The Open Scholarship Initiative

Workgroups

Process, administrative details and assignments

Admin

What's the first step?

Once your workgroup is connected via email, please take time to introduce yourself to your colleagues. The rest is up to you. Please feel free to start discussing your ideas in advance. Please copy workgroups@osinitiative.org on your conversations so we can monitor your progress. Also, feel free to reach out to the full group at osi2016-25@googlegroups.com at any time for ideas or information.

Assign a facilitator

Between now and April 1, each workgroup is invited to nominate one person who can take an online group facilitation course (coordinated by OSI). This person won’t necessarily end up serving as your group’s facilitator, but they will be available to serve as your “resident expert” in the event your group needs to layer more structure onto your deliberations at some point. The exact discussion techniques you use to approach your topic are up to you, but the group facilitator will be trained in several effective methods. These training materials will also be circulated to all delegates in April as “extra” reading—-you have plenty to focus on without this, but if you’re interested and have time, this information will be available.

What about writers, chairs, etc.?

Writers, presenters, chairs (if any), facilitators and discussion leaders will be chosen by your fellow workgroup members by whatever mechanism you see fit (potential facilitators will be appointed or identified first, as noted above).

Expected outputs

Each team will be responsible for putting together two 5-minute slide presentations for the full group—one preliminary presentation on Thursday afternoon (where feedback will be solicited) and a final presentation on Friday morning. Teams are also tasked with submitting a written paper within two weeks of the end of the conference. These papers and the official conference proceedings will be published by the George Mason University Press and also posted online using PressForward (a tool used to facilitate broad and continued online engagement between delegates and the broader stakeholder community). Both resources will form the foundation of an ongoing conversation—broadening participation, getting more feedback and refinement, and connecting this work to OSI2017 where we’ll continue driving toward developing and implementing actionable solutions.

When will workgroups meet?

At the conference itself, each workgroup will meet several times on Wednesday and Thursday, April 20th and 21st for a total of at least eight hours of face-to-face conversation. Workgroup meetings will be spread across these two days, and are generously interspersed with meals and breaks throughout the day (indeed, there will be as much networking time as workgroup time). The proposed meeting times are posted on the OSI website but will likely change between now and the start of the conference.

What do at-large delegates do?

At-large members will drop in on workgroup conversations and also meet as a group throughout this event to develop a big-picture overview for this effort and also report on any workgroup issues that might need to be addressed.

Questions and recommendations

Is this document complete? Please email info@osinitiative.org if you have any questions or recommendations for improving it. Thank you!

Process Summary

  1. OSI’S GOAL. The goal of the Open Scholarship Initiative is to create an effective, robust framework for discussion and collaborative action between a diverse array of stakeholder groups in scholarly publishing. The closest mileposts of this inaugural meeting of OSI are eminently reachable: First, delegates will discuss whether and how to begin implementing some of the workgroup recommendations produced at this conference. Second, delegates will decide whether this community should continue working together through OSI and if so, what the next steps should be (including authorizing the start of planning for OSI2017). Additional mileposts may also be reached.
  2. WORKGROUP COMPOSTION & ASSIGNMENTS. Delegates have been divided into 15 workgroups (plus one at-large group) which will focus on 13 different questions in scholarly publishing. The composition of these workgroups is balanced and diverse in order to incorporate a broad range of stakeholder perspectives and experiences and also encourage the development of new ideas and approaches.
  3. KEEP AN OPEN MIND. The perspectives you share at this meeting can be your individual thoughts as well as official institutional perspectives. Stated another way, while many of you are the top executives at your institutions, or have the blessings of your top executives to speak and act in an official capacity, you need not feel that you are only representing an official point of view or that what you say necessarily commits your organization to a particular point of view or follow-up action. This is an opportunity for you to speak freely amongst your peers and search for common ground and new ideas. Keep an open mind, worry less about selling solutions than trying to see the big picture, and be open to the possibility that your views may shift and evolve over the course of this event.
  4. HOW YOU’LL ANSWER BIG QUESTIONS. The initial questions posed in your workgroup descriptions are starting points for discussion. Each group should feel free to explore other aspects of their question as it sees fit. The touch points of your deliberations will be to: (1) Quickly summarize the issue and the various perspectives involved, (2) In more detail, describe areas of general agreement and disagreement between stakeholders and the knowledge, perspective and/or policy gaps that may be powering these different viewpoints, (3) Even if in rough outline form, propose a set of actions or outcomes that can balance the needs and interests of all stakeholders (or a mechanism for finding solutions or bridging gaps), and (4) Describe the challenges your proposal faces and how these might be addressed.
  5. OPERATIONAL DETAILS. Each workgroup will meet several times on Wednesday and Thursday, April 20th and 21st for a total of at least eight hours of face-to-face conversation. These meetings will be spread across these two days, and are generously interspersed with meals and breaks throughout the day (indeed, there will be as much networking time as workgroup time). Each team will be responsible for putting together two 5-minute slide presentations for the full group’s consideration. Teams are also tasked with submitting a written paper within two weeks of the end of the conference.

