Plenary: The Academic Research Enterprise: Structure, Leadership, Challenges, and Adaptation

Cliff Lynch: Delighted you could join us today, we’ll be getting started in about 90 seconds or so. Cliff Lynch: Thanks for joining us, we’ll be starting in about a minute. Cliff Lynch: We’ll be getting started in about 30 seconds. Thanks for being with us today. Cliff Lynch: All right, let’s go ahead and get started. Welcome, everybody. Thanks for being with us today. I’m Cliff Lynch. I’m the director of the Coalition for networked information and I will be introducing this session.

02:20 - Cliff Lynch: This session is one of a very small number of plenary sessions, which is part of the second day of the plenary days. Cliff Lynch: Of the CNI fault. Cliff Lynch: Member meeting. Cliff Lynch: Which is taking place virtually Cliff Lynch: A couple of mechanical things we are recording the session, it will be available after the session, we do have closed captioning available. Please turn that on. If it’s helpful. Cliff Lynch: There is a chat box and you’re welcome to use that throughout the session. There’s also a Q AMP a tool at the bottom of your screen. You can use that to pose questions for the presenters at any point during the presentation.

03:19 - Cliff Lynch: will address all the questions that have come in at the end of the session when Diane golden Burkhardt from CNI will moderate a Q AMP a session. Cliff Lynch: Let me just very briefly introduce this topic. Cliff Lynch: So, Cliff Lynch: If Cliff Lynch: SNR has been doing a whole series of important interrelated studies around the academic research enterprise around the services that support research around the role of the chief research officer in various kinds of institutions. Cliff Lynch: They’ve done it through analysis. They’ve done it through interviews. Cliff Lynch: And Cliff Lynch: It’s very rich work in an area that I think is largely under exam and and Cliff Lynch: Really a bit misunderstood by many people.

04:40 - Cliff Lynch: Outside of the well inside and outside of the research enterprise actually some of the roles and activities in here quite a mystery to many people. And I think that library leadership, for example, while they have certainly realized that effective relationships and working together. Cliff Lynch: With the chief research officer and their Cliff Lynch: Their team is essential, um, don’t necessarily fully understand that role and what it does. So I thought that this is an the same thing, by the way, should be said of CIOs at many of our institutions. Cliff Lynch: So I thought that Cliff Lynch: It would be very worthwhile for us to hear in a plenary session in some depth from the team at SNR or at least some of the team that’s been working on this.

05:51 - Cliff Lynch: Over the past months, I have to say I followed this work, particularly closely, both because of our interest in research support. Cliff Lynch: And what that comprises and how it’s delivered, but also because of the work we’ve done on research continuity and resilience through our executive roundtables so Cliff Lynch: I think you’ll find this extremely informative. And with that, I’d like to welcome January dechy Cliff Lynch: Why are eager and Roger Schoenfeld, all of whom I think are pretty well known to our community and thank them for joining us to fill us in on all this work, and I’m going to turn it over to Roger who will start off the discussion. Roger Schonfeld: Thank you so much. Clifford. Thank you for the invitation to present this this work today, but maybe most importantly, thank you to see an eye for recognizing and for seeing the importance of work on the research enterprise this year. Roger Schonfeld: CLIFFORD the, the executive roundtable that you mentioned for for folks who haven’t had a chance to read the notes from that it’s a it’s a very, very the report from that.

It’s a very, very important piece of work and 07:10 - Roger Schonfeld: The efforts around continuity or ones that we’ve we’ve really benefited from being members of the of this and participants in the CNI community this this this year. Roger Schonfeld: It’s just one. One example of the kind of continued importance that I think a lot of us have found from from the CNI community this year. So, so just a real recognition for for that. Roger Schonfeld: Chain and oil will be speaking in just a moment and and and so, so I don’t want to hold things up. But I do want to start with just a Roger Schonfeld: working definition of the research enterprise. What we’re really talking about here are the systems, the services staffing that that Roger Schonfeld: Of the work of the university to generate knowledge and and a lot of that in practice has to do with supporting scientific research and so you will hear a real emphasis on that in a lot of our discussions.

08:13 - Roger Schonfeld: Today, our presentation is drawn as Clifford mentioning from a number of projects we’ve worked on, but Roger Schonfeld: principally from from two. So in the next slide I’ll mention one of them, which is the senior research officer project, we just published this earlier this month. And this was a project that oil and I worked on. Roger Schonfeld: most closely in which we interviewed 44 Senior Research officers the vice presidents and vice provost for research across some of the largest and most research intensive universities in the US. Roger Schonfeld: And then the other project is is one that gene really led Jane and I worked on which which look at the impact of coven on the research enterprise. Roger Schonfeld: Large scale landscape review of everything that we could find that Roger Schonfeld: That that spoke to those impacts and we’re going to weave together some of the findings and analysis from both of these projects.

