DP&A Meeting Notes 2020-2022

Owned by Dan Noonan
Last updated: Sept 26, 2022
16 min read

Link to this page: go.osu.edu/DPA-Meetings-2020-2022

February 22 - September 27, 2002

On hiatus

January 25, 2022

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Regrets: Miriam Centeno

Guests: Sue Beck and Amy McCrory

Agenda:

  • What's next for DP&A?
  • Does this group need to exists?
    • recommendations based on workflow & rubric - may need to be a new group that is implementation/operationalizing
      • group of stakeholders
      • governing principles
    • This is a workgroup; are we moving to something more standing in nature?
      • is the next step a task force then a standing committee? OR or charge a standing committee that then sanctions a task force?
        • ex offico membership??
    • We do need to pay attention to what is working
    • Need presentation to Management Committee
    • currently lack of cross-organizational vision/strategy for digital initiatives
      • prior groups, SDIWG, MIWG, DRWG

Other business:

  • None

Action Items:

  • Dan to meet with Jennifer and Karla on January 28 to discuss next steps.

December 14, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck, Tamar Chute, Jenny Robb & Gene Springs

Agenda:

  • Rubric Review:
    • Copyright:
      • not "risk assessment"but moratorium exmption right now
      • Copyright consultation will need to happen for any of the three "yes" type answers.
      • How does Copyright Services work get prioritized if not by this rubric process?
  • Next Year - did not get to
  • New Subgroup - did not get to

Other business:

  • None

Action Items:

  • Dan to reach out to set up new sub-group
  • Dan to crreate virtual discussion regarding next steps and DP&A makeup for year 3.

November 23, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese

Guests: none

Regrets: Sue Beck, Courtney  Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Beth Snapp & Maureen Walsh

Agenda:

  • Meeting decimated by holiday vacations
  • Project Updates:
    • Initial Recommendations Report
    • Workflow analysis status
      • THOSC - Patron Digitization
      • Digital Preservation -Still drafting
    • Rubric Revisions - coming in December
    • Photograph Scanning Sub-group
  • December Meeting - Will try to reschedu.e to included Prioritization sub-group, if not will cancel and pick up in January
  • Strategic Directions for 2022 DID NOT GET TO THIS PART OF THE AGENDA
    • DP&A membership
      • What is the work and who should be there?
      • Should this be dictated by the Initial Recommendations Report

Other business:

  • TBD

Action Items:

  • Dan reschedule December Meeting
  • Dan to reach out to set up new sub-group

October 26, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck & Amy McCrory

Agenda:

  • Project Updates:
    • Initial Recommendations Report
    • Digital Preservation Ethos
    • Workflow analysis status
      • Area studies - no real need; would be similar to THOSC
      • Digital Preservation - Dan has started the SIPOC; it will be "drafty" at best as it is a very ad hoc process at  this point in time.
      • THOSC born digital for the time being can rely on similar workflows as identified by ARV, BICLM and Digital Preservation
    • Rubric Table-top Exercise v2
      • unstructured project descriptions made it difficult to rate in a reliable way; we really need a template
      • having proposer in the room would be valuable
      • Have discussion before scoring
      • Who has the info to properly assess
      • Elements in the rubric make sense
      • Some info may come from others than the proposer
      • It is valuable and useful and a barrier, but in a good gatekeeping way.
      • Having the discussion and understanding the resources is valuable
      • Similar to candidate vetting model (first cut) and is useful
      • Group rank vs individual rank
  • Photograph Scanning Sub-group Proposal/Recommendations (Miriam & Amy)
    • NC: If we are scanning photos and worried about future additional scanning and light exposure what do we need to consider? As well as how to handle photographic formats?
    • MC: This works well w/P&D annual goals. Selection considerations beyond handling and care go itnto these considerations.
      • NEDCC Leaflet (NEED LINK)
      • CLIR Selecting materials based on intellectual content report (NEED Link)
      • Additional decision trees (Canadian Council) and prioritization factors (other univs) (NEED Links)
      • Former work at UIUC for training students (NEED Link)
    • AM: Patron requests may be complicated, especially if the originals are fragile; how can the local curatorial staff make those decisions in the moment
      • Previously, Brittle Books project had a printed checklist to consider that evolved to an Access DB to track decision-making. It is no longer used, but also doesn't have a replacement
      • We do have existing scanning technical guidelines, and AM has either trained or created documentation; but implementation has been uneven, w/o an over-arching framework
      • Settings can be designed for particular projects, as well as content/material types; stations set up and personnel trained
      • In terms of light sensitive materials, we should also digitize only once.
      • We need to "build" a "tool" regarding the decision of who digitizes and with what equipment.
      • Workgroup:
        • Amy McCrory, Lisa Iacobellis, Check w/Tamar & Jenny
        • Keep it focused on photopgraphic materials, currently; could be broaden out in the future
  • Strategic Directions for 2022 DID NOT GET TO THIS PART OF THE AGENDA
    • DP&A membership
    • Potential Projects

