Upload
mhruska
View
961
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
NGTS overview presentation used for August and September UC campus visits
Citation preview
Martha Hruska & Carol Ann HughesAugust and September 2009
Next Generation Technical ServicesRethinking 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 yearsCatalysts for ChangeNext Gen Tech Services ChargeNext Gen Tech Services Scope Next Gen Tech Services ProcessPossible 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 PracticesSupporting Continuous Improvement
BSTF Report: Next Steps
Rearchitect cataloging workflowSelect the appropriate metadata
schemeManually enrich metadata in important
areasAutomate Metadata CreationSupporting Continuous Improvement
UC Initiatives over the last 4 years+
CAMCIG Reports: California Electronic Documents Cataloging Pilot
ProjectBrainstorming Draft for CAMCIGMetadata Survey ResultsSingle-Separate Record Report to HOTSUsing OCLC As A Single Cataloging Tool HOTS
UC CONSER FunnelCDL/HOTS agreement to fund temporary SCP
Chinese catalogerSCP Scope Statement ReviewHOTS Cataloging Expertise SpreadsheetShared Print Projects CDL / CDC
Journals (Licensed journals, JSTOR, IEEE)CanadianaCDC 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 MelvylChanging user expectationsMass Digitization
Hathi TrustWeb ArchivingExpose Hidden Collections Manage the life –cycle of born-digital and other
emerging formatsUC-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 PrinciplesSpeed processingTechnical services as a system-wide, single
enterpriseStart with existing metadata that is “good
enough” from all available sourcesAllow for Continuous improvements to “good
enough” from the UC Libraries and beyond: expert communities, vendors, other libraries
Eliminate redundant workMake *all* the UC Collections easily found and
usedFocus 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
21st Century
Resources
Metadata
Content
Get it
Manage it
Select it
Find it
Information Resource Types
1. Commonly Held Content in Roman Scripta. Licensed resourcesb. Print publicationsc. Reformatted content (digitized,
mass digitized, microfilmed)d. Audio-visual materialse. Imagesf. Born digital publications
2. Commonly Held Content in Non-Roman Scripta. Licensed resourcesb. Print publicationsc. Reformatted content (digitized,
mass digitized, microfilmed)d. Audio-visual materialse. Imagesf. Born digital publications
3. UC Unique Collectionsa. Special Collectionsb. Archivesc. Theses and dissertationsd. UC scholarshipe. Images
4. 21st Century Emerging Resourcesa. Harvested websites and
resources (Web at Risk)b. Scholarly websitesc. Blogs and other integrating
resourcesd. Mapse. GISf. Datasets
Task Group ChargesEach 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 MelvylWeb site
http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/uls/ngts/
Email updatesCampus visits
NGTS Process (continued)
Proposed models vettedExplore workflow, policies and best
practices optionsIdentify 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 beyondInterview stakeholders and expertsIdentify organizational structuresCollect evidence for proposed solutions, including
throughput and discovery statisticsDescribe when collaborative approaches to technical
services ought to be considered/not consideredDescribe 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 workflowsPropose policies and best practices neededPropose new tools, servicesPropose organizational structuresPropose funding modelsIdentify resource needs (including space requirements
if any)Propose governance modelsIdentify 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 functionsCollaborative approval plansCollaborative outsourcing and other vendor servicesImproved tools for system-wide acquisitions &
cataloging‘Shared Print in Place’ becomes norm rather than
exceptionLess 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/