We really tried to separate 09:10 - Roger Schonfeld: In the reports, here’s what we know about the impacts of coven versus here are some of the larger kind of strategic and organizational directions, but in this presentation. We’re going to try to blend blend those two together, because of course both of those are are incredibly important. Roger Schonfeld: So, um, so I will just say a word or two about the presentation as well give it. I’m going to just offer a couple of words about the Senior Research officer. Roger Schonfeld: Then the role itself. Jane will talk about the financial framework and then oil will talk about some of the Roger Schonfeld: Important findings that came out of our conversations with the Senior Research officers external funding research support research data research analytics.

09:52 - Roger Schonfeld: And then I’ll, I’ll close with some some observations about compliance and human impacts, we expect have plenty of time for questions and discussion. So please, please get get thinking about about those already Roger Schonfeld: So this, the role of the senior research officer, this will be very familiar to some, but maybe a little bit less familiar to others. Roger Schonfeld: In the next slide, what I’ll show is that is that this is a big job. It’s, it’s one that has been increasingly centralized across Roger Schonfeld: At the university level in recent years, so that today at most universities. The role has a unitary scope in the sense that there is a single Senior Research Officer for the university as a whole.

10:37 - Roger Schonfeld: This has been the product of a number of reorganizations in the universities in terms of staffing and reporting and so forth. Roger Schonfeld: It’s also the result increasingly have an interest in systems integration so that data don’t have to be repeated and so forth. So that services can be provided centrally Roger Schonfeld: This role overseas. Hundred and up to more than 1000 employees at the universities and many of the universities that we that we profile. Roger Schonfeld: This is a Roger Schonfeld: This is an academic and administrative role.

It is 11:19 - Roger Schonfeld: It’s an academic and administrative role leadership role hub. So it includes. It includes everything from compliance and research safety. Roger Schonfeld: Research Support Services and enablement fundraising and other forms of revenue generation and also a variety at some institutions, a variety of interdisciplinary academic centers that are part of this role. Roger Schonfeld: It has the role has different titles, so we can see in some institutions that Roger Schonfeld: That it’s a it’s a vice president. Sometimes it’s a vice provost, sometimes it reports to the president or Chancellor, sometimes it reports to the provost Roger Schonfeld: Typically these roles are dotted line to some degree across both of those two organizations, but when it reports, the President when it has a vice president title is more likely to have other kinds of responsibilities, whether it’s innovation Government Relations communications, etc.

12:13 - Roger Schonfeld: And then finally, we developed, we kind of assess that there were two different models for these roles, all of the incumbents are highly successful scientists or administrators typically Roger Schonfeld: Some of them are following more of a professional model where they’ve been the department chair than they were the Dean of Roger Schonfeld: The dean of a school now. They’re the vice provost and one day they might like to be the provost or the president of an institution. Roger Schonfeld: In other cases, they are following much more of a of a service model where they will be taking a three year term or five year term. Let’s say Roger Schonfeld: As a faculty member often continuing to run a lab of their own and really seeing themselves representing the voice of the faculty into the research administration. Roger Schonfeld: Apparatus. So there’s some there’s as many differences as there are similarities underneath this term Senior Research officer from here I’m now going to turn things over to Jane, who’s going to really kind of connect the human piece into the finance.

13:15 - Roger Schonfeld: In which this role and its work should be understood. Jane Radecki: Great, thanks. Roger. If you could go to the next slide, please. Okay. Jane Radecki: So first before we dive into discussion. It’s really important to take a look at university revenue streams and universities dependencies on certain types of revenue. Jane Radecki: As everything that we talked about today can be affected by this financial framework. So as you’ll see from this chart there are really just a few main revenue streams for US higher education.

13:52 - Jane Radecki: And as many of us know several revenue sources for research universities have been and are being negatively affected by the pandemic. Jane Radecki: First revenue from hospitals and healthcare providers has taken a significant hit due to the cancellation of elective procedures that we saw in the spring. Jane Radecki: For large research universities that have medical schools and hospital systems under the purview of the university system, the revenue losses in the spring grew rapidly. Jane Radecki: What the pandemic has shown very clearly is that hospitals have the ability to be a substantial drain on the universities that own them. Jane Radecki: Second, we all witnessed as enrollments for the fall 2020 semester dropped and thereby tuition and fees or the largest stream of revenue for colleges and universities decreased.

14:55 - Jane Radecki: What’s interesting about this revenue stream is that historically in an economic downturn or recession enrollment at colleges and universities actually increases, but this has not been the case during the pandemic. Jane Radecki: We have especially seen enrollment of international students decrease, which is troublesome for some universities in terms of revenue because notoriously these students pay more, or in most cases, pay full price for tuition. Jane Radecki: And additionally, more financial aid has been needed by students then in many years past. Jane Radecki: Finally, there was a significant amount of refunds on auxiliary fees, which are things like room and board meal plans parking passes and so on, all of which are part of what makes up this other category from the graph on this slide. Jane Radecki: All of these refunds took place in the spring of 2020 and the financial impacts on institutions from the loss of auxiliary revenue was and his material for many Jane Radecki: These millions of dollars in refunds left holes in universities operating revenue budgets and decreased housing and other auxiliary revenue has topped the list of factors that influence the 2021 fiscal year budget for many institutions.

