[Web4lib] But can libraries afford failure? [was The Ultimate Debate: Do Libraries Innovate" ]

[Jorge Serrano Cobos]

That´s probably why Librarything (a company) is a success

Besides, when you are at the bottom, you can only go upwards ;-)

-- 
Jorge Serrano-Cobos
Content Department
http//www.masmedios.com

Thinkepi Group Member
http://www.thinkepi.net
Personal web: http://trucosdegoogle.blogspot.com



2007/6/6, Knight, James <James.Knight at wolterskluwer.com>:
>
> /* my $0.02
>
> Per Tim's and Andy's comments below, a few questions/comments:
>
> Is failure, no matter how humane or inexpensive, an option for libraries
> (their staff, directors and technologists) that are still struggling to
> carve out an identity and achieve relevance in the information age?
>
> I once proposed to a group of librarians that they adopt a certain cheap
> and easy to deploy piece of technology, thus reducing their "cost of
> failure" (should the initial deployment not take within their
> constituency). At that point, I was reminded by one director that the
> library's reputation was at stake, and that failure of this sort could
> jeopardize said same with the institution's users and administration.
> Failure has consequences beyond improving one's chances for success.
>
> Can innovation take place in a risk- (i.e., failure) averse environment?
> Libraries are (historically) process driven institutions. Process and
> innovation are difficult to balance in any business. Innovation also
> creates chaos; not every institution (especially those with heavy handed
> bureaucracies) tolerates disorder and lack of control in its day to day
> operation.
>
> Are there other possible reasons libraries have not been the incubators
> of technological innovation?
>
> It's not just technology either. Look at the funding issues (requiring
> some financial innovation) and debate raised by Steve Coffman several
> years ago, and how few libraries have managed to expand beyond the
> current tax supported model that keeps so many public libraries afloat
> (or not).
>
> The panel might, IMHO, want to consider these questions at its
> discussion this summer.
>
> my $0.02 */
>
> -jk [who wonders if this discussion is being carried on elsewhere]
>
> --------------------------------------------
> James Knight, MLIS
> Product Specialist
> Wolters Kluwer Health - Medical Research
>
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 12:53:44 -0400
> From: "Havens,Andy" <havensa at oclc.org>
> Subject: RE: [Web4lib] "The Ultimate Debate: Do Libraries Innovate" at
>        ALAthis month
> To: "Tim Spalding" <tim at librarything.com>,      "web4lib"
>        <web4lib at lists.webjunction.org>
> Message-ID:
>
> <BEFAD900A34FA54AA723C1CF9DBB063AC4DAA8 at OAEXCH4SERVER.oa.oclc.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> What Tim said.
>
> One of the best presentations I ever heard was given by A.G. Lafley, CEO
> of Proctor & Gamble. When asked the secret of P&G's success, he replied
> with one word: failure. He then went on to explain that in his industry,
> each success requires hundreds if not thousands of failures in order to
> identify and, in many cases, invent suitable products for its various
> industries. He went on to say that their goal at P&G was to, "Fail
> often, as inexpensively and humanely as possible, while tracking and
> learning from each failure."
>
> The Beginner's Mind writ large.
>
>
> - A
> Andy Havens
> OCLC: Manager, Branding and Creative Services
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
> [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Tim Spalding
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 8:09 PM
> To: web4lib
> Subject: Re: [Web4lib] "The Ultimate Debate: Do Libraries Innovate" at
> ALAthis month
>
> RE: "How do you separate effective innovation from "innovation for
> innovation's sake"? It's one thing to be innovative to be trendy, and
> quite another thing to be innovative in a way that improves a library's
> services."
>
> But this is true in every single field of human endeavor in which
> innovation happens! Innovation in the software industry, for example, is
> sometimes for the good and sometimes not. What distinguishes libraries
> from some other fields are differing attitudes toward the possibility of
> failure. In Silicon Alley, having burned through millions of VC money in
> a failure is a resume plus, not a minus! Or maybe I should say "risks
> leading to failure," since libraries are okay with gradual failures.
> That, and finely tuned mechanisms for rewarding good innovation and
> killing bad. But maybe that was your point.
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>