NGTS Campus Visits 090409

Martha Hruska & Carol Ann Hughes August and September 2009 Next Generation Technical Services Rethinking Library Technical Services for the University of California

Next Gen Tech Services (NGTS) Context
Bibliographic Services Task Force Report 2005: next steps
UC Related Initiatives over the last 4 years
Catalysts for Change
Next Gen Tech Services Charge
Next Gen Tech Services Scope
Next Gen Tech Services Process
Possible Outcomes

BSTF Report 2005
“ Within Library workflows and systems too much effort is going into maintaining and integrating a fragmented infrastructure. We need to look seriously at opportunities to centralize and/or better coordinate services and data, while maintaining appropriate local control, as a way of reducing effort and complexity and of redirecting resources to focus on improving the user experience.”
Adopting New Cataloging Practices
Supporting Continuous Improvement

BSTF Report: Next Steps
Rearchitect cataloging workflow
Select the appropriate metadata scheme
Manually enrich metadata in important areas
Automate Metadata Creation
Supporting Continuous Improvement

UC Initiatives over the last 4 years+
CAMCIG Reports:
California Electronic Documents Cataloging Pilot Project
Brainstorming Draft for CAMCIG
Metadata Survey Results
Single-Separate Record Report to HOTS
Using OCLC As A Single Cataloging Tool HOTS
UC CONSER Funnel
CDL/HOTS agreement to fund temporary SCP Chinese cataloger
SCP Scope Statement Review
HOTS Cataloging Expertise Spreadsheet
Shared Print Projects CDL / CDC
Journals (Licensed journals, JSTOR, IEEE)
Canadiana
CDC Prospective Shared Print Monographs Task Force

Catalysts for Change: Beyond Cataloging and Bibliographic Services
LC Final Report of the Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control
Next-Generation Melvyl
Changing user expectations
Mass Digitization
Hathi Trust
Web Archiving
Expose Hidden Collections
Manage the life –cycle of born-digital and other emerging formats
UC-wide and campus financial pressures

Next Gen Tech Services
Executive Team : charged by the University Librarians to guide the Steering Team, to make resource allocation and other higher‐level decisions, to provide progress reports to the University Librarians, and to develop needed policy for approval by the University Librarians.
Members :
Bruce Miller, Chair (University Librarian, UC Merced)
Laine Farley (Executive Director, CDL)
Brian Schottlaender (University Librarian, UCSD)
Ginny Steel (University Librarian, UCSC)
Martha Hruska (UCSD, chair of Steering Team)
Steering Team : charged to develop a framework for the next three to five years for Next Generation Technical Services for the UC Libraries. The Steering Team will:
Members:
Martha Hruska , Chair (AUL Collection Services, UCSD)
Jim Dooley (Head, Collection Services, UC Merced)
Emily Stambaugh (Shared Print Manager, CDL) Ivy Anderson (CDL) interim
Carol Hughes (AUL, Public Services, UC Irvine
Armanda Barone (Asst. Hd. Tech Services UC Berkeley)

NGTS: Charge
Develop a framework for the next three to five years for Next Generation Technical Services for the UC Libraries. The Steering Team will:
address the broad transformative changes that will move technical services to the network level and that will reap the benefits of collaborative technical services
identify areas of coordination and collaboration among the UC Libraries technical services operations
quickly implement identified “low‐hanging fruit” changes (with approval from the Executive Team)

NGTS Scope: Values & Guiding Principles
Speed processing
Technical services as a system-wide, single enterprise
Start with existing metadata that is “good enough” from all available sources
Allow for Continuous improvements to “good enough” from the UC Libraries and beyond: expert communities, vendors, other libraries
Eliminate redundant work
Make *all* the UC Collections easily found and used
Focus cataloging and other metadata description efforts on unique resources

User Environment Library and Network Resources Collection Management Environment Commonly Held (Roman Scripts) Commonly Held (Non-Roman Scripts) UC Unique Collections 21 st Century Resources Metadata Content Get it Manage it Select it Find it

Information Resource Types
1. Commonly Held Content in Roman Script
a. Licensed resources
b. Print publications
c. Reformatted content (digitized, mass digitized, microfilmed)
d. Audio-visual materials
e. Images
f. Born digital publications
2. Commonly Held Content in Non-Roman Scr ipt
a. Licensed resources
b. Print publications
c. Reformatted content (digitized, mass digitized, microfilmed)
d. Audio-visual materials
e. Images
f. Born digital publications
3. UC Unique Collections
a. Special Collections
b. Archives
Theses and dissertations
UC scholarship
Images
4. 21 st Century Emerging Resources
a. Harvested websites and resources (Web at Risk)
b. Scholarly websites
c. Blogs and other integrating resources
d. Maps
e. GIS
f. Datasets

Task Group Charges
Each task force will be charged to develop 1-3 models
Each model must:
Address processes for selection, acquisition, cataloging, and preservation or reformatting, including possibilities for outsourcing
Incorporate the Values and Guiding Principles
Address options for system-wide organization of Technical Services

NGTS Process
Task Group members with mix of functional backgrounds
Consult just about all the UC stakeholders:
HOTS, CAMCIG, ACIG, CDC, CDC Task Force on Prospective Monograph Shared Print, SCP, PAG, HOSC, HOPS, UCAC, SOPAG….
Communications distributed as with Next Gen Melvyl
Web site http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/uls/ngts /
Email updates
Campus visits

NGTS Process (continued)
Proposed models vetted
Explore workflow, policies and best practices options
Identify and evaluate various potential enablers, such as new tools and services, policies, and current initiatives

Phase 1 – July - Oct. 2009
Research existing best practices and current initiatives within UC and beyond
Interview stakeholders and experts
Identify organizational structures
Collect evidence for proposed solutions, including throughput and discovery statistics
Describe when collaborative approaches to technical services ought to be considered/not considered
Describe when/if a collaborative technical services approach depends upon a shared UC collections approach
Consider vendor or other contracting solutions when appropriate

Phase 2 – Nov. 2009 – Feb. 2010
Outline proposed models
Include, as appropriate, selection, acquisition, cataloging, [electronic] resource management, harvesting, access services, digitization, preservation, or other relevant functions
Propose workflows
Propose policies and best practices needed
Propose new tools, services
Propose organizational structures
Propose funding models
Identify resource needs (including space requirements if any)
Propose governance models
Identify the collection development model best suited to the technical service model

Phase 3 – March 2010 – May 2010
Analyze proposed models
Conduct a Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threats (including barriers to adoption) analysis (SWOT)
Propose an assessment approach that monitors throughput and human resource effort over time and provides evidence of improvement in users’ ability to easily find and use materials

Possible Outcomes
Redefine, break down the silos of TS functions
Collaborative approval plans
Collaborative outsourcing and other vendor services
Improved tools for system-wide acquisitions & cataloging
‘ Shared Print in Place’ becomes norm rather than exception
Less redundant work  Campuses focus on local priorities
More collections managed and accessible with less total FTE

Follow monthly reports at the web site starting in September: http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/uls/ngts /

NGTS Campus Visits 090409

by mhruska

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 3

Statistics

NGTS Campus Visits 090409 Presentation Transcript