16:28 - Jane Radecki: So clearly, while many different sources of revenue have declined externally funded research, which is this brain grant circle that you’re now seeing on the chart. Jane Radecki: Has remained a strong revenue source with no immediate risks to its continuation on top of this external federal agencies have seemed to be relatively financially stable as well. Jane Radecki: Next slide please. Jane Radecki: One of the risks that universities had to be extremely cognizant about is that in most cases. Jane Radecki: Universities do not make money from externally funded scientific research, but rather in fact this research is very much seen as a loss for universities as they have to funnel money into these projects. Jane Radecki: The unfunded cause of research or then subsidized through university schools departments and and other contributions there by spending funds that are coming from negatively impacted revenue streams.

17:37 - Jane Radecki: As we all know, research experienced an unprecedented halt due to coven these temporary closures of research labs at universities. Jane Radecki: Not only impacted research progress, but it also had the fact of adding some undue pressures around the research office and indirect costs that needed to come in and be spent. Jane Radecki: So on average, around a third of most federal grants are allocated towards indirect costs and a portion of these indirect costs end up going towards the research office where they’re spent Jane Radecki: This money that comes into the research office from indirect costs from externally funded grants most time scientific grants. Jane Radecki: Goes goes towards ensuring the needs of the current research portfolio, but also to its aspirations. Jane Radecki: It also helps fund me to compliance measures proposal development administrative costs and and so on.

18:44 - Jane Radecki: So even when labs were shut down for a period of time in the spring and summer direct expenses such as travel and equipment or materials for project were unspent Jane Radecki: But they’re very well may have been a corresponding slowdown in the recognition of indirect costs from these projects in the research office. Jane Radecki: At the same time, many institutions and universities still had many expenses to pay for that are normally covered by said indirect costs such as research support services. Jane Radecki: While as I mentioned just a little bit ago externally funded research revenue has thus far been Jane Radecki: Relatively stable, there has been substantial risks to scientific research support and capital expenditure due to the inability to cross subsidize what would be considered a normal amount of capital from instruction and healthcare. Jane Radecki: These budgetary risks to research support are really important to consider. Jane Radecki: Especially when it comes to research cores as research cores are probably one of the most enabling shared services that senior research officers worry about Jane Radecki: Most importantly, why this is of such concern is due to the fact that research Corps enable capital investments at a level that would be impossible within a single externally funded research project or a single research lab.

20:25 - Jane Radecki: Finally, as we know from the recent library survey on library directors that SNR published last week, most research libraries are receiving budget cuts. Jane Radecki: It also became clear from interviews with senior research officers that even though revenues from research activities are steady and in many cases growing some institutions are fully expecting potentially devastating budget cuts to the research office. Jane Radecki: Next slide please. Jane Radecki: So, as we all know, scientific research was significantly impacted by the rapid shutdown of all non essential and non covered 19 related research thousands of research were researchers were left scrambling trying to figure out what to do to preserve their work. Jane Radecki: With research halted. It was assumed that the salaries for researchers would also be suspended. However, several White House Office of Management and Budget memos came out that Jane Radecki: Ended up authorizing a few short term exceptions to the guidelines in how federal research dollars could be spent.

21:44 - Jane Radecki: With personnel costs normally being the largest share of any federal grant institutions and researchers were allowed to continue to draw salaries from their grants, even when their labs were shut down. There were also other allowances put in place. Jane Radecki: Essentially, the goal of these policies was to attempt to preserve as much of the US research enterprise as possible in the face of unprecedented disruptions. Jane Radecki: However, it’s to be noted that these funding flexibilities were not extended indefinitely, which in many cases may have led universities to begin reopening Jane Radecki: Their lab sooner than they would have liked as federal agencies such as the NSF and NIH could no longer continue to pay researchers salaries, with no research actually taking place. Jane Radecki: In many ways, this meant the externally funded research activity and the continued need for capital had a really powerful and significant influence in shaping University activity and policy surrounding institutions. Jane Radecki: Allowing labs to reopen and researchers to return back to work. Physically on campus.

So with this financial framework in mind, I am now going to turn it over to oil to discuss findings from the Senior Research officers report more in depth. Oya Y. Rieger: Good afternoon. Oya Y. Rieger: It’s always a great pleasure. Oya Y. Rieger: And an honor to join the CIO forum. So our interviews with 44 Senior Research officers from the US to place in the thick of the pandemic. Oya Y. Rieger: So as you can imagine, the new jewels, we talk with we’re getting ready to start an unprecedented semester. Oya Y. Rieger: However, these two welcome when we asked them to tell us about their directions challenges and priorities beyond think can stage they were going through. So we would like to share some of our key findings, starting with buck. Oya Y.

