Let’s make a deal! Empowering Small and Mid Sized Universities to Participate in the Open Access Movement
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•115 views
Presentation delivered at the 2021 Charleston Conference.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Let’s make a deal! Empowering Small and Mid Sized Universities to Participate in the Open Access Movement
Similar to Let’s make a deal! Empowering Small and Mid Sized Universities to Participate in the Open Access Movement (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Let’s make a deal! Empowering Small and Mid Sized Universities to Participate in the Open Access Movement
- 1. Let’s Make a Deal! Empowering Small- and Mid-sized Universities to participate in the Open Access Movement Alexis Smith Macklin, PhD Carlow University Tim Schlak, PhD Robert Morris University
- 2. Go to www.menti.com Use the code at the top of the slide
- 3. IMLS National Leadership Grant • Big Question: How can a diverse group of smaller academic libraries create a more inclusive conversation around OA? • Goals • Identify challenges and opportunities to participate in OA • Create agency for sustainable models to publish in OA journals • Explore new ways to work with consortia and other partners
- 4. Human Centered Design Approach luma-institute.com
- 5. Phase 1 – Looking Phase 2 - Understanding Phase 3 - Making Fall 2020 - Build capacity Jan – Apr 2021 - Operationalize May – Aug 2021 – Groundwork • Train in HCD • Recruit CoP • Gather initial data on OA policies • Identify the stakeholders • Assess impact of budget cuts/BD cancelations • Determine support/faculty buy in for OA • Align TA with need • Develop communication plan • Promote OA • How are we handling OA? • What concerns do we have? • Who are the decision-makers? • What data are needed to inform their decisions? • What negotiating principles will we use? • What needs to be communicated for buy-in and campus support? • Shared understanding of TA/OA • Strategies for supporting OA • Sustainable OA/TA models
- 8. What keeps you up at night? • Inflation rates are not sustainable • Annual budget cuts (between 3 – 10%) • Not enough people/expertise to do the work • Faculty buy-in and administrative support • APCs do not equal subscriptions • Can we create an OA model that is sustainable and equitable? This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY
- 9. Go to www.menti.com Use the code at the top of the slide
- 10. Phase 1: Looking Outcomes • Community of Practice Established • 25 Academic Libraries (1 R1; 20 R2; 2 R3; 2 smaller) • 4 Consortia (PALCI; MCLI; SCELC; GWLA) Key Takeaways: • Budgets are being cut dramatically and big deals are being canceled • Policies for OA may be written but not implemented • Lack of buy-in and support
- 11. Key Questions Regarding the Big Deals: • What is the impact of big deal cancelations? • How will these cancelations change our relationship with consortia? Regarding OA and TA: • What is the value of OA and TA? • Why is there a lack of buy-in/support?
- 13. Budget Strategy Culture • Cost savings/control • Reshaped agreements • Targeted spending • Data-driven decisions • Align values with plans • Build relationships • Increased interest in OA • Library as partner • Investment in infrastructure/staff • Increased prices • Lost negotiation leverage • Less content • Need better data/analysis • Competing priorities • Uncertain of roles/responsibility • Impact factors (P&T) • Buy-in/support • More work/less time/expertise • Reallocated funds • Transparent licenses/contracts • Mission-driven collections • Greater awareness of need/values • Educated campus community • More collaboration • More OA content • Raised institutional profile • Faculty/staff retention
- 14. Key Takeaways • Invest in training • Gather data • Build relationships This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND
- 15. Phase 1 – Looking Phase 2 - Understanding Phase 3 - Making Fall 2020 - Build capacity Jan – Apr 2021 - Operationalize May – Aug 2021 – Groundwork • Train in HCD • Recruit CoP • Gather initial data on OA policies • Identify the stakeholders • Assess impact of budget cuts/BD cancelations • Determine support/faculty buy in for OA • Align TA with need • Develop communication plan • Promote OA • How are we handling OA? • What concerns do we have? • Who are the decision-makers? • What data are needed to inform their decisions? • What negotiating principles will we use? • What needs to be communicated for buy-in and campus support? • Shared understanding of TA/OA • Strategies for supporting OA • Sustainable OA/TA models
- 16. Key Questions • Who are the stakeholders driving decisions? • Who are the stakeholders impacted by those decisions? • What are the action steps? luma-institute.com
- 17. Phase 2: Understanding Outcomes Major Stakeholders Recurring Themes Core Questions • Librarians • Faculty • Administration (Deans, Provost) • Consortia • Publishers • Training • Communication/Relationships • Budgets • Policies • Who is responsible for what? • What data drive decisions? • How can partnerships be built/leveraged? Key Takeaways: • Lots of stakeholders, and the relationships are complex • Better communication • Too many moving parts, and no game plan
- 18. Bull’s Eye Diagraming CRITICAL • Identify stakeholders/partners • Assess TA/OA knowledge/interest • Review budget/collection strategy VERY IMPORTANT • Build knowledge base • Conduct publishing profile • Align needs to action • Revisit collection development strategies • Revisit negotiation principles/contracts IMPORTANT • Invest in professional development • Develop an action/communication plan • Create committees/task force
- 19. Bull’s Eye Diagraming CRITICAL • Identify stakeholders/partners • Assess TA/OA knowledge/interest • Review budget/collection strategy SMART GOAL Identify stakeholders/partners • Conduct SCOPUS report to determine publishing profile of University • Target 5 faculty with high productivity in OA to interview about the value of the library in their research process • Share executive summary of the interview with Provost
- 20. Phase 1 – Looking Phase 2 - Understanding Phase 3 - Making Fall 2020 - Build capacity Jan – Apr 2021 - Operationalize May – Aug 2021 – Groundwork • Train in HCD • Recruit CoP • Gather initial data on OA policies • Identify the stakeholders • Assess impact of budget cuts/BD cancelations • Determine support/faculty buy in for OA • Align TA with need • Develop communication plan • Promote OA • How are we handling OA? • What concerns do we have? • Who are the decision-makers? • What data are needed to inform their decisions? • What negotiating principles will we use? • What needs to be communicated for buy-in and campus support? • Shared understanding of TA/OA • Strategies for supporting OA • Sustainable OA/TA models
- 23. Go to www.menti.com Use the code at the top of the slide
- 24. Thank you for your time and interest!
