CASRAI Dictionary

Tag: GRID

  • Organisation identifiers beyond ROR: ISNI, Ringgold, the retired GRID and disambiguating institutions

    It seems like it should be a trivial question: which organisation produced this piece of research? In practice it is one of the hardest problems in research information. A single university may appear in the literature under dozens of name variants — different languages, abbreviations, former names, departmental forms, misspellings — and different institutions sometimes share confusingly similar names. Aggregating outputs by institution, attributing funding correctly, building accurate profiles and analysing the research landscape all depend on being able to say reliably that two differently spelled affiliations refer to the same organisation, or that two identical-looking ones do not. The answer, as with people and outputs, is persistent identifiers — in this case for organisations. This article looks at the main organisation-identifier systems and how they relate, drawing on the persistent identifiers domain of the CASRAI Dictionary.

    Why names are not enough

    Names are unreliable identifiers for the same reasons everywhere: they vary, they change, and they are not unique. An institution might be written one way on a grant, another in a journal’s metadata, and a third in an author’s self-reported affiliation, while mergers and renamings mean the same body has different names at different points in its history. Relying on name-matching therefore produces both errors of splitting (one institution treated as several) and errors of lumping (different institutions merged). A persistent identifier cuts through this by giving each organisation a stable code that does not change when the name does, so all the variant forms resolve to a single entity. The challenge has been which identifier system to use — and that is where the history matters.

    ROR: the open standard

    The Research Organization Registry (ROR) has become the leading open identifier for research organisations. ROR is a community-led, openly licensed registry that assigns each organisation a unique, persistent ROR identifier together with openly available metadata — names and name variants, location, relationships to other organisations, and links to other identifiers. Its defining characteristics are that it is open (the data and infrastructure are freely available, not locked behind a commercial gate), focused specifically on affiliation, and designed to be embedded throughout the research-information ecosystem, from manuscript submission to funder systems. ROR’s rise reflects a wider preference for open scholarly infrastructure, and it now anchors organisation identification in many systems that handle research metadata.

    ISNI: identifying public identities

    Predating ROR is ISNI, the International Standard Name Identifier, an ISO standard (ISO 27729) for identifying the public identities of parties — a category that includes not just organisations but people and other contributors to creative and informational content. ISNI is broad in scope: it spans publishers, institutions, companies, libraries and individuals across many domains beyond research, and it is widely used in the library, publishing and rights-management worlds. For organisations, an ISNI provides a standardised, internationally recognised identifier. Because it is an ISO standard with wide adoption outside research, ISNI plays an important role in connecting the research world to the broader information ecosystem, and ROR records frequently link to corresponding ISNIs — complementary rather than competing identifiers, each strong in its own territory.

    Ringgold and the commercial heritage

    A third system, Ringgold, came from the commercial side of scholarly publishing. Ringgold developed an identifier and database of organisations used widely in publishing workflows — particularly for managing institutional customers, subscriptions and the supply chain of scholarly content. Ringgold identifiers became embedded in many publisher and library systems. The important point for the research community is that Ringgold, as a commercial product, illustrates a different model from ROR: valuable and widely used, but proprietary — precisely the limitation the open-infrastructure movement sought to address. It helps explain why an open alternative was felt necessary, not because the commercial systems did not work, but because critical shared infrastructure was felt to belong in open, community-governed hands.

    GRID and the migration to ROR

    The clearest illustration of this consolidation is the story of GRID, the Global Research Identifier Database. GRID was a comprehensive database of research organisations with its own identifiers, widely adopted and influential. Crucially, ROR was built drawing on GRID’s data, and GRID itself subsequently stepped back from public releases — in effect, the community migrated from GRID to ROR, with GRID’s open contribution living on as part of ROR’s foundation. This transition is a useful case study in how research infrastructure evolves: a valuable resource is created, the community recognises the importance of having it under open, sustainable, community governance, and the function is carried forward into an openly maintained successor. Systems that still carry GRID identifiers can generally map them to ROR, preserving continuity.

    A note on the LEI

    Beyond the research-specific identifiers sits the Legal Entity Identifier (LEI), a global standard for identifying legal entities in financial transactions. The LEI is not a research identifier, but it is relevant context: it shows that unambiguously identifying organisations is a problem recognised across sectors, and that research identifiers may usefully connect to it — for instance, linking a university to its legal and financial identity. It is part of the wider landscape of how the world identifies organisations reliably.

    A consistent vocabulary for affiliations

    For organisation identifiers to do their job across funders, publishers, repositories and institutional systems, the way affiliations and organisation metadata are described must mean the same thing everywhere — what an affiliation is, how it relates to an output, and how the various identifier systems map to one another. That consistency is what the CASRAI Dictionary provides: a shared vocabulary so that organisation information travels accurately wherever it goes. And because the contributions made under any affiliation are part of the research record, they can be described in the same framework used for every output — the CRediT taxonomy and its full set of contribution roles. These identifiers, together with those for people and outputs, form the connected fabric explored in our wider CASRAI dictionary work; knowing exactly which organisation did the research is what makes the rest of that fabric trustworthy.

