Re: Whose elephant is it, anyway? (NOT long)

> It doesn't really matter how well (or how poorly) "back room" library
> systems are functioning if the public user interface doesn't work.

This just doesn't make sense to me - if your back office systems are inefficient, you end up putting more staff time into what are essentially administrative activities, and subsequently less time into user facing activities.

The whole of the library needs to work - you can't pick off one thing or another as 'key' - there is no point in having the best discovery system in the world if your users cannot access the resources once they have identified them - and if you haven't paid that subscription, or bought that book, then you aren't going to be able to access them. Conversely there is no point buying all this stuff if you keep the doors locked - this is chicken and egg stuff - you simply have to balance the investment.

I think Tim has an excellent point - certainly in large institutions much of the back office activity carried out by library systems such as 'budget management' is often duplicating other systems - which you will have to interact with for audit purposes anyway, and in my institution we would certainly save time by integrating more closely between the ILS and corporate systems (something we are working on)

There is a challenge here - libraries are extremely varied - I work in a Unversity library and as such work in an environment with many 'corporate' systems which the ILS duplicates (needlessly in many cases). On the otherhand some libraries standalone, and need local budget management etc - so ILS vendors are pulled in more than one direction.

In the context of this discussion I've been following the work on the OLE Project with interest, but I'm unclear from the working model of 'Acquire' http://oleproject.org/overview/ole-reference-model/acquire/ whether there is an vision of where this activity happens in terms of systems - I guess it is early days for this.

I would say that the more I discuss this and consider the issues, I see a separation of Discovery systems from 'back office' systems absolutely key to getting back office systems working efficiently (not to say they shouldn't be joined up, but loosely rather than completely integrated).

Owen

PS I was involved in writing an RFP along the lines Karen describes some years ago - I now feel the whole thing was over specified, and the success of the process (and I think it was successful in terms of choosing the right product) was not related to the length or detail of the RFP. 5-10 pages on the user interface now sounds about right to me - 20-30 pages on anything sounds completely over the top. However, I think that the necessity of accounting for public funds often drives the writing of the RFP rather than the best way of expressing your requirements...

Owen Stephens
Assistant Director: eStrategy and Information Resources
Central Library
Imperial College London
South Kensington Campus
London
SW7 2AZ
 
t: +44 (0)20 7594 8829
e: o.stephens_at_imperial.ac.uk

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
> [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Popp, Mary Pagliero
> Sent: 09 March 2009 02:33
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Whose elephant is it, anyway? (NOT long)
> 
> 
> I could not have said it better.   The major reason to have a catalog
> is to provide information for our users and prospective users.
> Although librarians and library staff members are also catalog users,
> they are not in the majority.
> 
> That said, many of our constituents don't use either our web sites or
> our catalogs.  We also need to figure out ways to get the data out of
> our catalog databases so that it can be used in other resources and
> services.  Is it time for us to team up with vendors who provide
> heavily used search engines, and not with those who provide ILS systems
> (for example, Google), to incorporate our content so that users can
> better search our catalogs?
> 
> Mary
> -----------------------------------------------
> Mary Pagliero Popp, Public Services Librarian
> Library Information Technology,
> Wells Library W501, Indiana University,
> 1320 E. 10th Street, Bloomington, IN  47405
> popp_at_indiana.edu  812-855-8170   FAX: 812-856-4979
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
> [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of B.G. Sloan
> Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 10:19 PM
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Whose elephant is it, anyway? (NOT long)
> 
> I wanted to circle back to my original point in this debate...
> 
> It doesn't really matter how well (or how poorly) "back room" library
> systems are functioning if the public user interface doesn't work.
> 
> Libraries exist to help people satisfy their information needs. If
> public user interfaces fail in this area, people will go elsewhere to
> satisfy their information needs.
> 
> It's just that simple.
> 
> Bernie Sloan
> Sora Associates
> Bloomington, IN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>