UC Libraries Next-Generation Technical Services

RSS

Transformation and quick wins, revisited

Martha Hruska and I presented an update on NGTS to the Librarians Association of the University of California (LAUC) Spring 2012 Assembly last week. The theme of the assembly was “Next-Generation Librarianship,” and clearly the NGTS initiative is helping to frame thinking and discussion, given that topics examined by participants in breakout sessions included shared service models; lightning teams as a model for working together; communication models; and new skills.

So, among the questions raised at the end of our presentation, one was about what outcomes we saw or expected that would be “transformational” and one was about what “quick wins” we have attained thus far.

What Transformation?

I think the fact that people are examining shared services and lightning teams as a way of working is an indicator that transformation is already happening. Beyond the specific objectives of each of the Power of Three groups, NGTS is about working together as a system to become even more collaborative and effective in how we provide services and resources to those we serve.

Enacting change at the University of California is steering a big ship. NGTS is not just about a few people at the helm, however; thus far, it is mobilizing over 100 members of the UC Libraries’ staff: from all campuses, CDL, and from a range of levels and areas of expertise.

We are figuring out ways of working together effectively. We are employing project management, and learning more about it as we go along. We are learning to make full use of online collaboration tools. We are defining new processes for getting things done, including communication and decision-making, and documenting them. We are doing this working from our eleven different locations, without new resources, without the ease of meeting in person or of a quick hallway conversation to work out any kinks or questions.

In short, we are establishing a culture of collaboration and coordination across our system as we learn to move forward concurrently on several complicated initiatives.

What Quick Wins?

At not quite one year since this implementation began, what are some of the quick wins thus far? One is implementation of the deposit system for CDL co-investments across all ten campuses. The Power of Three group 4 charged with that initiative has also identified best practices that can help streamline accounting practices.

Another is the deployment of Archivists’ Toolkit across eight of the ten campuses. As we move toward a common platform for some of our operations, there are greater opportunities to share expertise and improve our effective use of tools and technologies.

Power of Three group 6 has compiled existing shared collection services arrangements among the campuses to surface potential models and examples for further development. Power of Three group 7 has compiled and posted an inventory of existing cooperative collection development activities as a foundation for further coordination.

Quick wins are important in terms of building ongoing momentum. But some of the wins are perhaps not as obvious. They include, in my mind, the “softer” but significant steps of establishing working relationships among people at different locations and from different areas of expertise that will be essential for high-functioning, next-generation libraries. —Emily Lin

NGTS Update: April 2012

POT 1: Build the UC Digital Collection infrastructure

POT 1 has chosen to use the agile methodology for gathering requirements for the Digital Asset Management System (DAMS). The team is using Pivotal Tracker software to track team activities. Several lightning teams have been formed. One is gathering requirements for the DAMS along with digital collection discovery and delivery requirements. Another team is identifying and analyzing existing digital collections. One team will evaluate WorldCat Local for discovery and display, and another lightning team is establishing a rights management framework.

"POT 1 is a highly efficient group that has been able to put structure and specificity around what could be an overwhelming charge," says team member Lisa Schiff. "Team members share a desire to have concrete results from our efforts." Read more about POT 1.

POT 2: Transform cataloging practices

Two lightning teams have completed their work on identifying shelf-ready vendors and gathering campus processing specifications. POT 2 is developing a shelf ready proposal based on the input of lightning teams. A draft of “UC Guidelines for Cooperative, Vendor, and Campus Backlog Cataloging” is nearly ready for broader review.

POT 3: Accelerate processing of archival and manuscript collections

POT 3 has completed its report and recommendations on implementation of Archivists’ Toolkit. The Management Team is reviewing the recommendations. Progress on the development of More Product, Less Process guidelines is also on schedule.

POT 4: Simplify the recharge process

POT 4 has completed its near-term deliverable of implementing a deposit account for CDL co-investments. POT 4 also investigated the process of Interlocation Transfer of Funds to determine if it might be a viable alternative to the recharge process for co-investment accounting. In addressing its second major deliverable, the team looked into issues related to a secure directory for tracking recharge activity in real time. The team submitted an interim report with findings as well as recommendations on best practices in campus accounting to the Management Team.

