Whilst progress has been made since the original Roadmap, not surprisingly feedback from the consultation concentrates on what still needs to be done. Various changes in emphasis are indicated: the focus should be on higher level objectives rather than on repositories; the technology approach should be more aligned with Web 2.0; repositories are part of a wider network of digital services, and their role within that network needs to be clarified. The Review highlights a number of challenges facing repository managers, some of which can be addressed with help from JISC as outlined by the recommendations. Others require support from institutional stakeholders.
Taking a step back, the JISC funded repository programmes have introduced a level of cultural change into a large number of HE institutions within the UK. A majority of HE institutions are now implementing repository systems, some with initial funding from JISC, others self-funding. All these institutions are likely to be actively involved with other JISC repository projects and JISC support activities e.g. the Repositories Support Project. This means JISC is connecting to a much wider set of institutions than previously, presenting an opportunity to broaden their area of influence.
Many repositories have been funded initially as projects and will now be maturing to move towards a sustainable service footing. For JISC this will be a test of their ‘project to service’ approach, a topic of much discussion and planning over the years. Much of the guidance and support JISC has developed for shared services and its other projects will be of relevance to institutional repositories as they establish themselves as ‘services’ within institutions.
From a technology perspective, repositories are facing the challenge of keeping up to date with new technology developments. In these days of rapid change, a repository becomes a ‘legacy’ system soon after set-up, relying on a software platform that will need to manage change whilst still supporting existing implementions. The need to align legacy technology with new Web developments is an ongoing challenge that faces many other information services (libraries, library utility systems, publishers) and it is an area that repository software developers will need to address.
Whilst good practice for managing repositories for research outputs is maturing, treatment of data and learning materials is less certain. Planning the management of these content types may well benefit from the experience so far. However it is clear that there are some significant differences in the overall aims and objectives for managing different content types. It is important that future planning is properly informed by previous repository experience.
This Review has led to discussion of the role of a Roadmap in relation to repositories. In an increasingly complex landscape it becomes more difficult to present a coherent roadmap covering the diverse number of repository types. As well, a roadmap needs to be integrated with strategic objectives and evaluation, in this case with the objectives and evaluation of the various JISC repository programmes. Rather than focusing on repositories the Review suggests that a more useful structure for the Roadmap would be based around higher level objectives, otherwise characterised as ‘business functions’. In addition it may be that a small number of separate targeted milestones could be introduced based on specific metrics for different repository content types. These would provide evidence of value for money and would benefit both institutions and funders. Within the Review process there was widespread acknowledgement of the need to introduce both quantitative and qualitative metrics to demonstrate value, and that this would require consultation with the wider community. Discussion at the October 2008 JISC Repositories, Preservation and Asset Management Advisory meeting suggested that this Review might be used to move the Roadmap forward in these directions.