February 16, 2010 BHL Executive Committee notes

BHL Executive Conference Call 16 February 11 a.m. EST

On Call: Chris, Martin, Connie, Graham and Tom

1. Governance emails between Graham and Tom:

From Tom: Thanks for the response and attachments. It is unclear to me if you are proposing that BHL structure itself in a manner similar to the proposed EOL structure? If you are (or even if you aren't) here are some thoughts to consider.

1. EOL is dynamic and every-changing in a way that BHL isn't.

2. Digital Preservation is a necessary main mission of BHL. Not so for EOL.

3. EOL creates - or at least attempts to create - communities. BHL - not so much.

4. EOL - sometimes - has very big ambitions in the whole field of biodiversity. BHL - so far- has consciously been a niche program (and done a damn fine job, BTW).

5. The BHL IC members are not Directors of large brick and mortar institutions. The EOL SC members are. This is an important distinction. Members of the EOL SC or the proposed Executive Group for EOL can commit their institutions in ways that are generally not possible for the BHL IC members who are library directors within much large biodiversity institutions. In China, BHL-Europe, and to some degree Brazil this is also the case. This implies that apart from external grant-type funding, it is unlikely that BHL can do anything like the "internal" fundraising that EOL can. Cristian can commit his museum to raise X million dollars and has the authority to make it his Institution's priority. Nancy Gwinn or Susan Fraser or Chris Freeland lack that authority. They can all seek funding opportunities but cannot easily bump other institutional funding priorities. This leads to my last point.

6. BHL, for all our success, is really, really threadbare. In comparing what we have done and what we need to do, the funding and staffing level we have deployed is small. Check out JSTOR, SciElo, PLoS, PubMed, Hathi Trust, etc. if you doubt me.

I expect that even with additional funding BHL will be underfunded. Therefore, I feel we need the "lowest overhead" governing structure; the simplest that will work. The model you earlier sketched out (attached) is simple. (not that I am wedded to it by any means). The more reporting lines we have, the more subcommittees, etc., the more time. I think with BHL to date we have through time worked out task forces and meetings that contribute and have felt free to revise/drop others than haven't worked. This flexibility is important. Building too much into an org chart can create commitments when they aren't needed or have passed their time.

So, these are my first thoughts. I will continue to reflect on what you have sent and encourage others to do so. It should be a fertile meeting in March.

Graham: The key principles are : Flexibility, sustainability--these principles apply to BHL and we should capture this. Definitional model (exec runs the show) from EOL are good to include.

Graham will present the models at the IC meeting.

2. Updates.

A. Chris: Patrick Juoalua has approached us to use BHL as test bed for "conjecturator"--research questions. He has done this using victorian literature--. He wants to build a conjecture engine that would be a research idea generator. Wouldn't cost us anything and low overhead. He would like a letter of support written for his project by tomorrow. Chris asked that he cover some equipment (external drives) and travel funds. We need face to face meetings as soon as any project starts so we can be clear on what we are doing. No development work on our side--just asking for access to data and ideas for conjectures.

ACTION: Tom will write letter by tomorrow. There is a draft letter.

B. Neil Sarkar (UVM) is editing special issues in Bioinformatics on educational opportunities in bioinformatics. Bryan Heidorn and his students help solve real world problems in BHL. Chris and Bryan will be submitting a paper.

C. Graham and Chris will be in Berlin next week for BHL Europe.

D. Tom and Chris on travel on March 1.

E. Martin has a full report from Brazil meeting. More general is posted to wiki.

F. Chris noted that the project coordinator position from Moore funding--will add some funding from MOBOT to expand to project manager working for Chris. BHL plus a bit more. How does it fit with Moore and BHL? Will be doing everything that Moore is expecting plus other things with extra funding. Seems like a good idea-takes some load off Chris.

G. Next week is BHL Europe meeting in Berlin. Lots of technical discussion. AIT, ATOS, GRD reports and reviews.

H. ACTION: Connie to send position description for metadata position to Martin.

NEXT CALL: March 9

Dial the same phone number: 1-866-748-1119