Rieger: Well what excites sneer research officer is, by all means the vision of creating knowledge educating future researchers getting the innovation out there. Oya Y. Rieger: But to accomplish these goals they have been is an extremely important goal. Oya Y. Rieger: As one of the interviewees said restart has turned into a multi hundred million dollar source of revenue. Oya Y. Rieger: they implement a range of strategies to maintain and further develop the university’s revenue base and business model. Oya Y. Rieger: Research officers have funding related performance goals, the metrics used include the number and dollar value of proposal submitted or funded the percentage and distribution of scholars that submit proposals, for instance, beyond the STEM fields as many universities are interested in Oya Y.

Rieger: multi disciplinary work also external competition related to peer institutions could be a part of the metrics chip. Oya Y. Rieger: Well, it’s more efficient to implement a large grant than a smaller Oya Y. Rieger: So with increasing focused on taking on grand challenges in traditional interdisciplinary large scale projects are gaining more and more importance. Oya Y. Rieger: such projects metal new hire people skills in brokering partnerships, but also an effective and efficient service structured support or the proposal development and implementation processes. Oya Y. Rieger: Clearly, the research configuration is evolved however many universities continue to rely on distributed legacy support structures at the college and sometimes even at the department level.

So trying to develop common and Central Services, it’s indeed a big task. Oya Y. Rieger: Several interviewees told us that they need to avoid over reliance on the federal government corporate and slam traffic partnerships are increasingly essential Oya Y. Rieger: Not only to diversify sources, but also to fund prior areas outside federal agencies, for instance, climate change or stem cell research. Oya Y. Rieger: They were pulling incentives for working with companies, for instance, engaging in collaborative research. Oya Y. Rieger: Possible funds and scholarships. And also very importantly, creating internships and career tracks for graduates. Thank you use stressed. Oya Y.

Rieger: The significance of translating research and innovations into products within the state, especially at public institutions contributing to the local economy is important in generating public awareness and political support for research activities. Oya Y. Rieger: Research Support one of our questions during interviews was, how are the services that support research, such as shared facilities research computing and the library are evolving in your institution. Oya Y. Rieger: Well, Oya Y. Rieger: Research Support when we say research support the most important research support services across virtually every conversation we had was the research course can also refer to the research core. So let me just offer a very quick definition these facilities are centralized shared resources. Oya Y. Rieger: They provide access to instruments technologies testing and related services and very importantly, they provide expert technical and Consultancy Services. Oya Y.

Rieger: And in this case, you know, the P eyes and researchers, they can focus on their own areas of expertise and rely on our knowledge and assistance from research core staff. Oya Y. Rieger: And these facilities rely on cutting edge instruments and require significant capital and capital investments. Oya Y. Rieger: Research cores are important to be competitive. Oya Y. Rieger: Although these units often report up to the Senior Research officer. Oya Y. Rieger: Their business their purchase very and involved complex configurations of funds staffing and organizational models. Oya Y. Rieger: Well, Oya Y.

Rieger: You know, you, you probably have noticed that as we were as we were 29:38 - Oya Y. Rieger: Asking about research support we especially listed the library as one of the service providers. However, the library was held them mentioned Oya Y. Rieger: As the interviewees described as their research support configuration priorities and challenges when we probed and asked them specifically Oya Y. Rieger: Several mentioned that the library was evolving.

Sometimes they made references to indicate their awareness of budgetary pressures, especially with electronic resources they seem to be aware 30:18 - Oya Y. Rieger: Of extra data, but let me share some findings related to research data. Oya Y. Rieger: Well, Oya Y. Rieger: It’s clear from many interviewing interviewees that data services were largely a distributed and often actually uncoordinated function within the university. Oya Y. Rieger: Of these officers really do not feel that there’s a blueprint for how to do so and Oya Y. Rieger: They feel that none of your peers have figured it out yet either. Oya Y.

Rieger: There was a sense that treating public access as only a mandate was limiting instead 31:04 - Oya Y. Rieger: Researchers needed to be helped to see public access as part of the university is responsibility to make the products of research more accessible and shareable Oya Y. Rieger: When we’re talking about data in general. Oya Y. Rieger: Or specifically about research data, we noticed that they are mindful of. Oya Y. Rieger: Your technical issues such as security, privacy, confidentiality research ethics quality of data and reliability of data, so on so forth. These issues are very important for them, perhaps even more important than openness. Oya Y.

