As secondary data become increasingly integrated into research and coursework across a widening variety of fields and disciplines, data reference is gaining traction as a major area of library research support. To examine the current landscape of data reference, we distributed a survey via regional and international library listservs asking librarians about their experiences and opinions related to their data reference work. For this paper, the full collected dataset was limited to only academic librarians who answer at least one data reference question per month in order to identify the unique needs of respondents doing reference work in academic institutions, with the ultimate goal of improving our own work as academic librarians at our institution. We used a grounded theory approach to analyze the qualitative survey response data, and supplemented this analysis with descriptive statistics and chi-square tests for the quantitative responses. Through this analysis, we identify a theoretical framework consisting of three themes relating to limitations to success where librarians must advocate for change in order to maintain and improve high-quality data reference work in the academic sphere: (1) technology and resource limitations, such as substandard database interfaces; (2) institutional limitations, such as insufficient staff time or resources dedicated to data reference; and (3) personal limitations, such as a lack of data skills. While librarians have varying levels of influence over each of these three areas, identifying and targeting these categories can help librarians and other data professionals focus resources and build cases for additional support from their library and campus administrators.

We present a qualitative analysis of the results of a survey of faculty and researchers at a large Midwestern R1 university around their understanding of and attitudes toward scholarly metrics. The survey included opportunities for participants to provide freetext responses regarding their use of metrics and concerns they have about the use of metrics for assessment. Participants indicated they understand metrics and use them in a variety of ways, but they have concerns about administrators' potentially inappropriate use of metrics in assessment. Participants expressed a desire to be involved in decision making around the use of metrics in evaluation processes. With the end goal of improving our library's research impact-related services to better support faculty and researchers across campus, this exploratory qualitative analysis offers a more nuanced understanding of the current landscape of opinion around research impact metrics. To develop tools and services that actually address faculty and researcher needs, librarians must develop a comprehensive understanding of their interests and concerns around metrics.

As data skills are incorporated into academic curriculum and data becomes more widely available and used in everyday life, many librarians find themselves serving as 'accidental' data librarians in their subject areas. Due to this evolving landscape and growing data need, it is increasingly important for librarians to be familiar with data resources and able to answer secondary data reference questions. To learn more about this area of librarianship, this study uses survey responses from librarians who answer data questions to explore the challenges and frustrations that arise from data reference questions and interactions. Our key findings reveal that frustrations are ever present in data reference regardless of how much experience a librarian has, and many frustrations arise due to factors such as patron expectations, subject-specific and data-related jargon, and data formats and accessibility.