Final Project 7505

For our final project, we conducted four interviews as follows with: Stacy Brown, a librarian with Georgia Highlands Libraries; Matt Weaver, a Web Librarian with Westlake Porter Public Library (WPPL); Jimmy Lo, an e-Branch manager for DeKalb Public Libraries (DPL), and Mr. Paul Devillo, a Communications and Web Services Developer with the Public Library of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County (PLCMC). We were interested in understanding how each of these librarians and their respective libraries incorporate Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 technologies into the services provided to their patrons. Additionally, we wanted to identify how these librarians define Web 2.0 and Library 2.0, how their libraries determine which new technologies to employ, and how receptive the library staff is to new technologies. Furthermore, we sought to discern whether the costs of implementing these new technologies, both in terms of manpower and expenditures could be justified based on the goals of the libraries outlined in their mission statements and strategic plans.

The first question we posed was how to define Web 2.0 and Library 2.0. User centered change is an important aspect of Web 2.0 and Library 2.0. What other attributes define Web 2.0 and Library 2.0? Mr. Lo deems the most important aspect of Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 to be using tools to increase the interactivity between patrons and libraries. Only increased interaction between librarians and patrons will result in librarians recognizing what services their patrons really appreciate. 2.0 tools can contribute towards making patrons feel empowered to assist in the creation of their library environment. In addition to encouraging user centered change and increasing the interaction between patrons and the library, Ms. Brown considers that 2.0 librarians must make an effort to integrate change into all levels of library operations. Mr. Weaver recognizes that new librarians must be involved in “participatory librarianship.” At the core of this movement is the idea of engaging in conversations with the community using Web 2.0 technologies. Mr. Devillo reflects that 2.0 technologies are all about the end user. All of these ideas are remarkable and we believe reflect a movement towards more completely fulfilling the ultimate goal of libraries, which is to strive to provide better service to its patrons.

How do libraries decide what new technologies will be adopted? The responses to this question were uniform with all of the librarians interviewed. The libraries have technology committees that range in size, who facilitate new ideas. The merits of the new technology are thoroughly discussed. If a particular technology is deemed useful enough the idea is then forwarded to the Library Director, who has final approval. We were impressed with how much contemplation goes into these deliberations. Equally, the most important factor in concluding whether a technology was justified in being adopted was if it would benefit the patrons. Mr. Lo made an interesting point when he explained he felt that most of the new technologies being implemented in the library were less expensive than older systems because of the availability of open source. Even though open source may be time consuming in the beginning, it is often, free.

How does the library staff react to new technologies? As with most new ideas, some staff is onboard with new technologies from the beginning while others are more hesitant. Ms. Brown states that there is a bit of a generational gap and that some senior members may be a bit hesitant to use new tools out of fear. She further points out that she hopes that Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 will contribute to ending the current digital divide between generations. Mr. Lo has found that some library staff tends feel that if the library has been doing something a particular way and it is working, why should it change? He was quick to mention, though that once the staff have become used to the new technology, they often to come to appreciate its superiority over older methods. Mr. Devillo mentioned that the “23 Things” program designed by a prior Technology Librarian, Helen Bowers, reduced staff’s anxiety towards Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 technology. After completing this program, which gradually introduces staff to Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 technologies, the majority of the library staff is open and willing participants of 2.0 technologies. Like Ms. Brown, Mr. Devillo agrees that because there will always be a generational gap, a hundred percent involvement by all staff is unlikely. Interestingly, Mr. Weaver, implemented his own version of “23 Things” at Westlake Porter Public Library. As a result, staff at WPPL is more comfortable and open to 2.0 technologies as well.

Are staff members involved in the process of implementing new technologies? DeKalb Libraries do a test page for a month or two before they roll out any new technologies. For instance, before they launched their blog, they put the blog up internally for two months with their committee of bloggers submitting posts and receiving feedback from library staff. At Georgia Highlands library, staff is included in planning discussions. Mr. Weaver states WPPL’s technology team seeks feedback from various departments when exploring a new technology. Outside of the team, staff members who will be affected by a new technology are involved in the decision making processes. Consequently, potential problems with the technology are revealed and participation in the process contributes to staff “buy in” to the new technologies. At PLCMC, feedback and ideas for new implementations are discussed in weekly department meetings.

