Friday, October 11 at 11:00 EST

Attendees

LG and SG members:

Paul Albert, Ann Beynon, Mike Conlon,(star) Tom Cramer,  Anna Guillaumet, Doug Hahn, Virginia (Ginny) Pannabecker, Julia Trimmer,Alex Viggio,Steve McCauley

LYRASIS:

Laurie Gemmill Arp , Robert Miller

Regrets:

Federico Ferrario,  Violeta Ilik, hannah sommers, Terrie Wheeler, Andrew Woods, Dong Joon (DJ) Lee, Christian Hauschk,  

Not Attending: 

Robert Cartolano

(star) Note taker

Connection Information

To join the online meeting:

Agenda

  1. Review agenda.  Julia, 2 minutes.
  2. Prioritizing VIVO challenges: feedback on the ranking process (Julia and everyone, 30 minutes)
  3. Introducing the "It Takes a Village" framework and proposed next steps (Laurie, 15 minutes)
  4. VIVO opportunities at events (Mike, 10 minutes) . See Event Opportunities
  5. Conference report.  See VIVO 2019 Conference report

Notes

  1. Ranking VIVO Challenges exercise
    1. Many challenges across many diverse areas; order and structure was hard; spread was large
    2. See ranking of challenges. 
      1. First slide is traditional ranking
      2. Second slide is counts of challenges given any ranking.
    3. Opinions: 
      1. Paul Albert (for Teri): Great list of challenges; all over the map. Governance, product, etc. Would have hoped for clearer consensus on how to move forward from a project this mature. This is an opportunity for growth. The biggest challenge is the product itself; how do we build a product that appeals to many stakeholders (CIOs, savvy technologists, etc.). Need to have a common vision for how the product can grow. In antitrusts, when a company is too big, they break it up. Maybe we should break VIVO up into its essential components and let them talk to each other via microservices. Would like the group to buy into that vision. Was the exercise helpful? Don't want to second guess that; a good statement would incorporate a lot of the feedback. Maybe pull out governance. From comments in chat: "I would be interested in grouping these by governance, product design, etc. And then give voters an opportunity to vote on everything."
      2. Ann: had a lot of options, many overlapping / similar. VIVO must evolve; VIVO must be attractive to new users; VIVO must have clear value prop relative to LOD. These need development support to happen. How do we get VIVO. How do we communicate the value prop of VIVO? This is something Ann & Clarivate can help with. Maybe we can have a working group. 
      3. Mike: How many people provided numerical ranks? 11. We could use more coherence (less spread) in developing priorities for these to be actionable. But a lot of these have been talked about for years. We could use more work in defining the survey instrument to allow for clustering, actionability. Start over? Hard to do that when we've already started. Maybe hear about ITAV next. 
      4. Anna: Like the suggestions; there are a lot of things to do. Could be put into a strategic plan with different areas. 7 is not a lot of options; could work on those. Or we could pick different ones. Should we move forward with this list? Yes.
      5. Doug: Would be up for refining this list. Don't need to start over. 
      6. Ginny: Was a good exercise. Perhaps a second round would be useful. 
      7. Julia: Anxious to move forward with the plan to make some changes and address these challenges. Could do another round for this; would be happy to work on that. 
      8. Alex: <Has dogs, is at home.> Liked having opportunity to hear other people out. Challenge was which perspective to apply: community leader, or head of Faculty Systems at CU Boulder.  Would try a vote to do this again, but apply what we learned here. Should we come at this one more time with a task force? Can get behind these for the most part. Would prefer to try this again, refine from here (not start from scratch). Have more people respond and in a consistent way. 
      9. Tom: thinks we need product vision and also procedural tweaks; this seems similar to outputs of previous exercise. Can next step be one of action–how can we move to progress on key issues (product vision, governance, resourcing)? Another survey won't move the needle. 
      10. Steve: Lots of questions and lots of overlap among questions. Key questions are how do we set overarching strategy and how do we structure things to let community members contribute? 
      11. Robert: When things are not going well, it can be better and easier to make drastic changes rather than incremental change. VIVO has both technical and community challenges. VIVO seems stuck: groove or rut? This might be a good time to manufacture a crisis. 
  2. It Takes A Village
    1. https://lyrasis.org/itav
    2. See slides.
      1. Governance
      2. Technology
      3. Resourcing
      4. Community Engagement
    3. Suggest & Recommend: 
      1. Holistic examination of VIVO (across all 4 ITAV areas)
        1. look at VIVO challenges exercise
        2. look at internal VIVO ITAV assessment
      2. Community exercise & visioning exercise might be the next step
    4. Discussion
      1. What would we do? (at next meeting)
        1. Proposal
        2. Proposal and exercise
      2. Is this in addition to or instead of the ranking exercise? 
        1. Instead. 
      3. Proposal: Laurie will bring to ITAV framework discussion to next meeting of LG (Nov 8)
    5. Request: can we use subject tags in email lines? 
  3. VIVO Conference & Meeting opportunities: 
    1. Informational item
    2. DIscussion deferred
    3. See Event Opportunities write up by Mike





  • No labels

All content on the LYRASIS Wiki is licensed under the CC BY (Attribution) license, unless otherwise noted.