When you join the meeting, rename your Zoom name to your name + SILS group (Mouseover your participant window, click on the […] dots dropdown to the right of “mute”, choose Rename.)
Discussion items
Item
Desired Outcome
Time
Who
Notes
Decisions
Actions
Item
Desired Outcome
Time
Who
Notes
Decisions
Actions
1
Start recording!
Welcome!
0
All
2
Quick announcements
0
3
SILS co-chairs update
5
Günter, Chris
Met with ExL to discuss observations about issues with communications
Discovery FG is on a good pace. Focusing on Primo VE front end. Ambitious goal is by first week of March to make a highly-recommended list of configurations for all campuses to use. Discussed criteria to use.
CDL managed data in the NZ (subgroup of PPC) looking at discrete items on getting data into the NZ. Trying to get the breadth of everything the UCs license without too much duplication. There is a lot of different kinds of work that connects with other functional groups like RMFG. Work done by CDL group could impact those other groups and will rely on them to tell them what is the highest priority to work on.
AEFG: approach is to use what was identified in Vanguard. Focusing on consortial management level of NZ, shared acquisitions. Prioritizing functionality interconnections with other groups such as import profiles, CDL shared acquisitions. Other areas are not needed for day 1.
DCFG: explore Primo VEs ability to make digital collections discoverable. Some campuses already on Primo/Primo VE are able to have digital collections findable. Working with Discovery. Priority for test is to prioritize
RMFG: Figuring out who to collaborate with. Alot of what will be tested came out of vanguard. Like AEFG, looking at what impacts the NZ. Working on documentation. Many day 1 items
FFFG: looking at services and imagining how they will work in the new environment. Focusing on inter-UC borrowing, borrowing between UCs and RLFs. Majority of items will be day 1. Identifying what items will need upkeep and who will be responsible for them. Already sent a check list to the ICs about the decisions they are making and laid out steps they may need to take. There are a standard set of workflows that they are working to document well enough without being prescriptive to allow flexibility for local needs.
PSELG: there are a couple of items: CDI (central data index) and OA. With CDI, there are multiple dependencies. Clarity is needed around who makes decisions about this for day 1 and for cataloging practices and managing resources. With regard to OA, they are working towards a decision page and what will need harmonization across the system.
TSELG: been working on GOBI shelf-ready services but there are different levels of agreements throughout the UC. They initiated a conversation with YPB about uniform services and will be shared with Shared Content Leadership Group this month and will make a recommendation on how campuses should handle these records. MARCIVE records is the other thing, UCSD has graciously agreed to pull the legacy MARCIVE records and add them to the NZ. Dissertations should be shared immediately if there is no embargo. Should we treat this as a UC Collection and come up with an approach to how these should be treated? There will be quite a bit of work in this area with e-scholarship and will not be ready for day 1, might even take longer than 6 months. We participated with PSELG on the OA discussion.
Q: Noticing that many are saying that there are some things that will be implemented 6 months (or more) after go-live. This intersects with conversations that are happening in SGTF. At what point does it shift to the operational structure? Do you feel that in order to make the decisions and have the discussions you need to have, should we stay configured the way we are in the project for longer, or at what point can it move to the new structure?
If we are actively working on some things still past go-live, it might be disruptive to hand-off to another group for testing.
This is a good question that we should think about. We want a smooth transition, but don’t want work to get dropped which could happen if the hand-off is too early.
Q: Cohort groups like PPC who are making policy decisions don’t know who will do the work and this impacts making clear decisions. For instance, will CDL have more staff? Will work be redistributed to campuses? Who will decide this and when can these topics be discussed? Have reached out to CDL to find out what they are currently doing, but what are they doing in the future?
It’s clear that resources at CDL will not be expanding and work will need to fit with the level of FTE that is currently available. Aware that there is a lot more shared work and figuring out what work will go to CDL and what will go to campuses still needs to be determined.
Would encourage SGTF to examine whether there are groups that need to be formed now to assist the transition rather than thinking of it as a light switch (i.e., just turning on the new gov structure). Need to look not only at who does the work, but who makes the policies.
There will definitely be a kind of middle period after go-live before the new structure takes over (so not a hard switch).
If we look at all of our month 6 arcs and see what will carry over to the next phase for those who will carry the next phase. From chat: We may need to think about off-ramps for anyone who needs to and/or adjustment for expertise - adding people in as appropriate. (echoing thoughts of what Josephine is talking about from Phase 3)
Do we need the exact same expertise chunks?
Cathy will invite SGTF to watch this video.
Look at the arc of the work and prepare to transition the work and collectively organize ourselves. How can campuses support each other? How do we support CDL? How can we work better together and organize ourselves to move into SILS post-go-live.
There’s joy in figuring things out together! How we support SILS and make it shine. So many benefits of working together!
Used to be local catalogs and Melvyl - now it’s merging into one. We are on the same system together!
It’s both technology change and perhaps more importantly organizational and culture change. We will start to move away from technology and workflows and move toward being more transformative with our services. Yay!
@Cathy Martyniak (Unlicensed) to share with SGTF the recording link and time to start watching the Q&A discussing post-go-live SILS gov groups.
The SILS mission is to transform library services and operations through innovation and collaboration. The future is shared!
Question? Contact AskSILS-L@ucop.edu