Process details

OSI’s goal

The goal of the Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) is to create an effective, robust framework for discussion and collaborative action between a diverse array of stakeholder groups in scholarly publishing. The future of scholarly publishing is important and growing more so every year, affecting everything from library budgets to public policy formulation, research incentives and participation, research funding criteria, study design, information access and visibility, and even the very pace and nature of discovery.

The closest mileposts of this inaugural meeting of OSI (OSI2016) are eminently reachable: First, delegates will discuss whether and how to begin implementing some of the workgroup recommendations produced at this conference. Second, delegates will also decide whether this diverse community is willing to continue working together on scholarly publishing issues within a loose structure facilitated by OSI and if so, what the next steps should be (including authorizing the start of planning for OSI2017). Additional mileposts may also be reached.

Judging by the breadth and caliber of delegates who have agreed to participate, we may have already passed the first milepost—there already appears to be widespread, high-level interest in working together—but what this means in practice has yet to be determined (by you).  You may vote to establish a global collaborative framework to manage the future of scholarly publishing, and even recommend the formation of panels and committees to move forward; you may be intrigued by the foundations built by this year’s workgroups and vote to use some or all of their recommendations as starting points to begin making serious inroads on settling some of the key issues in scholarly publishing; or, you may simply agree to meet again next year.

Expectations vary among delegates (and organizers), and the eventual decision about where to go next belongs to you. It’s not likely that fully formed policy proposals will emerge from workgroups this year.  This could, however, be a first and positive step in a long process of engagement where stakeholder groups will begin working together on scholarly publishing solutions instead of separately and often at cross purposes. Modestly, our hope—and hopefully yours as well—is that what comes about in 2016 will continue to develop in 2017 and beyond and culminate in new, robust, global understandings and working partnerships.

Workgroup composition and assignments

The current delegate list is below. Please check to make sure you’re in the right group. Delegates have been divided into 15 workgroups of 12-14 members each. These groups will focus on 13 different questions in scholarly publishing: What is publishing (two groups), what is open, who decides, what are the usage dimensions of open, what are the moral dimensions of open, evolving open solutions (two groups), open impacts, participation in the current system, information overload and underload, repositories and preservation, peer review, embargos, and impact factors.

Each of the 15 workgroups has been formed by combining delegates  from a wide variety of stakeholder categories. Groups have also been balanced with respect to gender, geography and institution size.

In addition to these 15 groups, around 25 delegates will be part of an at-large delegation. At-large members will drop in on workgroup conversations and also meet as a group throughout this event to develop a big-picture overview for this effort and also report on any workgroup issues that might need to be addressed.

Keeping an open mind

Approximately 215 delegates will participate in OSI2016. Almost all are senior, experienced leaders in areas of academia, publishing, libraries, education, philanthropy, government, research or industry where the future of scholarly communication is key.

