IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v10y2022i4p49-d996958.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring and Promoting the Success of an Open Science Discovery Platform through “Compass Indicators”: The GoTriple Case

Author

Listed:
  • Stefano De Paoli

    (Division of Sociology, Abertay University, Bell Street, Dundee DD11HG, UK)

  • Emilie Blotière

    (CNRS National Center for Scientific Research, 8Cr de Humanités, 93300 Aubervilliers, France)

  • Paula Forbes

    (Division of Sociology, Abertay University, Bell Street, Dundee DD11HG, UK)

  • Sona Arasteh-Roodsary

    (Max Weber Stiftung, Rheinallee 6, 53173 Bonn, Germany)

Abstract

Previous research on indicators for measuring the success of Open Science tends to operate at a macro/global level and very rarely addresses the need to measure success at the level of a single project. However, this previous research has the merit of arguing for the definition of indicators that offer an alternative to more traditional bibliometric measures or indicators that focus on mere performance. This paper is the outcome of work conducted for a specific project that aims to build a discovery platform for social sciences and humanities, the platform GoTriple. GoTriple is designed taking inspiration from Open Science principles and has been built through a user-centered approach. The paper details the practice-led work conducted by the GoTriple team for assessing the meaning of the term success for the project and to identify indicators. To this end, this paper proposes the concept of compass indicators and presents how the project team arrived at the definition of this concept. The paper also highlights a distinction between compass indicators, which are modest measures, and key performance indicators, which tend to be tied up with measurable objectives. Compass indicators are defined as indicators that do not aim to achieve a specified numerical target of success but rather explain the journey of a project toward achieving certain desirable outcomes and offer insights to take action. Compass indicators defined for the project embrace areas such as diversity, inclusivity, collaboration, and the general use of the platform. In the final discussion, the paper offers reflections on the potential relevance of the notion of compass indicators and closes with a discussion of the next steps for this work.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefano De Paoli & Emilie Blotière & Paula Forbes & Sona Arasteh-Roodsary, 2022. "Measuring and Promoting the Success of an Open Science Discovery Platform through “Compass Indicators”: The GoTriple Case," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-25, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:10:y:2022:i:4:p:49-:d:996958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/10/4/49/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/10/4/49/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter B. Seddon, 1997. "A Respecification and Extension of the DeLone and McLean Model of IS Success," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 240-253, September.
    2. Bornmann, Lutz, 2014. "Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 895-903.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    2. Tsung Teng Chen, 2012. "The development and empirical study of a literature review aiding system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 105-116, July.
    3. Abdesamad Zouine & Pierre Fenies, 2014. "The Critical Success Factors Of The ERP System Project: A Meta-Analysis Methodology," Post-Print hal-01419785, HAL.
    4. Dwiza Riana & Achmad Nizar Hidayanto & Sri Hadianti & Darmawan Napitupulu, 2021. "Integrative Factors of E-Health Laboratory Adoption: A Case of Indonesia," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    5. Landrum, Hollis & Prybutok, Victor R., 2004. "A service quality and success model for the information service industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(3), pages 628-642, August.
    6. Ying Guo & Xiantao Xiao, 2022. "Author-level altmetrics for the evaluation of Chinese scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 973-990, February.
    7. Sanduni I. Senaratne & Samantha M. Samarasinghe, 2019. "Factors Affecting the Intention to Adopt M-Learning," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(2), pages 150-164, February.
    8. Isidro F. Aguillo, 2020. "Altmetrics of the Open Access Institutional Repositories: a webometrics approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(3), pages 1181-1192, June.
    9. Masoner, Michael M. & Lang, Sandra S. & Melcher, Arlyn J., 2011. "A meta-analysis of information system success: A reconsideration of its dimensionality," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 136-141.
    10. Lawrence, Michael & Goodwin, Paul & Fildes, Robert, 2002. "Influence of user participation on DSS use and decision accuracy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 381-392, October.
    11. Un-Kon Lee, 2017. "International Tourism Advertisements on Social Media: Impact of Argument Quality and Source," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, August.
    12. Jung-Yu Lai & Juite Wang, 2018. "Exploring the impacts of perceived e-collaboration service convenience on new product development in Taiwanese IC design companies," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 107-120, June.
    13. repec:thr:techub:1009:y:2020:i:1:p:397-404 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Byrd, Terry Anthony & Thrasher, Evelyn H. & Lang, Teresa & Davidson, Nancy W., 2006. "A process-oriented perspective of IS success: Examining the impact of IS on operational cost," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 448-460, October.
    15. Yu Liu & Dan Lin & Xiujuan Xu & Shimin Shan & Quan Z. Sheng, 2018. "Multi-views on Nature Index of Chinese academic institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 823-837, March.
    16. Ortega, José Luis, 2021. "How do media mention research papers? Structural analysis of blogs and news networks using citation coupling," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    17. Oghuma, Apollos Patricks & Chang, Younghoon & Libaque-Saenz, Christian Fernando & Park, Myeong-Cheol & Rho, Jae Jeung, 2015. "Benefit-confirmation model for post-adoption behavior of mobile instant messaging applications: A comparative analysis of KakaoTalk and Joyn in Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 658-677.
    18. Nurlia Dewi & Willy Abdillah & Muhartini Salim & Slamet Widodo, 2021. "The Role of Leadership in Implementation Public Information System of Local Government Institutions in Indonesia," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 11(6), pages 1-9.
    19. A. Maes & G. Poels, 2006. "Development of a user evaluations based quality model for conceptual modeling," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 06/406, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    20. Mingyang Wang & Zhenyu Wang & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Which can better predict the future success of articles? Bibliometric indices or alternative metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1575-1595, June.
    21. Fatma Fourati-Jamoussi & Claude Narcisse Niamba, 2016. "An evaluation of business intelligence tools: a cluster analysis of users’ perceptions," Post-Print hal-03165570, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:10:y:2022:i:4:p:49-:d:996958. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.