Purpose: – The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how knowledge of local research data management (RDM) practices critically informs the progressive development of research data services (RDS) after basic services have already been established.Design/methodology/approach: – An online survey was distributed via e-mail to all university faculty in the fall of 2013, and was left open for just over one month. The authors sent two reminder e-mails before closing the survey. Survey data were downloaded from Qualtrics survey software and analyzed in R.Findings: – In this paper, the authors reviewed a subset of survey findings that included data types, volume, and storage locations, RDM roles and responsibilities, and metadata practices. The authors found that Oregon State University (OSU) researchers are generating a wide variety of data types, and that practices vary between colleges. The authors discovered that faculty are not utilizing campus-wide storage infrastructure, and are maintaining their own storage servers in surprising numbers. Faculty-level research assistants perform the majority of data-related tasks at OSU, with the exception of data sharing, which is primarily handled by the professorial ranks. The authors found that many faculty on campus are creating metadata, but that there is a need to provide support in how to discover and create standardized metadata.Originality/value: – This paper presents a novel example of how to efficiently move from establishing basic RDM services to providing more focussed services that meet specific local needs. It provides an approach for others to follow when tackling the difficult question of, “What next?” with regard to providing academic RDS.

INTRODUCTION Many institutions have open access (OA) policies that require faculty members to deposit their articles in an institutional repository (IR). A clear motivation is that a policy will result in increased self-archiving. The purpose of this longitudinal study is to compare the impact of a campus-wide OA policy and mediated solicitation of author manuscripts, using quantitative analysis to determine the rate of article deposits over time. METHODS Metadata for faculty articles published by authors at Oregon State University between 2011 and 2014 was produced by integrating citation metadata from a bibliographic database and the IR. Author names, affiliations, and other metadata were parsed and matched to compare rates of deposit for three separate time periods relating to different OA promotional strategies. RESULTS Direct solicitation of author manuscripts is more successful in facilitating OA than an OA policy—by number of articles deposited as well as the number of unique authors participating. Author affiliation and research areas also have an impact on faculty participation in OA. DISCUSSION Outreach to colleges and departments has had a positive effect on rate of deposit for those communities of scholars. Additionally, disciplinary practice may have more influence on its members’ participation in OA. CONCLUSION Until more federal policies require open access to articles funded by grants, or institutional policies are in place that require article deposit for promotion and tenure, policies will only be as effective as the library mediated processes that are put in place to identify and solicit articles from faculty.

In July 2005, the Oregon State University Libraries began accepting electronic versions of student theses and dissertations into ScholarsArchive@OSU, the library's institutional repository. By January 2007, all Oregon State University graduate students were required to deposit their final research. This article compares past processes and workflows for print theses and dissertations with the present workflow for electronic. We provide the rationale for changes and review the cost- and time-savings produced. We describe the changing roles of students, technicians, and librarians in the metadata process as well as the value of students describing their own work.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to describe the findings of a survey of Bulgarian faculty about the extent to which their research is openly available, awareness of the European Union Competitiveness Council open access goal, support for the goal and preferences for achieving it.Design/methodology/approach: The authors conducted a survey of 584 faculty at six universities in Bulgaria using the Qualtrics online survey software. There were 222 effectively surveyed respondents.Findings: Bulgarian researchers are aware of arguments in favor of open access and believe that it benefits researchers in their discipline. Only a little more than a third of Bulgarian faculty are familiar with the E.U. goal of open access to all publicly-funded research by 2020. Once the goal is explained, they support it. Authors may not understand the intricacies of green and gold open access, but they are willing to meet the E.U. goal by either publishing in open access journals (the gold method) or depositing articles in open access repositories (the green method).Research limitations/implications: The results are useful to countries and funding agencies interested in achieving open access to state funded research.Originality/value: To date, there has been no research that seeks to determine the degree to which researchers are aware of the E.U. Competitiveness Council’s goal or that seeks to determine faculty preferences for achieving that goal. This paper explores methods available for achieving open access to the results of publicly funded research in Bulgaria.

(1) Background: Since the 1990s, theses and dissertations—a key part of scientific communication—have evolved significantly with advances in information and communication technologies. (2) Methods: This study reviews 99 publications examining these changes, drawing insights from international conferences and empirical studies in the field. (3) Results: Historically, a major challenge in managing PhD theses has been the shift to electronic formats, resulting in the creation of electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs). This shift involves four main tasks: adopting new digital formats, updating institutional workflows between departments, graduate schools, and academic libraries, implementing updated bibliographic standards (such as metadata and identifiers), and utilizing new tools and channels for distribution. With open science becoming a widespread research policy across many countries and institutions, ensuring open access for ETDs is an added challenge—though a substantial portion of ETD content remains restricted to institutional or library networks. Today, ETD management is on the brink of a new era, with advancements in data-driven science and artificial intelligence. (4) Conclusions: The development of ETDs varies significantly across different countries, regions, and institutions due to technological, organizational, and legal differences. It is essential for academic libraries and other stakeholders to address the challenges identified while considering these variations.

How are academic libraries organizing themselves in order to engage in the content selection and digitization of local collections? Are libraries creating new positions or units, assigning responsibilities to existing departments, setting up cross-functional collaboration among existing departments, or using a combination of these strategies? Who holds responsibility for the various activities related to digitization? The authors surveyed the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) to answer these questions.