Editor's Notes
- >1 minute Welcome and introductions
- 2 minutes We want this presentation to be as interactive as possible. If you want to join us in the conversation, take out your device of choice and log onto the Mentimeter website. Please note – completely optional. Responses are anonymous. We may use the data to inform our decision-making – right now – our intention is to create a shared understanding of our collective experiences with OA and TA.
- 1 minute So – we put forward a National Leadership grant proposal to the IMLS Our Big Question Our Goals
- 3 minutes We are using LUMA Institute’s method for HCD to: Understand what OA means for small and mid-sized universities Strategize ways to support OA on our campuses and Sustain our efforts by finding new ways of collaborating with each other and our consortia What is HCD? The LUMA Institute developed a unique framework called the System of Innovation for practicing human centered design. There are 36 methods organized around three key design skills — Looking (observing the human experience), Understanding (analyzing opportunities and challenges), and Making (envisioning and prototyping future possibilities), which can be used individually or combined in different ways (RECIPES) to address any and every stage of problem solving. For more information on our process – go to luma-institute.com
- 3 minutes We thought the timeline and outcomes would look like this – with 4 in-person forums at regularly scheduled conferences . . . BUT
- >1 minute This happened – and all our plans quickly changed
- >1 minute We moved into an online format using Zoom and Mural to facilitate the work
- 3 minutes Our first order of business was to identify individual and collective pain points. Using the LUMA method of What’s on Your Radar – we asked – What keeps you up at night? These are the top 6 that came up for our cohort.
- Your turn to let us know what keeps you up at night.
- 1 minute Once we convened our cohort group, which included - the top concerns were Budget and buy-in followed by expertise . . . Many of us have the policies, but we really don’t know what to do with them or how to implement them.
- 1 minute Since budget was a big concern – and the big deals were driving the conversation – we started with the question regarding the impact of big deal cancelations and then moved to the value of OA and TA.
- 3 minutes Describe recipes Discuss RTB (like a SWOT) and Affinity Clustering (clump into themes)
- 3 minutes A high-level view of affinity clustering showed three specific areas of interest: Budget, Strategy, and Culture Under each – the cohort was able to identify the following on top = ROSES – or positive aspects; middle = THORNS – or negative impacts; and bottom = BUDS – opportunities
- 1 minute At the end of Phase 1 – or the Looking Phase – we determined that We needed to invest in our own understanding of OA and the impact of our big deal cancelations We needed to spend time on data analysis, and we needed better data than our traditional bibliographic metrics and We needed to build strategic internal and external relationships
- These conclusions moved us into Phase 2 – Understanding – where we identified the decision makers and the data needed to inform those decisions.
- We used LUMA’s Stakeholder Mapping tool to identify the players and Bull’s-eye Diagraming to prioritize action steps Our key questions were
- Bull’s-eye Diagraming helped us come up with priorities and build consensus about some next steps. Three levels By design, a Bull’s-eye Diagram puts a limit on how much you can identify as critical, thus forcing your team to deliberate about essentials before producing anything. Since each successive circle is larger than the bull’s-eye, you must carefully consider what is critical, what is important, and what is merely peripheral. Often this means having to make trade-off decisions. The result, however, is a clear delineation of your team’s consensus about each item’s relative importance. It is a comparatively simple method of making difficult decisions.
- Truthfully – we got stuck in the magnitude of creating a culture to support OA – especially creating buy-in on our campuses – and came to a stand still. But if we break down the top priorities – using SMART Goals – SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely) We can see a way forward. Maybe these aren’t useful for your campus – but they might work for someone else. You would need to create your own priorities and goals for the needs of your campus. In doing so - you begin to lay the groundwork and start the process of shifting the culture towards OA.
- This brings us to Phase 3 – which we have not started yet – laying the groundwork and addressing culture change. Turn over to Tim
- To lay a solid foundation – we need to address culture change. Polarity model for effective decision making and culture change Changes in academic publishing are happening. What can we do to drive the change on our campus?
- Let us know how you might drive change on your campus. What action will you take this month, in six months, in a year?