Association of Research Libraries
Research Library Issues 291 2017
Lessons Learned
The 2016 projects employed different work models and had different
goals. The primary objectives of the author rights outreach project
were relatively finite, with tangible deliverables expected following
an intensive one-day working meeting. Although minimal planning
and coordination were required in advance, and outreach by way
of a public presentation followed the meeting, the bulk of the work
was contained within one working day. We will utilize this agile
development process again when appropriate, to quickly and efficiently
produce collaborative work products from a diverse representation
of the library. We will also promote our use of this process more
heavily when recruiting future project volunteers, as several
participants indicated that their involvement was due largely to the
anticipated high impact from a relatively low time commitment.
The ORCID@Cornell project was considerably more complex,
requiring communication with and training for library staff, public-
facing resources, and the outreach campaign, as well as technical
work in collaboration with Cornell IT. The team accomplished
everything it set out to, but assessing some components of the
project was a challenge. In particular, we do not know how
effective the outreach campaign was. We do know there were far
more Cornell-associated ORCID iDs at the end of the project than
when we began, but we do not know if that was a direct result of
coordinated outreach, or independent uptake by faculty. A specific
assessment plan could have helped us measure the efficacy of our
outreach efforts, but we chose to balance the effort required of
researchers to obtain an ORCID iD with the likely effort involved
in responding to a follow-up survey about their use of ORCID.
Similarly, explicit support and buy-in from library directors and
other administrators could have helped us track outreach activities
more closely. Integration of ORCID iDs into campus systems remains
a challenge as researchers are under no obligation to make public
their Cornell affiliation, or to authorize Cornell as a trusted party.
Previous Page Next Page