Building a research archive like Reconcile Journal doesn’t really allow for superficial success checkpoints. Other than being over the moon that 133 people subscribed to our archive in our first 4 months, and just under 600 people follow us on IG (which is a lovely vote of confidence), there isn’t going to be a systemised, easy way to measure success, and when we get there, impact might also be a difficult thing to pin point too.

This playbook blog series will exist in a dedicated corner of our archive website, as 1) I have no idea how to build a non-academic, academic-ish visual research platform, therefore each step will be filled with lessons and 2) I am building with systemic change in mind - however we end up making Reconcile Journal work (which we will!), should hopefully serve as a template for anyone else looking to question, generate and discuss research in new and exciting ways.

Generally, these memos should be pragmatic and to-the-point, rooted in reflexive questions in order to identify the lessons, steps or suggestions that could work. I also think I might benefit from a question section at the end, where I can keep track of the things I need to further research, or the question marks I need answering. Let’s see how we go.

First up, what does success look like for this new thing?

What makes a community a community, and how do I ensure the community’s needs are being met?

Community doesn’t mean:

constant views of every digest on our website and Instagram
high comment counts
our subscribers talking to us and each other all the time
people buying things from us, because nothing is for sale!

What community could mean:

Readers feeling intellectually stretched
Curiosity is piqued by a research finding
People replying to newsletters with their thoughts
People sharing feedback, suggestions or ideas as we try new things
Research papers are suggested for upcoming digests
Sharing digests with others who they think might benefit
Requesting to contribute or be featured in the journal
People are up for attending occasional live discussions
People cite Reconcile digests in their own work
They feel connection and/or ownership of the things happening here at Reconcile.

Now that I have taken the time to define how a community might feel for us, it feels positive. So far, I know from conversations with both peers and new subscribers that people feel intellectually stretched and curious about both the research we translate, AND the model we are using to build Reconcile. We have had a few wonderful requests to contribute, which is truly an achievement to celebrate, and lastly, people are citing Reconcile in their own research practice. This is good news!

Next up, I think I need to consider how to turn the above list into a simple impact metric system, so Reconcile Journal can strive to succeed in these areas, and measure our progress against them in a clearer fashion.