We were interested in what 2.0 technologies these libraries are using and what service and functional areas they were being utilized for. DeKalb Public Libraries has a blog and they do weekly podcasts of the Writer’s Forum for Georgia Center for the Book. They also offer podcasts of audio versions of books and rss feeds. Furthermore they have a Flickr page, used a content management system to design their new website, and use several internal wikis throughout the 22 branches. These wikis are basic. The e-Branch is working on replacing the current, very static, intranet with a large wiki being written using Plone. They are creating a Facebook page which they hope to launch soon. It is interesting to reflect upon Jimmy Lo’s thoughts about the decision making process for the new Facebook page. He speaks about how they had to ask themselves if a Facebook page could help the library in reaching its patrons and potential patrons enough to justify the manpower to create and maintain the page. What they hope to achieve with the page is an update every few days with events occurring in the library. Their belief is that if they can bring these events to a news feed on Facebook they will reach patrons who wouldn’t necessarily check the library website on a regular basis. These patrons probably do login in to Facebook on a much more regular basis than they look at the library’s website. Accordingly, this provides the library with a method to bring the library to the patron rather than expecting the patron to come to the library. It is an exciting idea and possibly the best reasoning that we have heard to date for a library’s presence on social networking sites. Dekalb County Libraries also hope to increase their patron base by using the viral nature of Facebook. In other words, one patron will become a friend and then their friends will see the library page and become a fan as well. Future uses for Facebook, as envisioned by the e-Branch, are making patrons aware of services that they may not realize the library provides from a quick perusal of the library website. These services include library outreach programs and computer classes. The biggest reservation Mr. Lo had about a Facebook page was the time management it would take to maintain the page. However, ultimately it is believed that the benefit to patrons will far outweigh the costs .

WPPL has blogs, wikis, and embedded video tutorials for both staff and patrons on its Drupal-based website. They also use Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, and LinkedIn. A Twitter account, which has 120 followers, was created for experimental purposes to ensure the library was familiar with this new technology. The initial reasoning behind creating a Facebook account was to connect with the younger patrons of the community. Through the utilization of Facebook, LinkedIn, and Flicker, WPPL aspired to attract more local citizens who were not current library card holders. As a result, the library’s membership would increase. Mr. Weaver is currently designing an online community for readers that will allow patrons to tag books, write book reviews, and engage in book discussions. PLCMC uses Flickr, Twitter, a variety blogs, Myspace for teens, rss feeds, Second Life, and Drupal is being used internally by staff to submit cost saving ideas. Georgia Highlands is using a Librarian Wiki internally for collaborative projects, Meebo, a student reference tool, podcasting, Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, and Second Life. They also have implemented Librarything onto their library webpage.

We inquired into how the librarians and their staff follow trends in library technologies. The majority of them read Computers in Libraries and Information Today. They also credit Resourceshelf.com, mashable.com, shashdot, and several web design blogs with keeping them up to date. Additionally, they follow discussions on Listservs and attend conferences. Nonetheless, the librarians credit collaboration and strong ties with colleagues involved in emerging technologies as the best way to keep up with new innovations.

Our next area of interest was usage statistics for the different technologies the libraries are using. We wanted to know how these statistics were monitored, if the patrons are allowed to comment on technologies like blogs, and how the library advertises new technologies to their patrons. All of our libraries allow commentary on their blogs but they also must approve the comments before they are made viewable to the public. DeKalb Public libraries can monitor the number of hits they have on the blog daily, which is generally 80 to 90. They are not able to monitor how many people are reading the blog through rss feeds or with rss readers. They have recently begun using feedburner to track what rss readers patrons are using to read the blog and what they are clicking on. DPL advertises new technology on the library webpage and through blog posts. Occasionally, if it is a really big rollout, like their webpage redesign, they advertise in the branches with signs and bookmarks. For example, they wrote the web address for the library website on the sidewalks in front of all of the branches with sidewalk chalk.

