Quite different institutions but similarities in publications management at systems level:

• Both use Symplectic Elements to manage publications and EPrints for IR
• BU Research and Knowledge Exchange Office manages OA funding and ‘Bournemouth Research Information and Networking’ while the IR (BURO) is managed by the library
• UCL Library manages both OA funding and publications through the Research Publications Service (RPS – think this is the Symplectic Elements) and Discovery (EPrints)

Publications Management

• Researchers manage their data via Symplectic, which can also get data from Scopus and Web of Science, the data is then pushed out to profile pages and/or Repository

Institutional Repositories

• UCL IR (Discovery) is both metadata only and full-text outputs – 317794 outputs in total – includes 5111 theses
• Bournemouth only has full-text  – much smaller numbers – 2831 outputs in total – not all public access

Staff support

• UCL – a Virtual Open Access Team
  • Gold: 4 = manager + 3 staff
  • Green: 4.27 = manager + 3.27 staff
  • UCL Press: 1 http://www.ucl.ac.uk/library/ucl-press/
• Bournemouth
  • OA Funding – 1 manager
  • No fulltime repository staff
  • Rota of 3 editorial staff, working one week in three on outputs received
  • 0.2 repository administrator
  • 0.2 Repository manager

OA Funding

• UCL OA funding managed by OA Team in the library
  • Combination of RCUK, UCL and Wellcome funding
  • at least 9000 research pubs per annum
  • RCUK 2013-14 target: 693 papers – successfully processed 796
  • Current level of APC payments >2000 per annum

UCL has many pre-payment agreements in place for APCs

• BioMed Central
• Elsevier
• BMJ Journals
• RSC
• IEEE
• PeerJ
• Sage
• PLOS
• Springer
• T&F
• Wiley
• ubiquity press
• and more – and hoping to extend further

Pre-payment agreements have been very successful and saved money

Both Bournemouth and UCL have found it challenging to spend all the money available for APCs

Challenges for engagement

• UCL Discovery
  • Metadatga only outputs – poor quality, not checked, can be entered multiple times
  • Feeds into Symplectic Elements from Scopus and WoS can lead to duplicates: Scopus sometimes has records for pre and post publication and WoS can have a record also – and academics select all three rather than just choosing one of them
  • Academic engagement
  • Difficulty sending large files from RPS (Symplectic) to IR
  • Furious about how h index is calculated in RPS (manual entries aren’t counted, only items from Scopus / WoS)
  • Incorrect search settings in RPS
  • Don’t understand the data harvesting process – user managed to crash the system by entering single word search with common author name
• Bournemouth BURO
  • 2013 – converted with full-text only
  • Mapping data issues
  • Incorrect publications display on original staff pages
  • Academic staff left thinking BURO no longer existed [think implication is that it looked liked it had been replaced by RPS?]

UCL have very clear requirement for outputs to be deposited in IR – http://www.ucl.ac.uk/library/open-access/ref/

Sheer volume of outputs at UCL is overwhelming

At Bournemouth – advocacy a big issue still (especially since many thought BURO had been discontinued) – but now outputs in BURO and BRIAN must be considered in pay and progression.

Shared challenges

• Deposit on acceptance
• Open Access options – making sure academics know what routes of publication are open to them
• Establishing new workflows
• Publishers move goalposts, change conditions etc.
• Flexible support
• Encouraging champions in Faculties
• Use the REF2020 as a stick and a carrot for their research

UCL as a whole supports Green OA, but assists academics to meet their requirements through Gold OA route. UCL feels Gold will still be important to science disciplines

BU – funding will be available and has institutional support – but issues may arise depending on volume in the future