Other business:

  • n/a

Action Items:

  • Dan to reach out to set up new sub-group

October 7, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Regrets: Nena Couch

Guests: Sue Beck

Agenda:

  • Rescheduled from September 28
  • Action Items Review:
    • Digital Preservation Ethos (Dan)
      • Complete
      • Messaging to come from Jennifer & Karla soon
    • Final draft Conclusions and final revisions of Preliminary Recommendations (Dan)
      • Final draft shared on 2021.10.06
      • Comments to Dan no later than 2021.10.13
    • Photograph Scanning Sub-group Proposal (Dan & Miriam)
      • Potential issues for this group to address:
        • Do we need a decision tree?
        • What appropriate standards?
        • Collection usage implications
        • Downstream impact
        • © implications
        • Why do we need it?
          • Reproduction quality?
          • Information only?
        • Condition of material?
        • Potential for reuse?
      • First steps:
        • Amy McCrory will draft a contextualized decision tree/matrix in consultation with Miriam for discussion at DP&A 2021.10.26 meeting
  • "Born Digital" Preservation Repository
  • Digital Content Policy/Governance Sub-group update
  • Workgroup makeup
  • Potential new sub-groups
    • Photograph Scanning (see above)
    • VRR Documentation
      • may be beneficial for standardized dicscussion around how we share outside of our repos
      • potential members:
        • Spec Collections
        • Scholarly Sharing/Copyright
        • Digital Initiatives
        • Metadata Initiatives
        • Archival Description and Access
        • Preservation & Digitization
    • Digital Projects Inventory
      • Dan and Anna K are working on files and projects inventory
      • Miriam is working on projects and capacity inventory
      • Do we need a workgroup?

Other business:

  • n/a

Action Items:

  • n/a

August 24, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Agenda:

  • MS Teams/OneDrive Migration
  • September Meeting - needs to be rescheduled
  • Action Item Review:
    •  Dan to forward documentation to Jennifer and Karla
    • Dan to review and propose rework of "Selection and Acquisition" section of Ethos to Share w/DP&A and sponsors
  • Draft preliminary recommendations discussion (Dan & Sue)
  • Kaizen event proposal (Sue)

Other business:

  • n/a

Action Items:

  • Dan to put finishing touches on Digital Preservation Ethos
  • Dan to draft Conclusions and final revisions of Preliminary Recommendations
  • Holdover:
    • Dan to reach out to Miriam about Photograph Scanning Sub-group Proposal

July 27, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck, Karla Strieb, Jennifer Vinopal

Regrets: Terry Reese

Agenda:

  • Status - Dan & Sue
  • Draft preliminary recommendations discussion
  • Digital Preservation Ethos Framework - DRAFT
    • Concern expressed regarding Selection & Acquisition Section

Other business:

  • n/a

Action Items:

