Journal of eScience Librarianship
Volume 8
Issue 2 Special Issue: Research Data and
Preservation (RDAP) Summit 2019

Article 1

2019-12-18

Collaborating Externally and Training Internally to Support
Research Data Services
Matthew R. Harp
Arizona State University
Et al.

Let us know how access to this document benefits you.
Follow this and additional works at: https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/jeslib
Part of the Scholarly Communication Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons

Repository Citation
Harp MR, Ogborn M. Collaborating Externally and Training Internally to Support Research Data Services.
Journal of eScience Librarianship 8(2): e1165. https://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2019.1165. Retrieved from
https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/jeslib/vol8/iss2/1

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
This material is brought to you by eScholarship@UMMS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of eScience
Librarianship by an authorized administrator of eScholarship@UMMS. For more information, please contact
Lisa.Palmer@umassmed.edu.

ISSN 2161-3974

JeSLIB 2019; 8(2): e1165
doi:10.7191/jeslib.2019.1165

EScience in Action
Collaborating Externally and Training Internally to Support Research Data
Services
Matthew R. Harp and Matt Ogborn
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

Abstract
The ASU Library is actively building relationships around and increasing its expertise in
research data services. We have established a collaboration with our university’s research
administration in order to coordinate our distinct areas of expertise in research data services so
that both entities can better support researchers all the way through the research data
lifecycle. The Library embedded itself into research administration’s learning management
system and works with their research advancement officers to engage with researchers and
staff we have not traditionally reached. Forging this new collaboration increased expectations
that the Library will expand existing research data services to more investigators, so we have
grown Library professionals’ internal competencies by providing research data management
training opportunities to meet these demands. In addition, the Library’s Research Services
Working Group established data competencies, workflows, and trainings so more librarians
gain skills necessary to answer and assist patrons with data needs. Greater expertise
throughout the Library enables us to authentically and confidently scale our research data
services and form new collaborations.

Correspondence: Matthew Harp: mharp@asu.edu
Keywords: collaboration, research data services, training
Rights and Permissions: Copyright Harp & Ogborn © 2019
Disclosures: The substance of this article is based upon a lightning talk given at RDAP Summit 2019.
Additional information at end of article.

All content in Journal of eScience Librarianship, unless otherwise noted, is licensed under
a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Journal of eScience Librarianship

e1165 | 1

Collaborating Externally and Training Internally

JeSLIB 2019; 8(2): e1165
doi:10.7191/jeslib.2019.1165

Collaborating Externally and Training Internally to Support Research Data Services
The Arizona State University (ASU) Library is increasing its expertise in research data services
in order to better support its community. As more and more academic disciplines work with
data, we must provide tools and services that strengthen and sustain efforts across our
campuses. The growing interest in data science and the sheer size of our institution require us
to expand research data expertise beyond just one or two librarians by developing
competencies in multiple librarians. In fact, these concerns require us to reach out to other
entities on campus to provide comprehensive support in this area. To put it succinctly,
“research data services are a larger-than-library issue” (Vitale, Marshall, and Nurnberger 2015,
26). We are currently establishing an active research data services collaboration with research
administration, which adds urgency to our own internal skill building.

The Office of Knowledge Enterprise Development (KED), ASU’s research administration, also
supports research data services for researchers at ASU. However, while the Library and KED
both have a common goal of fostering successful projects from proposal to completion, we
each have distinct priorities and expertise and utilize separate vocabularies to describe similar
concepts and processes. KED manages several large-scale units in the university, facilitating
activities from project planning, to proposal development, to grant applications, to
commercialization. It oversees state-of-the-art core facilities equipment and specialized
services, focusing on successful proposals, research dollars, compliance, and helping
researchers bring their “discoveries and innovations into the marketplace” (“Researcher
Support” n.d.). The Library supports research data services regardless of funding, and we
typically deal with researchers more interested in publication and open sharing than
commercializing outcomes. Regardless of our differences, as a hub for transdisciplinary
information management, the Library stands out as a natural partner and collaborator with
KED. Working together, we aim to identify sustainable methods to support large-scale
university research data services.
In this article, we first discuss how the ASU Library and KED began working together to
support research data services and how our collaboration is expanding and growing. Next, we
describe the Library’s efforts to strengthen the collaboration by working directly through one of
KED’s systems and with its research advancement officers. The more successful this
collaboration becomes, the more demand the Library will see for research data services. Given
this, we next discuss how we are building competencies and confidence among library
professionals to provide enhanced, transdisciplinary research data services support in a very
large university. We follow this with a brief description of how our collaborative model with KED
is informing other collaborations. Finally, we discuss how our coordinated plans will enable
excellent research data services while also building foundations for further partnerships within
the university.
Strengthening an evolving collaboration
While collaboration between libraries and other entities on university campuses to support
research data services is not new (Martin 2017; Whitmire, Boock, and Sutton 2015; Wittenberg
and Elings 2017), specific collaborations between libraries and research administration have
so far been little documented in the literature. According to Cara Bradley, who conducted a
content analysis of the library and information science and research administration literature in