Rieger: Software that support research data gathering and analysis, such as lab notebooks and survey platforms did not seem to write their attention. Oya Y. Rieger: Many of them were familiar with electronic laboratory notebooks as a category, but it did not seem to be at their level they were mindful of disciplinary differences and some were skeptical of their broad views and value even the disciplinary differences. Oya Y. Rieger: That’s actually say a few words about the library’s role as the topic entered our discussions, why we were discussing research data. Oya Y. Rieger: There were certainly some references to the library within the context of research data and workflow tools for instance, some of the officers. Oya Y. Rieger: Either have tested or we’re getting ready to test digital lab notebooks in your university their offices already or universities. Oya Y.

Rieger: And several interviewees we’re familiar with the libraries role and creating research data management plans, actually, you know, one sentiment, I would, I think, are presented by one comment was that implementing research data management plans was easier said than done. Oya Y. Rieger: And a couple of interview is actually referred to the aspirational nature of the library, taking the leadership in research data stewardship. Oya Y. Rieger: They were really mindful and they were making these remarks, especially given the broad range of skills and resources needed and what is already available and the distributed expertise within their universities. Oya Y. Rieger: Research Analytics. So whatever questions involved research analytics and which is actually a quick definition, the curation aggregation and utilization of information about research activities and our Oya Y. Rieger: Publications data sets patents grants academic service and honors. Just, just to name a few. Oya Y.

Rieger: Well, several interviewees were skeptical about the continuing role and importance of traditional metrics. Oya Y. Rieger: These to be much more interested in assessing impact, such as innovations translated into products or jobs created and live state. Oya Y. Rieger: They are mindful of disciplinary differences. Some feel that research analytics systems often fail in incorporating contextual or institutional practices and values. Oya Y. Rieger: We also asked them if they have a research information management system, how it is working. Oya Y.

Rieger: They are generally familiar with research information systems such systems. The material is not engaged with them. In some cases, the program is delegated to a subsidiary office. Oya Y. Rieger: Or in some cases the program is Oya Y. Rieger: Some cases actually they understand the importance of data driven decision making and the role research analytics can play but they don’t feel that they have access to the required information and analysis to support their purposes. Oya Y. Rieger: When it comes to managing research information there were really a handful of success stories. Oya Y.

Rieger: One of the impediments seems to be the distributed nature of responsibilities. Again, we kept on running into his actual distributed nature and also challenges and assigning responsibilities and coordinating efforts in such an autonomous environment. Oya Y. Rieger: Many expressed a cholesterol level of dissatisfaction with their institutional research information management systems actually does it another occasion when the library was mentioned as running the university’s room system. And actually, the system was Oya Y. Rieger: Mainly perceived as an external facing communication tool. Lot of Dan and information management mechanism system in support of their work.

I think at this point I’m going to turn over to Roger to continue with findings from this new research officer said 36:58 - Roger Schonfeld: So now we come to the boring part compliance. Roger Schonfeld: And fact. In fact, this was not a boring topic at all in the conversations with the Senior Research officers is one of the themes that came up Roger Schonfeld: Most frequently with with em in discussing their strategic priorities. So we can go on to the next slide it. What was, what was quite clear was that when they say compliance. There’s of course many things that they’re talking about many issues that they oversee but easily the most Roger Schonfeld: Important of these in terms of new areas that’s really come up as a strategic priority are the issues of foreign influence and research security and Roger Schonfeld: For those who may not know, CNN is currently running a series of executive roundtables on research nationalism and some of the issues related to this so Roger Schonfeld: There will be report out shortly on that which I think will be terribly informative for for all of us on on these topics. Roger Schonfeld: But what we heard from the Senior Research officers was a widespread view that although often there’s a discussion about foreign influence or research security.

38:08 - Roger Schonfeld: Often the regulatory target of of that today is China there. We did hear some mentions of Iran and Russia as well. Roger Schonfeld: Some of the specific issues that came up from the Senior Research officer perspective in these areas is disclosure of foreign research funding and some concerns about whether those disclosures are Roger Schonfeld: Are adequate given the regulatory scrutiny of those as well as issues around flows of international graduate students, there have been some of you may know some some concerns about the Roger Schonfeld: About the, the kind of sourcing and interest of certain sets of graduate students. This area has been occupying huge bandwidth for the Senior Research officers. We’ve worked to understand the issues because there have in fact not been Roger Schonfeld: You know, there’s a combination of new regulation but also newly enforced existing regulation and I think just trying to understand what the issues are has been a preoccupation.

39:16 - Roger Schonfeld: We’ve been efforts to establish the processes organizational structures and the staffing, by the way, there’s no dedicated staffing and many institutions to try to ensure and manage compliance with with some of these issues. Roger Schonfeld: And of course, there’s been an effort to educate faculty members and make sure the faculty members understand what their responsibilities and potential risks in some of these areas, maybe Roger Schonfeld: If we can go on to the next slide. One of the things that was really, really clear is that within this emphasis on compliance. There are also some real concerns that the Senior Research officers have Roger Schonfeld: Probably the one that came up most regularly was a concern about limitations in talent acquisitions and research competitiveness, were there were concerns about whether they would still be able to Roger Schonfeld: Acquire talent internationally to the same degree that had been possible previously and the implications that that could have on research competitiveness. Roger Schonfeld: There were concerns about scientific collaboration with universities and individual researchers and research labs and other countries.

