This invited talk at the University of Oregon Libraries addressed building user engagement and community around repository services.

1. R E P O S I T O RY S E R V I C E S : C H A L L E N G E S
A N D O P P O RT U N I T I E S
B U I L D I N G A N D S U S TA I N I N G C O M M U N I T Y E N G A G E M E N T A R O U N D
Patricia Hswe | @pmhswe
University of Oregon Libraries | 23 March 2015
Graphic created by Michael Tribone

2. W H AT T H E TA L K W I L L C O V E R
• Context: Laying a foundation for repository services
(infrastructure)
• How we invested & continue to invest in user
engagement
• “ScholarSphere the project” (development)
• “ScholarSphere the service” (production)
• Where we are now — two-and-a-half years later

3. B U T, R E A L LY, T H E S U B T E X T I S WAY
M O R E I N T E R E S T I N G . . .

4. • What is “community”?
What community/
communities? Who?
• What is “engagement”?
• Operationalizing the
above concepts
• Sustainability
challenges
B U T, R E A L LY, T H E S U B T E X T I S WAY
M O R E I N T E R E S T I N G . . .

5. • What is “community”?
What community/
communities? Who?
• What is “engagement”?
• Operationalizing the
above concepts
• Sustainability
challenges
• Defining / transforming
other concepts, e.g.:
• “Beta release” and
evolving a service
• Service/product
management
• Digital scholarship
• Collection development
• Liaison librarianship
B U T, R E A L LY, T H E S U B T E X T I S WAY
M O R E I N T E R E S T I N G . . .

7. M Y C O N T E X T, M Y R O L E S

8. M Y C O N T E X T, M Y R O L E S

9. M Y C O N T E X T, M Y R O L E S

10. D I G I TA L
S C H O L A R S H I P -
M Y C O N T E X T, M Y R O L E S

11. D I G I TA L
S C H O L A R S H I P -
• P R O G R A M M I N G
M Y C O N T E X T, M Y R O L E S

12. D I G I TA L
S C H O L A R S H I P -
• P R O G R A M M I N G
• S U P P O RT
M Y C O N T E X T, M Y R O L E S

13. D I G I TA L
S C H O L A R S H I P -
• P R O G R A M M I N G
• S U P P O RT
• S E R V I C E S
M Y C O N T E X T, M Y R O L E S

14. D I G I TA L
S C H O L A R S H I P -
• P R O G R A M M I N G
• S U P P O RT
• S E R V I C E S
• C O L L A B O R AT I O N S
M Y C O N T E X T, M Y R O L E S

15. L AY I N G A F O U N D AT I O N F O R
R E P O S I T O RY S E R V I C E S
( I N F R A S T R U C T U R E )
C O N T E X T:

16. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E

17. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E
• 2010

18. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E
• 2010
• Platform review - carried out by new hires in Libraries and
ITS (assignment from Content Stewardship Council)

19. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E
• 2010
• Platform review - carried out by new hires in Libraries and
ITS (assignment from Content Stewardship Council)
• 2011

20. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E
• 2010
• Platform review - carried out by new hires in Libraries and
ITS (assignment from Content Stewardship Council)
• 2011
• Curation Architecture Prototype Services (CAPS) pilot project

21. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E
• 2010
• Platform review - carried out by new hires in Libraries and
ITS (assignment from Content Stewardship Council)
• 2011
• Curation Architecture Prototype Services (CAPS) pilot project
• 2011 Open Repositories Conference led to Hydra/Fedora

22. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E
• 2010
• Platform review - carried out by new hires in Libraries and
ITS (assignment from Content Stewardship Council)
• 2011
• Curation Architecture Prototype Services (CAPS) pilot project
• 2011 Open Repositories Conference led to Hydra/Fedora
• 2012 - year of ScholarSphere’s release

23. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E
• 2010
• Platform review - carried out by new hires in Libraries and
ITS (assignment from Content Stewardship Council)
• 2011
• Curation Architecture Prototype Services (CAPS) pilot project
• 2011 Open Repositories Conference led to Hydra/Fedora
• 2012 - year of ScholarSphere’s release
• Program Sigma (for “services”)

