The presentation that Figshare CEO Mark Hahnel gave at the Swets Belgium 2014 customer day in hotel Bloom, Brussels (18 September 2014)

1. 32
It is not just about open or closed,
it is about control
Research Outputs Management
&
Research Outputs Dissemination

2. “But taxpayers who are paying for that
research will want to see something
back. Directly – through open access
to results and data. And indirectly –
through making science work better
for all of us.
That’s why we will require open
access to all publications stemming
from EU-funded research. That’s why
we will progressively open access to
the research data, too. And why we’re
asking national funding bodies to do
the same.”
Neelie Kroes.
Vice President for the Eurpoean Commission

3. 3
“The Obama Administration is committed to the proposition that citizens deserve
easy access to the results of scientific research their tax dollars have paid for.
That’s why, in a policy memorandum released today, OSTP Director John
Holdren has directed Federal agencies with more than $100M in R&D
expenditures to develop plans to make the published results of federally funded
research freely available to the public within one year of publication and
requiring researchers to better account for and manage the digital data
resulting from federally funded scientific research.”
February 22nd 2013

4. “Investigators are expected to share with other researchers, at no more than
incremental cost and within a reasonable time, the primary data, samples, physical
collections and other supporting materials created or gathered in the course of
work under NSF grants”
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf11001/aag_6.jsp#VID4
“NIH expects the timely release and sharing of data to be no later than the
acceptance for publication of the main findings from the final dataset”
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharingdata_sharing_guidance.htm#time
“NEH is committed to timely and rapid data distribution”
http://www.neh.gov/files/grants/data_management_plans_2012.pdf

5. 5
"Products of research are not just publications.”
NSF senior policy specialist Beth Strausser.
Biographical Sketch(es), has been revised to rename the “Publications”
section to “Products” and amend terminology and instructions accordingly.
13 January 2013: "National Science Foundation’s Merit Review Criteria: Review and Revisions” Chapter II.C.2.f(i)(c),

9. 2
What is figshare?
A cloud based research data management
system for academics and administrators:
Manage their research
outputs privately and
securely, with controlled
collaborative spaces
Public repository of all
research outputs from an
institution, with impact and
usage metrics

12. 4 Key Modules
1
2
Research Data Management
Private, controlled storage and collaborative spaces
for every academic at the institution.
Public Digital Research Repository
A customisable public portal with all digital files made public at an
institutional, departmental and group level.
3
4 Reporting Dashboard
Administrative Workflow Portal
A portal where administrators can manage curation of files to be
made public, storage space allocation and user rights.
Impact and Usage Reporting.

17. 37
Institutional API
The figshare API allows you to push
data to figshare, or pull data out.
This allows you to build applications on
top of your academic’s research.

20. 2206

21. 2217

27. •Incentivising compliance
•Facilitating international collaboration
•Integration into user workflows
•Quantifying impact
•Administrative curation layer
•Embargo support
•Open data principles
•Citable – with DOIs
•Increases impact of research
•Trusted Repository
•Persistent links
•Heavyweight infrastructure

28. 45
Thanks for your time.

29. Publisher examples
http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1003094#s5
51
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0059671#s4
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0059503#s5
http://f1000research.com/articles/2-5/v1
http://f1000research.com/articles/1-47/v1

35. Figshare’s positioning: the only player to support institutions all the way
to the top of the hierarchy: ‘Active Data’
Figshare Mendelay Archivum
Research
Gate Dryad Eprints
Fedora+Fr
ont End Zenodo
Lab
Archive
✓ ✓ no ✓
have the
community
✓
Needs
developers.
Files all stored
as individual
objects
Can but don’t
have a
community of
eyes on the
system.
Example of
Missouri
✓ ✓
✓ no no no no
Can track use
at level of
article.
No - needs
manual
intervention
no no
✓ ✓ no ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓
No – focused
on papers.
None of the
permanence
✓ no
✓
but not an
institutional
offer
✓
Own servers
so yes
✓
because its on
the institutions
servers
No – as only a
5 (2?) year
funding plan
Promoting
Sharing
Managing
Open Data
Making it
discoverable
• advocacy – driving uptake of
tools
• training for researchers,
• incentives?
• facilitating international
collaboration
• knowing the numbers. How
many papers, how many
citations, also for data
• Allocation of space around the
institution – e.g. 30GB / user.
User management
• Having a rights system for
access approval. CCO, CCBY,
CCNC etc
• Configurable workflow?
• Open data principles
• Having data stored somewhere
where – technically – it’s
discoverable – ie not on hard
drives
• Ensuring metadata attached
within 12 months
• Raw storage capacity
• Security and back up
• Persitent links
• Storage for 10 years from last use
(which must therefore be known)
Storing it properly • Archiving for posterity
no
Active Data