RAE-Revista de Administração de Empresas (Journal of Business Management), vol. 59, n. 6, november-december 2019

Editorial: 

Translated version

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020190601

 

DATA AND OPEN SCIENCE

The practice of providing open access to articles, adopted in Brazil and several other countries, still faces resistance from many commercial publishers abroad (Packer & Santos, 2019a). Recently, some of them have switched to a hybrid model (open and closed access) as a more balanced path. Transparency in the peer review process is also being discussed: The digital library SciELO recommends a “gradual increase of transparency and openness [...] with the disclosure of the identities of authors and reviewers during the evaluation process” (Packer & Santos, 2019b). Even more controversial is the policy of open access to research data of articles published in scientific publications. The Blog SciELO em Perspectiva has several texts discussing this trend, which have been questioned by many actors involved in the production and publication of scientific articles, including authors, universities, editors, and publishers. Who owns the data? Nassi-Calò (2019) reveals that research on this issue remains inconclusive, and many actors in this process may be the owners, such as funders of the study, institutions of the researcher, publishers and, of course, the authors of the study. The author argues that open science “is demanded by society, governments, and sponsors. This practice brings several advantages by making science more transparent, reproducible, reliable, and verifiable” (Nassi-Calò, 2019). However, several questions arise regarding researchers. In qualitative research conducted by means of interviews, for example, when the anonymity of the interviewees is ensured by an informed consent form, how does one proceed? Although this may not apply to the Exact and Biological Sciences, it is urgent for research in the Human Sciences, because participants could be identified, thus violating the confidentiality ensured within the ethical standards of the study. Besides that, it’s also consider the necessary time and resources of the researchers, as well as the ownership of secondary data from third parties that often only give access to only one specific study. Other aspects related to data transparency in this open science era, described as e-science, include the need for cyber-structure (technological bases that support the data), the collaboration of society, as well as the support of the State, as expressed by Targino and Garcia (2018). But again, who owns the technology infrastructure that stores the data? Packer and Santos (2019b) argue that open science is an irreversible movement, and the 4th Brazilian Action Plan on this topic involves some clearly defined milestones for the future based on the guidelines of the Global Open Fair. Although these guidelines have already been implemented in the field of healthin Brazil, the authors argue that graduate programs should invest in training programs. The State of São Paulo Research Foundation (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo [FAPESP]) considers this orientation in Thematic Projects. In the future, the quality of articles will be assessed not only by the journal in which they are published but also the available data (Kiley & Markie, 2019). This action is expected to eliminate problems such as plagiarism, reproducibility of the study, and biases. These criteria are undoubtedly valid for the Exact and Biological Sciences, but are they applicable to the Human Sciences, which are often concerned with unique and non-replicable phenomena? If the neutrality of algorithms is questioned even today, can we really engage in science without bias? Are data neutral?

This edition includes a forum on Big Data, organized by Eduardo de Rezende Francisco, José Luiz Kugler, Soong Moon Kang, Ricardo Silva, and Peter Alexander Whigham. The first guest article presented is “The journey has just begun” by William Lekse. Following the introduction to the forum, the next article presented is “Beyond technology: Managing challenges in the Big Data era” by the guest editors. The articles presented after this include: “Information management capability and Big Data strategy implementation” by Antonio Carlos Gastaud Maçada, Rafael Alfonso Brinkhues, and José Carlos da Silva Freitas Junior; “Intention to adopt big data in supply chain management: A Brazilian perspective” by Maciel M. Queiroz and Susana Carla Farias Pereira; “Measuring accessibility: A Big Data perspective on Uber service waiting times” by André Insardi and Rodolfo Oliveira Lorenzo; and “Factors affecting the adoption of Big Data analytics in companies” by Juan-Pedro Cabrera-Sánchez and Ángel F. Villarejo-Ramos. The Perspectives section raises the debate on the use of Big Data in business through articles such as “Big Data and disruptions in business models” by Eric Van Heck, and “Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose [The more things change, the more they remain the same]” by Flávio Bartman. The essay “Crimes corporativos: o espectro do genocídio ronda o mundo” by Cintia Rodrigues de Oliveira reminds us that misconduct, unethical behavior, and corporate social irresponsibility also permeate the business world.

Happy reading!

Maria José Tonelli1 | ORCID: 0000-0002-6585-1493

Felipe Zambaldi1 | ORCID: 0000-0002-5378-6444

1Fundação Getulio Vargas, São Paulo School of Business Administration, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

 

REFERENCES

KILEY, R., & MARKIE, M. (2019). Wellcome Open Research, o futuro da Comunicação Científica? [Publicado originalmente no blog LSE Impact of Social Sciences em fevereiro/2019] [online]. SciELO em Perspectiva. Retrieved from: https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2019/02/27/wellcome-open-research-o-futuro-da-comunicacao-cientifica/

Nassi-Calò, L. (2019). Promovendo e acelerando o compartilhamento de dados de pesquisa [on-line]. SciELO em Perspectiva. Retrieved from https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2019/06/13/promovendo-e-acelerando-o-compartilhamento-de-dados-de-pesquisa/

Packer, A. L., & Santos, S. (2019a). Ciência aberta e o novo modus operandi de comunicar pesquisa – Parte I [on-line]. SciELO em Perspectiva. Retrieved from https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2019/08/01/ciencia-aberta-e-o-novo-modus-operandi-de-comunicar-pesquisa-parte-i/

Packer, A. L., & Santos, S. (2019b). Ciência aberta e o novo modus operandi de comunicar pesquisa – Parte II [on-line]. SciELO em Perspectiva. Retrieved from https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2019/08/01/ciencia-aberta-e-o-novo-modus-operandi-de-comunicar-pesquisa-parte-ii/

Targino, M. G., & Garcia, J. C. R. (2018). Perspectivas da avaliação por pares aberta: Instigante ponto de interrogação [on-line]. SciELO em Perspectiva. Retrieved from https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2018/05/14/perspectivas-da-avaliacao-por-pares-aberta-instigante-ponto-de-interrogacao/

Portal FGVENG

Escolas FGV

Acompanhe na rede