Continuing Richard’s line of thought
Richard’s post to this blog came just as I was pondering a similar issue of my own; one that is beginning to annoy me more than just a little.
Why, oh why, oh why do we keep polarising these things? ‘Evil vendor’, ‘Good library’. Erm… OCLC? LibLime? Equinox? IndexData? Where do they fit in this insanely polarised view? What about all those library consortia that charge their members money, but ‘do good’ with their ill-gotten gains?
As Richard points out, we all have something to ’sell’; even if it’s just as individuals seeking tenure, promotion, or a renewal of our contract, or as libraries competing with other parts of our organisation for budget, mindshare, or car parking spaces.
So the distinction between ‘commercial’ and non is more than a little misleading, even at the best of times.
As we grapple with big issues around reshaping an ‘industry’, finding a place for libraries and their resources in the world beyond their walls and websites, and delivering meaningful and engaging services to end users in ways that meet their needs rather than ours, the whole us and them thing becomes, frankly, a significant barrier to everyone’s progress.
We need to get an awful lot better at harnessing the capabilities, abilities and experiences of really clever people, regardless of where their paycheque comes from each month. Yes, Talis is a commercial concern, and yes as an employee, shareholder, and Management Team member, I’m obviously interested in ensuring that we succeed in remaining profitable.
I’m also interested - socially and selfishly - in the continuation of the sector; the success of the sector. To ensure that success - and by extension the success of Talis, its customers, (some of!) its competitors, and others - I want to be able to engage in free and frank discussion with others who also care. Some of them will be customers. Some of them won’t. Some of them will be partners. Some of them will be competitors. So what?
And the thing that got me so annoyed? The recent JISC conference. Open to members of further or higher education. Or employees of exhibiting companies. So I have to be one of those who are sold to, or I have to be a seller. I can’t just be an individual or an organisation with stories to tell, paths to travel, and visions to share. So I couldn’t go. And I would have liked to.
We really need to grow up. For vendors, every conversation with a librarian really shouldn’t be an opportunity to plug the latest and greatest product, every conversation with another vendor shouldn’t be the opening salvo in a takeover bid. And for librarians, every conversation with a vendor shouldn’t be you telling them what you want, and asking them how much it’ll cost. There are ideas to share, on both sides, and we do a terribly good job of disrupting that sharing.
Technorati Tags: Indexdata, JISC, LibLime, OCLC, Equinox, Talis
March 29th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Good for you, both of you. I was going to comment on Richard’s blog post, then I saw yours, so treat this as a comment on both.
History has dealt you a difficult hand. How many people speak at conferences for the joy of sharing? More these days than ever before, but there’s still that fundamental assumption on the part of conference organisers that if you’re from a business, you’re going to try and pitch, even when you’re explicitly asked not to.
And, because of this assumption, you’re certainly not paid. But, maybe payment is the answer - get an honorarium, don’t pitch. (Not that you would anyway.)
At least the ‘hirer’ of your time and expertise will feel comfortable knowing they’d ‘bribed’ you not to sell. And you can trouser the cash, happy that you’re being paid to do what you would have done anyway.