SYM29A panel discussion: working with collection managers, documentation and institutional strategy

What this was about

The panel first discussed how to document regions of interest on fossil slabs and pollen slides, then whether collection managers resist new data approaches. Answers ranged from supportive departments to staff who see data work as a burden, and stressed involving managers, continuous support and written procedures. Audience members urged making data management work visible (ticketing boards, published progress and documentation). They proposed a data managers' support group, noted the joint TDWG–SPNHC conference next June, and argued that institutional strategy, not just bottom-up empathy, is needed. The final topic was who maintains CMS documentation, including version control, storing manuals safely, and AI-assisted documentation pipelines.

Why it matters. It brings together practical lessons on change management from several institutions and led to a concrete follow-up: a data managers' email group.

In the room

• Documenting regions of interest for multiple organisms on one slab or pollen slide is unsolved at NMNH Paleobiology; slabs use catalogue-number suffixes.
• Resistance varies: some collection managers see data management as a burden on their core work, while others are supportive if shown it makes life easier.
• Keeping collection managers in discussions, decisions and workflows, plus more implementation capacity, helps win them over.
• Collection managers are custodians, not owners; initial enthusiasm fades without continuous support.
• Making data management work visible (ticketing boards, published progress, documentation) builds understanding.
• Without institutional strategy, data managers and curators lack authority to resolve disagreements.
• Documentation should be versioned, stakeholder-reviewed, stored in known places (including physical copies), and part of onboarding.

Notable moments