I’ve discussed potential benefits of a variety of Web 2.0 services including blogs, wikis, Twitter, use of audio and video, etc. over the past two years on this blog. But it strikes me that a reason we can encounter resistance to use of new technologies is that people think that they will have to use them. I personally don’t think everyone should blog, use Twitter or make use of Second Life, for example - a point I made recently in a video blog post. Rather I feel that the early users of such services and the enthusiasts should be willing to explain why such technologies can provide benefits to others, but not mandate their use inappropriately. And the role of managers and policy makers should be to provide an environment in which the diversity of tools which are available can be used to support a diversity of tasks and a diversity of user preferences.
The problem, it seems to me, is the attitude of “I don’t see the point - therefore you should be doing it either” - although I suspect that in my cases the unspoken fear is “I don’t get it, and I’m worried that if I don’t oppose it I’ll be forced to do it“. Perhaps the tensions are between the positions of “I want diversity, you need convincing and he wants things to stay the same“.
On the other hand if you decide that you don’t want to blog, tweet, make use of wikis, etc. and you are an information professional, how employable will you be if you decide to change jobs?
Posted in Web2.0A job advertisement for ICT Programme Managers in JISC begins with the phrase:
No risk…. no innovation…
The advert goes on to say:
To innovate, you have to take risks… well managed ones. By undertaking innovation programmes with universities and colleges we can build a world class ICT infrastructure for UK research and learning. To keep us moving forward, we now need five Programme Managers with excellent people and programme management skills to manage large-scale programmes …
This view of what it means to be a part of today’s IT development environment reflects a comment I made when I was interviewed by Hilary Swain for an article on “Web 2.0: boon or bane for universities“ published in the Education Guardian on 12th May 2008. The article concluded with my comment: “Universities should be risk-taking organisations. Learning is a risky process.“
But its important to note the job advert’s comment on the need to take a ‘well-managed’ approach to risk-taking. The need to identify approaches for managing risks was the main focus on my paper on “Library 2.0: Balancing the Risks and Benefits to Maximise the Dividends” and this is an area in which further work will be needed. And this work will cover not just the JISC sector but also museums, libraries and archives. Roy Clare, the MLA’s Chief Executive, recently called for “radical action on structure, far-sighted leadership vision and more public Private Partnerships“ within this sector and an editorial in the CILIP Update magazine (June 2008, Vol. 7, No. 6) had the byline “In This Climate, You Have To Innovate“.
I think 2009 will be a very interesting time for those involved in the development and support of networked services.
Posted in Web2.0 Tagged: jiscIt strikes me that the recent set of comments made to my post on “Google’s G1 Phone: “Innovation For Tech Heads” have wider applicability to the networked development environment.
To summarise some of the issues which were highlighted in the original Guardian review which I cited and have been expanded on in John Naughton’s Google’s Android could smash iPhone’s locked gateway” article published in Sunday’s Observer (28 September 2008):
The Wow factor: Yes, the iPhone clearly wins with its ‘wow’ factor, As the Guardian review admitted the Android phone lacks the “wow factor of the Apple device“.
The usability: The iPhone, like many Apple devices, also has its strengths in its ease-of-use. As Paul Walk has commented “I want a device which ‘just works’“.
The openness of the application environment: As John Naugton describes in his Google’s Android could smash iPhone’s locked gateway article, a strength of the Android device there’s “a row brewing inside Apple’s cosily walled garden“. It seems that “developers are beginning to resent what they see as the company’s dictatorial attitude”. As one commentator puts it: ‘Trying to discern ahead of time [and of development expenditures] what Apple will or won’t accept has become close to impossible, not only because Apple isn’t talking about it, but also because it won’t let anyone else talk about it. All apps store dealings with developers are covered by a non-disclosure agreement“‘.
The potential for power users: Now the geeks will argue that the iPhone’s walled-garden is a non-issue as it’s possible to ‘jail-break’ the device to allow the installation of applications which may not be available via the Apple store. However this approach is clearly not one which the majority of users would be happy with, and conflicts with the need for a device which ‘just works’.
The hardware environment: The iPhone, like Macintosh hardware, is only manufactured by Apple. The Andoid phone, in comparison, can be made by any manufacturer. This competition should help to bring down prices, which will be benefical to the consumer (as Stuart Smith pointed out to make use of a ‘free’ iPhone “you are still looking about £810 over 18 months“). So much for social inclusion and widening participation!
