Hello Micah and All,
The additional rigor introduced by your 'tuning' revision should clearly
increase the effectiveness of the survey. One open question is whether the
dynamic logic of enabling/disabling follow-on options will be incorporated
into a subsequent version of the survey itself. If we translated the survey
into a web-based form, it could facilitate this dynamic behavior as well as
automate the raw data collection.

On a separate note, I have the following comments on the existing survey
questions:

#1 - This specifically limits the question to internally managed storage
media. In order to capture the full picture of the preservation storage
solution, it would be interesting to broaden the question to all storage
platforms used for preservation. That would provide a much better view into
how many copies are generally kept, and where.

#3/#4 - These ask about TB of storage space, which sounds more directed at
allocated space rather than storage space that is actually used to store
content. It would be interesting to know how much storage is allocated, as
well as how much is currently in use.

#6 - Along with the question being asked, it would be interesting to know
if the organization expects fixity checking to be carried out by any
third-party storage providers where their content resides (and on what
schedule).

#13 - For clarification, "More storage" here means that the storage system
must be able to grow? Something like "The capability to extend storage
capacity" may be more clear. Along the same lines, another feature that is
not listed but would be interesting to see in the list is "The capability
to reduce storage used, in order to reduce cost".

Unlike the earlier questions in the survey, the questions at the end
regarding external/cloud storage systems are more about "do you use" rather
than "how do you use". It would be very useful to understand how the
external storage systems are being used in conjunction with internal
storage to achieve an overall preservation strategy.

Andrew


On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Dr. Micah Altman <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Colleagues,
>
> To get the ball rolling on revisions, I attach a proposed set of 'tuning'
> revisions to the survey instrument aimed at getting more reliable &
> interpretable measures of the concepts we are *already measuring*. We may
> want to consider
>    (a) a bank of additional measurements based on the results of the
> national preservation agenda report we're working on simultaneously --
> things that can inform future versions of that agenda
>    (b) Pick 5-10 of the most critical of the *existing* questions that we
> might send to a larger audience
>
> D-Lib has accepted the article, probably for the May/June issue.
>
> Finally, to ensure replicability of our publication  a cleaned and
> de-identified version of the data is now available, along with the scripts
> used to replicate the analyis: http://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/19768
>
> best,
>
> Micah
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Micah Altman, Ph.D. <http://micahaltman.com>           Twitter: @drmaltman
>
> Director of Research -- MIT Libraries; Head/Scientist, Program on
> Information Science
> Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution
> "Entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate" - Doctor Invincibilis
> (Corollary, "Ad indicia spectate.")
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Padilla, Jose <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > Attached is the revised Storage Survey report. The report also contains
> > all the survey questions, which here have been revised to match the final
> > survey. If anyone would like a refresher of what was asked in the survey
> > then use this report; the questions I sent last week lacked the revisions
> > made to these.
> >
> > Don't forget if you have any comments, suggestions, or changes you would
> > like to make to the survey then contact me at [log in to unmask]<mailto:
> > [log in to unmask]>
> >
> > Have a nice day,
> > José "Ricky" Padilla
> >
> > ############################
> >
> > To unsubscribe from the NDSA-INFRASTRUCTURE list:
> > write to: mailto:
> > [log in to unmask]
> > or click the following link:
> >
> >
> http://list.digitalpreservation.gov/scripts/wa-DIGITAL.exe?SUBED1=NDSA-INFRASTRUCTURE&A=1
> >
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the NDSA-INFRASTRUCTURE list:
> write to: mailto:
> [log in to unmask]
> or click the following link:
>
> http://list.digitalpreservation.gov/scripts/wa-DIGITAL.exe?SUBED1=NDSA-INFRASTRUCTURE&A=1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the NDSA-INFRASTRUCTURE list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://list.digitalpreservation.gov/scripts/wa-DIGITAL.exe?SUBED1=NDSA-INFRASTRUCTURE&A=1