OurResearch’s Commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure

OurResearch is committed to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). This post summarizes how we are honoring these principles, as well as where we still have work left to do.

Since our beginning in an all-night hackathon ten years ago, we’ve tried to run OurResearch as a sustainable, open, and community-aligned provider of scholarly infrastructure. So while we didn’t write the POSI principles, we sure do recognize them: by and large, these are principles we’ve held (and argued for) from the beginning (eg: 2012, 2018). They’re consistent with our core values of openness, progress, pragmatism, sustainability, and community. 

So when someone asked us recently if we endorse POSI, our answer was HECK YEAH! Today, we’d like to follow that up with a more concrete, public, and formal commitment to these principles. This commitment has been unanimously approved by our board of directors.

The sixteen POSI principles are divided into three sections: Insurance, Governance, and Sustainability. We’ve arranged the document below in the same way. For each principle, we begin with a short description (in italics), taken from the original POSI paper.

If an item has a green heart 💚, we think we’re doing a decent job of it. But that doesn’t mean we’re doing a perfect job. We’re not. We’re committed to continual improvement, and continual vigilance to make sure we honor our commitments. If there’s a yellow heart 💛, we think we’re making progress, but still have a ways to go. We’ll be continuing to work on it. That may take us a while; this is a journey. But we’ll get there.

Finally: our thanks to Geoff Bilder, Jennifer Lin, and Cameron Neylon for authoring the principles, and thanks to Crossref, Dryad, ROR, and JOSS for their early POSI commitments, which gave us great examples to follow.

Summary

Insurance
💚 Open source
💚 Open data (within constraints of privacy laws)
💚 Available data (within constraints of privacy laws)
💚 Patent non-assertion

Governance
💚 Coverage across the research enterprise
💛 Stakeholder Governed
💛 Non-discriminatory membership
💚 Transparent operations
💚 Cannot lobby
💚 Living will
💚 Formal incentives to fulfil mission & wind-down

Sustainability
💚 Time-limited funds are used only for time-limited activities
💚 Goal to generate surplus
💚 Goal to create contingency fund to support operations for 12 months
💚 Mission-consistent revenue generation
💚 Revenue based on services, not data

(💚 = good, 💛 = less good)

Insurance

💚 Open source

All software required to run the infrastructure should be available under an open source license. This does not include other software that may be involved with running the organisation.

All the source code behind everything we do is freely available on GitHub under the MIT open source license. This includes our products, websites, and the software behind the papers we publish. Our code is “born open” — we write it in the open, rather than periodically posting a cleaned-up “open version” later on. Source code is archived via Software Heritage, ensuring availability over the long haul.

💚 Open data (within constraints of privacy laws)

For an infrastructure to be forked it will be necessary to replicate all relevant data. The CC0 waiver is best practice in making data legally available. Privacy and data protection laws will limit the extent to which this is possible

OurResearch makes the data behind our projects open. For example, you can download a full dump of the Unpaywall database, all 120M+ rows of it, any time. This data dump is updated at least once a year. That same data is also available via a public, open API with generous rate limits (100,000 calls per day). Past projects (Impactstory Profiles, Depsy, Paperbuzz, etc) have also always had an open API, and we commit to similar approaches for future products.

Sometimes users share their private data with us, so that we can use that data to generate reports and analyses for them. For example, Unsub users upload their COUNTER data and price lists in order to inform an analytics dashboard we make for them. We never share that private data, or the data derived from it. However, we do encourage users to share their own data, and we never restrict our users’ right to access and share any data they get from us. 

Some of our data, like Crossref’s, consists of facts that have no copyright. Where copyright is applicable, our data is licensed as CC0.

💚 Available data (within constraints of privacy laws)

It is not enough that the data be made “open” if there is not a practical way to actually obtain it. Underlying data should be made easily available via periodic data dumps.

As described above, OurResearch is committed to providing practical ways to obtain open data. 

💚 Patent non-assertion

The organisation should commit to a patent non-assertion covenant. The organisation may obtain patents to protect its own operations, but not use them to prevent the community from replicating the infrastructure.