Many of these leaders are the top executives in their organizations or have been asked by their top executives to speak and act on behalf of their organizations. Follow-through in these cases isn’t just a goal—it’s expected. The main reason for this arrangement, though, is to help facilitate post-conference action, not to restrict conversation to official talking points. Indeed, the perspectives you share at this meeting can be your individual thoughts as well as official institutional perspectives. Stated another way, you need not feel that you are only representing an official point of view or that what you say necessarily commits your organization to a particular point of view or follow-up action. This is an opportunity for you to speak freely amongst your peers and search for common ground and new ideas. Keep an open mind, worry less about selling solutions than trying to see the big picture, and be open to the possibility that your views may shift and evolve over the course of this event. 

This said, this can also be an opportunity for you to discuss with some authority how your institution sees the future and to find areas for potential agreement and collaboration between institutions—particularly where clarity or movement is currently lacking and an agreement to work together would be of enormous benefit to the entire stakeholder community and the cause of open scholarship.

Finally, the bulk of what you exchange and build upon at this conference might be your wealth of personal and professional knowledge, judgment and perspectives—including, importantly, your knowledge, judgment and perspectives that may have nothing whatsoever to do with the current practice of scholarly publishing.

The common denominator here is that in the interest of working together toward common solutions, all delegates should be prepared to listen, look for common interests, try to avoid taking “positions,” explore creative options, and color outside the lines as needed. And of course, to ensure that this effort gets the most benefit from this unique format, it will be important that everyone participates (and that one or a few individuals or viewpoints don’t dominate), and that delegates disagree with ideas and not with their distinguished colleagues.

How you’ll answer big questions

Throughout this conference you will work primarily with your workgroup colleagues to explore your issue and create a presentation for the full group’s consideration. Following the conference, you will work together with colleagues to write a short summary paper elaborating on your group’s concerns, findings and recommendations. These papers and the official proceedings will be published as described below. Going forward, some of you—hopefully many of you—may also choose to stay engaged in these ongoing conversations and proposals that connect your workshop efforts to real world initiatives and partnerships, and to the OSI2017 conference and beyond.

The initial questions posed in your workgroup descriptions will be starting points for your discussions. Each group should feel free to explore other aspects of their question as it sees fit. The touch points of your deliberations—which should be reflected in your slide presentations and written papers—will be to: (1) Quickly summarize the issue and the various perspectives involved, (2) In more detail, describe areas of general agreement between stakeholders, as well as areas of partial or total disagreement. Describe the knowledge, perspective and/or policy gaps (if any) that may be powering these different viewpoints, (3) Even if this is in rough outline form, propose an answer that works globally for all stakeholders (or a mechanism for finding solution or bridging gaps before widespread agreement and collaborative action can be taken), and (4) Even if your answer to step three isn’t polished, describe the challenges your proposal faces and how these might be addressed.

Between now and April 1, each workgroup is invited to nominate one person who can take an online group facilitation course (coordinated by OSI). This person won’t necessarily end up serving as your group’s facilitator, but they will be available to serve as your “resident expert” in the event your group needs to layer more structure onto your deliberations at some point. The exact discussion techniques you use to approach your topic are up to you, but the group facilitator will be trained in several effective methods. These training materials will also be circulated to all delegates in April as “extra” reading—-you have plenty to focus on without this, but if you’re interested and have time, this information will be available.

Writers, presenters, chairs (if any), facilitators and discussion leaders will be chosen by your fellow workgroup members by whatever mechanism you see fit (potential facilitators will be appointed or identified first, as noted above). At-large delegates will visit various groups throughout the conference but will not serve in any of these capacities.

Operational details

Once your workgroup is connected via email, please take time to introduce yourself to your colleagues. The rest is up to you. Please feel free to start discussing your ideas in advance. Please copy workgroups@osinitiative.org on your conversations so we can monitor your progress. Also, feel free to reach out to the full group at osi2016-25@googlegroups.com at any time for ideas or information.

At the conference itself, each workgroup will meet several times on Wednesday and Thursday, April 20th and 21st for a total of at least eight hours of face-to-face conversation. Workgroup meetings will be spread across these two days, and are generously interspersed with meals and breaks throughout the day (indeed, there will be as much networking time as workgroup time). The proposed meeting times are posted on the OSI website but will likely change between now and the start of the conference. Meetings will take place in conference rooms on the George Mason University campus. Each workgroup room will have its own room equipped with wireless access, notepads, flipcharts, a laptop (including access to a networked printer) and an LCD projector.

