K-State Libraries: ILS Task Force

June 30 Minutes

Present: Sara, Tara, Marty, Adam, Dave

Based on the responses Sara received (or not) from ILSTF members, Tuesday afternoons appear to be the preferred meeting time for the majority. So the new regular meeting time will be 2-3:00 p.m. on Tuesdays.

With the completion of part 1 of the task force’s charge, members present discussed where to place primary focus for phase 2. The following areas emerged as priority points for further investigation.

• Complete a general review of the current state of our proprietary and open source ILS options, including investigating Ex Libris’ plans for future development/ replacement of Voyager. Then provide a task force recommendation addressing the near-term advisability of “improving” the Libraries’ Voyager ILS versus replacing it. (Dave will gather information on the Ex Libris planning outlook.)
•  Consider ways to monitor the continuing development of open source-based options and new library services/ service models in order to determine when to implement system changes.
• Explore the viability of and requirements for “fixing” the Voyager system in the short term (while monitoring the continuing development of open source options), including an OPAC overlay, 3^rd party add-ons, rethinking certain local implementation options, etc.
• Evaluate more fully the advantages/ disadvantages of the open source alternatives as they relate to our system needs and our current or desired tech development and support model. Also consider vendor-marketed/ managed open source products. (Marty will begin exploring the open source issues.)
• Explore the advantages/disadvantages of a consortial approach to a new ILS that might involve KU and other Regents’ institutions. This will include gathering feedback, recommendations and best practices from participants in other ILS-centered consortia. (Sara will make some initial contacts with KU.)
• Investigate potential opportunities associated with the Google Book Search-OCLC WorldCat agreement. Also look further into WorldCat Local. (Adam will begin investigating these areas.)

Sara will make updated GroupWise appointments for future task force meetings through the end of August.

Report files, part 1

Library Systems Evaluation Task Force report part 1
ILS features.xls

June 16 minutes

Reviewed narrative report. Sara made a few changes once she had mastered the wireless keyboard.

Reviewed spreadsheet. Some extensive discussion ensued on the "enhanced OPAC" line. Dale will review the items listed and break them into three categories: can be done in Voyager, cannot, and system-independent. The last category will be removed from the spreadsheet. Many options for presenting this were discussed. Dale will work on the "enhanced OPAC" and "better OPAC searching" lines in the spreadsheet in order to specify what is possible in Voyager versus what is not.

The need/utility of a brief summary came up. Tara pointed out that it would be useful to have a summary sheet, where the recommendation is made clear for a casual reader. Beyond that, we should continue to have the full details available on all topics. While discussing this, we edited items on the summary list in the narrative document.

Made decisions on and edits to the items on the features spreadsheet for which there was no can/cannot entry, and tidied up some imprecise language.

Tabled the discussion of phase two, i.e.- the making recommendations part, to our next meeting. Sara tossed out a few options that will guide our discussion and she'll check with Lori G regarding her flexibility on the second part of our charge.

June 9 Minutes

ILSTF Meeting
Monday, 6.9.2008

ILS Features Spreadsheet is almost complete. We discussed and made some changes in order of items listed according to priority/urgency. Dave is compiling information about what Voyager can and cannot do.  (Thanks to Mary, Margaret, Jenny, and Adam for compiling info for this task.)

Google document is in progress – This is a narrative version of the info on ILS Features Spreadsheet.

Marty discussed – Rob McGee’s work on ILS profiling programs from ALA Mid-Winter programs. Suggested making contact with them at the upcoming ALA meeting to inquire the viability of our having them here to consult with us. RMG Consultants rmgconsultants.com.

Discussion of useful themes from the JISC Report:

•    Seeking increased value
•    No room for vendors to grow market outside of add-ons
•    Investment to shift from one system to another – takes a crisis to force that shift – “Dependency, not loyalty.”
•    Renegotiate contracts
•    Makes no sense for individual institutions to make these commitments. Should we move to consortial model. *Talk to KU/Regents
•    Support for Voyager will, at some point, cease. Is there the possibility that we could purchase it? (purchase outright  and support it via an open-source community of Voyager users/Programming cooperative)
•    Viability of open source possibilities
•    Google is going to be working with OCLC to make more library info available. Where will this be going?
•    “Liberation of the data.” Making sure that the info we create is available freely and not shackled to our system. Open access, not closed.
•    “Open data” - Were we to invest in data on front in, at publisher level, it would improve workflows.
•    Priority - User side – needs to function as users expect. Web2.0 features? Do we need an OPAC? If our data is accessible via Google?
•    Overlays for public interface
•    Consult vendor(s) to discover how we can mine our system for better data (E.g. “Clickstream” data collection as Amazon practices).
•    Single login!

We will send comments or make edits to the Google document. We will complete final edits on Thursday and send report out on Friday.

Next Monday we will begin discussing phase II.

