[Eg-oversight-board] Final conference thoughts
Kathy Lussier
klussier at masslnc.org
Thu Jun 15 13:50:57 EDT 2017
Hi all,
I know I'm a little late to this conversation, but I wanted to respond
to some of the comments and suggestions.
First of all, many thanks to Grace for pulling these suggestions
together! It's very easy to continue doing things the way they've always
been done, and I think it's a good idea to step back periodically to
ensure that we are getting the best experience we can out of the
conference. I've also witnessed first-hand the tight margins in previous
conferences with a few coming close to losing money for the project. I
agree that we need to find ways to generate more income from the
conference so that we aren't experiencing anxiety from year to year
about whether the conference will pay for itself.
- Attendance - I do think it's reasonable to plan for 150 attendees from
year to year with our current user base. Most of our recent growth has
come from libraries joining existing consortia, not from new library
systems / consortia implementing a new Evergreen system. Of course, we
hope to see future growth, and, at that time, we should expect to see
higher numbers at the conference. However, I wouldn't expect to see
higher attendance from libraries joining consortia. Looking at the
Evergreen consortia in Massachusetts, it is our central consortium staff
who are attending the conferences, not the library staff. The central
consortium staff then learns lessons from the conference that they bring
back to their member libraries through their own training programs.
- Two-tracks - I wasn't a big fan of two tracks at the 2013 conference,
but I would be willing to give it another try. Instead of designating a
general and technical track, could we just do the two tracks without
labeling them, keeping in mind that two concurrent programs should
appeal to different audiences? For the two conferences I worked on, my
recollection is that it was sometimes difficult to get a lot of
proposals for technical track programs. Just as non-technical folks
could probably benefit from sitting in on some technical programs to get
a sense of how underlying Evergreen development works, I also think
technical folks could benefit from "this is how I use feature x" programs.
- Programming - I agree with Grace that training should be a
pre-conference thing and not part of the general conference. Do we know
how many attendees are repeat attendees as opposed to those who are
first-time conference attendees? My sense is that a large percentage are
repeat attendees and that most first-time attendees are library staff
that work in the area where the conference is being held. If attendance
is indeed mostly seasoned Evergreen users, we should probably avoid
introductory sessions on how to use the software.
- Although I'm also in favor of reducing the number of days of the
conference, particularly on Saturday when we don't really have a lot of
content, I'm not a big fan of scheduling the hackfests around the
programming. It could be a personal thing. It takes me a while to get
settled into working at a hackfest, and I feel like I would just be
getting a rhythm when it time to move into programs. Overall, I think it
benefits the entire community if a day is set aside for working on
Evergreen, whether it be code, documentation, web site revisions, etc.
Although that day then costs more money, it's an investment that
generates actual improvements to our project resources. I would be
curious to hear what other developers, documentators, etc. think about
the hackfest times.
- I think I'm of the minority opinion that keynote speakers add value to
the conference. I like them. They inspire me and, when they are from
other open-source projects, make me think of new ways our own community
can operate.
- Food - I know food & beverage minimums can reduce other conference
costs, but I think we could make big reductions here. I see in the
surveys that most people wanted to continue with the existing food
options. However, the food costs are quite large and I don't know if
most people realize that sponsorships only cover a portion of those
costs. My one regret from the Cambridge conference is that we set our
food & beverage minimum way too high for the number of people who
ultimately attended. A lot of work could be done to curtail costs here.
Breakfast and the receptions have become more elaborate over the years.
I know people like eggs and bacon for breakfast, but they increase the
food budget significantly. Afternoon snacks are important as they get
people into the vendor hall, and we need to keep people visiting the
exhibitors. Coffee is important too. Another option might be to consider
ticketed breakfasts or lunches, which is how meals are handled at our
local library conferences.
I know I'm now moving in the opposite direction of cutting costs, but
another thing to consider is that this is the one time during the year
when such a large segment of the community comes together. Is there
other work we could be planning to get done while we're at the
conference? Could we be setting aside time to talk about larger,
strategic plans for Evergreen? Those are discussions that often work
better when we're meeting face to face.
Thanks again Grace for sparking this discussion!
Kathy
On 05/31/2017 03:34 PM, Ruth Frasur wrote:
> Just letting y'all know that I'm reading through the suggestions and
> comments. There's not much that I feel like I can add, but I'm going
> to anyway.