Journal of eScience Librarianship

e1165 | 2

Collaborating Externally and Training Internally

JeSLIB 2019; 8(2): e1165
doi:10.7191/jeslib.2019.1165

2018, “both librarians and research administrators regard themselves as integral to the
research mission of the university, but there has been little documented dialogue between the
two professions in the literature of either field” (2018, 17). Further, “no RA articles suggested
working with or partnering with librarians in a meaningful way, and the LIS literature only
infrequently raised the possibility” (Bradley 2018, 27). To some extent, then, ASU Library’s
active collaboration with research administration has few precedents.

Before the Library and KED could begin collaborating effectively, we had to address our
different vocabularies, expectations, and ways of working. KED’s vision of the research data
lifecycle has an entrepreneurial focus. Their very name reflects their emphasis on the
university as a knowledge enterprise, which includes establishing corporate partnerships,
designing innovation campuses, advancing entrepreneurship activities, and commercializing
research products. Just as they have a vested interest in facilitating and administering large
grants at ASU, they are also focused on technology transfer projects that result in patents and
licensing that generate profits. The Library is certainly not averse to commercialization, but our
focus is on open access, sharing, and the discoverability of scholarship. We are most
interested in the research data lifecycle as an ongoing, iterative continuum, with the ends of
projects informing and supporting the beginnings of new ones.
Although the Library first began meeting with KED to discuss research data services in 2015,
our early efforts at collaboration were unproductive. KED’s initial outreach to the Library
focused on their immediate concerns, such as data security and ensuring that large, restricted
data networks used by researchers were compliant with federal guidelines. These issues were
central to their vision of data management, while we were more interested in preserving data
and ensuring that future researchers have access to data generated by ASU researchers.
Nancy McGovern suggests that effective collaboration requires “coming together across
disparate, but engaged, domains in ways that are often unfamiliar or possibly uncomfortable to
member organizations and individuals in order to identify and solve problems together, to
achieve more together than we could separately” (2018, 6). Our collaboration could not really
take root until administrators in each organization decided that the collaboration was truly
important and began to dedicate time and resources to it. Earlier efforts at collaboration failed
largely because of a lack of this kind of support. The Library is now working with KED and
other affiliated organizations, such as the University Technology Office, to define our
respective roles and responsibilities in research data services. We are considering research
data terms from each of our perspectives and determining at which points in the data
management process each entity is best-suited to provide support.
One recent outcome of the Library’s collaboration with KED that demonstrates that we have
not yet entirely integrated our different views of research data services is the Library’s input on
a KED-driven researcher support guide. Currently, the guide shows five stages of a research
lifecycle, which ends with “Commercialize your work” (“Researcher Support” n.d.). However,
commercialization is not relevant for many researchers at ASU. The Library is advocating that
commercialization should be merely one option in a “sharing” stage that could also include
open access and the publication process. We hope that this more inclusive view of the fifth
stage of the research lifecycle will be reflected in the next version of the guide. Our
collaboration with KED is still very much a work in progress, and as our partnership develops,
integrating our perspectives will require ongoing negotiation and compromise.

Journal of eScience Librarianship

e1165 | 3

Collaborating Externally and Training Internally

JeSLIB 2019; 8(2): e1165
doi:10.7191/jeslib.2019.1165

Library outreach to KED
In our earliest and most direct collaboration with KED, we integrated library research best
practices and support tutorials into KED’s Research Academy learning management system
(LMS). Built by ASU’s Research Technology Office, the LMS acts as both an event
management system and a traditional e-learning environment. Some of KED’s tutorials in its
“Craft Your Proposal” series, which is targeted towards early career researchers and those
new to the university, include “The Proposal Narrative/Project Description” and “Budget &
Budget Justification,” to which the Library added “Data Management Tools” and information
that was integrated into a new “Proposal Writing Toolbox” tutorial. These tutorials familiarize
Research Academy users, primarily faculty, researchers, and staff at ASU, with the Library's
role in research data services. The Library’s increased presence in the Research Academy has
resulted in more research data services questions and consultation requests and has become
the foundation of ongoing collaborative efforts.