  • Holdover:
    • Dan to reach out to Miriam about Photograph Scanning Sub-group Proposal
  • Dan to forward documentation to Jennifer and Karla
  • Dan to review and propose rework of "Selection and Acquisition" section of Ethos to Share w/DP&A and sponsors

June 22, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck, Tamar Chute, Jenny Robb & Gene Springs

Regrets: Miriam Centeno & Terry Reese

Agenda:

  • Status - Dan
  • Photograph Scanning Sub-group Proposal - Nena

    • When should we scan photographs at preservation level or not? Among the issues are degradation on repeated exposure to light, various photographic processes/media/techniques, and space for preservation size images, so a range of inputs would be good. Is it just about photographs or the potential fragility of any scannable item?

    • Consensus that we should form a tactical sub-group, but will wait until Miriam is back to consider actual charge and makeup of the group (likely to include Amy M. and Lisa I.).
  • Draft Recommendations - Dan
    • Had substantive discussion with changes and suggestions being added to the document online.

Other business:

  • None

Action Items:

  • Dan to reach out to Miriam about sub-group
  • Dan will revise DRAFT Recommendations to share with the rest of the group.

June 2, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Regrets: Johanna Meetz & Terry Reese

Agenda:

  • Meeting rescheduled from May 24, 2021
  • Update on Workflow visualization - Dan & Sue
    • Status
    • Draft Recommendations
    • Presentations:
      • Best Practices Exchange May 18, 2021 - Presented
      • Poster proposals submitted: iPres 2021
      • Session proposals submitted: EDUCAUSE, DigiPres & DLF Forum
  • Update University Libraries Digital Content Policy & Governance - Dan
  • DP Ethos Framework - Postponed to the upcoming June or July Meeting

Other business:

  • n/a

Action Items:

  • Dan to re-draft recommendations in the document created by Morag and share with the DP&A for common editing.

April 29, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Regrets: Terry Reese

Agenda:

  • Update on Workflow visualization - Dan & Sue
    • ALX

      • Is there a way to make a digitization request from, say, Special Collections (just an example) such as a form? What is that workflow currently?

      • If images are made for affordable access, should they be kept for future use and how would they be secured if under copyright?

      • Need to develop rubric around lifecycle management
      • Creating OER is different from course reserves management
      • Some of this is being addressed in the Digital Scholarship Additional Support group
      • Information for submitting a Digitization Project Proposal - Information for submitting a Digitization Project Proposal
    •  Presentations:
      • Best Practices Exchange May 18, 2021 - Accepted
      • Poster proposals submitted: iPres 2021
      • Potential proposals to be submitted:
        • Due May 10 - EDUCAUSE
        • Due May 17 - DigiPres & DLF Forum
  • Update University Libraries Digital Content Policy & Governance - Dan
    • Definition of a "Project"
      • When does a project start?
      • Initial review/discovery phase/pre-project feasibility
    • Prioritization Factors
      • Factors can be used in both pre-project and project phase
      • Governance group would want to decide on priorities of "projects" not "pre-projects"

Other business:

  • Is it time to deliver a first set of iterative recommendations?

Action Items:

  • Dan & Sue draft a first set of recommendations

March 23, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck, Karla Strieb and Jennifer Vinopal

Regrets: Terry Reese

Agenda:

Other business: n/a

Action Items: Invite KS & JV to May meeting - Dan

February 23, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Regrets: Terry Reese

Agenda:

  • Action Items updates:

    • Digitization prioritization documentation - Miriam
  • Update on Digital Preservation Ethos Framework - Dan
    • Need to double check tone/style for consistency
  • Update University Libraries Digital Content Policy & Governance - Dan
    • a key concern will be balancing needs vs. resources
  • Update on Workflow visualization - Dan & Sue
    • Concern expressed about how much details required of brainwriting
      • More than SIPOC less than a procedural manual
  • March meeting visitors - Dan

Other business: n/a

Action Items: n/a

January 26, 2021

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Agenda:

  • Review of Digital Preservation Ethos Framework
    • Generally well received
    • Need to specify When and by whom annual review will be conducted
    • Need to address Ohio States' and University Libraries' commitment to accessibility
    • Tweak "Challenges" section; seems less about actual challenges and more about per-requisites
    • Make changes and share w/DP&A and Jennifer V.

