Shared print projects involve working with data from multiple libraries. The size of a group project can vary from as few as two or three libraries up to several dozen. The complexity of a project will vary depending on its size, on the participants’ previous history of collaboration, on the consistency of participants' respective data management practices, on the scope of the project, and other factors.

Group projects likely involve the following components:

1. Planning meeting(s): At the outset of a project, it is essential to bring together key players from each library to develop a project scope, strategy, and timeline. This can be done in person or via conference call, and it typically involves project leaders, systems librarians, representatives from collections, and people who knows the data well (often catalogers).
2. Data delivery: Each participant library will provide bibliographic, item, and circulation data for all of its in-scope monographs. OCLC then filters, cleanses, and normalizes this data.
3. Group data set: We then compile all of the normalized data from participant libraries into a single database and compute various group-level tallies and matches. At that point, the group-wide data set is loaded into GreenGlass Group Functionality.
4. Scenario development: In GreenGlass Group Functionality, you can model and discuss an unlimited number of group-wide retention scenarios. GreenGlass constructs retention scenarios from a wide array of parameters, including archiving thresholds (number of copies to retain), publication years, usage levels, and overlap tallies. Many combinations are possible, and developing scenarios that balance risk and yield appropriately is perhaps the most important task in any shared print project. These modeling exercises will help inform your shared retention agreements and will improve each library’s understanding of what can be safely deselected and what must be retained.
5. Allocation of retention commitments: Once criteria are finalized and the group has achieved consensus on the retention scenario that will be adopted, we allocate retention commitments to each of the member libraries. In group projects, deselection benefits and responsibilities must be shared equitably, or at least in some manner agreed by the group. Deciding which libraries may withdraw and which must retain certain titles depends on a number of variables, including how many copies the group seeks to retain, which library holds which titles, the size of the collections, space needs, and other factors.
6. Retention commitments loading to GreenGlass: In preparation for participants to take local action, each library’s GreenGlass account is updated to reflect the group’s retention agreement. Libraries can then generate lists of items that they are responsible for retaining and corresponding lists of items that are safe to weed.
7. Ongoing data management: Although new titles are acquired each year, circulation continues to occur, and other libraries adjust their collections. Most groups find that their final data set can serve for up to two years without modification.

• Managing the data: We validate, normalize, augment, and compile the group data to make it as comprehensive and reliable as it can be.
• Providing tools to enable the group to interact with its data: We have created GreenGlass Group Functionality specifically for shared print programs to assist with visualization, modeling, communication, and prediction.
• Ensuring project success: We convene and facilitate meetings, make presentations in person and via webinar, help communicate with stakeholders, support project managers, run custom queries and reports, and do whatever else is needed to achieve your group’s objectives.

Since 2013, hundreds of libraries worldwide have collectively made millions of formal retention commitments using OCLC's shared print tools and services.

Explore our interactive shared print map of North America to view retentions by location, program, and title.

• Academic Libraries of Indiana (ALI)
• Central Iowa Collaborative Collections Initiative (CI-CCI)
• Connect New York Shared Print Archive Project (CNY)
• Council of Prairie and Pacific University Libraries (COPPUL)
• Eastern Academic Scholars’ Trust (EAST)
• HathiTrust
• Libraries and Archives Canada (LAC)
• Maine Shared Collections Cooperative (MSCC)
• Michigan Shared Print Initiative (MI-SPI)
• Minitex
• MMS (U. Melbourne, Monash U., U. Sydney)
• Statewide California Electronic Library Consortium (SCELC)
• The TriUniversity Group of Libraries (TUG)
• University of North Carolina Shared Print Initiative
• University System of Maryland and Affiliated Institutions (USMAI)
• Virtual Library of Virginia (VIVA)
• Washington Research Library Consortium (WRLC)
• White Rose Libraries