Culshaw, "Build it Yourself or Buy it?"
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•74 views
The document discusses the University of Colorado at Boulder library's decision to continue using a purchased integrated library system (ILS) rather than adopting an open source alternative. It provides context about the library's current ILS (Millennium), partnerships, campus environment, finances, and staffing challenges. While acknowledging trends toward open source software, the library's strategy is to maintain its vendor partnerships and services, monitor open source developments, and advocate for increased resources, as open source ILS platforms are still maturing and staffing levels already present difficulties compared to peers.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Culshaw, "Build it Yourself or Buy it?"
Similar to Culshaw, "Build it Yourself or Buy it?" (20)
More from National Information Standards Organization (NISO)
More from National Information Standards Organization (NISO) (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Culshaw, "Build it Yourself or Buy it?"
- 1. Build It Yourself or Buy It? John Culshaw Professor and Associate Director for Administrative Services University of Colorado at Boulder
- 2. University Profile • 30,000 students • Mid-sized ARL library (3.8m volumes, $9.63m resources budget) • Innovative Interfaces ILS since 1994 • 54 librarians, 109 support staff
- 3. ILS Platforms • Founding member of Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries • CARL’s Public Access Catalog (PAC) deployed in library since inception in 1984 • Migrated to INNOPAC in 1994 • Committed to Millennium platform in 1999 • Adopted Encore discovery layer in 2009.
- 4. Other Critical Services • Digital Library: Luna Insight • Repository: Alliance Digital Repository (ADR)
- 5. Why Buy It? • Functionality • Partnerships • Campus Environment • Finances and Staffing
- 6. Functionality • Need for stable, consistent systems • Millennium continues to meet needs • Open source ILS platforms not fully fleshed out
- 7. Partnership • Partnership works • Development partnerships • Strong user community
- 8. Partnership: Encore Selection • Seamless integration with Millennium platform • Real-time circulation information • Single-sign on • Electronic resource data • Integration with Prospector
- 9. Campus Environment • Campus also advocates buy-it approach • New SIS – PeopleSoft • Tested Sakai – kept WebCT • Need infrastructure improvements
- 11. Rani Machoi IT Professional IV #107573 1 FTE Tim Leal IT Technician II #107791 1 FTE Mark Sondergard IT Professional I #104889 1 FTE Hans Schmidt IT Professional I #107258 1 FTE Justin Van Voorst IT Professional I #106236 1 FTE Richard Losoff IT Professional I #00677399 1 FTE John Dziadecki IT Technician II #100256 1 FTE John Culshaw ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES # 00159665 1 FTE Rani Machoi Interim Libraries IT Dept. Director #159767 & 150002 1 FTE Holley Long Digital Initiatives Asst. Professor #0065963 1 FTE Michael Riberdy Media Specialist IV #00103357 1 FTE
- 12. University of Colorado Libraries Budget Materials & Binding $9,724,032 Staff Expenditures $8,397,305 Other Expenditures $1,434,326
- 13. Staffing • Picture even more challenging when compared to AAU peers – Ratio of librarians to students – Ratio of library IT staff to students – Ratio of library IT staff to total staff
- 14. 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 Ratio Librarians/Students Ratio Lib'ns/Students
- 15. 0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014 Ratio IT Staff /Students Ratio IT/Students
- 16. 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Ratio Library IT Staff/Total Library Staff Ratio IT/Total Lib Staff
- 17. “The support for community-driven software development in higher education is at a relatively young, fragile stage and needs to be embraced by a wider variety of institutions.” -- Robert McDonald
- 18. Challenge? Dilemma? • Maintain existing service levels • Consider current budgeting and staffing models
- 19. Our Strategy • Continue to buy • Maintain strong partner relationships with vendors • Monitor open source trends • Continually lobby for increased resources.
- 20. Sources ARL Statistics 2006-2007. Washington DC: Association of College and Research Libraries, 2008. Fisher, Steve P. “Research Library Collaboration in Colorado – The Birth and Early Evolution of CARL, the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries.” Collaborative Librarianship 1:3 (2009), 91-98. McDonald, Robert H. “Sustainable Communities for Software: Variations on a Theme.” EDUCAUSE Review 44:5 (September/October 2009), 6-7.