Cambridge University Press and ROR

John Lewis, Data Operations Manager at Cambridge University Press, tells us why and how Cambridge uses ROR in this latest installment of our case study series.

What made you decide to use ROR?

Cambridge University Press originally adopted GRID. After ROR became the primary community-driven, open registry of persistent identifiers (PIDs) for organisations producing research, Cambridge adopted ROR IDs into publishing workflows that require a unique identifier for institutions. A PID for institutions associated with the research we publish makes publishing services more efficient, streamlines business analysis and is essential for accurate business insights.

As the academic publishing industry pivots towards an Open Access publishing model, PIDs are becoming even more crucial in the nuanced delineation of research funding bodies, institutions funding the publishing of academic research and the relationships they have with the authors conducting the research.

How do you use ROR?

ROR is a critical facet in our analytical toolkit; understanding the totality of our relationship with a research body regardless of how we interact with them is impossible without a persistent identifier drawing our immense and very different data holdings together. As developments in AI continue to influence present strategy and future thinking on the efficacy of publishing models, bad data becomes a business risk. Too often, data attributes associated with research bodies are uncertain, inadequately classified and not easily resolvable. Poorly maintained data holdings prevent the dynamic opportunities AI offers to the industry.

Using ROR as a PID in our systems redefines our data; it becomes a new, exciting asset rather than an artefact of the publishing process. PIDs are a simple, yet very powerful catalyst to creating insights which enables publishers like Cambridge to make objective data-driven decisions; to define, assess, refine and deliver strategic goals and to make publishing programs as successful, rigorous, efficient and cost-effective as possible.

What were the steps you took to integrate ROR into your systems and workflows?

The use of ROR in our publishing processes and the application of it to our data holdings is an ongoing process. It affects multiple workflows, databases, repositories, dashboards, publishing tools, and extensive examination of our data holdings associated with research institutions across systems used for different aspects of publishing and providing access to research.

Cambridge, like many academic publishers, has existed for quite some time and our data holdings are vast, so our data strategy adapts all the time as we assess each system, repository and data asset. Cambridge is modernising and upgrading many of its publishing tools; making sure the metadata that defines our relationships with publishing partners is unambiguous is a priority.

Over the years, institutions have been referred to in myriad ways, for lots of reasons, not least system variances, interactivity with other technologies, human intervention and the evolving cultural, historical and political environments academic research organisations exist within. The relationships are not always obvious, but this is precisely what the use of a PID like ROR is attempting to overcome.

What else would you like to say about ROR?

Cambridge is proud to be a member of the ROR community and to contribute to the adoption of ROR by associating it with the metadata for our published research and incorporating it into our workflows. A global, open, community-led registry that enables precise associations between researchers, their research and the institutions associated with it naturally allies with our continuing commitment to being a diligent contributor to the academic publishing community and helps us to realise our goals and ambitions as an Open Access publisher.