Archive | January, 2013

Where the Rubber Hits the Road (Part II)

30 Jan
A fantastic recording, btw!

A fantastic recording, btw!

When we first saw the request for proposals that ultimately secured the supplemental grant for an informationist and brought me into this work, we began to think about the roles I would take, the tasks I would assume, and the skills I would bring to a research team. In short, we put together an argument for the value of having an informationist on a research team. It’s no secret that this is an argument in the making. One of the main reasons that the National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health funded the program was to study the role and to evaluate its worthiness. Making our case was somewhat easier in that we had a template, i.e. the requirements of the RFP. Still, it was a new concept to our researchers and thus we had to invest some time and effort towards explaining what we hoped to achieve in this new partnership.

Since I began working on the mammography study in September, I’ve also been talking to other researchers on campus about the possibility of working with them. For the most part, I’ve leveraged relationships already formed between myself and certain researchers and/or departments. When trying to make my way in this new arena, I’m looking for all of the help I can get. At least with established relationships I have a head-start on arguing for the importance and relevance of the library. I’ve also taken advantage of attending meetings, symposia, and other forums where researchers present their work. One of these was the Community Engagement Symposium last November, hosted by our CCTS Section of the same name. I attended this event intending to try and talk to a couple of people in particular. When that didn’t happen, I used the meeting’s evaluation form to both thank the organizers of the event (who, by the way, I knew thanks to past collaborations) and to state my desire to meet with the leadership of the Section to talk about possibilities of being an informationist for them. Some time passed, but then a couple of weeks ago I got the following email from one of the organizers:


Thanks for coming to the Symposium!

You had requested a meeting to discuss forming partnerships for the library work of informationist. We are wondering if we could set up a time for you to talk with us as a group. We have a meeting on Feb 5 from 1-2. Would you like to join us? Or, is there a better time?



WOW!! GREAT!! I was delighted with the invite. I shared it with both my library director and my immediate supervisor, and they were really pleased, too. Then, a week later I got another email:


So that we could make the best use of our time, could you please share with us:

  • 3-5 questions that you would like to discuss
  • Background information on this new work



My immediate response was, “Uh oh.” I’m not sure why, but it was. Despite the fact that I’ve been doing this work for a few months now AND that I’d asked for the meeting, the thought of having to articulate the who, what, and why of it all gave me pause. Instinct, perhaps. This is all still new, not only the work itself but the selling of it to others. I’ve been reading and writing about being entrepreneurial, but now is the time to put all of that learning to work. How will I do?

I thought about my response for over a week. I traveled to the Miner Library at the University of Rochester Medical School last week to lead a workshop on these very things. As I spent almost a dozen hours driving solo to and from Rochester, I had a lot of time to talk to myself and formulate some ideas on how to proceed. This morning, I sat down and wrote my response. What do you think? If you were (or are) a researcher, is it enough to set the stage for a meeting? If you’re a librarian, would you present other skills or ask other questions? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comment section below. In the meantime, I’ll prepare myself for this opportunity – one that I really am excited about. And next week, I’ll report back on how it went.

Date: 01/30/2013

Proposal: To provide informationist/embedded librarian services to the Department of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine, specifically, though not limited to, projects related to the UMass CCTS Community Engagement and Research Section.

Background: Informationists are librarians with a disciplinary background in biomedical, behavioral or biological sciences, as well as library and information science. Medical librarians began serving as informationists in the clinical setting approximately 10 years ago, but more recently have begun to find a relevant place embedded in research teams and/or projects.

In the summer of 2012, the Library successfully collaborated with two principal investigators at UMMS, as well as their research team, to receive a supplemental grant from the National Library of Medicine. The award, an “NLM Administrative Supplements for Informationist Services in NIH-funded Research Projects”, was one of eight awarded nationally. It provides funding to support an informationist, or in-context information specialist, who serves the research team by offering expertise in the areas of data and information management.

For 18 months (Sept 2012 – Jan 2014), I’m serving as a member of the research team on the grant, “Promoting Breast Cancer Screening in Non-Adherent Women” (R01 CA-132935, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health). I’m devoting a quarter of my scheduled work time to the project, undertaking projects such as developing data management tools (a data dictionary and data request form), providing an in-depth literature review and report on the issues facing researchers and internet technology professionals when building and implementing research tools, assisting with a systematic review on the effectiveness of telephone intervention protocols for preventive screenings, and instructing the members of the team in advanced searching techniques and bibliographic management.

