Scholars, scientists, academic institutions, publishers and funders are all interested in impact. We have different roles and goals, and therefore different reasons for needing to understand impact; we are therefore asking different questions about impact, and those questions continue to evolve, much as the concept of impact itself is evolving.
- To answer our different questions, do we need different data, in separate silos, or is it possible for the same core data to be pivoted to provide answers to different questions?
- In an age of open data, can we collaborate on a ‘kaleidoscope of impact’, to enable cross-functional and cross-disciplinary comparison, and consistency in decision-making?
- Is such an idea (a) desirable, and (b) possible?
- What datasets are relevant, across both traditional and emerging proxies for impact?
- Who would we need to involve?
- What steps would we need to take to start?
- What barriers do we anticipate?
- What counter-arguments do we need to articulate to persuade stakeholders to participate?
- What organizational framework would best support progress in this area?
This session would gather researchers, publishers, funders, institutional representatives including librarians, and others such as metrics providers and standards organizations, to debate these questions. A moderator would seek input from delegates prior to the event, and prepare an opening 15-minute talk to set the scene and build the vision, incorporating ideas and questions from delegates, and suggesting some initial answers. The moderator would then put key questions to the panel, and encourage further questions and opinions from the delegates.