June 2 Minutes

Driving Principals
Observed Trends
Survey Updates
Prioritization
Next week
 

Open Forum Notes: May 22

What could a library system do to increase your workflow efficiency?

• Communicate better with other systems
  • patron loads with KEAS/LDAP
  • $ data with Verde
  • serial holdings w/ SFX
• authority works with keyword searching
• search limits in OPAC (location / material type)
• better links between call # and location (physical and medium)
• call # links to directions to item
• enhance "in process" status to make it more meaningful (fed ex tracking)
• keyword within subject heading
• better help options (more illustrative instructional functions)
• ability to save searches
• federated searching (integrated) multiple systems
• reduce false hits
• more intuitive (easier to use and not jargony)
• address inconsistencies between e-journals and catalog (hard to tell what we own)
• clarity of what journal issues are available
• bulk importing more simple (less manipulation of records)
• end-user reports easier to generate
• circulation stats available

What features are essential to a library system?

• Electronic content delivery (delivery through OPAC)
• EDI
• Patron Confidentiality (response varied)
• Richness of data integration (seeing records within broader contexts)
• Bulk import/export
• OAI compliant
• compliant with other standards
• language options (translation of content)
• STRONG and better integration with other systems
• filters, limits in all searches (as the amount of available information grows, the need to sort it grows)
• widgetized, portable
• data security and redundancy (mirroring)
• Advanced search function (better advanced searching)
• OPAC that is more like Google/Amazon - accessible to everyone (no lingo, etc)
• Database-driven?
• Flexible / Extensible - takes advantage of current and future capabilities
• Communication with other systems
• Patron interaction with how system works
  • ability to leave notes and comments
• Patron services could be easier
  • credit card transactions
  • clear holds in one place
  • pay fines online
• interface easy to interact with (e.g. resize)
• mobile OPAC (available on portable devices)

Googling the Catalog

A repeated theme during our open forum sessions has been the desire for a Google-ized catalog interface.  During Wednesday's forum I noted that, if Google wasn't in the process of developing a catalog, they should be.  When I returned to my office after the forum, I found a message from Dean Lori, sharing a press release from OCLC and Google: OCLC and Google to exchange data, link digitized books to WorldCat .

Open Forum Notes

Wednesday, May 21 @ 2pm

What could a library system do to increase your workflow efficiency?

• Better author/title searching capabilities
  • Name/title entries need to work better, especially with prolific authors/composers
• All 830s (series) should be displayed (on staff side)
• Very integrated (fully) selector tracking process for acquisitions (similar to Fedex tracking)
  • All modules (circulation, acquisitions, cataloging, etc) visible through one interface
• Help selectors with usage statistics and have user-friendly reporting features that do not require a programmer
• Better reporting capabilities for all types of reports
• More Google and Amazon-like features for the user (this would also be an effective marketing tool)
  • Faceted browsing
• Better search capabilities on the staff side (we currently have to run everything through Access)
• Increased accuracy of accounting/budget information
• Projection capabilities for continuations
• Ability for users to tag items
• Allow initial articles (a, an, the, los, etc) in OPAC searching
• More descriptive information in the OPAC
  • Tables of contents
  • What's in the book (like Google Books) - something easy and intuitive, maybe something that links out to Google Books
• Make it clearer that title is the default search field (or change default search fields)
• More flexible/navigable search limits (the ability to alter a search quickly and easily without starting over)
• An OPAC that is more inviting to users
• More information from Voyager circ in the OPAC record
  • barcodes
  • more information that shows up in full record, but more formatted
• Need to be able to find more information on how and when items are purchased
• ISSN/ISBN in short view record
• Real-time inventory tracking
• Report problems (i.e. problems for Jane Hale) via a link in the OPAC record
• Simpler formatting for financial information in Voyager
  
  • Fund codes

What features are essential to a library system?

• Accurate information on what we have
• Clear indication of what the catalog does and the ability to easily distinguish between that and databases
• Guided keyword searching
• Self-check of "My account" with one entry point (fully integrated)
• Longer time before re-login
• Real time, dynamic information
• More user-friendly reporting capabilities for all
• Consider all information as the same, regardless of format (don't segregate print from electronic, etc).
• Modern OPAC with a user-friendly, Google-like interface
  
  • fewer search choices
  • less clutter, same functionality
  • graphics (book covers, etc)
  • tags
• Ability to make small changes in catalog records
  • More staff training/education on what we can and cannot do with the system
• Ability to check funds
• User-initiated requests/services
  • library account (see what's checked out, pay fines, etc)
  • placing holds and ILLs in a central location
• Web-accessible everything - no installed modules
• Integration of all sub-systems (ILLiad, Verde, SFX and non-library systems like ISIS, K-REx, etc)
  • relates to "my" account
• Purple
• Catalog links to subject guides and librarians
• Flexibility for customization
• Booking system for rooms and resources

Thinking About Our Charge...