OurResearch believes patents do not belong in scholarly infrastructure. We will not pursue or assert patents. We will look into making a formal patent non-assertion covenant as suggested by Crossref.

Governance

💚 Coverage across the research enterprise

It is increasingly clear that research transcends disciplines, geography, institutions and stakeholders. The infrastructure that supports it needs to do the same.

We are committed to serving a diverse group of stakeholders across the research enterprise:

  • Disciplines: our products cover the gamut of scholarly disciplines, including STEM, humanities, social sciences, and professional education.
  • Geography: Our users are worldwide, on all continents (except Antarctica…we’re working on that one) and in nearly every country. We take care to support papers and other works written in all languages.
  • Institutions and stakeholders: we serve all different kinds of institutions and stakeholders. Unsub users, for example, include not just the world’s largest research universities, but also industry labs, nonprofits, museums, community colleges, and philanthropies. Unpaywall is used by all of the above, as well as by academic publishers, library services companies (large and small), bibliometricians, research assessment exercises, and startups. The free Unpaywall extension currently has 400,000 active users, including large numbers of students, journalists, policy-makers, independent researchers, laypeople, and other historically neglected stakeholder groups.

By offering different types of products, aimed at different sets of stakeholders, we’re able to engage with a wide range of communities, and hear how their needs are similar, and how they’re different. We build infrastructure that cuts across communities where applicable–for instance, the open Unpaywall dataset is used in all kinds of ways. However, we also find places where a particular group would benefit from more customized tooling. For example, we built the Simple Query Tool (a web-based UI to Unpaywall) in response to requests from less technical users who wanted to access the database, but didn’t feel comfortable using a REST API. Later we built an Unpaywall repository dashboard for institutional repository librarians, a stakeholder group we didn’t originally consider.

Although we do strive to be inclusive, there are areas where we can continue to improve, and we intend to do so. For example, we’d like to improve our internationalization, by writing more documentation and UI components in languages besides English. In the next year we will be making an important stride to support diversity, as we provide better support for research works not assigned a DOI. 

💛 Stakeholder Governed

A board-governed organisation drawn from the stakeholder community builds more confidence that the organisation will take decisions driven by community consensus and consideration of different interests.

OurResearch is a 501(c)3 organization, with a governance structure documented in its bylaws. Our Board of Directors, being a small group, is limited in its representation, in terms of geographic, ethnic, gender, disability, and organizational diversity. The current board includes those with work experience as a faculty member, publisher, library advocate, teacher, and infrastructure builder, with educational backgrounds in science, engineering, history, and business. While this does represent many aspects of our stakeholder community, the small size of our board limits the extent to which the range of stakeholders can be involved. We recognize that increasing the diversity of stakeholders on our Board is important to provide diverse perspectives. We will work towards improving this.

💛 Non-discriminatory membership

We see the best option as an “opt-in” approach with a principle of non-discrimination where any stakeholder group may express an interest and should be welcome. The process of representation in day to day governance must also be inclusive with governance that reflects the demographics of the membership.

OurResearch is not a membership based organization, but we fully support the principle of non-discrimination in our hiring, Board appointments, community engagement, outreach and all other activities. We engage our community through GitHub, Twitter, our mailing lists, and conferences (virtual and in-person), and welcome “opt-in” ideas from anyone at any time. We will also be launching an advisory group, to broaden the involvement of stakeholder groups as members of the community. 

We do not currently have a formal Code Of Conduct to govern interactions between OurResearch employees and Board members and the OurResearch community. We are working on one.

Representation in day-to-day governance comes from our employees, Board of Directors, customer feedback, and engagement with the community online. However, because our Board is 50% women, 50% men, entirely white, non-disabled, and based solely in the USA and Canada, it does not fully reflect the demographics of our community of users, which is global in scope and more racially, ethnically, and gender, disability, and geographically diverse than our current board. We will work towards improving this.

