1.1 EPSRC

Dear Ben,

Following previous discussions, I am writing to inform you that I am carrying out a study that involves performing knowledge audits of publicly funded research projects.

An outline of the rationale and motivation and methodology are listed on this publicly accessible website:

https://sites.google.com/site/kaframework/

One of the goals of the study is to understand how public research bodies regulate and monitor the dissemination of knowledge

I would be grateful if you could provide the following information about the knowledge sharing behaviour of your funding body:

FUNDING BODY POLICY SURVEY FORM

https://spreadsheets0.google.com/viewform?hl=en&hl=en&formkey=dDYxMGd3dXRUZWYySVlEMW9JWUdMUEE6MQ#gid=0

Project leaders will be contacted in the next few days to be informed of the audit procedure, which takes place remotely and unobtrusively via  searches of the respective project websites, so that they can point us to relevant repositories and sources of knowledge that can be publicly  evaluated.

Summary findings and recommendations of this study will be made available to you in preview form, before publication.

Please do let me have any questions you may have at this stage

Best Regards

Paola Di Maio

KAF Project Lead

*************************************

DMEM,  Room 106

University of Strathclyde

75 Montrose St

Glasgow, G1 1XJ

t: +44(0) 141 548 4308

paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk

EXHIBIT 2  - PREVIOUS CORRESPONDENCE WITH EPSRC ABOUT THEIR POLICY

Paola Di Maio

*************************************

DMEM,  Room 106

University of Strathclyde

75 Montrose St

Glasgow, G1 1XJ

t: +44(0) 141 548 4308

paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk

________________________________________

From: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I) [Ben.Ryan@epsrc.ac.uk]

Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 5:15 PM

To: Paola Di Maio

Cc: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I)

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Dear Paola,

I'm afraid my email may not have been quite clear: I don't have the time to trawl back through the previous correspondence to extract the relevant parts, but would be happy to review a pre-populated copy of your form if you fill it with information I have already provided.

Ben

Ben Ryan

Senior Evaluation Manager

EPSRC

-----Original Message-----

From: Paola Di Maio [mailto:paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk]

Sent: 14 March 2011 14:30

To: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I)

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Ben

thanks for reply

yes please, use the same info you already sent, just pasted in the structured form

and btw, do let me have any other comments and suggestions

on how to improve the information collection  or any other comment

If you want to try out the other data collection forms,

go to the 'get started' tab on this website

https://sites.google.com/site/kaframework/

a few of the links on that page lead to data entry form that I am using for my study

(currently just testing/piloting and refining  them)

 mark any test entry as TESTentry in the first slot, and fill out any random variables and I ll delete the garbage

from my spreadsheet afterwords

I would be valuable to know what you think about these data collection forms

and how to improve them

any additional comments and feedback welcome!

This work is part of my Phd, supported by a DTA awarded to Uni Strathclyde

via Nectise project, grant number

EP/D505461/1 for the project "Network Enabled

Capability Through Innovative Systems Engineering

(NECTISE)".

The  NECTISE project was terminated in 2009, i believe, but residual funding

was available for me to do a Phd, and prof Duffy at Strath has given me

ample freedom to steer this research as I see fit.

Paola Di Maio

*************************************

DMEM,  Room 106

University of Strathclyde

75 Montrose St

Glasgow, G1 1XJ

t: +44(0) 141 548 4308

paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk

________________________________________

From: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I) [Ben.Ryan@epsrc.ac.uk]

Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 10:42 AM

To: Paola Di Maio

Cc: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I)

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Dear Paola,

I would be happy to check the form if you could fill it in using the information already provided to you.

I note your form includes the statement: 'The information collected is part of KAF, Knowledge Audit framework, an EPSRC funded project' and I would be grateful if you could let me have the reference number of the EPSRC grant which is supporting this work.

