Tim Hackman’s October 2009 Scholarly Communication column, “What’s the opposite of a pyrrhic victory?,” discussed the failure of the University of Maryland to adopt an open access policy. Responding to the advice in Hackman’s piece, this column offers some suggestions on the process of proposing a policy at your institution. ...
My overall advice: consider your endeavor a political one. Yours won’t involve street demonstrations or smoke-filled backrooms (probably), but it certainly will involve making friends and changing minds. Politics is not only about logic and reasoning, but also emotion and relationships. Be prepared for it.
One theme echoed by Hackman and others who have proposed open access policies is to not overestimate faculty’s understanding of open access. To the contrary, expect to spend considerable time and effort informing faculty and responding to their questions and concerns. ...
Message control is key to any political endeavor. Formulating clear, succinct messages —and sticking to them—ensures that your most effective and favorable arguments will be communicated.
I’ve seen myriad different arguments for open access, some of them extraneous, confusing, or even antithetical to faculty interests. Be ever mindful of your audience. Speak their language and tailor your message to their concerns. ...
Small or private informational meetings, proceeding at a deliberate pace, help to avoid triggering alarms or making anyone feel they have been left behind. ...
As you proceed, be aware of the fault lines and diversity within your institution. The proposal shouldn’t come toward a vote with anyone feeling, “People like me weren’t consulted.” ...
At all stages, exhibit confidence in your proposal. Without being untruthful, always focus on the positive aspects; let critics do their own work. But always be willing to hear concerns, and be patient in addressing them. ...
Finally, one principle of politics is: never take a vote unless you know you will win it. If possible, do a “whip count” in advance to ensure your proposal has sufficient support to pass. Lobby waverers until they’re prepared to vote for the proposal, and delay a vote until then. ...
Posted by
Gavin Baker at 1/14/2010 05:03:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