24. S C H O L A R S P H E R E T I M E L I N E
• 2010
• Platform review - carried out by new hires in Libraries and
ITS (assignment from Content Stewardship Council)
• 2011
• Curation Architecture Prototype Services (CAPS) pilot project
• 2011 Open Repositories Conference led to Hydra/Fedora
• 2012 - year of ScholarSphere’s release
• Program Sigma (for “services”)
• Nine months to a production release

25. C
O
N
T
E
N
T
dm
E
T
D
db
D
P
u
b
S
O
L
I
V
E
“Grain elevators, Caldwell, Idaho (LOC)” by Russell Lee/LOC Public Domain

26. Got platforms - uh, silos? In
2010 we had these four.
C
O
N
T
E
N
T
dm
E
T
D
db
D
P
u
b
S
O
L
I
V
E
“Grain elevators, Caldwell, Idaho (LOC)” by Russell Lee/LOC Public Domain

27. Got platforms - uh, silos? In
2010 we had these four.
C
O
N
T
E
N
T
dm
E
T
D
db
D
P
u
b
S
O
L
I
V
E
“Grain elevators, Caldwell, Idaho (LOC)” by Russell Lee/LOC Public Domain

28. P L AT F O R M
R E V I E W
2014-04-30 17.09.53 by Nicholas Wang via Flickr CC BY-SA 2.0
At right: Excerpt of rubric used for platform review.

29. P L AT F O R M
R E V I E W
• User interviews and
demos
2014-04-30 17.09.53 by Nicholas Wang via Flickr CC BY-SA 2.0
At right: Excerpt of rubric used for platform review.

30. P L AT F O R M
R E V I E W
• User interviews and
demos
• Developed rubric for
platform assessment
2014-04-30 17.09.53 by Nicholas Wang via Flickr CC BY-SA 2.0
At right: Excerpt of rubric used for platform review.

32. U S E R E N G A G E M E N T
H O W W E I N V E S T E D I N

33. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
What
communities?
Who?

34. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

35. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F FLibrarians & users
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

36. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

37. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

38. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
Use case and
user stories driven
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

39. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
Use case and
user stories driven
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

40. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
Use case and
user stories driven
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

41. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
Use case and
user stories driven
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

42. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
Use case and
user stories driven
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

43. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
[To be
addressed] Use case and
user stories driven
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

44. Getting buy-in. Opposite of isolation, vacuum, going it alone.
What is “engagement”?

45. “ScholarSphere the Project” (development)
~ Operationalizing community engagement ~

46. T E A M M E M B E R S H I P A N D S P O N S O R S
• UL: Digital collections curator, metadata librarian, 20+
stakeholders
• ITS (central IT): Project manager, digital library architect,
applications developer (eventually two), dev ops
• Sponsors (why is this important?)
• UL: Associate Dean, Research & Scholarly
Communications
• ITS: Senior Director, then Digital Library Technologies

47. S TA K E H O L D E R E N G A G E M E N T
A C R O S S T H E L I B R A R I E S
• Arts & Humanities
• Architecture & Landscape
Architecture
• Cataloging & Metadata
Services
• Digitization & Preservation
• Earth & Mineral Sciences
• Education & Behavioral
Sciences
• Engineering
• Life Sciences
• Maps Library
• News & Microforms
• Physical & Mathematical
Sciences
• Social Sciences
• Special Collections

48. O P E R AT I O N A L I Z I N G
S TA K E H O L D E R E N G A G E M E N T
• Scaled out stakeholder efforts
from CAPS project
• Use cases / user scenarios
User Experience by James Royal-Lawson via Flickr
CC BY-SA 2.0

49. O P E R AT I O N A L I Z I N G
S TA K E H O L D E R E N G A G E M E N T
• Scaled out stakeholder efforts
from CAPS project
• Use cases / user scenarios
• Stakeholders talked, we listened
• Developers in the room
• Regular demos of emerging
tool => stakeholder feedback
=> iterative improvements
• Evidence, affirmation, trust User Experience by James Royal-Lawson via Flickr
CC BY-SA 2.0