>
> - Tracks: I like the idea of two tracks - one for development, the
> other for end users. In Grace's mock-up schedules, the hackaway
> events were concurrent with end user sessions and that intrigues me.
>
> - Food: I'm not sure what was up with the snack breaks this year. I
> know that the idea was to shuttle people closer to the exhibit area,
> and that's cool. They were just too soon after breakfast with more
> breakfast food (that was weird). I'm all for snack breaks, but it'd
> be great if they were went people needed both a break and a snack and
> included something(s) that were particularly interesting and/or
> related to the conference location.
>
> - Keynote: I'm pretty ambivalent about this. I've both enjoyed and
> not enjoyed keynote addresses in the past. I ALWAYS look forward to
> the State of Evergreen and the Developers' Updates and wouldn't mind
> to have those expanded in lieu of a keynote. I do like Galen's
> suggestion of bringing in over FLOSS community members to address our
> community. I think that was the goal this year, but I'm not sure how
> successful it was.
>
> - Merch: We learned a lot this year, and will definitely be putting
> those lessons into practice in upcoming years. As Rogan mentioned, we
> will be better at understanding and mitigating risk when it comes to
> merchandise. Having things not necessarily Evergreen or conference
> related may be a good idea. Again, it'll come back to balance risk
> and reward.
>
> - Vendors: I have no problem with vendor spotlights other than I'm not
> sure I'd attend them. And maybe this is an issue. Unless it's
> something actually innovative and interesting, I'm tired of the same
> buzzwords and library land sales pitches.
>
> - Types of Programs: I know there's always the push/pull surrounding
> types of programs. From my standpoint, as an end-user, I still think
> that the conference should be, first and foremost, focused on the
> development of the software. It should be incumbent on end-users, to
> push themselves to develop user groups and "local" community specific
> training. While I am a fan of the interest groups, it gets very
> tricky very quickly to do specific workflow training sessions because
> of local customizations.
>
> - Icebreaker Games - ahahahahahah! Unless you're talking about games
> that have Icebreaker gum as the prize. Or big boats with fortified
> hulls. Then I'm in.
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Terran McCanna
> <tmccanna at georgialibraries.org <mailto:tmccanna at georgialibraries.org>>
> wrote:
>
> I also agree.
> Terran
>
> Terran McCanna
> PINES Program Manager
> Georgia Public Library Service
> 1800 Century Place, Suite 150
> Atlanta, GA 30345
> 404-235-7138 <tel:%28404%29%20235-7138>
> tmccanna at georgialibraries.org <mailto:tmccanna at georgialibraries.org>
>
>
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Andrea Buntz Neiman
> <abneiman at equinoxinitiative.org
> <mailto:abneiman at equinoxinitiative.org>> wrote:
>
> From the peanut gallery...
>
> I really enjoyed the community member speeches in Boston. I'd
> be in favor of doing something similar in lieu of an opening
> keynote, perhaps in combination with a welcome/conference
> overview from the local conference chair.
>
> The State of Evergreen/Board Update in addition to the
> Developer Update makes for a good closing/last day segment, IMO.
>
> Andrea
>
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Holly Brennan
> <haderhold at ci.homer.ak.us <mailto:haderhold at ci.homer.ak.us>>
> wrote:
>
> >>If we were to get rid of the keynote, what would replace it?
>
> Icebreaker games! (Ahh! Just kidding)
>
> At the Boston conference in 2014 three Evergreen members
> did short 5-minute talks on the theme of “our experiences
> with Evergreen”, just prior to the Keynote. They were
> lumped together as State of Evergreen… I really enjoyed
> listening to more casual speeches by our own community, so
> a longer block for an individual or couple people doing
> something like that would be nice. That or a Blake GH
> magic show. J
>
> -Holly
>
> *From:*eg-oversight-board
> [mailto:eg-oversight-board-bounces at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:eg-oversight-board-bounces at list.evergreen-ils.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Timothy Spindler
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 25, 2017 9:58 AM
> *To:* scott.thomas at sparkpa.org
> <mailto:scott.thomas at sparkpa.org>
> *Cc:* Grace Dunbar; Oversight Board
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Eg-oversight-board] Final conference thoughts
>
> I like the idea of a vendor showcase. If we were to get
> rid of the keynote, what would replace it? Do we have
> information on whether it has attracted attendance?
