IR+ is an institutional repository software project developed by University of Rochester.

More details please visit http://code.google.com/p/irplus/

Live site  https://urresearch.rochester.edu/home.action

looking impressive , i will give a try to it although we have done through Dspace

JAIRO: Japanese Institutional Repositories Online.

Developed by the National Institute of Informatics, JAIRO provides integrated search of over 100 Japanese institutional repositories, including over 500,000 full text items, such as department bulletin paper, journal article, thesis or dissertations, etc.

What do you think of this resource?

Harvard University Scholarly Repositories

A central, open access repository for the scholarly output of faculty and the broader research community at Harvard.

http://dash.harvard.edu/

(This is one of the major landmark on Open Access Publishing as Harvard is one of the best academic institution , hope other will follow the harvard step)

Well DSpace is friendly. The web self of it is friendly…and happily, all the rest is command line, happy! No sniping, really happy. Prefer it, nearly, possibly. Though functionality is not high or many or multifarious, yet…I know there are command line secrets.

The Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR), is now freely accessible online. The Journal, which is India’s main IPR Journal started in 1996, is currently available from 2002 to the present date, and can be browsed by Title, Author, Keywords or by Date. Further back issues are being worked on currently and will be uploaded in due time. The National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR) is hosting the JIPR issues along with 14 other journals on its Online Periodicals Respository

TAIR 台灣機構典藏網站

臺灣大學機構典藏 NTUR
清華大學圖書館機構典藏 NTHUR
國立暨南國際大學
崑山科技大學機構典藏 KSUIR
交大學術集成 NCTUIR
修平技術學院機構典藏 HITIR
成功大學機構典藏 NCKUR
國立中山大學機構典藏
國立空中大學機構典藏 NOUIR
慈濟大學機構典藏 TCUR
台灣神學院數位典藏 TAITHEO
國家衛生研究院 NHRI
臺灣科技大學機構典藏 NTUSTR
真理大學機構典藏 AUIR
高苑科技大學機構典藏 KYU
勤益科大機構典藏 NCUTIR
大同技術學院機構典藏 TTCIR
嘉南藥理科技大學機構典藏 CHNAIR
嘉義大學機構典藏 NCYUR
台南科技大學機構典藏 TUTIR
中華醫事科技大學機構典藏 HWAIIR
文藻外語學院機構典藏 WenzaoIR
正修科技大學機構典藏 CSUIR
屏東教育大學機構典藏 NPUEIR
南台科技大學機構典藏 STUTIR
華夏機構典藏 HWHIR
淡江機構典藏 TUIR
輔英科技大學機構典藏 FYIR
輔仁大學機構典藏 FRDOIR
政治大學機構典藏

Details of an upcoming gig, The Scholarly Communication Landscape in Manchester on the 23rd of April 2009. If you are interested in coming, you need to register by Monday the 13th April at the official symposium pages.

Why? To help University staff and researchers understand some of the more complex issues embedded in the developments in digital scholarly communication, and to launch Manchester eScholar, the University of Manchester’s new Institutional Repository.

How? Information will be presented by invited speakers, and views and experience exchanged via plenary sessions.

Who For? University researchers (staff and students), research support staff, librarians, research managers, and anyone with an active interest in the field will find this symposium helpful to their developing use and provision of research digital formats. The programme for the symposium currently looks like this:

Welcome and Introduction by Jan Wilkinson, University Librarian and Director of The John Rylands Library.

Session I Chaired by Jan Wilkinson

• Is the Knowledge Society a ’social’ Network? Robin Hunt, CIBER, University College London
• National Perspectives, Costs and Benefits Michael Jubb, Director, Research Information Network
• The Economics of Scholarly Communication – how open access is changing the landscape Deborah Kahn, Acting Editorial Director Biology, BioMed Central

Session II Chaired by Dr Stella Butler

• Information wants to be free. So … ? Dr David Booton, School of Law, University of Manchester
• Putting Repositories in Their Place – the changing landscape of scholarly communication Bill Hubbard, SHERPA, University of Nottingham
• The Year of Blogging Dangerously – lessons from the blogosphere, by Dr Duncan Hull (errr, thats me!), mib.ac.uk. This talk will describe how to build an institutional repository using free (or cheap) web-based and blogging tools including flickr.com, slideshare.net, citeulike.org, wordpress.com, myexperiment.org and friendfeed.com. We will discuss some strengths and limitations of these tools and what Institutional Repositories can learn from them.

