After reading Jim Collins’ Good to Great, the first question that came to mind was, “Libraries don’t measure success by their stock performance so how can this apply to my situation?”. There is clearly value in the concepts of picking the right people, thinking deeply and clearly about your situation, and applying core understanding with rigor and consistency but the underlying metric of  success in economic terms is problematic.  Fortunately, he produced a supplemental piece called Good to Great and the Social Sectors to address this problem by tweaking the measurements of greatness so they can more directly apply to non-profits such as libraries in higher education.

Particularly useful is the clarification of output measures unique to the social sector and how to assess these outcomes through fulfillment of mission either in qualitative or quantitative terms.  On page 5, Collins says,

The confusion between inputs and outputs stems from one of the primary differences between business and the social sectors. In business, money is both an input (a resource for achieving greatness) and an output (a measure of greatness). In the social sectors, money is only an output, and not a measure of greatness.

Since money is not valuable as an output metric something else must take its place. He uses the Cleveland Orchestra as an example of what to focus on when assessing things that are hard to measure.  The three foci mentioned on page 6 concern finding evidence of superior performance, distinctive impact, and lasting endurance.

How could a digital library collect this type of evidence?  Using metrics from the Web is one way but that is still too close to a traditional input.  Getting testimonials from members of the university, other schools copying the digital library program, wider use in the classroom, and good brand reputation are several ways of determining outcomes of valued use and mission fulfillment.

One action to take from reading this book is to develop a “Hedgehog Concept” by deeply examining and defining your three circles from page 19:

1. What you are deeply passionate about -

organizations core values and mission

2. What you can be best in the world at

unique contributions

3. What drives your resource engine (as opposed to economic in business)

3 parts – time, money and brand

Digitization efforts have a vast potential and the temptation is to try and pursue all of them.  However, success and greatness take disciplined planning and action.  Current examples at the CONTENTdm Upper Midwest User Group meeting demonstrated that this is true.  Those who are presenting successful programs had a good core focus and collected things that were unique to their institutions.  One factor that remains to be determined is the longevity of those programs as most have been around less than 5 years.

This book is very helpful for anyone who is planning a digital library program or wants to improve one that already exists. It helps to refocus effort and to take a step back to see if that effort is producing excellent results.

• Codex Sinaiticus – Home

  This ancient biblical manuscript is an excellent example of collaboration between institutions and how digital collections are invaluable to scholars. These four manuscripts could not be combined into a whole without their digital surrogates.

  tags: bible, religion, history, christianity, digital, collections, bethel, manuscripts

This will really help to circumvent the unattractive interface of CONTENTdm. 

• North Carolina Digital Collections Collaboratory » User-friendly CONTENTdm interface design?

  Code created by UNLV to improve CONTENTdm’s interface and enabling Web 2.0 features.

  tags: contentdm, digital collections, usability, web design

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

ABC News ran a story about doctors who expect to have access to the medical literature but can’t because of publisher costs.  They also mentioned the open access movement including the NIH mandate to deposit publications funded by the federal government to PubMed Central so they can be accessed by the public for free.

This is a great opportunity to educate the public about the need for Open Access promoted by advocates like Peter Suber in the United States and Steven Harnad in the UK.  The story begins with a direct connection between the doctor who did the research that would help many people and the lack of access by most people because of commercial publication costs.

Maybe us librarians could hit the comment section with a dose of open access education?  This way more people will understand that the disproportionately rising costs of journals compared to library budgets is a danger to them as well as the “ivory tower”. That’s the ticket.

Institutional Repositories: Thinking Beyond the Box – 3/1/2009 – Library Journal

Current state of IR’s is poor writes Andrew Richard Albanese. Begins with Harvard’s open access mandate and details what went wrong overall with repositories. Mentions some things that IR’s need to do to be successful such as enticing faculty to contribute by providing services.

Some interesting quotes from the article followed by my comments:

“IRs have failed to catch on for a multitude of reasons, Salo explains, not the least of which is that the first generation was hopelessly passive about their collection activities.”

• Librarians must better understand faculty motivations, including tenure and reputation, and build services around that desire. – post by kgerber

“In his opening keynote at the 2008 SPARC Digital Repositories Meeting in Baltimore, John Wilbanks, director of Science Commons, spoke about what would move IRs forward: incentives. ‘My experience is that faculty don’t like to be hit with sticks,’ Wilbanks said. ‘They prefer carrots.’”

• What carrots can we provide? Some ideas:

• Offer assistance in submitting to discipline-specific repositories or organizations
• Provide personal Web space
• Repository submissions recognized in tenure process – post by kgerber

Many news organizations trumpeted the release of the World Digital Library on April 21st.  John Billington, from the Library of Congress, with the help of UNESCO and other funders, succeeded in putting up an interesting interface that provides access to over 1,000 of the world’s precious documents of cultural history.  Included are items from all continents, except Antarctica, which are old, beautiful, and high quality.  You can zoom in on an ancient map or manuscript to get a good look and can experience it in seven languages.