Each team will be responsible for putting together two 5-minute slide presentations for the full group—one preliminary presentation on Thursday afternoon (where feedback will be solicited) and a final presentation on Friday morning. Teams are also tasked with submitting a written paper within two weeks of the end of the conference. These papers and the official conference proceedings will be published by the George Mason University Press and also posted online using PressForward (a tool used to facilitate broad and continued online engagement between delegates and the broader stakeholder community). Both resources will form the foundation of an ongoing conversation—broadening participation, getting more feedback and refinement, and connecting this work to OSI2017 where we’ll continue driving toward developing and implementing actionable solutions. As mentioned above, some of you—hopefully many of you—may also choose to stay engaged in these ongoing conversations and proposals that connect your workshop efforts to real world initiatives and partnerships, and to the OSI2017 conference and beyond.

Questions

Is this document complete? Please email info@osinitiative.org if you have any questions or recommendations for improving it. Thank you!

Workgroup Assignments

The final assignments shifted throughout 2016; this list represents our best guess as to who landed where.

WHAT IS PUBLISHING? (1 of 2)

  1. Amy Brand, Director, MIT Press
  2. Ann Gabriel, Vice President, Academic & Research Relations, Elsevier
  3. James Butcher, Publishing Director, Nature Journals
  4. Jamie Vernon, Director of Science Communications and Publications at Sigma Xi and Editor-in-Chief, American Scientist
  5. Kathleen Fitzpatrick, Director of Scholarly Communication, Modern Language Association (MLA)
  6. Matt Spitzer, Community Manger, Center for Open Science (COS)
  7. Meg Buzzi, Director, Opus Program, UCLA
  8. Rikk Mulligan, Program Officer for Scholarly Publishing, Association of Research Libraries (ARL)
  9. Trevor Dawes, Associate University Librarian, Washington University St. Louis
  10. Vivian Siegel, Director of Education and Training, Global Biological Standards Institute, Vanderbilt University
  11. Winston Tabb, Dean of Libraries and Museums, Johns Hopkins University

WHAT IS PUBLISHING? (2 of 2)

  1. Andrew Tein, Vice President, Global Government Affairs, Wiley
  2. Harriette Hemmasi, University Librarian, Brown University
  3. Ivan Oransky, Vice President and Global Editorial Director, MedPage Today, and Co-Founder, Retraction Watch
  4. John Inglis, Executive Director and Publisher, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press and Co-Founder, bioRxiv
  5. Lisa Macklin, Director, Scholarly Communications Office, Emory University
  6. Mark Parsons, Secretary General, Research Data Alliance
  7. Melanie Dolechek, Executive Director, Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP)
  8. Nancy Rodnan, Senior Director of Publications, American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB)
  9. Sharon Farb, Associate University Librarian for Collection Management and Scholarly Communication, UCLA
  10. Steven Hall, Managing Director, IOP Publishing

WHAT IS OPEN?

  1. Alicia Wise, Director of Access and Policy, Elsevier
  2. Catherine Murray-Rust, Dean of Libraries & Vice Provost for Academic Effectiveness, Georgia Tech
  3. Denise Stephens, University Librarian, University of California Santa Barbara
  4. Diane Graves, Assistant Vice President for Information Resources and University Librarian, Trinity University
  5. Dick Wilder, Associate General Counsel, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  6. Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
  7. Martin Kalfatovic, Associate Director, Digital Program and Initiatives, Smithsonian Libraries
  8. Rick Anderson, Associate Dean of Libraries at the University of Utah and President-Elect, Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP)
  9. Roy Kaufman, Managing Director, New Ventures, Copyright Clearance Center
  10. Seth Denbo, Director of Scholarly Communication and Digital Initiatives, American Historical Association
  11. Steven Hill, Head of Research Policy, Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE)
  12. Susan Haigh, Executive Director, Canadian Association of Research Libraries

WHO DECIDES?