  • Digital Content Policy/Governance Update go.osu.edu/DPA-Digital-Content-Policy

  • Workflow Analysis Update
    • Showed new status tracking pages
    • Process getting back on track

Action Items Review:

  • BTAA follow-up regarding checklists for digitization prioritization
    • Miriam to check with Preservation Group
      • In general literature is at least 10 years old and as old 30 years
      • LC had point system - Miriam
        • Quantify actual conservator bench time; however, no documentation on decision-making
      • Miriam will also follow-up with NYPL
        • Robust program internal and outsourced; but also no
      • Courtney to follow-up with Schaumberg Institute - they directed up to NYPL
      • Nena: UCLA - prioritization template link broken; Nena will send contact info to Miriam along with contact at NYPL
    • Dan to check with Digital Preservation Group's documentation – Cannot find any

Other business: n/a

Action Items:

  • Miriam to continue to seek out digitization prioritization documentation

December 22, 2020

Agenda CANCELLED

November 24, 2020

Attendance: Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: None

Agenda

  • Digital Content Policy/Governance Update

  • Workflow Analysis Update

Action Items Review:

  • BTAA follow-up regarding checklists for digitization prioritization
    • Miriam to check with Preservation Group
      • One response that talks to dividing time between general collections and special collections
      • LC had point system - Miriam could follow-up
      • Miriam will also follow-up with NYPL
      • Courtney to follow-up with Schaumberg Institute
    • Dan to check with Digital Preservation Group's documentation
  • Create and launch digital content policy sub-group - Dan

Other business: n/a

Action Items: See Review above for additional Action Items

October 27, 2020

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Regrets: Johanna Meetz & Terry Reese

Guests: Sue Beck,

Agenda

Update of SIPOC/RACI/Brainwriting sessions:

  • Dan - Making progress again and close to completing first set of Brainwriting visualizations. Working on circling back to completed SIPOCs and RACI reviews, as well as starting sessions with new groups/workflows. For more details see: go.osu.edu/DPA-Workflow-Analysis-Status.

Action Items Review

  • BTAA follow-up regarding checklists for digitization prioritization
    • Miriam - Preservation Group
    • Dan - Digital Preservation Group: reviewed email inquiries to BTAA and NDSA on 2020.06.12 re: Workflow capacity and "temporary" storage; only one response, and the sub-question "What prioritization metrics do you use?" was answered with, "Not sure what you mean here, prioritization of what?"
  • Create Selection Criteria Subgroup - defer this to discussion below

