Skip to main content

Common Workflows & Use Cases

This guide demonstrates how OpenCDMP is used in real-world scenarios. Learn from practical examples covering common workflows, team collaboration patterns, and integration use cases.

Use Case 1: Plan Creation, Review and Approval Workflow​

Scenario​

A research organization requires all DMPs to be reviewed by a data governance committee before submission to funders.

Roles​

  • Researchers: Create plans
  • Data Stewards: Provide guidance and feedback
  • Governance Committee: Approves plans
  • Funders: Receive final approved plans

Workflow​

Stage 1: Draft​

  1. Researcher creates plan:
    • Fills in all sections
    • Saves as Draft
    • Submits for internal review

Stage 2: Under Review​

  1. Plan status changes to "Under Review":

    • Automatically notifies assigned Data Steward
    • Researcher can no longer edit (read-only)

  2. Data Steward reviews plan:

    • Uses annotation tool to add comments:
      • "Section 3: Please clarify backup frequency"
      • "Section 5: Add DOI for related dataset"
      • "Section 7: License choice - verify compatibility"
    • Each comment has status: Open, Resolved, Won't Fix

  3. Data Steward returns plan to researcher:

    • Changes status to "Revision Required"
    • Researcher receives notification

Stage 3: Revision​

  1. Researcher addresses comments:

    • Plan status changed back to Draft (editable)
    • Makes required changes
    • Marks annotations as "Resolved" with explanations
    • Resubmits for review

  2. Data Steward verifies revisions:

    • Reviews updated sections
    • Checks if annotations addressed
    • If satisfied, changes status to "Committee Review"

Stage 4: Committee Approval​

  1. Committee reviews plan:

    • Multiple committee members view plan
    • Discussion via annotations

  2. If approved:

    • Status changes to "Approved"
    • Researcher notified
    • Plan locked from further edits (unless version update)
    • Can now export for funder submission

  3. If not approved:

    • Status returns to "Revision Required"
    • Committee comments added
    • Cycle repeats

Stage 5: Submission​

  1. Researcher exports approved plan:
    • Exports PDF and other formats
    • Submits to funder
    • Uploads proof of submission to OpenCDMP
    • Status changed to "Submitted"

Automation & Notifications​

  • Email notifications sent at each status change

Key Takeaways​

  • ✅ Status-based workflow ensures proper review process
  • ✅ Annotations provide structured feedback
  • ✅ Notifications keep everyone informed

Use Case 2: Integration with Institutional Repository​

Scenario​

University library provides an institutional repository (Zenodo) for data archiving. OpenCDMP integrates to enable seamless deposit.

Components​

  • OpenCDMP: Plan creation and management
  • Zenodo Repository: Long-term data archiving
  • OpenCDMP Deposit Service: Integration bridge

Workflow​

Setup (One-Time)​

  1. Admin configures Zenodo deposit service:
    • Zenodo URL
    • Authentication credentials (API token)
    • Community selection (which Zenodo community to deposit to)

User Workflow​

  1. Researcher creates plan in OpenCDMP:

    • Documents dataset to be archived
    • Completes metadata fields

  2. Ready to deposit:

    • Plan is Finalized
    • Dataset is ready for archiving
    • Researcher clicks "Deposit" button in OpenCDMP

  3. Researcher confirms deposit:

    • OpenCDMP sends metadata and files to Zenodo
    • Zenodo creates new record
    • Assigns DOI (persistent identifier)
    • Returns DOI to OpenCDMP

  4. OpenCDMP updates plan:

    • Stores DOI in plan
    • Links to Zenodo record
    • Status changes to "Published"
    • User notified of successful deposit

Benefits​

  • ✅ No duplicate data entry: Metadata filled once in OpenCDMP
  • ✅ Persistent identifier: DOI for citation
  • ✅ Long-term preservation: Zenodo handles archival
  • ✅ Funder compliance: Demonstrates data sharing

Advanced: Bidirectional Sync​

Some institutions implement bidirectional sync:

  • OpenCDMP → Zenodo: Deposit as described above
  • Zenodo → OpenCDMP: Update plan if dataset metadata changes in repository
  • Benefits: Single source of truth, always up-to-date

Use Case 3: Multi-Tenant Academic Institution​

Scenario​

A large university deploys OpenCDMP to serve multiple departments, each with their own requirements and users.

