Martha Hruska LAUC Spring Assembly May 13, 2009 Next Generation Technical Services Rethinking Library Technical Services for the University of California

Next Gen Tech Services (NGTS) Context Bibliographic Services Task Force Report 2005: next steps UC Related Initiatives over the last 4 years Catalysts for Change Next Gen Tech Services Charge Next Gen Tech Services Scope Next Gen Tech Services Process Possible Outcomes

BSTF Report 2005 Within Library workflows and systems too much effort is going into maintaining and integrating a fragmented infrastructure. We need to look seriously at opportunities to centralize and/or better coordinate services and data, while maintaining appropriate local control, as a way of reducing effort and complexity and of redirecting resources to focus on improving the user experience. Adopting New Cataloging Practices Supporting Continuous Improvement

BSTF Report: Next Steps Rearchitect cataloging workflow Select the appropriate metadata scheme Manually enrich metadata in important areas Automate Metadata Creation Supporting Continuous Improvement

UC Initiatives over the last 4 years+ CAMCIG Reports: California Electronic Documents Cataloging Pilot Project Brainstorming Draft for CAMCIG Metadata Survey Results Single-Separate Record Report to HOTS Using OCLC As A Single Cataloging Tool HOTS UC CONSER Funnel CDL/HOTS agreement to fund temporary SCP Chinese cataloger SCP Scope Statement Review HOTS Cataloging Expertise Spreadsheet Shared Print Projects CDL / CDC Journals (Licensed journals, JSTOR, IEEE) Canadiana CDC Prospective Shared Print Monographs Task Force

Catalysts for Change: Beyond Cataloging and Bibliographic Services LC Final Report of the Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control Next-Generation Melvyl Requires harmonization of UC cataloging policies and process revisions for effective implementation Requires cooperative approaches to acquisitions practices Requires new ways of working with vendors (book and subscription agents) Mass Digitization Hathi Trust Web Archiving Expose Hidden Collections Manage the life –cycle of born-digital and other emerging formats UC-wide and campus financial pressures

Next Gen Tech Services Executive Team: charged by the University Librarians to guide the Steering Team, to make resource allocation and other higher level decisions, to provide progress reports to the University Librarians, and to develop needed policy for approval by the University Librarians. Members: Bruce Miller, Chair (University Librarian, UC Merced) Laine Farley (Executive Director, CDL) Brian Schottlaender (University Librarian, UCSD) Ginny Steel (University Librarian, UCSC) Martha Hruska (UCSD, chair of Steering Team) Steering Team: charged to develop a framework for the next three to five years for Next Generation Technical Services for the UC Libraries. The Steering Team will: address the broad transformative changes that will move technical services to the network level and that will reap the benefits of collaborative technical services identify areas of coordination and collaboration among the UC Libraries technical services operations quickly implement identified low hanging fruit changes (with approval from the Executive Team) Members: Martha Hruska, Chair (AUL Collection Services, UCSD) Jim Dooley (Head, Collection Services, UC Merced) Emily Stambaugh (Shared Print Manager, CDL) Ivy Anderson (CDL) interim Carol Hughes (AUL, Public Services, UC Irvine Armanda Barone (Asst. Hd. Tech Services UC Berkeley)

NGTS: Charge Develop a framework for the next three to five years for Next Generation Technical Services for the UC Libraries. The Steering Team will: address the broad transformative changes that will move technical services to the network level and that will reap the benefits of collaborative technical services identify areas of coordination and collaboration among the UC Libraries technical services operations quickly implement identified low hanging fruit changes (with approval from the Executive Team)

NGTS Rationale Both user expectations and financial realities make it imperative that we maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of our processes for exposing and delivering UC library collections in their full depth and breadth. Development of Next Generation Technical Services will: 1. position UC Libraries to successfully support Next Generation Melvyl and to address the backend recommendations in the BSTF Report 2. seize the opportunity to seamlessly shift from WorldCat Local to technical services operations 3. build on past successful UC Libraries collaborative efforts in technical services (e.g., Shared Cataloging Program and CDL Acquisitions) 4. leverage scarce staff expertise within UC 5. expand technical services staff expertise and experience beyond MARC based formats 6. build capacity to pursue UC wide projects that require technical services expertise and experience (e.g. UC wide digital collection)

