from geekandpoke

I’m just in the midst of reading this ITHAKA S+R report on the sustainability of digital “projects.” It’s one of those reports where the basic ideas are so simple, but you didn’t realize that you knew them until you read it. Among the things that they suggest are vital to sustainability of projects:

• Dedicated and entrepreneurial leadership (this could also be ongoing leadership: how many digitization projects do you know of that fell apart or became static after the project manager left)?
• A clear value proposition (as in clear evidence of the value of the project)
• Minimizing direct costs (hello appropriate outsourcing!)
• Developing diverse revenue sources (of course that’s a dirty word in some parts of the academy)
• Clear accountability and metrics for success

The question I am increasingly coming to grips with is: In an era of “Do More with Less” what priority does digitization take in the grand scheme of library work? Especially since a lot of us are still out there at the grass roots level trying to raise support. We know that there is a future for this material, but in some cases our faculty don’t yet fully realize what they can do with it (Digital Humanists aside). They may be pleased to be able to replicate as much of their traditional research paradigm online as they can, but it’s hard to argue that we need twice as many resources so we can provide redundant online and in-house services. The small but growing field of Digital Humanities can be effective partners, but they are just one group. Even our own fellow librarians may not be able to grasp how it is more than “putting pictures online”.

In the face of possibly taking another 10% budget cut here that will reduce the staff even further, is digitization the priority? If we do have to cut back, what do we deem the essential activities:

• Digitization, but less robust metadata
• Digitization and metadata but little to no preservation activity
• Very limited further development of repository tools (this includes both public and administrative tools)

Obviously, a lot of work done by the digital curation communities (DigCCurr, DCC, and ICPSR being among the most prominent) can be a guide, but studies of sustainability seem to reinforce the idea that we can’t cut back, that the only way to ensure that these materials meet their potential is to continue to invest resources into maintaining them, and even to increase those resources into the future. So instead of cutting back as above, should I as project manager begin looking into more diverse and creative ways to find funding outside of my organization’s budget? Is it time to create the “digital swear jar” that Ann and I used to joke about (in which we would put an online donation link in the repository and ask people to donate a dollar every time they swore)?

Merrilee Proffitt and Jennifer Schaffner wrote:

Although we need evidence of the impact of digitization and the unique collections themselves, quantitative metrics aren’t enough. We must make sure libraries and archives both measure use of special collections and work with faculty to demonstrate their value for excellent research.” (RLG Programs 2008: The Impact of Digitizing Special Collections on Teaching and Scholarship [PDF], p. 7. )

How can we measure the “impact” of our digital collections? What uses are most important to us? What are the best methods for documenting them? Surveys? Case studies? Interviews? How would we know these uses were taking place, especially in the classroom? Could we use citation analysis somehow? Would citation analysis miss some innovative uses of our collections, like mashups or digital art?

What about evaluation of internal processes in digital collection-building? Do you keep track of the average time and cost to build a digital collection? Average time and cost per item? One interesting idea for documentation and evaluation of internal workflows is the Balanced Scorecard management tool in use at University of Virginia Libraries. Could we adapt a model like this for digitization initiatives?

This work is relevant for several reasons. Someday, these contemporary documents will be historical documents. That is, if they exist at all. If they are not saved, our history goes with them. That’s just a simple fact. But the value of this work goes far deeper. I mean, we preserve the physical (read: paper) copy of the Declaration of Independence to ensure that we do not forget our ideals of democratic government; we preserve Abraham Lincoln’s letters not only as a testament to his strength, influence, and unconquerable spirit, but also for the historical importance of their content in documenting the activities of a sitting president. It is no less important to preserve the intellectual output of our public servants today because they create it with computers and not quill pens. In 2008, we elected the first female governor in North Carolina’s history. Shouldn’t her tenure be documented and saved?

On another level, this work is important for those who cannot (or can no longer) afford to travel to pursue their research. Because of budget cuts, many of us cannot travel right now, no matter how important it is to the work we do. This will continue to worsen before it gets better. For researchers, limiting funds for travel can be devastating. Content offered through digital repositories can play a huge part in aiding these patrons. And, as more researchers opt for online over in-person visits, many of us have begun tracking their needs and digitizing in response to them.

The problem is that many libraries around the country are facing significant budget and staffing cuts. Our own Library is, as well. The funny thing is that many indicators* point to library usage increasing during economic downturns. In this era of online everything, will our web stats increase as much, or more, than our turnstile counts? And if so, are we ready to respond to that usage? How do we offer the services that patrons need with a smaller budget and fewer staff? I’m betting on our online services to help us weather this storm. And, we’ll continue to do our part in preserving democracy by providing free access to government information.

* See, for instance, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008630228_libraries15.html, http://www.wickedlocal.com/braintree/archive/x511410985/Library-use-booms-during-economic-downturn, http://www.stevenspointjournal.com/article/20081215/SPJ0101/812150372/1657, and http://blog.njla.org/archives/2009/01/