  1. Adam Huftalen, Senior Manager of Federal Government Affairs, RELX Group
  2. Deborah Stine, Professor of the Practice, Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University
  3. Ivy Anderson, Interim Executive Director and Director of Collections, California Digital Library (CDL)
  4. Joan Lippincott, Associate Executive Director, Coalition for Networked Information (CNI)
  5. John Vaughn, Senior Fellow, American Association of Universities (AAU)
  6. Lee Cheng Ean, University Librarian, National University of Singapore
  7. Mel DeSart, Head, Engineering Library, University of Washington
  8. Ralf Schmimer, Head of Scientific Information Provision, Max Planck Digital Library, Max Planck Society
  9. Remi Gaillard, Head of Collection Management Department, University of Pierre and Marie Curie
  10. Salvatore Mele, Head of Open Access, European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)
  11. Susan Gibbons, Deputy Provost, Libraries & Scholarly Communication, Yale University

MORAL DIMENSIONS OF OPEN

  1. Bill Priedhorsky, Science Resource Office Director, Los Alamos National Laboratory
  2. Cheryl Ball, Director, Digital Publishing Institute, West Virginia University
  3. Donna Scheeder, President, International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA)
  4. John Willinsky, open access pioneer, PKP founder, and professor, Stanford University
  5. Karina Ansolabehere, human rights and democracy expert, FLACSO-Mexico
  6. Medha Devare, Data and Knowledge Manager, Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)
  7. Mike Taylor, Software Engineer, Index Data and Research Associate, University of Bristol
  8. Ryan Merkley, CEO, Creative Commons
  9. Susan Veldsman, Director, Scholarly Publishing Unit, Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf)
  10. Tee Guidotti, President-Elect, Sigma Xi
  11. Wim van der Stelt, Executive Vice President, Projects Open Research, Springer Nature

USAGE DIMENSIONS OF OPEN

  1. Amy Nurnberger, Research Data Manager, Columbia University
  2. Chris Erdmann, Director, Harvard-Smithsonian Astrophysics Library
  3. Dee Magnoni, Research Library Director, Los Alamos National Laboratory
  4. Emily McElroy, Director, McGoogan Library of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center
  5. Éric Archambault, President and Founder, Science-Metrix
  6. Ginger Strader, Director, Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press
  7. Kevin Bradley, President, US Journals, Taylor & Francis Group
  8. Lorcan Dempsey, VP Research, Online Computer Library Center (OCLC)
  9. Michael Van Woert, Executive Officer and Director, National Science Board Office, National Science Foundation (NSF)
  10. Robin Staffin, Director for Basic Research, US Department of Defense
  11. Stephanie Fulton, Executive Director, Research Medical Library, MD Anderson

EVOLVING OPEN SOLUTIONS (1 of 2)

  1. Adyam Ghebre, Director of Outreach, Authorea
  2. Elizabeth Kirk, Associate Librarian for Information Resources, Dartmouth College
  3. Frank Sander, Director, Max Planck Digital Library, Max Planck Society
  4. Geoffrey Bilder, Director of Strategic Initiatives, CrossRef
  5. Joshua Nicholson, CEO and Co-Founder, The Winnower
  6. Matthew Salter, Publisher, American Physical Society
  7. Melinda Kenneway, Executive Director, Kudos
  8. Nancy Weiss, Senior Advisor to the Chief Technology Officer, Innovation and IP, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)
  9. Paul Murphy, Director, RAND Press
  10. Robert Kiley, Head of Digital Services, Wellcome Library

EVOLVING OPEN SOLUTIONS (2 of 2)

  1. Aaron McCollough, Head, Scholarly Communication and Publishing Unit, University of Illinois Library
  2. Alison Mudditt, Director, University of California Press
  3. Brett Bobley, CIO, National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH)
  4. Frances Pinter, CEO, Manchester University Press and Founder of Knowledge Unlatched
  5. Lisa Spiro, Executive Director of Digital Scholarship Services, Rice University
  6. Marilyn Billings, Scholarly Communication & Special Initiatives Librarian, University of Massachusetts
  7. Micah Vandegrift, Digital Scholarship Coordinator, Florida State University
  8. Michael Eisen, co-founder of PLOS and Professor of Genetics, Genomics and Development, U Cal Berkeley
  9. Renaud Fabre, Director, Scientific and Technical Information Directorate (DIST), French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS)
  10. Richard Price, Founder and CEO, Academia.edu
  11. Tony Roche, Publishing Director, Emerald Publishing Group

