Focus and Scope

PARTNERSHIP is the journal of “Partnership”, Canada's national network of provincial and territorial library associations. 
Partnership promotes the exchange of ideas about libraries, librarianship, and information science among practitioners across all library sectors. We are a Canadian, open access journal publishing double-blind peer-reviewed research and editorially-reviewed articles and opinion pieces.

PARTNERSHIP est la revue de « Partnership », le réseau national canadien des associations des bibliothèques provinciales et territoriales.
Partnership favorise le partage d’idées concernant les bibliothèques, la bibliothéconomie et les sciences de l’information parmi les praticiens dans l’ensemble des secteurs des bibliothèques. Nous sommes une revue en libre accès canadienne qui publie de la recherche évaluée à double insu par les pairs ainsi que des articles révisés par le comité de rédaction et des articles d’opinion.

Section Policies

Editor's Comments

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Innovations in Practice

This section publishes articles that describe and evaluate new library initiatives. Articles should critically analyze the impetus, implementation,challenges, and outcomes of the initiative and include some research into the context for the innovative practice through a literature review. Articles in this section are typically 3,000 to 7,000 words in length and will be subject to a double-blind peer review process.

  • Jennifer Easter
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Theory and Research

This section invites substantive research articles of empirical studies or philosophies, policies or trends in all types of library and information environments. Research articles can be either quantitative or qualitative in nature. Empirical models (evidence-based or experimental techniques) and exploratory models of investigation are welcome. Articles are typically 3,000 to 7,000 words in length and will be subject to a double-blind peer review process.

  • Ann Smith
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Conference Spotlight

This section invites articles based on presentations at Canadian library (or allied fields, such as technology, user experience, etc.) conferences. The original article may be based on an oral presentation or poster presented at a conference and transformed into an engaging article by the conference presenter(s). 

We also invite personal reflections by conference attendees on the theme of a conference or highlights learned from a conference. Creative approaches, including video or other media, will be considered if accompanied by a transcript.

Submissions are typically 500 to 2,000 words in length. Please do not submit if the conference presentation has already been published in conference proceedings.

  • Jessica Lange
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Professional Development

How do you grow and develop in your career? Share learning and training ideas, best practices, current trends and insights on professional development for library practitioners. Although the column is informal, authors are encouraged to draw on relevant literature. Articles are approximately 2,000-3,000 words in length.

The Roundtable: 
This is a special feature of the Professional Development section. Each issue we ask for responses to a prompting question. We collect the responses and publish them as a Roundtable article. You will be cited as a contributing author. Submit 250-750 words to by April 30, 3018. French or English submissions are welcome.

How do you like to do professional development? 

Do you jive on journal clubs or wax poetic about webinars? Do you prefer to lurk on listervs or congregate at conferences? Maybe MOOCs are your thing? Perhaps podasts? Or do you linger at None of the above? What's the professional development experience you can't live without?

  • Allana Mayer
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Book Reviews

We welcome reviews of current books which will assist readers of the Journal to select works for their own professional use or to add to their library collections. Reviews may relate directly to libraries and the information profession (e.g. Neal-Schuman Library Technology Companion: A Basic Guide for Library Staff) or may relate more broadly to the social and technological context in which we work. (e.g. Changing the Subject: Art and Attention in the Internet Age). If the book is not directly about the library and information profession, the reviewer should make explicit how it is important and relevant for readers of this Journal. Your review should make the case for why readers should (or should not) invest time in reading the book. What theoretical knowledge, practical wisdom or professional skills will we expect to gain from reading this book? Reviews are 750-1,000 words in length.

  • Linda Ecclestone
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


The Viewpoints section allows for the expression of opinions or viewpoints on current or topical issues in the library and information profession. The pieces should be relatively short in length (approximately 1,500 words); engage the reader by identifying an important issue and/or presenting a call to action; and be supported by references to relevant literature as needed.

  • Jessica Lange
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


This section will feature short profiles of practitioners in the LIS field. It will showcase well-known and not-so-well known librarians, library workers and information professionals from across Canada who are passionate about what they do. Write a tribute to a colleague or co-worker, or submit your own personal story! The format and content is up to you. Essay-form profiles can be submitted to the Section Editor.

  • Jessica Lange
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

News and Announcements

What went on, what’s going on and what’s happened to whom. A News & Announcement article briefly describes things such as an award received, a new library, a new appointment, or research in progress.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


The Features section of Partnership is an editorially-reviewed column. Its purpose is to provide an open, inclusive, and informal space for authors to share and exchange ideas, information, and works of interest to the library and information community. 

This section accepts a variety of publication formats including articles, essays, reports, profiles etc. Creative approaches, including video or other media will also be considered if accompanied by a transcript. 

Submissions may include, but are not limited to (word count guidance is listed in brackets):

  • Expression of opinions or viewpoints on current or topical issues in the library and information profession (1500-2000)
  • Professional development best practices, current trends, and insights for library practitioners (1500-3000)
  • Profiles of practitioners in the LIS field (500-1000)
  • Case studies and overviews of new projects (side note: I included this here because I’ve noticed the PR sections get ‘case studies’ that aren’t strong enough for peer review but still may be of interest to readers) (2000-3000)
  • Summary of conference presentations and conferences (500-2000)
  • Interviews with persons of interest to the LIS community (1000-2000)

Submissions to this section must have a clear writing style and be well-organized and structured. References to relevant literature should be included as necessary.

