1. love
2. conservatism
3. culture
4. socialism
5. ethics
6. integrity
7. leadership
8. twitter
9. irony
10. agnostic

One of these things is not like the others…

Carol reports that she did not participate in the Fun Run/Walk at 6:30 a.m.

We’re facing the challenge of demonstrating our value to stakeholders. Economy adds to this by pressuring budgets, combine w/ perceptions of library as gateway (Ithaka studies) we have a value gap. Amount spent vs. *perceived* value. (Perception of other roles hasn’t declined.) Wrong perceptions can become reality if we don’t address them head on.

Carol in middle of studies on ROI so that will be her focus today.

Usage logs: what people do on library systems. Picture of one segment – electronic; don’t tell you what people do with the info or the value it has to them. What did people do instead of going to the library? Carol recently joined COUNTER board.

Focus groups and surveys: to examine changes, to improve what we do.

User surveys and data: go beyond amount of use – what do people do with the info, what are outcomes. combine with other data on budget and income then you can get at ROI.

Objectives of ROI: how does library contribute to income of university. For every $ spent on library, university received X $ in return. Articulate value in terms of institutional objectives.

Study in 3 phases: 1) case study at a US University (U of Illinois)  – there’s a white paper on the Elsevier website. Judy Luther was involved w/ team. ROI in grants was focus. 2) expanded Phase 1 to 8 countries, 9 universities. does the phase 1 methodology transfer? 3) propsal pending w/ IMLS to look at ROI for grants/research, teaching, student engagement – essentially go beyond grants to other ROI and quantify.

Findings from Phase 1: Not just quantitative, so need to meet with top admins to determine what they value. Found similar values at research universities, e.g., attract and retain top faculty, focus on new intellectual directions, strengthen interdisciplinary work, increase research impact. Benefit of interviews: informing admins about the library, too.

How do you calculate ROI: faculty generate income through grants, increase reputation. they use library collections in proposals. what proportion of grant’s income could be assigned to the library?

Grant cycle: conduct research -> write articles -> write reports and proposals -> obtain grants -> conduct research, etc.  library has role in first three, how do we make specific connection?

Worked with an economist on methods. Need to clarify purpose of project before going out to talk to faculty: not trying to claim allocation back to library, not cost/time saving exercise. Faculty worried about money being allocated as an outcome of project.

studies on ROI for public libraries: Worth their weight by Americans for Libraries Council and Making cities stronger Urban Libraries Council. Include tools for calculation – this is a goal of Tenopir’s work.

studies on ROI for corporate libraries: Demonstrating Value and ROI by Outsell. time and money saved, revenue generated.

Data gathered during Phase 1: different types with different metnhods. e.g. surveys of faculty, office data on grant income, etc.

Model: % faculty w/ grants using citations x % grant award success rate using citations from library x $ avg grant income = $ avg grant income generated using citations from library x # grants expended / $ library budget (total not just collections) = $ grant income for each $1.00 invested in library. at Illinois this came out to 4+ : 1 ratio.

Phase 2 ongoing to see if model works, is it transferable. similarities and differences across countries and institutions.

Faculty survey – tried to keep short. combination of open-ended and quantitative questions. asked demographic data to determine differences among rank and discipline.

Value of e-resources: similar responses around the world – access from desktop is key.

Measuring up to admin values: tie between faculty with more pubs and citations have higher propensity of obtaining more grants. Faculty who publish more read more. Those who receive awards read more. Can’t claim cause and effect, but it is a picture of a successful faculty member.

References clearly important to grants. Avg # of citations: 20-46 is range.

% of citations from e-library: mode vaies 50-99%.

ROI varied from 15:1 to under1:1. varied depending on institution mission. some were teaching institutions so grants are not a good mechanism for measuring ROI.

Phase 3: will broaden focus from grants to other functional areas, e.g. teaching and learning. anticipate change: new scholarly endeavors such as e-science, IRs. challenge is to develop measures. e.g. how do you measure careers after graduation, measure prestige? and what’s the library’s role?

Conclusion so far: libraries help generate grant income. e-collections valued by faculty and bring ROI to university anywhere in world. hope to show library’s products and services help faculty be successful, students be successful, immediate and downstream income.

Final thoughts: tie what you measure to mission of university. measure outcomes not inputs. quantitative data show ROI and trends, qualitative data tell a story, multiple methods needed.

question about ILL: didn’t include in study – they were looking more at collections rather than services.

question about publishing phase 2: hoping this summer, but not sure.

question about calculator: yes, expect to make tools available with ARL.

question about how people know they’re using library systems: tried to phrase questions carefully at each institution in order to get at this. suspect they underestimated library use because people may not know, especially if the systems are good.

question pointing out that studies are exploratory and require further follow up. methodology evolved with phases. tenopir agrees.

OpenURL overview: evolution from magic to sausage making in how it is implemented and how information gets passed around. when the link resolver fails it affects the user’s perception of the tool

bad data, bad formatting, lack of knowledge

what is the measure of success? better access, fewer false positives and negatives. number of links should equal number of access points available

History of KBART: 2007 UKSG research report, led to collaboration between UKSG and NISO

Better data for everyone: providers, processors, presenters, users

Core working group + monitoring group. Anyone can join monitoring group.

Problems w/ OpenURL: 3 main onese are inaccurate data leads to bad links, incorrect implementation, lack of knowledge

Lack of knowledge: some providers just don’t know about OpenURL – need education

Incorrect implementations: help providers determine what’s working, what isn’t, need more and better examples. opportunity to standardize transfer of data. Adam Chandler Cornell project to look at source OpenURLs.

Inaccurate data: what to do? grade? police? shame? biggest problem to solve. coverage data especially. education on why it matters.

KBART deliverables: report and provide guidance on these problems. offer best practices guildines for how to effectively transfer accurate data. better understanding of supply chain.

How to deliver it: FTP tab delimited, separate files for each db, as often as necessary. standardized file name structure. guidance on how to provide coverage, what info to include – defined fields. defining how to represent certain kinds of data, e.g. embargo data. Much discussion about what to include vs. what to point to e.g. with a DOI.

Error reporting – how? link resolvers vs. content providers doing correction. public error reporting db?

Education sections, FAQ, website – who would maintain?

Next steps: library specific data, consortial package work, non-textual resources. standards?

(Had to leave this a couple minutes early.)

For all you techie troubleshooters out there,

Apparently since Windows 2000, you’ve been able to copy the entire error message to your clipboard by hitting the universal copy shortcut, Ctrl-C (who knew?!).

No more SnagIt just to get a copy of the text.

Post via LifeHacker.

One phrase that kept coming out of the mouths of the panelists, however, was “the dark side.”  Now I like a good Star Wars reference as much as the next person, but as someone who just made the switch from working in a library to working for a library software company, I found it a bit perturbing.  When I started telling people about my new job, the only people who used that phrase were in sales, and I don’t recall anyone who works at a library using it during the panel session.

I’m sure there are librarians working in libraries who do think those of us in industry have gone to the dark side, but for the most part that has not been my experience. If we want to change perceptions about what we do and why, we should at least give ourselves a little credit and leave the “dark side” comments to, um, the Harrison Fords of the serials world.

But if you sit down to watch network primetime with any member of the legal, medical, or forensic science professions, you will quickly learn that librarians aren’t the only group outraged by their treatment at the hands of the the media and entertainment industries. It seems that whether the portrait is flattering or not, no one likes to see their chosen career misrepresented for fun and profit.

In honor of Halloween, on which day, in my opinion, librarians don’t even make the top 10 list for stereotypes, I offer a suggestion: the next time you see the DHL commercial, read Harry Potter, visit Ms. Dewey, or hear the adventures of Ruth Harrison, go ahead and laugh. You’ll be doing your part to dispel the stereotype.

Today, radio listening habits have shifted, and I only hear the radio in cars and offices. Television viewing (if you can even call it that) is experiencing a similar shift, as people multitask at home, with the television playing in the background.

The post goes on to mention a partnership between YouTube and NBC and the shift from watching TV on, well, TV to watching it on computers and portable players.

It got me thinking: I live by technology at work. The words “digital library initiatives” are in my job title. I blog. I think coding web pages is fun and I actually sort of like vi. I own an MP3 player and connect it frequently to my computer at work (although lately I’ve been listening to my favorite radio station, WXPN 88.5, a lot). I use IM to help patrons with technical problems. I am obsessive about checking my feed reader.

But when I get home at the end of the day it’s a different story. I own a cell phone for emergencies, but I don’t know the number and I definitely can’t check for messages. I am more likely to listen to NPR than to watch television. (I did get addicted to several procedurals last winter, but summer has helped me get things under control and I hope to stay on the wagon. Does anyone know of a CSI 12 step program?) I used to maintain a website for fun but stopped because I was never in the mood to work on it. I spent a recent evening playing a board game with some friends and I have been thinking of taking up sewing or knitting.

What gives? I am getting all digital-ed out at work? Are my roots showing? Is it Gen X nostalgia for my pre-web existence? These are all rhetorical questions, but I am curious to know if anyone else can relate.