Page Comparison

...

Recommendation

...

Risks & Benefits: With so many (5 + CDL) institutions going in the vanguard, the ICs observe that the major risk would be “biting off more than we can chew” in terms of resources and efforts, or that these efforts would push back our overall timeline. HoweverAn alternate recommendation would be to ask one or more of the UC volunteers to step back from the vanguard, but asking one of them (for example, UCSF) to step back didn’t seem to buy us very much overall.

So, in discussion together and with Ex Libris, this seems unlikely: efforts that are made in the vanguard will make the final implementation stage go faster and easier, especially for those campuses moving to Alma/Primo for the first time. Also, allowing the majority of our “new” campuses to go in the vanguard allows us to identify hitches well in advance, again, hopefully shortening and easing the final implementation phase. Overall, the ICs felt that the benefits of the large vanguard outweighed the possible risks. Additionally, Ex Libris has committed their full support for this vanguard and in making sure the timeline is not at risk.

WG notes: Concur with erring on the side of inclusion, erring on the side of taking a risk earlier rather than later. ICs are empowered to change the slate as appropriate, should the need arise. Approved 4/17.

Background

The SILS team will recommend 5 institutions to be in the “Vanguard,” a group who will do a preliminary sandbox migration in June - Nov 2020. The deadline for choosing these vanguard institutions is the end of April 2020 at the latest, in order to prep for sandbox migration activities and kickoff starting in June.

...