Posts Tagged ‘library2.0’
The chi.mp service, which describes itself as a content hub and identity management platform, just has a very long way to go before it becomes a good content hub and identity management platform. I got an account back when their beta was closed, and after a few months of toying with it, it just could not meet my needs. Here are some of the problems I found:
- A limited number of services available. It has a a very small list of services you can bring in: Flickr, Facebook, Twitter, and rss feeds (which can allow you to bring in your blog, for instance), Delicious, and one or two other things. Given the many services out there, they need to expand this list.
- The service "does not play well" with Facebook. From the beginning, the chi.mp folks claimed that you could connect your Facebook status to their service. This never worked, and as of today, when I finally made the decision to hit the delete button, it was not working. I saw some notes on their forums that Facebook apparently was giving them difficulties with importing photos into the service. Now, I don't use Facebook for photos much. I use Facebook for photos for the FB library's page, but not for personal use. So, this was not a big issue, but the status and feed integration was definitely a desired feature, and I saw no indication it would get fixed any time soon.
- Feeds. I pulled in the feeds from my blogs and my delicious account. I noticed that updating the feed over on chi.mp from the blog was not very expeditious. I made a post this morning earlier, and chi.mp had not picked it up yet. There was no option to refresh the feed when logged in, and no note or indication in their help about how long it could take for a feed to update. A content hub does not work very well if it does not update in a timely matter.
- Their help forums. While there is an e-mail for questions and support, most of the help is routed to their forums. For the forums, which are powered by some third party, you have to register (again). This was very off putting for me. I already registered for your service, and you are going to make me jump another hurdle so I can send you feedback, feedback which you claim to welcome? No, thanks.
Overall, it was a good experiment. I got some ideas of things I would like to accomplish in terms of social networking and 2.0. The idea of putting all (or a lot of) my content online in one place is very appealing. That you can control and create personas (public, private, so on) and have your visitors see just what you indicate sounds very good. But at this point in time, the service was simply too limited, and to be honest, it does not do anything that I cannot do on Facebook or even here on Vox. So, not seeing any real point, I finally made the decision to delete the account. Maybe if the service improves substantially, I would be willing to give it another try. For now, it did not work for me, and on the basis of my experience I would not recommend it.
I am still interested in something that can centralize my social network profiles, so I will continue searching. If anyone has any suggestions, feel free to let me know.
Roy Tennant wrote a list of "The Top Ten Things Library Administrators Should Know About Technology." What caught my eye on this were the items dealing more with people. Maybe it is because I am not a "techie" librarian like a lot of the celebrity libloggers are. Or maybe because I tend to think that your technology is only as good as the people you have running it. The idea of good people managing your library's technology has been on my mind lately, and if I was passing this on to my boss, I would especially highlight the following items from the list:
- "Maximize the effectiveness of your most costly technology investment — your people." Mr. Tennant makes a good point about making sure you have good resources for your people. Don't bog them down with cheap or less than the best equipment. But I will also say to turn that equation around. Don't go around skimping on good people either. You need to hire good people to manage your technology. Just like library administrators have a specific skill set, which may or not include technological prowess, tech people also have a unique skill set, and it is one not all librarians or library staff have or desire to have (and I say this in terms of temperament, not unwillingness to learn). If you know you are going to need a good systems analyst or similar, hire one. Don't try to skimp by tossing the responsibility to another overworked professional in your library who may not have the full range of skills or the temperament to do it. And don't say "they can learn it" when you define "learning it" as just hand them a folder and hop to it. That's not right.
- "A major part of good technology implementation is good project management." Indeed. Again, this goes to the idea that everyone has different skills. It also goes back to the idea that you need good planning, and that you need to be proactive, not reactive. In other words, plan ahead and don't wait for the crisis to happen.
- "The single biggest threat to any technology project is political in nature." I think what Mr. Tennant wrote here pretty much speaks for itself. To administrators, he asks: "Are you willing to throw your political support behind it? Are you willing to invest the resources required to make it a success? Will you marshall the entire organization to support, promote, and use this new site or service? If not, simply don't bother." As I always say, put your money where your mouth is, otherwise, shut up.
Anyhow, my quick two cents. I may add to this later, or probably just add it along to another post with a few other things about library managers.
Citation for the article:
Birdsall, William F. "The Chiasmus of Librarianship and Collaborative Research for Evidence Based Practice." Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 3.2 (2008): 65-75.
Read online (this is an open access journal. Article link opens as a PDF file. Journal homepage here).
This is just another article that I have not that much to say, but I still wanted to make a note in it someplace. In essence, the article is saying that we may be moving back to a more heterogeneous era in librarianship, somewhat similar to the previous century. By this, the author means going back to the notions of the library being maintained on the basis of local needs as opposed to the more homogeneous era we have now based on standards and bureaucracy set (in stone it seems) by the professional organization. A lot of this movement is being propelled by the 2.0 movement. Author also suggests considering local forms of knowledge, reviewing the literature on native forms of knowledge.
Citation for the article:
Luo, Lili. "Chat Reference Evaluation: A Framework of Perspectives and Measures." Reference Services Review 36.1 (2008): 71-85.
Read via Emerald.
I just wanted to make a note of this article, but I don't have anything substantial enough for the main blog. It provides a review of procedures for evaluating chat reference services. It basically goes through the literature, and it summarizes the various approaches available for evaluating chat reference. Overall, a decent overview.