Now as Mike Ellis argues “most users couldn’t give a stuff about the closed nature of their devices, applications OR data. Facebook, iPods, iPhone, any gaming console - the list goes on. These all seem to be pretty popular, however much us IT types continue to shout about the dangers of closedness.” And I think he’s right - the IT development community tends to focus on the backend development processes and policies which are not necessarily of great concern to the majority of users. But even if we accept John Naughton’s premise that ‘Google’s Android could smash iPhone’s locked gateway’ we need to emphasise the importance of word ‘could‘. It was not so long ago when people argued that Google’s Open Social widget environment would blow away the closed development environment provided by Facebook. But that, I would argue, hasn’t happened (and, indeed, Scott Wilson wrote a blog post back in November 2007 in which he described why he was singularly unimpressed by Open Social). Let’s be honest and recognise that both the iPhone and Facebook are very popular with large numbers of users - and let’s acknowledge that the development community can learn from the popularity of these closed environments.
And let’s remember the point Mike Ellis made when he said “I find it sad when developers seem to think that any real users actually *care* about what’s under the hood ;-)“. But why do I think that Mike isn’t just referring to the mobile phone debate when he makes this point?
Posted in GadgetsIt was good to read the article in The Guardian Editorial page yesterday (1 October 2008) on the iPRES 2008 Conference on digital preservation which was held at The British Library on 29-30th September. As the article states “If all goes well, we will have the capacity to preserve as many of our memories, personal and national, as we want“.
The issues of how and what we should be preserving on our Web sites happened to be the content of the paper I presented at the conference on Monday. The paper on “Preservation of Web Resources: The JISC PoWR Project” is available online and the slides of the talk (in which I focus primarily on preservation within a Web 2.0 environment) are also available and are embedded below.
There is also a video recording of the talk available (I haven’t yet been able to upload the video to Google Video, I’m afraid).
As well as this paper, which described the work of the JISC-funded PoWR project, I’m pleased to add that two of my colleagues (Alex Ball and Manjula Patel) also wrote papers which were presented at this conference.
I should also add that Chris Rusbridge provided a comprehensive report on the conference. I was pleased to read Chris’s comments on my talk which he described as “a very entertaining talk, and well worth looking up“. He went on to describe me as ”not a preservationist, but is a full-blown technogeek discussing the roles of the latest Web 2.0 technologies on his blog, in his role as UK Web Focus“. And this technogeek was particularly pleased to read that the JISC PoWR “project achieved a strong level of interaction through its several workshops“.
Posted in Web2.0Guest Blog Post
The guest blog slot provides an opportunity to include some different voices and views on the UK Web Focus, which can provide a fresh insight in the various topics covered in this blog.
I’m therefore pleased to welcome this guest blog post from Jo Alcock, Academic Information Assistant for the Harrison Learning Centre at the University of Wolverhampton - although perhaps better known in some circles as Joeyanne Libraryanne for her Joeyanne Libraryanne blog. In her post Jo describes a variety of ways in which Web 2.0 services are being used and goes on to highlight some of the challenges which this approach entails. I should also add that Jo is a contributor to the paper on Library 2.0: Balancing the Risks and Benefits to Maximise the Dividends which I’ll be presenting at the Bridging Worlds 2008 Conference.
Setting the Scene
I work at the University of Wolverhampton which has a large proportion of part-time students (some schools are up to 70% part-time). The University is also geographically spread across the region with five campuses in total. This means students do not always come into Learning Centres and often use the closest geographical centre rather than their subject specific centre. We have recently adopted a University-wide Blended Learning strategy to support the changing nature of our students, and the Learning and Information Services department are developing ways to support students from wherever they choose to study. This includes obvious things like e-journals and e-books, as well as virtual reference support and Web 2.0/Library 2.0 initiatives to support students online.
Current Initiatives
Blogs
We currently have five subject blogs (the School of Computing and IT Blog, School of Applied Sciences Blog, School of Engineering and the Built Environment Blog, School of Humanities, Social Sciences and Languages Blog and the Wolverhampton Business School Blog to support students and staff of particular academic schools, along with an University of Wolverhampton Electronic Resources Blog for updates to services. We also have a number of project related blogs and internal communication blogs.
