Beard and Kuchma’s presentation situates contemporary scholarly communication within a proliferating ecology of digital tools, arguing that libraries must no longer confine themselves to collection provision but actively mediate the entire research workflow. Drawing on the 101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication survey, conducted between May 2015 and February 2016, the authors map research as a cycle extending from discovery, analysis and writing to publication, outreach and assessment. The visual workflow on pages 7–11 is especially instructive: it aligns library services—data management plan review, reference-management training, open access repository support, systematic-review assistance, post-publication sharing and metrics advice—with concrete researcher practices. The EIFL case synthesis sharpens this argument through 674 responses from 38 countries, with strong participation from Ukraine, Poland and Ghana, and a disciplinary profile in which social sciences constitute the largest share of EIFL responses. The charts on pages 43–45 expose a familiar disjunction: researchers overwhelmingly support open science in principle, yet comparatively fewer adopt open data and code-sharing tools in practice. This gap defines the library’s strategic mandate. Rather than merely recommending platforms, librarians must inform, train, advise, advocate and co-shape institutional policy, as page 59’s support model proposes. The conclusion is therefore pragmatic and political: libraries become infrastructural translators, converting chaotic tool abundance into equitable, multilingual, low-cost and sustainable research practice across diverse scholarly contexts.