Many thanks,

Ben

Ben Ryan

Senior Evaluation Manager

EPSRC

-----Original Message-----

From: Paola Di Maio [mailto:paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk]

Sent: 11 March 2011 20:14

To: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I)

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Dear Ben

In our initial exchanges you provided some information about the knowledge sharing policy status of EPSRC

I can use the information you provided for my study, but I have since developed a structured data collection form

to capture the essential variables (funding body has /does not have policy, etc)

I would be grateful if you could fill out this form, it should take only a few minutes

https://spreadsheets0.google.com/viewform?hl=en&hl=en&formkey=dDYxMGd3dXRUZWYySVlEMW9JWUdMUEE6MQ#gid=0

If you feel filling out the form is a duplication of what you already told me and do not want to waste time

I can scrape the emails you sent me for this information, and fill it out myself, but I would still need you to verify this

I am sending uder separate cover a stadard letter which I am sending out to the respective research councils

as part of my research protocols

let me have any questions

Thanks again for your assistance with this study

Best regards

Paola Di Maio

*************************************

DMEM,  Room 106

University of Strathclyde

75 Montrose St

Glasgow, G1 1XJ

t: +44(0) 141 548 4308

paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk

________________________________________

From: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I) [Ben.Ryan@epsrc.ac.uk]

Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 5:46 PM

To: Paola Di Maio

Cc: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I)

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Dear Paola,

Thanks for your further questions.

>>What do I do if I identify that EPRSC is falling short or providing misleading information when it comes to its open access policy?

As I hope is clear our policy on 'Open Access' relates to the availability of published research outputs arising from our funding, and I equally hope that you do not feel we are providing misleading information about this. However, if you do feel that we are falling short or providing misleading information please do provide further details and I would be happy to respond further.

>>Is there any open public consultation about the work that you are doing in relation to policy development?

There is not as yet a public consultation; this kind of development is typically initiated by a paper submitted to our governing Council setting out the issues and a range of options for consideration. As mentioned previously, we are taking advice in this initial work through targeted consultation with public and private research organisations and research publishers. It may be that Council recommends further and wider consultation before any proposed policy options are formally adopted.

>> In which legislation is this policy change based?

>> How is EPRSC responding to various EU actions, for example JRC plan 2010-2020

There are a three primary pieces of UK legislation in this area - the Data Protection Act, the Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental Information Regulations. We are of course also taking note of relevant EU legislation/directives as appropriate, e.g. the PSI directive (http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/psi/docs/pdfs/directive/psi_directive_en.pdf).

>> Is this policy entirely your sole responsibility, or is there anyone else at EPRSC responsible for knowledge sharing policies?

Our governing Council has ultimate responsibility for setting new EPSRC policy. My role, with the advice and support and of senior colleagues and external stakeholders as noted above, is to describe the issues and set out the options.

>>How can I make a recommendation to EPRSC to include glossary for each research in the published data, which is minimum  essential 'knowledge'

I am happy to take account of your views in my work; I agree that whenever research data is published then it is also good practice to provide contextual information which would include a glossary containing definitions of the data items. However, please note that EPSRC does not currently insist on the publication of specific research data. Individual researchers are free (subject to UK legislation) to decide which findings and supporting data to publish and when to do so (and when not to do so); in reaching their decisions they of course take into account a variety of factors - see the attached Nature article.

>> Note that this enquiry is part of wider research context in this field, see the next meeting I'll be attending next week

The meeting you refer looks as if it will be interesting and I hope it will assist you with your research.

With best wishes,

Ben (not Brian!)

Ben Ryan

Senior Evaluation Manager

EPSRC

-----Original Message-----

From: Paola Di Maio [mailto:paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk]

Sent: 08 September 2010 18:47

To: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I)

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Thanks Brian

A few more questions please:

How can I make a recommendation to EPRSC to include glossary for each research in the published data, which is minimum  essential 'knowledge'

What do I do if I identify that EPRSC is falling short or providing misleading information when it comes to its open access policy?

Is there any open public consultation about the work that you are doing in relation to policy development?

