40 Association of Research Libraries Research Library Issues 296 — 2018 conversation about data sharing. Norms and best practices of curation are still forming. • An early effort in our project was to research and document a shared glossary of data curation terms.2 • Challenges of practical network design. There is a tendency to over-engineer and create complex workflows. On the other hand, not everyone will “see themselves” in a more general workflow. There is a need to find balance. • Developing a framework for shared work is changing. Our goals have been to not change how local institutions do data curation, but to keep the DCN workflow modular and allow institutions to decide locally how to best incorporate a shared staffing network. There have been many trial-and-error opportunities. • Antiquated and limited view of libraries. Libraries face skepticism about having a role in data services at all. Some curators don’t want to “criticize” researchers’ data. • Our planning phase spent a considerable amount of time holding focus group interviews with researchers to understand what data curation activities they find important and where our project could make the most impact.3 • No sustainable funding model. It is challenging to find and secure sustainable funding in an age of austerity. Within the cacophony of data projects and “membership fatigue”—being heard is hard. • In our current phase we aim to engage a sustainability consultant to help navigate these issues. • Easier to do it yourself. Library work is often built around relationships. If we rely on others to perform complex data consultations with local researchers, what opportunities for strengthening relationships are lost? It may be better, easier (or perceived as such) to do all curation work locally. • A strong lesson learned from this project has been to keep