| 2 | Subgroup to investigate the integration of the SILS into the UC Libraries Advisory Structure (UCLAS) | Subgroup members will present a more detailed overview of the proposed structure, for SGTF feedback and guidance. | 00:40 | Felicia, Salwa, Sarah T., Danielle . | The subgroup has continued to focus on iteratively building out the organizational structure through identifying the core responsibilities and needs, post go-live. The revised structure shared with SGTF now more clearly articulates the division of responsibilities between LG and OT (LG is focused on strategy and strategic direction, and OT to oversee operations). The Functional Teams will then carry out functional, UC-wide implementation and standardization work. Because phase 4 has been more focused on implementation, the subgroup agreed that standing functional teams for at least the 1-2 years post go-live will be needed.
The subgroup’s proposed structure is informed by the SGTF principles for designing shared governance, including that we should aim to make decisions with the least amount of escalation needed. In other words: decisions should be made by those “closest to the work,” where possible. SGTF discussed the need to clearly communicate the post-phase 4 governance (aka. UCLAS-integrated SILS governance) is distinct from the phase 4 structure. Phase 4 teams will be thanked and discharged. SGTF members reflected that similar naming (Functional Teams is similar to Functional Groups) might be confusing, or the structure may inherit practices and assumptions that are not applicable/helpful for ongoing operations. SGTF noted that the subgroup and SGTF might want a different naming convention for Functional Teams (task forces? services teams? etc.). TF discussion around the fact that phase 4 does not currently have an end date, and so some cohort members might be making assumptions about their continued involvement in SILS. SILS WG may want to circulate a communication addressing this (that there will be a transition to a new model; what that transition looks like is currently being developed; unlikely - or will not be - on go-live, but after a set period of time). The ultimate transition to ongoing SILS governance could coincide with when UC transitions to Ex Libris customer service. TF member recommended that the Leadership Group have the ability to charge a time-limited strategy/study team to consider a particular strategic topic. SGTF discussed the roles of the Operations Team and CDL Operations Center/SILS Service Manager. While the SSM has a coordination role, both (OT and SSM) will have a role in discussing systemwide trends, needs and issues. Still to be discussed: how UC organizes its participation/vote for Ex Libris matters and with the consortial Alma group. Outside of the SGTF’s scope but important for SILS-WG consideration: technical tools support communications - but it’s also a matter of how we utilize and take best advantage of these tools. TF members reflected that mechanisms and practices should be in place to support inter-structure communication, particularly between the LG and OT. The subgroup potential options that have come up so far in the design/development process (overlapping membership, potentially the OT chair sitting on the LG, or the two groups sharing the same support staff; joint steering meetings; or a DOC liaison to sit on both groups). A TF member reflected that an information coordinator role (across OT and LG) might not be sufficient or effective; it was proposed that SGTF and the subgroup consider viewing this communication/engagement role as having an OT stakeholder sitting on LG, and an LG stakeholder sitting on OT.
| | Action: SGTF asks the subgroup to further consider mechanisms to support inter-team communication (particularly between the LG and OT). Further work should also be done on the Functional Teams. |
| 3 | Poll data | Brief overview of data clean-up and identification of a subgroup to analyze the response data. | 00:05 | Danielle Subgroup: Aislinn, Salwa, Danielle What’s the work product? | | Summary to WG and CoUL A secondary report-out should be providing as a public report out Decision: SGTF foresees two work products: report(s) for the WG and CoUL; and a public report/briefing. | Action: The poll subgroup will consist of Aislinn, Salwa and Danielle |