Georgia Highlands Library also allows users to comment on the blog with control over what is made viewable to the public. They alert patrons to new technology by postings on the web page and Facebook page. The library’s blog has a counter which is monitored monthly.

WPPL also filters comments from patrons prior to publishing. They monitor the number of times a blog post has been read via Drupal. Some blogs receive an average of 100-150 hits monthly. According to Mr. Weaver, WPPL advertises its new technology to the public via the library’s website, newsletter, and occasionally in the newspaper.

PLCMC allows patrons to respond to the community forum blog but these comments are filtered as well. The statistics of bloggers are included in the overall website access statistics. They are currently working on a program using Google analytics to have the statistics read separately. According to Mr. Devillo, PLCMC’s Myspace and Facebook pages are open to direct contact by the patrons. The staff monitors the comments on these sites randomly.

The idea of allowing patrons direct access to make unfiltered comments on a SNS led us to questions about how the libraries handle instances of misuse, such as profanity or inappropriate content/comments. We wanted to know if there had been any instances where such an occurrence had negatively affected public relations. None of our libraries had had a problem with this thus far. Only two of the libraries, DPL and WPPL, had attempts twice by patrons to post profanity and inappropriate comments on their blogs. Mr. Lo pointed out that complaints are not considered inappropriate and that DeKalb will post these along with a response from the library. He maintains that if you are inviting people to comment you should not censor them if there is criticism of your service. These comments can be really helpful. The other libraries expressed the same sentiments. Mr. Lo also believes that there is a generational divide to radical trust. Younger people in the library community tend to trust that issues that arise from trusting patrons will work themselves out while older library staff tends to want to keep a tight rein on what patrons can contribute content to. Facebook was a big concern for some of the staff. They wanted to know what would happen if someone wrote something bad on the library wall. Mr. Lo thinks that this scenario is unlikely given how few inappropriate comments they have gotten on the blog but these things can be removed and the library can decide to allow only approved comments to the wall.

Mr. Devillo is a strong believer in radical trust. He agrees in allowing the public to be self-correcting. If something inappropriate is displayed on PLCMC’s Myspace or Facebook page, the public will enlighten the library. Similarly, the new online community that Mr. Weaver is developing for WPPL will not regulate public comments. There will be functions that people can use to report abuse and ignore patrons that are not agreeable. Mr. Weaver is excited by the prospect of trusting patrons to provide content to a portion of the library’s web presence. His belief is that you have to trust patrons in order to better serve them.

In summary, the most appealing aspects of our interviews were those that demonstrated how reflective and considerate these librarians are in choosing the new technologies to implement in their libraries. They are fulfilling the libraries’ various mission statements and strategic plans in choosing new technologies, not because they are the latest thing but because they can add huge benefit to their patrons. The librarians and staff are interested in maximizing the interaction between patrons and the library in order to facilitate improved services in all areas of the library. Paul Miller describes these attempts perfectly in his article, ‘Web 2.0: Building the New Library’ as reaching out beyond the walls of the library and the library website to reach patrons where they “happen to be”. This is what these librarians are attempting to do with their Twitter, Facebook, and Myspace pages as well as with their blogs and rss feeds. They are taking the conversation between patrons and the library to the next level of communication and service.

Presentation

Ebonye and I gave our presentation last night and it seemed to go fairly well. We are happy it is over and we're working on editing the paper. I'll be happy when I'm finished! I should start working on my two summer classes this weekend but I think I might actually take a day or two off. I could use the break! It was a great maymester but wow, what a lot of material packed into such a short time!

Interview Final Project

This is the interview that I had with Jimmy Lo for my final project in MLIS 7505. I'm posting it because I think it is a great interview and I learned a lot from the answers Mr. Lo gave.

1. User centered change is an important aspect of Library 2.0. What are some other attributes that you think define Library 2.0?

Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 are just fancy ways of describing a movement towards more interaction between web users and the web and patrons and the library. Before, you had static websites that you logged onto and received static content, now users can generate and contribute content. Patrons in libraries can generate book recommendations or make comments on a library’s blog. Our library is increasingly using polls to make user centered changes to our services but also to increase the interactivity that we have between the library and its patrons. These things add a lot to the patron feeling empowered to help in the creation of their library environment.

