Katherine Skinner Executive Director, Educopia Institute Program Manager, MetaArchive Cooperative An Age of Discovery, ARL-CNI Washington D.C. Friday, October 16, 2009

 Why do we need to collaborate?  What are some basic principles of collaborative networking?  What do they look like in practice?  MetaArchive Cooperative MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/092

 Collections  Books, journals, newspapers, unique items, etc.  Services  Building, disseminating, and preserving collections ▪ Once solitary; now defies such boundaries ▪ Competition vs. collaboration issue ▪ Viability at stake MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/093

 Adjust to a more collaborative mindset to accomplish two preservation goals: 1. To preserve the digital collections we create ▪ Maintain integrity so that we can continue to access both “born digital” and digitized materials 2. To preserve our own institutional missions ▪ Outsourcing a core mission is a dangerous proposition MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/094

Collaborative Network: An association of autonomous entities collaborating to achieve common or compatible goals. Source: Wikipedia.org MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/095 FLEXIBILITYFRAGILITY

 Enables communities to work together on a common solution to a common problem  Demands attention to organizational structure in order to work  Requires three key elements:  A common cause  Solid institutional buy-in  Attention to the organizational arrangement that governs the partnerships MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/096

Management of…  Accountability  How do you allocate responsibility and tasks  Legitimacy  How do you assure members of your clout and value  Conflict  How do you settle disputes and issues of authority  Commitment  What carrots can you use for enticement and motivation  Design  How do you set up and maintain your management structure (distributed, centralized) Source: Milward and Provan. A Manager's Guide to Choosing and Using Collaborative Networks, 2006 MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/097

8

 A distributed digital preservation cooperative for digital archives, based on LOCKSS  Founded in 2003; supported by combination of sponsored funding (NDIIPP, NHPRC), consulting fees, and membership fees  Provides digital preservation infrastructure and training and models to enable other groups to establish similar networks MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/099

10 12 US Members + Lib. of Congress 2 Overseas Members

 Auburn University  Boston College  Clemson University  Emory University  Florida State Univ.  Folger Shakespeare Lib.  Georgia Tech  Pontifícia Universidade Católica  Rice University  Univ. of Hull  Univ. of Louisville  Univ. of North Texas  Univ. of South Carolina  Virginia Tech  Library of Congress  NDLTD  SDSC 11MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/09

 Collections  Technical Infrastructure  Organizational Infrastructure MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/0912

 Format-agnostic solution  Subject- and genre-based archives  Southern Digital Culture  Electronic Theses and Dissertations  TransAtlantic Slave Trade  Early Modern Literature  Newspapers (coming soon) MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/0913

 MetaArchive provides a cost-effective cooperative structure:  secure distributed digital preservation of archives  based on re-use of LOCKSS for archives  Network participation as a MetaArchive- LOCKSS cache is simple and cheap MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/0914

 Preservation solution needed a long-term, sustainable infrastructure  Question arose: Who’s in charge of a Cooperative of peer institutions?  Sought guidance  legal team, librarians, archivists, and IP specialists  Created core structure in 2006:  charter, membership agreement, papers of incorporation, business plans, etc. MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/0915

 Separating the administrative apparatus and member institutions  provides a clear line of leadership and responsibility  helps to keep any one member’s goals from unduly influencing the cooperative’s direction  gives leverage for external partnerships 16 MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/0916

 reducing our short- and long-term costs  Investing in a commonly-owned solution, not purchasing a service  Sharing technological development and organizational tasks  decentralizing our activities  Safety in this “brave new world” of digital preservation may well reside in shared knowledge and shared commitment  decreasing dependence on third-party solutions  There is room for various types of solutions  Increased capacity for acting as a community of cultural stewards MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/0917

 Outsourcing core services = risky proposition  Core missions:  Building collections  Disseminating collections  Preserving collections Cannot focus on the collections at the expense of the services … need both in order to carry our missions forward MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/0918

 Dr. Katherine Skinner   MetaArchive - ARL-CNI /16/0919