In this, I wonder how you classified all your print and digital data? Was the classification system different for both print and digital data, or one and the same?
Also, did you re-use the data? Was it re-usable? Was some data more re-usable than others?
And, how about storage? Where did the data go when the project was finished? And how long would it stay there? Was data routinely evaluated for its ‘value’, and if it passed a certain use-by date, it was discarded?
I use folders on the PC and paper folders on the desk. Classifications are idiosyncratic and often very imperfect. Typically I have a master folder on the hard disk for each project, but details after that can become messy.
Here is the thing: read my
Knowledge Quest column on how I write a research paper. That spells out a lot. A key is to document everything IN the paper as I write it. Bear in mind that the process (as I implement it) is as much art as science, and greatly influenced by deadlines. (I work backwards from the drop-dead due date and set milestones to get me there.)
Sure, some material is more reusable that others. Depends entirely on the kind of project. For my reports on California's Central Valley, heavily dependent on social and economic statistics, for each new edition I downloaded new sets of data and started spreadsheets pretty much from scratch (perhaps cannibalizing some elements like basic layouts and some historic data -- but not necessarily even that, as even historic numbers are sometimes revised by the Department of Finance's demographics unit). Some never gets touched again. Depends on the project. I really should (now that I am self-employed) undertake a new edition of my San Joaquin Valley report (it has a ready-made audience, and maybe a paying one). That would be facilitated by the extensive source documentation in the published papers, but I will still be downloading new data for analysis and rethinking the layout of the report and the topics to cover.
Storage . . . much got tossed when I left the Research Bureau. I still have some old paper files in storage, but not sure how useful they would be now. Old files on my PC might or might not be helpful. I have a box of state curriculum guidelines printed out for my Knowledge Quest column (the "Policy and Data Resources on the Web" series), but those are becoming outdated. I also have several of the state documents on my PC -- but I have to check for newer versions for every new column in that series.
For one large, but (irksomely) aborted project, I retained boxes of files for a while, until they were tossed out (after some materials were culled for the permanent collection). But I still have my original version of the report (it was published after I left, in a truncated and rewritten form), which I can use to help find data sources if I ever revisit the topic. Some sources are in the permanent reference collection in the State Library (decades of state budget documents, for example). One needs to know where to find those, not to have copies. Look at any of my California Research Bureau reports (esp. the Central Valley reports, but also the one on indoor mold) to see my approach to documentation. (BTW, that sort of detail has gone out of favor with that office now, I think.)
FWIW, when I was doing policy research for a living, I had a structure in which to do that, literally and figuratively, including reference librarians and a vast collection of resources in library stacks and in databases (and the librarians could track down practically anything I might need). Topics covered everything from ferrets to indoor mold, forestry law to computers in K-12 education. In general, each project stood alone. Only the statistical reports on the Central Valley formed a series. If I am ever invited back to do a fifth one (not likely), I'll have to start from scratch, as the Library cleaned house and dumped my files.
I hope that is helpful. A key point is that the process is never tidy. Another key point is that meticulous, accurate documentation of all sources is critical. Even if you don't have a copy, you have to be able to find the source again.
BTW, you might want to look at Kate L. Turabian,
A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, 7th edition, revised by Wayne C. Booth and others (University of Chicago Press, 2007). Booth and others have also written a book with the title
The Craft of Research (2nd ed. pub. 2003). They revised Turabian's venerable manual to include aspects of their book on research.
--Ken