POT 5: Maximize the effectiveness of Shared Cataloging

Lightning team 1 has completed and submitted its report to the POT on Shared Cataloging Program (SCP) record distribution. CAMCIG has also completed its report to POT 5 on monetary and staffing costs of SCP record distribution.

POT 6: Develop system-wide Collections Services Operations

A number of lightning teams have wrapped up their work. One completed an inventory of existing shared staffing agreements and projects, and identified success factors for such collaborations. The other teams have completed their reports on current and projected campus staffing needs, as well as on existing and needed tools. A final team is completing its report on existing backlogs (including Special Collections). From the information gathered, POT 6 will identify possible pilot projects for collaboration.

POT 7: Transform collection development practices

POT 7 has completed charges and proposed memberships for lightning teams to address the roles and responsibilities of UC bibliographers in light of the changing landscape of collection management. The Management Team is reviewing these proposed teams and charges.

Implementation of Archivists’ Toolkit in UC to Accelerate Processing of Archival Collections

One of the NGTS initiatives has been the systemwide deployment of Archivists’ Toolkit (AT) to support efficient processing, description and overall management of archival collections. 

Archivists’ Toolkit Is Largely Deployed

Power of Three (POT) group 3 was charged with developing an implementation plan. Over the winter, a lightning team conducted an assessment of usage and needs within special collections and archives in the UC libraries. To date, eight of the ten UC Libraries have deployed or are currently using the AT. Out of the eight, two (UC Merced and UC San Francisco) are using the California Digital Library’s (CDL) hosted service; the rest have implemented a locally-hosted instance. UC Santa Cruz is planning to implement AT. UC Berkeley Bancroft Library is currently utilizing local systems that are already tailored to collection management and processing workflows.

The team estimates that costs for hosting the Toolkit are relatively low. In addition to the hardware and material costs of hosting the open-source software and back-end SQL database, initial set-up and configuration require fairly minimal IT personnel time. The ongoing maintenance cost is marginal, but the team suggests that costs would incrementally rise to accommodate upgrades, migrations, and release packages.

Given that upfront costs for the locally-hosted instances have already been encumbered, the team does not believe there are significant cost savings for institutions to embark on migrating from existing locally-hosted instances to the CDL service. Nonetheless, the team was able to demonstrate that such a migration would be relatively simple. The CDL service, which currently supports 33 institutionsmanages software updates, maintenance, and data recovery processes.

Recommendations: Support Effective Use and Best Practices

In lieu of a deployment and implementation plan, the team identified a need for greater emphasis on the coordination of best practices and use of the application by campuses that have already implemented or plan to implement it in the near-term. Two recommendations to support more effective use of AT throughout the system are:

  1. Constitute a special interest all-campus library group of knowledgeable users from across the campuses (“UC AT User Group”), to facilitate sharing of expertise and support of the application, and
  2. Support in-person, multi-day, highly customized”train the trainer” workshops in the north and south targeted to UC-specific needs, to cultivate the formation of a cross-campus expert user community.

The UC AT User Group would serve as a locus for collaboration, where participants could share information and expertise, exchange solutions and techniques, and cultivate best practices. In addition, the group would be poised to conduct early testing of the forthcoming ArchivesSpace software. 

Training was cited as a key need, based on the team’s assessment work. While there are existing training options for AT users, a “train the trainer” approach offers a number of advantages to those options, where attendees could serve as local expert users and training resources for their local campus processing staff. 

Pending management approval, the team expects to form the UC AT User Group this summer and to conduct the training workshops in summer/fall of 2012.

Power of Three (POT) 1 begins to build UC Digital Collection infrastructure

As the Power of Three group begins its tasks, team member Lisa Schiff (CDL) discusses the objectives, challenges, and outlook for POT 1.

