Understand your collection: Difference between revisions

From wiki.dpconline.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(34 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[File:Analyse web.png|right]]
== Understanding your Collection ==
Understanding your digital assets is a critical process for the production of a digital preservation business case, regardless of whether the focus is on addressing preservation of particular digital assets or on broader needs such as additional staffing, establishing a new repository or bringing in other new technology. In the former case, convincing business cases must be able to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the digital assets and the context in which they will be preserved. In the latter case, this detail may not be as critical but it's still essential to think through the implications of the preservation and the impact they will have on the main focus of your case. As a consequence, not all information generated in the process outlined below may need to make it into the final business case. Careful thought about the [[Stakeholder analysis|audience]] that the case is targeted at will help to inform how much detail is required.


== Understanding your Collection ==
Preservation of the collection is a fundamental purpose behind any digital preservation business case, regardless of the type of business case being drafted. Convincing business cases must therefore be able to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the collection and the context in which it is being preserved. Not all information generated in the process outlined below will make it into the final business case, which should only include the most essential information to convince funders of the need for the proposal.
==Process==
==Process==
''This is the process that a practitioner should follow to build this section of the business case. This should be a numbered list!''
''This is the process that a practitioner should follow to build this section of the business case.''
 
For the sake of simplicity this section considers the process of understanding a group of digital assets, what some practitioners would call a "collection" of digital assets. Depending on your circumstances it may be necessary to examine a wider array of digital assets.
 
# Consider or assess the origins & value of the digital assets
#* Examine the provenance of the assets
#*
## Purpose: demonstrating the provenance of the collection, fit to the organisational content development strategy, value of the collection to the organisation
# Collection profiling
# Collection profiling
## Purpose: identifying what types of content are in the collection, possible sub-collections, traits shared by all content in the collection, preservation intent associated with the collection.
## Purpose: identifying what types of content are in the collection, possible sub-collections, preservation intent associated with the collection, retention periods for the collection
# Cross-institutional readiness (different groups involved? e.g. IT, library divisions, vendors e.g. hosted services)
# Organisational context
## awareness of other cultures or policy contexts within different divisions (e.g. use of cloud or in-house systems) -- what has got a chance of getting through and what will get laughed out of the room?
## Purpose: illustrating how the proposal fits into the wider organisational policy framework, mandate, strategy, departmental structures...
# Digital preservation objectives as part of organisational mission?
# Legal context
# Gap analysis - skills, functions, required change (also useful to do comparator analysis with peer institutions)
## Purpose: makes a clear case for preserving the collection - we must, rather than we may.
# Ownership, responsibility, accountability - roles and responsibilities, organisational structure, job specifications
# Wider Landscape
## clear leadership and communication? collaboration rather than enforcement
## Purpose: Is this collection unique? How does it compare to other collecting institutions? How does the proposed approach compare to what other collecting institutions are doing for similar types of content?
# Stakeholder analysis - demand, expectations, priorities, awareness/engagement - what are they trying to achieve? How does DP support them?
#Value
## Examples from different domains? Internal and external, senior management, users, depositors, etc.
# User expectations for the collection
## Purpose: Provides the context in which the collection will be used and justifies the investment to be made in preserving the collection - preservation & access two sides of the same coin.


==Content==
==Content==
''This should describe the contents or structure of the business case, resulting from following the Process above''
''This should describe the contents or structure of the business case, resulting from following the Process above''
Describe the change you want to see in the organisation
Describe the change you want to see in the organisation
The Context
* where are we now
* where are we now
* where do we want to be
* where we are going
* timetable
** staged progression over time? long-term vision and/or small term component of that?
** continuous improvement? capacity of the organisation to adapt to change?


