m delighted that I will soon be joined by our new Regional Director for China, Jason Hu, who will be starting in early April. Look out for more news about this soon!

Along with researcher use, institutional membership in the region is also steadily increasing. All eight publicly funded universities in Hong Kong are now members.  Japan has the most diverse membership, though small in number, including a funder, two national research institutions, two scholarly societies, two corporations, and two universities. We now have four members from Singapore, three of which joined early this year. While the ORCID community has started growing in these countries, it is also imperative to call for institutional support in other places where we see a huge uptake of individuals but only a small number of member organizations: China (more than 100,000 iDs and just three member organizations), India (more than 40,000 iDs, one member), and Korea (more than 30,000 iDs, one member). Organizations can help their researchers save time by supporting the use of ORCID. See how research organizations are integrating ORCID and building trust in digital information infrastructure. 

We look forward to continued collaborations with all members in Asia-Pacific during 2017. We will be participating in many conferences and meetings in the region throughout the year (CLSTL, ISMTE Asia-Pacific, OR2017, ARMS, to name a few), and also hosting a number of events in the region. We’ve already held our first workshop of the year in the region in Malaysia, with more planned throughout the year - check our events page for updates.


ORCID in Europe: Reasons to be Cheerful

Mon, 27 Mar 2017 - 20:41 UTC

Europe is the region with the most intensive uptake of ORCID, with 40% of Registry usage and close to half our members in 2016. In this post, Josh Brown, formerly Regional Director for Europe (now Director of Partnerships), talks us through developments in 2016; and Matthew Buys, formerly Regional Director for the Middle East & Africa -  whose role has expanded this year to include Europe - shares some of his plans for the region in 2017.


Engagement with ORCID in Europe continues to be high, and we were delighted to meet with members of the community from all sectors at our well-attended workshops in France, Germany, and Spain, and at our first members meeting in England.  Our 2016 member town hall meeting for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa was attended by around 100 people in person and virtually. It was a great opportunity for members to hear about our 2015 activities, 2016 goals, and our Board election process, and for us to hear from them about the use of ORCID in their communities.

We welcomed five new national ORCID consortia members from Europe during 2016. Belgium, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden joined Denmark, Italy, and the UK to bring the total number of consortia members in Europe to eight, collectively representing 215 institutions. By the end of 2016, European members comprised 48% of our total membership of 625 organizations globally.

With this large-scale national adoption in Europe, the community is starting to benefit from the network interoperability effects, as a near-majority of researchers use ORCID iDs as they publish and, increasingly, as they deposit data sets and submit research funding requests.  

For instance, Germany launched a three-year project to integrate ORCID into national systems that require reliable researcher identification.


In 2017, we continue to support our users and members in the region,  and are actively engaged with the research community  at the local and national level in several more countries in Europe, and are seeing growing interest by researchers and universities in Czech Republic, Latvia, Hungary, Russia, and Turkey.

We are planning workshops in Stockholm (May 16), Prague (May 22), and Budapest (May 25) and other events still to be planned - watch our events page for more information nearer the time.

Later this year, we will  be releasing the results of a European Commission funded project: Project THOR. This partnership between ORCID, the British Library, CERN, DataCite, and six other organizations is exploring take-up of identifiers in the humanities, social sciences, physics, and life sciences. THOR’s analysis will provide a clear understanding of the way different countries and disciplines use identifiers. This is helping ORCID and our partners to improve our support for these communities, and for the research community as a whole.

The ORCID European community - of users and members - is growing fast. We have learned a lot as we work with researchers and our members in the region, and thank all of you for your engagement and support.   


ORCID in the Middle East & Africa

Mon, 27 Mar 2017 - 02:07 UTC

Matthew Buys, ORCID’s Regional Director for Europe, Middle East, & Africa, talks about recent developments and upcoming projects in the Middle East and Africa.

Could you begin by introducing some of the challenges of name disambiguation in Africa and the Middle East?

There are three reasons why ORCID is particularly important in Africa and the Middle East: name ambiguity, lack of visibility in a global context, and multi-language publishing.

