Archivists can use several elicitation techniques to gather requirements for their projects. These methods, ranging from document analysis to in-depth interviews, provide ideas for needed projects.
The Importance of Face Time
There are several ways to elicit requirements for your projects. The most common method is face-to-face meetings to gather information about stakeholder needs. If your archival project involves several departments, hold meetings with representatives from each faction to discuss their needs. These meetings identify necessities and also assist in obtaining buy-in from the attending department members. You may want to hold separate meetings for different audiences, such as the reference team and the IT department.
Users Sometimes Don’t Know What They Want
Requirements do not have to come directly from people. I’ve learned while working as a lone arranger and an archival consultant that many stakeholders and clients may not know or be able to articulate their requirements. Sometimes, requirements emerge indirectly based upon research, reviewing existing documents, and studying other data.
Many Ways to Uncover What’s Needed
Interviewing users can help identify the processes they use and the functions they require. A structured approach helps provide the necessary information. For example, the first series of interviews could document fundamental requirements while the second round could review and refine them.
Surveys or questionnaires can provide useful information to help you gather your requirements. You will want to design the questionnaire carefully and determine whether you want to ask open- or closed-ended questions. One challenge is making sure you are not leading people’s responses but allowing them to tell you what is important.
You may also need to employ some of the following techniques:
Comparative analysis: Be alert to the ways in which other organizations are being innovative.
Document analysis: Study the existing documentation to determine questions to ask.
Focus groups: Work with a gathering of five to ten people; solicit their suggestions and assess requirements.
Forecasting: Focus on trend analysis as a basis for predicting future needs and expectations.
Interface analysis: Examine interfaces with your technical stakeholders to understand how the system interacts with other systems, hardware, and users.
Interviews: Ask questions of your interviewees to explore and understand the answers that will shape your requirements.
Observation: Watch users perform tasks to get an insight into an organization’s operations.
Prototyping: Develop a model of the project so users can envision what the solution will look like.
Requirements workshops: Also called facilitated work sessions or Joint Application Development (JAD) sessions, this technique gathers team members in highly structured meetings.
Reverse engineering: See how a product is built by taking it apart. With software, this approach means examining the code.
Surveys: Use these appraisals to elicit requirements from stakeholders and to understand user needs or desires.
Leverage Existing Materials
There are also elicitation tools for gathering requirements from existing materials, such as document analysis, interface analysis, or reverse engineering. These techniques are not meant to stand alone. They should be combined in a way that is most useful for your project. They should also be iterative. You will never receive all the information at once. You may start with a critical mass of data to begin analyzing and determining the requirements; then you can return to your stakeholders to get more information that clarifies and expands upon your findings.
Try Recycling and Prototyping
Consider reusing existing requirements. If you are working on a project similar to one performed in the past, you can use existing requirements as a foundation for your current project. This approach reduces effort, and you may be able to improve on the previous solution based on past feedback.
For software applications, creating a prototype can encourage creative ideas and help users explain what they need. A prototype is a rough model used to test an idea. Built early in the development phase of the project, it provides insight into how an application will look, feel, and work. Prototypes are used to gather and document requirements, and, after feedback, gain additional requirements.
The prototype, or even a rough draft of the requirements, can act as a straw man for stakeholders to critique. Users can use the draft as a tool to better articulate their needs. By stating what they do not need, stakeholders show what they are seeking in the project.
Uncovering Assumptions
As the project evolves, you may discover implied requirements that were never documented. You may also find infeasible requirements given existing project parameters. Additionally, extraneous requirements may be identified.
The requirements baseline for an archival project is the standard agreement that pending change requests are measured against. Its purpose is to fend off defects and poor quality, as well as the small, undocumented changes to the project scope—collectively called scope creep. When stakeholders sign off on the requirements scope, they agree that these identified needs will serve as the baseline for the project, and these items are mandatory for project acceptance.
The blog was originally published on Lucidea's blog.
Archives often operate in environments defined by scarcity of space, staff, time, and funding. In these conditions, every decision carries weight. Without a plan, archives risk spreading their resources too thin, responding only to immediate crises, and missing opportunities for growth and impact. Strategic planning serves as a lifeline, providing archivists with a structured approach to prioritize, allocate resources, and communicate the value of their work to stakeholders.
Archivists have long recognized patterns of limited funding that shape their institutions, yet they have consistently responded with creativity, commitment, and innovation. Even when resources are scarce, archives continue to find ways to build and maintain essential infrastructure and strengthen public engagement. Each challenge underscores the importance of archivists’ labor and provides an opportunity to advocate for the central role archives play in their communities.
Archives safeguard treasures, including objects like the founding documents of a nation and photographs of defining cultural moments. These holdings inspire a sense of connection to the past, and at the heart of that work are archivists whose expertise brings these collections to life.
No archives is an island. Especially in resource-constrained environments, collaboration through shared infrastructure provides a lifeline. Consortia models turn scarcity into opportunity by spreading costs and expertise across multiple archives. By pooling resources, institutions achieve more than they could alone.
Well-resourced institutions have developed archival best practices, including comprehensive finding aids, climate-controlled storage, and digital preservation systems. For small or resource-constrained archives, these standards can feel out of reach. The danger is that the profession’s ideals may discourage institutions from taking action, leaving records vulnerable. The solution lies in paring down practices and procedures without abandoning principles.
Many archives exist within environments of chronic underfunding. Community archives, small historical societies, or lone arrangers may work with little more than donated materials, a handful of volunteers, and minimal budgets.