As we prepared this proposal with Drs. Luckmann and Costanza, Elaine Martin, Library Director, became convinced that this was both a relevant and exciting new opportunity for the Library and decided to commit to the service. I’ve been given a new role in the Library, informationist or embedded librarian, and charged with seeking out other opportunities where I can be integrated into research teams to provide library, information, and data management expertise as needed.

With an educational background in both exercise physiology and library science, years of providing support to the UMMS research community, and additional work as an exercise physiologist for a couple of Sherry Pagoto’s studies, I feel there’s likely not a better fit for me on this campus than the Department of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine and/or the UMass CCTS Community Engagement and Research Section. When we meet on 2/5, I’d like to talk about this further and answer any questions you might have regarding the work I’m doing now for the Luckmann/Costanza study. Additionally, I’d like to hear your thoughts and experiences regarding how (or if) you think an informationist could be of benefit to your team(s). Specifically:

  • What is your current process for obtaining relevant literature and other supporting information for preparing grant proposals, thinking of new research projects, staying current in your research areas, etc.?
  • Could members of the Department benefit from regular training in areas such as searching the literature, managing and organizing information, and/or improving communication between team members?
  • Do you have an established protocol for training new members to the Department or projects in the above-referenced areas? If not, would you be interested in having such?
  • How do you currently communicate and share information between team members?
  • When beginning research projects, do you establish standards for data collection, management, and sharing? Are these methods sufficient for your work?
  • Has anyone considered writing a formal systematic review on the topics studied by your group? If so, have you considered the benefits of having a dedicated librarian involved in such an endeavor?

Life on the Playground (Everyone Wants to be Picked for a Team)

17 Jan

I just returned from a seminar hosted by the Office of Faculty Affairs at my workplace (University of Massachusetts Medical School) entitled, “Team Science: The New Normal”. It was led by Dr. Robert Milner, Associate Vice Provost for Faculty Development. Along with his role in administration, Dr. Milner’s research background and focus is in neuroscience.

The reason I’m writing this post is twofold. First, it was my first real formal attempt at utilizing the things I learned reading Mike Rohde’s book, The Sketchnote Handbook (and watching the accompanying DVD). I’ve also worked through Sunni Brown’s online course on visual note taking and read all three of Dan Roam’s books on using pictures in the practice of problem solving. If you find that you’re looking for a new, different, and I’d attest, better, way to think and process and take notes, you might want to give these leading folks in the field a look see. So really, my first reason for writing this post is to show off my new skill.

The second reason is because the seminar had a slant towards junior faculty, those early in their careers who are trying to find their way, make connections, and both raise awareness of and gain recognition for the work that they do. As I took my notes, I couldn’t help but think of how much of what Dr. Milner was sharing about team science, as it applies to junior faculty, sounded so much like what we talk about when we’re trying to figure out how to be successful as embedded librarians and/or informationists.

  • How do you find collaborators?
  • How do you get invited to be on a team?
  • How do you weigh out your contributions?
  • How do you not get lost in the work of others?

These are exactly the same questions we’re asking! And the answers shared were similar, too.

  • Tap into your networks,
  • Be known for what you do,
  • And bottom line, learn how to communicate well.

I went to this session, hoping I’d find a way to better articulate how informationists fit on research teams. Happily, I came away with one more bit of proof that we’re really not that different from scientists at all. I’m going to remember this as I continue to do my work and make my way in this “New Normal”.

Team Science Notes

Click on my notes for a bigger picture. If something doesn’t make sense in them, feel free to ask in the comments section below.

The Privilege to be a Crusader

15 Jan

I went to bed last in a fitful state, my mind racing with thoughts of several online discussions I’d taken part in during the day. I also thought that if there was ever a time for me to heed Clay Johnson’s words from The Information Diet, it was then. I felt sick, as if I’d eaten one too many pieces of chocolate cake. Aaron Swartz, Lance Armstrong, and the flu shot were the sources of my calories.