Next Steps Priorities Discussion and Action Plan

  • Gaps identified and categorized based upon issues raised during DP&A monthly meetings, and identified during the workflow analysis exercises. These were placed in the "Parking Lot": 
    1. Lack of digital content policy:
      1. Clarify the selection criteria for long-term preservation and stewardship versus transactional work that need to be discarded
      2. Is it in alignment with existing collection strategies?
      3. Is it in alignment with organizational goals/strategies?
      4. Investigate peer institution decision-making criteria?
    2. Lack of overall priority management:
      1. What drives the priority decisions?
      2. Who decides on the priority? (A committee once had the authority)
      3. What is an appropriate governance model?
    3. Lack of process controls (essential for a sustainable system)
      1. Develop rubric for life-cycle preservation decision-making
      2. Develop SOP for patron requests
    4. Lack of consolidated project documentation and designated repository for it
    5. Loss of transfer of knowledge resulting from staff turnover. 
  • Discussion prompts:
    • Identify what are our deepest priorities to set up task groups around; i.e. what are the one or two things over winter to get action going on?
    • Approach this activity in a mode of incremental or iterative change. It doesn’t have to be perfect out-of-the-box.
    • Who should be invited to the task group(s)?
    • What would a timeline for a first iteration look like?
    • What can be an exemplar?
  • Key Discussion points:
    • Gaps #3, 4 & 5 could be combined as having process controls, that are documented, and therefore are available for knowledge transfer.
    • The gap analysis actually seems to be a good outline of a framework. While there may be a bit of "chicken and egg" aspect to it, it may lend itself to working relatively linearly from top to bottom.
    • With the SIPOC exercise happening at such a high and modelized level, actual technological gaps may not have yet been identified.
    • A lot of what we want to be able to do are resource dependent, human and technological. We have to be careful in articulating what we can and cannot do, based upon our resources.
    • Outside of traditional project-based digitization and patron requests, what other public services models could we consider to deploy?
    • What resources exist at Ohio State that are not in the Libraries that can be leveraged or referenced?
    • Need to identify the criteria elements (e.g. lifecycle categories, collection polices/strategies, ties to organizational strategies/policies, critical decision points/considerations, etc.)
  • Next Steps:
    • Form Digital Content Policy Workgroup:
      • Members:
        • Morag Boyd
        • Miriam Centeno
        • Nena Couch
        • Dan Noonan
        • Gene Springs
      • Charge:
        • Address Items 1a through 1d at a minimum, keeping track of when the investigation "spills into" (or intersects) with Issues 2 through 5.
        • Target Completion: January 31, 2021
    • Form a Priority Management Workgroup:
      • Members:
        • TBD
      • Charge:
        • Work will be dependent upon the initial findings of the Digital Content Policy Workgroup
        • Target Completion: March 31, 2021

Other business: None

Action Items:

  • BTAA follow-up regarding checklists for digitization prioritization
    • Miriam to check with Preservation Group
    • Dan to check with Digital Preservation Group's documentation
  • Create and launch digital content policy sub-group - Dan

September 22, 2020

Attendance: Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Regrets: Terry Reese

Agenda

Action Items Review

  • Dan: Do we need SIPOC for Access Services re: Google Books?
    • Yes, while the project is on COVID-hold, we should at least document it.

Continue discussion of prioritization process: The following was posed as homework questions for the group to consider. Feedback is captured in a document in the DP&A's BuckeyeBox folder.

  • How does our historical documentation (http://go.osu.edu/DigiPresEthos-task1) inform this discussion? Did any of the previous working groups develop any governance policies, recommendations, etc. that we can use, tweak, or adjust, based on what we have learned during this process?
  • It was agreed that our process should not be monolithic; there are different pathways, uses and rationales. Therefore, the UL should be asking:
    • What are our preservation intents?
    • What are our lifecycle management considerations?
    • What are our risk management considerations?
    • What are our use cases?
    • What are the considerations for the rubric/model/decision tree?

Update of SIPOC/RACI/Brainwriting sessions:

  • Dan demoed/explained new Brainwriting tool and updated Workflow Analysis status

Other business:

Action Items:

  • BTAA follow-up regarding checklists for digitization prioritization
    • Miriam - Preservation Group
    • Dan - Digital Preservation Group
  • Create Selection Criteria Subgroup

August 25, 2020

Attendance: Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Regrets: Terry Reese

Agenda

Action Items Review

  • Dan: Do we need SIPOC for Access Services re: Google Books?
  • Dan/Sue: Recap JamBoard discussion

Continue discussion of prioritization process:

  • Recap of JamBoard session
  • UL Communications plans
  • Additional Insights:
    • An overarching concern expressed here and in other conversations is how does the UL define “digital projects”?
    • The University Libraries (UL) has a lack of overall priority management:
      • Who decides on the priority?
      • What drives the priority decisions?
    • The UL lacks digital content policy to clarify the selection criteria for long-term preservation and stewardship versus transactional work that can be discarded; preservation and long-term stewardship of digitized content is assumed, as opposed to being assessed. UL should be looking to balance:
      • retaining all digitized content to ease access (research must go on while everyone works remote) and
      • discarding one-off content that does not support a priority or strategic plan

Update of SIPOC/RACI/Brainwriting sessions:

  • First brainwriting session with ARV/BPA/OCA; partially recorded
  • Will begin to schedule additional sessions
  • Will be scheduling additional SIPOCs

Other business:

  • Possible move to Teams

Action Items:

  • Dan: Do we need SIPOC for Access Services re: Google Books?