2. Who decides what technology is going to be implemented or adopted by the library and how are these decisions made?

We have two committees, the technology and the e-branch committees who make decisions about new technology. If it something smaller we are working on, for instance making a facebook page, the e-branch committee will make all of the decisions rather than involving the technology committee. These decisions don’t have to involve everyone because they don’t affect things like needing to install new computers or having a new server. The e-branch committee is made up of about eight people. We have thorough discussions about the merits of new technology and if we believe that it would useful or an added benefit to our patrons then we take the idea to the director and assistant director of the library. They have the final say in what is implemented. It’s a group effort.

3. What factors are involved in the decision making criteria regarding the technology like costs, resource allocations in terms of people, etc.?

We use a lot of open source, free software but every once in a while we have to buy some software. Compared to other systems in the library, I feel that the library 2.0 technologies tend to be less expensive in terms of money spent although they do require more manpower in the beginning. One thing that we recently had to spend a good deal of money on was when we began podcasting the writer’s forum for Georgia Center for the Book. The costs in terms of the technology needed to put these performances online is virtually nonexistent but we did have an initial outlay for the recording equipment. It has been a great success though, and well worth the resources spent.

4. Are library staff willing participants in Library/Web 2.0? Have staff members been intimidated by new technology? In general, how has the library’s staff response been towards 2.0 technologies?

As with any most things, some people are really onboard from the beginning. Some are skeptical of new technologies. From their point of view, the library has been doing something a certain way for a long time and it has worked. Why would we want to change it? Almost always, after they have become used to the new application, they come to appreciate that sometimes the new way is a better working way than the old one. For instance, we had some opposition when we changed the way that children’s activities would be posted to the website. The e-branch went in and designed a way for librarians to go into the back end of the website and enter information into the system that would automatically update the events calendar. It was hard to get everyone to try but we’ve gotten the system streamlined and everyone knows how to use it now. Aside from a few people errors that happened again and again, the system was good when it was set up and is working well now after some tweaking. We think that even the skeptics are happier with the new technology now that they are used to it.

5. Is feedback from all staff or only certain staff members solicited prior to implementing specific technologies?

We are a very careful library. We do a test page for a month or two before we roll out most new technologies. For instance, we had the blog up for two months with our committee of bloggers writing and receiving feedback from library staff before we opened it up to the public.

6. What kind of Web 2.0/Library 2.0 technologies are being used in your library? What functional and service areas are these technologies being utilized for?

Well, I’ve already mentioned that we have a blog and we podcast. We also used a content management system on the redesign of our website. We are about to roll out a facebook page and we started a flickr page, although, I don’t think we are using that technology to its full extent yet. We are also using several wikis internally throughout our 22 branches. These wikis are really crude just now but I’m working on creating a large wiki, using Plone, to replace the intranet that we currently use to connect all of the branches. The current intranet is very static and I think the new wiki will be a great addition for our library staff. Wikis are incredibly useful as a way to store and share knowledge within the organization. To build up that information base into a system where all the library staff can reference it will be a great tool. One of the problems that we foresee is getting everyone to contribute to the wiki. There are always one or two people who are gung ho about new technology but some that are frightened by or shy of these new methods. We hope to get all of our staff onboard with the new wiki because wikis are better when everyone contributes.

As with all adoptions of new technology, we realize that we can’t just jump into every new thing that comes along. We have to look at the technology and determine whether it will help us reach our goals for serving our patrons. Also it is important to consider what technologies, your patrons are using although if we find a new technology that will be really helpful that isn’t being used much yet we will still consider adopting it. For instance, with the facebook page we are creating, we had to ask ourselves if facebook could help the library in reaching its patrons and potential patrons enough to justify the manpower to create and maintain the page. We think that it will. Our goal with facebook is to update the page every few days with events that will be occurring at the library. We are hopeful that people who become fans who would not ordinarily check the library website everyday will login to facebook and see these updates on their login screen. We also hope that facebook will be helpful in making people aware of services that the library provides that they would not ordinarily be aware off from just looking at the library home page like how the library shows movies, has outreach programs, and computer classes, etc. Our biggest reservation was how much time it would take us to update the page but we’ve decided the time is worth it.