Not only are there a lot of common names in Africa, but people may use different naming conventions depending on where they publish. And in the Middle East many researchers publish in both English and Arabic, with the same name expressed in two different alphabets. There are also different naming conventions regarding surnames and nicknames.  These all create challenges for identifying  and connecting researchers to their contributions. It’s not surprising, then, that, in our 2015 community survey, African respondents viewed ‘‘mistaken attribution’ is the most important reason to register for an ORCID iD (84% compared with 69% across all other regions).

Text-based searches or  algorithms cannot reliably identify the individual and their associated professional activities – only persistent identifiers can do this.

Interest in ORCID in this region varies a lot. In East Africa the focus is primarily on ORCID for researchers, and the way it creates visibility for them. By having articles connected to their ORCID iD, and by having the ORCID iD connected to other systems globally, researchers get increased visibility for their work and a better digital presence.

In Southern Africa and the Middle East it’s more about interoperability and connections with other systems. Southern Africa, in particular, has a developed research infrastructure in terms of research information management systems, institutional repositories, and a national funding system.

Overall, the key benefits of ORCID for our users and members in the region are the increased visibility for researchers and the trusted digital presence that connects research information across systems. Researchers get a credible online presence, spend less time reporting, and research administrators can use ORCID to keep up-to-date on the professional activities of their researchers.

What were ORCID’s key successes in the region last year?

Compared with the early 2016, there’s now a much better understanding of what ORCID is all about. Crossref was already well known in the region as the persistent ID for content, and ORCID is now equally well known as the persistent ID for individuals. In 2016 traffic to the ORCID registry from MEA doubled, so it’s not just that more people have heard of us, they are also registering for and using an iD.

Hundreds of journals in Africa use Open Journal Systems (OJS), so a key development in 2016 was their improved integration of ORCID. Critically, OJS is now authenticating ORCID iDs, which improves the user experience of connecting their ORCID iD and creates trust in the metadata. The connection of our two systems is really important in this region.

One of the biggest challenges for members in the Middle East & Africa is actually building their ORCID integration. When we discuss membership, everyone can see the use cases, the benefits, and the cost-benefit; the difficulty is to find the skill set and the time within the institution to make the integration happen. IT support departments in African universities are overstretched so it can take a while, even when ORCID integration is a priority. Which brings us to 2017.

So what are your plans for 2017?

It’s important to remember that the public API is of huge benefit to African institutions, as is the fact that the service is free to researchers. ORCID is a non-profit mission-driven community initiative.  It is our mission to work together with the community to build an open research infrastructure.

There are really positive discussions happening at both a national and local level. I’m particularly excited about developments in South Africa, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, including some movements toward a national consortium approach to ORCID adoption and integration. This enables institutions to collaborate on integration, including appointing a dedicated support person to help with the integrations for all consortium members. That will make a huge difference to bandwidth and help members in the region get up and running with their ORCID integration. It’s going to be an exciting year!


