Child pages
  • Tuesday 10th February
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

 

Connect 

Dial: +1 (530) 881-1400
Access Code: 651025#

 

Attendees

Karen Cariani (WGBH)
Tom Cramer (Stanford)
Richard Green (Hull) (apologies)
Julie Rudder (Northwestern)
Jim Tuttle (Duke)

 

Agenda and notes

  1.  Roll call
    1. Welcome any new folks
    2. Facilitator and note taker for this call?
    3. Call for agenda items
  2. Reviews
    1. Web presence comparison matrix
    2. Persona materials: Personas from elsewhere :: Persona Template
    3. Look at key roles:  Tuesday 27th January
  3. Next steps
  4. Next call
    1. Date? Tuesday 24th February?
    2. Facilitator? tbd
    3. Note taker? tbd

Notes

  • Julie Rudder = Facilitator, Tom Cramer = Note taker
  • Web Presence matrix = 75% done. 
    • Julie will complete Fedora (site was dog slow)
    • Jim will pick up OpenCast
    • Tom will do Figshare and Archivematica 
    Next step = as a group debrief on findings, insights on what makes sites most useful
  • Personas
    • general commendation for Julie's template; will add picture and name as a useful personification
    • appreciation for Spotlight examples. Julie drew on Spotlight and simplified slightly.
    • Avalon had two categories: primary users and secondary users
    • What's missing from this list? 
      • Last April's Power Steering meeting generated, for marketing purposes, a list of stakeholders:
        • * CFO
        • * CIO
        • * CTO
        • * University Librarians / head library director (who may not be familiar with IT)
        • * Provost
        • * VP of Research
        • * Medical School
        • * Senior leadership in IT, enterprise architect types
        • * Large(r) IT consultancy firms - product oriented
        • * General council office and tech transfer (several +1s)
        • * Purchasing
        • * Computational scientists - HPC folk supporting faculty
        • * Administrative computing
        • * Managers of research infrastructure (eg DH data center managers)
        • * Office of sponsored programs
        • * Faculty senate
        • * Drupallers (!)
        • * IT managers & sys admins (who don’t have RoR / Agile / Hydra experience...)
        • ...and not forgetting academic staff
      • DevelopersArchivists
        • new to Hydra (may not know RoR)
        • experienced
      • List is potentially too specific – computational scientists? 
      • Partners/AffiliatesDeveloper / Tech Staff, Managers, Administrators, Content/Functional Specialists, Affiliates
        • DPLA, Archivematica, Fedora, etc.
           
    Refined List of Key Audiences
    • Developers  (tick)
      • new dev (doesn't know RoR & Hydra stack components)  (tick)
      • veteran dev ( (tick) for wiki)
      • sys admin
      • architect / strategists --> doing tech assessment
    • Managers  (tick) --> need to understand project, what it does, how it works, but not necessarily how to do it, typically making the case internally on using Hydra
      • tech managers
      • enterprise architect types
      • central IT
      • project manager
      • resource managers for IT staff
      • Repository manager
    • Administrators / Senior Leaders  (tick) --> Do you pass the smell test? quality site? trustworthy? Who is using it? etc.?
      • UL (non tech)
      • AUL (tech and non-tech) : (tick) Tech may be coming to meetings, making the case internally: often the champions for project w/in administration but not spending all their time on it  
      • CIO (more technical)
      • Provost??? 
      • Committee members (doing tech selection, etc.)
    • Content/Functional Specialists  (tick)
      • Preservation Librarians
      • Archivists
      • Metadata librarians
      • Repository managers
      • AV
      • Geospatial, Science data..., etc.
    • Affiliates  (tick)
      • Vendors  & potential vendors  (tick) 
      • Other projects–do they overlap, do they want to integrate (DPLA, Archivematica, Fedora users, Islandora)
      • Granting agencies & funders
  • Other vectors
    • small IT shop vs. large IT shop
    • completely new to project vs. potential adopter vs. current partners vs. longtime adopters

Next Steps:

  • Tom will share a shortlist of personas
  • finish web presences matrix
    • think about how we will use this information
  • next meeting: 
    • Feb 24 doesn't work for Karen or Tom
    • Karen will propose alternative dates of Feb 26 or Mar 3 via email


  • No labels