Session III Chaired by Professor Simon Gaskell

• The University Press and Digital Publishing Ben Stebbing, Manchester University Press
• MIMAS’ role in Supporting the Repository Landscape Vic Lyte, MIMAS
• Defrosting the Digital Library (hmmmm, nice title) Professor Terri Attwood, Faculty of Life Sciences
• Research Computing at Manchester, Dr Mike Daw, Head of Research Computing, IT Services Division
• Enhancing User Experience of Scholarly Communication through Text Mining, Dr Sophia Anianadou, Director, National Centre for Text Mining (NaCTeM.ac.uk)
• Manchester eScholar – what, why and when Professor Carole Goble, School of Computer Science

Sumary and close by Professor Simon Gaskell, Vice-President for Research

Slides from the seminar today, for those that asked for them. Thanks to everyone who came, we had a good turn out, much better than expected.

Those Library and Institutional Repository people have asked for an encore too…

WHO SEAR Institutional Repository is also a public source for those who are seeking for WHO  SEAR (South-East Asia Region) publications, image files, and videos file in our region, please feel free to read the provided  instruction for proceed your search. Let’s see http://library.cphs.chula.ac.th/Ereferences/Related%20References/09_WHO%20SEAR%20Institutional%20Repository.pdf

Zum Thema “Scannen für Repositorien” 2 Hinweise aus der Inetbib-Liste.
archiv.twoday.net

Bibliotheksrecht.blog

Snowman in a tree

Yesterday’s launch of Opus, our repository was held in the department of Mechanical Engineering’s e-lounge. This location itself deserves a mention – it’s a fantastic space for students, with study tables, slim SunRay computers, food dispenser machines, and to add some class, some beautiful artwork on the walls. We took over half of the space for an hour for the Opus launch event (but the students did get the benefit of chips, drinks and sandwiches after we’d done!).

I mentioned that I’d post the information I’d covered in my part of the presentation. Brian Kelly has blogged about this at his UKWebFocus blog but I wanted to focus on a few things. We’ve been really lucky to have the support of the Vice-Chancellor for Research, as well as Library, Web Services, Office of Policy and Planning and also UKOLN. I tried to mention these people in my presentation yesterday, but also took the opportunity to take a captive audience of Heads of Departments and other guests to say a little about Opus and the surrounding issues. I suggested a few immediate courses of action to the researchers and authors present:
1. When you’re back in your office, check your publications list to make sure it’s correct. Send me any corrections or amendments.
2. Upload your latest paper.
3. Take the time to read the next Copyright Transfer Agreement that comes across your desk. Make sure it gives you the right to share the content of your work. Contact me if you would like help.
4. Save the Accepted Version of your papers as this is often the version you are permitted to place online under a standard publisher agreement.
5. Well, I’m sure there was more but that’s enough for today. I’ve got two departmental meetings to present at today, and on Friday there is a one hour session on Opus that focuses on the practical side of the things mentioned above. Uni of Bath staff are welcome to join us, contact me for details.

Today saw the official launch of Opus, the University of Bath research repository (‘Opus’ being short for Online Publications Store). There is an internal news item on the uni website with a brief outline of events.
I am hoping this means the work will really begin, now that it has been officially put in the public sphere. I know there are publications details in there at present that need correcting, but it needs the owner of the work to point these out sometimes.
Still , a relief to get this up and out there. Thanks to Adam from Eprints Services who sorted out a few last minute bits and pieces, from possibly the most comfortable office in the world. Actually, speaking of thanking people, I’ll put an outline of the text of my speech up here tomorrow (too late tonight and I’ve got icy roads to navigate to get home).