Challenges of Measuring PID Adoption

Fri, 24 Mar 2017 - 00:00 UTC
The THOR team is hard at work helping forge the path to sustainable persistent identifier (PID) services – including ORCID iDs. As with any long-term goal, a bit of self-reflection is helpful for tracking your progress, considering your successes, and psyching yourself up to tackle challenges along the way. In the case of a project like THOR, we can help this self-reflection along by developing a structure to help us properly measure our success as we go. But this is often tougher than you might think.   In the early days of PID services, it was fine to be concerned only with uptake, since the priority was to get the word out. While we still have some work to do there, PID services have now matured to the point that we can no longer be satisfied solely with simply "getting the numbers up." We need to tailor our messages in order to drive further innovation towards the interoperable future that THOR and our partners dream of. Having better information about underlying motivations for adopting PIDs and about who might be ready to do so will help us drive the creation of services that will make the whole system better. To further this warm and friendly mission, we need cold hard facts. So how do we go about finding those facts? And how do we turn them into something useful and, quite frankly, a bit less prickly? What can be measured? The first step in evaluating our progress was to set objectives that are actionable and measureable. Though it's tempting to set strict performance targets, this is just setting yourself up for failure. If you define success as selling 50 widgets, and you only sell 48 then, by your own definition, you've failed. In THOR's case, our driving purpose is infrastructure improvement, so we're more interested in observable trends rather than concrete targets. Developing key performance indicators (KPIs) is helpful here. Remember that an indicator is just a way to consider trends (e.g. "number of widgets sold"), and it isn't itself a target (e.g. 50 widgets). How should it be measured? (With which indicators?) The next step was to determine how to measure what we want to measure. The goal here is to select indicators that are valuable as well as meaningful. "Valuable" means that knowing the indicator's status will help us to make a decision. "Meaningful" means that we understand what the indicator is actually tracking. If the trend line associated with our chosen indicator goes up, will we know what that means for us, and will we know how to react?   Part of the difficulty of selecting indicators in this way is that the most meaningful and valuable information for you might not be immediately available. When THOR first started down the indicator path, we just wanted easily gatherable quantitative measures; we weren't looking to take on any complex user studies. However, some of the information we wanted wasn't available, either because it wasn't being tracked on a regular basis or because gathering it ourselves would have been a manual process we weren't yet willing to take on. How should it be measured? (Tool or no tool?) Once you know what your objectives are and which indicators will help you track your progress to those objectives, you need a convenient way to monitor it all. Fancy tools may not be necessary, in fact most of the time they probably aren't, depending on which indicators are important to your particular flavour of success. But we wanted to demonstrate some of the possibilities of having PID measures ready to aggregate -- and if we're honest, we do like fancy -- so we developed a dashboard to keep everything in one place. (Read more about our process in our report.) Creating the dashboard was a good exercise in establishing what could be measured and how. It also gave us a chance to explore what meaningful metrics might be. For instance, we can see that PID uptake is on the rise, and we can see some information about the metadata that is associated with those PIDs, but this doesn't actually give us any insight into causal relationships or let us know precisely why this trend is happening or even exactly who is involved.   Because we're all about meaningful data, these adventures in measurement have led the THOR team to identify gaps in the available metrics surrounding PID service adoption and to consider which additional indicators might be useful for future work in the PID research space. We've now embarked on a more detailed gap analysis that will lead to a study of some of these missing measures. Since our goal is to drive PID service adoption, we've identified disciplinary coverage and geographic distribution as our most promising themes to pursue. We are now collecting the data we need to analyze PID adoption in X disciplines and Y countries – a full report will be available later this year. Moving forward So what have we learned throughout this process? First and foremost, not everything is as concrete as you might want it to be. When you're dealing with humans and human behaviours, things get squishy. Second, since we're only monitoring existing trends based on factors we don't necessarily control, some information available to us will remain just "good enough" until others can do more detailed work to either improve the data or flesh it out. Our job for the remainder of the THOR project is to point out what would be most useful to know about interoperability, so that it can be studied.   The PID field is still evolving and has a lot of growth and changes left in store. Some potentially valuable information requires further study to tease out. Our service adoption study, beginning with the gap analysis, will help us make a start on that research, and we hope to gather some useful information that can set the stage for future work. We'll also need help from the wider PID user and integrator community to improve existing metadata and to help us consider meaningful metrics.   As always, if you have questions or comments about THOR, please get in touch. Blog

Valuing privacy and transparency

Tue, 21 Mar 2017 - 00:00 UTC

Individual control is a core ORCID principle that we reaffirm each year during our audit of ORCID's policies and practices. ORCID users control what information is added to their record, the visibility of that information, and which organizations can access a user's record to read, write, or update their information. Individuals can store information such as their name, contributions, and affiliations in their ORCID record, or grant permission to organizations they trust to provide this information.

An ORCID record contains only metadata, so, for example, for a journal article, ORCID stores the title, author list, date, and DOI, but not the article itself. We also do not collect or store sensitive information, such as a user's address, tax ID, or financial or medical information.

Since 2013 (just after our launch) we have sought independent audit and certification of our Privacy Policy against international standards. This year, ORCID again engaged with a third-party auditor to recertify our privacy policy, and included an assessment of our data privacy management practices against current European Union (EU) regulation. The independent auditor has verified our compliance under the EU-US Privacy Shield Framework.

Privacy Shield, a successor to Safe Harbor, is a framework designed by the US and European Commission to provide organizations on both sides of the Atlantic with a mechanism to comply with data protection requirements when transferring personal data from the EU to the US. ORCID is committed to taking a proactive approach to meeting international privacy regulations, and we continuously monitor and align our operations with these regulations as they are released. We are currently taking steps to align with the EU’s new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) privacy regulations to ensure compliance when it takes effect in May 2018.