In which legislation is this policy change based?

How is EPRSC responding to various EU actions, for example JRC plan 2010-2020

http://www.welcomeurope.com/en-interviews-JRC-and-its-new-2010-2020-JRC-Strategy-174.html

Note that this enquiry is part of wider research context in this field, see the next meeting I ll be attending next week

http://www.iskouk.org/events/linked_data_sep2010.htm#Booking

Is this policy entirely your sole responsibility, or is there anyone else at EPRSC responsible for knowledge sharing policies?

Let me know if at any stage a call would be useful

My research protocol will follow shortly

Thanks

Paola Di Maio

*************************************

DMEM,  Room 106

University of Strathclyde

75 Montrose St

Glasgow, G1 1XJ

t: +44(0) 141 548 4308

paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk

________________________________________

From: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I) [Ben.Ryan@epsrc.ac.uk]

Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 11:39 AM

To: Paola Di Maio

Cc: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I)

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Dear Paola,

My job title is below my name at the end of my email.

You will find the answer to your question on what is meant by Gold if you study the report commissioned by RCUK published in 2009 - the page where you will find this is http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/access/default.htm (a link to this is on our own page covering our policy on access to research outputs).

The more you read reports in this area it will become clear that the 'Open Access' debate refers primarily to the research literature that we refer to as 'research outputs', and in particular to peer review journal articles. There is, however, increasing interest in the arrangements for access to and management of the data underpinning such research outputs, and this is the area in which I am helping to develop EPSRC policy, informed by targeted consultation with public and private research organisations and research publishers. I am afraid I do not see an individual role for you in this process.

Best wishes,

Ben

Ben Ryan

Senior Evaluation Manager

EPSRC

-----Original Message-----

From: Paola Di Maio [mailto:paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk]

Sent: 06 September 2010 16:07

To: Ben Ryan (EPSRC,C&I)

Cc: Alex Duffy; Iain Boyle

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Dear Ben

cc. Alex Duffy, Iain Boyle Research advisors

thanks for your reply.

>>>>Simon Crook has forwarded me your enquiry, which I will do my best to respond to. You research topic is an interesting one and relates to an area that I am also engaged in.

Glad my research is of interest to you.

May I ask what is your job title/in what role and capacity are you replying to my enquiry?

>>>I would first like to ask you a couple of questions if I may? Before I do so it will help to be sure that I have correctly understood things: from the message trail below I gather that...

>>>1. You originally approached the Director of the NECTISE research programme seeking access to data generated by the NECTISE project in January this year;

Nope, In early 2009, when my Phd started - there have been a number of questions and answers sent back and forth between Laughborogh and BAE, but I never got any straigh answers

>>>2. You were informed that because of BAE's involvement in the project, and the relevant collaboration agreement between BAE and your University, BAE would need to agree to you having access to the project data. It is also clear that BAE (David Gunton) was asked >>>in January 2010 to agree (or not) to this access.

>>>3. Your PhD is funded at least in part through the doctoral training block grant we give to Strathclyde.

I think so,  as far as I know, the DTA was part of the NECTISE project

>>>4. Your PhD research started 'in 2009'

yes, actually I was awarded the DTA in 2008 but deferred the start til December 2008 then actually started in 2009

>>>5. You first contacted EPSRC in relation to your research on 22 August 2010

yes

>>>If you could confirm that I haven't misunderstood anything I would be grateful, and it would also be helpful if you could answer the following two questions.

>>>Q1 - It is not clear from your message whether BAE responded to your request for access to the project data, but it is implied that access has been refused. Can you confirm this?

 I would prefer to say that BAE has never answered the question whether a glossary exists in the first place,

I asked textually

'does a glossary exist? and if yes, can I access it?

never got an answer, will forward you the email

>>>Q2. Your statement that you are 'a DTA holder at Strathclyde University, the funding for my PhD part of NECTISE' is confusing. Please could you clarify whether the NECTISE project also provided funds at any stage for your PhD, and if so for how long (I note that the >>>NECTISE project closed on 30th April 2009).

