Notes from Open Forum on forming an Aleph Users' Group

Tuesday, June 22, 10:00-12:00

Faculty Lounge, Hesburgh Library

Present: Bob Konicek, Clara Enriquez, Thomas Lehman, Judy Kendall, Kitty Marschall, Pamela Nicholas, Mary Lehman, Mary English, Lorry Zeugner, Kathie Ryan-Zeugner, Marsha Stevenson, Barbara Connelly, Judy Conner, Lisbeth Lannuier, Lisa Stienbarger, Debbie Huyvaert, Margaret Porter, Jo Bessler, Steve Hayes, David Williams, Phil Andrzejewski, Jean McManus, Laura Sill, Sue Dietl

(NOTE: Concern was voiced regarding the upcoming meeting at ALA. Due to the limited participation at this meeting, the general feeling was that specific decisions regarding the nature of the users' group should take place after the ALA meeting when more wide-spread involvement was possible).

1. Do we want a users' group?

Yes. No one objected.

2. What should be the scope of the users' group (geographically)?

The scope of the users' group could be based on forming a group of like-constituents. Factors like type of library (academic), language, users of the same version of Aleph software, or use of library standards, could serve as a basis for forming a core group. Most felt that the natural core might be United States and Canada, however, membership could be open/extended to others (i.e., Mexico, Latin America, etc.) Thinking of the group as a subset of ICAU was thought to be desirable (i.e., call the group ICAU-North America), since it allowed for a relationship to the international group, but helped with the practical matters of travel costs, etc. This type of relationship might also facilitate Ex Libris' promise of focused development for the North American market.

3. What should be the goals of the users' group?

Potential goals to be fostered by the group include: guide the development of the Aleph software, provide networking opportunities for Aleph users, provide a forum for showcasing work accomplished through the use of the Aleph software, facilitate information sharing about the use of the Aleph software, and serve as a resource about the Aleph software to the general library community.

4. To whom should membership be open?

It was most widely accepted that any institution with a contract or letter of intent for the Aleph software should be invited to join as members. There was less agreement on whether membership should include only those institutions running Aleph 500 software, only those following US library standards, or offering a proportional membership based on the degree to which the software is installed at a particular institution (i.e., how many applications are implemented). It was agreed that a close relationship to the vendor was necessary and should be fostered, however, it was stressed that this should be a users' group controlled by the users. Inviting Ex Libris to join as an ex officio member or as a guest was suggested. Separating voting vs. attendance rights might be considered. Voting rights might be reserved for those who have a contract or have signed a letter of intent and attendance rights might be open to others (i.e., prospective customers, other vendor-partners, etc.).

5. How should the users' group be organized?

The organization of ICAU, with an assembly of members, steering committee, and chair seemed generally agreeable to the group. Additional suggestions were to include development or module coordinators to help manage development requests, and to further organize around a series of Special Interest Groups (SIGs) to facilitate communication on specific areas of the system (e.g., circulation, acquisitions, etc.). A steering committee should have a system-wide view, rather than application focus. The number of steering committee members could equal the number of SIGs (i.e., each SIG would elect a steering committee member). The same might hold true for group of development or module coordinators.

6. What should be the main responsibilities of each area of the users' group?

The module or development coordinators could help facilitate the development request process. The SIGs could organize discussions at the Users' Group meeting and other meetings (i.e., ALA) on common areas of the system (i.e., applications or features, etc.). The steering committee could concern itself with administering the users' group as an organization, focusing on overarching issues and conference planning. The chair of the users' group would speak for the organization and chair the steering committee.

7. Where should the home-base of the users' group be located?

The pros and cons of a permanent vs. roving home base were discussed. The benefit of a permanent home could come in the form of permanent administrative help, archiving resources and space. While alternating the home-base among the members might emphasize the user-controlled nature of the group, having a permanent home base, for example at one of the institutions or in the Ex Libris offices in Chicago, might facilitate the practical matters of administrative and paper/web archives.

8. What should the users' group relationship be to Ex Libris?

The users' group could serve as a sounding board for Ex Libris, and focus on fostering strong communication between members and the vendor. Answers to the flip side of this question, what should be Ex Libris' relationship to the users' group, included the suggestions of providing financial support, administrative help, and strong feedback regarding the development of the system (i.e., development areas and release notes).

9. What information should members be expected to provide to the users' group?

Comments on this question included ideas beyond providing just information. The members should be prepared to provide continued financial support to the users' group. This might come in the form of paying annual dues, funding a position for administrative/web support, providing funding for space and equipment to house paper and web resources produced by the users' group (i.e., a server). It may also come in the form of conference planning that is sensitive to providing opportunities for wide-spread involvement (i.e., offering cost effective conference packages and allowing staff to attend the meetings). Members should be willing to share their practices in the use of the system (i.e., "here's how we do x at our Aleph site"), participate in the activities of the users' group, and foster partnerships through networking at the meetings and throughout the year (i.e., over the Alephint list, through web pages, etc.).

10. What information should Ex Libris be expected to provide to the users' group?

Comments described expectations beyond just information to be provided, including offering demos on new aspects of the Aleph software, participating in the development request process, and providing seed money for 2 years to get the users' group started.

11. How often should the users' group meet?

The general consensus was that the users' group should meet annually. The exact time of the year should take into consideration cost breaks (i.e., holding the meeting during intercession when dorm facilities are available, etc.), as well as run counter to when ICAU meets.

12. Where should the users' group meet?

ALA might be considered a possible meeting point for the users' group or subset of the users' group, although some disagreement on this point was voiced (i.e., the users' group meeting should not be affiliated with ALA, which is seen more as an opportunity for the professional library staff to meet; ALA may exclude technical and staff participants). The group agreed that Notre Dame (i.e. Jim Wruck at the New Orleans meeting on the 28th) should offer to be the site for the users' group meeting for the first two years (i.e., possibly spring of 2000 and 2001).

13. What types of communication vehicles should be available to users?

A web page, similar to the ICAU page was considered desirable. Use of the existing Alephint email list was encouraged.

14. What should take place at the users' group meetings?

Various ideas were offered: presentations by users of the system, reports by the chair and/or steering committee, presentations by Ex Libris, cross application discussions by the SIGs, other vendor-partner presentations possible in an exhibits area, and informal networking opportunities (i.e., a social).

15. How should development requests from the users' group be managed?

A well-known, formalized process should be developed. There were concerns about the timing of switching to such a process. What does it mean for development ideas that have already been sent to Ex Libris by MALC? Another question was that of how local development would mesh with development being done by Ex Libris? There should be close coordination between the two. The SIGs could have an active role in the development request process. They could be responsible for encouraging the submission and organization of requests that could then filter to coordinators or the steering committee. It was desirable for Ex Libris to actively participate in this process, and some thought the assignment of complexity points was helpful. The managing of development requests should be ongoing and not just occur once each year.

General Suggestion:

As the users' group is being formed, a survey of other international groups or other ILS vendor's users' group should be conducted for any insight it may provide.

Revised: 1/10/00