It is an excellent example of what a digital library can do by providing access to items that some would never be able to see.  This site will not substitute for a visit to the actual holders of the items but is a wonderful opportunity for those who can’t.

You may have heard the term open source mentioned many times but are wondering what it really means.  Karen Schneider from Equinox,  the software company that supports the open source ILS Evergreen, presented an excellent introductory Webinar on Open Source software on March 17, 2009. Follow the “Here’s the recording” link. The first 12 minutes are an orientation to the Webinar functions and troubleshooting for the attendees.  Skip forward to get to the content on Open Source.

The Webinar inspired this post and I am highlighting  some important points in the presentation while including my own comments and examples. The five main sections are:

1. Definition of Open Source
2. Examples
3. Reliability and Quality
4. Cost
5. Assessment
6. Question and Answer session

Definition

The definition of open source software is set by the Open Source Initiative and is paraphrased below:

Software that allows its users to access and modify the computer code it was created with and includes licensing that allows it to be freely shared and modified without restriction.

A similar concept exists in the GNU Operating system and the Free Software Foundation who originally developed the concept of free software distribution. The major difference with their license and philosophy is that they choose to emphasize the word “free” and do not accept some license restrictions that open source does.

Examples

• Some familiar examples:
  • Firefox browser, WordPress blog software
• For libraries:
  • Integrated Library Systems (ILS) – Evergreen, Koha, OLE (in development)
  • Digital Repositories – DSpace, Fedora, Greenstone, ePrints
• For programmers and Web developers:
  • Databases – PostgreSQL, MySQL
  • Scripting code – PHP, Perl
  • Web Server – Apache
  • Operating System – Linux

• For more examples fast forward to (33:30) for a list of open source software in libraries – The audio mentions moreOther lists
  • Jessamyn West wrote a post about open source in libraries on Feb. 2007
  • Library Success Wiki (not all items are open source)
  • Open Source Systems for Libraries (choose the type of application)

Reliability and Quality

(15:20) It is reliable enough that over half of commercial vendors use open source such as the Linux operating system

• Many Websites are run on a whole suite of these software called the LAMP stack:
  • L – Linux operating system, A – Apache Web server, M – MySQL database, P – PHP or Perl scripting language
  • Karen informed me that Evergreen runs a variation called LAPP because they use PostgreSQL instead of MySQL because it is more powerful. DSpace, the repository software, also uses this database language.

(19:00) How is quality maintained in these projects?  Description of the meritocracy helps to answer this question.

• (22:20) In Evergreen, some major problems are fixed within hours because of the amount of people collaborating with access to the code

Cost

A common statement about open source is that it is as “free as a free kitten”. (28:00) Karen provides a cost comparison with proprietary or commercial software that takes this comment a step further:

• Traditional – pay for use of proprietary code
• Open source – pay for support and development

Assessment

(36:00) Three open source coding terms that are important to know for assessment

• Commit – “process where code change becomes permanent”,
• Trunk – “base of a product on which development progresses”, and
• Fork – “starting another software program using code from an existing project”

(38:42) Questions to ask

1. How open is it? – based on these principles Foundations of Openness
2. (40:45) How has it grown and how is growth managed?
3. (42:20) Is there a development plan and is it documented?
4. (43:00) How engaged is the community?
5. (44:35) What support models are there?
   1. Self-service
   2. Commercial
   3. Hosted

Questions

(52:40) How do you make a conversion from proprietary software?

• Examine what is currently available – know what you want
• Blog post from Equinox, Migration Nation, assumes you have chosen a product
• Issue an RFP

(53:45) Programming Languages used in Koha and Evergreen

• Evergreen – C, SQL, Javascript  Koha – Perl, some SQL
• also learn Python

Michael Stephens posted part of a proposal to measure the effect of Learning 2.0 in Libraries and I wish him the best of luck.  Since the program began with Helene Blowers in 2006 it has been adopted by close to 1000 organizations worldwide proving that it is clearly a success in the library world. Why should we stop there?

Libraries are not the only groups that are struggling to understand the effect of Web 2.0.  The structure of Learning 2.0 provides the space for people to learn at their own pace and join a community of learners.  Why not open this opportunity to a larger community?  Librarians could lead the way in educating their communities about these tools.  For academic libraries, workshops centered around Learning 2.0 could be a valuable service for faculty or students.  Public libraries could extend this to the general public or specific communities like small businesses.

Has any library used Learning 2.0 as an outreach tool?  I would love to know.

Your institution uses software services like Turnitin.com so you can rest assured that student cheating will be caught, right?

Not so, says Thomas Bartlett of the Chronicle of Higher Education in an article on March 20, 2009. While many professors are aware of different services that help students write their papers for them, they may not be aware that it is a profitable and global industry they are up against.

These companies called essay mills write custom papers for students who pay per-page, and avoid software like Turnitin because the essays are original works; they just aren’t created by the student. The Chronicle tracked one of these companies, Best Essays, from Virginia to Ukraine to the Philippines, back to the US.
John Gordon of Future Tense interviewed Bartlett about the story on March 27 and it is well-worth the four minutes to listen.

