45 Association of Research Libraries Research Library Issues 296 — 2018 improving open access to data and other non-traditional research products. In all of these interactions, I must stay aware of the different motivations and needs of the people I am supporting in my work as well as the new developments/cultural norms in the open science communities on which my work touches. When done well, research data management and stewardship leads to success from multiple sides—a researcher shares their data or software and receives credit for their work while others learn from and even build on the work already completed by that initial researcher. When working on a project designed to support a heterogeneous community, such as you often find in open science, each collaborator’s expertise and knowledge contributes a small piece of the puzzle until the final product is developed or the goals of the initiative are achieved. For example: • Without the funder perspective, perhaps there would be no one in the room to incentivize open practices. • Without the perspective of certain tool builders, developing a format compatible with citation managers might be forgotten. • Without the librarian perspective, discovery for re-use or re- purposing might be undervalued. • Without archivist representation, the complexity of preservation could be disregarded. • Without researcher collaboration, test cases and pain points may be overlooked. Two specific examples follow. Example 1. Radical Collaboration in Support of Open Science: Software Citation The Software Citation Principles1 published in 2016 by FORCE11 came out of a multi-part need observed by the research community and