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 With well over 6m ORCID iDs registered, we are moving out of our startup phase.“New” has been replaced by “Widely used” in the top five attributes you associate with ORCID, and the number of respondents who have had an iD for three or more years, which has grown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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
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.