Paper short abstract

The paper presents the most prevalent lock-in stories circulating among Dutch universities in relation to the Open Research Information (ORI) movement. It highlights the inherent messiness, fuzziness, and overlapping nature of technological, institutional, and behavioral lock-ins.

Paper long abstract

This article investigates how Dutch universities perceive lock-in mechanisms related to the Open Research Information (ORI) movement.

Research information plays a vital role within the research landscape. For instance, it aids scholars in discovering relevant literature, supports institutions monitoring their research activities, and it also informs university policymakers in shaping their future strategies. They are also often packaged into metrics and analytics used to rank or compare researchers across departments, universities, and research centres, particularly with respect to productivity and performance.

Despite its various importance, research information is often locked behind proprietary databases. This has become a major driver for the ORI movement, which advocates switching to a more open, community-led research information system, such as OpenAlex and OpenAIRE. But, despite the growing support for the movement, many Dutch universities still rely on proprietary platforms. From 19 interviews across 14 institutions in the Netherlands, three prevalent lock-in stories are identified. First, proprietary platforms play various roles within the research landscape. Various actors within a university with varying levels of awareness and interest in the ORI movement have integrated these tools into their workflows, making it highly difficult to switch. Second, the continuous acquisition of community-driven initiatives by proprietary companies has made universities more hesitant to formally invest in emerging alternatives, slowing the development of ORI platforms. Third, the persistence of the ‘publish or perish’ culture shapes how researchers engage with the ORI movement, as career advancement often remains closely tied to publication metrics and established systems.