Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
1
More Product, Less Process:
A Low-Calorie, High-Fiber Alternative to Traditional Archival Processing
Mark A. Greene, American Heritage Center
Dennis Meissner, Minnesota Historical Society
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
2
The Problem Archival processing does not keep
pace with the growth of collections
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
3
The Problem Archival processing does not keep
pace with the growth of collections• Unprocessed backlogs continue to grow
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
4
The Problem Archival processing does not keep
pace with the growth of collections• Unprocessed backlogs continue to grow• Researchers denied access to collections
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
5
The Problem Archival processing does not keep
pace with the growth of collections• Unprocessed backlogs continue to grow• Researchers denied access to collections• Our image with donors and resource
allocators suffers
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
6
Hypotheses Increasing breadth and scale of
contemporary collections
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
7
Hypotheses Increasing breadth and scale of
contemporary collections Failure to revise processing
benchmarks to deal with problem
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
8
Methodology Literature review
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
9
Methodology Literature review Repository survey
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
10
Repository Survey Respondents
C&U Archives
Research Libraries
Religious Institutions
State Archives/HistoricalAgencies
County/Local Govt. Archives
Museum Archives
Public Libraries
Other
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
11
Methodology Literature review Repository survey Grant project survey (NHPRC files)
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
12
Methodology Literature review Repository survey Grant project survey (NHPRC files) User survey
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
13
Methodology Literature review Repository survey Grant project survey (NHPRC files) User survey Review of related surveys
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
14
Findings Processing benchmarks and
practices are inappropriate to deal with problems posed by large contemporary collections
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
15
Findings Processing benchmarks and
practices are inappropriate to deal with problems posed by large contemporary collections
• Ideal vs. necessary
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
16
Findings Processing benchmarks and
practices are inappropriate to deal with problems posed by large contemporary collections
• Ideal vs. necessary• Fixation on item level tasks
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
17
Findings Processing benchmarks and
practices are inappropriate to deal with problems posed by large contemporary collections
• Ideal vs. necessary• Fixation on item level tasks• Preservation anxieties trump user needs
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
18
Findings Arrangement
•Practice: Still often at the item level
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
19
92
60
68
0 20 40 60 80 100
WeedDuplicates(20th C.)
SeparatePhotos
Arrange atI tem Level
Survey: Arrangement Practice
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
20
Findings Arrangement
• Practice: Still often at the item level•Warrant: Literature mixed, but much
advises against item level work
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
21
Findings Description
Practice:• Weak commitment to online access• Little focus on item level
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
22
Survey: Descriptive Practice
We "sometimes, usually, or always"...
31
38
72
0 20 40 60 80
HTML (in lieu of EAD)
EAD Finding Aids
Cat. Records in OPAC
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
23
Findings Description
Practice:• Weak commitment to online access• Little focus on item level
Warrant:• Describe all holdings, in general, before
describing some in detail• Descriptive level follows arrangement level• Level varies from collection to collection
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
24
Findings Conservation
•Practice: Strong commitment to item level work
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
25
Survey: Conservation Practice
We "sometimes, usually, or always"...
88
46.9
81
89
0 20 40 60 80 100
Separate and/ orSleeve Photos
Encapsulate/ MendTorn I tems
PhotocopyNewsprint, etc.
Remve MetalFasteners
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
26
Findings Conservation
•Practice: Strong commitment to item level work
•Warrant: Item-focused conservation prescriptions often contradict advice on arrangement and description
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
27
Findings Metrics
•Literature: Range of 4-40 hours per cubic foot
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
28
Findings Metrics
•Literature: Range of 4-40 hours per cubic foot
• However, a convincing body of experience coalesces at the high-productivity end:
• Maher, 1982 (3.4 hours per cubic foot)• Haller, 1987 (3.8 hours per cubic foot)• Northeastern University Processing Manual
(4-10 hours per cubic foot)
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
29
Productivity Expectations(Hours/cubic foot)
0 20 40
RepositorySurvey
Grant FileSurvey
Literature
MeanMode
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
30
Findings Metrics
•Literature: Range of 4 - 40 hours per cubic foot
•Grant Project Survey: 0.6 – 67 hours per cubic foot (Mode = 33 hours ; Mean = 9 hours)
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
31
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.001 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45
Repository Identifier
Cub
ic F
eet
NHPRC Grant Files Survey: Cubic Feet Processed Per Day
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
32
Findings Metrics
•Literature: Range of 4 - 40 hours per cubic foot
•Grant Project Survey: 0.6 – 67 hours per cubic foot (Mode = 33 ; Mean = 9)
•Survey of Archivists: 2 – 250 hours per cubic foot (Mode = 8 ; Mean = 14.8)
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
33
Repository Survey: Quantity that Archivist Can Process in a Year
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Respondent identifier
Cub
ic F
eet p
er Y
ear
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
34
Recommendations General Principles for Change
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
35
Recommendations General Principles for Change
• Establish acceptable minimum level of work, and make it the processing benchmark
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
36
Recommendations General Principles for Change
• Establish acceptable minimum level of work, and make it the benchmark
• Don’t assume all collections, or all collection components, will be processed to same level
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
37
Recommendations Arrangement Description Conservation Productivity
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
38
Recommendations Arrangement
• In normal or typical situations, the physical arrangement of materials in archival groups and manuscript collections should not take place below the series level
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
39
Recommendations Arrangement
• In normal or typical situations, the physical arrangement of materials in archival groups and manuscript collections should not take place below the series level
• Not all series and all files in a collection need to be arranged to the same level
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
40
Recommendations Description