OPEN IMPACTS

  1. Christopher Thomas, Administrator, Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), US Department of Defense
  2. Jack Schultz, Director, Christopher S. Bond Life Science Center, University of Missouri
  3. Jason Hoyt, CEO, PeerJ
  4. Jean-Gabriel Bankier, President, bepress
  5. John Dove, library and publishing consultant
  6. Karin Trainer, University Librarian, Princeton University
  7. Natalia Manola, Director, OpenAIRE
  8. Neil Thakur, Special Assistant to the Deputy Director for Extramural Research, NIH, and program manager for the NIH Public Access Policy
  9. Rebecca Kennison, Principal, K|N Consultants
  10. Trevor Owens, Senior Program Officer, Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS)

PARTICIPATION IN THE CURRENT SYSTEM

  1. Barbara DeFelice, Program Director for Scholarly Communication, Copyright and Publishing, Dartmouth College
  2. Crispin Taylor, Executive Director, American Society of Plant Biologists
  3. Gary Evoniuk, Director of Publication Practices, GlaxsoSmithKline (GSK)
  4. Jane McAuliffe, Director, National and International Outreach, Library of Congress
  5. Jeff Mackie-Mason, Dean of Libraries, University of California Berkeley
  6. Jennifer Pesanelli, Deputy Executive Director for Operations and Director of Publications, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB)
  7. Julie Hannaford, Deputy Chief Librarian, University of Toronto
  8. Michael Wolfe, Executive Director, Authors Alliance
  9. Nancy Davenport, University Librarian, American University
  10. Paul Royster, Coordinator of Scholarly Communications, UNL Libraries
  11. Pollyanne Frantz, Executive Director, Grants Resource Center, American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU)

INFORMATION OVERLOAD & UNDERLOAD

  1. Bryan Alexander, higher education publishing consultant and futurist
  2. Claudia Holland, Head of Scholarly Communication and Copyright, George Mason University
  3. Jake Orlowitz, Head of The Wikipedia Library
  4. Jeff Tsao, Distinguished Member of the Technical Staff, Sandia National Laboratories
  5. Joyce Ogburn, Dean of Libraries, Appalachian State
  6. Kathleen Keane, Director, Johns Hopkins University Press
  7. Mary Augusta Thomas, Deputy Director, Smithsonian Libraries
  8. Kim Barrett, Dean of the Graduate Division, University of California San Diego (UCSD)
  9. Patrick Herron, Senior Research Scientist, Information Science + Studies, Duke University
  10. Sioux Cumming, Program Manager, Online Journals, International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications (INASP)

REPOSITORIES & PRESERVATION

  1. Agathe Gebert, Open Access Repository Manager, GESIS-Leibniz-Institute for the Social Sciences
  2. Brooks Hanson, Director of Publications, American Geophysical Union
  3. Christina Drummond, Director of Strategic Initiatives, Educopia Institute
  4. James Hilton, University Librarian and Dean of Libraries, Vice Provost for Digital Education and Innovation, University of Michigan
  5. Joyce Backus, Associate Director for Library Operations, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health
  6. Maryann Martone, Director of Biosciences, Hypothes.is, and President, FORCE11
  7. Richard Ovenden, Bodley’s Librarian, Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford
  8. Rita Scheman, Publications Director, American Physiological Society
  9. Robert Cartolano, Vice President for Digital Programs and Technology Services, Columbia University
  10. Sarah Michalak, Associate Provost for University Libraries and University Librarian, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill (UNC)
  11. Sarah Pritchard, Dean of Libraries, Northwestern University

