[nobodyandproud]

For #2, are you saying the administration doesn’t hold the purse strings?

Why the resistance to the top-down approach?

Nobody resists if it means more resources; and faster procurement of resources.

Instead it seems researchers are forced to navigate politics and raise funding.

Or do you mean that each department has its own IT department and it’s resisting consolidation?

For #3: It’s not about resources but about how “impact factor” is measured, and whether it’s useful a useful metric.

Often, for example little attention is given to confirmation of a suspected dead-end. That still requires in-depth knowledge of the subject, is still research, and advances knowledge.

[op00to]

For #2, yes - the administration doesn't hold the purse strings. Each PI gets their own grants, and thus can control how much of the money is spent, barring overhead. I had to make a value proposition for the PIs to explain to them why they couldn't afford NOT to modernize their data storage. Unfortunately, it's cheaper to go to Staples and buy a USB drive than it is to pay for properly archived storage.

The resistance to the top down approach was, to me, misunderstanding the risks of storing their data outside of a safe place, and a fear of losing control of their data.

The last institute I worked at was focused on basic biomedical research - dead ends were what we chased all day!