Area 51 notes – April 1, 2010

Area 51 notes – Apr. 1, 2010
Present: Shel Sax, Mike Roy, Mary Backus, Jeff Rehbach, Mike Lynch, Terry Simpkins, Doreen Bernier, Carol Peddie

Joseph joined us to discuss ways we can incorporate 2nd floor Voter staff into the Main Library. We focused on trying to keep functional groups intact as much as we could, keeping managers and workgroups in proximity, and also tried to consider the impact of noise.  Once we are sure that we have enough physical spaces allocated, the plan will most likely allocate blocks (usually but not always contiguous) of space to each area, and allow the areas to make individual office assignments within their block.

We held a mostly confidential staffing discussion of various outstanding job descriptions and the hiring process

Discussed the Digital Archives Team proposal to create a Digital Committee, which would have primary oversight for vetting proposals, and a Digital Center, which would be the primary group doing the work of content and metadata creation.  There would be some overlap between the two groups.  The proposal was approved without specific membership decisions at this time (more details will be forthcoming!).  There will also be a space dedicated for work on digital projects in the space plan.  Mike R. also mentioned the idea of creating an advisory group of faculty to work with Special Collections in identifying significant materials there that should be given priority in terms of processing and providing access.

Carol talked about “zero-based” budgeting.  The ADs will review their budget lines, make sure we are clear on what each line is used for model, and set priorities.  The ADs will also review the 3rd quarter budget report to be sure it’s on target, as well as the capital equipment fund.

Mike R. will work with Fred Schmitt to select dates for his visit to work with the new teams, tentatively scheduled for May 10-13.

We discussed the impact of the hejira of various members of ACS to other areas on the liaison program, specifically what their ongoing responsibilities will be.  Mike R. proposed that we not absolve them of those responsibilities, although these may shift somewhat and will need to be discussed with the staff members and their supervisors to make sure workloads are balanced and reasonable.  Mike L. will need to pull out of his liaison responsibilities because of his AD appointment, but will remain in that role until a succession plan is formed.  Terry suggested that most or all of the primary liaison responsibilities remain within the CM group, although this will need more discussion with those folks to see If that is realistic.  Most of the supporting liaisons will remain in that capacity, and others could conceivably be brought into these roles if necessary.  Liaison meetings will be set up monthly, with the expectation that liaisons will attend; AD’s will talk to their managers to make sure that staff has time for this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *