Open Science Visions from different perspectives

Open Science is a very diverse collaboration. We have all entered for unique reasons and we all expect different results. These reasons and goals may even change as we go. Thus it is very important that we take the time to stop, reflect and listen to why our collaborators are involved and where they see the need for Open Science. If we want to do successful science and obtain important results, we need to be aware of the goals and efforts, we are working for. We need to be brave enough to say both when we are all in and when we disagree with the goals and priorities.

At the Open Science symposium, 6 representatives were invited to share their visions, needs and goals for Open Science. Morten Foss and Rikke Louise Meyer represented the researchers.

Open Science from a researcher’s perspective

They highlighted that open science is a place to collect knowledge from different fields and create network with industry not hindered by IP rights. Open Science projects are based on curiosity and as OS does not have many resources, a project often consist of 1 student and limited funding. We need to know each other to connect and create new projects. Remember that a bachelor project is a student going into the lab for the first time, part-time. They can only scratch the surface – sometimes that is enough. Crowdfunding could be a solution to accelerate the projects. We need true interest in each other – not just funding wise. We take the time to get to know each other in an informal atmosphere. Smaller projects can make us collaborate better. Smaller projects may lead the way into larger collaborations.

What do the students think

Two open science students offered insight into why they chose open science. Matias is finishing a 6 month engineering intern and Christina is doing her masters project based on her 6 month OS project done spring 2017:

Both students engaged in open science based on a suggestion from their supervisor. The students’ motivation arise from easy, fast and engaging feedback from interested parties as well as knowledge about how different industries are interested in using their results.

Their wish for the future of OS: Let us make it bigger! Open science should be more than materials. We need interdisciplinarity to take it to the next level – we need Arts, Engineering, Science/Technology etc.

Industrial perspective

The industry was represented by one of the founding companies (NEWTEC) and a company new to open science (COWI)

The companies had focus on both the gain and the risk of open science

The gain

  • When most of the time is spend on costumers, open science is a place to gain new knowledge and new competences
  • If an idea is truly good, it must be implemented as fast as possible – can OS provide speed?
  • avoid that anyone else take the patent – some projects must be open to be further developed
  • access to researchers and student projects
  • The “small things”:
    • Utilize expertise of others to make sense of data
  • OS creates a unique opportunity for SMEs to become directly involved in research

The risk:

  • Beware of being lost in the clouds of idealism: Money still rule the world. Is it just branding
  • Actual value: Stocked projects may get life again – will this make OS a garbage can.
  • R&D is not done in OS
  • Noise in prioritizing (how fast are we actually able to react and prioritize – OS must not become a random walk between projects)
  • IPR are lost

 

The presentations given by Bjarke Jørgensen from NEWTEC and Hans Møller from COWI are now found online: http://spoman-os.org/december-11-2017/