Library collections are fundamental to the outcomes of teaching and research at an institution. They provide valuable resources that enable students and faculty to operate at an excellent standard. Despite their importance, university libraries face challenges and constraints – they are vulnerable to budget cuts, but have become adept at doing more with less for decades.

When librarians face hard choices about their collections, they frequently turn to usage data to determine which journals are most essential for their users. However, when budgetary constraints require cuts to journals that receive equal levels of usage, it creates a dilemma. The incorporation of citation analysis to your collection development strategy is a potent approach. This method assists you to identify the critical journals that drive your institution’s progress and cannot be sacrificed, even during unavoidable cutbacks.

Why use citation analysis for collection management?

Citation analysis is a research method used to evaluate the impact and influence of academic or scholarly work by analyzing the citations it receives in other publications. It’s been used by librarians from as early as the 1920s, helping to provide a clear picture of the journals that scholars rely on for education and research.

By tapping into existing data like cited reference lists to identify trends in authors’ publication habits , you can evaluate the scholarly contributions of individuals and institutions, identify important works in a field, and make informed decisions about resource allocation, funding, and collection management in libraries. Moreover, citation analysis also plays a crucial role in understanding the development and evolution of scientific knowledge within different disciplines.

Citation analysis delivers incredible value to collection management decisions. Librarians describe the technique as unobtrusive and concrete. That’s because it’s neatly packaged data that helps you spot the critical information you need, driving honest discussions and enabling fast decisions.

Putting tools together for simpler workflows

Among the most popular tools for citation analysis is InCites Benchmarking & Analytics (InCites) from Clarivate –  a customizable, web-based research evaluation tool relied on by institutions around the world. Using publisher-neutral data sourced from the Web of Science, InCites provides objective metrics for the analysis of publication, citation, patent and funding data that can be used for research assessment and to inform library collection development.

Now, analysis of journal utilization is faster via seamless integration between InCites and the Alma library management system from Ex Libris, part of Clarivate. If your institution subscribes to both InCites and Alma, you can easily see your researchers’ detailed citation activity in your library’s journal holdings – all in one place. You simply opt-in from the Alma platform to allow your Alma holdings information to be included in your InCites reports.

Reports that provide rich insights

The InCites Organization Report offers valuable insights by incorporating a Journal Utilization tool that enables you to pinpoint priority journals that are relevant to your institution by aggregating bibliographic data associated with faculty members affiliated with your institution. Moreover, libraries can now view a customized, comparative Alma Collection Report that combines publication and citation data from the Web of Science with collection holdings data from Alma.

Using the InCites Journal Utilization tool along with the pre-configured Alma Collection Report, you can make confident collection management decisions:

• Discover which journals your authors cite the most
• Identify which journals cite your authors
• Obtain a year-by-year breakdown of the journals your authors publish in
• See recommended journals not currently in your collection, which have high publication or citation activity associated with your authors
• View your collections mapped to Web of Science research areas to analyze coverage across disciplines
• Monitor the progress of your open access strategy, based on publication and usage data

 Which journals are citing your authors the most?

Using the Journal Utilization tool and Alma Collections Report, you can see which journals cite your authors most often. This gives you an understanding of which journals are influenced by the authors at your institution and are building upon your institution’s work.

Using the customizable Alma Collection Reports, you can easily see patterns among publications citing your authors’ work within your library holdings and compare them to publications not in your collections.

The InCites collection development tools and reports provide valuable insights into actual scholarly publishing behavior. This data is essential for making informed decisions regarding the addition or removal of items  from your library collection to optimize the allocation of funds to help you maximize library collection budgets while ensuring access to crucial resources that drive the success of your institution.

Try citation analysis for collection management

Citation analysis helps you recognize the content that’s essential to your institution’s research endeavors. By utilizing informative metrics, you can effectively support your organization’s research and educational programs even in times when budgets are constrained to ensure the sustainability and continued progress of your institution’s academic initiatives.

Learn more about how InCites Benchmarking & Analysis integrated with the Alma library management system can help you build collections that drive academic excellence.

The post Maximize Collection Management at your Library: the Power of Citation Analysis + Integrated Evaluation Tools appeared first on Clarivate.

The number of new U.S. government limited submissions has nearly doubled over the last three years and now make up between 16% and 20% of all U.S. government funding opportunities, according to data from Pivot-RP^®.

These limited submission opportunities, which restrict the number of submissions a single institution can submit, are also becoming more complex and are often confined to specific topics or subtopics, while turnaround times are getting shorter.

