Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Ivies+ Access Symposium, part 2

Panel Session:
  • Emily Batista, "ILL Eden: A Vision of the Ideal System"

  • David Larsen, "Beyond the Horizon: Rethinking ILS Options"

  • Sarah Scully, "Next-Gen Systems, Next-Gen Jobs?"

David Larsen: Examples from the University of Chicago. They are struggling with some of the issues discussed in the keynote.

Assessment is important; we need to let our users' expectations drive what we do and help us make decisions about what we do. Just completed the virtual wayfinding study to complement the earlier physical wayfinding study.
Results: users went to the library web page to find basic information, but to other external sources for "research" questions. A new beta web page has been created, but staff are unwilling to release it because it is not yet "perfect."
Using Aquabrowser as a font-end and are adding information about non-owned resources. But all the resources that are being added to the "database" aren't "cataloged" in the same way so they may not be retrieved using the discovery tools.
Chicago watching open source ILS; watching OLE
Using: Horizon, Aquabrowser, ILLIAD, Ares, III Acquisitions module; have a test installation of Evergreen and seeing the level of effort involved.

Emily Batista: What is wrong with our current systems?
patron requests items for things that are owned. They don't understand our catalogs or electronic resources. Discovery systems are not working.
We can't own everything and therefore resource sharing is important.
How much duplicate effort are we putting into finding sources that users request through us? Do we annotate the requests once filled? Did we find what you asked for; was this helpful? The Amazon reviews are very helpful; can we have a similar model? How inconvenient do we make it for users? We get the items, but they don't pick them up. Can we deliver the items to them? How inconvenient do we make it for our users?
We don't want to pass costs on to the users, but we also want to be good stewards of the resources.

Sarah Scully: How do these new tools affect our work and interactions with the patrons?
- job descriptions and performance reviews still focus on physical interactions (charge/discharge, create cards, recall, shelve, etc.)
- users expectations: rapid change, customized services, etc. Library offers a comfortable, inviting space. Want both physical and online services.
- stacks are going away and being replaced by study spaces. Transforming our spaces to meet users' needs.
- have to learn, explain, and trouble-shoot the new e-services.
- Research and Computing help (in the library). Is this where we need to be?
- What will our new job descriptions look like?


back to part 1
Share/Save/Bookmark
blog comments powered by Disqus