💚 Transparent operations

Achieving trust in the selection of representatives to governance groups will be best achieved through transparent processes and operations in general (within the constraints of privacy laws).

OurResearch strives to be a transparent organization.  As a 501(c)3 nonprofit, all of our tax returns are publicly available; you can find links to these on our transparency page. That page also publishes executive salaries, incorporation documents, bylaws, and other relevant information.  All our grant proposals (funded and unfunded) are openly published and archived on Open Grants (search under “Piwowar” or “Priem”). 

💚 Cannot lobby

The community, not infrastructure organisations, should collectively drive regulatory change. An infrastructure organisation’s role is to provide a base for others to work on and should depend on its community to support the creation of a legislative environment that affects it.

OurResearch is a mission-driven organization that works toward accelerating the transition to open science. We’re not lobbyists and we don’t lobby. As a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, we strictly adhere to U.S. limitations in this area.

💚  Living will

A powerful way to create trust is to publicly describe a plan addressing the condition under which an organisation would be wound down, how this would happen, and how any ongoing assets could be archived and preserved when passed to a successor organisation. Any such organisation would need to honour this same set of principles.

Our core assets are our source code and datasets. These are both open. Software is archived via Software Heritage assuring long-term persistence. Key datasets are integrated into other open datasets (eg, Unpaywall is part of the open DOIBoost dataset).  Today and in the future, our data and code can be used by a wide variety of successor organizations. 

We are a non-profit company without equity shares, so are unlikely to be bought or acquired.  That said, we are looking into formal mechanisms to codify that any future disposal of our brand assets (trademarks, domain names, etc) could only be to organizations who honour the same principles.

💚 Formal incentives to fulfil mission & wind-down

Infrastructures exist for a specific purpose and that purpose can be radically simplified or even rendered unnecessary by technological or social change. If it is possible the organisation (and staff) should have direct incentives to deliver on the mission and wind down.

Many of the tools that OurResearch provides are “stop-gap” solutions. For example, in a world where all articles are open access at the time of publication, no open-access index like Unpaywall would be needed — the DOI would simply resolve to an open copy of the paper every time. Similarly, in a world without toll-access academic journals there is no longer a need for tools like Unsub to help librarians assess the value of journal subscriptions. 

We eagerly look forward to the day when our stop-gaps are no longer needed! We also plan accordingly, and will wind down projects (or parts of projects) as they are no longer valuable to the community. We don’t have formal incentives for this, other than looking forward to a really big party.

Sustainability

💚 Time-limited funds are used only for time-limited activities

Day to day operations should be supported by day to day sustainable revenue sources. Grant dependency for funding operations makes them fragile and more easily distracted from building core infrastructure.

Currently earned revenue fully covers the day-to-day operations of OurResearch. When we get grants, we use them to support the development and early stages of new products, or to fund one-time enhancements of existing products. We will continue to work hard to ensure this remains true in the future.

💚 Goal to generate surplus

Organisations which define sustainability based merely on recovering costs are brittle and stagnant. It is not enough to merely survive, it has to be able to adapt and change. To weather economic, social and technological volatility, they need financial resources beyond immediate operating costs.

OurResearch currently has an operating surplus. This hasn’t always been true — we’ve had some lean years in the past — but it is certainly our goal to maintain a surplus in the future. Our deliberate decision to run with a relatively small number of staff makes it easier to achieve that goal. Our experience running in both rich and lean times over the last ten years makes us resilient to a wide range of financial contingencies. 

💚 Goal to create contingency fund to support operations for 12 months

A high priority should be generating a contingency fund that can support a complete, orderly wind down (12 months in most cases). This fund should be separate from those allocated to covering operating risk and investment in development.

We currently have funds available to support our operations for 12 months. We have not formally set these aside as a contingency fund. We will create a Use Of Funds policy to make our contingency and wind-down funds more explicit.

