Session proposal: assess the Library Publishing Services report

The impulse for THATCamp Publishing came out of the organizers’ participation in a series of workshops on Library Publishing Services, offered by the libraries at Purdue, Georgia Tech, and the University of Utah as part of a project designed “to advance the professionalism of library-based publishing by identifying successful… strategies and services, highlighting best practices, and recommending priorities for building capacity.” We organized THATCamp Publishing not only to enable training in relevant technologies, but also to provide a venue where publishers from a variety of settings–including university presses–could exchange ideas, opinions, and experience.

As luck would have it, the first version of the Library Publishing Services project white paper has just been made available for comment here:  wp.sparc.arl.org/lps/

I propose a session to discuss the report–or perhaps just its recommendations (listed below). Many of these are things that university presses are already doing. Others might be simpler for nascent digital library publishers to implement. How are UP practices a model for library publishing? What can library publishers learn from UP experience? What do digital publishers in libraries have to teach UPs?

General Recommendations: “Library Publishing Services: Strategies for Success”

Develop Best Practices for Library Publishing
·  Develop meaningful impact metrics for library publishing services to demonstrate the effectiveness and value of library-based publishing programs and inform resource allocations.
· Establish editorial quality and performance criteria to increase the value and longevity of the publications that library programs support.
· Promote sustainability best practices to improve the long-term strength and stability of library publishing programs.
· Develop return-on-investment justifications for funding library publishing programs to support increased library budget allocations in support of such programs.

Collaborate to Create Community-based Resources
· Create a shared repository of policies, tools, and templates to improve and accelerate adherence to best practices and encourage community sharing and participation.
· Develop centrally hosted software solutions for publishing platforms to facilitate cost sharing and support robust system functionality and capacity.
· Share service models and revenue approaches to increase library publishing program funding options and facilitate the efficient implementation of successful programs.
· Promote collaborations and partnerships to leverage resources within campuses, across institutions, and between university presses, scholarly societies, and other partners.

Formalize Skills & Training
· Create formal and informal training venues to provide training and community-building resources, including virtual online conferences and seminars.
· Articulate the particular value delivered by library publishing programs to define the role played by library publishing and position such programs with authors/editors, university administrators, funders, and others.
· Establish dedicated library publishing positions to provide program champions and improve program continuity and success.

Favorite 0 No users have favorited this post yet.
Categories: General |
Avatar of Monica McCormick

About Monica McCormick

I support digital scholarship and publishing at NYU Libraries and NYU Press and serve as managing editor of MediaCommons (http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/ ). My career has been divided between publishing (a dozen years as an acquiring editor at a university press) and libraries (MSLS from UNC Chapel Hill, work at NC State and NYU). My primary interests are in supporting innovative forms of collaborative scholarship and publishing.

One Response to Session proposal: assess the Library Publishing Services report

  1. Barbara says:

    Yes, good timing. But I must admit that reading that list of conclusions makes me happy to be at an unconference – seriously! This is like prep for an accreditation visit.

Comments are closed.