PEER REVIEW

  1. Angela Cochran, Director of Journals, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
  2. Becky Clark, Director of Publishing, Library of Congress
  3. Bev Acreman, Commercial Director, F1000
  4. Caroline Black, Editorial Director, BioMed Central (SpringerNature)
  5. Catriona MacCallum, Acting Advocacy Director, PLOS
  6. Chris Bourg, Director, MIT Libraries
  7. Francisco Valdés Ugalde, Director General, Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO) in Mexico
  8. Kevin Davies, Vice President for Business Development, American Chemical Society, and Publisher, C&EN
  9. Paul Peters, CEO, Hindawi Publishing
  10. Peter Berkery, Executive Director, American Association of University Presses (AAUP)
  11. Rachel Dresbeck, President, National Organization of Research Development Professionals (NORDP) and Director of Research Development and Communications, Oregon Health and Science University
  12. Robert Schnabel, CEO, Association of Computing Machinery

EMBARGOS

  1. Ann Riley, President, Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL)
  2. Audrey McColloch, Chief Executive, Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP)
  3. Danny Kingsley, Head of Scholarly Communication, Cambridge University
  4. Eric Massant, Senior Director of Government and Industry Affairs, RELX Group
  5. Gail McMillan, Director of Scholarly Communication, Virginia Tech
  6. Glenorchy Campbell, Managing Director, British Medical Journal (BMJ) North America
  7. Gregg Gordon, President, Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
  8. Keith Webster, Dean of Libraries, Carnegie Mellon University
  9. Laura Helmuth, Incoming President, National Association of Science Writers (NASW)
  10. Tony Peatfield, Director of Corporate Affairs, Medical Research Council, Research Councils UK (RCUK)
  11. Will Schweitzer, Director of Product Development, AAAS/Science

IMPACT FACTORS

  1. Colleen Cook, Dean of Libraries, McGill University
  2. David Ross, Executive Director for Open Access, SAGE Publications
  3. Roberto F. Arruda, Special Advisor to the Scientific Director, São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP)
  4. Laurie Goodman, Editor-in-Chief, GigaScience
  5. Mary Ellen Davis, Executive Director, Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL)
  6. Neil Jacobs, Head of Scholarly Communication Support, UK Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC)
  7. Pablo Gentili, Executive Secretary, Latin American Council of Social Sciences (CLACSO) and Director, Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO) in Brazil
  8. Richard Gedye, Executive Council Chair, Research4Life and Director of Outreach Programs, International Association of STM Publishers
  9. Robin Champieux, Scholarly Communication Librarian, Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU)
  10. Stuart Taylor, Publishing Director, The Royal Society

AT-LARGE DELEGATES

  1. Ali Andalibi, Associate Dean of Research, George Mason University
  2. Bhanu Neupane, Program Specialist, Communication and Information Sector, UNESCO
  3. Concetta Seminara, Editorial Director, US Social Science & Humanities Journals Program, Routledge/Taylor & Francis
  4. Dave McColgin, User Experience Director, Artefact
  5. Grace Xiao, Co-Founder and President, Kynplex
  6. Jessica Sebeok, Associate Vice President for Policy, Association of American Universities (AAU)
  7. John Warren, Head, Mason Publishing Group, George Mason University
  8. John Zenelis, Dean of Libraries and University Librarian, George Mason University
  9. Joshua Greenberg, Program Director for Digital Information Technology, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  10. Judy Luther, President, Informed Strategies
  11. Kamran Naim, Lead Researcher, Open Access Cooperative Study
  12. Mark Ware, Director, Mark Ware Consulting
  13. Mary Woolley, President, Research!America
  14. Meredith Morovati, Executive Director, Dryad
  15. Nancy Gwinn, Director, Smithsonian Libraries
  16. Norbert Lossau, Vice President, University of Göttingen
  17. Peter Potter, Director of Publishing Strategy, Virginia Tech
  18. Scott Plutchak, Director of Digital Data Curation Strategies, University of Alabama at Birmingham
  19. Sindy Escobar-Alvarez, Senior Program Officer, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation Medical Research Program
  20. Steve Fiore, President, Interdisciplinary Network for Group Research (INGRoup)
  21. Susan Skomal, President/CEO, BioOne
  22. Terry Ehling, Associate Director, Content Acquisition and Publisher Relations, Project MUSE, Johns Hopkins University Press
  23. Todd Carpenter, Executive Director, National Information Standards Organization (NISO)
  24. William Gunn, Director of Scholarly Communications, Elsevier