💚 Mission-consistent revenue generation

Potential revenue sources should be considered for consistency with the organisational mission and not run counter to the aims of the organisation. For instance…

The earned revenue of OurResearch currently comes from service level agreements to the Unpaywall Data Feed and subscriptions to Unsub custom analytics services. Our revenue comes from a worldwide assortment of universities, university consortia, scholarly publishers, discovery services, and research analytics companies. We supplement our earned revenue with grants from mission-aligned organizations like the Arcadia Foundation.

💚 Revenue based on services, not data

Data related to the running of the research enterprise should be a community property. Appropriate revenue sources might include value-added services, consulting, API Service Level Agreements or membership fees.

OurResearch receives no revenue for its data, which is completely open, but rather for service level agreements and value-added services. We’re deeply committed to maintaining this model. 

Our Research is now OurResearch

We love our name, but in the last few years we’ve found that it’s a bit confusing. In a lot of contexts, it’s not totally clear whether you’re talking about “Our Research” (the enthusiastic Open Science nonprofit) or “our research” (some research that belongs to some people, some of whom are us). That’s bad.

So, we’re changing the name. Or more accurately, we’re changing the spelling, by getting rid of the space. Our Research is now OurResearch! We’ve updated the spelling in all the places we could think of; this includes modifying our logo (hi-res version here):

If you find outdated usages we missed, please let us know. Also, if you’re using the old spelling or logo anywhere, we’d be thankful if you could change it to the new one, when it’s convenient. 

Thanks for reading, and thanks for your support! We’ll let Drake handle the outro:

We’re building a replacement for Microsoft Academic Graph

Edit 15 June: Read our latest update on OpenAlex (this tool’s new name) here, and sign up for our mailing list here to get new updates as they happen.

This week Microsoft Research announced that their free bibliographic database–Microsoft Academic Graph, or MAG for short–is being discontinued. This is sad news, because MAG was a great source of open scholcomm metadata, including citation counts and author affiliations. MAG data is used in Unsub, as well as several other well-known open science tools.

Thankfully, we’ve got a contingency plan for this situation, which we’ve been working on for a while now. We’re building a successor to MAG. Like all our projects, it’ll be open-source and the data will be free to everyone via data dump and API. It will launch at the end of the year, when MAG is scheduled to disappear.

It’s important to note that this new service will not be a perfect replacement, especially right when it launches. MAG has excellent support for conference proceedings, for example; we won’t match that for a while, if ever.  Instead, we’ll be focusing on supporting the most important use-cases, and building out from there. If you use MAG today, we’d love to hear what your key use-cases are, so we can prioritize accordingly. Here’s where you can tell us.

We plan to have this launched by the time MAG disappears at year’s end. That’s an aggressive schedule, but we’ve built and launched other large projects (Unpaywall, Unsub) in less time. We’ve also got a good head start, since we’ve been working toward this as an internal project for a while now.

We’d love to hear ideas and feedback from the community…drop us a line on Twitter (@our_research) or via email (team@ourresearch.org)!

PS Many thanks to the team behind MAG, who built a really cool thing and made the data free and open. Respect.

Unsub pricing update

We’re rolling out a new pricing structure for Unsub, designed to be more fair to smaller institutions, and more streamlined for consortia.

New institution pricing

In the eight months since we released Unsub, we’ve gotten a lot of feedback from folks concerned that our flat-rate pricing placed an unfair burden on smaller institutions. Big university libraries often manage budgets a hundred times larger than those of small college libraries; charging them both the same price feels inequitable to many.

We have come to agree–even before accounting for the fact that COVID seems poised to hit smaller colleges particularly hard. We want to build a fair, sustainable community around Unsub, and so we’re changing our flat-rate model to one where price is tied to institutional budgets.

Here’s the new pricing table: 

In this model, Unsub is cutting prices for most institutions; well over half of our prospective users fall into the new $500 tier. The richest schools, on the other hand, will pay more–but still less than they’d pay for comparable tools (specifically, the 1figr data report, which was around $15,000 for large universities, before Elsevier bought and discontinued it).

And even at the highest tier, we believe Unsub offers an unbeatable value for users. As Science recently reported “[Unsub] is saving universities millions of dollars in journal subscriptions.” We think–and are hearing from users–that $3,000 is a bargain, given this upside.