• Since description represents arrangement: describe materials at a level of detail appropriate to that level of arrangement
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
41
Recommendations Description
• Since description represents arrangement: describe materials at a level of detail appropriate to that level of arrangement
• Keep description brief and simple
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
42
Recommendations Description
• Since description represents arrangement: describe materials at a level of detail appropriate to that level of arrangement
• Keep description brief and simple• Level of description should vary across
collections, and across components within a collection
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
43
Recommendations Conservation
• Rely on storage area environmental controls to carry the conservation burden
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
44
Recommendations Conservation
• Rely on storage area environmental controls to carry the conservation burden
• Avoid wholesale refoldering
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
45
Recommendations Conservation
• Rely on storage area environmental controls to carry the conservation burden
• Avoid wholesale refoldering• Avoid removing and replacing metal fasteners
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
46
Recommendations Conservation
• Rely on storage area environmental controls to carry the conservation burden
• Avoid wholesale refoldering• Avoid removing and replacing metal fasteners• Avoid photocopying items on poor paper
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
47
Recommendations Conservation
• Rely on storage area environmental controls to carry the conservation burden
• Don’t perform conservation tasks at a lower hierarchical level than you perform arrangement and description
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
48
Recommendations Productivity
• A processing archivist ought to be able to arrange and describe large twentieth century archival materials at an average rate of 4 hours per cubic foot
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
49
GOAL: Effective collection management strategies
User access is preeminent objective
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
50
GOAL: Effective collection management strategies
User access is preeminent objective Resource management is crucial
strategy
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
51
GOAL: Effective collection management strategies
User access is preeminent objective Resource management is crucial
strategy We must understand the practical
consequences of our processing decisions
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
52
Lessons learned What do our users really need and
expect?
•Access• Online discovery tools• Effective finding aids
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
53
Lessons learned What are the essentials of effective
arrangement work?
• Respect des fonds• Original order• Series-level arrangement
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
54
Lessons learned What preservation activities are
truly necessary?
• Protection from light• Protection from atmospheric pollutants• Protection from excessive heat• Protection from moisture
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
55
Lessons learned
What productivity levels can realistically be achieved and expected?
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
56
Understanding our behavior
Our processing actions contradict our managerial self image
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
57
Past Model
Process driven Resource insensitive Artisan quality High unit cost Lengthy turnaround Stable resources
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
58
Future Model
Audience driven Resource sensitive Production quality Low unit cost Rapid turnaround Uncertain resources
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
59
A better model
Make user access paramount: the most material available in a usable form
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
60
A better model
Expend the greatest effort on the most deserving or needful materials
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
61
A better model Establish acceptable minimum level
of work, and make it the processing benchmark
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
62
A better model
Embrace flexibility : Don’t assume all collections, or all collection components, will be processed to same level
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
63
A better model Embrace ambiguity : Stop
pretending that you know what will be important in the future
• User needs and interests• Access and description needs•See every collection as a potential work
in progress• Let future events drive further work
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
64
A better model
Don’t allow preservation anxieties to trump user access and higher managerial values
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
65
A better model
Establish good risk management models
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
66
Early Implementers University of Montana—Missoula
• Donna McCrea [email protected]
• No physical work within file folders• Uniform collection-level descriptive access• No weeding below series level for backlog • No notable user acceptance problems• 2 hours per linear foot on average
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
67
Early Implementers Yale Univ.—Manuscripts & Archives
• Christine Weideman [email protected]
• Minimal but adequate processing at point of accessioning
• Offer to share processing work with donors• Emphasize flexibility in approach each
collection
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
68
Early Implementers Texas Christian University Archives
• Michael Strom [email protected]
• Jim Wright Congressional Papers (huge)• Minimal processing on most series, reserving
intensive work for others• Restricted appraisal to high-level decisions
only• Proved effective for guiding student workers• Productivity increases have impressed deans
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
69
Early Implementers Yale—Beinecke Library
• Tom Hyry [email protected]
• Use drives processing: priorities and levels• Minimum standard used on vast majority • All collections should have basic
descriptions before any receive more detailed description
• All collections are not created equal
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
70
Early Implementers Univ. of WI—Eau Claire
• Colleen McFarland [email protected]
• Be flexible: rigid standards don’t work• Be imperfect: keep focused on the forest• Focus on users: Access is their priority
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
71
Early Implementers Univ. of Alaska—Fairbanks
• Anne Foster [email protected]
• Series level processing of extensive photographs
• Lets use drive more intensive processing• Involves donor in processing continuum• Solicits $$ donations from donors for more
processing
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
72
Early Implementers Univ. of WI—Oshkosh
• Joshua Ranger [email protected]
•Series level processing of digitized collections
•High-speed bi-tonal scanning of photocopied collection materials
•The perfect is the enemy of the good•Move metadata level from item to folder
level
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
73
Early Implementers Library of Congress—Prints &
Photos• Helena Zinkham [email protected]
• Minimal processing of photo collections• Prioritize level and sequencing of
processing work based on collection characteristics: use, value, viability
• Save big efforts for the neediest materials
Twin Cities Archives Roundtable April 18, 2007
74
“Insanity is when you do things the way you’ve always done them, but expect a different result.”
--adage ascribed to both Albert Einstein and Ralph Waldo Emerson.