What is a professor to do?  Solutions using technology can help but as Bartlett concludes, having a relationship with the student and their work is still the best deterrent.

This post is a summary of a presentation given by two Information Literacy Librarians from Wartburg College, Kimberly Babcock Mashek and Kari Weaver,  at the Library Technology Conference on March 19, 2009.  They compare different user guide models and present best practices to make them more interactive and effective. 

The main points of the presentation are to:

1. Understand what your users want
2. Understand what resources you have available
3. Choose the most appropriate resources according to points 1 & 2.
4. Continue to evaluate and maintain your services.
5. Share their experience and successes at Wartburg College

Brief History of User Guides

Pathfinders or Static Web Pages

Problems

• Don’t know if people are using them
• No standardization
• Users don’t understand library jargon

Why user guides?

• Enhances Info Lit Instruction
• Virtual Access
• Model proper research behavior

What is expected?

• Be specific
  • by class or assignment
• Allow customization
  • what are primary databases in their field
• Need to be current
  • link checking (can pay or have student workers do it)
• Want sophisticated search but not have to struggle to use it
• Easy to find library Web page
• Familiarity/comfort with interface
  • use Wikipedia platform (MediaWiki)
• Explanation of resources and context
• Minimal clicks
• No library jargon
  • research help
• Anytime, anywhere convenient

Meeting Expectations

• Target appropriate audience
• Ask for input
• Be specific – don’t do broad and general topics
  • Newspapers specifically in their collection is popular
• Quality vs. Quantity
  • Not broad sources, maybe dont’ include encyclopedias
• Make it easy
• Check links
• Speak their language

Technical End (Kim)

Widgets

• Social Bookmarking – Delicious, Diigo
  • Pros
    • Free
    • Collaborative
    • Multiple tagging – health, medicine, consumer heath
    • variety of sophistication
  • Cons
    • Link maintenance – must check your links
    • Controlled Vocabulary is not used
    • Coding experience needed with RSS feeds
  • Example
    • use link roll to post a feed into Web page
• RSS feeds
  • Pros
    • free
    • aggregates content in one location
    • create many different ones
    • push and pull tech
  • Cons
    • ?
    • ?
  • Examples
    • can add blog feed to page in LibGuides
• Chat Widgets
  • Pros
    • fre
    • instant access
    • low tech – small learning curve
    • point of need
  • Cons
    • fee
    • Availability – are you going to be available all the time?
    • Demand – How many will use it?
  • Examples
    • Meebo
    • Volero (paid)
    • Customer Service database
• Search Widgets
  • Pros
    • Free from vendors (serials solutions)
    • search from multiple places (catalog, databases)
    • google like
  • Cons
    • need to know html code
    • unavailable from vendor or for a fee.
  • Examples
    • U of M

Automated Options

• Wikis
  • Pros
    • Free
    • increase productivity
      • searchable
      • small barriers to participation
    • easy to use and update
    • search
    • many options
    • easy cross-references
  • Cons
    • Fee (sometimes)
    • Security (collaborate with IT)
    • Set up
    • Local Hosting
    • Many options available
    • User generated content
  • Examples
    • Biz Wiki at Ohio ULibrary a la Carte (from Oregon State)
• Library a la Carte (open source)
  • Pros
    • free
    • customize
    • interoperable with Web 2.0
  • cons
    • programming skills and time required
    • Server space and maintenance must be locally available
    • No easy Facebook integration
  • Example
    • at Oregon State 
• Lib Guides
  • from Springshare
  • Pros
    • Easy updates
    • limited Web design skill necessary
    • customization available
    • off-site hosting (they host it)
    • easily reusable (can harness items within and at other institutions with Libguides)
  • Cons
    • High cost – based on FTE – 17000 students – $5,000)
    • Access problems with off-site servers
      • trouble with authetication because of location
    • Not fully customizable
  • Examples
    • Kari Weaver’s Marketing class

Advanced Technology Options

• Podcast or screencast
  • subscription based
  • invest in great microphone to include audio
  • need server space
  • get a video camera – some for $100
• Tutorials
  • Anywhere, point of need
  • need screen capture software with good audio
  • Camtasia, Captivate, Jing, Camstudio
• Mashups
  • RSS feeds, Images everything fed onto Web page
  • Content is not owned by guide creator, could disappear
• Examples
  • New Zealand University of Auckland
  • Wartburg

Library Playground – demo of Yahoo pipes

libraryplayground.wordpress.com

Implementation at your Library

• Get buy in from staff
  • Create standards first (would have done this first)
• Interfacing with Tech department (don’t recommend doing first and asking for forgiveness)
• Matching talents with tools
• Addressing user expectations

Find help and experience

• Springshare has some online tutorials

Assess your User Guides (offer prizes or food)

• usage statistics
• surveys
• focus groups
  • six students, six people was very successful

Final thoughts

• Choose items carefully and start small

Send email if you want copy of presentation.