Martin
Na začátku asi ano, ale lidé v pracovních skupinách by logicky měli At the beginning, it probably was. However, people in the working groups should logically be interested in participating not only to gain up-to-date information but also to have the opportunity to influence the direction of the initiative (projects, recommendations, etc.). If we compare the numbers year-over-year, the membership in the working groups has grown by nearly 100%. The working groups are the core and the primary professional drivers of the initiative and its projects.
For example, the Metadata Working Group had 70 members at the end of 2023, and a year later, it has 140. This put higher demands on management and coordination, and perhaps even on the efficiency of the outputs being delivered. So, we’ll need to think about how to structure the working group management. It’s not our goal to have as many people as possible in the working groups, as this could be counterproductive. Instead, we want committed and active members who contribute and help shape the environment themselves.
Jirka
The design is such that the working groups should be long-lasting and independent of specific projects. And regarding the 100% growth—just before Christmas, we attended the Austrian EOSC annual meeting, where a question was raised: "How did you manage to double your numbers?"
Well, first, it’s partly due to the influence of projects. The second factor is a bit of luck, as this topic is increasingly resonating not just in academic circles but also in other areas. For instance, prestigious journals like Nature are now working with data. This natural progression is pushing the scientific community toward better research data management.
Another contributing factor is the effort of the working group secretaries, who actively sought out experts in this field across the country and motivated them to join and contribute to the development of this initiative.