Based on our best growth projections, this will be a roughly revenue-neutral change for us. That is, we don’t expect to make (or lose) much money on the new prices; cuts at the bottom will be offset by the increase at the top. Our goal is to distribute the support burden more equitably. 

We put a lot of time into figuring out the correct pricing levels, and we had a lot of help. We’d like to thank the SPARC team, who provided helpful consulting, advice, and support. We’d also like to thank the folks who responded to our pricing survey, and the IPEDS database, all of which provided essential data. Of course we didn’t follow all of everyone’s advice, so we’ve erred, it’s our fault, not theirs!

The new prices will be effective immediately (4 August, 2020). If you are in the middle of getting the old price approved, that’s ok; just let us know and we’ll make an extension for you. 

If you’re already a customer, your next renewal will be at your current price (or the new price, whichever is lower). After that, you’ll get bumped up to the standard pricing (if that’s relevant for you; again, most universities will see the price drop or stay the same). So for example, if you’re a library with a $3M materials budget, and you subscribed in June 2020: when you renew in June 2021, you’ll pay the same $1,000 you paid to sign up, but in June 2022 you’ll get bumped up to $3,000.

As before, if you’re truly unable to afford the tool, get in touch, and we’ll do our best to work something out. It’s important to us that Unsub stays sustainable, but it’s also important to us that the barrier to entry is as low as possible. Our number one priority is the mission.

New consortium pricing

Our old consortium price deal was that if you could get 10 or more institutions to sign up together, we’d give you 20% off. 

This has turned out to be a bad fit for many consortia, because they want to do more of a rolling admissions system: they’ve got five institutions now, and expect another 20 to gradually sign up, one by one, over the course of the next year.

So, we’re modifying how the consortial discount works. It’s now a 10% discount, and there’s no minimum number of institutions needed to qualify. You just have to be getting Unsub through a consortium. Member institutions can sign up whenever they want, and we’ll bill the consortium right then (applying their 10% discount), and set up the new institution right away.

OK, that’s the news! We’re excited about these changes, because we think they’ll help us keep building the Unusb community in fair and sustainable ways. We really appreciate all the folks who gave us feedback. Keep it coming! We are learning a ton from our community and will keep making changes as we learn more and more.

Unsub: saving universities millions of dollars in journal subscriptions

Unsub was highlighted in a Science news article that just came out:

SUNY was facing an annual $9 million bill for its subscription to about 2200 Elsevier titles. But Unsub revealed that by spending $2 million a year for just 248 of the journals, the university could give researchers at its 64 campuses immediate access to roughly 70% of the Elsevier papers they are likely to read in the next 5 years. 

They were paying $9-10 million/year, so that’s a savings of 80%.

And maybe even better:

Unsub is a “game changer,” says Mark McBride, SUNY’s library senior strategist in Albany, and “I don’t think I’m the only one who thinks that.”

Read the full article here!

Unsub Q&A in a recent Scholarly Kitchen post

In case you missed it, Unsub was featured in a recent post on the Scholarly Kitchen.

Author Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe (@lisalibrarian) interviewed us about Unsub, which she describes as:

“the game-changing data analysis service that is helping librarians forecast, explore, and optimize their alternatives to the Big Deal.”

Give it a read — dare we suggest, even the comments! — and let us know what you think 🙂

ps Unsub now has its own twitter account: @unsub_org and we’ll be using the hashtag #UnsubBigDeal for conference twitter threads etc.

Name change: Unpaywall Journals is now Unsub

As of today, Unpaywall Journals is now called: Unsub! That’s the only change–all the functionality is still the same, and of course it’s still the same Our Research team behind it.

Why the change? Two reasons:

1. We added data beyond Unpaywall. We started this project with a modest goal: a journal-level analysis of Open Access rates, using data from our free Unpaywall database. So, Unpaywall Journals was a natural name.

