INNOPAC library system’s performance

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

System librarians of five GAELIC libraries, two FRELICO libraries and three libraries in the Southern African region

System librarians provide technical support to staff, as well as the end-users of the system. They should to be conversant with all the modules to effectively provide assistance. This group was chosen to provide information on the system’s performance, the benefits derived from using the system and on the ways in which they used the support system provided by the vendor. In addition, system librarians were asked to comment on pitfalls to look out for during the implementation of the INNOPAC library system. In addition to GAELIC and FRELICO’s system librarians, BCA, NUST and UNAM’s system librarians were purposely selected to provide the information described above.
The libraries chosen are located in Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe and were used because they are in the Southern African region, and are similar to Lesotho libraries in terms of size, budget and types of clientele served. They were among the first to implement the INNOPAC library system. They can provide valuable insight into the general performance of the system and highlight problems and resolutions. System librarians are responsible for the overall management of a system and are considered the best candidates to provide information on the overall performance of the INNOPAC
library system.In addition to GAELIC and FRELICO’s system librarians, BCA, NUST and UNAM’s system librarians were purposely selected to provide the information described above.
The libraries chosen are located in Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe and were used because they are in the Southern African region, and are similar to Lesotho libraries in terms of size, budget and types of clientele served. They were among the first to implement the INNOPAC library system. They can provide valuable insight into the general performance of the system and highlight problems and resolutions. System librarians are responsible for the overall management of a system and are considered the best candidates to provide information on the overall performance of the INNOPAC library system.In addition to GAELIC and FRELICO’s system librarians, BCA, NUST and UNAM’s system librarians were purposely selected to provide the information described above. The libraries chosen are located in Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe and were used because they are in the Southern African region, and are similar to Lesotho libraries in terms of size, budget and types of clientele served. They were among the first to implement the INNOPAC library system. They can provide valuable insight into the general performance of the system and highlight problems and resolutions. System librarians are responsible for the overall management of a system and are considered the best candidates to provide information on the overall performance of the INNOPAC library system.

Questionnaires

A questionnaire is defined as a data collection technique through which people are asked to respond to the same set of questions in a pre-determined order (Gray, 2004: 187). Besides the advantage of allowing for wide coverage, questionnaires save a lot of time and effort since a single set of questions is duplicated and sent to many respondents. According to Gray (2004: 187), and Bryman (2001: 127), questionnaires are less costly and allow respondents to complete them at a time and place that suits them, thereby limiting any interference and bias that could be caused by the presence of the researcher. Several disadvantages are associated with this data collection technique. Bennett (2003: 59), Bryman (2001: 127), and Gray (2004: 187) contend that the drawbacks of a questionnaire are:
• low response rate;
• difficulty in probing respondents since personal contact is lost;
• no allowance for respondents to ask questions should clarity be needed; and
• greater risk of missing data.

READ  Challenges of Canaanite Identity

Some of the drawbacks raised above are addressed in this study by making questions as clear and unambiguous as possible. The questionnaires were preceded by a short explanation of the aims and objectives of the research. This gave respondents an insight into the study and elicited relevant and useful data. The questionnaires were as brief as possible so that respondents did not lose interest and thus fail to answer questions. The questionnaires also provided space for comments and suggestions for respondents to provide additional information.
A set of five questionnaires were prepared and administered to:
• GAELIC and FRELICO library heads;
• GAELIC and FRELICO systems managers;
• GAELIC librarians who use different library modules;
• LELICO library heads; and
• Systems managers in three institutions from other Southern African countries using the INNOPAC library system.
All questionnaires were pre-tested to ensure that they captured the requisite information. It was envisaged that there would be issues that require clarification during the pretesting.
The instruments were then adjusted accordingly to accommodate the necessary changes.

CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.2 Statement of the problem
1.3 Methodology
1.4 Significance of the study
1.5 Limitations
1.6 Definitions of terms
1.7 Chapter outline
1.8 Conclusion
CHAPTER TWO – LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Motivation for library co-operation
2.3 Library co-operation in developed countries
2.4 Library co-operation in developing countries
2.5 Success factors in the management of a library consortium
2.6 Limitations and challenges facing library consortia
2.7 Systems in libraries
2.8 Evaluation of library systems
2.9 Conclusion
CHAPTER THREE – RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
3.2 General perspective
3.3 Research design
3.4 Target Groups
3.5 Sampling techniques
3.6 Data collection methods
3.7 Issues relating to data quality
3.8 Data analysis and interpretation
3.9 Conclusion
CHAPTER FOUR – DATA ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction
4.2 INNOPAC library system’s performance
4.3 Performance of the INNOPAC library system in three selected libraries in other Southern African countries
4.4 Impact of the INNOPAC library system on libraries
4.5 Cost-benefit analysis of the INNOPAC library system
4.6 Benefits of consortium membership
4.7 Centralised and decentralised server models
4.8 Analysis on LELICO
4.9 Conclusion
CHAPTER FIVE – INTERPRETATION OF DATA
5.1 Introduction
5.2 The INNOPAC library system performance in GAELLIC, FRELICO and three institutions in other Southern African countries
5.3 Benefits of consortium membership
5.4 Experiences on central and decentralised system server models
5.5 LELICO automation status and its system requirements
5.6 Conclusions
CHAPTER SIX – IMPLEMENTING LELICO COMMON LIBRARY SYSTEM
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Lessons learned from the Southern African region
6.3 A proposal for implementing the LELICO common library system
6.4 Functions and features of the system
6.5 System management structure
6.6 Mode of operation
6.7 Adapting the INNOPAC library system to the specific requirements of a small consortium in a developing country
6.8 An INNOPAC-based ‘virtual consortium’ for the Southern African region
6.9 Conclusion
CHAPTER SEVEN – CONCLUSION
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Findings
7.3 Recommendations
7.4 Suggestions for future research
7.5 Conclusion
REFERENCES

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT

Related Posts