As stated above, to the best of my knowledge, my  DTA was part of NECTISE in relation to networked capabilities research project. Sometime in 2009 the project was 'suspended' but my doctoral research has already been granted the funding

so it is goind ahead, more or less researching the same topic, just not within the BAE led project, NECTISE

>>>Re. your questions

>>>1. '... what is the EPRSC policy in relation to access to knowledge...?'

>>>The Open Access policy pages you refer to (http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/about/infoaccess/Pages/roaccess.aspx) relates to academic publications rather than the data which underpins them.

Okay, could you please tell me where is such distinction specified? is it somewhere in the wording? I dont think  a 'glossary' is data though. Perhaps EPRSC does not distinguish clearly enough what constitutes 'knowledge', in which case

I may be able to make a recommendation as part of my conclusions

>>> Although EPSRC council has agreed to open access publication, this has not yet been translated into policy. You are correct that we do not currently monitor whether academics are choosing the 'green' or the 'gold' options, but anecdotal feedback suggests few are >>>choosing 'gold'

Can you explain this a bit more? what do you mean gold? again, if there is no policy, then I would say this could be a critical gap when it comes to facilitating  knowledge sharing in systems engineering

>>>Policy on the management of and access to research data (as opposed to publications) varies across the research councils - since most such data is now in digital format you may find the following site helpful in understanding the reasons behind this and the associated >>>issues: http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/policy-and-legal/overview-funders-data-policies) EPSRC is currently developing a more detailed policy in this area.

Considering my research is in this field, are there collaboration options where I can provide some input perhaps, and learn more about how EPRSC is developing such policy? (basically, who is doing it, how, and how can I help)

>>>What you have already been told is correct: we do not claim the intellectual property arising from research we fund and we expect collaborative research projects (which we support with one or more external partners) to have agreements in place setting out how any >>>Intellectual Property arising from the research will be managed. Even where there is no third party supporting the research we expect the grant holding university to take appropriate steps to protect and exploit any intellectual property that arises from research we >>>fund, and so a balance has to be struck between the benefits of free access and the need to restrict access in a way that allows effective exploitation.

I'd like to learn more about how this balance is struck, and any possible weaknesses affecting knowledge sharing  that can be identified in this process

>>>2. 'I would like to carry out a case study around EPRSC Knowledge Sharing/Reuse policies...'

>>>It would be helpful if you could first forward the research protocol you are developing. And we could then discuss how best - if at all - EPSRC can help you further once I have been able to study it.

Thanks, I am currently refining/streamlining the research protocol, will forward it to you in a few weeks or so

Thanks a lot for your attention, look forward to be learning more and possibly contributing to better knowledge acess in systems engineering research

Best regards

Paola Di Maio

With best wishes,

Ben

Ben Ryan

Senior Evaluation Manager

EPSRC

-----Original Message-----

From: Paola Di Maio [mailto:paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk]

Sent: 25 August 2010 22:05

To: Mandy Rea (EPSRC,C&I)

Cc: Simon Crook (EPSRC,BI)

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

sorry, one sentence was truncated

resending with complete sentence below

Given the policy, can you please explain how can EPRSC committ to Open Access if, according to your statement below, you do not seem to monitor if the grants EPRSC awards to projects actually meet the Open Access policy guidelines?

________________________________________

From: Paola Di Maio

Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:01 PM

To: Mandy Rea (EPSRC,C&I)

Cc: simon.crook@epsrc.ac.uk

Subject: RE: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Dear Simon

With reference to my earlier enquiry, in relation to my current research,  I am writing on two accounts

1. Please can you frame your statement below in relation to the EPRSC Open Access policy?

http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/about/infoaccess/Pages/roaccess.aspx

Given the policy, can you please explain how can EPRSC committ to Open Access if, according to your statement below, you do not seem to monitor if the grants EPRSC awards to projects actually meet the Open Access policy guidelines?

