Meeting Minutes

Notes from the meeting held at the Maughan Library, KCL

Present: Máire Lanigan (St. Mary's & Chair), John Gilby (LSE - Minutes), Marysia Henty (LSE), Julie Howell (London Metropolitan University), William Marsterson (Middlesex), Ewan Mathieson (KCL), Janet Percival (UCL), Madura Rasaratnam (LSE).

Apologies: Ginny Malone (Greenwich), Nicholas Martland (SOAS),

1. Introduction of Group Members

ML welcomed two new members to the group: Madura Rasaratnam recently bagan working at the LSE as the M25 Administrative Assistant, helping the M25 Secretary, Chair and Treasurer with Consortium business; and Ewan Mathieson who is the Communications Manager within Information Services and Systems at KCL. ML also informed the group that Frances Norton from the Wellcome Library would be joining the group.

2. Agree the Agenda

The proposed agenda was agreed.

3. Previous Meeting Minutes & Matters Arising

The minutes from the meeting on 15 July 2004 were agreed as a true and accurate record.

The following list is an update on the actions from the previous meeting and also matters arising:

• Action 2.1 - status of the new InforM25 flyer - there was no further news about this so the group assumed that the flyer re-design has not begun.



• Under item 3 - Staff Awareness Survey 2004 - JG sought ideas for ways in which he could follow up various comments made during the survey about the InforM25 service whilst maintaining the survey respondants anonymity. A number of helpful suggestions were recieved and JG will seek some further feedback and if necessary, bring issues to the group for assistance.



• Action 3.1 - JG had sent the group the URL of the CC-interop Project CERLIM Report on union catalogue user behaviour study. Action complete.



• Action 3.2 - JG reported that the draft web statistics requirement specification was ongoing. New Action 3.1 JG to forward specification to group when ready.



• Action 3.3 - JH reported that the list of CPD25 courses taken up from the survey results was ready for forwarding to CPD25. Action complete.



• Action 3.4 - due to the summer vacation period, the action for all members to inform their link working groups of the survey findings is ongoing. New Action 3.2.
  
  
• EM and JH agreed to look at summarising the 2004 Awareness Survey. JH also agreed to circulate the survey comments grouped together. Action 3.3 JH, EM


One opportunity put forward was that the survey summary could be made into a press release about the Consortium.


• ML prompted a discussion about the printed Annual Report for 2003-04 and concluded that it will be proposed to the M25 Steering Group that the Annual Report be updated from the previous report with minimal styalistic changes to allow it to be printed sooner. ML expressed a desire to "spice up" the report in the future and this was supported by the group. It was acknowledged that once the Consortium attains charity status, it was probable that the Annual Report would need to include financial data. It was also concluded that the web and printed versions of the Annual Rport would be better to remain independent as they would likely have differing audiences. Comment was also made that the awareness survey showed that the Consortium was more well known and this ought to be included in the Annual Report, especially highlighting CPD25 and InforM25.



• Regarding the list of group member links with other working groups - JP voluntered to be the link with the Quality Working Group for the time being.



• Top Ten Facts - There had been no further comments from group members on the latest draft of the Top Ten Facts. Agreement was reached that any further comments should be made within two weeks and then MR could arrange to have both the printed and web versions of the document updated.



• Action 6 - JG had discussed the procedure for sending out Welcome Packs to new Consortium members with the Secretary and the task now is within the remit of MR.

4. Advocacy Work

ML opened a discussion about how the group should function, agreeing an approach and looking at short term and medium term priorities and task assigning. The group agreed that its role was to advocate the Consortium to its member library staff and not especially member institution students (with the exception of the live services).

JH suggested that the group review who are the target audiences and referring to the Actin Plan. The prime stakeholders are the M25 member libraries.

Further discussion centred on the role of the group particularly with regard to press releases and the appropriate procedure to adopt. In the longer term there may be advantages in looking into the possibility of a Consortium Press Officer or similar consultancy and the role of the group becomes a 'filter' for the promotion of issues for the Steering and Working groups and the live services.

JH suggested that advocacy be a regular agenda item for all of the working groups and this was endorsed by all those present. Alongside this there is an existing need to inform the working groups what roles the AWG can perform for them and for the Consortium as a whole.

WM volunteered to talk with communications staff at Middlesex about ways in which awareness of the Consortium can be promoted within such organisations as London Higher.

5. M25 Website

ML introduced this topic and prompted a discussion about the planned website review and its relationship with printed material. There was possibly a need for an external consultant to review the visual identity of the Consortium as a whole, including the web site and printed material.

Action 5.1 ML to report back to group on the Steering Group guidance on what should be included in the 'website review' whether this is just the secrtarial/business pages or whether InforM25 and CPD25 are included also.

6. Management of the Welcome Pack

All agreed that there were a number of pages within the Welcome Packs that were in need of updating. JG queried the value for money with the packs for such a small (annual) audience and suggested that advantage ought to be taken of the high quality of the packs. Further suggestions included having a generic folder printed that could be used for Welcome Packs and anything else the Consortium wanted to do, and some pack inserts that can be easily and quickly (& possibly at lower cost) updated to avoid the time consuming loop of designer and commercial printers.

7. Review of Action Plan

This action was deferred until the next meeting.

8. Dates of Next Meeting

Action 8.1 ML to arrange date for next meeting in early November 2004.

Minutes by JG.