SWAN ILS Search Committee Meeting

Quick recap

The meeting focused on planning the task force structure and scoring process for SWAN's ILS vendor selection process. The group discussed forming specialized task forces for different areas including youth services, public services, cataloging, acquisitions, circulation, directors, and system administration, with each task force developing scenarios and questions for vendor demonstrations. The Committee reviewed the scoring methodology using a weighted system against the RFP requirements, starting with a detailed examination of holds management functionality where participants assigned weights from 1-4 to various features outlined within the RFP document. The team agreed to continue working through the scoring process in future meetings, with Tara planning to send out a poll for potential meeting dates in November to maintain momentum on the evaluation process.

Next steps

Scott

• Work on the written charges for the task forces, including the director's task force.
• Add the discussed points to the cataloging task force charge and duplicate that style for the other task force charges.
• Add explicit instructions to each task force charge, such as requiring at least two scenarios regarding analytics and at least one scenario regarding each section of the RFP.
• Put the draft cataloging task force charge in the SharePoint.

Tara

• Prepare the online form for task force sign-ups.
• Send out a poll for potential meeting dates in November to book additional working sessions.
• Send the scoring spreadsheet/poll to individuals directly to ensure everyone receives it.

Aaron

• Draft the director's task force charge specifically.

Summary

Task Force Purpose & Deliverables

Aaron outlined plans for structuring the ILS Search Committee Task Force groups, with separate groups with a focus on membership participation and inclusion. Aaron proposed that Directors Task Force review RFP proposals and cost contracts to provide recommendations and rankings. The group discussed assigning liaisons from the ILS Search Committee for each group, along with SWAN staff in a supporting role. The goal of the task force is to create questions and scenarios for the vendors to follow, which would be provided to vendors in advance. The task force groups would meet and agree on a recommended ranking of the solutions that would be submitted to the ILS Search Committee. SWAN staff and liaisons from the ILS Search Committee would not have a vote in the ranking process.

ILS Task Force Selection Process

The group discussed written charges for each task force, with Brooke suggesting that each task force should contribute to analytics discussions and emphasizing the need for clarity in the draft charges. Scott shared a draft charge for the cataloging task force, which included scenarios for cataloging, searching, and analytics topics. The team debated the number of scenarios needed and the distinction between questions and scenarios, with Brooke and Brittany noting the potential for an overwhelming number of scenarios if not limited. Aaron noted that each task force would have access to full proposals for review, and Cynthia highlighted the need to determine software demo duration to set appropriate scenario time limits.

System Administrator Task Force & Demo Planning

The group discussed plans for a system administrator software demo for SWAN staff, with Aaron proposing to include documentation, training, development cycles, and reporting tools administration. The Committee agreed to make the demo available as a live stream with a recording posted afterwards to ensure transparency and allow all membership staff to participate, to ensure ILS capabilities are understood by those who would like to know which are crucial for many library operations. 

Reporting & Analytics Discussion

The team discussed whether analytics and reporting should have a dedicated task force or be incorporated into other departmental task forces. Hubbell and Melissa expressed support for a dedicated analytics task force due to its cross-departmental nature, while Scott explained the rationale for previously eliminating a dedicated analytics task force, which was reports and analytics are used so widely across library staff in various roles that each task force could create scenarios specific to analytics functions. Multiple task force groups could attend a demo session dedicated to analytics. The discussion ended with Aaron asking the group to clarify their feelings about needing a dedicated analytics task force, and there was agreement to outline for each task force within its written charge to include scenario questions about reports and analytics relevant to their library role, and not include a task force specific to analytics.

Vendor Demo Planning Process

The team discussed planning for vendor demos, focusing on how to structure the process and manage time allocation. Aaron suggested allowing vendors to book demo dates early and potentially extending beyond 3 hours if needed, while Brittany proposed having groups rank their questions by importance to ensure key topics are addressed first. Cynthia emphasized that initial guidelines should be general rather than specific about the number of scenarios, with more detailed information to be provided later once task forces are confirmed. Aaron shared a lesson from a previous RFP process 13 years ago about the importance of prioritizing task force questions but allow time for other participant’s questions.

Task Force Role with Vendor Demonstration Planning

The group discussed how to structure task force scenarios for vendor demonstrations, agreeing to keep them general while allowing for follow-up questions during demos. They decided that task force members should review the RFP before their first meeting to understand existing questions and avoid duplicating information from vendor proposals. The team also agreed to provide vendors with sufficient lead time for planning, while maintaining fairness across all vendors through consistent scenarios.

Task Force Structure and Feedback

The group discussed the size and structure of task forces, with Brittany expressing concern about keeping the number too small at a suggested five participants. Allyson suggested making the number open-ended to allow more flexibility based on who volunteers and their expertise. The discussion also covered how observers would participate in the weekly demos, with Aaron explaining that previously observers submitted questions on paper forms, though this method had limitations. Tara proposed using a Likert scale with written comments for observer feedback to give task forces a better understanding of overall sentiment, and Scott suggested routing feedback through task forces rather than directly to the ILS committee for better organization.

RFP Evaluation Scoring Criteria

The task force met to discuss scoring approaches for the RFP evaluation process, with Tara presenting a detailed spreadsheet containing weighted scoring criteria for different sections. The group agreed to use a 5-point scale (0-4) to assess vendor responses against RFP requirements, with zero indicating not scored and 4 indicating essential functionality. The team decided to start scoring smaller sections to build momentum, specifically focusing on cataloging, patron record management, and search functionality.

The group decided to continue meeting regularly to complete their scoring rubric process and Tara agreed to send out a poll for potential meeting dates in November.