Date: Friday, 30 May 2014
Location: 111B Olin Library (LTS Conference Room next to Jim's office)
Background Document: Bob's summary of problems and objectives
Attending: Kate Harcourt, Jim LeBlanc, Xin Li, Bob Wolven
Agenda:
9:00 - 9:30 The Problem
9:30 - 10:15 Objectives (brainstorming)
10:15 - 10:30 Break
10:30 - 11:15 Objectives (brainstorming -- contd.)
11:15 - 12:00 Outcomes, Next Steps
********************
Notes:
Xin distributed copies of Cornell's "Check-Up for Existing Partnerships" tool as additional guidance for our discussion.
There seems to be a disconnect between the original vision for TSI and institutional-level limitations to realizing that vision. There is still belief that the future of libraries is in collaboration since no library can manage on its own.
Maybe we need to lower expectations and redefine the project with more realizable goals.
The Slavic record exchange was discussed as an area where one side (Columbia) benefits more than the other. Columbia will get Cornell records and there may be some benefit in learning about record loading issues and creation of collections within Blacklight or potentially Alma.
The word "integration" may be threatening from a legal point of view.
We will change the project name from 2CUL Technical Services Integration to the 2CUL Technical Services Initiative (still TSI).
The Proof registry is still viable for recording successful and non-successful initiatives.
We know there are two things we cannot do: supervise each other or spend each other's money; however, we need to better define these restrictions (i.e make the invisible fence more visible).
Agreement that once the by-laws and addenda to the 2CUL MOU have been worked out, we shouldn't need to run anything further regarding TSI by Columbia or Cornell lawyers, unless it's something unusual.
2CUL communication across library divisions (collection development, IT, technical services) isn't working as well as it should.
We've inadvertently created a lot of suspicion about 2CUL and 2CUL TSI.
We've touted certain ideas just for the sake of doing something and implying that 2CUL is a wonderful thing in itself.
Can we come up with some desirable characteristics for projects we wish to pursue -- for example, Jim Neal's four drivers: quality, productivity, improvement, innovation?
We need to assess whether the re-imagination of TSI is a factor in Alma planning. It should at least stand as a warning about invisible fences.
Action Items: