2020-10-27 Meeting Notes

Owned by Matt Buga (Unlicensed)
Last updated: Oct 28, 2020
6 min read

  • This meeting is mostly about feedback on Ex Libris and Folio

  • Pinup: https://pinup.com/QEdNO131O

  • But first: Laurel will discuss about Tind’s plans for the futures

  • SD: We’d like to discuss with other libraries and their experience with Folio & Ex Libris, so any feedback and questions that we could follow up on would be great.

  • DISCOVERY AND ACCESS - Primo portion of Ex Libris and EBSCO’s discovery service

    • LN: We have not taken notes for every single meeting we’ve had, except for JY’s excellent notes on committee meetings, but I have been taking notes on meetings with vendors that you can see here:  https://caltechlibrary.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/FLM/pages/1513357329

      • FR: There has been a lot of information given, so these notes are good to go through if there is a section you’ve forgotten about it or need to re-visit.

    • Ex Libris tracks a lot of data, potentially too much, and there’s no way to turn it off.

      • This was not a big contention when brought up to UW.

      • They’ve looked through all of the data, but have never seen any personalized data. Ex Libris could be capturing data we do not know about. Just because the data is de-identified, does not mean it could be identified.

    • EBSCO’s Discovery interface that was just demo’d was very slick and attractive.

    • Question: What is your judgement on configurability? The source data in our system is messy, which leads to poor search results. Would migration fix the data? Or is it a big clean up process?

      • We’ve been directed to focus on configurability, less customization.

      • There will be clean up no matter what.

    • Thoughts on ease of transition?

      • Folio will be easier to transition too -- we already have some EBSCO products.

      • When you talk migration: Ex Libris would require all migration: bibliographic records, electronic resources. If Folio, much less of the electronic resources.

      • Ex Libris is good at migration though, they have migrated thousands of libraries. They’ve migrated the whole UC system, State system. This is probably newer to EBSCO as they are newer to the ILS part of the world.

    • Who does data belong to? Milwaukee said it would be us. They seemed to think that Ex Libris would not claim ownership of our data.

      • With EBSCO for example, the metadata is something they are very proprietary with, because they put a lot of work cleaning up and putting the data together. 

      • Both systems have said that we can import the basic information used to link out to the repositories, so you could search for them in the discovery layer.

      • So seems like EX Libris would do much of the migration, or do they give us a spec and we do most of the migration?

        • Standard: that they do the bulk of the work, and we do the bulk of the mapping with their help. We pay them.

      • Was there one system preferable or more problematic when it came to acquisitions? Lots of detail given, but seemed hard to judge for someone in non-acquisitions. Too complicated, too easy, wrong?

        • Too hard to say, both seem do-able. They work with larger institutions with more complex needs, so we’d likely be fine.

      • How about analytics? Seemed Ex Libris went a long ways towards providing different analytics with pretty graphics.

        • Milwaukee really liked Alma’s analytics. Seems both would meet our needs. TIND lacks in this department.

        • Ex Libris may be more advanced in this because they analyze everything, which is good for a public institution which needs to prove its value. But we may not need all the data.

        • example of the granularity: they would use information on how users are searching the system to help them how to figure out how to update the displays. If they see them using a specific facet over another, they will move that facet up the line. 

        • We may not need such granularity.

        • KW: Agree with all that you are saying that getting some analytics is better from where we are now -- but the cases we’ve been able to make in the last year based in turnaway data, docuserve data, the possibilities we might be able to do with additional analytics can be nice. 

    • We are talking of Univ of Arizona next week. We will talk to smaller schools too.

    • On topic of DISCOVERY, we can look at EDS & Primo installations, lots of both of them out there. You can get a good example of if they work well or not.

      • Links are on confluence 

    • PINUP: I’d like a system that automatically updates our knowledge base (via API)

      • Might need more info. Sounds good.

      • We currently use EBSCO’s, which is automatically updated by vendor. Depends on what kind of data! LN would really like to see our HOLDINGS updated automatically. We’ve asked about this a few months ago to Wiley, who said no.

  • CIRCULATION

    • KW would like to hear from a collections management perspective, since that’s where TIND has not been able to do so well.

    • As a reminder: both systems have said both can already handle RFID (and barcodes)

    • Both systems are comparable in terms of notices, customizing emails, patron information setting up. What I like about EBSCO is they have that ability to preview before sending notices. From circ’s POV, any of the systems will do.

    • The Folio notice system is very similar to what TIND just updated.

    • Setting up Proxy Borrowers -- both have set that up. But there may be some doubt: EBSCO they came up with a solution, but was not an actual answer. You could have someone acting in lieu of faculty member, but not exactly the same as family members. Did not seem EBSCO had the exact answer we were looking for.

      • Could be handled within their capabilities, but not with the language we expected.

      • KW, we had a similar capability in the previous FOLIO incarnation at NYU. 

      • FR: We made specific cards for TAs to borrow directly from professor’s account.

      • PINUP: I guess this will be an unpopular opinion, butI think there are higher priority functions than allowing family members to have borrowing privileges.

    • JP: There are still issues with the circulation module that we're hoping will be resolved in future iterations of TIND. Example: the issue of where the screen advances after setting up holds, or placing items on hold. Also, how the dates are displayed.

    • SD: FOLIO might be missing some things around the edges, and inventory functions in particular are not there ready-to-use off the shelf. Ex Libris, coming from a long line of existing systems, that stuff is baked in there ready to use.

      • Modular development in FOLIO means that if it is still undeveloped, it will not remain that way for long.

      • One of the drawbacks of a proprietary system like Ex Libris, is that you have to advocate for updates. But looks like their widget system allows you to add some custom things.

      • https://wiki.folio.org/display/FOLIOtips/Inventory
 <- inventory module for folio. Unclear how implemented yet.

    • KW- are there any features of the systems that we looked at, don’t have?

      • Cataloger had something she missed after moving to Ex Libris: one example was being able to create your own local authority record. Overall she didn’t say it mattered that much, you have to learn to work with the new workplace. You gave up a little bit of customization,but the benefits were worth the trade off. Ex Libris is probably not lacking, but may have a few things where we need to change our own workflows. Not lacking, but not always customizable.

      • PIN-UP: I am glad Stephen mentioned Collection management, because we haven’t been able to monitor and manage our collection this past few years. A robust out-of-the-box system is very important for this area.

    • PINUP: Has there been a discussion of costs of migration versus doing work to improve TIND & ERM system?

      • No, we have been asked to not consider costs.

      • The charge has been to compare the separate systems vs an integrated system (LSP). Initial discussions made it clear that people wanted an integrated system, rather than separate components. 

        • If we were to stick with TIND, it’d be because we expect them to make an LSP. See Laurel’s presentation above.

      • Two costs: Cost of waiting, cost of mitigation work/customization, then cost of paying a vendor to do everything for you. It depends on where you want to put your resources.

      • “We want to customize the software, not configure it.”

      • We will have to look at how we want things to be done. The less customization we have, the less opportunity we have to make it unique. Where should we be investing as a library?