  • Jessica Lange
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

All submissions to Partnership are subjected to editorial review. Articles featured in the Theory and Researchand Innovations in Practice sections are governed by a strict double-blind peer review process. Submissions to these sections are carefully anonymized before being sent for review. Appropriate reviewers are selected from a database of more than two hundred Canadian and international subject experts based on their knowledge of the topic of the paper under consideration. Where necessary, the editors will search beyond this database to find qualified reviewers for a particular manuscript. 

Peer reviewers may indicate to the editors their permission to share their comments anonymously with other reviewers of the same manuscript. Pending such permission, reviewers may request to the section editor to view the other reviewer’s comments.

Individuals interested in becoming reviewers should contact the Editor-in-Chief.

Publication Frequency

Partnership publishes two issues per year.

Articles however are published on a rolling basis and may be put out under 'early release' if they are ready before an official publication date. 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.


Partnership is indexed with full text available in:

  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • EBSCOhost Library Literature & Information Science (H.W. Wilson)
  • EBSCOhost Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts
  • Google Scholar
  • Ontario Council of University Libraries Scholars Portal
  • ProQuest CBCA Complete
  • ProQuest CBCA Reference
  • ProQuest Library & Information Science Abstracts 
  • Professional ProQuest Central
  • ProQuest Central
  • ProQuest SciTech Collection
  • ProQuest Technology Collection

Code of Ethics for the Editorial Team

  • All communication among the editorial team and between editors and peer reviewers and authors will take place in a clear, respectful, timely and transparent manner. 
  • Section Editors are the primary contact between the author and the editorial team. If copyeditors, proofreaders, or layout editors have questions for the author during the production of an article, these should be directed to the Section Editor. This minimizes confusion and miscommunication with the author.
  • Members of the editorial team who wish to submit a paper to the journal will submit it directly to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief will anonymize the paper and direct it through the publication process. Section Editors and/or peer reviewers will determine whether or not to accept the paper. Section Editors may not submit a paper to their own section.
  • The Editor-in-Chief will remain neutral and treat all possible breaches of this Code confidentially. The Editor-in-Chief will take action against any individual(s) who do not adhere to the Code of Ethics. This may result in declining a manuscript, or dismissing a peer reviewer or editor of his or her duties.
  • Appeals may be directed to the Partnership board for resolution.
  • In the event of a dispute involving the Editor-in-Chief, the matter will be directed to the Partnership board for resolution.
  • These rules of governance are applicable to any individual involved in the production of the journal. These include, but are not limited to: editors, peer-reviewers, authors, etc.

Code of Ethics for Authors

  • Authors will conduct their research in line with best practices and regulations of their professional bodies and home institutions. Authors will adhere to the guidelines of TCPS 2 (2014): the latest edition of Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans. The paper complies with the ethical requirements of Informed Consent and any conflict of interest has been declared.
  • Authors will declare any conflicts of interest. (See, for example: Review of Practical Open Source Software for Libraries in Partnership 7(1), 2012).
  • All authors must be named on the manuscript, and in the order in which they would like to be acknowledged, at the point of submission. 
  • The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration.
  • The author retains copyright of his or her work. The author will acknowledge the Partnership as the first place of publication in subsequent use, such as placement in an Institutional Repository.
  • The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines, which is found in About the Journal.
  • The author has obtained the permission of the copyright holder for the inclusion of any third party material, including images, in the text.
  • There has been no falsification or fabrication of data findings.
  • The paper includes no instances of plagiarism, such as verbatim copying of another’s work and submitting it as one’s own, or changing words and phrases while retaining the essential content of another’s work.
  • If submitting to a peer-reviewed section of the journal, the instructions in Ensuring a Blind Review have been followed.
  • Publication has been approved by all co-authors and responsible authorities at the organization where the work has been carried out. 
  • Anonymous manuscripts will not be accepted.

Code of Ethics for Peer Reviewers

  • Peer reviewers will agree to review manuscripts only for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.

  • They will respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.

  • They will not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.

  • They will declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest. A peer reviewer shall declare knowledge of the author if he or she detects this in the manuscript.

  • They will not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations.

  • They will be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments.
  • They will decline to review if they feel unable to provide a fair and unbiased review.
  • Peer reviewers will take into consideration the ethical standards required of authors when submitting their papers. They will assess whether the paper may be plagiarized, if informed consent ought to have been obtained, if authors have declared competing interests, and whether there is any indication the data has been fabricated or inappropriately manipulated.


  • The opinions of our authors do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial team or the Partnership Association. The authors are solely responsible for the content of their submitted material.
  • The editorial team and peer-review process will typically identify and reject submitted material with serious ethical, legal and academic issues. However, it must be recognized that like any other process, mistakes can be made. Therefore we state:
  • By submitting written material to the Partnership Journal, the author hereby agrees to assume full legal responsibility in any matter that may arise due to the publication of their submission(s). This can include, but is not limited to, issues of data falsification, libel/slander, moral misconduct, academic misconduct and plagiarism.