In recognition of another core ORCID principle, transparency, we want to highlight two changes in our privacy policy implemented during this year’s annual review.

Tracking technologies

While ORCID does not directly track individual users on our sites, we have always used industry standard third-party technologies to deliver a more secure and efficient website. Some examples of third-party tools that we use include spam protection technology to prevent bots from using the ORCID registry and Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) for faster graphic delivery.  In some cases, these technologies may collect data about users, often for the purposes of serving interest-based advertising on other websites.  We have now added a section in our policy to provide greater awareness of this use. ORCID does not display any advertising on our own site, nor do we receive any form of payment from such advertising, nor do we have access to the data collected.  Those users who do not want their information used for interest-based advertising may opt-out by clicking here (or if located in the European Union click here). (See Section 5 Information we collect for more details.)

Correcting errors

We have added information about making corrections to data in your record when there is invalid data, for example, due to ORCID system errors, changes to standards, null fields, or formatting issues. This change has been made primarily to allow ORCID to correct any errors due to our work. This type of error is fundamentally different from what might be incorrect data such as spelling mistakes, or inaccurate metadata; we will never make corrections to what may be incorrect data without an explicit request from the ORCID record holder. (S/he can also make the corrections him/herself, of course.) For more details about invalid or incorrect data, please review the ORCID Trust Integrity page. (See Section 8 Access, Review, Editing and Changing Data for more information.)

As always, please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns about our privacy policy, including the audit and these recent changes.


New Feature Alert!

Wed, 15 Mar 2017 - 00:00 UTC

ORCID works hard to be responsive to community input and improve the quality of our Registry and services. In response to your feedback on our iDeas Forum and elsewhere, we have been developing a number of features to help users manage their ORCID record; please see our 2017 Roadmap card for more details..

This is the first in our 2017 series of occasional posts to introduce these new features as they become available. This week, three new features have been launched - removing duplicate iDs (requested by several member organizations as well as users), exporting works to BibTex (requested via our iDeasForum), and the ability to filter search and link wizards for importing works.

Removing duplicate iDs

Minimizing duplicate iDs is critical to building trust in ORCID. Although we make every effort to ensure that duplicate records aren’t created, there are still situations where users find they have more than one ORCID record. Until now, users have had to ask our community support team to help merge these records, but now you can remove duplicate ORCID iDs yourself from within your account settings. In a couple of simple steps, items on the duplicate record are merged with your primary ORCID record, with the old iD set up as a pointer to your primary ORCID iD. Find out more about what to do if you have more than one ORCID iD.

Exporting to BibTeX

Importing works to an ORCID record from a BibTeX file has been possible for some time, and users can now also export works to a BibTeX file. It’s an easy process that you can access from the export works header on the works section of the user’s record. Find out more about importing and exporting to BibTex. And we also welcome your suggestions for improving our BibTeX parser!

Search and link wizard filtering

As the number of ORCID search and link wizards for adding works continues to increase, we have added two filters to help you quickly find the most relevant wizards for your needs. You can now filter by work type and/or region. For more information see Linking works to your ORCID record.

Please do remember if you have any suggestions to help us improve the Registry we warmly invite you to submit them to the ORCID iDeas Forum so that other researchers and member organizations can publicly discuss them, offer their own views, and vote for your iDeas!


Celebrating Pi Day the ORCID Way!

Tue, 14 Mar 2017 - 12:41 UTC

Pi Day 2017 is officially here - but ORCID and our community have been partying irrationally for the past few weeks, building up to our very own #ORCIDPi Day, when we celebrated our 3,141,593rd registrant!

We’re delighted to announce that our Pi registrant is Professor Olaf Weyl of the South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity, a research facility of member organization the National Research Foundation (South Africa)! Professor Weyl will be receiving his own personalized ORCID t-shirt, a box of delicious ORCID cookies, and some ORCID items to bake his own pie... Professor Olaf commented that he is "proud to be Pi"!

To celebrate with our wider community, we launched the #ORCIDPiDay countdown together with an online competition for the best pie pictures and tweets. Thanks to everyone who to everyone who took part; the lucky winners are:

Best Pie - Mathis O Riehle 
Best Tweet - Simon Kerridge

Special Mention - Oxford PharmaGenesis

(100/166 employees signed up for an ORCID during the run-up to ORCID Pi Day!)

