Another Year, Another...

Mixed bag.

Again, I begin another year hitting the ground running. Or, rather, coughing. I brought home a whopper of a cold and cough from a well-needed, extended vacation to Utah. This too shall pass.

But, project-wise, I have some leftover Archivists to the Rescue work to plan with the slightly smaller team. I should back up a bit here. Around Thanksgiving, I was alerted by the SAA Council Rep that SAA would no longer support the Archivists to the Rescue project. It was a bit shocking, since the support given previously had been very limited (we raised our own funding by selling the Archivist pins from the Los Angeles Archivists Collective, making more than three times the original seed money provided by SAA for the pin purchase), the work itself fulfilled many of the goals of the strategic plan, the data we collected had not yet been analyzed and shared with SAA, and the number of people supporting the work and giving us positive feedback about it kept growing steadily throughout the year.

I had a few questions, but the big one amounted to "could we take the work elsewhere?" Eventually the questions were answered, and we can. So, I'm looking into doing that.

I've also been asked by the NJ State Library to participate in an effort that will, hopefully, lead to a statewide digitization program, related to NJ's entry into the DPLA's hub system. I'd like to see some focus on context for images and other cultural heritage materials that are digitized and shared online. Sure, it's important to follow standards in terms of size and resolution, and other elements. However, it also must be a priority to have substantial descriptive, as well as technical metadata. We need to put these items not just into historical context, but the context of the collection of which it is a part. There is meaning in the way people and organizations collected and organized their things. That's a soap box I've worn my clog prints into over the years.

It's nice to be asked to be part of this type of project, as the project manager and I are both very big fans of the Culture in Transit program. I've seen a few conference sessions on that program, and they've always been impressive. I'm especially bowled over by their documentation and the fact that they made all of their information available online so folks don't need to reinvent the wheel with their projects. It's always good to learn from successful innovators. 

I try to be as transparent as possible in all of my project work, using online collaboration tools and sharing widely. I also share my department documentation on the Chester Library web site. It took a fair amount of researching what others did to create similar documents, and the least I can do is make them available for other Lone Arrangers and small historical organizations that don't already have the documents needed to run a successful archive.

As I write this, I am reminded of a time when I wrote frequently about online collaboration environments and strategies to improve organizational communication by using them. Now, folks use Google docs and other tools to collaborate all the time. It's pretty intuitive and straightforward. Back then (the bulk of my work in the area was in 2004-2007), there were places like Yahoo Groups, but if you wanted to do some sophisticated stuff like sharing documents and working on the simultaneously, you had to spend a lot of dough and time learning the software.

We have come a long way in terms of tools we can use to work together. But, working well together is an art. Collaborating as a team requires a host of skills that 1. don't come easily to many people, 2. aren't taught in most schools (I'm not talking about leadership programs here), and must be practiced regularly. Creating an environment where everyone's ideas are welcomed and encouraged is a must. We can disagree, but we have to agree to disagree without being disagreeable. We also can table things, and circle back to them at a time may be more productive. Putting things to the side doesn't mean they aren't worth considering. It means that they are acknowledged, but we're just not sure what to do with them now. They might be exactly what we need later, though.

Last year, I participated in a year-long, county leadership program. It's primarily designed to shape folks to run for local office. That isn't why I did it, though. I thought Leadership Somerset would help me learn how to be a better leader in all of my work. And, it did. It also reinforced ideas and practices that I've known and put to work throughout my career path, especially my work with Archivists to the Rescue. It was a herculean effort to manage all of the people, sites, outreach, documents, videos, and everything else involved with that project during the year span it was running on full steam. It amounted to a full-time job, on top of my paid work.

There's still more work to wrap up on that Big Project, and it will get done. But my biggest takeaway is that when folks tell you that a project might be too ambitious, don't be afraid of it. Do your best. Commit to going all in. Most importantly, if your work is based in serving the public in some way, let that inspire and steer the project. As long as I focus on the original purpose of the work (to make "hidden" materials accessible and meaningful to researchers, to ensure that everyone's stories are being told, to make our collective historical record inclusive to all), it will all fall into place (eventually).