## Research Data Management at Macquarie University: ### Focus on Higher Degree Research Students through the “culture-change looking glass” In September 2021, Macquarie University released a [Research Data Management (RDM) Framework][1] which provided a foundation for changes in researcher behavior and established mechanisms to ensure compliance, manage risk and enable best practice in RDM. The creation of this institutional RDM framework involved substantial organizational change in the approach to RDM and significant and coordinated action among stakeholders to enhance the environment for RDM at Macquarie University. The crux of the framework included a [detailed policy suite][2] outlining a comprehensive set of expected practices for managing data throughout the research data lifecycle accompanied by key improvements to infrastructure for both active and archived or published data. Macquarie’s participation in the ARDC Institutional Underpinnings (IU) program thus coincided with the execution of the early phases of the University’s own [RDM Framework implementation][3] project. Several institutional initiatives provided an essential foundation for responsible data management practices to be enacted by researchers. Increasing the adoption of new practices, however, required modification of individual and community behavior. Substantial changes were desired in terms of researcher awareness and understanding of responsibilities and risks, as well as implementation of best practices - all considered to be key aspects of ''culture change''. Due to the effort and resources required for a shift of such magnitude, it was decided that support would be staged to specific cohorts of researchers, transitioning them to the new framework over 18–to-24 months. One of the first cohorts to be transitioned were new PhD researchers (those commencing their studies after January 2022). **Culture change approach** The culture change model initially adopted at Macquarie (in 2019) during the drafting of the RDM policy and development of supporting resources was the [Nosek model][4] which directly addressed change related to Open Research in universities. However, it was suggested in the ARDC IU Culture Change paper that the assumptions of the Nosek model might be too optimistic in the context of some Australian universities (i.e. the model assumed researchers already possessed the skills and motivation to make the required behavioral changes and that the role of university leadership was to create an environment to encourage researchers to do what they already wanted to and knew how to do). For this reason, a more nuanced ''culture change lens'' was applied to help identify gaps in using the Nosek model and improve the approach. The hybrid model incorporated more universal and theory-based principles of change, as outlined in the ARDC IU Culture Change paper. The initial phases of this project thus involved: 1. articulating the culture change guiding principles (introduced in the ARDC IU Culture Change element of the framework) that were considered most appropriate to the Macquarie context. 2. identifying essential foundations for each principle of culture change that were addressed by the University prior to this project and ascertaining remaining elements which could feasibly be addressed during the timeframe of this project. The above exercises highlighted several areas for enhancement in our approach to achieving culture change. For example, one challenge typically associated with culture change outlined in the ARDC IU Culture Change paper is that current state needs to be clearly described and measurable final state goals need to be defined as early as possible. Meaningful data must then be collected to evaluate change progress. Inadequate resourcing of teams, or lack of culture change experience by staff responsible for implementing RDM projects, means tracking the change process is an often-neglected component of culture change. Indeed, it was a milestone that could have easily been neglected due to workload constraints at Macquarie University. To address these gaps: 3. organizational perceptions of current state and desired target state from a self-assessment on the University’s RDM services (via RISE) were explored. 4. an initial set of targets and accompanying metrics were established and measured (where possible in the timeframe) to help quantify or signal changes in RDM understanding, outlook and behavior. For the targeted HDR student cohort, the following three RDM culture change objectives were identified: **A.** HDR students are familiar with the RDM Policy and Procedure and can apply RDM knowledge to their own work. **B.** HDR students can successfully lodge DMPs for their research projects (that embody good practice). **C.** HDR students can define best practices in RDM and are engaging with documentation, training, and other resources designed to move RDM behaviors towards best practices. Several measures and indicators were selected and evaluated to assess progress against these three objectives over the timeframe of the IU Project: - Completion of RDMOnline training module - Results from pre- and post-surveys bookending the RDMOnline training module - Attendance in additional live training sessions - Successful lodgmentof data management plans - Usage of endorsed data storage Platforms - Requests for support and advice using the OneHelp ticketing system **Outcome** Current and target state were identified. An initial set of metrics was established and measured (where possible in the timeframe) to help quantify or signal changes in PhD students’ RDM understanding, outlook and behavior (to track progress towards the target state). The metrics revealed signs of positive changes in terms of RDM understanding and practices by HDR students at Macquarie University. Metrics will now more consciously and intentionally be employed as early as possible in subsequent work. ## Resources The following documents and resources, related to the Macquarie University RDM Framework implementation project are made available here, along with the [**full project report**](https://osf.io/kxfsv): *Note that a list of all files can be found in the top level files section* 1. [Change management literature review][5] 2. [DMP form in pdf (containing the complete list of questions indicating general dependencies and some form logic), a DMP User Guide and completed mock example DMPs][7] 3. [Survey questions for 'DMP completion survey' for process improvement activities][8] for process improvement activities 4. [RDMOnline Training program in Articulate via DRESA][6] and associated test bank [RDMOnline Training Quiz for HDR Students](https://osf.io/mr9yj/wiki/RDMOnline%20Training%20Quiz%20for%20HDR%20Students/) 5. [Survey questions for 'Attitudes and behaviour around FAIR data and Open Research survey'][9] 6. [Survey questions for 'Pre-RDMOnline training survey' and for 'Post-RDMOnline training survey'](https://osf.io/mr9yj/wiki/RDMOnline%20Pre-%20and%20Post-Surveys/) [1]: https://staff.mq.edu.au/research/strategy-priorities-and-initiatives/research-data-management-framework [2]: http://www.mq.edu.au/thisweek/2021/09/13/new-research-data-management-rdm-policy-what-does-it-mean-for-researchers/#.YxguhrRBy71 [3]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbI9VCEbqPo [4]: https://www.cos.io/blog/strategy-for-culture-change [5]: https://osf.io/m9h4r [6]: https://dresa.org.au/materials/macquarie-university-research-data-management-rdm-online [7]: https://osf.io/mr9yj/wiki/Data%20Management%20Plan%20%28DMP%29%20documents/ [8]: https://osf.io/mr9yj/wiki/DMP%20Completion%20Survey/ [9]: https://osf.io/mr9yj/wiki/FAIR%20Data%20Attitudes%20Survey/