Social Networking
The Learning Centres have a Facebook Page which was established at the end of last year. The page includes links to relevant parts of our Web site, our aggregated RSS feeds (from our blogs) and search applications. One of the most useful features of the page are sending updates to “fans” - another way of letting users know about our services and reaching them where they already are (a quick scan of any communal PCs show numerous Facebook users!).
Wikis
We have started exploring wikis and although we do not currently have a departmental wiki we have a number of small scale wikis for sharing information.
Online calendars
I’ve included this as although it’s not usually included in general “Library 2.0″ initiatives, it’s something that we’ve found really useful. We have been using Google Calendar (see the University of Wolverhampton InfoBites Calendar) to manage our events for a few months now and it’s so much easier than updating numerous places when the timetable changes or a new event is added. Now we just update the calendar on Google and the changes are reflected wherever the calendar is embedded. Users can also subscribe to the calendar or add single events to their own calendar. We’ve also recently used it as a shared calendar for scheduling purposes for our busy induction weeks.
Barriers
There have been a number of barriers to the Library 2.0 developments, some which may have been exclusive to us but many that I imagine are shared with other libraries.
External Hosting and Software
Many of the Web 2.0 products we use are external products, often hosted externally. This has immediate issues when it comes to reliability and stability. Services change over time, which is often a positive thing but may mean that your service no longer functions in the same way you wanted it to. You may find that it suffers “downtime” whilst the software is being upgraded or simply because the servers are not reliable. You may even find that the service ends completely without warning.
This can be a big issue for institutions, and understandably so. An alternative option whilst still utilising the technologies is to use open source software but host it internally therefore passing control back to the institution. Examples of this are using the WordPress.org blogging software (rather than their hosted service at WordPress.com) and the MediaWiki software for wikis. This way, the institution can update when it wants to (and also therefore not when it doesn’t want to!) and also has greater flexibility with the functionality and style of the software.
Staff Awareness
Another issue has been lack of awareness and uncertainty about the technologies utilised. Quite often, I have found that people are pleasantly surprised when they realise how easy it actually is to use. I understand that some of the software is bewildering at first experience though, and getting over that stage if you are uncertain about the fundamentals of the technology (for example, what on earth is a wiki or a blog?!) can be a big hurdle. Something that I think is now being recognised by the profession is that more time needs to be allocated for keeping staff up-to-date and providing training or even just time during work to explore the technologies.
Culture Change
This is something I am particularly aware of, probably because I am part of the so-called “net generation”. I like to share experiences and work collaboratively, but I know this can be quite a culture change to many who are used to working in isolation and keeping their work to themselves. When you have a shared calendar for example, or a shared blog, it can take some getting used to. Clear definition of roles and expectations from the beginning can help alleviate this.
User Needs and Experience
This is one of the main issues for me - although I am a keen user of many new technologies and use a lot in my own life, I only want to adopt them at work if they make sense from a user point of view - whether this is other staff when we are thinking about a shared resource like a wiki, or our community when it is a development for users.
Over the summer we have thought a lot about the future of the blogs; whether to merge the subject blogs or keep them separate, and what the actual purpose of each blog is. There are many issues around merging the blogs - such as whether to include all subjects (not all currently have a blog) and the logistics of subscribing to your subject only. The main issue for me was to look at it from a user point of view. With many subjects all on one blog, you can use categories to create separate RSS feeds for each subject. This initially seemed like a feasible way of merging the blogs whilst still allowing users to subscribe to only their subject. However, from examining our blog stats, most of our users subscribe by e-mail, suggesting that many of them do not currently use RSS feeds. I considered having a guide on the blog and holding training sessions, but in the end decided it was too much to expect of our users and would likely put them off subscribing if it was too confusing.
Ultimately, we are here for our users and if something doesn’t make sense or isn’t of use to them, there is little point us investing time in it. For example, if Facebook fell dramatically in popularity, it would make no sense to continue to develop our Facebook page and we should instead concentrate our efforts on whatever else our users are familiar with.
This is a fundamental part of the Web 2.0 philosophy for me; have a go - if it works, great, if it doesn’t, there’s no big loss. I like to invest a small amount of time trying something and assess whether or not it is worth pursuing after you’ve given it a chance. If it isn’t or the barriers are too great, just scrap it or try something else.
How about you? What barriers have you experienced with Library 2.0 Initiatives and how do you overcome them? Please share your thoughts in the comments.
Jo Alcock, University of Wolverhampton
Posted in Blog Tagged: Guest-post