>
> Tim
>
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:57 AM, scott.thomas at sparkpa.org
> <mailto:scott.thomas at sparkpa.org>
> <scott.thomas at sparkpa.org
> <mailto:scott.thomas at sparkpa.org>> wrote:
>
> Regarding consortia, I have a few thoughts about this.
> First, money is obviously the first barrier to attendance,
> but we offer scholarships that have paid for all of the
> costs (previous years) or a fixed amount to go towards the
> cost (this year), and we advertised for applicants across
> all of our listservs which takes us down deeply into our
> 104 members. Every year we only get a handful of
> applicants, and they are always from the larger,
> well-staffed libraries who could actually afford to send
> their staff without consortium assistance. Why? In the
> smaller libraries, the majority of our 104, they simply
> can’t spare the time commitment. Bodies are needed at the
> desk. The other, darker issue is that some consortia may
> not encourage wider attendance from members because they
> then go to the conference, learn things, and start asking
> for things that you may not want to give. You do lose a
> bit of control. These things are hard to overcome.
>
> I think we just need to stress, as the conference
> approaches, that there is something for everyone not just
> administrators and coders and that it is a great
> experience for anyone who uses Evergreen. I have a few
> folks who would be willing to give testimonials on You Tube.
>
> Scott
>
> *From:*Grace Dunbar [mailto:grace at equinoxinitiative.org
> <mailto:grace at equinoxinitiative.org>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 24, 2017 12:13 PM
> *To:* scott.thomas at sparkpa.org
> <mailto:scott.thomas at sparkpa.org>
> *Cc:* Amy Terlaga <terlaga at biblio.org
> <mailto:terlaga at biblio.org>>; Kathy Lussier
> <klussier at masslnc.org <mailto:klussier at masslnc.org>>;
> Oversight Board <eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org>>
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Eg-oversight-board] Final conference thoughts
>
> Hi,
>
> Diane, I'm glad you asked your question... and I'm glad
> Kathy answered. :) It really is a very broad conference
> that's trying to meet a lot of needs. But, realistically,
> I think we have to look at it like any other similar
> conference. For example, when I would go to NCLA when I
> worked at a library in North Carolina, I went with the
> expectation of networking, being exposed to new and
> innovative ideas, and collaborating with colleagues. The
> Evergreen conference is organized by the community itself,
> with all the work and content being provided by community
> volunteers - and we are at the mercy of that wonderful and
> talented group of people who all have other
> responsibilities. Even if we wanted to provide
> more/different programming at the conference, can we
> realistically deliver on that? What *do* people expect
> from the conference?
>
> But that brings us neatly into what Scott asked...
>
> Do we know why people don't attend? I think the obvious
> one is money. The "hidden" reason is that Evergreen is
> adopted largely by consortia. People in branch libraries
> often feel that the Evergreen conference is for the people
> "at the top" and not for them. If we want to increase the
> Evergreen conference numbers then we need to figure out
> how to promote more outside the Evergreen community and
> how the community and consortia using Evergreen can better
> promote the conference to their members. Evergreen Indiana
> and NC Cardinal did great jobs in that regard and the
> conference attendance numbers reflected that.
>
> I do think it's absolutely worth surveying the broader
> community to find out what would encourage them to come to
> the conference. As an interesting data point, there are
> just over 700 subscribers to the Evergreen General Mailing
> List. So, all 700 of those folks ought to have been aware
> that there was a conference...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Grace
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 8:20 AM, scott.thomas at sparkpa.org
> <mailto:scott.thomas at sparkpa.org>
> <scott.thomas at sparkpa.org
> <mailto:scott.thomas at sparkpa.org>> wrote:
>
> I am sorry I’m weighing a bit late. Yesterday was our
> Users Group conference. Thank you, Grace, for sharing
> your thoughts. I also appreciated hearing everyone’s
> responses. As a newbie on the board, I need to ask a
> few questions, and I apologize in advance if this was
> already been discussed numerous times. Given the size
> of the Evergreen community, do we think 140 is a
> reasonable number of attendees? Also, do we have any
> theories as to why we did not see an increase from
> last year given that the Evergreen community is
> growing and not shrinking? Prior to putting out a Call
> for Proposals for 2019 (and I am all in favor of
> Kathy’s suggestion of advancing the deadline), should
> we survey the community about the conference? It can
> start with a Did you attend? Y/N and, if N, we can try
> to find out why. We can also ask them to rate what is
> most and least important in terms of the conference
> experience. If you are all amenable to this, I will
> volunteer to take the lead with the survey.