Special Mention - Karama Neal

(The perfect Pi Day music!)

We’ve also taken advantage of this opportunity to thank our 25 oldest members with Pi Day cookies - not to mention thanking our Board with these delicious pies baked by Laure Haak, our Executive Director!


You might think after so many pies we could barely move? Wrong! To celebrate our 3,141,593 registrant we also launched a Spotify Playlist featuring the best Pi -and of course pie- songs.


ORCID has come a long way since 2012 - from zero to Pi - and today we want to thank you all and wish you a happy (ORCID) Pi Day!


eLife collects ORCIDs from authors of accepted papers at proofing

Tue, 07 Mar 2017 - 16:08 UTC

Authenticating researchers’ ORCIDs can be a daunting task for scholarly publishers, particularly for works with multiple authors. Requesting iDs from the corresponding author is the logical first step, whether by offering ORCID as a sign-in or registration option, or by allowing authors to link their profile in the manuscript submission platform with their iD. Many publishers now collect authenticated iDs from co-authors during the submission process and embed them in the manuscript’s metadata.

eLife is delighted to announce that we have taken our ORCID integration one step further, by giving contributing authors an opportunity to associate their authenticated ORCID iD with their work during the production process. When corresponding authors share the proof link with their co-authors, they are required to sign in via ExeterPremedia’s Kriya platform using their ORCIDs, which will then be collected and displayed with the article and delivered downstream to platforms such as PubMed and Crossref.

eLife, together with PLOS and The Royal Society, was the driving force behind an open letter published in January last year, committing to requiring ORCIDs in publication workflows. We were one of the original signatories and among the first to implement our ORCID mandate for submitting authors. We have been keen to collect authenticated iDs during the production process because we often receive requests to add ORCIDs at this stage. We see this as the best solution for both our authors and our workflow, as it enables even more authors to uniquely connect themselves with their eLife papers. Authors also benefit from the ORCID auto-update process by having their authenticated ORCIDs submitted to Crossref.

As well as showing our support for ORCID by signing the open letter, eLife is one of ORCID’s first member organisations to qualify for its Collect badge – part of its Collect & Connect initiative to encourage a community-based approach to developing integrations that benefit researchers, their organisations, and the wider scholarly community.

Authors who authenticate their ORCIDs during the production process will benefit later down the line, as eLife will retain their iDs within their profiles. Our reviewers are already benefitting from the initiative through the peer-review functionality, which enables us to add their reviewing activities for eLife to their ORCID records.

Contributing authors will be able to authenticate their ORCID iDs during eLife’s production process from today (March 7, 2017). Other publishers using the ExeterPremedia production platform will also be able to start collecting iDs during the production process.

This is a slightly edited version of a post published today in eLife News


Meet Joe Schwarze, our Privacy Specialist

Thu, 02 Mar 2017 - 23:30 UTC

ORCID has always been grounded by the 10 principles that guide our work and emphasize our commitment to being a respectful, reliable, inclusive, and accountable partner in the research community. This includes respecting the privacy of ORCID iD-holders, and their ability to control what information is connected to their ORCID record, whether that information is shared, and with whom. In late 2016, we launched our ORCID Trust Frameworkto provide greater transparency for the programs, policies, and practices that are foundational to our principles.

In December 2016, we further recognized our commitment to our principles and the Trust Framework by hiring Joe Schwarze as our Privacy Specialist, a new position focused on user privacy and data security..

Please tell us a bit about yourself

My full name is Joseph, but please call me Joe. I am originally from New Jersey, US - the very northern tip of what many people call the “Shore” (but no I am not like any of the characters in the TV show “Jersey Shore”!).  I am now based in Austin, Texas. I attended Stevens Institute of Technology, where I majored  in Cybersecurity; before joining ORCID, my professional career was focused on privacy concerns and regulatory compliance. Most of my recent work has been on the newly formed Privacy Shield program and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

What interested you the most in this field and the position at ORCID?

I like to consider myself an oddball when it comes to security majors, as I was always more interested in the privacy and regulatory side as opposed to the technical security implementation, which most of colleagues preferred. One of my favorite projects in college was writing a research paper on HIPAA. I did an analysis on the regulations and penalties put in place by the act, and then tracked how many hands private information could potentially touch after an individual signs a consent form.

