Re: What has LIS learned?

Ron Peterson said:

I don't think we should, or even can, do that by "embracing their ever
changing desires".  First, as Alex said, users aren't very good at
telling us what they want.

Yes - sometimes we just don't know what we want until after we see it...
or until someone has been able to show us how it can be valuable to us -
and then we want more of it.

Nathan Rinne
Media Cataloging Technician
ISD 279 - Educational Service Center (ESC)
11200 93rd Ave. North
Maple Grove, MN. 55369
Work phone: 763-391-7183

-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Ron Peterson
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 9:46 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] What has LIS learned?

While I agree that we need to be focused on our users in designing the
NGC or any other service we offer.  I don't think we should, or even
can, do that by "embracing their ever changing desires".  First, as Alex
said, users aren't very good at telling us what they want.  We can look
to libraries themselves for an example of this.  It has been said, the
reason we have such a crappy catalog currently is because the vendors
were giving us what we were asking for.  They were trying to meet our
desires.  Of course, we all had different desires, so they were not able
to "satisfy" any of us.  But worse than that, they were so busy chasing
our desires that they weren't working on making a better product.  They
weren't anticipating what was coming next, what advances in technology
could be applied to meeting the goals of their library clients.  As a
result, their business has stagnated.

We, as libraries and librarians, are supposed to be the experts in
connecting people to information.  I think it is a mistake to turn that
responsibility over to the users, to let them tell us how we should do
our jobs.  Not that we shouldn't get their feedback, formally and
informally.  We have a lot to learn from our users; how they find
information, how they use information, how they are creating
information, how they are communicating, what information they are
looking for, etc., but it is up to us to develop the means for them to
accomplish those goals.  That doesn't mean adding tags because they are
asking for it, but it may mean adding tags because it helps them find
the information they need.


----- Original Message ----
From: Erik Hatcher <esh6h_at_VIRGINIA.EDU>
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2007 9:07:15 AM
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] What has LIS learned?

Alex,

I don't find that rantful at all.  In fact that is very much what I
was getting at, actually.  a "process", not a "product".  Continual
feedback.  We must accept that we desire change, and plan up front
for it.  We have identified a number of issues with the Blacklight
interface that demand change, immediately before its ready for prime
time.  None of those changes are difficult to make, however effort is
to be expended to get there from here.  If the mission is to "satisfy
your users", embracing their ever changing desires is by definition
all there is to it.  Karen's point is starting with the user and
working backwards is the only logical way to build ultimately
satisfying systems.

I want to emphasize your point about users telling you what they
don't want.  Don't make me think!   It's not what you add, it's what
you take away.  Simplicity is elegance.  And it's effort.  Here's my
rallying cry for us to push up our sleeves and get to work :)

        Erik

p.s. I worked hard not to use any "but"'s in this message.  Oops!  ;)

On May 3, 2007, at 6:05 AM, Alexander Johannesen wrote:

>> > Give me a clear, definitive user-centric statement any day.
>
> On 5/3/07, Erik Hatcher <esh6h_at_virginia.edu> wrote:
>> how's this one?  <http://code4lib.org/node/177>
>
> In a somewhat narrow definition of what users are and want, yes,
> that's very good, is as much as it's not so much user-centric
> statement as it is listening to feedback.
>
> rant/ (not directed at Eric at all)
>
> Very often, when doing user-centred design, for example, (which is
> highly relevant to Karens rant) you take a few steps back in the
> design process to that magical place before feedback is even
> generated. Often it can be summed up as "making iterations so small,
> the feedback-loop seems seemless".
>
> The thing with users is that they're not actually any good at telling
> you what they want, but they are extremly good at telling you what
> they don't want. This is why feedback has become so integral to our
> various development processes (be it software or otherwise) and
> project methodology. Unfortunately through this it becomes much harder
> to see that you should be aiming for removing it alltogether in
> working tightly with the users instead.
>
> /rant
>
>
> Alex
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchymist, UX, RESTafarian,
> Topic Maps
> ------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/
> --------