>
> Scott
>
> *From:*eg-oversight-board
> [mailto:eg-oversight-board-bounces at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:eg-oversight-board-bounces at list.evergreen-ils.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Amy Terlaga
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 23, 2017 12:49 PM
> *To:* Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org
> <mailto:klussier at masslnc.org>>
> *Cc:* Grace Dunbar <grace at equinoxinitiative.org
> <mailto:grace at equinoxinitiative.org>>; Oversight Board
> <eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org>>
> *Subject:* Re: [Eg-oversight-board] Final conference
> thoughts
>
> All good suggestions, Kathy!
>
> Amy
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Kathy Lussier
> <klussier at masslnc.org <mailto:klussier at masslnc.org>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I haven't read the document closely, but some
> pieces (new sponsor/exhibitor rates) may be
> something we can implement sooner while # of
> rooms, food expenditures, and other contract items
> can be planned out for 2019. Another thought I've
> had is that we might want to consider putting out
> the call for the 2019 conference earlier this
> year. Although we put out the call about 16 months
> ahead of time, I know some locations are already
> fully booked by that time. Maybe we can plan for
> putting the next Call for Proposals out in August
> / September and plan on resolving these questions
> by then so that the 2019 planners know what the
> new requirements are.
>
> In addition to reducing costs, the other advantage
> to reducing the number of rooms is that it
> increases the number of conference hotels that can
> accommodate us.
>
> Kathy
>
> On 05/23/2017 12:28 PM, Amy Terlaga wrote:
>
> These are some very intriguing suggestions for
> future conferences. I'm all for reducing the
> overall cost to help the project make money.
> Unfortunately, contract signing with the
> conference venue for 2018 is wrapping up today
> or tomorrow. I followed this year's plan. I
> stuck with the formula. I needed something to
> go on and felt the pressure of locking in the
> venue as the local committee has been working
> out a plan with them since before the 2017
> conference.
>
> I'm sorry some of this can't be executed for
> 2018, but the work has been laid out for 2019.
>
> Grace, you've done so much work - it is much
> appreciated. Your insights and expertise are
> invaluable..
>
> Amy
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Grace Dunbar
> <grace at equinoxinitiative.org
> <mailto:grace at equinoxinitiative.org>> wrote:
>
> I thought it might be useful to provide my
> suggestions for the Evergreen conference
> and changes we may want to consider for
> the future. Apologies in advance if this
> is either rambling or redundant, or both.
>
> The conference operates on thin margins.
>
> Every year the conference committee is
> confident (perhaps overly confident) that
> this year they will increase attendance
> numbers and increase sponsorships. The
> problem is that we can't increase our
> sponsorships without increasing our
> attendance. And our attendees who increase
> our numbers are generally just employees
> of a library in an existing consortia.
> This exact complaint was brought up by
> multiple vendors - essentially, the
> Evergreen conference is really only
> between 8 and 10 "clients" and having more
> circ or cataloging staff attendees at the
> conference doesn't increase their ROI.
> And that's fair.
>
> And the attendees who can increase our
> numbers (local staff) seem to want very
> specifically targeted information related
> to them at the conference. The conference
> surveys have been pretty clear that
> end-user staff want and expect *training*
> from the conference. But that hasn't
> traditionally been the aim of the
> conference, nor can we reliably provide
> that since the programs are solicited from
> volunteers in the community. Also
> complicating things for "training" on
> Evergreen features is that Evergreen is so
> customizable that "training" or
> explanations of how to use certain
> features may not jive with local policy
> for their consortia or library system.
> Regardless, I believe we can, to some
> extent, provide that kind of training in
> the pre-conference sessions. However, we
> will need to be very selective in the
> process of recruiting the pre-conference
> presenters (trainers) if we're going to
> try to actively meet that need.
>
> Also, I firmly believe that the conference
> should make money for the project. With
> that money, the project can provide
> outreach, build infrastructure, and
> promote the community. We want to provide
> a good conference with stellar programs
> and a welcoming environment. But the
> conference is also for building
> relationships, allowing developers and
> community leaders to conduct business and
> brainstorm, as well as providing space for
> the EOB, committees, and interest groups
> to meet. IOW, we're trying to meet a lot
> of needs and there needs to be balance -
> we can't make everyone happy all the time.
