Rosetta Repository Profile: Center for Jewish History

Question responses provided by Eric Fritzler, Senior Manager for Metadata and Discovery on December 18, 2018.

Questions

Tool and version, if applicable

Rosetta 5.5

How did your institution select this digital asset management system?

As an Ex Libris product, Rosetta will synchronize well with other library systems available at Center. 

When and why did you adopt this system? What tool/system did it replace (if any)?

January 2017, system adopted for robust digital preservation features and reporting, Rosetta replaced earlier DAMS, Digitool.

Briefly explain how this system functions at your institution (e.g. do you only use it for accessioning, or does it fill all the functions from accessioning to public access?)

Access and preservation, accessioning (of born-digital) is primarily accomplished outside the system and, then, ingested into management system. 

What pre-installation/migration preparations were taken to facilitate implementation of this system?

Fixity review, metadata analysis and remediation, but migration is still ongoing.

What degree of IT support was needed to implement and migrate into this system?

High.

Is your digital asset management system hosted on-site and in-house or off-site by a vendor?

On-site and in-house

Please describe significant post-implementation challenges using the administrative and/or public interfaces.

Still in process of implementing DAMS, will soon be switched to support--at which point migration and new ingest will begin in earnest.

Is your institution integrating this system with other automated request, preservation, or digital asset management systems?

Yes, system is synchronized with integrated library system and, soon, discovery layer.

In what ways has using this system been an improvement over your previous digital asset management system?

New system is scalable, supported, and has extensive digital preservation capabilities.

What is your most favorite feature of this system?

The stability of the system, coupled with the scale and scope that the Center and our partners can make digital asset available globally, both new and migrated material.

What is your least favorite feature of this system?

System has required the development of a processor to prepare deposit into system. Consequently, implementation manager has needed to develop and hone programming skills.

Lessons learned, or tips for prospective users?

Providing a proof of concept isn't the same as facilitating migration of digital assets; always take a vendors promises with a grain of salt; expect your implementation team to accumulate knowledge of the system that surpasses that of the vendor and cultivate their growth.