December 19, 2013

Collaborative Technical Services Team WebEx meeting minutes December 12, 2013



Collaborative Technical Services Team WebEx meeting minutes
December 12, 2013

Present at the meeting were:  Beth Burnett, Bill Clayton, Bill Walsh, Cathy Jeffrey, Chris Huff, Donna Bennett, Miriam Nauenburg, Sherrida Crawford. 

Cathy Jeffrey welcomed everyone to the meeting. She opened the meeting by requesting approval of the minutes from the previous meeting.  The minutes were approved.  Cathy indicated that the minutes would be posted to the Next Gen Blog.   

Cathy reported that no additional comments had been made in response to the Collaborative Technical Services blog posts.  

Cathy asked if there were other topics to discuss before the group moved to a discussion of the RFP questions.  No other topics were suggested.

The group moved on to the discussion of the RFP questions.  The final version of the document to this point is included at the end of the minutes. The group began the RFP discussion by returning to a discussion of Electronic Resource Management.  Several additional questions were added to this section.  An additional question was also added to the Granularity of Security section. 
 
The group moved on to the new Workflow section.  Several questions were discussed with the final version of the Workflow section including four questions.

The group discussed two new questions suggested by Chris Huff one on patron privacy issues and the other regarding special collections, archives, digital artifacts.  The group decided to forward these questions to other groups. 

Remaining topics to be discussed at the next meeting are Authority Management and Collection Development.  Those sections as they currently stand are included below.

Authority Management
·         How does your solution support the collaborative management and maintenance of a shared authority file?
Collection Development
·         Describe how your solution supports collaborative collection development among USG libraries.
Cathy indicated that she would send the questions that had been drafted to this point out in the minutes.  Cathy said that it would be her hope that we could complete work on the questions during our Dec. 19th meeting. She would then be able to prepare a document for submission after the Christmas break and send it to the Planning Team on Dec. 30 or 31.  

The next meeting will be Dec. 19, 2013 at 12:00.

The meeting was adjourned.

Below is the list of questions as they stood at the end of the meeting.

In answering the questions below, please include how your implementation will support work in a consortial environment and enhance collaboration.


Granularity of Security. The solution should support administrative and functional authorization and security at multiple levels: individual staff or patron, single institution, subset consortia, and consortium-wide.
  • Describe how your solution handles system security in the assignment and creation of administrative and functional accounts.
  • Describe how the solution will provide tracking of and accountability for staff editing of all records within the shared environment.
     
Unique Identifiers. 
  • Describe how the solution insures that identifiers that are unique at an institution are unique throughout the consortia.  This includes but is not limited to  item and patron barcodes, university identification numbers, and staff authorization codes. 
Shared Records.  Member libraries of the USG Consortium understand the benefits of using shared records.  We also value the additional service to users that local customization can provide.  We seek a solution that can make use of shared records while still allowing each institution to make local additions.
  • How does your solution manage shared records?
  • What types of records can be shared by member libraries (bibliographic, vendor, license, other)? Please provide a complete list.
  • Does this solution support the addition to shared records of local data such as local notes, access points and other unique metadata?  
  • What types of records that are shared by member libraries can include local customization?

Electronic Resource Management.  The USG Consortium includes electronic resources owned collectively and individually.  The successful solution must facilitate the management of all electronic content owned or subscribed by USG libraries.
  • Describe how your solution supports the management of electronic resources at both the local and consortial level.  
  • Describe how your solution would handle trials at the local or consortial  level.
  • How will your solution assist  in the movement of ownership data into associated systems like discovery systems or link resolvers?
  • Describe the workflow for loading records owned by all members of the consortia.
  • How will your solution clearly expose the resources a user has the right to access and connect users with the appropriate electronic or digital resource?
  • Does your solution include a method to manage license agreements locally as well as at the consortial level? Is there a  way for member libraries to share license agreements that they have negotiated?
  • Does your solution include an OpenURL resolver? 
  • Describe how your solution works with an OpenURL resolver in managing both local and consortial resources.
  • Describe how your solution provides usage statistics for electronic resources.
  • Describe any features your system provides to facilitate and manage the lending of e-books and possibly other e-resources to users at non-owning member  institutions.
Reports and Reporting.
  • What reports are available to compare data among member institutions?
  • Can different subsets of institutions be selected for comparison?
  • How are locally customized reports shared with the rest of the consortia?
  • Describe how shared reports are accessed and by whom.

Workflow
  • Which of your solution’s technical services workflows can be integrated across institutions to avoid repetitive data management?
  • Describe how your solution manages duplicate data across institutions .
  • Are there automated processes that encourage the use of  existing records  or data across the consortia?
  • Describe workflows for updating local holdings in WorldCat for consortially owned  titles.

Submitted by
Cathy Jeffrey

1 comment:

  1. Do you have any immediate project requirements to be handled by skilled manpower or is your existing staff finding it nearly impossible to keep up with the project demand? IT Staff Outsourcing Services augmentation service is designed to give you an edge over such volatile situations.

    ReplyDelete