50. E N G A G E M E N T O P E R AT I O N A L I Z E D :
F O C U S G R O U P + U S A B I L I T Y T E S T I N G

51. E N G A G E M E N T O P E R AT I O N A L I Z E D :
F O C U S G R O U P + U S A B I L I T Y T E S T I N G
• Word-of-mouth promotion

52. E N G A G E M E N T O P E R AT I O N A L I Z E D :
F O C U S G R O U P + U S A B I L I T Y T E S T I N G
• Word-of-mouth promotion
• Faculty, student, staff as
test users

53. E N G A G E M E N T O P E R AT I O N A L I Z E D :
F O C U S G R O U P + U S A B I L I T Y T E S T I N G
• Word-of-mouth promotion
• Faculty, student, staff as
test users
• Developers in the room

54. E N G A G E M E N T O P E R AT I O N A L I Z E D :
F O C U S G R O U P + U S A B I L I T Y T E S T I N G
• Word-of-mouth promotion
• Faculty, student, staff as
test users
• Developers in the room
• Iterative improvements

55. E N G A G E M E N T O P E R AT I O N A L I Z E D :
F O C U S G R O U P + U S A B I L I T Y T E S T I N G
• Word-of-mouth promotion
• Faculty, student, staff as
test users
• Developers in the room
• Iterative improvements
• Role of user empowerment

56. “ScholarSphere the Service” (production)
~ Sustaining community engagement ~

57. Frequent releases = keeping pulse on user needs.

58. R E L E A S E S C O N TA I N F I X E S A N D
F E AT U R E S B A S E D O N U S E R F E E D B A C K

59. R E L E A S E S C O N TA I N F I X E S A N D
F E AT U R E S B A S E D O N U S E R F E E D B A C K
My files are
bigger than the
maximum allowed
size.

60. R E L E A S E S C O N TA I N F I X E S A N D
F E AT U R E S B A S E D O N U S E R F E E D B A C K
My files are
bigger than the
maximum allowed
size.
I don’t have time to
deposit all my files. Can
someone else do it?

61. R E L E A S E S C O N TA I N F I X E S A N D
F E AT U R E S B A S E D O N U S E R F E E D B A C K
My files are
bigger than the
maximum allowed
size.
I don’t have time to
deposit all my files. Can
someone else do it?
I would like to
be able to group my
files.

62. R E L E A S E S C O N TA I N F I X E S A N D
F E AT U R E S B A S E D O N U S E R F E E D B A C K
My files are
bigger than the
maximum allowed
size.
I don’t have time to
deposit all my files. Can
someone else do it?
I would like to
be able to group my
files.
What if I have
files in Dropbox and
Box?

63. R E L E A S E S C O N TA I N F I X E S A N D
F E AT U R E S B A S E D O N U S E R F E E D B A C K
My files are
bigger than the
maximum allowed
size.
I don’t have time to
deposit all my files. Can
someone else do it?
I would like to
be able to group my
files.
What if I have
files in Dropbox and
Box?
We’ve also done short surveys to current users.

64. D E D I C AT E D
M A R K E T I N G
• ITS (IT Comm) offered
to do a ScholarSphere
campaign -
• Fall 2013 - faculty
• Spring 2014 - students
• Boost in new users, new
inquiries

65. S C H O L A R S P H E R E U S E R S G R O U P ( S U G )

66. S C H O L A R S P H E R E U S E R S G R O U P ( S U G )
Initially to provide feedback loop for development of
ScholarSphere 2.0 in 2014

67. S C H O L A R S P H E R E U S E R S G R O U P ( S U G )
Initially to provide feedback loop for development of
ScholarSphere 2.0 in 2014
• Core set of diverse users

68. S C H O L A R S P H E R E U S E R S G R O U P ( S U G )
Initially to provide feedback loop for development of
ScholarSphere 2.0 in 2014
• Core set of diverse users
• Participatory design

