2CUL: EMERGING MODEL OF DEEP COLLABORATION? Anne R. Kenney ASERL Fall 2010 Membership Meeting

What is 2CUL? Transformative and enduring partnership between Columbia and Cornell University Libraries Deep integration of resources, collections, services, and expertise

Why Columbia and Cornell?  Major research libraries  New York State  Private Ivies  Similar academic characteristics  Record of collaboration  Record of innovation  Budget challenges  Will and interest 3

Increase productivity and responsivenessReduce/eliminate duplication where possibleEnhance qualityPromote innovationBuild and redirect resources to new areas b 2CUL Goals

Initial Focus of Our Work Collective collections Backroom functions Technology infrastructure Business planning; governance

Collective Collection Challenges Institutional identity, faculty acceptance Better sense of overlaps and gaps Financial restrictions, accounting systems Delivery mechanisms, legal issues Outreach/research support for faculty and students

Collective Collection Challenges Pre-nups for shared collections

2CUL Collective Collections Focus on global studies collections Ensure delivery between partners analogous to request from offsite storage Share curatorial staff

First Year Progress  Shared Slavic and East European Studies Bibliographer  Coordinated purchasing plan in South Asian Studies  Potential in other areas, e.g., Latin America, Southeast Asia  Pursuing joint e-resource licensing negotiations  Collection overlap and use analysis underway  Resource sharing report due later this fall

Cornell 5,857,315 Columbia 5,579,486 Collection Overlap in WorldCat: Columbia and Cornell 3,789,465 65% 3,511,636 63% 2,067,850 37% / 35%

Backroom Functions Connections with leading libraries in other countries Collective negotiation with vendors for content and metadata Shared technical processing, centers of effort

Backroom Functions Challenges  System of “credits” for work done on behalf of others  Standard definitions of good enough  Budgets/funding streams  Shared backend systems

First Year Progress  Pre-order online form tool  Reciprocal cataloging pilot for Turkish-language material  Chinese mainland vendor pilot  White Paper on 2CUL Technical Services in 2015

Technical Infrastructure Building local cyberinfrastructures Bridging Institutional Repositories Layering services on top Reimagining academic computing

First Year Progress  Determination not to collaborate in building joint archival repository  Business/workflow requirements for e-archives  Digital preservation costs/coverage for 2CUL holdings and licensed content  Web archiving and data management  Each party supports Haithi Trust and Duraspace Gold Sponsorship

Business Planning Achieving major integration of operations, services, collections and resources Reducing cost of overall library activities to direct resources to new priorities Increasing revenues through joint proposalsOffering services to other librariesBringing in other parties; building strategic partnerships

First Year Progress  Developed process for comparing budgetary apples to apples across institutional lines  Identified end goal in target for cost avoidance, savings, redirected savings, and joint investment  Submitted six joint grants; three successful, one still pending  Initiated discussions around new service offerings

Some “Ah Ha” Moments  Bringing two organizations together to perpetuate traditional library models is not a goal but a dead end  It’s got to be seen as being about more not less  Enabling prerequisites for radical collaboration are key  Appreciating cultural differences and need for face time  Importance of trusted third party at the table  Early wins are needed, not always in areas you expect  Sometimes quick wins not possible, focus on longer-term benefits that will pay off

Enabling pre-requisites lead to user buy-in Expanded collections and services for our faculty and students Co-investment in critical under-supported areasFrom me and thee to we Resolved governance, co-ownership, budgetary, legal, and institutional issues Shared measures for success and impactAdditional partners, provide collaborative model What Will Success Look Like?

Enabling Deep Collaborations Can we stop measuring “success” by how much money is spent at individual libraries? And instead….. Measure “success” by increasing % of scholarly resources collected and preserved, by operational efficiencies and effectiveness, and by addressing big challenges at the university? Fill gaps in scholarly record collectively Measure amount of $ saved, not spent Help address attrition/completion rates, support x-disciplinary work, partner in data curation, meet emerging needs

"Faced with the choice between change and proving there is no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof." John Kenneth Galbraith