I made an enquiry to the UKCoRR mailing list asking whether anyway was using a CRIS in the UK. The replies were interesting, with a lot of interest in Symplectic. Only one reply from the list used InfoEd. The other options I asked about included PURE from Denmark, and the ProQuest Research Support Suite, which is a bit of a red herring, I don’t think it really performs entirely the work of a CRIS, especially when looking internally at an institution.
It’s quite obvious that in the lead up to the REF there’s a lot of naval gazing going on in terms of how universities are managing their research information. There are discussions over buildiing in-house systems, versus buying in a solution. I do think it’s a niche market here in the UK that Symplectic have jumped into. We’re in the process of considering how to go about this – a few things spring to mind for anything that eventually fills the gap:
Must be able to import our existing information from a legacy system
Should be able to integrate with various university systems (not the least being the repository)
Must be based on CERIF standards (I need to read up more on this).
Any comments on experiences with using a CRIS most useful. I wonder how they do this in Australia and elsewhere abroad..

For shame, for shame. The thing I hated most when researching on blogs in libraries: the abandoned blog. I think perhaps it’s been more of a dry spell really. A long time between drinks? A hiatus? And WordPress have moved everything around in here.
We spent the summer collecting and then checking and re-checking publications for the Research Excellence Framework Pilot on Bibliometrics, which was a mammoth task, although now hearing of other larger institutions woes, perhaps we got off quite lightly.
Very busy with Opus, our repository, tidying up records and getting ready for our launch in February. Go and take a look. Can I just say how great Eprints Services have been? They’ve been great. And the silver lining to the REF cloud is that now we have masses of metadata records in our repository.

Apologies for the lengthy delay between posts. It’s very bad form on my behalf but it has been an exceptionally busy couple of months.
We have been involved in the Research Excellence Framework Bibliometrics Pilot Exercise, so it was a summer of collecting references. Now we wait whilst the company doing the data crunching, Evidence Ltd tidy up the material submitted then start investigating the metrics. Results won’t be back until next March but details on the Bibliometrics pilot are available from the HEFCE website – http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Research/ref/

Otherwise, the summer was spent working with the Eprints Services team at Southampton. We have taken the big step of changing to a hosted Eprints solution. We have Eprints 3.1, and have started populating it, pulling in our old material from existing systems and DSpace. I really think it’s a beautiful interface, especially for depositing items. The Eprints team have been really helpful, very patient and it’s great to be able to draw on their expertise. There’s still a lot of tidying of the references now in there to be done, but we’re hoping to launch late next January. Progress!

Recently I read an article by Dr. Peter Gray titled The impact of knowledge repositories on power and control in the workplace. The article brought to light some ideas which had not occurred to me and which one does need to think about when considering building and/or maintaining a knowledge repository.

The article discusses two principle outcomes of the implementation of knowledge repositories.

1. The use of knowledge repositories by employees who are net re-users of knowledge-based work products is expected to increase the extent to which these employees are interchangeable while reducing the level of skill they need to carry out their work.

2. For employees who are not net contributors to knowledge-based work products, the use of knowledge repostories produces the opposite effect.

One item Dr. Gray discusses is the disconnect between colleagues which occurs when providers are separated from seekers and the effect this has on the one on one relationships within a group. This is something I had not thought about and worry about. Yet, in the fast paced world of legal information what is the seeker suppose to do when the provider is unavailable for conversation?

“All else remaining equal, the contributor retains less proprietary knowledge upon which to argue his or her unique value to the firm. This, in turn, reduces an employee’s power position in relation to his or her manager” (page 375). Maybe this power struggle could encourage workers to challenge themselves to reach new levels of irreplacability.

“An individual has power in an employment relationship to the extent that he or she is the only one who knows about the intricacies of a particular area of responsibility” (page 376). We talk about crosstraining constantly but we rarely act on such plans.

“Employees may use the system but hold back key contextual knowledge. Managers may discover such acts of resistance and take punitive measures. However, when employees hold back important knowledge, and when such resistance is difficult or impossible for managers to find out about, employee uniqueness is unlikely to decrease” (page 377). Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we can develop an incentive plan that would turn this negative aspect of knowledge repositories into a win-win situation?

“Easy access to existing knowledge is a tempting prospect, and at the surface would seem to improve the rate of learning. Yet, those who become net users of the work products others generate become less valuable to their organizations over time. They may also become dependent on a continued flow of these products” (page 378). This statement gives a whole new meaning to the term “information junkie.” And, makes me think of Zipf’s principle of least effort. We humans are such creatures of habit.

