Tassos reports:
> 1. None of the twenty test-users was satisfied with any of the two
> solutions - and each was annoyed for a different reason.
This suggests that the choice of ELN is not the most difficult part of the
adoption process. Maybe the test users at the NKI were annoyed by the idea of
using an ELN at all.
In my experience, the hardest part is ensuring that it provides benefits to the
people who have to enter the data, and provides them early. The fact that it
will make information retrieval easier in three years is not enough.
I suggest focussing on electronic support for housekeeping: booking time on an
instrument, finding the files the instrument created, ordering oligos,
recording when you use the last of a reagent. Scientists work very
independently in most respects, but they do have certain obligations that flow
from sharing the lab space. You can make use of these to encourage compliance
with the ELN. If you do, then most of the science will get recorded in passing.
I suggest also ensuring that it includes electronic tools that actually help.
Two examples from PiMS are primer design, and automatically uploading and
interpreting results from the Caliper GX instrument.
It must allow round trips with spreadsheets, i.e. dump ELN data as a
spreadsheet, edit it, upload it again. Despite their substantial disadvantages,
some scientists will not give them up. It should also allow crossreferencing
with paper note books. Some will continue to use a lab notebook. When they
discover that the ELN serves as a searchable index to it, they will warm to the
ELN.
I suggest aiming for "no paper" at your lab progress meetings within say 12
months. When you reach that point, everything important is in the ELN. Before
then, the ELN is not giving real value.
You will need someone who is keen on the introduction of the ELN, to customise
it, provide first line user support, and act as a single point of contact with
the supplier. This might be a scientist or an IT person. I have also seen this
done well by a technician, Delphine Chesnel when she was at the EMBL Hamburg.
If you can't find such a "champion", then introduction will not be successful.
Some of the problem here is an "own goal" by the community: scientists are
trained to use paper during their degrees, so ELNs are a controversial change
of practice. One person who, unusually, began with an ELN told me how
inconvenient it is now she works in a paper-based lab.
PepTalk 2012 had a workshop on this topic. The recording and notes are here:
http://www.structuralbiology.eu/support/forums/networks/pims/why-dont-scientists-use-limselns
regards,
Chris
____________________________________________
Chris Morris
[email protected]
Tel: +44 (0)1925 603689 Fax: +44 (0)1925 603634
Mobile: 07921-717915
Skype: chrishgmorris
http://pims.structuralbiology.eu/
http://www.citeulike.org/blog/chrishmorris
Daresbury Lab, Daresbury, Warrington, UK, WA4 4AD
