1. More Product, Less Process: Mark A. Greene, American Heritage Center Dennis Meissner, Minnesota Historical Society

2. Mark Greene Director, American Heritage Center, University of Wyoming

3. Why did we work on this? My experience at four repositories with significant backlogs of unprocessed materials: Carleton College, Minnesota Historical Society, Henry Ford Museum, AHC Dennis’ experience as processing manager at MHS

4. The Problem Archival processing does not keep pace with the growth of collections

5. The Problem Archival processing does not keep pace with the growth of collections Unprocessed backlogs continue to grow

7. The Problem Archival processing does not keep pace with the growth of collections Unprocessed backlogs continue to grow Researchers denied access to collections

9. The Problem Archival processing does not keep pace with the growth of collections Unprocessed backlogs continue to grow Researchers denied access to collections Our image with donors and resource allocators suffers

11. Findings Processing benchmarks and practices are inappropriate to deal with problems posed by large contemporary collections

13. Findings Processing benchmarks and practices are inappropriate to deal with problems posed by large contemporary collections Ideal vs. necessary

14. Findings Processing benchmarks and practices are inappropriate to deal with problems posed by large contemporary collections Ideal vs. necessary Fixation on item level tasks

15. Findings Processing benchmarks and practices are inappropriate to deal with problems posed by large contemporary collections Ideal vs. necessary Fixation on item level tasks Preservation anxieties trump user needs

17. Findings Arrangement Practice: Still often at the item level

18. Findings Arrangement Practice: Still often at the item level Warrant: Literature mixed, but much advises against item level work

19. Findings Description Practice: Weak commitment to online access Little focus on item level

20. Findings Description Practice: Weak commitment to online access Little focus on item level Warrant: Describe all holdings, in general, before describing some in detail Descriptive level follows arrangement level Level varies from collection to collection

21. Findings Conservation Practice: Strong commitment to item level work

22. Findings Conservation Practice: Strong commitment to item level work Warrant: Item-focused conservation prescriptions often contradict advice on arrangement and description

23. Findings Metrics Literature: Range of 4-40 hours per cubic foot

25. Findings Metrics Literature: Range of 4-40 hours per cubic foot However, a convincing body of experience coalesces at the high-productivity end: Maher, 1982 (3.4 hours per cubic foot) Haller, 1987 (3.8 hours per cubic foot) Northeastern University Processing Manual (4-10 hours per cubic foot)

26. Findings Metrics Literature: Range of 4 - 40 hours per cubic foot Grant Project Survey: 0.6 – 67 hours per cubic foot (Mode = 33 hours ; Mean = 9 hours)

27. Findings Metrics Literature: Range of 4 - 40 hours per cubic foot Grant Project Survey: 0.6 – 67 hours per cubic foot (Mode = 33 ; Mean = 9) Survey of Archivists: 2 – 250 hours per cubic foot (Mode = 8 ; Mean = 14.8)

28. Recommendations General Principles for Change

29. Recommendations General Principles for Change Establish acceptable minimum level of work, and make it the processing benchmark

30. Recommendations General Principles for Change Establish acceptable minimum level of work, and make it the benchmark Don’t assume all collections, or all collection components, will be processed to same level

31. Recommendations Arrangement Description Conservation Productivity

32. Recommendations Arrangement In normal or typical situations, the physical arrangement of materials in archival groups and manuscript collections should not take place below the series level

33. Recommendations Arrangement In normal or typical situations, the physical arrangement of materials in archival groups and manuscript collections should not take place below the series level Not all series and all files in a collection need to be arranged to the same level

34. Recommendations Description Since description represents arrangement: describe materials at a level of detail appropriate to that level of arrangement.

35. Recommendations Description Since description represents arrangement: describe materials at a level of detail appropriate to that level of arrangement Keep description brief and simple

36. Recommendations Description Since description represents arrangement: describe materials at a level of detail appropriate to that level of arrangement Keep description brief and simple Level of description should vary across collections, and across components within a collection

37. Recommendations Conservation Rely on storage area environmental controls to carry the conservation burden

38. Recommendations Conservation Rely on storage area environmental controls to carry the conservation burden Avoid wholesale refoldering Avoid removing and replacing metal fasteners Avoid photocopying items on poor paper

40. Recommendations Conservation Rely on storage area environmental controls to carry the conservation burden Don’t perform conservation tasks at a lower hierarchical level than you perform arrangement and description

41. Recommendations Productivity A processing archivist ought to be able to arrange and describe large twentieth century archival materials at an average rate of four hours per cubic foot

43. The goal of all this… …is to make our patrons, donors, administrators, and funders happy, proving that repositories can use the resources they have to the best advantage and with the greatest efficiency.

44. Questions