July 28, 2020

Attendance: Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck, Sarah Collier, Amy McCrory

Agenda

Action Items Review

  • Dan: Do we need SIPOC for Access Services re: Google Books - not completed

Initiate discussion of prioritization

  • How do we know what digital project are currently being worked on?
  • How do we find out about potential digital projects?
  • How do we prioritize digital projects?
  • How do we prioritize digital ingest?
  • How do we communicate to the organization these priorities & processes?
  • Done via JamBoard

Update of SIPOC/RACI/Brainwriting sessions:

Other business: None

Action Items:

  • Dan: Do we need SIPOC for Access Services re: Google Books?
  • Dan/Sue: Recap JamBoard discussion

June 23, 2020

Attendance: Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Courtney Hunt, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck, Karla Streib & Jenifer Vinopal

Agenda

Welcome of guests & new member

Action Items Review

  • Dan redo Meeting invite
  • Dan update unit/dept name
  • Dan update RACI template

Update of SIPOC/RACI sessions

  • Recapped the overall process for guests and new member
  • Provided update of status
  • Discussed some early impressions, "Ah Ha" moments, gaps
  • Q&A from Jennifer and Karla

Brainwriting tool demo

  • Google Jamboard
  • Sue demonstrated how we will use it

Initiate discussion of prioritization

  • Did not get to; next meeting

Other business:

Action Items:

  • Do we need SIPOC for Access Services re: Google Books

May 26, 2020

Attendance: Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp and Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Agenda

Action Items Review

  • RACI Template – Dan
  • “Parking Lot” - Dan on Wiki
  • Wiki – Dan
  • Clean up dept/unit titles – Dan

Review of Archives SIPOC sessions

  • Overall digitization workflow
  • Eventually for legacy & born digital

RACI

  • Exercise with Preservation & Digitization
  • Expand the RACI v2 to consider Internal/External roles
  • Completed RACI v2 for Preservation & Digitization's "Classic Digitization"

Potential Brainwriting tools review

Other business: None

Action Items:

  • Dan redo Meeting invite
  • Dan update unit/dept names
  • Dan update RACI template

April 28, 2020

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Beth Snapp, Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Regrets: Terry Reese

Agenda

Action Items Review:

  • SIPOC Template: Dan
    • Box folders
  • SIPOC Pilot w/DP&A: Dan & Sue
  • SIPOC video(s): Sue

Review of Digitization SIPOC sessions

  • Helpful to have facilitators to keep on track and working through terminology
  • The very high level SIPOC led to a more granular one
  • Other SIPOCs need input from folks from other groups
  • Potential need for prioritization around workflows to that may inform proposal process; make sure Miriam is informed about other workflows that would inform this workflow
  • Associate Deans’ priorities mapping end-to-end workflow
  • Brainwriting can begin before all SIPOCs done

RACI

  • Should be role based
  • May be more granular than the SIPOC, but the SIPOC process steps are the starting point
  • Dan needs to reconfigure the RACI part of the template.

Need space for articulating gaps and other insights as process progresses (wiki)

Next Steps:

  • Special Collections Forum
  • Recorded Zoom
    • SIPOC, RACI, & Brainwriting Intro
    • SIPOC sessions
  • Scheduling SIPOCs
  • Feedback form

Request for Wiki space

Other business: None

Action Items

  • RACI Template – Dan
  • “Parking Lot” - Dan on Wiki
  • Wiki – Dan
  • Clean up dept/unit titles – Dan

March 24, 2020

Attendance: Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp, Maureen Walsh

Guests: Sue Beck

Agenda

Membership Review

Mapping end-to-end the current state of the born digital, digitization, digital preservation and access workflws.