Structure​

  • Central IT manages the instance
  • 5 Departments use separate tenants:
    • Life Sciences
    • Physics & Engineering
    • Social Sciences
    • Humanities
    • Medical School

Implementation​

Central IT Setup​

  1. Creates tenant for each department:

    • Separate user pools
    • Department-specific branding (logos, colors)
    • Custom blueprints per discipline

  2. Appoints Tenant Admins:

    • Each department has 1-2 admins
    • Admins manage their department's blueprints, users, templates

  3. Shared Resources:

    • Common reference types (ORCID, grant databases)
    • Central authentication (university SSO)
    • Shared deposit service (institutional repository)

Department-Specific Configuration​

Life Sciences Tenant:

  • Blueprints: DMP with ethics/biosafety sections
  • Templates: Clinical trial data, lab experiment data, biobank samples
  • File Transformers: DOCX export with ethics compliance formatting, RDA JSON for biodiversity data
  • Deposit Services: Zenodo
  • Evaluators: Biosafety compliance checker, FAIR data principles evaluator
  • Prefilling Sources: ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, institutional ethics database

Physics & Engineering Tenant:

  • Blueprints: Data & Software Management Plan hybrid
  • Templates: Simulation data, experimental setup, computational models
  • File Transformers: DOCX with code documentation sections, JSON for computational workflows
  • Deposit Services: DSpace
  • Evaluators: Software citation validator, reproducibility checklist
  • Prefilling Sources: DOE Data Explorer, NASA data repositories, Zenodo

Social Sciences Tenant:

  • Blueprints: DMP with GDPR and human subjects sections
  • Templates: Survey data, interview transcripts, statistical datasets
  • File Transformers: DOCX with anonymization guidelines, DDI XML for survey data
  • Deposit Services: Dataverse
  • Evaluators: Zenodo
  • Prefilling Sources: OpenAIRE, institutional IRB database, DataCite

Humanities Tenant:

  • Blueprints: Scholarly edition management, digital humanities project plans
  • Templates: Archival materials, digital collections, text corpora
  • File Transformers: TEI XML export, DOCX with manuscript formatting
  • Deposit Services: Humanities Commons, institutional digital libraries
  • Evaluators: DSpace
  • Prefilling Sources: ORCID, library catalogs, digital humanities registries

Medical School Tenant:

  • Blueprints: Clinical DMP with HIPAA compliance
  • Templates: Patient data, clinical trial protocols, imaging data
  • File Transformers: DOCX with HIPAA privacy sections, FHIR JSON for clinical data

Benefits​

  • ✅ Department autonomy: Each department controls their own configuration
  • ✅ Cost efficiency: Single instance, multiple tenants
  • ✅ Consistent university branding: Central IT maintains core identity
  • ✅ Shared infrastructure: Authentication, storage
  • ✅ Discipline-specific integrations: Each tenant can configure their own file transformers, deposit services, evaluators, and prefilling sources to match their research workflows and compliance requirements

Challenges & Solutions​

Challenge: Different departments have conflicting requirements

Solution: Tenant isolation allows independent customization

Challenge: Central IT overwhelmed with support requests

Solution: Train Tenant Admins to handle department-specific issues

Conclusion​

OpenCDMP supports a wide range of workflows, from simple individual plans to complex multi-institutional collaborations. The key to success is:

  1. Choose the right workflow for your needs
  2. Leverage OpenCDMP's features (collaboration, versioning, integrations)
  3. Iterate and improve based on experience
  4. Share best practices with your community

For more detailed guidance on specific features, see: