Online seminar PIDs for Organizations and Projects
Research projects and organizations benefit from the use of PIDs (summary)
The DFG-funded project PID Network Germany invited participants to the final event in its seminar series on persistent identifiers (PIDs). Over the past two years, events have been held on various entities and use cases, highlighting the importance of PIDs in different knowledge resources such as research data, people, events, software products, and much more. The shared use of these standards and infrastructures is intended to create a network that ensures the long-term availability and interoperability of research data and results. The aim is to create a basis for open, transparent, and traceable science.
On September 15, 2025, the event focused on the use of PIDs for projects and organizations from different perspectives:
The Integrated Authority File (GND) forms a central basis for the identification of persons, corporate bodies and concepts in German-speaking countries. It enables the linking of PIDs with comprehensive knowledge bases and thus contributes to the semantic networking of research information.
As the central IT infrastructure for the German research landscape, GERIT (German Research Institutions) makes a significant contribution to the provision and operation of the necessary technical basis for PIDs.
RAiD (Research Activity Identifier) provides a standard for the unique identification of research projects and activities. This makes it possible to clearly name projects, link them to the associated data, publications and researchers and thus increase the traceability and comparability of research.
ROR (Research Organisation Registry) is working on the creation of an open, standardized service that assigns unique identifiers to research organisations. The aim is to standardize the presentation of organisations in different systems and to facilitate the automatic assignment of research results.
In addition to presentations on the topics mentioned above, participants in the online seminar had the opportunity to discuss five questions on the topic in an interactive section. The answers are summarized here.
Summary of the interactive part
1. What types of projects (research, infrastructure, cultural heritage, etc.) would benefit most from standardized PIDs?
The majority of participants confirmed that all types of projects would benefit from using PIDs. Three areas were identified in the process:
Cross-Institutional & Collaborative Projects:
Initiatives involving multiple organizations, stakeholders, or funding sources.
Projects that exchange physical samples
Citizen science initiatives
Data-Intensive & Interdisciplinary Endeavors:
Projects producing numerous digital assets or multiple datasets that require high findability, reusability, and transparency (adhering to Open Science principles).
Infrastructure & Archival Systems:
Research data infrastructures and information systems that aggregate data from diverse sources.
Any project whose outputs need to be permanently archived, linked in bibliographic databases, or interconnected within university/state systems for long-term availability and management.
2. What are the biggest challenges you currently face in managing and tracking your project’s outputs?
The primary difficulties in managing and tracking project outputs stem from a widespread lack of standardization and resulting data fragmentation. Key Challenges are:
Data Fragmentation: Outputs are scattered across diverse repositories and platforms, making a comprehensive overview difficult.
Standardization Issues: Inconsistent use of PIDs (such as DOIs, ORCID iDs and RORs) leads to inconsistent identification and poor discoverability.
Administrative Burden: Duplicated reporting due to multiple system requirements and incompatible/non-connected databases create redundant work.
Data Quality: Individual selection of tools causes inconsistent data (e.g., spelling errors in funding info) and limited metadata options hinder interoperable sharing.
Cultural Barriers: Lack of researcher incentives to share data.
3. What are the current practices for managing project and organizational metadata?
Current practices are highly fragmented and characterized by a lack of standardization, though institutions are adopting individual solutions and best-practice principles.
Prevailing Practices (What is Done):
In-House Systems: Institutions and libraries develop their own systems to track and harvest research outputs, often but not always utilizing APIs to collect published articles.
Institutional Metadata Systems: Some organizations maintain central systems that list projects and connect them to associated research data and publications.
Individual Tool Selection: Project owners frequently select their own tools and organizational methods, resulting in highly variable and non-standardized metadata creation.
Best Practices and Recommendations (What Should Be Done):
PID Implementation: Actively integrating PIDs like DOIs, ORCID iDs, and RORs for projects, organizations, and research outputs whenever possible.
Standardized Vocabulary: Using established, consistent vocabularies (e.g., PACS, Fields of Science) and adhering to recognized metadata standards (e.g., Dublin Core) to ensure consistency and interoperability.
Organizational PIDs: Specifically using ROR for organizational metadata to standardize institutional identification.