7. How do you and/or your library staff follow trends in library technologies?

There are a lot of tech journals like Computers in Libraries and Information Today that I read but mostly I browse the web. I follow web design blogs.

8. Does the library follow any best practices model?

Yes

9. If you are using new technologies such as blogs, wikis, etc. how are your usage statistics being monitored? What is the average monthly number of users? Are patrons allowed to make comments on your blogs? What methods has the library used to advertise these new technologies and have you found them to be effective?

The server that our blog is on is the library’s server so we can monitor how many hits we have on the blog a day. We have 80 or 90 hits on any average day. We haven’t been able to monitor how many people are reading the blog using rss feeds or rss readers until recently. We’ve begun using feedburner to track how many people are reading the blog and what reader they are using. We can also see what they are clicking on. We can’t see who these patrons are in particular, nor would we want to.

We advertise new technology on the library website itself by placing the story on the front page or by placing making it into a slide for the slide presentation on the front page. We also will write blog posts about new applications. Occasionally, if it is a really big rollout we’ll advertise in the branches. When we rolled out the new website design and when we launched the blog we had signs in the library and printed bookmarks with the new Urls on them. When we rolled out the new website design we wrote the web address with sidewalk chalk in front of all the branches on the sidewalks.

10. How do you handle incidents of misuse, such as profanity or inappropriate content/comments?

All comments have to be okayed before they are posted to the blog. The e-branch committee receives an email when we have a new comment and one of us goes in and okays it. We really don’t have a problem with inappropriate comments though. We’ve probably only had two in the entire time we’ve been blogging. We do get a lot of spam but the software filters that out for us.

11. Have you had in incidents that have affected public relations as a result of blogs?

No, not really. Complaints are not inappropriate and they are posted along with a reply from the library. If you are inviting people to comment then you shouldn’t censor them if there is constructive criticism of your services. These comments can be really helpful. The library puts out surveys occasionally to see how we are doing and to solicit suggestions. For instance, when we redesigned the website we got consistent feedback from users that the catalog, my account, and search boxes were not easy to find and so we redesigned that whole portion of the website to make it more visible to our patrons. We take these suggestions seriously and consider paying attention to them to be a part of fulfilling our mission.

12. The term radical trust is used often when discussing Library 2.0 technologies. How do you and the library staff feel about trusting your users with direct access to the library content, such as blogs, wikis, etc.?

Here, I think there is sometimes a bit of a generational divide. Younger people in the library tend to trust that issues that arise from trusting the patrons will work themselves out while older library staff tend to want to keep a pretty tight rein on what patrons can contribute content to. Facebook was a big concern for some of the staff. They wanted to know what would happen if someone writes something bad on our wall. I think we’ve seen from how few inappropriate comments we’ve gotten on the blog that this scenario isn’t that likely but regardless, these things can be removed and we can decide to only allow approved comments on our wall in the first place.

One of the more interesting applications that I’ve come across that represented radical trust was from librarything. It allows patrons to logon and inform the website of what languages they speak. The patron is then directed to a screen where they are allowed to translate phrases from the library’s website from English into other languages. If enough patrons participated then we could have our website in several different languages and the translations would probably be of much better quality than if we used something like google’s translator service. I couldn’t get much support for this from most of the library staff though. Too much trust was the problem I think.

Another cool application that we are going to use from librarything is an api for library patrons that will overlay our catalog. Users will be able to generate and see word clouds, they can read and write book reviews, and see similar titles. It won’t change the search functionality of the catalog though which we know is a problem but we haven’t come up with a cost effective way to resolve that issue as of yet.