Users must authenticate before they can access modules in the Research Academy, which
tailors the availability of resources based on each person’s unique affiliation but also limits
access to content based on this affiliation. We do not want to send ASU researchers to
Research Academy resources if they may be unable to access them, and we believe that even
if access to some of the modules themselves is ultimately restricted, information about what
modules and resources are in Research Academy should be open to all. Nonetheless, the
Library is using Research Academy, which provides tagging, integrated campus maps, and two
-way communications with participants, to schedule workshops, register participants, and
target faculty and research support staff. It also alerts users to the Library’s expertise in
research data services when learning about university procedures. We benefit from direct
association with other enterprise-wide events, using the system to target audiences by
affiliations and as a direct line of communication with Research Technology staff, which allows
us to collaborate with their marketing and program strategists. We continue experimenting with
the system, providing feedback on some of the shortcomings of the platform to KED and
advocating for an open, accessible, shared system that enables the uses desired by both KED
and the Library.
Shortly after the integration of Library resources into the Research Academy, the Library
began working directly with research advancement officers (RAs), who are trusted members of
research project teams deployed throughout the university. KED hires RAs, trains them using a
research staff pipeline approach, and then transfers them into schools and colleges, where
they become staff. RAs are embedded to work directly with researchers for the entirety of
specific projects. KED also maintains a handful of direct RAs, who facilitate proposal
development and project support for units that do not maintain their own advancement officers.
Together, they form an enterprise-wide network of experts with a shared set of practices and
administrative approval.
Working with the RAs is an indirect and sustained means for us to connect with researchers,
but most RAs were unaware of the Library’s expertise and capabilities. To improve our
relationship, librarians now train RAs on library resources, reinforce our expertise in the
research process, and build familiarity. For instance, we have presented sessions on the Data
Management Planning Tool and how to access social sciences data from the Inter-University
Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). Changing the RA culture will take time,

Journal of eScience Librarianship

e1165 | 4

Collaborating Externally and Training Internally

JeSLIB 2019; 8(2): e1165
doi:10.7191/jeslib.2019.1165

but each time we present information to these staffers is an opportunity to remind them that we
are here to help.

Library strategies to meet increasing demands
In order to support the relationship that the Library is building with KED, we also collaborate
internally to enable successful implementation of research data services. Library administration
created a cross-functional research data services group called the Research Services Working
Group (RSWG), which is comprised of rotating representatives from collections, technology,
and engagement. The group supports liaisons and research project programming by ensuring
that outreach and training activities are properly resourced and in line with the Library’s
strategic priorities.
RSWG has developed research data management competencies in librarians, including
teaching best data practices, reviewing proposals, and making appropriate service referrals
both within the library and to the larger university community. It has also established workflows
that enable responsible and open research data services and has focused on growing
research data expertise to more broadly support the relationships we build with KED and other
university service points. Instead of having one or two individuals with expertise in research
data services, which is frankly unsustainable in an institution the size of ASU, we are building
capacity so that more librarians can answer and assist patrons with data needs, leaving only
the most complicated questions to those librarians with the greatest data expertise. Increased
competencies ultimately support the deployment of new services in a sustainable manner.
In 2018, RSWG sent out calls for Library professionals to attend out-of-state data training
events, asking those applying to submit simple statements describing their interest in the
opportunities and how they would disseminate what they learned upon their return. The
opportunity to travel and attend conferences and events is an appealing incentive, and those
chosen for these opportunities can network and learn new data skills to incorporate into their
day-to-day work and share with their colleagues. Participants increase both their own expertise
and the expertise of the Library in general. The Library pays for these trips with administrative
funding, which demonstrates buy-in from our Library’s administrators, who recognize that more
research data services expertise within the Library will enable more outreach.

Since May of 2018, eight Library professionals have attended four data-related training
opportunities. In each case, participants presented what they learned upon returning. After
attending a one-day ACRL Roadshow on research data management in Reno, Nevada, one
librarian enrolled in two National Library of Medicine data management courses, which in turn
led to her holding a workshop for graduate students called “Data Management Plans for
Successful Grant Proposals.” She has since become a research data services expert in health
science-related research and grant projects. After attending a five-day ICPSR workshop in Ann
Arbor, Michigan, one librarian became ASU’s ICPSR Designated Representative and began
networking and collaborating with other individuals and entities on campus who are actively
involved with ICPSR data. Both librarians who attended the ICPSR workshop have begun
offering social science data workshops to graduate students on multiple campuses. One of the
main impacts of these internal training opportunities has been the Library’s ability to more
directly support data-related projects, including workshops, events, and consultations.