However, as we talked to early users, we learned that understanding OA in isolation wasn’t that helpful. Users wanted OA data, yes, but they wanted it in the broader context of a decision support tool. That required us adding a lot of new data and forecasting features. Unpaywall become just one data source of many.

2. We focused on supporting unsubscription. Early users helped us understand, they are not exploring the data for fun. They’re making Big Decisions about keeping or cancelling their Big Deals. These Big Deals have been leaking value for years, even as prices keep going up. As the inevitable cuts are made this year, Big Deals are an attractive target.

But users emphasized that they needed better data to understand their alternatives to the Big Deal, and how cancellations would affect campus access. As we worked to supply this data, Unpaywall Journals evolved into an increasingly focused tool, one built to help libraries unsubscribe with confidence.

So: time for a new name! One that reflects these two changes.

The result: Unsub! A tool to help librarians forecast, explore, and optimize their alternatives to the Big Deal. We hope you like it!

Upcoming webinar: Intro to Managing Serials with Net Cost per Paid Use

Want to learn about the latest development in cost-effectiveness of academic journals?

Join Our Research co-founder Heather Piwowar for an ALA webinar: Intro to Managing Serials with Net Cost Per Paid Use on Wednesday Feb 26, 2020 at 2:00 PM-3:00 PM (Eastern).

This webinar will discuss a new metric for evaluating the cost effectiveness of Serials: Net Cost Per Paid Use (NCPPU). NCPPU goes beyond the standard Cost Per Use calculation to exclude free content (OA and back catalog), incorporate ILL costs, and value citation and authorship.

The webinar is part of the ALCTS series — thanks to ALCTS for hosting! Details on the webinar (content, connection details, fee) here: http://www.ala.org/alcts/confevents/upcoming/webinar/022620

The recording will be made freely available in 6 months — we’ll post the link again at that point. Stay tuned for more webinars and conference presentations about Unpaywall Journals in the next few months!

Interested in keeping up on news about Unpaywall Journals Dashboard and journal cost-effectiveness? We’re starting a newsletter to make that easier! Subscribe here.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us any time at team@ourresearch.org.

Update: In May 2020 we changed the name of Unpaywall Journals Dashboard to Unsub.

Stop by for a demo of Unpaywall Journals at ALA midwinter

We are at ALA Midwinter this weekend! If you are interested in data to help you reassess the value of your Big Deal, stop by table 867 for a demo of the new product, Unpaywall Journals!

Alternatively, you can book a time to make sure you have our undivided attention, or stop us in the halls any time you see us. We’ll be wearing our green Unpaywall t-shirts so we are hard to miss 🙂

Jason and Heather (CNI 2019)

If you don’t do collections or acquisitions, but you are a fan of the Unpaywall link resolver, browser extension, API, or integrations — stop by anyway and grab an Unpaywall sticker. Come and get them before they are gone! From what we’ve heard ALA midwinter is a little low on swag, so it’ll nice not go home empty handed….

Yes we have more than this, but not oodles, so come by early 🙂

Email us at team@ourresearch.org if email is better. Looking forward to a great conference! — Heather and Jason.

Update: In May 2020 we changed the name of Unpaywall Journals to Unsub.

Thankful for Repositories and OA advocates

It’s American Thanksgiving this week, and we sure are thankful. We’re thankful for so many people and what they do — those who fight for open data, those who release their software and photos openly, the folks who ask and answer Stack Overflow questions, the amazing people behind the Crossref API…. the list is long and rich.

But today I want to shout out a special big thank you to OA advocates and the people behind repositories. Without your early and continued work, it wouldn’t be true that half of all views to scholarly articles are to an article that has an OA copy somewhere, and even better this number is growing to 70% of articles five years from now. That changes the game. For researchers and the public who are looking for papers, and for the whole scholarly communication system in how we think about paying for publishing in the years ahead in ways that make it more efficient and equitable.

I gave the closing keynote at Open Repositories 2019 this year, and my talk highlighted how the success of Unpaywall is really the success of all of you — and how we are set for institutional repositories to be even more impactful in the years ahead. It’s online here if you want to see it. We mean it.

Thank you.