To choose an integrated library system for one's library is a bit like walking into a well-stocked supermarket and attempting to pick the tastiest peanut butter out of the dozen or so varieties available. All appear, at first glance, relevant to your tastes and needs. Which is the best for you? Fortunately with ILSs, there are a few ways to sample the products. ILS marketplace review articles, vendors on hand at annual library association conference exhibit halls, word-of-mouth suggestions from fellow librarians - all are means to scout out the best fit of an ILS for one's own library. Reviewed here, the May/June 2003 issue of Library Technology Reports provides an in-depth look at how smaller libraries can analyze the market of ILSs (Salter, 2003).
In the preliminary pages of this report, Salter defines small in the context of the "smaller libraries" on which this issue focuses (2003). For small libraries funding is especially tight, even given the limited budgets many libraries manage. Special libraries, according to Salter, are looking at a one-time purchase that will stay within the library for a number of years. This contrasts the purchasing schema of a larger research library, which may upgrade to a newer system after just a few years. From a pool of a significant number of ILS products, specialized libraries must use their money wisely to purchase a system.
The FPL Library has been using CyberTools for five years. As far as I am aware, there is no plan to migrate to a different vendor. I would not be able to comment on this library's budget, but I see first-hand how small libraries are strapped for time. Despite the shortcomings of CyberTools, the FPL Library does not have energy to waste in looking for a new ILS vendor. Especially if CyberTools is low-cost and service technicians are approachable, it makes sense for the FPL Library to stay with this vendor.
This report defines an ILS and cites what features an ILS should have (Salter, 2003). While there are a variety of ways an ILS has been defined previously, this report lists both basic and more advanced attributes an ILS should include. An ILS needs to be functional and flexible.
CyberTools defines itself as being both functional and flexible. It also meets Salter's basic requirements for an ILS. It lags on some of the more advanced features. This is where the 1990s-looking interface is a strike against CyberTools. Perhaps the biggest drawback to this ILS is that the search engine is not easily manipulated. Indeed, it can be challenging to search this database!
The best ILS for one's own small library depends on a few considerations (Salter, 2003). The main characteristics include the industry of your library, the size and type of your collections, the size of your staff, the amount of work you do, and your budget. From here, there are a few more specific points to ponder regarding the vendors who sell products that would suit your needs. Think about the products these vendors have recently developed, their customer service response, recent profit and gross sales of the vendor, among other factors (see the report for a full analysis). The report goes on to provide a timeline for how to select an ILS. Salter also gives recommendations for how to maintain your ILS investment. The last half of the report lists specific institutional profiles.
The head librarian at FPL Library learned of CyberTools through an article in Library Journal. I am not sure of the details of the FPL Library's purchasing decisions, but I am sure cost was an important factor. A government library, fiscal responsibility is always a priority. The FPL Library remained the largest collection for the company until about two years ago. Our head librarian informed me that she believes she asks the most questions of CyberTools. With her background in cataloging, she tends to try to push the system to keep doing more. While the developments CyberTools currently has underway are more health-sciences oriented (a federated searching component, incorporating health science databases, as well as an open-access collection of qualified health science resources), they seem to remain receptive to this government librarian's constructive comments, too.
_____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment