This research investigates the challenges and factors that influence the implementation of research data management (RDM) in Indonesian research institutes. This study conducted in-depth interviews with six data managers from five Indonesian research institutions using a qualitative research approach. The interview data were analyzed using NVivo software, and the TOPE framework guided the identification of factors and challenges in (RDM) implementation. Critical aspects in RDM implementation are applications, hardware, culture, organizational units, institutional policies, leadership support, awareness, knowledge, education, skills, funder regulations, and government policies. Challenges in RDM implementation encompass access control, data quality, ease of use, building trust, availability of responsible staff, user understanding, researchers’ resistance, awareness, and inter-institutional relations. Research on data management, especially in developing countries like Indonesia, is limited. This study contributes by providing a high-level overview of research institutions in Indonesia, enhancing their understanding of the challenges and critical aspects involved in establishing effective RDM within their institutions.
AbedSS (2020) Social commerce adoption using TOE framework: An empirical investigation of Saudi Arabian SMEs. International Journal of Information Management53: 102118.
2.
Al-JaradatOM (2021) Research data management (RDM) in Jordanian public university libraries: Present status, challenges and future perspectives. Journal of Academic Librarianship47(5): 102378.
3.
AmorimRCCastroJARochadaSilvaJ, et al (2017) A comparison of research data management platforms: Architecture, flexible metadata and interoperability. Universal Access in the Information Society16(4): 851–862.
4.
AnggawiraDMayestiN (2020) The Indonesian national scientific repository: A case study of research data sharing. Preservation, Digital Technology and Culture49(1): 14–25.
5.
AnilkumarN (2018) Research Data Management in India: A Pilot Study. EPJ Web of Conferences186: 03002.
6.
AshiqMUsmaniMHNaeemM (2022) A systematic literature review on research data management practices and services. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, Epub ahead of print 5 December 2022. DOI: 10.1108/GKMC-07-2020-0103.
7.
AshiqMWarraichNF (2022) Librarian’s perception on data librarianship core concepts: a survey of motivational factors, challenges, skills and appropriate trainings platforms. Library Hi Tech. Epub ahead-of-print. DOI: 10.1108/LHT-12-2021-0487.
8.
AshiqMWarraichNF (2023) A systematized review on data librarianship literature: Current services, challenges, skills, and motivational factors. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science55(3): 096100062210836.
9.
Bany MohammadAAl-OkailyMAl-MajaliMMasa’dehR (2022) Business Intelligence and Analytics (BIA) usage in the banking industry sector: An application of the TOE framework. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity8(4): 189.
10.
BirkbeckGNagleTSammonD (2022) Challenges in research data management practices: A literature analysis. Journal of Decision Systems31(S1): 153–167.
11.
BorgmanCLDarchPTSandsAE, et al (2015) Knowledge infrastructures in science: Data, diversity, and digital libraries. International Journal on Digital Libraries16(3–4): 207–227.
12.
BorkakotiRSinghSK (2021) Research data management in central universities and institutes of national importance: A perspective from North East India. Library Philosophy and Practice2021: 1–15.
13.
CrameriLHettiarachchiIHanounS (2021) A review of individual operational cognitive readiness: Theory development and future directions. Human Factors63(1): 66–87.
14.
CreswellJW (2014), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 4th edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
15.
DonnerEK (2023) Research data management systems and the organization of universities and research institutes: A systematic literature review. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science55(2): 261–281.
16.
EifertTMuckelSSchmitzD (2016) Introducing research data management as a service suite at RWTH Aachen. Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), Proceedings – Series of the Gesellschaft Fur Informatik (GI) P-257: 55–64.
17.
FanielIMConnawayLS (2018) Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College and Research Libraries79(1): 100–119.
18.
GürdürDEl-khouryJTörngrenM (2019) Digitalizing Swedish industry: What is next?: Data analytics readiness assessment of Swedish industry, according to survey results. Computers in Industry105: 153–163.
19.
HamadFAl-FadelMAl-SoubA (2021) Awareness of research data management services at academic libraries in Jordan: Roles, responsibilities and challenges. New Review of Academic Librarianship27(1): 76–96.
20.
HuangYCoxAMSbaffiL (2021) Research data management policy and practice in Chinese university libraries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology72(4): 493–506.
21.
Indonesia (2019) Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun 2009 Tentang Sistem Nasional Ilmu Pengetahuan Dan Teknologi. Jakarta: Kementerian Sekretariat Negara, pp. 1–92.
22.
IshakITajuddinNIYah JusohY, et al (2019) Influencing factors in determining research data repository infrastructure for research data management. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology9(1): 1655–1660.
23.
JonesSPryorGWhyteA (2013) How to Develop Research Data Management Services – a Guide for HEIs, DCC How-to-guides. Edinburgh: Digital Curation Centre.
24.
KhinSKeeDMH (2022) Factors influencing Industry 4.0 adoption. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management33(3): 448–467.
25.
KigerMEVarpioL (2020) Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Medical Teacher42(8): 846–854.
26.
LefebvreABakhtiariBSpruitM (2020) Exploring research data management planning challenges in practice. IT – Information Technology62(1): 29–37.
27.
MalikSChadharMVatanasakdakulS, et al (2021) Factors affecting the organizational adoption of blockchain technology: Extending the technology–organization– environment (TOE) framework in the Australian context. Sustainability (Switzerland), MDPI13(16): 9404.
28.
MarlinaEHidayantoANPurwandariB (2022) Towards a model of research data management readiness in Indonesian context: An investigation of factors and indicators through the fuzzy Delphi method. Library and Information Science Research44(1): 101141.
29.
MasenyaTM (2021) Research data management practices and services in South African academic libraries. Library Philosophy and Practice2021: 1–22.
30.
MohammedMSIbrahimR (2019) Challenges and Practices of Research Data Management in Selected Iraq Universities. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology39(6): 308–314.
31.
MozgovaIKoeplerOKraftA, et al (2020) Research data management system for a large collaborative project. In: Proceedings of the NordDesign 2020 Conference, NordDesign 2020.
32.
MuhammadJSIsaAMSamsudinAZH, et al (2020) Critical factors for implementing effective information governance in Nigerian universities: A case study investigation. Education and Information Technologies25(6): 5565–5580.
33.
NiuJ (2020) Diffusion and adoption of research data management services. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication69(3): 117–133.
34.
PalsdottirA (2021) Data literacy and management of research data – a prerequisite for the sharing of research data. Aslib Journal of Information Management73(2): 322–341.
35.
PinfieldSCoxAMSmithJ (2014) Research data management and libraries: Relationships, activities, drivers and influences. PLoS ONE9(12): e114734.
36.
SchöpfelJProstHRebouillatV (2017) Research data in current research information systems. Procedia Computer Science106: 305–320.
TangRHuZ (2019) Providing Research Data Management (RDM) Services in Libraries: Preparedness, Roles, Challenges, and Training for RDM Practice. Data and Information Management3(2): 84–101.
39.
TjandrariniDH (2021) Laboratorium Manajemen Data: Jejak Langkah Membangun Kualitas Data Optimalkan Manfaat, Lembaga Penerbit Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kesehatan, Jakarta.
40.
UzwyshynR (2022) Online data research repositories and digital scholarly ecosystems: From research data and datasets to artificial intelligence and discovery. In: World Library Information Congress 2022: Special Interest Group in Big Data Session, 1–16 July.
41.
WibowoMP (2019) Perubahan Paradigma Data Penelitian Terbuka: Pentingnya Platform Pengelolaan Data Penelitian (Research Data Management (RDM) di Indonesia. OISAA Journal of Indonesia Emas2(1): 1–6.
42.
WilmsKLStieglitzSRossB, et al (2020) A value-based perspective on supporting and hindering factors for research data management. International Journal of Information Management54: 102174.
43.
YangJLuoBZhaoC, et al (2022) Artificial intelligence healthcare service resources adoption by medical institutions based on TOE framework. Digital Health8: 1–42.
44.
YangZSunJZhangY, et al (2015) Understanding SaaS adoption from the perspective of organizational users: A tripod readiness model. Computers in Human Behavior45: 254–264.
45.
YidavalapatiJSinhaPSubaveerapandiyanA (2021) Research data management and services in South Asian Academic Libraries. Library Philosophy and Practice(e-journal): 6457. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/6457.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