4. What policies or guidelines are needed to encourage the adoption of PIDs for projects and organizations?
Effective PID adoption requires a strategic mix of mandates, supporting infrastructure, and professional incentives.
Mandatory Policies and Enforcement
Funder Mandates: Make PID assignment (RAiD, ORCID iDs, DOIs) mandatory in grant agreements and project reporting requirements.
Standardized PIDs: Enumerate clear recommendations on which PIDs to use (e.g., ROR for organizations) and embed these in organizational affiliation guidelines.
Political Support: Secure commitment from ministries and governing bodies to drive mandatory standardization across the sector.
Infrastructure and Incentives
Usability: Develop user-friendly tools and interfaces that integrate PID assignment seamlessly into existing research workflows.
Professional Support: Provide dedicated staff (e.g., librarians, information specialists) to assist researchers with implementation.
Recognition: Integrate PID usage into evaluation processes and incentive structures to ensure researchers receive credit for their work and good RDM practices.
Guidance: Offer clear implementation guidance for repositories and publishers on integrating PIDs into their services.
5. What level of granularity is needed for project / organisation identifiers?
The required granularity for PIDs must be flexible and is highly dependent on the use case and the entity's hierarchical position.
Project Granularity
Flexible and Situational: The optimal level of detail varies greatly. PIDs should primarily be assigned to independent, citable outputs produced by the project.
Hierarchical View: A minimum of three levels is often necessary for comprehensive tracking:
Key Value: PID systems should focus on defining the relationships and provenance between project instances rather than imposing fixed limits on the hierarchy.
Organization Granularity
Institutional Focus: Identifiers like ROR are typically registered at the top-level legal entity/institution (e.g., the university).
Hierarchical View: While top-level is common, up to three levels are often needed to capture internal structure:
Parent Organization (Top-level legal entity)
Child Organizations/Units (Faculties, major centers)
Sub-units/Teams (Departments, working groups).
Internal Need: Although PIDs may be registered at the institutional level, internal needs often require the ability to reference and track specific departments or units for statistical and administrative purposes.
Online seminar PIDs for Organizations and Projects
Research projects and organizations benefit from the use of PIDs (summary)
The DFG-funded project PID Network Germany invited participants to the final event in its seminar series on persistent identifiers (PIDs). Over the past two years, events have been held on various entities and use cases, highlighting the importance of PIDs in different knowledge resources such as research data, people, events, software products, and much more. The shared use of these standards and infrastructures is intended to create a network that ensures the long-term availability and interoperability of research data and results. The aim is to create a basis for open, transparent, and traceable science.
On September 15, 2025, the event focused on the use of PIDs for projects and organizations from different perspectives:
The Integrated Authority File (GND) forms a central basis for the identification of persons, corporate bodies and concepts in German-speaking countries. It enables the linking of PIDs with comprehensive knowledge bases and thus contributes to the semantic networking of research information.
As the central IT infrastructure for the German research landscape, GERIT (German Research Institutions) makes a significant contribution to the provision and operation of the necessary technical basis for PIDs.
RAiD (Research Activity Identifier) provides a standard for the unique identification of research projects and activities. This makes it possible to clearly name projects, link them to the associated data, publications and researchers and thus increase the traceability and comparability of research.
ROR (Research Organisation Registry) is working on the creation of an open, standardized service that assigns unique identifiers to research organisations. The aim is to standardize the presentation of organisations in different systems and to facilitate the automatic assignment of research results.
In addition to presentations on the topics mentioned above, participants in the online seminar had the opportunity to discuss five questions on the topic in an interactive section. The answers are summarized here.
Summary of the interactive part
1. What types of projects (research, infrastructure, cultural heritage, etc.) would benefit most from standardized PIDs?
The majority of participants confirmed that all types of projects would benefit from using PIDs. Three areas were identified in the process:
Cross-Institutional & Collaborative Projects:
Initiatives involving multiple organizations, stakeholders, or funding sources.
Projects that exchange physical samples
Citizen science initiatives
Data-Intensive & Interdisciplinary Endeavors:
Projects producing numerous digital assets or multiple datasets that require high findability, reusability, and transparency (adhering to Open Science principles).
