Katherine Stephan, Research Engagement Librarian - Liverpool John Moores University Lucinda May - The University Of Manchester Steve Carlton - University or Manchester Certain in our uncertainty: Acknowledging, addressing and achieving in an unequal scholarly communications landscape This breakout session will scrutinise two very different scholarly communications teams and identify the similarities, differences and chasms within. Each team represents a ‘side’ of this inequality: When you ‘have’ - what do you focus on? When you ‘have not’ - how to achieve when your resources are very limited? We will share our different experiences of challenges we have in common, such as grappling with Transformative Agreements; establishing processes to support data-driven decision-making; and advocacy and securing buy-in from senior leaders. We’ll also consider some challenges which are specific to our local context; how we have addressed these; and identify future issues on the horizon. Using our own institutional perspectives, we hope to invite discussion on how we can do better, for and by each other, recognising that by acknowledging similar uncertainties, we may find solutions that can benefit all of the academy. We would be keen to hear your thoughts on the challenges we identify in our session, either before, during or after. You can contribute anonymously (or not) to our Padlet at bit.ly/uksg_padlet.

1. Certain in our uncertainty:
Acknowledging, addressing and
achieving in an unequal scholarly
communications landscape
Photo by Kyle Glenn on Unsplash

2. Different contexts
• Different experiences
• Different perspectives
• Different approaches
Photo by Ramesh NG on Wikimedia Commons

3. Disclaimer
Photo by Immo Wegmann on Unsplash

4. Session outline
• Sharing our experiences:
• Challenges we've faced
• Challenges on the horizon
• Over to you:
• Share your perspectives
and experiences
• Is collaboration the key?

5. Open Access
challenges we’ve faced
1. Transformative Agreements:
assessment & decision-
making​
2. Effective gathering and
analysis of data ​
3. Advocacy and buy-in from
senior leadership ​(and solving
problems through alternative
methods)​
4. #RichPeopleProblems​
5. Rights Retention​

6. Transformative Agreements
• A new route to OA​
• Principles, strategic aims & pragmatic
considerations (not always aligned!)​
• How transformative?​
• Easier for researchers, but no change to
Library's administrative burden​
• Manchester's TA assessment framework

7. Manchester’s TA
assessment
framework
Available via Figshare: https://doi.org/10.48420/22323361

8. Manchester’s TA assessment framework
Criteria:
• Deal is genuinely transformative
• Deal represents good value for money
• Publisher demonstrates responsible position on open research
• University dependency on publisher
Scoring:
• Evidence
• Pass/Fail
• Weighting

9. Transformative Agreements
• A new route to OA​
• Principles, strategic aims & pragmatic
considerations (not always aligned!)​
• How transformative?​
• Easier for researchers, but no change to
Library's administrative burden​
• Manchester's TA assessment framework

10. LJMU Transformative
Agreements
Read access is the dealbreaker
No review process (but we do review)
Smaller university/less publishing/cost
implications
Taking the TA plunge: PLOS deal

11. Effective gathering and analysis of data
Steven Zucker via Flickr

12. Effective gathering and analysis of data

13. LJMU and data
Smaller university: less
budget/fewer complications
Looking to others
Less complex decisions
Future plans?

14. Advocacy and buy-
in from senior
leadership
(… and solving problems through
alternative methods)
Photo by Jaime Lopes on Unsplash

15. Advocacy and buy-
in from senior
leadership
(… and solving problems through
alternative methods)
• Timing is crucial
• Leverage strategy
• Nurture relationships
• Accept, embrace & use
hierarchy and red tape
Photo by Jaime Lopes on Unsplash

16. #RichPeopleProblems
Photo by Mathieu Stern on Unsplash

17. #RichPeopleProblems
Photo by Mathieu Stern on Unsplash
Manchester's context
• 5,000 papers processed per year
• Manage OA budgets totaling £2.6m
• Multiple deposit routes
• Various publishing models
• Responsibility to be bold
• Advocating in order to meet demand... but
is this right?

18. #RichPeopleProblems
Photo by Mathieu Stern on Unsplash
LJMU’s context
1,846 papers processed in 2021-2022; 1,500
already this year (with less than 1FTE people)
Block grant is £44,000. We have no institutional
fund.
We rely on others to lay groundwork because we
don’t have time!
Can be easier with a small team as less people to
ask but changing personnel can have a big
impact. And-we ARE the support, so less
opportunity/time for peer-to-peer support.
Photo by Susan Holt Simpson on Unsplash

19. Rights
Retention
Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

20. Rights
Retention
Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash
Potential power and impact
through collaboration
• N8 Research Partnership
• Self-identified 'smaller
institutions' listserv and
group

21. Challenges on the horizon

22. • Next steps for Rights Retention – Manchester Open Research Tracker
• OA monographs
• Post-block grant future
• REF 2028
• New connections and alignment between traditional and newer Library functions (subscriptions and OA)
• Really push for transformation of models
• Potential reframing of Library's role within institution

23. Libraries carry the weight
Photo by Graphic Node on Unsplash

24. Over to you
Time for discussion

25. Share your perspectives
& experience
Which challenges resonate with you?
What have we missed?
How have you approached challenges at
your institution?
10 mins
Notes on Padlet:
https://bit.ly/uksg_padlet

26. Is collaboration key?

27. Thank you

28. Keeping the conversation going
• Discussion Padlet: https://bit.ly/uksg_padlet
• Twitter thread summarising our talk:
• @UoML_Steve
• @MsIowaInTheUK
• @UoMLib_Lucy
• Email us:
• k.d.stephan@ljmu.ac.uk
• stephen.carlton@manchester.ac.uk
• lucinda.may@manchester.ac.uk
• Use & build your network