40:26 - Roger Schonfeld: And there were concerns you know frankly about the basic principles of scientific openness and the free exchange of ideas. Roger Schonfeld: All that said, we heard a variety of different views about the nature of this emphasis on compliance. We heard some individuals who felt very, very strongly that this was a reflection that this, this Roger Schonfeld: Issue of foreign influence and research security really was a reflection of research Nationalism, and even seen a phobia in the in the outgoing administration in the US. Roger Schonfeld: Then we heard others who said, Well, I’m reading on a classified basis. And I can tell you that at least some of these concerns are very legitimate so we heard a really wide range and everything between between those, those two extremes.

41:15 - Roger Schonfeld: I would like to Roger Schonfeld: Emphasize that the concerns here. Some of them are are are about competitiveness and so forth, but some of them are actual some of the concerns we heard from the Senior Research officers. Roger Schonfeld: Are real human concerns about the effects on individuals. And so I’d like to close. We’d like to close by talking about some of the human impacts that the Roger Schonfeld: Not just from research security but but also from the pandemic itself on the research enterprise. And so in the next slide, what you’ll see is that the human impacts of coven on researchers that Roger Schonfeld: That we were able to see in our landscape of review are vast.

I’m sure this is not a surprise to anyone but it would be remiss not to emphasize 42:03 - Roger Schonfeld: The limitations facing international students graduate students in this case is what we were focusing on because of Roger Schonfeld: Because of the research enterprise and the impediments that they face in in in coming to and staying in the United States during especially during the pandemic, but there were other Roger Schonfeld: Certainly other issues connected to that as well. We. It was also very clear that there are differential impacts from the pandemic and the associated disruptions. Roger Schonfeld: These impacts our inequitable by gender. Their inequitable by caregivers status. Your inequitable by career level. And this really comes into you know into how the research enterprise is staffed and the researchers themselves, how they are Roger Schonfeld: Have their career progression and professional development will will take place. Roger Schonfeld: And so just to kind of recap, we saw that there were substantial unanswered questions in these areas about international talent flows and so here you can see that the pandemic.

43:09 - Roger Schonfeld: And these issues around research security are probably compounding on one another in some in some deleterious ways Roger Schonfeld: There’s substantial and extra questions about the development of early career researchers and some of the challenges that that they may face from some of these disruptions. Roger Schonfeld: And although it was clear that there are likely setbacks in achieving gender equity in the academic science enterprise. Roger Schonfeld: There of course are substantial unanswered questions about exactly what what those will look like, and whether there are ways to ameliorate that. So with that we would like to bring the presentation to a close. Roger Schonfeld: We’ve certainly covered a tremendous amount of ground here and we would love to hear what resonated and what what questions there.

There may be where we can perhaps dig in a little bit further. Thank you. Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): Thank you so much. Roger and thank you and Jane for just fantastic presentation and overview of this landscape which is rich and fascinating and Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): Really just leads us to so many more questions about where we’re headed. And what more we need to be addressing and asking and thinking about. I really appreciate you setting the scene for that.

44:31 - Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): And as Roger said, the floor is now open for questions, so please feel free to type your questions into the Q AMP a box now and our panelists would be happy to address them. I know that cliff has a question. So while we’re waiting to hear from other attendees live. Do you want to go ahead Cliff Lynch: Yes, I do. And it’s, it’s a little bit long winded, but I’ll ask it anyway. So, particularly when we started looking into research continuity kinds of issues in the March, April timeframe.

There was a sense that we got at a number of institutions that senior leadership seem to roughly equate 45:21 - Cliff Lynch: Their research enterprise with the stuff we do in the labs here. Cliff Lynch: Which I found very interesting Cliff Lynch: I’m thinking a little bit about your definition of the research enterprise and it seems like there are a couple ways you could go at it. One is a purely is this sort of, well, it’s what we do in our labs. Cliff Lynch: Another way is to look at it as it’s anything we can get extramural funding for Cliff Lynch: And the, you know, sort of financial frame. Cliff Lynch: Lens. A little credence to that or you can use the sort of more general definition that I believe Roger opened with about you know it’s it’s about the generation knowledge.

46:20 - Cliff Lynch: How to have in your conversations. How did, how did things like humanities factor in to the thinking of Chief research officers and maybe as as one additional sort of sub footnote to that I find your distinction between professional and service. Cliff Lynch: Approaches to the chief research officer position extremely illuminating and fruitful. Cliff Lynch: I’m in my limited experience here. When you look at people who are doing this in the service role they almost I cannot think of a, of an example that doesn’t come out of some kind of STEM field.