The End of Maymester

I can't believe that it is the end of the semester! Ebonye and I managed to find four people who were willing to give us interviews for the final project. The interview that I did with Jimmy Lo from DeKalb Public Libraries was quite good. I'm really impressed with how knowledgable and helpful he is. Ebonye had a great interview with a librarian from Westlake Porter library in Ohio. I've been working on a draft of the final paper and Ebonye has been working on the presentation. All I've got to say about that is Thank You Ebonye! I think I would have lost my mind if I had to try to figure out power point slides and how to get them onto WebCt. We will give our presentation tonight and do the final edits of the paper by Saturday and then we're done! This class has been great and I'm really glad I stepped outside of my comfort zone and took it. I've learned a lot. More surprisingly than my having actually figured some of this new technology out, is how interesting it all is to me. I didn't think that would happen. I'm pretty sure I'll even be taking more tech classes during my time in the program.

Assignment Four

I found Dspace to be a lot more intuitive than I thought it would be. I watched Dr. Oguz's presentation and then I went in. The first thing I did was to check out the metadata registry since this was the part that I didn't understand. I wasn't really sure what I would be doing by creating a new field with my name as the qualifier and I wasn't really sure how to achieve that but I followed in some of my fellow classmates footsteps and I eventually I got it right. I emailed my information to Larry and then I started having fun. Dspace, aside from the metadata registry, I think is quite intuitive. I had no problems with creating a community named Boyd's community which is here http://mlis.library.gatech.edu/handle/123456789/34. After creating a community I added two collections, the first of which is MLIS Papers. That collection is here http://mlis.library.gatech.edu/handle/123456789/36. I did have some issue with creating a key words for these collections because I have no experience with controlled vocabulary but then I remembered that this is supposed to be about library 2.0 and that I should enter the words that seemed to make the most sense when describing my collection. I submitted two items to my MLIS Papers collection. The process of submitting these items was also easy or intuitive. After I submitted them I used the advanced search option to see if I could find them. The results of those searches are here http://mlis.library.gatech.edu/simple-search?query=%28%28correctional%29+AND+%28libraries%29%29&from_advanced=true&conjunction2=AND&field3=ANY&field2=ANY&conjunction1=AND&field1=ANY&query1=correctional+&query2=libraries&query3= and here http://mlis.library.gatech.edu/simple-search?query=%28%28mlis%29+AND+%28biography%29%29&from_advanced=true&conjunction2=AND&field3=ANY&field2=ANY&conjunction1=AND&field1=ANY&query1=mlis&query2=biography&query3=. Next I created one more collection. I chose to create a collection of photos to see if submitting photos was just as easy as documents and it was. My photo collection is here http://mlis.library.gatech.edu/handle/123456789/87. Once again, I did an advanced search using key words and the results of that search are here http://mlis.library.gatech.edu/simple-search?query=%28%28standing%29+AND+%28stones%29%29&from_advanced=true&conjunction2=AND&field3=ANY&field2=ANY&conjunction1=AND&field1=ANY&query1=standing+&query2=stones&query3=. I have to say that I really enjoyed being able to experiment with Dspace. It and google reader are my two favorite technologies we've studied in this class.

Is Anybody Else As Tired As I Am?

I spent the weekend doing the readings and podcast listenings for the fourth and final module of MLIS 7505. I also spent some time this weekend learning my way around Dspace and uploading some content to my community. I really, really like Dspace and hope that eventually Valdosta will roll out its own version. I actually found myself arguing, not heatedly, with one of my academic friends who isn't into new technologies about the merits of Dspace this weekend over dinner. I couldn't stop explaining to her how awesome this was going to be for her as an academic if her institution ever adopted the technology. This from the woman who couldn't have told you what Dspace was two weeks ago! Funny, huh?
Unfortunately, I lost plenty of sleep this weekend freaking out because not one of the six people I sent emails to about the final interview has gotten back to me! I don't know what Ebonye and I are going to do if we can't find willing participants. I'm just hoping that they are all going to check their email today and write back to me. I don't know how we can possibly do the presentation either if we don't even get the interviews until the end of the week! I know, I need to chill out, and realize that things are going to work out but time is running short and this class will be over on Saturday! Surely someone will get back to me. I sent out two emails to digital librarians at Georgia Tech, two to Emory Librarians, one to Dekalb County Public Librarians and one to a woman who works on a library project in the Virginia Highlands. Somebody will come through, I hope. Cross your fingers.