It all adds up to extra handling by research administrators. As the number of limited submission opportunities grows, research administrators are challenged to use time and resources more efficiently and increase faculty engagement to generate higher quality proposals.

Rebecca Milczarek, Ph.D., Assistant Director, Office of Research Development at University of Illinois Chicago (UIC)* and Joshua Roney, Ph.D., Director, Research Development, at University of Central Florida (UCF) joined their colleague Seema Freer, Ph.D., Director of Research Development at Temple University, to share best practices for optimizing limited submission processes in a recent webinar and discussion hosted by Clarivate and InfoReady. These experienced research administrators use both Pivot-RP, a comprehensive global source of funding opportunities, and InfoReady,  a software tool used by more than 200 organizations worldwide for managing and automating internal grants, competitions and approval processes.

The resources are part of a wave of data-rich technology resources that enable research administrators to make better decisions, simplify processes and increase efficiency. Pivot-RP and InfoReady go an extra step: they include integrations across the two resources that further streamline processes, particularly the limited submissions process. Pairing these resources enables research administrators to integrate funding discovery with automated competition management.

Finding the best reviewers

With limited submission opportunities, it is essential that universities identify and submit only the best applications to win major grants. Often this means holding internal competitions, which comes with its own set of challenges, including finding reviewers for submissions that are objective and qualified.

Freer uses a curated list of reviewers that has been assembled over time. These individuals have already been briefed on confidentiality, know that they may be approached and understand they will need to prioritize the review. Her team uses the list to match reviewers to the criteria in the call for submissions. Occasionally, the opportunity is a new type for which they have no listed reviewer. In those cases, they reach out to faculty in the relevant field and ask for recommendations for reviewers who have no conflicts of interest.

At UIC, Milczarek’s team “takes a cue from funders” and asks the applicants for suggested reviewers. “Usually, they suggest great folks,” she said. She includes the request for suggested reviewers in the submission template she develops in InfoReady. Another option in recurring and longstanding awards is to tap someone who received the award in the past since they have first-hand knowledge of what it takes to win.

Establishing a source of truth

Research administrators have access to more data through tools such as Pivot-RP and InfoReady.  These platforms are “becoming the source of institutional memory,” said Milczarek. “If we want to know who applied in previous years for recurring calls, it’s the source of truth. I took this role over from someone else and it’s been helpful to see how the competition was run. It’s a great source for institutional knowledge transfer and resource development.”

Indeed, Freer, who recently started her role in Research Development at Temple, relies on data from Pivot-RP and InfoReady to provide insightful reports to university administrators.

The data from Pivot-RP and InfoReady empower research administrators to strategically support faculty. The Office of Research at UCF uses the data to allocate resources. Roney identifies limited submissions with predictable application cycles and high popularity among faculty. To understand faculty success rates and where to redirect support, Roney tracks applicant activity. The tracking enables Roney’s team to provide broad, customized support for faculty. For example, a researcher who applied for a limited submission opportunity, but wasn’t selected, can be directed to other sources of funding that align with their work.

Encouraging faculty funding discovery

Access to funding databases enables faculty to work independently to find opportunities. As part of routine discussions with faculty, Freer covers three major topics: “We talk about grants, we talk about funding received, not received and anticipated, and inevitably, I’ll ask ‘Have you looked at Pivot(-RP)?’”

Roney’s team also provides one on one introductions to the funding database as part of new faculty onboarding. While this approach is very effective, it might not always be possible for others. Resource pages with links to training, newsletters – easily sent through InfoReady or Pivot-RP – and reminders to check for funding opportunities are good ways to encourage faculty to be part of the discovery process.

Learn more strategies and tips for optimizing the limited submission process, watch the recording of Optimizing Your Limited Submission Process with Pivot-RP and InfoReady Integration webinar.

Learn all the ways Clarivate can help you make evidence-informed decisions to drive research excellence.

*The University of Illinois Chicago is not affiliated with Clarivate or InfoReady Corporation and does not endorse or recommend Clarivate, InfoReady Corporation or the products of these companies.

The post How U.S. universities can improve limited submission processes appeared first on Clarivate.

The University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) is a ’young’ R1 university in the heart of Las Vegas. Founded in 1957 as a small branch college, it has grown into a thriving research institution serving 30,000 students and supporting medical, dental and law schools. Research is increasing at UNLV and when Lori Ciccone arrived in 2018 to lead the Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP), she found a team facing significant challenges that were preventing them from effectively supporting faculty:

• Increasing number of faculty seeking funding
• Staff turnover and shortages
• New regulations and increasing compliance demands

UNLV represents a real-world case study demonstrating the broad trends researchers and research offices have faced for more than a decade.

