[GOAL] Re: The Open Access Interviews: Dagmara Weckowska, lecturer in Business and Innovation at the University of Sussex

[Heather Morrison]

Andrew Adams raises an important point from my perspective, and this problem is not limited to the UK.

Even though I am a librarian and enthusiastic advocate of self-archiving myself, when my library has policies that don't let me upload my work and get my URL immediately, my inclination is to hop over to google docs. Hopefully I'll continue to remember to cross-deposit in the IR, but in the meantime the IR (and the library and the university) are losing out on the highest likely time of exposure, when things are current.

A shift to immediate free access for the self-archiving author (unless checking specifically requested) could do a lot to facilitate self-archiving, and the resulting increase in use of the IR could increase the web metrics and perceived value of library, IR and university.

A library service that gave me my URL to freely share my work immediately on deposit, with a thank-you note and update on metadata checking at a later date is a service that I'd really appreciate. Developing services that people really find valuable and enjoy using, in my opinion, would bode well for the future of libraries and IRs [speaking as a prof in an information studies program].

best,

Heather Morrison


On 2014-09-22, at 7:35 PM, "Andrew A. Adams" <aaa at meiji.ac.jp<mailto:aaa at meiji.ac.jp>>
 wrote:


The challenge now for UK Universities will be to keep librarians out of the
way of reserachers, or their assistants, depositing the basic meta-data and
full text in the repository. At the University of Reading, where I was
involved in early developments around the IR but left the University before
the final deposit mandate (*) was adopted and the process decided on, they
have librarians acting as a roadblock in getting material
uploaded.Thisistotheextentthat a paper published in an electronic proceedings
at a conference was refused permission to be placed in the repository, for
example, while there is a significant delay in deposited materials becoming
visible, while librarians do a host of (mostly useful but just added value
and not necessary) checking. Sigh, empire building and other bureaucratic
nonsense getting in the way of the primary mission - scholarly communications.

(*) They have a deposit mandate but refuse to call it that. I'm not sure why,
butthey insist on calling it a "policy". If one reads this policy, it's a
mandate (albeit not an ideal one). For a University with an overly strong
management team and a mangerialist approach, this unwillingness to call a
spade a spade and a mandate a mandate, seems odd. Perhaps it's that this
policy came from a bottom up development and not a senior management idea so
they're unwilling to give it a strong name.

--
Professor Andrew A Adams                      aaa at meiji.ac.jp<mailto:aaa at meiji.ac.jp>
Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/


_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL at eprints.org<mailto:GOAL at eprints.org>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20140923/65e990f1/attachment.html