The death of Aaron Swartz is a tragedy, there is no dispute. As Kevin Poulson of Wired Magazine said to Margaret Warner during an interview on PBS NewsHour, “If he had done nothing but co-invent RSS when he was a teenager, that alone would be an achievement to assure some sort of place in Internet history. But then he went on to do one thing after another.” It was, sadly, one of those other things that led to repercussions that many now claim caused him to take his own life. As most know by now, Swartz was pursued vehemently (many will conclude, unfairly) and ultimately charged with breaking a number of federal laws for hacking into MIT’s network and downloading thousands of full-text articles provided to MIT via their paid subscription to JSTOR.

There is a lot to this story, more than I am qualified or prepared to go into on this post. However, the one point I do want to make relates to the notion expressed by numerous sources as they praise Swartz for his activism:

  • “You know, it’s not accurate to say that he hacked into it. This was a database that was available on MIT’s campus for free to any students there, because MIT paid the subscription cost. So what he did is he went onto the campus and he used their network there, their public network initially, to automatically access the database, the same way you could do manually legally, and download one article right after another in rapid succession.” – Kevin Poulson
  • Comparing Swartz’s actions to those of HSBC, and most importantly the Governments actions towards both as they addressed the crimes, James Allworth writes, “Lay those two cases down beside that of a 26-year old kid who did the online equivalent of checking out too many books out of the library. “
  • “MIT deliberately operates an ‘extraordinarily open network’ with few controls to prevent abuse. Any visitor can register, and it’s easy to bypass the controls that do exist by assigning yourself an IP address. There are no terms of use or definition of abusive practices. And when Swartz downloaded the JSTOR articles, ‘the JSTOR website allowed an unlimited number of downloads by anybody’ on MIT’s network.” – Alex Stamos, expert witness for Swartz, in recent blog post

The issue I take with each of these statements is the notion behind them that the end justifies the means. He didn’t really “hack” into the network because (a) his methods weren’t all that complicated and (b) because the network was public. MIT promotes an open atmosphere of sharing. And downloading a bunch of articles is just like borrowing too many books and not returning them on time. In other words, none of it was a big deal.

Swartz didn’t believe that information should be trapped behind walls. He lobbied for a free and open Internet. He was an extremely important person in this movement. He brought to the public a wealth of information, particularly information that was in the public domain and should have been easily accessible, through his work in several ventures. It was good work and it will be missed by us all, whether we realize it or not.

However, the glossing over of a few aspects of the allegations (and they remain allegations) troubles me. Swartz was not a student at MIT. Universities, and more importantly libraries, pay substantial subscription prices to make the full content of scholarly journals available to their students, faculty, staff, researchers, etc. One can argue that anyone who believes scholarly articles are worth much monetarily are nuts (as Larry Lessig does well here), but just because Swartz could have never made any money off of the articles he downloaded, something the prosecution errantly believed, this doesn’t mean that they weren’t worth anything. They were, in fact, worth a great deal. The MIT library paid no small price for that subscription. It is a line item in their budget. It costs them money that, if they really didn’t have to pay for JSTOR or any other database or online journal, could be used for something else like, say, research support or instruction. Materials that are made available to patrons of a library are not free.

Was the punishment that the prosecutors wanted disproportional to the crime? Absolutely. Without a doubt. But if the charges against Swartz could have been proven in court, if he really did set up his laptop in that network closet and download thousands of articles, then he did break the law and he deserved some sort of punishment. He did not deserve to be bullied, singled-out, or made to be an example to others who might seek to do similar acts. I agree with Lessig, who states in the above-referenced post,

“I am a big supporter of changing the law. As my repeated injunctions against illegal file sharing attest, however, I am not a believer in breaking bad laws. I am not even convinced that laws that protect entities like JSTOR are bad. And even if sometimes civil disobedience is appropriate, even then the disobedient disobeys the law and accepts the punishment.”

Which brings me to the second helping of chocolate cake that kept me tossing and turning, Lance Armstrong. One might wonder (as I do) why the federal government dropped its case against Armstrong last year. “The government always has a tremendous amount of prosecutorial discretion regarding whether or not to bring an indictment. In this case it appears that they have acted judiciously and likely considered all of the good works of Lance Armstrong and his foundation” (Mathew Rosengart, a former federal prosecutor). Yes, Armstrong has now had his time on Oprah’s couch and supposedly confessed to the years of doping that he engaged in while riding professionally. I don’t care. I am an avid cycling fan. I absolutely LOVE the Tour de France. I am in awe of the feats that cyclists can accomplish, blood doped or not. I couldn’t even walk up Alpe d’Huez, let alone ride a bicycle to the top of it. As I listened to Tyler Hamilton and Daniel Coyle’s book, “The Secret Race“, over the weekend, I felt sorry for everyone involved. For the most part, Armstrong EXcluded, the individuals in the story seemed like nice guys who got caught up in something bigger than themselves. They wanted to win and the only way to do that was to cheat.