Skills
The digital assets
* staff time / availability
* Collection profile (what are they?)
* exemplar skills profiles from organisations (in-house might mean local tech skills, hosted might mean project management/procurement/SLAs)
* Origins, importance and constraints (why do we have it?)
* training programmes - does this mean change to existing posts? or change to team workloads?
** Provenance (why do we have the them?)
** Value (what are they worth?)
** Legal requirements (what are we allowed to do with them? / what do we have to do with them?)
* Preservation Intent or Vision for preserving the collection - should this also include 'Access intent' & tie-in with user expectations?  (what will we do with it?)
* Challenges facing the collection that this business case will solve (how will this proposal help us achieve our vision/mandate?) (also see [[Risks]])


Infrastructure
Move these to Inst Readiness:?
* approaches to storage/hardware
* approaches to software (e.g. repository systems)


Finances
* How business case supports organisational mandate
* financial preparedness - ability to fund the necessary infrastructure, staffing
* How proposal fits with wider organisational policy framework/strategies
* sustainability of any funding allocated to DP


Stakeholders
* ways to engage? language? (e.g. IT: 'business continuity', ITIL)
* demarkation of functional responsibilities (e.g. define DP policy vs execute part of it; support and guidance vs mandates)
==Scenarios==
==Scenarios==
''Thoughts on how to adapt the content of this section to particular scenarios that the business case is focused on. Eg: Risks to consider/prioritise in a business case for a repository system, or Risks to consider/prioritise in a business case for new DP staff, orRisks to consider/prioritise in a business case for a digital preservation service''
'''Scenario 1: HE institution business case for a new repository system'''
* Where are we now: size and complexity of collection
* Where we are going: predictions for growth of collection over next 5, 10, 20, 50 years
* Contents of the collection - high level overview of the different content types (web, AV, e-theses...), origins of collection
* Preservation intent & vision - breakdown of different preservation intents for diff content types...
* Problem and solution statement - collection currently stored in an aging repositry system that is no longer supported with minimal preservation functionality -> collection will be migrated to a new repository system with integrated preservation functionality
* Organisational mandate - supporing research by ensuring content is preserved and made accessible
* Organisational policy framework - Collection development policy, other Library policies, Institutional strategy.
 
'''Scenario 2: Local archive business case for a digital preservation officer'''
* Where are we now: size and complexity of collections  | low organisational understanding of digital collection & preservation requirements | no designated digital collections/preservation officer | lack of technical support | lack of information about collections
* Where are we going: predictions for growth of collections over next 5, 10, 20, 50 years | improved organisational understanding | clearly designated staff posts and roles
* Contents of the collections: high level overviews identifying different content types emails, spreadsheets, digital surrogates etc
* Provenance of collection: depositors information, ownership etc
* Some analysis of preservation strategies likely to be used for different collections
* Organisational mandate: identify who makes decisions about access, retention, preservation etc.
* Organisational policy framework: understand organisational priorities and strategies.


==Communications==
'''Scenario 3: Large CH institution moving to third pary service provider'''
''Notes relevant to tailoring this section to the appropriate audience and communicating the the business case to that audience''
* Where are we now:
* Where are we going:
* Contents of the collection:
* Preservation intent and vision:
* Problem & solution statement:
* Organisational mandate:
* Organisational policy framework:


==Resources==
==Resources==
''These are external resources of relevance to this section. Links can be incorporated into the text above if that is more useful''
''These are external resources of relevance to this section. Links can be incorporated into the text above if that is more useful''
BL's Collection Profiling template (forthcoming)
[http://aida.jiscinvolve.org/wp/ Assessing Institutional Digital Assets (AIDA)]

Latest revision as of 13:05, 19 August 2013

Analyse web.png

Understanding your Collection

Understanding your digital assets is a critical process for the production of a digital preservation business case, regardless of whether the focus is on addressing preservation of particular digital assets or on broader needs such as additional staffing, establishing a new repository or bringing in other new technology. In the former case, convincing business cases must be able to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the digital assets and the context in which they will be preserved. In the latter case, this detail may not be as critical but it's still essential to think through the implications of the preservation and the impact they will have on the main focus of your case. As a consequence, not all information generated in the process outlined below may need to make it into the final business case. Careful thought about the audience that the case is targeted at will help to inform how much detail is required.