What do you see to be the goal or desired impact of POT 1’s work?

The primary goal of POT 1 is to develop the systemwide infrastructure to support digitized and born digital UC collections, specifically a Digital Asset Management System (DAMS) coupled with an end-user-friendly Discovery and Display (DD) layer. While this infrastructure is intended to be used by all campuses, a primary requirement is to ensure that the system meets the practical needs of campuses that don’t currently have a DAMS in place. This is an exciting effort to ensure that UC can more thoroughly attend to and make available the extensive set of valuable materials throughout the UC system. 


What are some of the challenges that POT 1 will be dealing with?

The POT’s biggest challenge is developing a good understanding of the baseline requirements for a DAMS and discovery/delivery system. By definition, the system is intended to support a diversity of materials that will exist in heterogeneous formats, have differing types and amounts of metadata, and come with varying levels of curatorial support. Additionally, identifying collections and associated owners presents its own challenges. We are currently in the early stages of tackling both of these issues.


What are the strengths of the team or some of the positive outcomes or aspects of team work thus far?

POT 1 is a highly efficient group that has been able to put structure and specificity around what could be an overwhelming charge. Team members share a desire to have concrete results from our efforts and to build something that will solve real problems for our campus colleagues. This inclination, along with a great degree of collegial respect and support, has established a positive tone for the group and has given us momentum as we move along with our work.


What are near-term next steps that people on the campuses will be hearing about or be involved in soon?

Some of our campus colleagues have already heard about the various POT 1 Lightning Teams (LTs) that are forming to tackle specific, narrowly scoped tasks. Two of the recently formed LTs will be actively contacting collection owners throughout the system, so there will be opportunities to provide information about the kind of support needed for those materials.

Shared Collection Services: 4 Success Factors

The NGTS Power of Three (POT) group 6 is charged with developing system-wide models for collection services operations. To do so, and as part of its initial phase of identifying and implementing pilot projects for such operations, the POT formed a Lightning Team to gather information on shared technical services arrangements involving multiple UC campuses as well as on noteworthy examples of similar arrangements outside of UC.

Xiaoli Li from UC Davis, who served as convener of the Lightning Team, James Soe Nyun (UCSD), and Manuel Urrizola (UC Riverside) identified a total of thirty-nine examples of such arrangements and then conducted phone interviews with key contacts from about half of them (listed below). They gathered information on the scope of the projects undertaken, project planning and operations, and overall evaluation—the project’s strengths and weaknesses, and whether or not it was deemed successful.

Based on their interviews, the Lightning Team concluded that success of a service depends on attention to these critical factors:

  • planning
  • communication
  • funding
  • management

Sufficient planning early on is often key to a successful shared service; lack of planning usually led to pitfalls and hurdles to overcome.

Timely communication kept providers and recipients of shared services on the same page and helped to clarify reporting mechanisms; lack of communication slowed down services or brought the service to a halt.

Stable funding is necessary to the viability of any shared service, especially ongoing services; many of the shared services lacked stable funding.

Ultimately, the successful management of a shared service depends on supportive library administrations—not just economic support, but moral, cultural, and political support as well.

These success factors are neither surprising nor groundbreaking: they are bread-and-butter to the success of any project or undertaking. For shared services in particular, however, where multiple boundaries (of time, place, culture, institution, among others) must be traversed, it is essential that all involved realize and actively commit attention to these four aspects.

**********

The Lightning Team conducted interviews for these shared services projects:

CATALOGING

UC CONSER Funnel Project (Status: Ongoing)

  • A UC-wide cooperative agreement that facilitates contributions to the national CONSER database for institutions that are not full CONSER members.

Music CD copy cataloging: UCSD for UCSB (Status: Ongoing)

  • Catalogers at San Diego copy catalog compact discs for Santa Barbara.

Thai language cataloging: UCR for UCB and UCSB (Status: Ongoing)

  • One cataloger at Riverside provides regular cataloging of Thai language materials for Santa Barbara and Berkeley.