47:17 - Cliff Lynch: I’m wondering if you ran across any chief research officers in a service role, who came out of the humanities. Oya Y. Rieger: Roger, do you want to start Roger Schonfeld: Or perhaps I’ll, I’ll jump in and and or Jane can as as as as useful. Roger Schonfeld: I think that I would just say in terms of the definition I would start by saying in terms of the definition of the research enterprise, I think it would vary tremendously based on which Senior Research officer we spoke with so we spoke with some who Roger Schonfeld: You know who really see themselves principally as chief revenue officers for the for the research enterprise and for those. I don’t think that the humanities. Roger Schonfeld: Do meaningfully factor in except in so far as in a few cases, they really were looking at Roger Schonfeld: How could we generate more revenue for the Humanities. That was, that was kind of the discussion topic that at least one of them maybe to really prominently Roger Schonfeld: We’re trying to emphasize, and they were saying, Look, it’s not that we’re expecting the humanists to generate millions of dollars each.

But if we go from, you know, an average of 48:35 - Roger Schonfeld: $5,000 each to $10,000 each that’s a huge increase, percentage wise and it represents a validation of the an external validation of the, the kind of impact and interest in the work. So there was a kind of of mindset like that that we came across a few a few times. Roger Schonfeld: So, you know, I think the other way that the humanists factored in. We spoke about this already was in terms of Roger Schonfeld: The richness of these interdisciplinary programs and teams that some of the senior research officers were trying to foster Roger Schonfeld: On particular projects. And so we thought just humanists, I mean, it could be legal scholars, it could be Roger Schonfeld: Social scientists and others, but the idea of bringing together, you know, an ethics perspective on the biological Roger Schonfeld: Area, you know, biomedical area of interest or what have you.

There was a sense that there are ways that humanists can and should contribute to and support that work, and I think that was one of the one of the bits that came up 49:37 - Roger Schonfeld: Probably more more frequently than anything else in terms of how we heard about about humanists of Clifford your observation about the service role, I think is so service model is such an important one. Roger Schonfeld: Of those call of those Senior Research officers almost every single one of them was a Roger Schonfeld: Was a scientist and not all of them were necessarily a lab scientists, there could be you know field field researchers or observational researchers of one sort or another. There was one notable exception, who was a law professor Roger Schonfeld: And I think that may have been the only Senior Research Officer of what service or professional model, who was not a Roger Schonfeld: scientist by training at least and and in that particular case the individual brought to bear some pretty extensive policy and sort of legal interests that were germane to Roger Schonfeld: To the Senior Research officer role. So it wasn’t as surprising of a of a sort of, you know, intellectual property and knowledge and spring things, things of that sort. So let me stop there and where Jane me man may wish to add to that. Oya Y.

Rieger: Just, just one point to add 50:59 - Oya Y. Rieger: In every conversation we had this whole issue of interdisciplinary importance of interdisciplinary research was highlighted and Oya Y. Rieger: Always mentioned was scientists working with humanists social scientists and actually they ignorant often listed professional programs, whether it’s law, social work, school of management so on so forth. Oya Y. Rieger: But something you really did not check was whether this whole interdisciplinary thing was more aspirational as vision or how much they were able to put it in practice, but they were often mentioned about Oya Y. Rieger: Kind of structural, not necessarily the barriers, but impediments in means of kind of bringing individuals together and you know and motivating them to work together.

And again, I think, Roger already made this point but there were several mentions to 51:57 - Oya Y. Rieger: You know income cooking comparison to science, the funding sources for humanities not being robust. And again, that’s one of the reasons they are trying to diversify from, you know, getting funds from alumni or from foundations. So, so forth. I think definitely Oya Y. Rieger: I’m really happy to hear kind of this research enterprise definition, you know, being kind of formed beyond the science, although the science is at the center because of the revenues of generates or sometimes its impact, especially with health. So, so forth. Cliff Lynch: Thanks. That’s really illuminating. Thank you. Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): Thank you so much. Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): It. We do have a few more questions here in the queue. So let me just get right in there.

The first one is, could you give a better sense of the context when the library was mentioned by sorrows. Oya Y. Rieger: Sure. Oya Y. Rieger: Let me perhaps start and then I’ll turn it over to Roger and Jane. Oya Y. Rieger: I mean is you know SNR Oya Y. Rieger: We work very closely with libraries and Oya Y. Rieger: I spent more than 20 years of my life in the library. So we, we know when we add to these conversations we really want to understand the big picture, but we were really Oya Y. Rieger: Trying to also understand the space. These are the library.

So very, very specifically in at least two questions. Oya Y. Rieger: We asked about libraries libraries role. So that was where the context of the first big one was our research support. Oya Y. Rieger: And that we, as I said, that was the big question to start the conversation. And then we use probes, we said you know about the library. I was delighted you’re working and the second one was Oya Y. Rieger: research data and research information management system. So again, we did ask Oya Y. Rieger: As I said, you know, Roger nine these interviews were very much interested in understanding implications for Oya Y. Rieger: Various service providers that are really aiming to support the research enterprise so library was very important for us at least understanding. I hope I answered your question, Roger anything, Dad. Oh, gee. Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): I think that’s perfect, I think. Thank you. Oh, yeah. And thank you for the question.