Process

This is the process that a practitioner should follow to build this section of the business case.

For the sake of simplicity this section considers the process of understanding a group of digital assets, what some practitioners would call a "collection" of digital assets. Depending on your circumstances it may be necessary to examine a wider array of digital assets.

  1. Consider or assess the origins & value of the digital assets
    • Examine the provenance of the assets
    1. Purpose: demonstrating the provenance of the collection, fit to the organisational content development strategy, value of the collection to the organisation
  2. Collection profiling
    1. Purpose: identifying what types of content are in the collection, possible sub-collections, preservation intent associated with the collection, retention periods for the collection
  3. Organisational context
    1. Purpose: illustrating how the proposal fits into the wider organisational policy framework, mandate, strategy, departmental structures...
  4. Legal context
    1. Purpose: makes a clear case for preserving the collection - we must, rather than we may.
  5. Wider Landscape
    1. Purpose: Is this collection unique? How does it compare to other collecting institutions? How does the proposed approach compare to what other collecting institutions are doing for similar types of content?
  6. Value
  7. User expectations for the collection
    1. Purpose: Provides the context in which the collection will be used and justifies the investment to be made in preserving the collection - preservation & access two sides of the same coin.

Content

This should describe the contents or structure of the business case, resulting from following the Process above

Describe the change you want to see in the organisation

The Context

  • where are we now
  • where we are going

The digital assets

  • Collection profile (what are they?)
  • Origins, importance and constraints (why do we have it?)
    • Provenance (why do we have the them?)
    • Value (what are they worth?)
    • Legal requirements (what are we allowed to do with them? / what do we have to do with them?)
  • Preservation Intent or Vision for preserving the collection - should this also include 'Access intent' & tie-in with user expectations? (what will we do with it?)
  • Challenges facing the collection that this business case will solve (how will this proposal help us achieve our vision/mandate?) (also see Risks)

Move these to Inst Readiness:?

  • How business case supports organisational mandate
  • How proposal fits with wider organisational policy framework/strategies

Scenarios

Scenario 1: HE institution business case for a new repository system

  • Where are we now: size and complexity of collection
  • Where we are going: predictions for growth of collection over next 5, 10, 20, 50 years
  • Contents of the collection - high level overview of the different content types (web, AV, e-theses...), origins of collection
  • Preservation intent & vision - breakdown of different preservation intents for diff content types...
  • Problem and solution statement - collection currently stored in an aging repositry system that is no longer supported with minimal preservation functionality -> collection will be migrated to a new repository system with integrated preservation functionality
  • Organisational mandate - supporing research by ensuring content is preserved and made accessible
  • Organisational policy framework - Collection development policy, other Library policies, Institutional strategy.

Scenario 2: Local archive business case for a digital preservation officer

  • Where are we now: size and complexity of collections | low organisational understanding of digital collection & preservation requirements | no designated digital collections/preservation officer | lack of technical support | lack of information about collections
  • Where are we going: predictions for growth of collections over next 5, 10, 20, 50 years | improved organisational understanding | clearly designated staff posts and roles
  • Contents of the collections: high level overviews identifying different content types emails, spreadsheets, digital surrogates etc
  • Provenance of collection: depositors information, ownership etc
  • Some analysis of preservation strategies likely to be used for different collections
  • Organisational mandate: identify who makes decisions about access, retention, preservation etc.
  • Organisational policy framework: understand organisational priorities and strategies.

Scenario 3: Large CH institution moving to third pary service provider

  • Where are we now:
  • Where are we going:
  • Contents of the collection:
  • Preservation intent and vision:
  • Problem & solution statement:
  • Organisational mandate:
  • Organisational policy framework:

Resources

These are external resources of relevance to this section. Links can be incorporated into the text above if that is more useful

BL's Collection Profiling template (forthcoming)

Assessing Institutional Digital Assets (AIDA)