The past 10 years have seen significant growth and development in terms of the number dedicated systems supporting research management and the breadth of their functionality. And this has increasingly permeated our consulting work as research and innovation offices look to replace ageing, disconnected and often basic systems with modern solutions.
The team at Research Consulting has extensive experience in this area, with many of us having worked on in-house systems projects earlier in our careers, followed by the delivery of numerous consultancy projects for universities. My own experiences date back far enough to “homemade” solutions based on Microsoft Access (actually pretty good, but lacked resilient support) and the early attempts at web-based solutions that emerged in the late 90s to replace these (which initially felt like a backward step for user experience).
At Research Consulting, we adopt a vendor-neutral position and have worked with both universities and software suppliers on a number of projects. Where we do make recommendations about the adoption of systems, it follows in-depth analysis of the institution’s requirement and best fit solutions.
The market for research management systems
So, what is the market like for research management systems? Here’s our take on the current state of the market and segments within it. Firstly, let’s separate out the two big segments, which reflect different origins and needs: (i) publication management and (ii) proposal, grant and contract workflows.
Current research information systems (aka CRIS) have been established for over two decades and emerged from the need to manage publications at scale. There is now an association dedicated to this area, euroCRIS. Over time, systems have developed additional functionality including repository modules, open access management, staff profiles, typically linked to the outcomes from research, and (in the UK) preparation for the Research Excellence Framework (REF). These are often global products, as the functions they support are similar across regions and countries, and they serve the needs of users in libraries and research offices as well as the wider institutional community. Elsevier’s Pure and Symplectic Elements are widely adopted commercial solutions in the UK, though many institutions continue to use Eprints’ open-source repository software.
More recently, systems have emerged that support workflows relating to “proposals, grant and contracts” and these are typically the focus of procurement by research offices. This is typically a more localised market, particularly for areas driven by external funder requirements – costing tools being a good example. Worktribe is reported as the most frequently implemented system in the UK, and Vidatum has a similar position in Ireland. While the market still includes a range of other providers, including GrantsNow and Cayuse (who acquired UK-based Haplo in 2021), a number of suppliers have withdrawn from the UK research management sector over the years, including Tribal and InfoEd. Unit4’s decision to end support for its Research Costing and Pricing (RCP) solution, used by as many as 35 UK universities, is currently driving significant activity as institutions look for replacement solutions.
The desire for an end-to-end solution
The withdrawal of some suppliers from the marketplace reflects increasing convergence in the marketplace, driven by user demand for integrated solutions that cover the spectrum of needs and minimise the need for multiple systems. This has led existing suppliers to expand their core offering in response to user demand, such as Worktribe’s development of a research contracts module and (more recently) functionality to support researcher timesheets (e.g. Vidatum). As a result, vendors have steadily moved to offer additionality functionality that covers this breadth. Within the UK, there are now several examples of institutions using one system to manage workflows from proposal idea to outputs.
The other component of the market is the specialist systems. These have developed to meet the distinctive needs of specific areas with distinctive features and workflows. For example, in technology transfer (e.g. Inteum), research ethics (e.g. Infonetica), managing research impact (e.g. hivve and GrowImpact), managing PhD students (e.g. Haplo’s PhD Manager product, now marketed as Graduate Education Manager by Cayuse) and costing (e.g. Blackdackel).
Three tips for research managers
So, what would we recommend research managers think about when it comes to systems and implementations? Here’s three tips based on our experience:
- Be an informed customer
- Think people, process and systems
- Socialise the change and benefits
Be an informed customer
Get to know the market and the range of options out there: it’s not actually that big. ARMA 2024 was a fantastic opportunity to meet a good number of vendors and UCISA’s Corporate Information Systems report (and detailed data if you are a member) also give an excellent view of systems adopted by institutions and (importantly given the critical interfaces) the underlying HR and finance systems.
But also explore the other benefits of modern systems – a wealth of data that can be further exploited and visualised to meet specific needs. Increasingly we’re seeing examples of how such data extracts are helping research office teams to see and manage workloads and other aspects of their delivery (using tools like Tableau or PowerBI). Yes folks, the skill set of a modern research manager absolutely includes data management and visualisation.
Think people, process and systems
Adopting new systems is not an isolated activity – it’s critical to consider ‘people, process and systems’. Modern systems now have well developed workflows and ‘within system, in context’ communications that present the opportunity to change and improve ways of working. Add to this the fact that many have been well tested by a range of institutions and improved through feedback. So, avoid the temptation to start your thinking with “how can we customise this to fit our current process” and change up to think “how does this system enable us to improve”. Talk to peers who have implemented systems and get a feel for how they experienced the change.
Socialise the change and benefits
The huge advantage of modern systems for ‘idea to project’ workflows is the range of users who can view relevant fields and information. But this makes the change process one which needs much greater socialisation – before, during and after. Think about engagement to understand the issues different users experience, demonstrations that create internal champions and advocates, learning from peers and engagement with vendors. Think back to how Covid, and how the forced use of MS Teams fundamentally changed internal communications. So too the adoption of modern systems changes the flow of communications and information. A benefit we hear so often is how emails “chasing things up” are massively diminished, pushing aside a high nugatory burden on research office staff.
Support and information
Procuring new or additional system functions is a difficult task. Our experience is that most research managers have only limited views of the market, and few have strong working knowledge of multiple systems. Time to investigate this is always a rare commodity and a key barrier (as we found in our 2024 work on research contract management and also in Jisc’s recent workshop). We are always open to discussions sharing our view of the landscape and approaches to systems work.
As a final point, in 2018 our work on research contracts management saw very limited adoption of e-signature software, despite it being a well-established and widely used business tool. The potential benefits were known, but adoption and implementation were seen as “difficult”. The same questions in 2024 saw a massive change and most institutions had adopted it as a standard way of working with clear benefits and efficiencies already evident. As we observed at the time, it only took a global pandemic to tip the balance…
