88 · SPEC Kit 292
36. What are the top three challenges that your institution has faced in implementing, promoting,
and running the IR? N=50
Content recruitment, building a critical mass of content 16 32%
Staffing issues 15 30%
Faculty awareness/buy-in/interest/engagement 14 28%
Copyright issues 11 22%
Communicating with faculty, articulating the benefits of the IR 10 20%
Adequate funding and other resources 7 14%
Integrating a new unit/workflow into existing structures 6 12%
Additional Comments
37. Please submit any additional information regarding the institutional repository at your
institution that may assist us in accurately analyzing the results of this survey. N=26
Selected Comments from Respondents
“Additional challenges include getting other Internet sites to link, search, and recognize content getting
scholars and administrators to accept e-publication as a viable credential.”
“Although we have used DSpace for about two years, I would not say that we have an active IR. In fact
we have little more than a pilot project at this point. Our locally published scholarly journals are found in
CONTENTdm, as well as our ETD collection.”
“Another challenge: providing ongoing staff support, ensuring sustainability.”
“Dspace@MIT is somewhat unusual among production IRs because of its age (3 years in production) and
having been developed in-house with HP Labs.”
“[Our] use of the consortium IR is a small movement in the establishment of an overall university-wide
approach to digital asset management. Due to the culture of distributed computing, it has been extremely
difficult to both advocate for a good strategy for an IR as well as articulate to the campus stakeholders why
an IR is of use. Thanks to the advances of the consortium implementation, the university has at least an
opportunity to understand how IR’s can be used on campus.
In Dec 2005, I made a detailed presentation on digital libraries and their future to a campus wide Research
and Information Technology Committee. The consortium IR was featured at the end as a significant opportunity
for the university to embrace new ways to deal with campus-generated content. In Summer 2005, I was
honored to be an Educause Frye Institute participant and part of my acceptance into the institute was based
on my proposed project towards creating a true institutional repository. Situations on campus have begun to
36. What are the top three challenges that your institution has faced in implementing, promoting,
and running the IR? N=50
Content recruitment, building a critical mass of content 16 32%
Staffing issues 15 30%
Faculty awareness/buy-in/interest/engagement 14 28%
Copyright issues 11 22%
Communicating with faculty, articulating the benefits of the IR 10 20%
Adequate funding and other resources 7 14%
Integrating a new unit/workflow into existing structures 6 12%
Additional Comments
37. Please submit any additional information regarding the institutional repository at your
institution that may assist us in accurately analyzing the results of this survey. N=26
Selected Comments from Respondents
“Additional challenges include getting other Internet sites to link, search, and recognize content getting
scholars and administrators to accept e-publication as a viable credential.”
“Although we have used DSpace for about two years, I would not say that we have an active IR. In fact
we have little more than a pilot project at this point. Our locally published scholarly journals are found in
CONTENTdm, as well as our ETD collection.”
“Another challenge: providing ongoing staff support, ensuring sustainability.”
“Dspace@MIT is somewhat unusual among production IRs because of its age (3 years in production) and
having been developed in-house with HP Labs.”
“[Our] use of the consortium IR is a small movement in the establishment of an overall university-wide
approach to digital asset management. Due to the culture of distributed computing, it has been extremely
difficult to both advocate for a good strategy for an IR as well as articulate to the campus stakeholders why
an IR is of use. Thanks to the advances of the consortium implementation, the university has at least an
opportunity to understand how IR’s can be used on campus.
In Dec 2005, I made a detailed presentation on digital libraries and their future to a campus wide Research
and Information Technology Committee. The consortium IR was featured at the end as a significant opportunity
for the university to embrace new ways to deal with campus-generated content. In Summer 2005, I was
honored to be an Educause Frye Institute participant and part of my acceptance into the institute was based
on my proposed project towards creating a true institutional repository. Situations on campus have begun to