However, these institutions remain vital, safeguarding the histories of communities often absent from mainstream narratives. Scarcity shapes their reality, yet it can still allow meaningful work.
Humanity produces more digital content than at any other point in history. Every click, message, and post contributes to an expanding universe of data that represents the cultural memory of our time. At the center of this transformation stand archivists, the professionals uniquely trained to ensure that memories survive in the future. However, even as the scale of the challenge grows, their voices risk being sidelined in public conversations about digital preservation.
In recent years, the concept of “slow librarianship” has emerged as a thoughtful response to the accelerating pace and pressures placed upon library professionals. Drawing inspiration from the broader slow movement, it emphasizes care, reflection, ethics, and people-centered work over speed and efficiency.
The archival profession is characterized by dedication to public memory, cultural preservation, and service. However, beneath this noble mission lies a troubling reality: the increasing reliance on gig and contract labor.
Written documents have long occupied a privileged position in archives as the most authoritative memory source. However, this excludes vast repositories of knowledge that reside outside the written word, especially within Indigenous communities, where memory is often preserved and transmitted through oral traditions, performance, storytelling, ceremony, and embodied practices.
Archival description is often treated as a neutral or technical task: summarizing contents, assigning subject headings, and organizing metadata for retrieval. However, description is actually far from neutral. It shapes how users interpret records, which narratives are centered, and whose voices are made visible or erased.
As the archival profession reckons with the legacies of colonialism, more institutions and practitioners are turning toward Indigenous and decolonial approaches that reframe traditional archival practice. Central to this shift is recognizing cultural protocols and community-defined rules governing how knowledge is created, shared, accessed, and preserved. Cultural protocols are foundational to ethical, respectful, and reciprocal relationships between archives and Indigenous communities.
In recent decades, Indigenous communities and archivists have challenged the dominant frameworks that have long shaped archival practice. Traditionally, Western archival models have prioritized state authority, institutional control, and the presumption of neutrality. These models often fail to reflect Indigenous worldviews, community needs, or the rights of Indigenous peoples over their records and heritage.
As archival practice shifts to meet the challenges of the digital age, the ethical use of born-digital materials has become one of the most pressing concerns for archivists. These materials—emails, websites, text messages, digital photographs, spreadsheets, social media posts, and more—are created and stored digitally from their inception.
The fundamental principles of archival preservation focus on the agents of deterioration, preventive conservation, and essential preservation strategies applied in archival settings.
The monetary appraisal of archives and manuscripts is a critical yet underexplored intersection of library science and financial valuation. This article addresses the persistent knowledge gap between archival assessment and fiscal valuation and provides an overview of the monetary appraisal process in the United States. It focuses on concluding the fair market value (FMV) of noncash charitable contributions, a process governed by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). By documenting practices and terminology, the article serves as a resource for archivists navigating the complexities of donor relations and institutional stewardship. It advocates for increased fiscal literacy within the archival profession, suggesting that an integrated understanding of market dynamics and stewardship costs is essential for the care and financial substantiation of collections.
Proper archival storage is one of the most critical aspects of archival preservation. In addition to housing collections in a dedicated archival storage room, using suitable storage materials and enclosures helps protect archival collections from environmental damage, physical wear, and chemical deterioration.
One of the core challenges archivists face is determining the appropriate description level for materials in their collections. From broad collection-level overviews to granular item-level details, descriptive hierarchies play a crucial role in conveying the context and structure of archival materials.
Description is a cornerstone of archival practice, providing the means for users and archivists to understand, access, and interpret materials.
Mixed-media archives, which contain physical and digital records, present unique challenges for archival arrangement. These collections require archivists to develop strategies that address the different needs of physical and digital materials while maintaining the collection’s coherence and accessibility.
Digital records have introduced new challenges to traditional archival arrangement practices. While the principles of original order and provenance remain relevant, the nature of digital materials requires archivists to adapt these principles to new formats and technologies.
Archival arrangement organizes and structures archival materials to ensure efficient management, access, and preservation.
Redaction in archival work—obscuring or removing sensitive information from records—has become a central concern in contemporary archival ethics. As archives increasingly acquire born-digital records and digitize historical collections for online access, archivists must grapple with data privacy, access, transparency, and potential harm.
Archives have traditionally focused on preserving historical records, ensuring access, and maintaining the integrity of collections. However, in the digital age, the moral responsibilities of archivists have grown more complex.
Archives have long been viewed as bastions of memory, preservation, and historical accountability. However, archivists must confront ethical questions in an era of digital surveillance, data harvesting, and global information flows.
As archival institutions evolve from custodians of information to facilitators of memory and meaning-making, emotional engagement has become a vital, though often overlooked, dimension of archival design.
Archival reading rooms have long been the centerpiece of public access to collections. They are where researchers engage with historical documents, where discovery becomes tangible, and where the institutional identity of an archives is most visibly embodied.
Archival discovery tools, such as catalogs, finding aids, search interfaces, and digital repositories, are often the first point of contact between users and collections. These tools serve as maps and compasses, guiding users through vast and often complex holdings.
Design thinking has become a widely adopted approach in fields ranging from technology to education, prized for emphasizing empathy, experimentation, and iterative problem-solving. For archives, traditionally shaped around internal workflows and professional conventions, design thinking presents an opportunity to reimagine outreach and engagement strategies from users’ perspectives.

With shrinking resources and increasing demands, archivists cannot afford to view budgeting as an afterthought. A carefully developed budget is a strategic tool that connects an archives’ mission to its daily operations. It demonstrates accountability, supports advocacy efforts, and provides a framework for decision-making.