  • Pre-work: Review “DPA-Presentation-20200317.pptx” and “bpe2019-s23a-slides-sorenson.pdf.”
    • DPA-Presentation-20200317.pptx, developed by Sue Beck, will be our jumping off point for discussion.
    • bpe2019-s23a-slides-sorenson.pdf is documentation of a similar project the State Library of North Carolina conducted.
  • IDing Key Stakeholders and the RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) Model
    • Add: Accessibility 2 coordinators and workgroup – working on toolkit
    • AD&S IT/informed
    • General collections eg MUS
    • Bus Offc vendors/purchases
    • Collections Strategist – books digitization efforts google/hathi – ohio-centric
    • Access services (consulting)
  • SIPOC (Supplier-Inputs-Process-Outputs-Customer) Diagram
    • How do we calibrate appropriate level of detail? Sue & Dan will dev rules of engagement
    • Dan & Sue to facilitate small group SIPOCs
  • Brainwriting
  • Assignments

Other business: None

Action Items:

  • SIPOC Template: Dan
  • SIPOC Pilot w/DP&A: Dan & Sue
  • SIPOC video: Sue

February 25, 2020

Attendance: Leigh Bonds, Morag Boyd, Miriam Centeno, Nena Couch, Johanna Meetz, Dan Noonan, Terry Reese, Beth Snapp, Maureen Walsh

Agenda

Background: Dan

Purpose: Dan

Proposed Purpose: The Digital Preservation & Access Workgroup (DP&A) works to coordinate the long-term curation of digital collections at The Ohio State University Libraries (University Libraries).  The DP&A’s purpose is to guide the University Libraries' policies, strategies and tactics for managing, preserving and providing access to its digital collections. It brings together key individuals to ensure that information sharing and best practices are reflected throughout the organization. 

Prioritized Task from ADs:

“We’d like this group to first work on mapping end-to-end the current state of the digital preservation workflow. Miriam has been working with Sue Beck on this and I don’t know how far they’ve gotten.”

Potential Tasks:

  • Define, refine, and clarify roles and responsibilities around preservation and curation of digital collections
  • Standardize accessioning and processing of born digital collections
  • Standardize the digitization processing for at risk collections
  • Standardize the digitization prioritization and processing for providing online access to collections
  • Ensure consistent implementation of metadata profiles
  • Implement best practices for digital collection lifecycle management
  • Establish an open access clearinghouse/portal for University Libraries’ policies, guidelines and best practices for digital preservation and access
  • Sponsoring internal education sessions about or in support of University Libraries’ policies, guidelines and best practices for digital preservation and access
  • Continually evaluate University Libraries’ current capabilities, and make recommendations with input from all stakeholders around the evolution of services

General Discussion:

  • Sue B. has studied Lean and getting certified. Need to optimize overall workflows, not just departmental. We could use her as a consultant to look at value-stream for this.
  • Currently, P&D is on hold looking at other PM tools.
  • Levels of Digital Preservation and what is appropriate
  • Cloud storage and how does that work?
  • Does all digital content go to DC or KB? How do we lifecycle manage especially, non-permanent content.
  • Where does this overlap w/Digital Scholarship? Helping us identifying infrastructure needs. The two will interact, we will likely implement the framework.
  • How are we prioritizing content ingest?

Action Items:

  • Facilitated group sessions to begin to strategize
  • Have people map what they think the digital preservation workflows are and where they interact with them:
    • Distinctive Collections
      • THO
      • Archives
      • Billy Ireland
      • Area Studies
    • Music
    • Digitization
    • IT
      • AD&S
      • DI
      • DP
    • Metadata Initiatives
    • AD&A
    • ILL
    • Depository
    • Publishing
    • Preservation
    • Bibliographic Initiatives
    • Research Services

Key Resources:

The Ohio State University

If you have a disability and experience difficulty accessing this content, please contact LIB-a11y@osu.edu.