Assignment Three -- I ended up having two great interviews...

I conducted this interview, by email, with Laura Crossett who is the webmaster for Park County Libraries in Wyoming. The website for her library is http://parkcountylibrary.org/.

Q: How and where did you first hear about content management systems?

A: I'm not really sure, although it is possible that I first heard the term via an entry on librarian.net about ALA putting out an RFP for a CMS (http://www.librarian.net/stax/1317/ala-csm-rfp-omp/

Q: What were the motivations behind adopting a content management system for your library website?

A: I wanted to run our website with a system that would make it easy for staff to add or make changes themselves. We're a three library system in a large county where it takes a half hour to an hour to get from one branch to another. I wanted to have something simple that would allow staff at other libraries to make changes on their own.

Q: What were the decision making criteria for picking this CMS and what is the name of the system you currently use?

A: We run our library website using Wordpress, which is really a blogging software, that has some CMS qualities that make it work well for running a small website. I chose it in part because I use it for my own blogs and therefore was familiar with it, because I thought it would be possible to make it do what I needed it to do, and in part because it has a robust developer community and thus is likely to be around for a long while.

Q: What are the important benefits of Wordpress over systems you've used in the past?

A: The only other CMS I've worked with is Drupal. It's used to run the Radical Reference site and as a member I've used several Drupal modules to add content to the site but I have only the dimmest understanding of all that it is capable of. Wordpress, while it has many fewer features, is, I think, easier to learn and use.

Q: How was the learning curve?

A: I already knew how to create posts and pages on Wordpress, so mostly what I needed to learn was to fiddle with the CSS for our site and how to do a little bit of cut and paste magic with some of the PHP. For instance, I used CSS to change the appearance of the initial theme we chose and I eliminated dates on pages by messing around with the PHP templates and trying to figure out what command controlled the date and then deleting it. A lot of learning came through making mistakes and then having to fix them. I also had some friends who helped me with the tricky stuff in the CSS.

Q: How many people currently contribute to the website?

A: Seven people have been trained on how to add content to the website and I'd say that four to five of them are regular contributors.

Q: How many people were involved in constructing the website or did you organize it alone?

A: I did the organizational part pretty much on my own although I did ask for advice along the way and I did some very basic usability testing before we rolled the website out.

Q: How long did it take you to get your website up and running?

A: About six months in total but we did a soft launch about three months in (i.e. we put the site out into the open but didn't do any promotion right away).

Q: How often do you update versions of your system?

A: Not as often as we should! We are currently one version behind in Wordpress. Wordpress has made some significant changes to its back end with its last two versions and getting staff comfortable with a new look and feel is sometimes a bit of a project.

Q: How pleased are you with Wordpress and would you choose to use it again or another CMS?

A: I'm generally quite pleased. While there are days when I think, "I wish we had a more full-featured CMS so I could do more things with it," those days are far outnumbered by the days when I am grateful that we have a small, easy system. Everyone who works on the site is doing so in addition to their regular duties as librarians and I think that if we had anything more complex they wouldn't be able to work on it at all due to the demands of running small but busy libraries.



I have to say that I love this interview because it is reflective of what a librarian who knows a little about technology and has a desire to learn more can do with software like Wordpress. She created a website for her county libraries and has gotten others on board to update content. That says a lot about her desire to enhance her patron's library experience and about the ingenuity of a web community that creates and maintains software like Wordpress.

The second interview that I conducted was also by email with Jimmy Lo, the e-Branch Manager for Dekalb County Public Library. The website is http://dekalblibrary.org/. I'm including this interview not because I want to make you read more, but because I hate to waste a good interview that gives a different perspective on CMSs than my original interview with Laura Crossett. It is interesting to compare the needs of a large library system with a very tech savvy webmaster (Dekalb County) to the needs of a small library system with a volunteer webmaster (Park County).

Second Interview

Q: How and where did you hear about Content Management Systems?