I think our task force is doing a good job collecting ideas on the system and functional requirements for an ILS.  But, how will we move to address the first part of our charge to "identify functional and system requirements....and vet them with the library administration and staff?"

It seems to me the task force will need to make decisions as to which elements are important to have in an ILS, and which elements are not essential.  I imagine we would have to put these decisions into some sort of report that we can share with the library admin and staff.

The second part of our charge is to "evaluate available options...against approved function and system requirements...and make recommendations to the library administration on the strengths and weaknesses of available options."  I have a hard time imagining what this "evaluation" will look like, but I think we'll need to know a lot about the "available options" in order to provide a meaningful evaluation. 

Do we need to start gathering information on "options" at this point?  Again, we're doing a great job gathering ideas on what the ILS should be, but that's only part of our charge, and maybe it's the easy part of our charge.  Determining the true capabilities of a system can be tricky, especially if we're dealing with vendor marketing staff.   

Open Forum Notes - May 20, 2008

ILS Task Force Open Forum

May 20, 2008  Attendance = 13 Library staff

Tara (moderator), Marty (recorder)

Those in attendance divided into three groups.  Each group recorded it’s own points, which were then read to the group as a whole.  We had some discussion and clarification of points.

 

Listed below are points raised in the small groups.  Points are grouped into like categories.

Question 1: What could a library system do to increase your workflow efficiency?

Communicate with other systems

• Portability of data.  Able to move data from one system to another.
• Ability to communicate with other systems.
• Integrated with collection management systems from Blackwell, Yankee, etc.
• Need to be able to get multiple feeds from the catalog (RSS, XML, etc.)

End User Searching

• Use the label “Advanced Search” rather than “Set Limits.”  This would be easier for users to understand.
• Provide Boolean searching
• Make items in the catalog searchable through Google, i.e., when you search Google, items from the catalog will appear in the results list.

Integration

• Integrated modules.
• One click jump between the same record across different modules.
• Don’t require staff to have to log in to each individual module

Reporting

• Print reports easier
• Reports need to be available at all service points.  Ability to export reports to spreadsheets.
• Easy access for fund account information (how much money do I have left) for subject librarians.
• Improve functionality of reports
• Staff should be able to run/retrieve reports on their own.
• Need to be able to pull information for reports from multiple modules.

Interfaces

• More intuitive
• User friendly
• Give staff permissions to do more things in the system
• Customizable help screens

Specific Functions

• Tag tables need to be current.  Those supplied with systems and upgrades are typically out of date.
• Delete records in batches rather than individually.
• System configuration and .ini settings should be retained during upgrades.  Voyager upgrades reset .ini files to default settings.

General Qualities

• Reduce reliance on 3^rd party software.  It would be better to have the functionality built into the system
• Avoid serving as a beta test site for new systems.
• Customizable functionality in all areas.

Question 2: What features are essential to a library system?

OPAC Interface

• User friendly searches
• More intuitive
• User friendly OPAC
• Patron customizable OPAC
• Personalizable OPC.  Features might include the ability to change the display language, retain personal settings, review check out history, etc.
• Catalog interface should be user friendly.  Features should include faceted browse and a Google-like search, i.e., one search box in which you can enter any type of term (author, title, keywords, etc.)
• OPAC interface that is more visual and not just text.  But, still needs to be ADAcompliant.
• Library news feeds within the OPAC.

OPAC Record Display

• OPAC should not be cluttered with extraneous information.  For example, the basic item record should include only the title, call number, location, and circulation status.  Provide a “more” button for additional information.
• Counterpoint: Some items will have identical titles, and the user will need to see more information in order to identify the desired item.
• Provide more tables of contents for books.
• Provide the ability to view pages of a book
• Display book jackets.

Integration

• Fully integrated modules
• Ability to integrate with other campus systems (HR, registration, financial, etc.)
• The system should be customizable and flexible.  Customization is restricted in Voyager.

Availability Options

• Provide ILLand purchase options if a search results in zero hits.
• Request function should search many options (ILS, WorldCat, Amazon, etc.)

Electronic Resources (Online journals)

• Easy and consistent access to electronic resources available through the OPAC.  SFX and “Get It” don’t always work.
• Easy access to electronic resources

Specific features

• The system should be able to accept user-supplied metadata.
• The system needs to supply accurate and timely location information.
• Flexible acquisitions fund accounting
• Bulk import/export of records.  At present, we rely on 3^rd party software for this, and the process is clunky.
• Ability to search by limits such as language, format, location, etc. with out other search terms.
• Ability to push information to users.  For example, send course reserve information to all students enrolled in a particular class.  Send subject librarian contact information to all students in a particular major.
• Ability to easily export citations to popular personal bibliographic database management software programs.
• Send an e-mail reminder a few days before an item is due.
• Use less library jargon.  For example use “more” as a button label instead of “Full Record.”