2. I would like to carry out a case study around EPRSC Knowledge Sharing/Reuse policies, as part of my doctoral research. it consists of carrying out an audit to assess the sharability of knowledge generated by EPRSC funding  Is there a process you would like me to follow, or shall I just email you my research protocol (the case study procedure I am writing out?)

Thanks a lot in advance

Best regards

Paola Di Maio

*************************************

DMEM,  Room 106

University of Strathclyde

75 Montrose St

Glasgow, G1 1XJ

t: +44(0) 141 548 4308

paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk

________________________________________

Hi Mandy,

The only information we carry on the research is the grant proposal, he really ought to speak to the prinicipal investigator Michael Henshaw, which he has.

As for IP, EPSRC never owns IP on grants, it gives all the funded responsibility to the univeristies to negotiate with the companies. AS Nectise was funded jointly with BAE Systems, this is what has happened. It seems the standard kind of arrangement has been put in place, work can be published subject to commercial concerns of BAE Systems. This really is between the university and BAE Systems.

Simon Crook

(Senior Sector Manager for Aerospace and Defence, EPRSC)

-----Original Message-----

From: Mandy Rea (EPSRC,C&I) On Behalf Of Infoline - EPSRC External Help Line

Sent: 23 August 2010 12:02

To: Simon Crook (EPSRC,BI)

Subject: FW: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Hello Simon

Please can you help with questions 1 & 2, I will forward to Andrea Bertram for help with question 3.

Regards

Mandy

-----Original Message-----

From: Paola Di Maio [mailto:paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk]

Sent: 22 August 2010 13:52

To: Infoline - EPSRC External Help Line

Subject: knowledge reuse in systems engineering

Dear Sirs

I am a DTA holder at Strathclyde University, the funding for my Phd part of NECTISE

http://gow.epsrc.ac.uk/ViewGrant.aspx?GrantRef=EP/D505461/1

I am writing on three different issues as follows:

1. nectise glossary

Nectise project was terminated last year,  however in order for me to proceed with my research i needed basic access to some of NECTiSE knowledge, for example the glossary, or controlled vocabulary

Although my DTA started in 2009, as of today i have been unable to find out

a) whether such a glossary exist

b) why despite this project being eprsc funded, all the relevant IP belongs to BAE Sustems

I am therefore making enquiry as to what is the EPRSC policy in relation to access to knowledge, should a research project which is funded under EPRSC not make at least some deliverables/outcomes of the research available to the public in general? or at a minimum. to other researchers working on the project?

Please refer to the email trail below for background

Note this email is part of an inquiry into 'knowledge reuse in systems engineering' whih is the main tpic of my doctoral research

2. I would like to carry out a case study to investigate how EPRSC facilitate knowledge reuse in the systems engineering field this would consist of a knowledge audit and some interviews, who can I talk to? is there anyone in charge of knowledge exchange?

3. As an experienced professional and invited expert  I'd like to make a contribution to EPRSC technical committees listed here Please let me know who to contact, thanks http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/about/partner/Pages/getinvolved.aspx

Thanks for your prompt attention

Paola Di Maio

*************************************

DMEM,  Room 106

University of Strathclyde

75 Montrose St

Glasgow, G1 1XJ

t: +44(0) 141 548 4308

paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk

________________________________________

From: Mike Henshaw [M.J.d.Henshaw@lboro.ac.uk]

Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 10:36 PM

To: Paola Di Maio; David.Gunton@baesystems.com

Cc: Alex Duffy; Natalie Pugh

Subject: Re: Paola Di Maio

Dear Paola,

All NECTISE work is covered by agreements between BAE Systems and the individual universities.

Alex Duffy will hold the BAES-Strathclyde agreement should you wish to consult it.  This has specific restrictions on use of IP and defines the conditions under which information is published.

The agreement is the same for all universities, except Loughborough where it covers a wider set of conditions. Specifically, the Loughborough agreement includes PhD students, but those for the other universities cover only employees.

