Data Management: Assessing where you are

In the previous chapter, you identified the main areas to include in your Node data management strategy and created a first strategy outline.

In this chapter, you will take a closer look at selected areas. You will use the Data Stewardship Handbook maturity model to understand what is already in place, how well it is developed and where there may be room for improvement.

Why assess your current situation

Before deciding what to develop further, it helps to understand where you are now.

An assessment can help you make existing work more visible. It can show that an area is already well developed, that practices differ across the Node or that something depends heavily on one person, project or institution.

It can also help you distinguish between different situations. Something may be:

• already working well
• available but not consistently used
• developing
• difficult to find or coordinate
• provided by another organisation
• outside the current scope of the Node

These differences matter. Not every area needs to reach the same level of maturity, and a lower maturity level does not automatically mean that something is wrong or missing.

Using the Data Stewardship Handbook maturity model

The Data Stewardship Handbook maturity model is a self assessment tool for exploring how research data management is organised and supported.

The model is organised into four domains:

• Strategy and sustainability
• Legal and governance
• RDM support
• Data and metadata management

Each domain contains more specific indicators. These cover areas such as RDM strategy, personnel, funding, training, communication, guidelines, services, infrastructure, standards and data management planning.

Each indicator contains descriptions of different levels of maturity. Use these descriptions to discuss which one best reflects your current situation.

Connecting the maturity model to your strategy

In Chapter 3, you used the GORC model to structure the areas that may belong in your strategy.

The GORC model and the maturity model are complementary, but they do not map directly onto each other.

A broad strategy area may connect to several maturity model indicators. An indicator may also be relevant to more than one area of your strategy.

For example, a strategy area on human capacity could connect to indicators on personnel, training, training materials, expert networks and communication.

A strategy area on sustainability could connect to funding, personnel, goals, monitoring and the organisation of services.

You do not need to create a complete mapping between the two frameworks. Use the maturity model indicators that help you understand the strategy areas you want to assess.

Reflection: choose what to assess

Return to the strategy outline you created in Chapter 3.

Choose one or two areas that you want to understand better.

You might select an area because:

• it is relevant to your strategy
• several institutions or teams contribute to it
• the current situation is unclear
• practices differ across the Node
• there have already been discussions about improving it

For each selected area, look through the maturity model and identify one or more indicators that can help you assess it.

Strategy area	Relevant maturity model indicator	Why is this useful to assess?
Add an area from your strategy outline	Select one or more relevant indicators	Note what you want to understand better

Do not worry if there is no exact match. Select the indicators that help you ask useful questions about the current situation.

Exercise: assess selected areas

Now use the maturity model descriptions to assess the indicators you selected.

For each indicator:

1. Read the maturity descriptions
   Which description comes closest to the situation in your Node? If no single description fits, record that rather than forcing the situation into one level.

2. Check the evidence
   What makes you choose this description? Think about existing documents, services, roles, practices, feedback or examples.

3. Compare perspectives
   Would people from different institutions or roles give the same answer?

4. Record what is working
   Which parts are already clear, established or useful?

5. Note what could improve
   Where is there inconsistency, limited visibility, unclear ownership or another issue worth exploring?

Use a simple table to capture the discussion.

Strategy area	Maturity model indicator	Current situation	What is working	What could improve
Add your selected area	Add the indicator	Note the maturity description that best fits and why	Record strengths or existing practice	Note gaps, uncertainties or possible improvements

Assessing a distributed Node

For an ELIXIR Node, the answer may not be the same everywhere.

One institution may have a mature service while another relies on informal support. A national infrastructure may provide something that the Node itself does not provide. Some activities may sit entirely with individual institutions.

Do not force these differences into a single answer.

Instead, record them.

For example:

Indicator	Current situation
RDM training	Regular training is available through two partner institutions, while other Node partners mainly use external training
RDM guidelines for researchers	Several institutions provide their own guidance, but there is no shared Node overview
Personnel for RDM	Data stewardship expertise exists across the Node, but responsibilities and capacity differ between institutions

This can reveal useful questions about coordination without assuming that every activity needs to be provided at Node level.

What your assessment could look like

Imagine that your strategy outline includes human capacity as one of the areas you selected.

You might select two maturity model indicators:

Strategy area	Maturity model indicator	Current situation	What is working	What could improve
Human capacity	Personnel for RDM	RDM duties exist across several institutions, but there is no shared overview of roles or capacity	Expertise is already present across the Node	Responsibilities and available capacity are difficult to see
Human capacity	RDM training	Several partners provide training, but provision varies and activities are not always connected	Existing courses and trainers can be reused	Better overview and coordination could make training easier to find

The result does not yet tell you what the Node should do next.

It gives you a clearer picture of the current situation and possible areas to discuss further.

Reflection: what did you learn?

Look across the indicators you assessed.

Consider:

• What is already working well?
• Where did you find differences between institutions or perspectives?
• Which activities exist but are difficult to find or coordinate?
• Where is ownership or responsibility unclear?
• Which areas depend heavily on individual people or temporary arrangements?
• Did the assessment reveal something that you had previously considered a gap but is actually available elsewhere?
• Which possible improvements emerged from the discussion?

Keep these observations with your strategy outline.

You will use them in the next chapter to decide which areas should be developed further and what a realistic future direction could look like.

What’s next

You have used the maturity model to look more closely at selected areas of your strategy. You now have a clearer picture of what is already working, where practices differ and where there may be room for improvement.

In the next chapter, you will use this assessment to decide where your Node wants to go and which areas should be developed further.

Related pages