German language monograph cataloging: UCB for UCSD (Status: On Hold)

  • One cataloger at Berkeley cataloged German monographs for San Diego.

Electronic California documents cataloging pilot: CAMCIG initiative (Status: On Hold)

  • Five campuses performed original cataloging for documents issued by 28 California agencies; cataloging records were harvested and distributed by the Shared Cataloging Program (SCP).

Elsevier/ACM pilot: UCSD and UCLA cataloging for the ten campuses (Status: Concluded)

  • A large planning effort in 2002-3 developed workflows to process single print items received in conjunction with CDL license agreements for Elsevier journals and various physical formats for ACM Print Archive monographs. UCLA did Elsevier and UCSD did ACM titles as part of the pilot to compare the cataloging experiences at different institutions and to compare the effectiveness of cataloging at a more distant institution that didn’t have the same integrated library system (ILS) as the Southern Regional Library Facility (SRLF).

CONSERVATION, PRESERVATION, DIGITIZATION

Management of UC shared print journal archives (Status: Ongoing)

  • UCLA maintains cataloging records, checks in, and processes issues of single copy of shared print journals acquired as a Tier 1 resource. Licensing arrangements include that this copy will be provided.

Management of Springer e-books shared print copies (Status: Ongoing)

  • Merced receives, processes and houses shelf-ready print versions of Tier 1 Springer e-books on behalf of UC. Springer finances shelf-ready physical processing through YBP while Merced covers incidental local processing costs. Processing mirrors local workflows and is totally successful.

SILDRN [San Diego and Imperial County Libraries Disaster Recovery Network] (Status: Ongoing)

  • In the area of disaster preparedness, UC San Diego is the lead institution in the 16 member organization. This group maintains a mutual aid agreement in case of disasters affecting library and museum collections, as well as commonly accessible and maintained caches of emergency response supplies.

Preservation microfilming service: UCB for UCD (paid) (Status: Ongoing)

  • In this ongoing arrangement Berkeley provides preservation microfilming services to Davis for various serials including Sacramento newspapers and journals focusing on viticulture and enology.

Preservation imaging service: SRLF for southern campuses (Status: Ongoing)

  • Begun as a microfilming service for the southern campuses, SRLF now has broadened its offerings to include digitization. Current workload focuses on newspapers and dissertations, and list of customers includes some non-UC institutions.

Digital preservation for the UCSD Libraries’ Digital Asset Management System (DAMS) content (Status: Ongoing)

  • The preservation of DAMS contents is realized through a partnership with the San Diego Super Computer Center’s Chronopolis Digital Preservation Repository. Chronopolis is a large, grant-funded project to explore distributed backup strategies for digital assets; resulting strategy was then used for library’s DAMS.

UCLA Conservation Lab repairs damaged items for UCSB (Status: Concluded)

Digitizing special collections: UCM for UCSF (Status: Concluded)

  • A fee-for-service project where Merced digitized approximately 200 cholera-related pamphlets for San Francisco.

California Audio Visual Preservation Project (Status: Concluded)

  • Nineteen institutions participated in this grant-funded project where Berkeley digitized and managed the digitization of audiovisual resources. A second year of the project—with entirely separate funding—is proceeding.

Shared Licensing: UCD negotiates license for several UC campuses (Status: Concluded)

  • All Tier 2s are licensed at the campus leading the Tier 2. Licensing expertise and willingness to undertake this activity varies from campus to campus. The willingness to negotiate on certain license issues varies from campus to campus.

Canadian Literature Project: UCLA and SRLF for the ten campuses (Status: Concluded)

  • Anglophone Canadian materials were acquired and cataloged centrally to avoid duplication and provide access to the materials.

NON-UC PROJECTS

2CUL (Status: Ongoing)

  • Initially supported by a grant ($385,000) from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the libraries at Cornell and Columbia started to collaborate in the following areas: 1) Technical services (acquisitions, cataloging, e-resource management); 2) Collection development/global resources collecting; 3) Technology infrastructure/digital preservation.