Infrastructure & Archival Systems:
Research data infrastructures and information systems that aggregate data from diverse sources.
Any project whose outputs need to be permanently archived, linked in bibliographic databases, or interconnected within university/state systems for long-term availability and management.
2. What are the biggest challenges you currently face in managing and tracking your project’s outputs?
The primary difficulties in managing and tracking project outputs stem from a widespread lack of standardization and resulting data fragmentation. Key Challenges are:
Data Fragmentation: Outputs are scattered across diverse repositories and platforms, making a comprehensive overview difficult.
Standardization Issues: Inconsistent use of PIDs (such as DOIs, ORCID iDs and RORs) leads to inconsistent identification and poor discoverability.
Administrative Burden: Duplicated reporting due to multiple system requirements and incompatible/non-connected databases create redundant work.
Data Quality: Individual selection of tools causes inconsistent data (e.g., spelling errors in funding info) and limited metadata options hinder interoperable sharing.
Cultural Barriers: Lack of researcher incentives to share data.
3. What are the current practices for managing project and organizational metadata?
Current practices are highly fragmented and characterized by a lack of standardization, though institutions are adopting individual solutions and best-practice principles.
Prevailing Practices (What is Done):
In-House Systems: Institutions and libraries develop their own systems to track and harvest research outputs, often but not always utilizing APIs to collect published articles.
Institutional Metadata Systems: Some organizations maintain central systems that list projects and connect them to associated research data and publications.
Individual Tool Selection: Project owners frequently select their own tools and organizational methods, resulting in highly variable and non-standardized metadata creation.
Best Practices and Recommendations (What Should Be Done):
PID Implementation: Actively integrating PIDs like DOIs, ORCID iDs, and RORs for projects, organizations, and research outputs whenever possible.
Standardized Vocabulary: Using established, consistent vocabularies (e.g., PACS, Fields of Science) and adhering to recognized metadata standards (e.g., Dublin Core) to ensure consistency and interoperability.
Organizational PIDs: Specifically using ROR for organizational metadata to standardize institutional identification.
4. What policies or guidelines are needed to encourage the adoption of PIDs for projects and organizations?
Effective PID adoption requires a strategic mix of mandates, supporting infrastructure, and professional incentives.
Mandatory Policies and Enforcement
Funder Mandates: Make PID assignment (RAiD, ORCID iDs, DOIs) mandatory in grant agreements and project reporting requirements.
Standardized PIDs: Enumerate clear recommendations on which PIDs to use (e.g., ROR for organizations) and embed these in organizational affiliation guidelines.
Political Support: Secure commitment from ministries and governing bodies to drive mandatory standardization across the sector.
Infrastructure and Incentives
Usability: Develop user-friendly tools and interfaces that integrate PID assignment seamlessly into existing research workflows.
Professional Support: Provide dedicated staff (e.g., librarians, information specialists) to assist researchers with implementation.
Recognition: Integrate PID usage into evaluation processes and incentive structures to ensure researchers receive credit for their work and good RDM practices.
Guidance: Offer clear implementation guidance for repositories and publishers on integrating PIDs into their services.
5. What level of granularity is needed for project / organisation identifiers?
The required granularity for PIDs must be flexible and is highly dependent on the use case and the entity's hierarchical position.
Project Granularity
Flexible and Situational: The optimal level of detail varies greatly. PIDs should primarily be assigned to independent, citable outputs produced by the project.
Hierarchical View: A minimum of three levels is often necessary for comprehensive tracking:
Key Value: PID systems should focus on defining the relationships and provenance between project instances rather than imposing fixed limits on the hierarchy.
Organization Granularity
Institutional Focus: Identifiers like ROR are typically registered at the top-level legal entity/institution (e.g., the university).
Hierarchical View: While top-level is common, up to three levels are often needed to capture internal structure:
Parent Organization (Top-level legal entity)
Child Organizations/Units (Faculties, major centers)
Sub-units/Teams (Departments, working groups).
Internal Need: Although PIDs may be registered at the institutional level, internal needs often require the ability to reference and track specific departments or units for statistical and administrative purposes.