But there you have it. Another means to an end. Justification, perhaps, but not an excuse. There were rules in place and the cyclists chose to break them. Some got caught and others didn’t. That’s not fair. None of it is fair. Exorbitant journal prices are not fair. Allowing some people an advantage, whether it be through wealthy schools that can afford large subscription fees or wealthy cyclists who can afford to stay one step ahead of the testers, is unfair. Armstrong claims, via Hamilton (and perhaps even admits it to Oprah), that he didn’t cheat because everyone was cheating. If everyone is breaking the rules, then the rules no longer apply. That’s the logic. Personally, I think it’s anarchy.

What bothers me most about both Armstrong and Swartz, is that neither of them ever appeared to accept the consequences of their actions. Armstrong lied ad nauseum over the years and it is only now, when he is retired, when his charity is facing huge losses, when his image is tarnished, when his millions in sponsorships are drying up, when he can no longer win over (or bully) his former teammates into saying what he wants them to say… only then does he go to the Queen of Confessions herself to share his sad story and ask our forgiveness. Maybe. But when one is forced into the place of admission and apology, what’s the point? Can it even possibly be sincere?

Aaron Swartz hung himself. This is sad beyond sad. Anyone who has lived with depression or knows someone suffering from it, you know that the depths of despair that must come at the moment of suicide are unbearable. It is the unbearableness that leads to the choice of ending one’s life. It is a horrible, horrible thought – a horrible thing. The federal government, MIT, and others involved in the case, bear some responsibility for Swartz’s death, but so does he.

The ends justify the means only when one takes responsibility for those means in the first place. Rules and laws can need changing, but we need to be accountable for the means by which we bring about the change. The fact that no one in either of these cases (I am referencing all sides) seems to want to take any responsibility for his or her or their actions – that’s what bothers me the most.

And finally, the flu shot. I did not get one. I talked with my doctor about whether or not I needed a shot during my last check-up, in November. I am healthy and I don’t live or work with a vulnerable population. My chances of getting the flu may be higher this year, if there really is an epidemic happening, but if I do get it, I can sequester myself, stay in bed, ride it out, and in a couple of weeks, be fine. It isn’t that I want to get sick. Who wants to get sick? But sickness – germs and viruses and bacteria – is a part of life. I’ve had influenza twice in my lifetime. Twice in 50 years. I’ve had more cavities than that, despite fluoride in my water, regular dental visits, and pretty good oral hygiene practices.

I posed the question, “Who do you listen to more for health advice, your health insurance company or your doctor?” on my Facebook page yesterday. I posed it in the context of the flu shot – I received an email from my insurer telling me to get a shot, despite the fact that I’d had an intelligent, thoughtful discussion with my doctor and, based upon it, made a decision. In a nutshell, I was hung out to dry. Horror stories of individuals’ experiences with the flu were shared, layers of guilt over how I was going to make others sick were applied, pleas were made for me to use my good sense. So I shared an abstract  from the Cochrane Systematic Review on the effectiveness of flu shots for preventing the flu in healthy adults (modest), thinking that by at least providing some evidence for my beliefs and actions, my many colleagues who teach (and preach) the importance of evidence-based decision-making would pause. Nope. Didn’t matter. The episode marked the trifecta of things not making any sense to me for the day. I called it quits and turned out the lights.

What do any of these stories have to do with my role as an informationist? Specifically, nothing, but generally, I think each one is a clear indication of the ways in which the distribution and management of information effect us all. We try to control it, manipulate it, commodify it, and use it to prove or disprove our beliefs. We can twist it or ignore it or accept only the parts of it that we agree with. It is, in many ways, a free-for-all.