Orbis Cascade demand-driven acquisition e-book pilot (Status: Concluded)

  • A successful non-UC project that looked at patron-driven acquisitions over the entire consortium so that the titles could be shared with all members; the pilot is morphing into an ongoing workflow. Used EBL and YBP as vendors. Adjusted trigger to initiate a purchase (to fewer short-term loans). Experienced some issues related to OCLC updating their knowledge base only monthly.

Ohio State University, Columbus Law Library/Main Library Collaborative Cataloging Project (Status: Concluded)

  • The main library contracted out its cataloging services to the law library, a completely different administrative unit; process involved sending some catalogers on-site to the library being served (which was on the same campus).

Orbis Cascade Foreign Language Cataloging Pilot (Status: Concluded)

  • In this non-UC pilot project, six members of the Orbis Cascade Alliance explored centralizing the cataloging of books in Chinese and Japanese at University of Oregon and those in Arabic at University of Washington.

NGTS Update: March 2012

POT 1: Build the UC Digital Collection infrastructure

POT 1 has adjusted its task list and timeline to reflect feedback from the NGTS Management Team, and is preparing to charge lightning teams. The lightning teams to be created in the near term will focus on gathering requirements for a system-wide Digital Assets Management System (DAMS) with discovery and display options and developing an aggregation strategy that ensures existing UC digital assets will be available for discovery and display as part of the UC Library Digital Collection.

POT 2: Transform cataloging practices

POT 2.1 Lightning Team 1 has completed and submitted its report on the current shelfready environment to the POT. POT 2.2 is evaluating responses from the Heads of Technical Services (HOTS) and Cataloging and Metadata Common Interest Group (CAMCIG) regarding the acceptability of the BIBCO Standard Record (BSR) and has begun drafting the framework and guidelines for applying the BSR.

POT 3: Accelerate processing of archival and manuscript collections

POT 3 has completed several steps in drafting a UC-wide implementation plan for Archivists’ Toolkit, including identifying a proposed infrastructure, identifying support needed to facilitate migration to AT, and defining services available to users of the CDL-hosted service. POT 3 has also completed drafting a minimal record specification for collections and will be working with POT 2.2 to solicit feedback.

POT 4: Simplify the recharge process

A key milestone was achieved in this fiscal quarter as remaining campuses (UCD, UCSB) implemented the deposit system for CDL co-investments. POT 4’s Lightning Team 1 has completed its analysis of the survey results on implementation of the deposit system thus far. A key assumption to be tested by the POT was that using deposit accounts for CDL co-investments would minimize the number of transactions and result in overall efficiencies and cost savings. The assessment finds that while implementation of a deposit account system has reduced the number of recharges between CDL and each campus from numerous times per year to about four or five times per year, those savings have been offset by the work campus accounting units perform to track expenditures against deposit accounts. So while there have been efficiencies gained for the CDL acquisitions unit, the overall library workload has not been reduced, but changed.

The POT will be digesting and communicating the findings in further detail. Lightning Team 4.1 further recommends gathering input from campuses on the process after the end of the fiscal year.

POT 5: Maximize the effectiveness of Shared Cataloging

POT 5 Lightning Team 1 has begun drafting a report on Shared Cataloging Program (SCP) record distribution based on analysis of survey results. A second lightning team has compiled data that would ascertain the monetary and staffing costs of SCP record distribution and identified three use-case scenarios to guide their analysis of the costs of campuses obtaining records on their own.

POT 6: Develop system-wide Collections Services Operations

POT 6 Lightning Team 1A has completed its report of existing shared staffing agreements and projects. The POT is completing the compilation and analysis of survey results on campus staffing needs; needed tools; and existing backlogs.

POT 7: Transform collection development practices

POT 7 has completed and posted its “Current Inventory of UC Cooperative Collection Development Activities” on the Collection Development Committee (CDC) website to collect and provide as much information as possible on these activities for collection officers, bibliographers, and other library staff. (Note: the document is intended for internal staff information and may be viewed with the CDL password.)