  • ROR and organisation disambiguation: one identifier for every institution

    Ask a research-information system who wrote a paper and, thanks to ORCID, it can usually give you a clean answer. Ask it where the author worked and the answer dissolves into a free-text affiliation string that might read “Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Manchester” on one paper and “The University of Manchester, School of Natural Sciences” on the next. Organisations have lacked the one thing authors gained a decade ago: a single, open, persistent identifier. The Research Organization Registry — ROR — exists to fix exactly that, and it is now the standard answer for organisation disambiguation across the research-information-systems domain. For the wider explainer index, see the plain-language explainers.

    The affiliation problem ROR solves

    A single institution can be written hundreds of ways across a corpus of publications: different word order, abbreviations, departmental sub-strings, translations, historic names, and plain typos. For a librarian trying to count their institution’s output, a funder tracking where grant money produced results, or a ranking body comparing universities, that variation is corrosive. Two records that mean the same place do not match; two records that mean different places sometimes do. The cost is paid in hand-cleaning affiliation data that should never have needed cleaning.

    A ROR ID attacks the problem at the root. It is a persistent identifier for a research organisation — a short, resolvable URL of the form https://ror.org/ followed by a unique string — that points to a curated registry record holding the organisation’s canonical name, its known name variants, its location, its relationships to parent and child organisations, and cross-references to other identifier systems. When a publisher records a ROR ID against an affiliation, the messy display string becomes secondary: the identifier carries the meaning, and every variant collapses onto one entity.

    What a ROR record contains

    The point of a registry, as opposed to a bare identifier, is the metadata attached to each entry. A ROR record typically holds:

    • A canonical name and a controlled set of name variants, aliases, acronyms, and labels in multiple languages — so all the ways an institution is written resolve to one record.
    • Geographic location, expressed against standard place data, which lets systems aggregate output by city, region, or country reliably.
    • Relationships to other organisations — parent, child, related, and successor links — so a research institute inside a university, or a hospital trust within a wider group, can be placed in its hierarchy.
    • Cross-references to other identifiers, including ISNI and the Crossref Funder Registry, so ROR can act as a hub rather than yet another silo.

    Crucially, ROR is open. The registry, its data, and its API are freely available under an open licence, with no membership barrier to use. That openness is deliberate: an organisation identifier is only useful if everyone — publishers, funders, repositories, CRIS vendors — can adopt it without friction.

    The legacy: GRID, ISNI, and how ROR relates to them

    ROR did not appear from nowhere, and understanding its lineage avoids confusion with the identifiers it sits alongside.

    GRID (the Global Research Identifier Database) was a widely used organisation registry developed by Digital Science. ROR launched in 2019 using a snapshot of GRID as its seed data, and the two were aligned for a period. GRID subsequently moved to a model that is no longer openly maintained for community registration, and ROR became the community-governed, open successor for the disambiguation use case. Where older datasets still carry GRID identifiers, ROR records cross-walk to them, so the legacy data is not lost.

    ISNI (the International Standard Name Identifier, ISO 27729) is broader: it identifies persons and organisations across the creative and scholarly economy, not just research bodies. ISNI and ROR are complementary rather than competing — ROR records reference ISNIs where they exist. The practical distinction is scope and governance: ROR is purpose-built for research organisations, community-led, and open, which is why it has become the default in scholarly metadata pipelines even though ISNI predates it.

    Where ROR fits in the identifier stack

    ROR is most powerful in combination with its sibling identifiers, each answering a different question about a piece of research:

    • ORCID answers who — the individual researcher.
    • ROR answers where — the organisation they are affiliated with.
    • DOI answers what — the output itself.
    • RAiD answers which project — the activity that produced it.

    Linked together, these identifiers turn a pile of disconnected records into a navigable graph: this person, at this organisation, on this project, produced this output. ROR is the organisational anchor in that graph, and its absence is precisely why “output by institution” has historically been so hard to compute.

    Adoption and how to use it

    ROR is now embedded in major scholarly infrastructure. Crossref and DataCite accept ROR IDs in their metadata schemas, ORCID supports them on affiliations, and a growing number of publisher submission systems and CRIS platforms either store ROR IDs or match incoming affiliation strings against the registry. For an author, the practical step is simple: when a submission system offers to attach a ROR ID to your affiliation, accept it, and check it resolves to the right organisation. For an institution, the higher-value work is ensuring your CRIS records the ROR ID on every affiliation, and that your registry record’s name variants and relationships are accurate — ROR records can be corrected and updated through its curation process.

    Where shared vocabulary fits

    “Affiliation”, “organisation”, “institution”, “parent”, and “successor” are used loosely across systems, and that looseness is part of why organisation data has been so hard to reconcile. A shared, federated vocabulary that defines these terms precisely — and points back to ROR for the identifier itself and to ISNI for the broader name standard — is what lets one institution’s record mean the same thing in every system that reads it. Supplying that definitional layer is the role the CASRAI dictionary is designed to play; the relevant terms sit in the research-information-systems domain.

    Related reading