This was posted on our Intranet by our head of Technical Services:
This year during the ILUG @ AALL (July 2006). There will be discussion on the State of the Innovative System. I would like to get your thoughts and present them during this discussion. Things that will be discussed are:
How has Millennium worked in your institution? What has it helped? What problems has it raised? Where does the Innovative system fit into the IT environment of your institution? … From the standpoint of you and your institution, where do you see library system software heading? Are there any implications for the overall business model?
So I of course had to answer – and since it was such a long answer and the kind of thing I’d usually post here I have decided to share my answer with you all.
First I’d like to state that I can only speak from the point of view as a programmer and web designer -I have no idea how this package works for the people at circulation, cataloging or acquisitions.
How has it worked? This is a question for the people I mentioned above. How has it adapted to the times? This is a better question for me – and the answer is poorly. The interface is clunky at best and the customizability requires more work that it’s worth. There is poor HTML and CSS hidden from the people who can make a difference. A year ago there was an extra tag – I had to wait for a new release to fix this problem when I could have easily gone in and deleted it if I had the control. I frequently have to tell people in my workplace that I can’t change or fix something because it is out of my realm – nothing should be out of my realm – we pay for this product and should be able to alter anything and everything we choose.
What has it helped? Once again I don’t think this really applies to someone in my position.
What problems has it raised? It has raised several design issues – with more open code, or an API I’d be able to go in and make things look the way we’d like – instead of having to explain to people that the catalog design has nothing to do with me – the web designer. It has also caused issues with the way we store data. We have a separate customer database and we have to import data into the III on a nightly basis – if we were allowed to run simple “select” queries and edit the coding behind the scenes, we could have access to more up to the second data by pulling it directly from our database. The same goes for information we’d like to get out of the system. The statistics provided to us are spotty at best, there are missing pieces that, given the rights, we could be getting for ourselves out of the database.
Where does III fit? I’d say it’s a like the crazy cousin you have to deal with because he’s family! It doesn’t fit, we are a very open IT environment, we have applications all over that need to talk to each other nicely and the III system is a brick wall preventing us from getting the information we need and sending the information we’d like.
Where do I see it heading? No where – I haven’t seen any changes that have been advantageous to my work or my department. Where would I like to see it headed? I’d like III to look at Talis (http://www.talis.com/home/), I’d like them to see how this company is communicating with it’s users on the user level. I want to see III join forces with Talis and the other vendors to implement the idea of the Platform (http://www.talis.com/platform/) by visiting the Shared Innovation site (http://www.talis.com/tdn/) and working together. We pay for these applications and should have the ability to model them around our own business model and company mission.
I’m not sure I understand the last question – but I read it like this, “What’s wrong with the current business model and how can we change it?” Right now libraries are required to buy the same main package and then have the option to add on additional features/packages. A quote from my blog:
“Library 2.0 is about opening the library up and delivering content to our users where they are when they want it. We need to engage our users – which we are doing, but we need to do even more. Paul called for us to “disaggregate our monolithic library systems”. He explained this to us like this: Imagine a great big black box which a vendor sells you and instead of taking everything the vendor offers you take only the bits you need. Plugging in bits of other applications – maybe from other vendors – or that you have written yourself. Which is what I have the hardest time with – we have this ILS that was written for primarily academic libraries and we’re forced to buy the whole package and use only 1/3 of this – then out comes an add on that makes more sense for us – but we have to pay extra to get it – why not let us pay for the core and then pick and choose the other pieces we’ll need – customizing our catalogs to our specific institution? Paul says library systems should be like Lego, you can build the picture on the box or you can build something new and different.” (http://www.web2learning.net/archives/266)
Let us make our own packages – why should we be paying for a user database when we already have one – why not let us write a bridge script to get the information to and from our database instead of having to rely on the limits imposed by the current system?
It’s a new world and building onto a system that is more than 15 years old isn’t going to cut it anymore – there needs to be a new system, one that allows for more freedom, and it has to come soon, because more and more libraries are going to turn to open-source. I know that I’m ready to go out and lend a hand on one of the open-source LIS projects out there – especially if it means I get to have a system that will do what I want, how I want – and let me make changes when I want.
- ILS Customer Bill-of-Rights