What are the goals of your scholarly communications programs and services, and how do you define success? Critics and proponents alike often attempt to paint the scholarly communications movement with a broad brush. Both groups seem to push for a common definition of what the movement should look like and how success should be defined. In the world we live in today, these loudest voices are often amplified through their use of social media, listservs and prominent roles on the conference circuit, leaving some in the middle to question their own success and whether they have a place in this movement. And because scholarly communications programs do often grow out of the open access movement, some institutions may define their local success in terms of the movement as a whole.
We argue that effective scholarly communications programs are ones that are aligned with their institutions’ mission and goals, and use planning and evaluation methods that reflect their unique community and needs. This panel will explore the challenges posed by those who seek a singular definition of success and share brief examples of how scholarly communications programs are developed, sustained, and evaluated at three different institutions. Panelists from a liberal arts college, a comprehensive university and a research university will discuss the ways they define and measure success at their institutions, and how this may have evolved over time.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License.
Wertzberger, Janelle, "Stuck in the Middle: Re-defining What Successful Scholarly Communications Programs Look Like" (2017). All Musselman Library Staff Works. 72.