BAES require PhD students to be covered through a separate agreement for use of NECTISE material.

Your award is through a separate funding stream and is not subject to the original partnership agreement.

The publications are listed in www.nectise.com

The release of all NECTISE deliverables is subject to BAES permission.

There are probably two courses of action you may wish to chose between.

1. Strathclyde establish a separate agreement for named individuals (students) to access all deliverables, 2. Request for specific deliverables should be made to David Gunton

This probably sounds a bit bureaucratic, but only BAES can determine the commercial sensitivity of information and we all signed the agreement with the restrictions.

You should deal directly with David on this issue.

I hope this clarifies the position for you.

Regards

Michael Henshaw

--

Michael J de C Henshaw

Professor of Systems Engineering

Loughborough University

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:57:32 +0000

  Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk> wrote:

> Dear Mike

>

> thanks a lot for reply

>

> I wait to hear from David accordingly at his convenince

>

> In the meantime, for further analysis of knowledge access to NECTISE

>please provide some information  to the following points

>

> a) if you are (are) were the NECTISE consortium Director (as it

>appears on the website)  why do you have to ask David (BAE) for

>permission to access?

> what is the relationship between NECTISE management and BAE? Who is

>making this decision? Based on what process/procedure?

>

> b) Where can I access the policy that defines who qualifies as a

>consortium member? do we have to rely on the decision of an individual?

>what guidlelines  will David follow in granting/not granting

>permission?

>

> c) does the fact that I am a NECTISE DTA researcher, not automatically

>qualify me as a consortium partner?

> if not, why not? (what document /directive is being consulted or what

>decision making process is David

>following)

>

> e) What NECTISE deliverables to date are availabel for public access?

>    what NECTISE deliverables are avaialble for academic research?

>

>

> Thanks in advance for any questions you may be able to answer

>

>

> best regards

>

> PDM

>

>

>

>

>

> Paola Di Maio

> *************************************

> DMEM,  Room 106

> University of Strathclyde

> 75 Montrose St

> Glasgow, G1 1XJ

> t: +44(0) 141 548 4308

> paola.dimaio@strath.ac.uk

> ________________________________________

>From: Mike Henshaw [M.J.d.Henshaw@lboro.ac.uk]

> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 4:51 PM

> To: Gunton, David (UK)

> Cc: Paola Di Maio; Alex Duffy; Natalie Pugh

> Subject: Paola Di Maio

>

> Dear David,

>

> I have received various messages from Paola Di Maio today concerning

>access to the SDE for NECTISE.

>

> I think the situation is that she wants access, but doesn't currently

>have it.  She is working on a NECTISE DTA project.

>

> I know that there is a special situation with regard to PhD students,

>because they are not covered by the standard agreement  between BAES

>and its partner universities.

>

>From my point of view, we can set up access if required.

> The only information Natalie and I need is whether BAES grant access

>to  Paola - i.e. we don't need to know any details about the agreement,

>just yes or no.

>

> If you can confirm by email that BAES gives permission, then we shall

>enable the access.  If 'no' then we won't.

> Please let us know.

>

> Regards

>

> Michael Henshaw

>

>

> Michael J de C Henshaw BSc(Hons), MBA, PhD, MRAeS, MIEEE, MINCOSE

>Professor of Systems Engineering  Engineering Systems of Systems (ESoS)

>Group  Dept. of Electronic and Electrical Engineering  Garendon Wing,

>Holywell Park  Loughborough University

> LE11 3TU

>

> +44(0)1509 635 269

>

> http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/el/people/Henshaw-Michael-Professor

> .html

>

>

_______________________________________________________________

This message has been scanned by the WebRoot Email Security Service. For more information please visit http://www.webroot.com _______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Explore the impact of our research at www.impactworld.org.uk

_______________________________________________________________

This message has been scanned by the WebRoot Email Security Service. For more information please visit http://www.webroot.com _______________________________________________________________