NGTS Update: February 2012

There was a hiatus in January in reporting from the POTs, but each of the groups have been hard at work meeting their deliverables. In addition, SOPAG and the NGTS Management Team have discussed the need to measure the impact of the Next-Generation Technical Services initiatives. The Management Team has provided the POTS with suggested methodologies for assessing the efficiencies gained by implementing a new process, policy, or system.

POT 1: Build the UC Digital Collection infrastructure
POT 1 has mapped out an initial task list, which is currently being reviewed by the NGTS Management Team. The scope and timeline is ambitious and will draw together digital library expertise from across the UC libraries.

POT 2: Transform cataloging practices
One of the POT 2 lightning teams has been collecting information about shelf-ready vendors, profiles, agreements, and shelf ready success versus failure rates. The team is beginning to identify opportunities for shelf-ready expansion among the UC Libraries. Concurrently, another lightning team has been gathering and comparing campus processing specifications to identify commonalities and divergences. Both lightning teams are expected to submit a report on their findings to the POT this month.

POT 2 has drafted a minimal record standard at “quasi” OCLC Level 3 and will be evaluating the responses from Heads of Technical Services (HOTS) and Cataloging and Metadata Common Interest Group (CAMCIG) regarding the utility and acceptability of the standard, as wellas the BIBCO Standard Record for collaborative cataloging.

POT 3: Accelerate processing of archival and manuscript collections
POT 3 has completed a survey of campus needs in terms of Archivists’ Toolkit (AT) usage and training. The POT is now drafting a plan that includes training options tailored to meet the needs identified from the assessment, as well as proposed infrastructure and support for Archivists’ Toolkit implementation. POT 3 has completed the pilot migration of data from UCI’s hosted instance of AT to the CDL-hosted instance, and this will inform guidelines for future migrations.

The POT has also assessed the implementation of “More Product, Less Process” principles among UC libraries and is developing a manual of “best practices” or approaches to efficient processing. A lightning team is currently defining a minimal collection-level record specification for materials described using archival control.

POT 4: Simplify the recharge process
POT 4 has compiled the results of a survey on the deposit system for CDL recharge and has begun analysis. All campuses have now adopted the deposit system. The POT is preparing to charge a lightning team to gather auditing requirements from the campuses. 

POT 5: Maximize the effectiveness of Shared Cataloging
POT 5 has prepared a survey on Shared Cataloging Program (SCP) record distribution. The survey will be distributed to the staff of four campuses representative of different sizes and integrated library systems among the UC Libraries: UC Davis, UC Riverside, UCSD, and UCLA.

POT 5 has worked with CAMCIG to gather data on the costs and processes associated with SCP record distribution. CAMCIG is developing use case scenarios to analyze the effects of stopping SCP record distribution.
 
POT 6: Develop system-wide Collections Services Operations
POT 6 has conducted interviews on existing and recently-concluded arrangements that have involved shared collection services across multiple UC campuses. The POT has received responses from all campuses to a survey of existing and needed tools to support technical services operations. It has launched a survey to assess current backlogs, including those in special collections, and is preparing to launch a survey on current and projected campus staffing needs.
 
POT 7: Transform collection development practices
POT 7 has completed an Inventory of UC Cooperative Collection Development Activities and has made recommendations for ongoing documenting and sharing of these to CDC and CDL. The POT has received comments from the Management Team on a revised task list and charge and will be proceeding with setting up lightning teams to review the roles and responsibilities of UC bibliographers.

Next-Generation Technical Services Across the U.S.

The University of California is not alone in planning for and experimenting with new ways to collaborate and share expertise. Other libraries across the country are forming unique partnerships to transform both collections and technical services operations. Library consortia are beginning to experiment with initiatives that use collaboration in new ways.

Two examples are the Orbis Cascade Alliance, a consortium of 37 academic libraries in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, and 2CUL, a partnership between Columbia University Libraries and Cornell University Library.

