50 Association of Research Libraries Research Library Issues 296 — 2018 been submitted, or whether an issue has been closed. While discussions about transparency and visibility are certainly not limited to the archival field, my thinking was at least partially informed by ongoing conversations about making the work of archivists more visible in descriptive practice. By making the identities of authors and maintainers clear, we demonstrate that people are making decisions to include this information. Providing this context can also connect people to the selection process: why was this added? When? What else is relevant? Adding the human context can also help us to understand and reflect on bias, neutrality, and gaps in our work and the work of others. Making Research Data Management a Social Activity By modeling transparent behavior for community engagement and outreach, this approach also suggests a way to encourage and engage with overlapping communities. Encouraging an open and welcoming approach to learning research data management tools, systems, and techniques is an avenue for connecting more deeply with researchers and others who both use and benefit from well-described, well- managed, accessible research data. Encouraging social research data use and training may increase long- term engagement. The Data/Software/Library Carpentries2 are one solid example of a grassroots, community-driven approach to creating ownership and buy-in around particular training topics and techniques. But change does not necessarily need to come from a grassroots model. Building a shared vision of research and of research data management as community goals, rather than individual mandates, allows for the continued and sustained growth of a shared ecosystem of support. Finding ways to further align the professional incentives and systems for members of the broader research data management community can further help in this regard. But the need for a radical shift towards more inclusive, expansive collaboration still exists.