Wendy Kozlowski, Deborah Cooper, Steve Folsom, Michelle Paolillo, Simeon Warner, Tre Berney, Jean Pajerek, Peter Hook, Dean Krafft, Gail Steinhart Discussion of RepoExec members survey fall 2018(notes), Sandy Payette, Jenn Colt, Jason Kovari, Erin Faulder
Background - RepoExec members survey fall 2018
- Purpose: identify high level priorities with respect to CUL's repositories
- Survey intended to prompt thinking in advance and seed discussion, and not the final word
- Focus on the ideas and not the details of implementation
Discussion:
- Some items require major investment of resources, others don't- do we treat them the same way? Do we entertain a notion of ROI for addressing this? Especially with respect to A, B, D (related: A is the problems at hand, B and D are some possible approaches).
- Sandy and Anne's analysis is also looking at most urgent issues, some overlap. Note multiple views: IT, access function, RepoExec.
- Several issues further down the list follow from A.
- Is there anything people would like to add?
- Research data responsibilities at Cornell.
- Infrastructure agnostic metadata management that doesn't rely on consolidating platforms. Example: ORCID. Also serves item G.
- Digital humanities absent.
- Lack of definition of the CUL service that we mean to provide with repositories.
- Question re: A and consolidation - is that about reducing number of platforms or reducing number of services? We suspect both.
- B,C, D may be candidates for RepoExec work.
- Work in A has to be planned and executed strategically.
- If we start with D, determine a CUL repo strategy and policy, who is it for? Who has agency in making decisions?
- Consider where we are now, issues with, where we should be going.
- Consider perspective - individual/collection of repositories ("repository first approach"), or the services that they individually and collectively provide.
- Can we agree on priorities, take those and suggest some possible ways forward?
- Note that B, C, E, I are all related (could be as big a bucket as A)
- Perhaps D is uber issue, with three sub-groups (A, C/E/I, B)
- RepoExec role in the short term is summarizing and providing this feedback
- Next steps:
- Rewrite / reorganize ideas - volunteers: Wendy, ...
- Plan to meet in November
- Tre:
- Trying to provision for some RMC assets - prompted larger examination of question of roles with respect to ArtStor, Kaltura, and Samvera digital collections
- Dianne did a series of interviews, surfaced some policy needs for ArtStor
- Tre will move forward on Kaltura
- Then can start to fill specific roles (currently no ownership in those areas)