opposite alternating Thursdays?
other suggestions?
Is the document sufficiently user-centric?
In Strategic Directions, it says that "the staffing focus should be on the intellectual aspect of the work." What is this in contrast to? A division of cataloging labor based on format? Is that what other libraries have chosen to do? If so, why? And why is our proposed path the right decision for us?
When we envision ourselves as a consulting service, exactly how do we see ourselves engaged with other campus units?
In Policies, Procedures, Best Practices, and Workflows, do we need to be more specific, e.g., "database competence will be achieved by N persons in N amount of time"? Also: what actions will be required to achieve this?
Can Staff Development be considered a dimension of (and therefore be integrated with) the Strategic Goals?
Would Strategic Goals be expressed better as sentences (with verbs) rather than as bullet points?
Name change to project a more forceful presence: instead of Cataloging, how about Bibliographic Control, Surveillance, and Enforcement? More seriously ... how about: Metadata Services and Intellectual Access? Several suggestions have been entered in a chart, and at our last meeting the Task Force seemed to recommend most highly the name Resource Description and Access [yes-- same name as the new cataloging code]