Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management
-
Upload
mainesharedcollections -
Category
Education
-
view
224 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management
![Page 1: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management
Managing the Collective Collection
Maine Shared Collections Strategy Advisory Board, 23 May 2013
Constance Malpas
Program OfficerOCLC Research
@ConstanceM
![Page 2: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Managing the Collective Collection
OCLC Research portfolio• North American library storage capacity (2007) – Lizanne Payne
• ~70M volumes in storage; further capital investment unlikely
• Preservation risk assessment – a model for (re)selection (2008)• distribution of aggregate resource; institutional motivations to preserve
• Policy requirements shared print repositories (2009)• critical need: disclosure of print preservation commitments
• Leveraging infrastructure: MARC21 583 Action Note (2009)• copy-level retention, condition statements are required
• Cloud-sourcing research collections (2010)• mass digitization of monographs accelerates shift to shared print
• Mega-regions and print management (2011)• framework for regional print management
![Page 3: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
• Pilot project (2007-2008) measured market readiness for cooperative collection analysis service, comparing locally held collections to large-scale storage collections
• Inspired by North American Storage Trust (Gherman)
• High level of library interest; limited OCLC capacity; solution would have required significant additional investment. Pilot concluded with a no-go decision.
• Critical question: How to disclose preservation capacity, including shared print archives, at scale?
Cooperative Collections Management Trust
![Page 4: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
• Debra McKern (LC) proposed use for print archiving during CCMT pilot
• Defined for use in both bibliographic and local holdings record
• Successfully deployed for cooperative microfilming projects in US, web archiving in Australia, DLF/OCLC Registry of Digital Masters
• Existing PDA thesaurus includes terms appropriate for print archiving actions (retained, condition reviewed, etc.)
• OCLC Research leveraged community interest in editing new guidelines, 2009.
MARC 583 Preservation Action Note
![Page 5: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
• Objective: Test feasibility of registering item-level print archiving commitments in WorldCat using existing bibliographic infrastructure
• Timeline: April 2011 – April 2012
• Participants: Center for Research Libraries, Indiana University, Stanford University, UCLA, UC Riverside, UC San Diego, University of Minnesota, University of Oregon [strong WEST representation]
• OCLC: K. Harnish, M. Hopkins, C. Malpas, D. Massie
Print Archives Disclosure Pilot
![Page 6: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Process (April 2011– March 2012)
• Metadata working group (Payne)• Vetted 583 guidelines, established recommended
approach to implementation in Local Holdings Record
• Preservation working group (Malpas, Stambaugh)
• Established condition and comprehensiveness standards and terms
• Resource-sharing working group (Massie)
• Developed and tested inter-lending scenarios
![Page 7: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
• Metadata guidelines and term list
• http://www.oclc.org/services/projects/shared-print-management/metadata-guidelines.en.html
• Report summarizing impacts on local workflows, implications for OCLC
• Confirmed feasibility based on current WorldCat infrastructure
• Limitations of ‘two symbol’ approach; overhead associated with substitutive LHR; satellite ILLiad license
• Test-bed of print archiving statements in WorldCat
• 1200 titles representing tens of thousands of library holdings
Outcomes – April 2012
![Page 8: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Pragmatism v. perfectionism – a strategic choice
OCLC Print Archives Disclosure Pilot Final Report (April 2012)
![Page 9: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Situating Shared Print in OCLC Service Array
Platform strategy ‘externalizes’ application development and specialized service provision
Extending cooperative capacity, expanding shared infrastructure
![Page 10: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
• Shared Print Liaison: Bill Carney
• Assists print archiving institutions and groups with set up (new symbol, dataloads)
• Coordinates with OCLC product and portfolio managers
• Represents OCLC at Shared Print gatherings (PAN etc.)
• Situated within Business Development unit (Nilges)
• Ongoing analysis of market research, new service opportunities
• Current focus: alignment of product roadmaps with Shared Print requirements
• Indexing of 583 Local Holdings fields
• Testing discovery of Shared Print items/collections in OCLC Discovery services (WorldCat Local, WorldCat.org)
OCLC Shared Print Management Program
![Page 11: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Registering Shared Print Collections
Implementing the 583 LHR Guidelines
![Page 12: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
• New Shared Print symbol, typically “SP” suffix on existing symbol (though forms vary), e.g. CUSSP
• Libraries contribute Local Holdings data for items committed to Shared Print collections using new symbol, according to guidelines
• Libraries remove any local holdings for those items on former symbol
Basic requirements
![Page 13: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Minimally:
single 583 ‡ a Action=”committed to retain” with ‡3 Materials specified, ‡c Time/Date of Action, ‡d Action interval, ‡f Authorization [program name], and ‡5 Institution
Optionally, if title was validated for completeness:
second 583 note summarizing action and reporting gaps. Include ‡ a Action=”completeness reviewed” with appropriate ‡l Status terms to report evidence of missing units, binding anomalies or reprints; use the ‡ z Public note to specify gaps and missing materials.
If the title was validated for condition:
third 583 to summarize the action and record the conditions found. Include ‡ a Action=”condition reviewed” with one ‡l Status and one ‡ z Public note for each condition found, reporting the condition and indicating the volumes to which it applies.
Implementation 1, 2, 3
![Page 14: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Examples: simple retention commitment and validated holdings
![Page 15: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
• A secondary ‘print archive’ symbol?
• Institution symbols are a critical part of current resource-sharing and collection analysis infrastructure
• Limited support for item-level indexing, retrieval, reporting in shared bibliographic systems
• Implementation at local holdings level?
• Experience with Registry of Digital Masters has shown that recording copy-level preservation data at master record /bibliographic level is problematic
• Growing need for item-level data (copyright status, preservation condition, ‘duplicate’ scans) … viz. supra
But … why do we need:
![Page 16: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
As of May 2013:
• 17 symbols have contributed LHR print archiving data for more than 5000 titles
• 49 Shared Print symbols defined in WorldCat, i.e., more registration activity in the pipeline
• We hope to grow this to several hundred symbols and tens of thousands of titles in the coming year
• MSCS is a vital part of shared data infrastructure
Current Status
![Page 17: Managing the Collective Collection: Cooperative Infrastructure for Shared Print Management](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062419/5579b0f9d8b42ac1148b5168/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
The world’s libraries. Connected.
Huzzah!
Should action interval be based on 5 year review cycle or intended 15 year commitment? [Discuss]