Difference between revisions of "Develop a structure for the business case toolkit and preservation support pages"

From wiki.dpconline.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
Brain storm for the development of the business case for preservation
Brain storm for the development of the business case for preservation


Neil Grindley reporting back his breakout group:  
'''Neil Grindley reporting back his breakout group:  
Useful to think about a simple interrogatory approach ...
'''Useful to think about a simple interrogatory approach ...
When, Why, What, How, Who
When, Why, What, How, Who


Maureen Pennock reporting back:
'''Maureen Pennock reporting back:
Define what we thought should go in a business case then work back to what we might need to help people right. this breaks down into a series of tasks:
'''Define what we thought should go in a business case then work back to what we might need to help people right. this breaks down into a series of tasks:
*Exec Summary
*Exec Summary
*Strategic vision (where do we want to be)
*Strategic vision (where do we want to be)
Line 18: Line 18:
*Resources needed, institutional readiness (Skills / resourcs / stakeholders)
*Resources needed, institutional readiness (Skills / resourcs / stakeholders)
*Practical recommendations over a short period (and risks associated with them)
*Practical recommendations over a short period (and risks associated with them)
'''Discussion'''
These are noticeably different approaches but they reinforce each other.  The when/who/what/how questions are 'real english' and they work well to provide questions that are useful and also immediately understandable.  But it won't steer you through a large wad of stuff. The headings are more 'cookie-cutter' giving the outline of everything that would be needed.  These two approaches are not mutually incompatible.

Revision as of 14:47, 30 July 2013

Brain storm for the development of the business case for preservation

Neil Grindley reporting back his breakout group: Useful to think about a simple interrogatory approach ... When, Why, What, How, Who

Maureen Pennock reporting back: Define what we thought should go in a business case then work back to what we might need to help people right. this breaks down into a series of tasks:

  • Exec Summary
  • Strategic vision (where do we want to be)
  • Understand the collection
  • Understand the context / landscape
  • Fit to organizational mission
  • What are the risks facing the collection / institution
  • Prioritisation of risks
  • List of benefits - Value, ROI
  • Costs of action and inaction
  • Resources needed, institutional readiness (Skills / resourcs / stakeholders)
  • Practical recommendations over a short period (and risks associated with them)

Discussion These are noticeably different approaches but they reinforce each other. The when/who/what/how questions are 'real english' and they work well to provide questions that are useful and also immediately understandable. But it won't steer you through a large wad of stuff. The headings are more 'cookie-cutter' giving the outline of everything that would be needed. These two approaches are not mutually incompatible.