> If you look at the breakdown of attendees,
> systems administrators and developers are
> roughly 1/3, end-users are roughly 1/3,
> and admin/consortia leaders are roughly
> 1/3. Those are all stakeholders that are
> important but their needs are very different.
>
> To reduce overhead for the conference and
> to try to give _everyone_ the best
> experience we should at least look at
> making some changes. Based off of my
> experience and the results of conference
> surveys, I have some suggestions for
> changes to the structure and the
> sponsorships.
> Note that the proposed reduction of the
> conference to two tracks had wide support
> in the survey and the track reduction and
> changes to pre-conferences and when/where
> IGs, etc. meet, should reduce the overhead
> for costs associated with meeting rooms,
> A/V, signage, labor, etc.
> See attached doc for details.
>
> Thanks for sticking with the rambling...
>
> And as always, this is just a suggestion
> based on my experience - I leave it to
> y'all to decide what to take away from the
> information and what direction to go.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Grace
>
> p.s. Exhibitor and attendee surveys also
> attached. For anyone who prefers visual
> representations, just let me know and I
> can share the Google form with you.
>
>
>
> --
>
> +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
>
> Amy Terlaga
>
> Director of Member Services
>
> Bibliomation, Inc.
>
> 24 Wooster Avenue
>
> Waterbury, CT 06708
>
> (203)577-4070 x101 <tel:%28203%29%20577-4070>
>
> terlaga at biblio.org <mailto:terlaga at biblio.org>
>
> --
>
> Kathy Lussier
>
> Project Coordinator
>
> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
>
> (508) 343-0128 <tel:%28508%29%20343-0128>
>
> klussier at masslnc.org <mailto:klussier at masslnc.org>
>
> Twitter:http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
> <http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier>
>
> --
>
> +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
>
> Amy Terlaga
>
> Director of Member Services
>
> Bibliomation, Inc.
>
> 24 Wooster Avenue
>
> Waterbury, CT 06708
>
> (203)577-4070 x101 <tel:%28203%29%20577-4070>
>
> terlaga at biblio.org <mailto:terlaga at biblio.org>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eg-oversight-board mailing list
> eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org>
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board&c=E,1,_hVKgsER-pJNloGHdVaYKyRPsYO6HRM0LKgkKPQdDlzU5U4CRoxnNClrTt-uFDjYkpAeBTz0jLMAREjGjdJRGuvGFWtZoEgMMmtFG9OvyDA35ZkA0SwxPje3&typo=1>
>
> --
>
> Tim Spindler | Executive Director
>
> tspindler at cwmars.org <mailto:tspindler at cwmars.org> |
> 508-755-3323 x120 <tel:%28508%29%20755-3323>
>
> C/W MARS |http://www.cwmars.org
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http://www.cwmars.org/&c=E,1,gIdhDEAxjEPPOvyj76o12qShEjw3F19ZdxpVZMxpG7PfVSnZqIM1MBkOT6RZf8_y5OW6mUsFzKAISt-FrjdfTHElWoRsaCgHep7FgsD2hcQU_NuV&typo=1>
>
> 67 Millbrook St., Ste. 201
>
> Worcester, MA 01605
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eg-oversight-board mailing list
> eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org>
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
> <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board>
>
>
> --
> Andrea Buntz Neiman
> Project Manager for Software Development
> Equinox Open Library Initiative
> abneiman at equinoxinitiative.org
> <mailto:abneiman at equinoxinitiative.org>
> 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
> _www.equinoxinitiative.org <http://www.equinoxinitiative.org>_
> _______________________________________________
> eg-oversight-board mailing list
> eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org>
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
> <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ eg-oversight-board
> mailing list eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> <mailto:eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org>
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
> <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board>
>
>
> --
> Ruth Frasur Director of the Historic(ally Awesome) Hagerstown -
> Jefferson Township Library 10 W. College Street in Hagerstown, Indiana
> (47346) p (765) 489-5632; f (765) 489-5808 *Our Kickin' Website
> <http://hagerstownlibrary.org>, Our Rockin' Facebook Page
> <http://facebook.com/hjtplibrary>, and The Nettle Creek Players
> <http://nettlecreekplayers.com>*
>
> _______________________________________________
> eg-oversight-board mailing list
> eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
--
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier at masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/eg-oversight-board/attachments/20170615/7f9fa560/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the eg-oversight-board
mailing list