| Advocacy Working Party 10th August 2005 |
Advocacy Working Party Meeting MinutesNotes from the meeting held at the LSE.Present: Máire Lanigan (St. Mary's & Chair), John Gilby (LSE - Minutes), Marysia Henty (LSE), Julie Howell (London Metropolitan University), Mary Nixon (Goldsmiths), Madura Rasaratnam (LSE), Monica Rivers-Latham (Westminster). Apologies: Apologies were received from Paul McLaughlin (SHL), Frances Norton (Wellcome Library). ML welcomed everyone to the meeting and informed the group that Rachel Redrup had officially resigned from the group. The group expressed its grateful thanks for her efforts. ML also welcomed Andy Jakes from Ultima Displays who was in attendance for Item 2. 1. Previous Meeting Minutes and Matters ArisingThe minutes from the meeting held on 5 July 2005 were agreed as a true and accurate record. Review of actions:
MR informed the group that the first e-Bulletin was just about to be sent out. Maureen Wade (M25 Secretary) had agreed to act as Editor-in-Chief and the Steering Group was to have the e-Bulletin as a standing item on its agenda. It was agreed that the e-Bulletin should be sent to lis-m25, lis-london and SCONUL. 2. Promotional BannersML gave a brief overview and background to the Consortium and the reasons for wishing to purchase banners to promote the Consortium. Andy Jakes representing Ultima Displays was in attendance to demonstrate a number of different banner designs. The group agreed that the banner(s) for the Consortium had a need to be portable (not too heavy) and that there would be no requirement to periodically change the graphics (an option with some of the banner stand designs). Three types of roller stand were demonstrated along with a 'tension wire' type with a fabric graphic. Stand hardware was guaranteed for 10 years excluding the graphic and Ultima Displays provide the stand to promotional printing companies who create the required graphic. Outline costs were discussed and group members experimented, carrying the different stand types to gauge weight and ease of transport. Andy Jakes was thanked for attending the meeting and explaining the advantages of the different stand types. Following discussion, the group agreed that the Boomerang 'tension wire' stand with a fabric graphic looked the most stylish and appeared to be more stable. Action 2.1 ML to seek M25 Steering Group approval for the purchase of two banners, one for CPD25 and one for general M25 promotion. 3. M25 Annual ReportThis Item was the main business to be covered during the meeting. MH introduced two documents, a draft brief for the Annual Report designer, and a collation of the various submissions for report content. The group went through the content submissions in detail and discussed a number of general and specific edits that ought to be carried out. These edits were not minuted. It was also agreed that the report ought to contain a list of the Steering Group members and their role within the Consortium. Previously agreed was a list of the institutions in the Consortium and that some form of map or way to show geographic spread of the membership would be left to the designer. The proposed schedule for design and printing of the report was agreed. Action 3.1 All to circulate more specific comments on content to MH after she had updated the summary contents following the meeting. 4. Work with Collaboration & Partnership WGML announced that there was an opportnity to promote the Consortium to London Higher and that M-RL had been looking at some texts for a flyer. M-RL tabled some examples of current London Higher material to aid discussions on her proposed flyer texts. The group agreed the concept of using six headings to summarise the Consortium and discussed details of their content. All wished to strongly promote the Consortium's strong academic information provision. 5. AWG Input into M25 Strategy DocumentDue to time pressures, it was agreed that this task should be done via email. The requirement is to nominate specific tasks or actions that are derived from the Strategy document and will form the group's action plan. 6. Update on the Web ReviewML updated the group with progress stating that the ITT had been sent out to three companies and that all three had indicated that they would be putting in a tender. A small group had been set up to review the tenders in early September. 7. Report from Steering Group MeetingThis Item was deferred. 8. Next MeetingTo be arranged for late September 2005. AOBThere was none. Minutes by JG |