69. S C H O L A R S P H E R E U S E R S G R O U P ( S U G )
Initially to provide feedback loop for development of
ScholarSphere 2.0 in 2014
• Core set of diverse users
• Participatory design
• Direct access to service development

70. S C H O L A R S P H E R E U S E R S G R O U P ( S U G )
Initially to provide feedback loop for development of
ScholarSphere 2.0 in 2014
• Core set of diverse users
• Participatory design
• Direct access to service development
• Insight into user behavior, expectations, goals

71. S U G A N D D E S I G N P R O C E S S F O R 2 . 0
Post (re-)design
Get feedback
Post re-design
Get more
feedback
Tweak /
(possibly)
finalize
Not unlike stakeholder engagement process for 1.0

73. Examples of wireframes
that were posted
to Yammer . . .
ScholarSphere 2.0 was
released on 9/10/2014 -
2 years after beta.

74. W H E R E W E A R E N O W
T W O - A N D - A - H A L F Y E A R S L A T E R

75. U S E R S E R V I C E S : B L E N D O F D I Y
A N D W D I F Y *
• Prioritize:
• What users want
• User experience
and design
• Ease of use, ease of
support
• Service request model
• Define/demo/sell the
service - the value
• Outreach / Train the
trainer
• High touch, “low”
tech
• Digital preservation
best laundromat in seattle by gothopotam via Flickr CC BY 2.0
* “We Do It for You.”

76. S O M E S C H O L A R S P H E R E S TAT S —
S U C C E S S E S / O P P O RT U N I T I E S
• Almost 500 new users
since March 2014
• 3/2013-3/2014: a little
more than 100 new users
• Most files are open
access (default) - 60%
• Private - 36%
• Penn State only - 4%
• Most frequent
resource types
• Books
• Articles
• Data sets
• Most active users -
collection creators

77. S O M E S C H O L A R S P H E R E S TAT S —
S U C C E S S E S / O P P O RT U N I T I E S
• Almost 500 new users
since March 2014
• 3/2013-3/2014: a little
more than 100 new users
• Most files are open
access (default) - 60%
• Private - 36%
• Penn State only - 4%
• Most frequent
resource types
• Books
• Articles
• Data sets
• Most active users -
collection creators

78. S O M E S C H O L A R S P H E R E S TAT S —
S U C C E S S E S / O P P O RT U N I T I E S
• Almost 500 new users
since March 2014
• 3/2013-3/2014: a little
more than 100 new users
• Most files are open
access (default) - 60%
• Private - 36%
• Penn State only - 4%
• Most frequent
resource types
• Books
• Articles
• Data sets
• Most active users -
collection creators

79. S O M E S C H O L A R S P H E R E S TAT S —
S U C C E S S E S / O P P O RT U N I T I E S
• Almost 500 new users
since March 2014
• 3/2013-3/2014: a little
more than 100 new users
• Most files are open
access (default) - 60%
• Private - 36%
• Penn State only - 4%
• Most frequent
resource types
• Books
• Articles
• Data sets
• Most active users -
collection creators

80. C H A L L E N G E S — W H I C H A R E A L S O
O P P O RT U N I T I E S . S C A D S O F T H E M !
• Notion of an “evolving”
service / experimentation
• Definition of “user”?
• Researcher workflow
• Discovery, metadata
• Promotion / marketing /
communication
• Service / product
management
• Collection development
• Governance/policies
• Developer resources
• Scaling / distributing -
repurposing of roles?

81. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
Use case and
user stories driven
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

82. I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
S E R V I C E S
U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S
P R O J E C T
H Y D R A
( O P E N - S O U R C E
S O F T WA R E
C O M M U N I T Y )
!
!
!
FA C U LT Y
S T U D E N T S
S TA F F
Librarians & technologists
Technologists
& users
Librarians & users
Workforce
needs Use case and
user stories driven
What is “community”? What communities? Who?

84. Images from
ScholarSphere
repurposed for
homepage banner

85. Thank you!
Keep in touch: phswe@psu.edu
Graphic created by Michael Tribone