[Eg-oversight-board] Final conference thoughts

Thu May 25 14:48:45 EDT 2017

>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>
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] *On Behalf Of *Timothy Spindler
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 25, 2017 9:58 AM
> *To:* 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 <
> 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]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 24, 2017 12:13 PM
> *To:* scott.thomas at sparkpa.org
> *Cc:* Amy Terlaga <terlaga at biblio.org>; Kathy Lussier <
> klussier at masslnc.org>; Oversight Board <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 <
> 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] *On Behalf Of *Amy Terlaga
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 23, 2017 12:49 PM
> *To:* Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org>
> *Cc:* Grace Dunbar <grace at equinoxinitiative.org>; Oversight Board <
> 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>
> 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> 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 <(203)%20577-4070>
>
> terlaga at biblio.org
>
>
>
> --
>
> Kathy Lussier
>
> Project Coordinator
>
> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
>
> (508) 343-0128
>
> klussier at masslnc.org
>
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
>
> Amy Terlaga
>
> Director of Member Services
>
> Bibliomation, Inc.
>
> 24 Wooster Avenue
>
> Waterbury, CT  06708
>
> (203)577-4070 x101 <(203)%20577-4070>
>
> terlaga at biblio.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> <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 | 508-755-3323 x120 <(508)%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
> 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
1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
*www.equinoxinitiative.org <http://www.equinoxinitiative.org>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/eg-oversight-board/attachments/20170525/75ac9627/attachment-0001.html>