I share ORCID’s values and principles of transparency and user control, which is a key reason why I was interested in this position. Often we see organizations hide behind a wall of obscurity, but ORCID is proud of its privacy policies and I am excited to be part of the team.

You’ve been here for a few months now. What have you been up to so far?

It has been a busy first few months! My core role is to manage the ORCID Trust program and ensure that we stay true to our values and principles of transparency and user control. So, my first project was to lead this year’s annual re-certification of our privacy policy. Within my first week, I was already deep-diving the privacy policy for the annual re-certification. I’ve also been formalizing our internal training on privacy and data security..

What are your major projects for the rest of 2017?

In 2017 I plan to help formalize and continue to improve ORCID’s Trust Program. This work will include projects like reviewing our policies and practices for consistency with the program, and building materials to support our users and member organizations as they work with ORCID tools within the spirit of the program. I’ll also be monitoring global activity and trends as they relate to program topics like privacy, security, and transparency; I’ll incorporate what I learn to ensure that our Trust Program remains relevant.

How are you going to be intereacting with the ORCID community?

Aligning with ORCID’s commitment to transparency, the community needs to be part of the Trust program. We are therefore kicking off a Trust Working Group comprised of members of the community. This group will be crucial in providing input and feedback to the ORCID Board and staff as we continue to build and evolve this program.

In addition, I am looking forward to creating resources for the community, including a series of general blog posts about security and privacy. If you have any topics in which you are particularly interested, please let me know. ORCID is lucky to have a really active community and I look forward to hearing suggestions from you.

Finally, there is so much good work being done in the research and scholarship infrastructure community, and I expect to participate in these communities as well.

Any parting words?

I just want to reiterate how crucial community involvement is for the Trust program. Please send suggestions and feedback for how we are doing!


(ORCID) Pi Day is Coming!

Tue, 21 Feb 2017 - 00:00 UTC

In March 2017 we will see our 3,141,593rd ORCID registrant and we’re planning to celebrate with our very own ORCID Pi Day!

We’ve come a long way since our launch in October 2012. As well as over three million registrants, we now have well over 650 organizational members, who have launched 300 or so integrations – with another 200 in the pipeline. We are lucky to be supported by an active and engaged Board, as well as a team of around 60 ORCID ambassadors around the world, and members of our community working groups.

We’d like to take this opportunity to recognize the 25 members who have been with us since our launch – each will be receiving Pi Day cookies to help us celebrate this milestone:

  • American Physical Society
  • American Psychological Association
  • Aries Systems
  • Association of Computing Machinery
  • Boston University
  • California Institute of Technology
  • CERN
  • Clarivate Analytics (formerly Thomson Reuters)
  • Copernicus
  • Cornell University
  • CrossRef
  • Elsevier
  • Faculty of 1000
  • Figshare
  • Harvard University
  • Hindawi
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
  • Modern Language Association
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Nature Publishing Group (now Springer Nature)
  • New York University Langone School of Medicine
  • Springer (now Springer Nature)
  • University of Michigan
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Wiley

Not to forget our wider community! All of the researchers, research administrators, librarians, funders, publishers, repository managers, service providers, and others of you who have contributed to our success and continue to do so. Thank you!

So, how will we be celebrating ORCID Pi Day? And how can you get involved?

Beginning today, we will be counting down on Twitter the number of registrations to go until we reach our 3,141,593rd – probably right around the week of the official Pi Day – as well as tweeting fun facts about ORCID, Pi (and pie). So, if you don’t already follow us on Twitter, make sure you sign up now (@ORCID_Org)!

Every week until Pi Day, we will be announcing a competition – for the person with the most Pi-related works and other outputs in their ORCID record, the best pie recipes, and the best ORCID Pi Day tweet. Winners, whose entries will be anonymized and voted on by the ORCID team, will receive a special ORCID Pi Day package – apron, spatula, and whisk – so that you can create your own pies in style!

We’re also creating an ORCID Pi Day Spotify playlist and will be inviting you to add your contributions.

And, on ORCID Pi Day itself, we will contact the lucky Pi registrant to congratulate her/him and arrange for their shipment of ORCID goodies. Runner-up goodies will be sent to the five people whose registrations are closest in time to the Pi registrant.

Please join us for some fun celebrations of ORCID's one and only Pi Day!