Journal of eScience Librarianship

e1165 | 5

Collaborating Externally and Training Internally

JeSLIB 2019; 8(2): e1165
doi:10.7191/jeslib.2019.1165

Future directions
As we begin to see dividends from our efforts at competency building within the Library and the
new relationship that we’re establishing with KED, we are thinking about ways to expand our
services. Connecting with RAs, developing internal training and competency programs, and
regularly engaging with KED are strategic components of a combined effort to include the
Library in an enterprise-wide researcher service providers (RSP) team that will coordinate
events and produce shared marketing collateral. The RSP team’s first deliverable is the
aforementioned researcher support guide based on the project lifecycle, which directs
researchers to the entities on campus that are the experts in each stage of the research
process. The Library’s contributions include our research data services, author consultations,
and how our maker services tie into prototyping and product development. The RSP has also
begun to host events for new faculty and researchers at ASU.
Building upon our success collaborating with KED, we are looking to establish other
relationships that will support good research data practices on campus. The Library’s new
graduate student workshop series includes instruction on research data services. The Library
is working with both the campus Writing Centers to differentiate the expertise and perspective
of each entity in supporting graduate students and the Graduate College to identify what
research data services ASU graduate students need to further their academic careers. In both
of these cases, the key to supporting good, integrated research data services is relationship
building that will ultimately benefit our researchers and students.
Conclusion
The Library and KED’s ongoing collaboration has not been without some difficulties. Both
organizations had to wait until the right administrators were in place to explore and begin to
understand the different ways that we have historically approached research data services.
When it comes to diverse actors like librarians and research administrators, there is often a
“lack of common ground between professional services, as well as the gap with researchers’
own conceptions” (Cox and Verbaan 2016, 324). The Library and KED have both experienced
this lack of common ground, but we have persisted in meeting with one another in an effort to
provide high-quality research data services to our constituents. Our collaboration is still fairly
new, but the Library has already seen an increase in research data services questions and
requests for data consultations, which will only grow as we continue to work closely with KED.
Both organizations believe that our collaboration amplifies and expands the types of research
data services that we provide for the ASU community. As our collaboration continues, we plan
to reach out to other entities on campus to improve and enrich our research data services.
Disclosures
The substance of this article is based upon a lightning talk given at RDAP Summit 2019:
“A Case Study in Collaborative Open Research Training” available at https://osf.io/u6pdg.

References
Bradley, Cara. 2018. “Research Support Priorities of and Relationships among Librarians and Research
Administrators: A Content Analysis of the Professional Literature.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
13(4): 15-30. https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29478

Journal of eScience Librarianship

e1165 | 6

Collaborating Externally and Training Internally

JeSLIB 2019; 8(2): e1165
doi:10.7191/jeslib.2019.1165

Cox, Andrew M., and Eddy Verbaan. 2016. “How Academic Librarians, IT Staff, and Research Administrators
Perceive and Relate to Research.” Library & Information Science Research 38(4): 319-326.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2016.11.004

Martin, Elaine. 2017. “Advancing Data Management Education and Services.” Journal of EScience Librarianship
6(1): e1118. https://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2017.1118
McGovern, Nancy. 2018. “Radical Collaboration and Research Data Management: An Introduction.” Research
Library Issues 296(December): 6-22. https://doi.org/10.29242/rli.296.2
“Researcher Support.” n.d. ASU Office of Knowledge Enterprise Development Research. Accessed September
19, 2019. https://research.asu.edu/researcher-support
Vitale, Cynthia R. H., Brianna Marshall, and Amy Nurnberger. 2015. “You’re in Good Company: Unifying Campus
Research Data Services.” Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology 41(6): 26-28.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bult.2015.1720410611
Whitmire, Amanda L., Michael Boock, and Shan C. Sutton. 2015. “Variability in Academic Research Data
Management Practices: Implications for Data Services Development from a Faculty Survey.” Edited by Dr Andrew
Cox. Program 49(4): 382-407. https://doi.org/10.1108/PROG -02-2015-0017

Wittenberg, Jamie, and Mary Elings. 2017. “Building a Research Data Management Service at the University of
California, Berkeley: A Tale of Collaboration.” IFLA Journal 43(1): 89-97.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035216686982

Journal of eScience Librarianship

e1165 | 7