The Orbis Cascade Alliance has made collaborative technical services a key component of their strategic agenda. So far, they have gone from broad investigation to more focused initiatives including issuing an RFP for a shared integrated library system (ILS); implementation of an e-book pilot; a pilot in cataloging Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean language monographs as a consortium; and a Fedora-based Institutional Repository pilot with the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries.

Columbia University Libraries (CUL) and Cornell University Library (CUL) are building a transformative partnership (2CUL) aimed at integrating resources, collections, services, and expertise between the two library systems. Projects include sharing one Slavic Studies Selector, sharing collection building in South Asian Studies, the cataloging of a backlog of Korean-language materials, and an approval-plan pilot for 2CUL with Hong Kong University Library and a vendor in Beijing.

The UC libraries are keeping a watch on these developments and others, as they may provide valuable insights and lessons learned for Next-Generation Technical Services. —Vicki Grahame

NGTS Update: December 2011

Power of Three (POT) 1 to build UC Digital Collection infrastructure
The NGTS Management Team held a kickoff conference call with Power of Three (POT) group 1, which has been charged to “Build the systemwide infrastructure to support digitized and born digital UC collections.” Given the scope and complexity of this charge, this particular “Power of Three” group has six members in addition to a project manager. The five priority actions encompassed in the charge are:

  1. Select and implement a systemwide Digital Asset Management System (DAMS) for those UC campus libraries that do not yet have one.
  2. Select and implement a discovery and display system capable of showcasing the richness of the UC Library Digital Collection.
  3. Aggregate existing UC Library digital assets, from all campuses, into a UC Library Digital Collection for purposes of discovery and display.
  4. Aggregate existing UC Library digital assets, from all campuses, into the Merritt Repository for purposes of long term preservation.
  5. Establish a UC Library Digital Collection Service designed to support and manage the resources and processes relative to the UC Library Digital Collection.

POT 1 will be analyzing and preparing an initial task list and timeline to be submitted to the NGTS Management Team for review in February.

POT 2: Transform cataloging practices
POT 2 has initiated discussion with Heads of Technical Services (HOTS) and Cataloging and Metadata Common Interest Group (CAMCIG) to assess adopting the BIBCO Standard Record (BSR) standard systemwide.

POT 3: Accelerate processing of archival and manuscript collections
POT 3 has developed and issued a survey on Archivists’ Toolkit usage and campus needs.

POT 4: Simplify the recharge process
POT 4 has developed and issued a survey for the Acquisitions Common Interest Group (ACIG) to comment on the deposit system for CDL recharge.

POT 5: Maximize effectiveness of Shared Cataloging
POT 5 is working with CAMCIG to analyze the costs of stopping SCP record distribution.
 
POT 6: Develop system-wide Collections Services Operations
POT 6 has identified all existing and recently-concluded arrangements that have involved shared collection services across multiple UC campuses and will be following up with a survey on those arrangements.
 
POT 7: Transform collection development practices
POT 7 has conferred with the CDL Collection Development office regarding coordination of activities and is currently revising its task list.

CDL, all campus libraries contribute to the NGTS Implementation
Thanks to the CDL for purchasing a Survey Monkey license for NGTS use. This will greatly facilitate the assessment activities of the various NGTS teams.

We extend our appreciation to all of the UC libraries staff who are contributing to the NGTS implementation initiative. There are over 70 people from the UC libraries directly involved on teams at present. To everyone, we offer our warmest wishes for the holiday season.

"Redefining the Academic Library"

Making the rounds is a report by the Education Advisory Board that sums up the challenges, pressures, and trends academic libraries face and presents some of the strategic shifts libraries are making in the “migration to digital information services.” Those strategic shifts, captured in broad brushstrokes as “sustainable collection management” and “smarter allocation of library staff time,” are also the drivers behind NGTS. If you haven’t viewed the report, it provides good context and points of comparison for how we are approaching next-generation services at the UC Libraries.