A: I heard about them many years ago. I was working as a web developer for small companies before I worked for the library, and our company had developed a CMS of our own. Two years ago, when I began working for the library I researched CMSs that were already built. It was interesting to see all the different products out there and the range of capabilities.

Q: What were the motivations to adopt Joomla and Wordpress for your library website?

A: There were many motivations:
1. We wanted a site that could be updated by multiple contributors instead of a centralized "webmaster".
2. We wanted to separate the content of the site from the design and logic.
3. We wanted to take advantage of a lot of the add-on products for CMSs that often come pre-built...Like RSS capability and an interactive events calendar.

Q: What were the decision making criteria for choosing Joomla and Wordpress as opposed to other CMSs?

A: It had to be easy to use. It had to be able to handle a lot of web traffic since we get thousands of hits a day. It had to have an events calendar capability. Preferably, it should be open source with a large user base. It had to have the ability to assign different user privileges. Preferably, it would use standards compliant code.

Q: What are the important advantages of Joomla and Wordpress over the old system of CMSs you've used in the past?

A: The old system was static HTML. That means that the design, the code, and the logic was all in one place. The webmaster has to make all the changes and these changes had to be written in HTML. In addition, content was viewable in one way and one way only.

In the new system, the design, code, and content are separated. That means that different people in the library system can change content without worrying about "how it looks" on the website. They just type it in a web interface similar to MS Word. Since content is separated out, content is now re-usable. For instance, the same events calendar can be viewed in multiple ways...you can browse by age, location, event type, etc.. The raw data is there, and it can be used in whichever way you please.

Q: How was the learning curve?

A: It took quite a while to get used to Joomla. A lot of things were unintuitive and needed hacking or tweaking or writing custom code to complement the the basic set of capabilities that came with it. In addition to Joomla we've added a Wordpress component so that our website actually runs on a combination of the two as well as some custom code. At first, I thought Joomla was very easy to use but when it came to having it do very specific things, I felt Joomla was not flexible enough. It's good if you don't have a very specific thing in mind in terms of how your website will look and/or function because Joomla just wants to do things its own way.

Q: How many people currently contribute to the website?

A: There are about 35 contributors to the website but we plan to add more.

Q: How many people were involved in constructing the website or did you organize it alone?

A: Many people were involved. I was the only one involved in technically constructing it but I had many meetings with people from many different branches and sections of the library to see what they wanted the website to be. In addition, we had an online survey asking our patrons directly for what they would like to see on our new webpage.

The goal was not just to move the old website to a new CMS but to develop a completely new website with a new look, new functionality, and new "online" services. We wanted to incorporate everyone's ideas into the final product.

In addition, we had an e-Branch committee that helped me along the way with design and implementation decisions.

Q: How long did it take to get your system up and running?

A: About a year.

Q: How often do you update your system?

A: We still use an old version of Joomla because we have made so many custom modifications to the system that a simple "upgrade" would be very difficult. The Wordpress sections of our website are updated maybe once every three months or so if there is a new version available. I try not to update too often because many times the interface changes slightly between upgrades and some library contributors may be confused by the new look.

Q: How pleased are you with your system and would you choose to use it again or a different CMS?

A: I'm pretty happy with the way Wordpress functions as a more blog-oriented CMS. I am not completely happy with Joomla. For a small library, Joomla may be perfect, but for our particular needs, I felt it was way too inflexible. Also, it writes table-based code instead of CSS compliant code.

Other CMSs we considered were Drupal and Expression Engine. I still am not sure if Drupal wouldn't have been better. It seems more powerful than Joomla but I'm not sure if its any more flexible. Expression Engine seems flexible and definitely more standards compliant but I wasn't sure if it would be able to handle a lot of web traffic, since all the sample sites I went to at the time were pretty small.

A CMS I discovered recently is Plone. It runs on Python and requires a dedicated machine. Its advantages are that it is very flexible and powerful. I am currently designing our intranet using Plone and am very satisfied with it. If I had to do the website again, I might consider Plone. The only drawback is that the learning curve is pretty steep if you want to make high level customizations, especially if you need to learn the Python language.