Verde Consortial Implementation: Best Practices, Data Population and Authority

1
Verde Consortial Implementation Best
Practices, Data Population and Authority

• Heather Christenson
• Tony Harvell
• The University of California Libraries

2
What we hope to cover

• Overview of the UC situation
• How did we get here?
• What is unique about a consortial implementation
  of Verde?
• Developing best practices across a consortium
• The experience of testing
• Our documentation
• Planning ahead

3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
UCs Implementation Team

• Jody Bussell, UC Berkeley
• Adam Siegel, UC Davis
• Keith Powell, UC Irvine
• Angela Riggio, UCLA
• Jim Dooley, UC Merced
• Margaret Hogarth, UC Riverside
• Anneliese Taylor, UC San Francisco

• Tony Harvell, UC San Diego/CDL
• Linda Barnhart, UC San Diego (Shared Cataloging
  Program)
• Catherine Nelson, UC Santa Barbara
• Sue Chesley Perry, UC Santa Cruz
• Heather Christenson, CDL

6
Important contributors

• Margery Tibbetts, CDL - SFX
• Karl Kocher, UC Davis SFX, Aleph
• Terry Vrable, CDL Human ERMS
• Curtis Lavery, CDL - Licensing

7
Our Vision

• Collection development and e-resource management
  will be integrated across UC using a common set
  of data
• Campuses will have the ability to view each
  other's local resources
• There will also be "authority" in the data
  reducing the problems with version control,
  outdated lists, etc.

8
A brief history

• October 2003 CDL Electronic Resource Management
  Assessment report
• April 2004 Two-day UC-wide discussion with
  stakeholders
• July 2004 RFP responses
• August 2005 Ex Libris Verde 1.0
• January 2007 Verde 2.0 test installation

9
Systems across UC

• Campus ILS Systems
• Aleph (2)
• Endeavor (1)
• Local system (1)
• Innovative (6)
• UC Union Catalog
• ALEPH OPAC (no acquisitions system)
• Link resolver
• SFX

10
UCB
CDL SFX SERVER
UCD SFX SERVER
UCI
UCLA
UCM
UCR
UCSB
UCSC
UCSD
UCSF
11
E-resources across UC
12
The consortial implementation . Putting the
puzzle together
13
What is unique about a consortial implementation
of Verde?

• Remember it is a shared system
• Be consistent and be responsible
• Have realistic expectations
• Create a mechanism to make implementation
  decisions
• Agree on hardware and technical setup
• Plan for ongoing communication across layers
• Develop best practices

14
Developing Best Practices

• Principles statement
• Minimum set of elements across consortium
• Authorities for organization/vendor/e-product,
  e-interface names
• Conventions for data population, and local
  configuration decisions
• License interpretation into data elements
• Checklist for campus readiness
• Workflow evaluation

15
Guiding Principles

• Establish a common understanding to guide the
  project
• Resolve questions related to scope
• Resolve questions related to future directions

16
Minimum set of elements

• Theres as much data about data as there is
  data Andrew Pace

17
Minimum set of elements

• Criteria
• Is it required in Verde?
• Is it required in ERMi?
• Is it potentially seen by an end user?
• Is it necessary for multiple campuses to view?
• Is it necessary for CDL (central) needs?

18
Authorities for vendor/product names

• Organization list populates other Verde records
• Identifying the authoritative name
• LC Name Authority File
• Publishers web site
• ILS vendor file
• Provide alternative forms
• Clarify company relationships and histories?

19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
How about the vendors web site?
22
Tackling the e-standalones.
23
Conventions for entering data local
configuration decisions

• Drop down menus
• Field labels
• Defining local fields
• Elements without a home

24
License record population

• The Pre-Verde Plan - getting a head start
• What are the minimum data fields for the license
  record?
• Dealing with subtleties and nuances in license
  agreements why and how?

25
Pre-Verdegetting a head start
26
Ready, set, go. the checklist for campus
readiness

• Common issues for all campuses
• Analyzing and mapping license data
• Filling in the missing pieces for non-loadable
  data
• Squeaky clean SFX data
• What is important on Day 1?
• Assigning permissions, roles, mapping workflow,
  staff training?
• What are the milestones of implementation?
• Life cycle of one product, pushing data to
  public user?

27
Workflow Evaluation

• Where is the first line of authority control in
  the workflow process?
• How are roles and permissions assigned across the
  consortial implementation vs. roles assigned
  locally? QA oversight needs to be maintained
• Next steps Evaluating workflows in Verde and how
  we might use them.

28
The experience of testing
29
The experience of testing

• Verde 2.0 test environment
• Real word questions
• The empty vessel problem
• Documentation needs
• Future testing

30
Updates, enhancements, fixes oh my!
31
Planning for production

• How are problems reported?
• How are updates and fixes handled?
• How will training take place?
• How are enhancements proposed?
• What kinds of quality assurance and ongoing
  assessment will we have?

32
Documentation

• Documents stored on CDL Extranet
• Principles of the UCERMS
• Minimum data set recommendations
• License interpretation guidelines
• Configurable field definitions
• Conventions authority for vendor e-product
  names
• Minutes from the Implementation Task Force

33
Questions? Comments?

• Heather Christenson, Project Manager, CDL
• heather.christenson_at_ucop.edu
• Tony Harvell, Head of Acquisitions, UC San Diego
• tharvell_at_library.ucsd.edu
• Project Web Site
• http//www.cdlib.org/inside/projects/erms/index.ht
  ml