The discussion at the end of this morning’s team meeting centered around the question(s) of what kind, if any, conclusions the research to date might be giving. It is a multi-year study and the final results won’t be available for several years, but is there anything there now that’s of value to a larger audience? Is there anything new? Depending upon how the question is framed and the data presented, there may be. It’s something to look into (and off I went with a couple more lit searches to do). But the point is that with so much information available to us, integrity becomes so much more important. Taking responsibility for the actions that we take, the questions that we ask, and the conclusions that we draw around information may be more important now than they have ever been. Those of us working in the field not excepted.

Follow Along

7 Jan

blog bubbleI’m a HUGE fan of Twitter. I know that many of my colleagues, associates, and people in general still don’t get it. They don’t understand how a continuing stream of bits of information could be relevant to anyone. Mostly, I find that those who either don’t get or don’t like the social media tool always sum up their feelings by stating, “I don’t care if you brushed your teeth today.”

Concerns for halitosis and dental hygiene aside, these short-sighted and shallow accusations of Twitter are just that. But this isn’t a blog post to share the merits of Twitter. I need to write that piece for another blog (NAHSL) later this week. Instead, this is a very quick collection of BLOGS that, in many cases, Twitter led me to. In other words, the 140 characters shared by someone on Twitter ultimately took me to the following substantive resources that I check daily. The blogs themselves are not all updated on a daily basis, but I decided that this year I would put them into a folder on my bookmarks toolbar and look at them each morning. Anything new that these people write never ceases to inform, inspire, energize, and/or entertain. I share them with you here in the hopes that you will choose to either follow them as well, or perhaps create your own “Top Ten” to share with others.

  • Get Moving: Fitting Fitness into Your Day is the blog of’s senior health and wellness producer, Elizabeth Comeau. You can follow along with Elizabeth on her own journey to live a healthy life, as well as find many links to important news stories related to health and wellness. Elizabeth gets the first listing in this list because today marks her one year “blogiversary”. Congrats, Elizabeth! You can also follow Elizabeth on Twitter at @BeWellBoston.
  • FUDiet is the blog of, admittedly, my favorite researcher at UMass Medical School. Librarians are not supposed to choose favorites (I think I’ve typed this before), but I have a bias towards Sherry Pagoto, PhD, a clinical psychologist and researcher in the areas of health, nutrition, fitness, depression and obesity. She lets me work with her, she planks in the Library, she makes me laugh. Ranking #1 for sure! Her blog and her social media movement, #PlankADay, are not to be missed. If you want to know the FACTS about health and fitness, follow an expert. Follow Sherry! @DrSherryPagoto
  • The Brilliant Blog is home of the musings of author, journalist, consultant and speaker, Annie Murphy Paul. Annie is a regular contributor to numerous news sources including Time, CNN, Forbes, MindShift, Psychology Today, and The New York Times, to name a few. She writes fascinating and thought-provoking pieces on the science behind learning and intelligence. You can also find Annie on Twitter at @anniemurphypaul
  • I started following Laura Vanderkam’s blog after reading her book, 168 Hours. I need all the help I can find, all the tips offered, to help me manage the multiple projects I have going on in my life, both at work and away from here. Laura provides these through her books, her videos, and her blog. Felling overwhelmed? Take a few minutes to read her stuff. You really DO have more time than you think. @lvanderkam
  • Librarians know Daniel Pink. Members of the Medical Library Association were lucky to have Dan speak at our annual meeting a few years back, as well as host a webcast just for us! When it comes to understanding people and how to put that understanding to practice in my people-oriented work, his books are at the top of my list. And his blog is a great way to keep those ideas going in between the publication of said books. @DanielPink is also on Twitter.
  • I would be remiss if I didn’t include my colleague, Donna Kafel’s, blog in this list. Donna oversees the e-Science Community Blog, a multi-contributor source for all information related to librarians, eScience, and data. I slip in a post there myself, from time to time. If you’re an informationist, a research librarian, any kind of librarian working with data, you can find a lot of relevant information here. The NER eScience Portal tweets, too – @NERescience.
  • Speaking of data, David McCandless and Omid Kashan’s website and blog, Information is Beautiful, is… beautiful! Leaders in data visualization, these guys regularly publish amazing pieces on all kinds of topics. It’s a fun stop in your busy day. Info=Beautiful, @infobeautiful
  • The Chronicle of Higher Education hosts a number of great blogs, but the one I choose to list here is Percolator: Research that Matters. From politics to morality to academia, Percolator is worth your attention. Grab a cup of Joe(sephine) and enjoy! You can keep up with all news from The Chronicle on Twitter at @chronicle.

