History

Prior to the RAE 2001 the University had a proprietary Research Management system from a U.S. supplier. The system was problematic in that:

• It was very much a standalone system and did not integrate with other university systems
• It was very U.S.-focused especially in terms of funding alerts

An attempt to use the system to load the 2001 RAE data met with limited success and subsequently it was decided to replace the system with an in-house development.

Design

The core of the system is a publications database. The basic design philosophy was that data should be entered once and re-used wherever necessary both internally and externally without further modification or addition. The system should be able to link to core systems such as the Human Resources and Student Record information systems.

Much of the original functionality was developed for the RAE 2008 and allowed academics to identify their nominated four outputs and in addition two 'spares' in order to resolve clashes where other internal co-authors cited the same publications. Initially some academics only used the system for the four outputs which were going forward for the RAE. Since then staff are being encouraged to enter all their publications. As well as RAE/REF, the information is used for academic CVs, personal websites and Institutional Repository.

The system is linked to the University's HR system and reflects the institutional management structure.

Further Information

Ulrichs website: www.ulrichsweb.com

CrossRef website: www.crossref.org

The system maintains a definitive list of journals and academics do not enter the International Student Serial Number (ISSN). The ISSNs are retrieved from Ulrichs, CrossRef and, as a last resort, by using Google to search for the title.

The University used the Excel, XML and pdf mechanisms to upload the RAE2008 response. The XML files were generated from the publications database and HR database for the RA2 reports and from the Student Record system for the RA3 reports. The RAE uploaded data was deleted and recreated at regular intervals so that should an error be identified near the submission date the University's response could be regenerated quickly.

The files to be uploaded were stored in a central Sharepoint site and several people had the ability to upload the information.