An “arms race” for funding

In 2012, the Research Universities Futures Consortium called the competition for U.S. Federal funding an “…arms race to compete for these funds…”^[1] Ten-years later finding research funding opportunities “…continue to be the most demanding elements of the research life cycle.”^[2]

Increasing research funding and diversifying funding are the top priorities for research office leaders^[3] but dwindling budgets, staffing shortages and competing priorities have resulted in less direct support for researchers. Research office staff are often stretched too thin for one-on-one consultations with faculty or embedded departmental support. As a result, overburdened researchers return to familiar sources of funding rather than seeking out new sources.

A gap between researchers and research offices

Both researchers and research offices are being asked to do more with less. While they share a common challenge, a real or perceived gap exists between the groups.

Eighty-four percent of researchers report searching for funding themselves but expect the research office to facilitate access to funding opportunities – only 49% report receiving assistance.^[4]

To close the gap, research office administrators need to find effective funding discovery tools and efficient communication strategies to promote targeted funding directly to faculty.

How UNLV overcame the challenges

At UNLV, Ciccone took action to ensure her team was supporting the university’s mission and goals. She focused her strategy on addressing key issues: staffing shortages, managing compliance issues and meeting faculty expectations.

1. Building a strong team

She built the staff to capacity, increasing it by 30%. She addressed issues of turnover by developing staff and growing internal expertise. Importantly, she implemented a departmental leadership path so team members could see a future for themselves. She also created a new position: Research, Scholarly and Creative Activities Development Manager, which is dedicated to searching for funding opportunities in Pivot-RP and helping researchers use the tool to find funding on their own.

Pivot-RP’s features simplified funding discovery and related processes for UNLV staff and faculty. Ciccone notes limited submissions, internal opportunities, saved searches, tracked opportunities and identifying collaborators are favorite features.

2. Communicating opportunities

Along with investing in Pivot-RP and a second tool Cayuse, the Office of Sponsored Opportunities (OSP) implemented a robust internal communications plan. The team now sends a branded, targeted email newsletter, Funding Friday, every week. Another Pivot-RP feature, ‘Curated Opportunities,’ which automates searches for funding opportunities, helps the OSP identify funding opportunities to include in the newsletter.

The email program became an overwhelming success. More than 60% of newsletter recipients open the emails and the team has even received kudos from faculty, “In case no one says it often enough, thank you for the regular funding emails.”

3. Think like a marketer

Research offices of any size can build similarly successful programs to overcome resource challenges and provide better support to research faculty.

To build efficient communication strategies that reach faculty with relevant funding opportunities, Ciccone and her team’s success shows that research officers can benefit from thinking like a marketer:

• Target communications by segmenting the audience. Create targeted groups around research areas and initiatives, institutions and centers, or departments.
• Send out newsletters consistently, at a regular cadence.
• Automate newsletter content and deployment. Embed ‘Dynamic Results’ and ‘Curated Lists’ of relevant funding opportunities.

Creating touchpoints outside of email will provide faculty with more ways to learn about funding opportunities. Pivot-RP makes it easy with features and functionality:

• Public Groups within Pivot-RP allow users to self-subscribe based on their research interests.
• Embedded links to Curated Lists and Dynamic Results provide access to funding opportunities directly from frequently visited webpages.
• Curated Lists support special initiatives such as DEI-related research.
• Links to Curated Lists can be shared on Twitter or other social media platforms.

Finally, measure the results of communication efforts and share successes with university leaders:

• Use Google Analytics or social media platform analytics to measure impact.
• View statistics within funding solutions to measure traffic and usage.
• Ask for feedback. Iterate. Continue moving forward.

Watch the webinar recording, Doing More with Less: Maximizing Exposure to Funding Opportunities with Efficient Communication Strategies with UNLV’s Lori Ciccone and Eddie Neuwirth, Clarivate Senior Director, Product Management.

Learn more about ways to drive research excellence at your institution.

_____________________________

^[1] The Current Health and Future Well-Being of the American Research University (elsevier.com)

^[2] Industry Report Sheds Light on Opportunities for Research Offices and Libraries to Support Researchers More Effectively – Ex Libris (exlibrisgroup.com)

^[3]Ibid.

^[4]Ibid.

The post Three timesaving ways for research offices to connect faculty with funding opportunities appeared first on Clarivate.