And now, perhaps the two most important blogs to follow (save my own, of course!):

  • Because a life without music is no life at all, read Kim Ruehl’s blog for great writing on music and community. Kim writes regularly for No Depression, FolkAlley, NPR, and Yes! magazine. Though you can find her work at each of these places, I like to follow her own website. One-stop reading.
  • Ask Amy. Go ahead, ask her! She will answer. The Chicago Tribune’s nationally syndicated advice columnist, Amy Dickinson, is a sure thing for a 2-minute daily ponder regarding some important life lesson. Wondering what to say to your tacky neighbors (nothing, you McSnippy!), your whining children (just do the chores, you lazy kiddos!), the last guy to not return your calls after a date (seriously?! move on!)? No worries, someone has surely asked Amy and she’s provided just the right advice. If you work in a cubicled environment with other people (as opposed to being a zoo keeper), Amy can help you get through the days a little bit easier. Her memoir, The Mighty Queens of Freeville, is also worthy of a list, just not this one. Even better, buy the audio version and Amy will read it to you herself. Follow Amy on Twitter @AskingAmy and catch her from time to time as a regular panelist on NPR’s Wait Wait… Don’t Tell Me!

Yes, I can see that you’re hard-pressed to make an argument that each of these blogs is relevant to the librarian life, but this librarian’s life would be much less of what it is without them. Thanks to each of the writers for writing them!

Go Dog. Go!!

2 Jan

[Aside: Back in my preaching days, I wrote an entire sermon based upon the text of P.D. Eastman’s book, Go Dog. Go! I’m sure it’s scriptural, too.] 

Go Dog GoI read several books on the topic of happiness last year. One of them was The Happiness Project, by Gretchen Rubin. (Great book, BTW.) Since reading it, I’ve been keeping up with her blog and following her on Twitter. These activities led me to her post this morning that gives a quick overview of Daniel Pink’s ideas on the “new” kind of elevator speech. I started Pink’s new book, To Sell is Human, just last night. No doubt, it will be the subject of a future post, but I digress…

After reading Rubin’s post from this morning, I clicked on the link to a related item she wrote back in December of 2010 called, “Choose One Word to Set the Tone for Next Year”.  As I found myself back in the cubicle this morning, working my way back into the post-holiday, working mindset, I thought about what one word I would choose for myself for 2013. Here are a few that came to mind:

  • Green (I got a juicer for Christmas, so I was thinking more of green drinks than the environment.)
  • Sing! (If only life was a musical.)
  • No Fear! (Two words and already taken by my loony, fitness-crazed, twitter friends, @drsherrypagoto, @mbfgmike, and @bewellboston. I’ll let them keep it.)
  • Sugar (As in, “watch it!”)
  • Data (Heaven help me.)

As I thought more about some of the things I’ve set for myself to accomplish this year (learn a new song each week, build “Wheelie Good”, spend more time in the studio, etc.), I realized that pretty much any hope or idea or goal that I have for the coming year involves one thing, or better said, can be summed up in one word – GO!

So, there it is. That’s my word for 2013. GO! (In all caps, bold, italicized, and red.)

I’m going to remember my word in those moments when I don’t know how to do something, when I don’t know exactly how to solve a problem, when I have a task ahead of me that I’m not too fond of, when I hit a particularly sticky few bars in one of my new songs… I’m just going to say to myself, GO! Get on it! Get to it!

I’m not talking “bull in the china shop” GO!, and I don’t want to be like (or steal from) a certain very large sporting goods manufacturer that tells us to “Just Do It!”, but I do want to be like those dogs in one of my favorite books of childhood (and adulthood). I want to GO!

Alison Gregory and Steven Dietz wrote a children’s play based upon Eastman’s classic and in their preview guide for parents and teachers wishing to put on a production of it, they state that in his own way, Eastman provides us a timeless classic that “honors the joyous simplicity of the world around us”. Of course, it also has great reference to dog anarchy and dog parties in trees and dogs in fancy hats! What’s not classic about that?!

In other words, my word GO! is going to be about paying attention, taking note, acting on the little things that may (or may not) lead to bigger ones. I’m going to do this in work and in play. I’m going to adopt this with family and friends. I’m going to GO!


How about you? What’s your word for the new year? Share them in the comments section below. GO on. Do it!