And 54:29 - Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): Roger just pointed out to me there was a there is kind of a related question here that I think would be fine to go ahead and follow up on Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): On that last question from Sarah Pritchard who Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): Who asks, did any of your VP our interviewees seem to get that libraries themselves meet all the definitions of core facilities and library funding should be worried about Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): In exactly the same way. And then she comments too often on campus. We’re not clustered to advocate in that way. And I’m not talking about how overhead rate is split up. Would you like to comment on that. Roger Schonfeld: So perhaps I’ll try to speak to that. So the simple answer is no, I don’t think that the typical Senior Research officer that we spoke to Roger Schonfeld: Gets that even though of course we and that was the reason why we phrased the question. The way that the way that we did as we pointed out, I would say that the single exception, which I think may be of interest to some of the library directors in particular.

55:37 - Roger Schonfeld: Maybe not the single exception. One of the very, very few exceptions. Roger Schonfeld: Was a senior research officer VP of research, to whom the library reported Roger Schonfeld: So as, as many of the people in the CNI community will realize there tends to be a preference among library directors to report directly to the provost Roger Schonfeld: Whether as a vice provost for libraries themselves Associate Provost for libraries or as a as a Dean of Libraries, right, that tends to be a scene is seen as a kind of Roger Schonfeld: Signal of the kind of importance that’s given to the to the library, but in fact, the one case where the Senior Research officers seem to really, really get Roger Schonfeld: Some of the strategic things that were going on in the library was a case where that senior research officer had the library as part of their reporting responsibility, so I don’t say that to you know argue with anybody’s perspective on anything. I just thought it was very, very interesting. Roger Schonfeld: I think this raises a really important question, though, which is what are the things that libraries can do to build greater alignment with, you know, with the Senior Research officer and a greater sense of Roger Schonfeld: Sort of shared purpose and and so we’re actually one of the things that we’re thinking of doing is organizing a kind of cohort of Roger Schonfeld: research library directors who might be interested in exploring that that question. Further, so I’m happy to talk to anybody offline who might be interested in pursuing Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): That that was really interesting and great question. Sarah, thank you for raising that. Thanks for addressing it. Roger. Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): Another question.

Now, was there any consideration of working in the various open environments open source, open access open data. Oya Y. Rieger: Perhaps this is an editorial not a generalization. But as someone who’s really interested in preference. This kind of six that would make Oya Y. Rieger: One of the interviewees mentioned that their faculty now has increasing interest in using preference. Oya Y. Rieger: And he mentioned that maybe it was a recent meeting or they were discussing preference and it was very interesting, because he was thinking about reputation building and institutional reputation and risk. Oya Y.

Rieger: So it was an obvious to this person would of course be excited about openness, but his mind was really thinking about what does it mean for my university. Oya Y. Rieger: How would early sharing golf research going to affect my my University’s reputation, or are there any risks involved. So it’s just an anecdotal, but Oya Y. Rieger: There were definitely are definitely watching this space. And I think I try to articulate and I as I was talking about research data research data public Oya Y. Rieger: Access mandates. There is really great awareness among these Senior Research officers that it’s really important to engage the public’s and Oya Y.

Rieger: You know, and increase your confidence about research knowledge created and how it has impact on real individuals. So they are very mindful. Oya Y. Rieger: But, but they were talking about how do we tell our story. How do we unpacked research so it’s easier to understand. Oya Y. Rieger: And yes, openness is important, but is that open information making sense. And is it really leading to better understanding. I thought they were really much more thinking about impact, not opens for the sake of openness, Roger and Jane, you may have an addition.

59:29 - Roger Schonfeld: I think that’s really, really well said well and you know the Research Data case just really as you’ve already spoken just really made that clear that there were just so many Roger Schonfeld: Factors on their landscape, other than openness, it wasn’t to say that they disagreed with it or have any you know ideological opposition to it, but there were just so many other factors at play. I think that’s, that’s just Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): So interesting. Thank you very much. We really appreciate that question as well. Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): I see that we’re close to time here. So I’m going to go ahead and Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): I’m going to actually shut down the recording. But invite any attendees who’d like to stay back Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): Our panelists have agreed to stay with us a little bit longer here for a chat and we’d love to have you join us.

00:22 - Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): So if you just raise your hand. I can turn on your microphone and you can join our chat and thank you again so much to our three panelists Oya Jane. Roger. It was wonderful, having you here at CNI. We really appreciate Diane Goldenberg-Hart (CNI): Your coming to share this work with us. And thank you so much to our attendees for making time with us, we hope will see you at our next plenary where Fran Burnham will receive the pole of and Peter’s award. So hope to see you there. Bye bye. .