Overall, this article was informative and definitely cause one to pause and think about the longer term effects of knowledge repositories on the employee-employer relationship.

Reference:

Gray, Peter H. 2001. The impact of knowledge repositories on power and control in the workplace. Information Technology & People 14 (4): 368-384.

We are one of twenty-two institutions in the UK who have been selected to participate in the Research Excellence Framework Pilot Exercise. This exercise will be looking at how well citation analysis, or bibliometrics measures up. I’m off to London next Wednesday to find out more at a HEFCE briefing, so will have more to report after that. What this does mean is that we’ll be collecting all staff publications between 2001-2008 – a huge job, and putting them in the repository. Clearly this isn’t something you can do without decent ingest mechanisms or import tools.
Speaking of tools, there’s a product that’s come up recently called Symplectic from Imperial College in London. It looks very interesting, with a publications management module, a content management system, and a module for student management. I believe they’re working on integration with DSpace (already available) and Eprints (working on this).

Der Universitätsverlag hat gemeinsam mit der Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Fakultät die Voraussetzungen geschaffen, den zentralen Nachweis der wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Publikationen der Universität Potsdam in RePEc zu organisieren.

Damit sind alle wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Publikationen, die in einer Schriftenreihe auf dem Publikationsserver der Universität erschienen sind, zugleich in RePEc nachgewiesen.

RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) ist eine besonders für Wirtschaftswissenschaftler bedeutende Datenbank, die international über 550.000 fachwissenschaftliche Dokumente (davon 450.000 im Volltext) nachweist und die Downloads zählt.

After two long weekends in May, these five day work weeks in June are rough. June is looking busy though, with some big repository decisions coming up here, and then I’m out and about a couple of times. Next week, on the 12th June is the UKeIG Annual Seminar where I’m doing a session on Web 2.0 in academia : what works and why. I’ll put my slides on slideshare soon.
The week after, the RSP are holding their summer school again, this time in Thornton Manor in the Wirral.
I ranted about the beautiful location last year, at Dartington Hall near Totnes – someone is doing really well picking these summer school locations! After speaking with Stephanie yesterday, I think I’ll be giving a short ‘graduate’ talk.
Then, the week after that is the UC&R seminar at UWE on Web 2.0 (can’t find a link for this one at the moment).

We were in Cambridge last week and stayed at a FarmStay in NE Essex called Rockells Farm – it’s a lovely spot, and for the fishing enthuasists, they have their own stocked lake.. We strolled to Arkesden for dinner at the Ax and Crosses – excellent food, get there early.

Auf Initiative des Universitätsverlages Potsdam wurde in die zukünftige Standardversion der Software des Publikationsservers OPUS die JEL-Klassifikation implementiert.

Die Übernahme der JEL-Klassifikation ist eine der Voraussetzungen, um auf dem Publikationsserver der Universität Potsdam erscheinende wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Publikationen in RePEc nachzuweisen. RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) ist eine besonders für Wirtschaftswissenschaftler wichtige Datenbank, die weltweite Fachliteratur nachweist und die Downloads zählt.
→ http://repec.org/

Der Universitätsverlag Potsdam hat die Voraussetzungen geschaffen, Abschlussarbeiten der Universität Potsdam (Diplom-, Magister-, Staatsexamens-, Master- und Bachelorarbeiten), die mit sehr gut oder besser bewertet wurden, auf dem Publikationsserver der Universität zu veröffentlichen.
→ http://pub.ub.uni-potsdam.de/

Food for thought, possible mathematical fumblings following…
Snapshot of publications: January – February 2008 – Web of Science Alerts

•176 articles listed with University of Bath affiliated authors
•119 articles published with publishers offering an Open Access payment
• Therefore 67% of articles published are with publishers offering an OA payment option.

• Average cost of OA options = seems to be around £1000 – £1500
• Various publishers embargo articles for 6 – 24 months (ie. Taylor & Francis, OUP, Blackwells..).
• Of the snapshot total, 67 articles were with publishers who allow for immediate deposit of a post-print or publisher version of an article in an OA repository.

Therefore OA payment most useful to those who wish to get their material viewed quickly rather than for open access purposes?