[Eg-oversight-board] Final conference thoughts

Thu May 25 14:59:02 EDT 2017

Kathy and I were talking about keynotes earlier.
I suggested replacing them with invited local speakers who would/could give
regular program sessions.  IOW, we would still retain the benefit of having
outside ideas and perspectives but not in a keynote.
For example, if the conference was back in Michigan I might suggest Charles
Watkinson <https://www.lib.umich.edu/users/watkinc> from University of
Michigan who is deeply involved in the open scholarly publishing  model.
Just a random idea...
:)
/me fades into the background again
Grace

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Andrea Buntz Neiman <
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>
> 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-bou
>> nces 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.everg
>> reen-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-bou
>> nces 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/ace15622/attachment-0001.html>