RE: [IUG] Question about enhancement process

[Elizabeth Thomsen <et at noblenet dot org>]

This has happened to me, too.  Also, there have been many times when I
have made a suggestion here on the list or at a presentation or other
discussion with III staff, and I've been able to point people to my
enhancement request for the details.

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, Helwig, Ruth M. wrote:

> I would like to reinforce the idea that enhancement requests are not
> lost.  This week I received a call form III about an enhancement that I
> submitted last year.  They were looking for clarification and were
> investigating the feasibility of this functionality. 
> 
> Ruth Helwig
> Park Library 305
> Central Michigan University
> Mt Pleasant MI 48859
> Phone: 989-774-2404
> Fax: 989-774-2179
> helwi1rm at cmich dot edu
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
> [mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org] On Behalf Of
> cbrigham at temple dot edu
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 11:14 PM
> To: Will Owen; IUG INNOPAC List
> Subject: Re: [IUG] Question about enhancement process
> 
> Dear Will,
> 
> Here are my thoughts on your question as co-coordinator of the
> enhancements process. 
> 
> I do not think it is possible for us to identify each of the
> enhancement requests that did not make the ballot with an
> explanation of why it did not make the cut.  However, because
> something is not on the 2006 ballot, it is not the end of the
> road for the request. 
> 
> First of all, only 17% of the requested enhancements make the
> ballot.  We have the ballot number set to 240 items and the
> total submitted was near 1446.  The reason this was set up was
> two-fold.  When we revamped the process 2 cycles ago, we
> worked closely with staff at Innovative, and we agreed that we
> would maintain the number of ballot items and "winners" as in
> the previous years.  This was 240 ballot items and 70 winners.
>  This would be true regardless of the number of submissions
> that were made by members.  This might be something that we
> have to revisit with Innovative.
> 
> In the words of a current Functional Expert "Sometimes there
> are just more good ideas than we can submit and it's a matter
> of trying to figure out which items might benefit the most
> people.  Sometimes we just have to choose one instead of
> another, and although we try to find compelling reasons it can
> be very difficult to choose."
> 
> It is also important to note that all requests get passed to
> Innovative.  At the end of the voting, we submit all of the
> enhancement requests to Innovative (broken down by category).
>  So even though an item is not on the ballot, that does not
> mean that it will not be passed along to Innovative.  You
> should also feel free to submit your enhancement suggestions
> to Innovate directly at enhance at iii dot com dot 
> 
> Additionally, the processes for reviewing which items go on
> the ballot is left to the Functional Expert Teams.  We have
> tried very hard over the past two years to develop Functional
> Expert Teams that have librarians of different library types
> to best represent our users as a whole.  By having teams of
> librarians from public, academic, law, international, medical
> (and other) settings, we hopefully can address the needs of a
> wide variety of our members.  In years past, single Functional
> Experts would work for a category and might not have an 
> understanding of the complexities or needs of the librarians
> at a different type of organization.  I think that this
> process ensures a more fair and balanced means of selecting
> enhancement items. 
> 
> Functional Experts currently alert submitters in cases where
> a)a request is not clearly understood or b) what is requested
> is already possible or expected in an upcoming release.  These
> situations are recorded in the comments section of the
> individual enhancement request.
> 
> I hope this helps answer your questions.
> 
> Carol Brigham, Enhancements Co-Coordinator
> 
> ---- Original message ----
> >Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 16:20:11 -0500
> >From: Will Owen <owen at email dot unc dot edu>  
> >Subject: [IUG] Question about enhancement process  
> >To: innopac at innopacusers dot org
> >
> >We're working on our enhancement requests for this year and
> one of the 
> >staff sent me this:
> >
> >I would like to suggest an enhancement not to the software,
> but to the 
> >enhancement process.
> >
> >Problem: When we submit an enhancement suggestion, and the
> submission does 
> >not make it to the ballot, we have no idea why.
> >Request: Provide feedback on why suggestions were rejected. 
> Feedback could 
> >be as simple as choosing from a menu:
> >
> >a. Expect this to be included in forthcoming release of software.
> >b. Do not believe this is feasible.
> >c. Do not understand submission, or do not understand why
> anyone would want 
> >this.
> >d. Do not believe submission would have broad appeal
> >e. other
> >
> >
> >So, what happens to requests that don't make it onto the
> ballot?  Does IUG 
> >provide any feedback?  Do we just keep trying?  Send them
> directly to III?
> >
> >this is our second year participating in the process, and we
> were pretty 
> >disappointed with it last year.  Any information would be
> appreciated.
> >
> >Will Owen
> >UNC-Chapel Hill
> >
> >--
> >This message was distributed through the Innovative Users
> Group INNOPAC list
> >Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
> >Update your subscription options:
> http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac
> Carol A. Brigham
> Access Services Librarian
> Paley Library (017-00)
> Temple University Libraries
> 1210 W. Berks Street
> Philadelphia, PA  19122
> 215-204-0750
> FAX:  215-204-0769
> cbrigham at temple dot edu
> --
> This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC
> list
> Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
> Update your subscription options:
> http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac
> 
> --
> This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC list
> Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
> Update your subscription options: http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac
> 


-- 
Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager
NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange
Danvers MA 01923
et at noblenet dot org