I like how you focus here on plans. When I was looking over the NDSA’s levels, I was imagining people either jumping into it rather quickly (the hustle to prevent digital deterioration!) or looking at their current digital collections and identifying ways they needed to or could improve. It would make sense, though, for people to use these to map out how they can spend their time efficiently, to address all of the needs that come with building and maintaining a digital archive.
I wanted to ask you about planning for priorities to shift– which I read as having more/less resources to work with. In such a case, do you think there are certain categories in the LoDP that should be kept at or brought to higher levels than others?
@aerogers: that’s a tricky question, so I guess it’s best to say that it depends. At work, I have to take the idea that priorities (really, things in general) will change – it’s inevitable. When I’m working on a processioning project, the first thing I ask myself is: if I have to drop this tomorrow or next week and someone has to pick this back up again in two years, what can I do to make it easier? Having a plan or some kind of documentation as a record of what you’ve done/what you planned on doing can aid in this process.
I say “it depends” because every institution or project has its own unique goals and missions. If you work for a competitive, for-profit company, perhaps “Information Security” may be prioritized over, say, “Metadata.” Meanwhile, it could be the complete opposite for a library.
Like you said, planning is an essential part of any endeavor. It’s especially important in areas like digital preservation where there are countless factors to take into consideration. However, the harsh reality of life (especially for a control freak like me) is that no matter how much you plan, something will change or go wrong.
That’s why I enjoyed the LoDP article so much. The authors recognized that their plan was simply a generalization and could easily differ among various institutions. They even encouraged other institutions to modify and improve it.
So your idea of planning for things like obsolescence and shifting priorities is important, but realistically how much can you really plan for? There’s no way to anticipate every scenario you might encounter, but having a basic guideline (like LoDP) is always a good idea.
I like how you focus here on plans. When I was looking over the NDSA’s levels, I was imagining people either jumping into it rather quickly (the hustle to prevent digital deterioration!) or looking at their current digital collections and identifying ways they needed to or could improve. It would make sense, though, for people to use these to map out how they can spend their time efficiently, to address all of the needs that come with building and maintaining a digital archive.
I wanted to ask you about planning for priorities to shift– which I read as having more/less resources to work with. In such a case, do you think there are certain categories in the LoDP that should be kept at or brought to higher levels than others?
@aerogers: that’s a tricky question, so I guess it’s best to say that it depends. At work, I have to take the idea that priorities (really, things in general) will change – it’s inevitable. When I’m working on a processioning project, the first thing I ask myself is: if I have to drop this tomorrow or next week and someone has to pick this back up again in two years, what can I do to make it easier? Having a plan or some kind of documentation as a record of what you’ve done/what you planned on doing can aid in this process.
I say “it depends” because every institution or project has its own unique goals and missions. If you work for a competitive, for-profit company, perhaps “Information Security” may be prioritized over, say, “Metadata.” Meanwhile, it could be the complete opposite for a library.
Like you said, planning is an essential part of any endeavor. It’s especially important in areas like digital preservation where there are countless factors to take into consideration. However, the harsh reality of life (especially for a control freak like me) is that no matter how much you plan, something will change or go wrong.
That’s why I enjoyed the LoDP article so much. The authors recognized that their plan was simply a generalization and could easily differ among various institutions. They even encouraged other institutions to modify and improve it.
So your idea of planning for things like obsolescence and shifting priorities is important, but realistically how much can you really plan for? There’s no way to anticipate every scenario you might encounter, but having a basic guideline (like LoDP) is always a good idea.