NGTS Scope: Values Speed processing throughout all technical services functions View all aspects of technical services as a system-wide, single enterprise Start with existing metadata that is good enough from all available sources Allow for Continuous improvements to good enough including from the world beyond the UC Libraries: expert communities, vendors, other libraries Eliminate redundant work Make the UC Collections easily found and used by our researchers and students Focus cataloging and other metadata description efforts on unique resources

NGTS Scope: Guiding Principles Technical services support and provide infrastructure for the development and management of the library collections Technical services provide broad access to and facilitate discovery of collections according to the public service mission of the University UC Libraries will build a culture of continuous improvement of services applied to scholarly content UC Libraries seek to organize technical services and develop standards of practice to achieve efficiencies and attend to a broader scope of content

User Environment Library and Network Resources Collection Management Environment Commonly Held (Roman Scripts) Commonly Held (Non- Roman Scripts) UC Unique Collections 21 st Century Resources MetadataContentGet itManage itSelect itFind it

Information Resource Types 1. Commonly Held Content in Roman Script a.Licensed resources b.Print publications c.Reformatted content (digitized, mass digitized, microfilmed) d.Audio-visual materials e.Images f.Born digital publications 2. Commonly Held Content in Non- Roman Script a.Licensed resources b.Print publications c.Reformatted content (digitized, mass digitized, microfilmed) d.Audio-visual materials e.Images f.Born digital publications 3. UC Unique Collections a.Special Collections b.Archives c.Theses and dissertations d.UC scholarship st Century Emerging Resources a.Harvested websites and resources (Web at Risk) b.Scholarly websites c.Blogs and other integrating resources d.Maps e.GIS f.Datasets

Task Group Charges Each task force will be charged to develop 1-3 models for each information resource group. Each model must: Address processes for selection, acquisition, cataloging, and preservation or reformatting (as needed), including possibilities for outsourcing some or all to third parties Incorporate the Values and Guiding Principles Address options for system-wide organization of Technical Services

NGTS Process Task Group members with mix of functional backgrounds Consult just about all the ACGs: HOTS, CAMCIG, ACIG, CDC, CDC Task Force on Prospective Monograph Shared Print, SCP, PAG, HOSC, HOPS, SOPAG…. Communications distributed as with Next Gen Melvyl Web site updates Campus visits Proposed models vetted Explore workflow, policies and best practices options for potential collaborative models. Identify and evaluate various potential enablers, such as new tools and services, policies, and current initiatives within UC, which can help transform technical services.

Phase 1 – May - Sept Research existing best practices and current initiatives within UC and beyond Interview stakeholders and experts Identify organizational structures Collect evidence for proposed solutions, including throughput and discovery statistics Describe when collaborative approaches to technical services ought to be considered/not considered Describe when/if a collaborative technical services approach depends upon a shared UC collections approach Consider vendor or other contracting solutions when appropriate

Phase 2 – Oct – Jan Outline proposed models Include, as appropriate, selection, acquisition, cataloging, [electronic] resource management, harvesting, access services, digitization, preservation, or other relevant functions Propose workflows Propose policies and best practices needed Propose new tools, services Propose organizational structures Propose funding models Identify resource needs (including space requirements if any) Propose governance models Identify the collection development model best suited to the technical service model

Phase 3 – Feb – March 2010 Analyze proposed models Conduct a Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threats (including barriers to adoption) analysis (SWOT) Propose an assessment approach that monitors throughput and human resource effort over time and provides evidence of improvement in users ability to easily find and use materials

Possible Outcomes Redefine, break down the silos of TS functions Collaborative approval plans Collaborative outsourcing and other vendor services Improved tools for system-wide acquisitions & cataloging Shared Print in Place becomes norm rather than exception Less redundant work Campuses focus on local priorities

Follow developments at the web site: Questions/Comments