Transcript Slide 1

2CUL:
EMERGING MODEL OF DEEP COLLABORATION?
Anne R. Kenney
ASERL Fall 2010 Membership Meeting
What is 2CUL?
Transformative and enduring partnership between
Columbia and Cornell University Libraries
Deep integration of resources, collections, services,
and expertise
Why Columbia and Cornell?
3

Major research libraries

Record of collaboration

New York State

Record of innovation

Private Ivies

Budget challenges

Will and interest

Similar academic
characteristics
2CUL Goals
b
Increase productivity and responsiveness
Reduce/eliminate duplication where possible
Enhance quality
Promote innovation
Build and redirect resources to new areas
Initial Focus of Our Work
Collective collections
Backroom functions
Technology infrastructure
Business planning; governance
Collective Collection Challenges
Institutional identity, faculty acceptance
Better sense of overlaps and gaps
Financial restrictions, accounting systems
Delivery mechanisms, legal issues
Outreach/research support for faculty and
students
Collective Collection Challenges
Pre-nups
for shared
collections
2CUL Collective Collections
Focus on global studies collections
Ensure delivery between partners
analogous to request from offsite storage
Share curatorial staff
First Year Progress






Shared Slavic and East European Studies
Bibliographer
Coordinated purchasing plan in South Asian Studies
Potential in other areas, e.g., Latin America,
Southeast Asia
Pursuing joint e-resource licensing negotiations
Collection overlap and use analysis underway
Resource sharing report due later this fall
Collection Overlap in WorldCat: Columbia and Cornell
Cornell
5,857,315
Columbia
5,579,486
3,511,636
63%
2,067,850
37% / 35%
3,789,465
65%
Backroom Functions
Shared technical processing, centers of effort
Collective negotiation with vendors for content and
metadata
Connections with leading libraries in other countries
Backroom Functions Challenges




System of “credits” for
work done on behalf
of others
Standard definitions
of good enough
Budgets/funding
streams
Shared backend
systems
First Year Progress




Pre-order online form tool
Reciprocal cataloging pilot for Turkish-language
material
Chinese mainland vendor pilot
White Paper on 2CUL Technical Services in 2015
Technical Infrastructure
Building local cyberinfrastructures
Bridging Institutional Repositories
Layering services on top
Reimagining academic computing
First Year Progress





Determination not to collaborate in building joint
archival repository
Business/workflow requirements for e-archives
Digital preservation costs/coverage for 2CUL
holdings and licensed content
Web archiving and data management
Each party supports Haithi Trust and Duraspace
Gold Sponsorship
Business Planning
Achieving major integration of operations, services, collections and
resources
Reducing cost of overall library activities to direct resources to new
priorities
Increasing revenues through joint proposals
Offering services to other libraries
Bringing in other parties; building strategic partnerships
First Year Progress




Developed process for comparing budgetary
apples to apples across institutional lines
Identified end goal in target for cost avoidance,
savings, redirected savings, and joint investment
Submitted six joint grants; three successful, one still
pending
Initiated discussions around new service offerings
Some “Ah Ha” Moments







Bringing two organizations together to perpetuate
traditional library models is not a goal but a dead end
It’s got to be seen as being about more not less
Enabling prerequisites for radical collaboration are key
Appreciating cultural differences and need for face
time
Importance of trusted third party at the table
Early wins are needed, not always in areas you expect
Sometimes quick wins not possible, focus on longer-term
benefits that will pay off
What Will Success Look Like?
Enabling pre-requisites lead to user buy-in
Expanded collections and services for our faculty and students
Co-investment in critical under-supported areas
From me and thee to we
Resolved governance, co-ownership, budgetary, legal, and
institutional issues
Shared measures for success and impact
Additional partners, provide collaborative model
Enabling Deep Collaborations
Can we stop measuring “success” by how much money is
spent at individual libraries?
• And instead…..
Measure “success” by increasing % of scholarly resources collected
and preserved, by operational efficiencies and effectiveness, and
by addressing big challenges at the university?
• Fill gaps in scholarly record collectively
• Measure amount of $ saved, not spent
• Help address attrition/completion rates, support x-disciplinary work, partner in
data curation, meet emerging needs
"Faced with the
choice between
change and proving
there is no need to
do so, most people
get busy on the
proof."
John Kenneth Galbraith