Comments for Lib(rary) Performance

Comment on About by Sian Brannon

Sian Brannon — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 13:57:00 +0000

Another reference for you: http://libraryjuicepress.com/blog/?p=2756
“Some objections to our use of library statistics” by Rory Litwin.
He makes some interesting points about incompatible data comparisons and how just trying to increase your stats can affect teaching styles.

Comment on About by Sian Brannon

Sian Brannon — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 19:04:45 +0000

Mr. Lyons-
Have you seen the new book “Proofiness” by Charles Seife? It is about the falsehood of numbers, and part deals with statistics. I think you might like it. I do! I follow your sites and have enjoyed your musings. Like you, I enjoy statistics and libraries. I even used some of your writings in a literature review! Woohoo!
Sian Brannon

Comment on A Preponderance of the Evidence by raylyons

raylyons — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:25:57 +0000

Thanks for your comments, Kerry!

Based on the understanding of evidence-based medicine I’ve gained from exploratory reading in that area, its main function is to improve clinical decisions in order to improve patient health. So, certainly, your re-phrasing this to apply to libraries seems just fine. The point is that this EBM as an approach values impartiality. Underlying that I suppose is the value that patient welfare should be first, and that balanced and impartial views of potential treatment steps are a requirement. So, having a a bias or up-front agenda (whether this be favoring a particular treatment in EBM or ‘showing’ a library’s value in EBLIP) is not an impartial position.

As to whether ‘evidence-based librarianshop’ can ‘ever be’, Glen Holt, editor of Public Library Quarterly, has campaigning constantly to get librarianship to begin amassing a sound body of research-supported knowledge that can guide practice. So, I think EBLIP, by whatever label it might be known, needs to be a professional aim.

I suspect that library management and programming is not nearly as detailed and specific as health care. We many fewer client “types” than health care, I suspect. That is, our clientele cannot be segmented into categories analogous to the myriad of diagnoses/illnesses
the medicine has. Thus, our treatment protocols, if you will, will not be nearly as numerous.

Comment on A Preponderance of the Evidence by Kerry

Kerry — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:32:55 +0000

So, based on your argument, can there even be such a thing as “evidence-based librarianship?”

You say that “[t]he function of evidence-based medicine is not to promote or commend physicians’ decisions, but rather to inform them. The practice has no agenda other than to help improve clinical decisions and patient health.” Could we modify this to say the following?:
“The function of evidence-based librarianship is not to promote or commend librarians’ decisions, but rather to inform them. The practice has no agenda other than to help improve decisions about library service delivery in order to meet patrons’ needs.”

Comment on A Preponderance of the Evidence by John Hunter

John Hunter — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 20:22:13 +0000

Applying management principles is so complex that what is called the same thing (whatever it might be called six sigma, lean manufacturing, TQM, evidenced based management…) in two companies are often incredibly different.

I don’t think it is really possible to use a title of a program to say an organization is managed well. I believe in Deming’s management ideas. But companies saying they are using those ideas is often not very close to the actual ideas. And I think that is true for whatever the management style is called.

Comment on Technology 2.0 by Yani

Yani — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:46:07 +0000

It’s absolutely amazing how we all get to watch technology grow in every conceivable direction. I found some interesting predictions about the direction of future technology at pandalous. They’re here: http://www.pandalous.com/nodes/technology_what_are_you

Comment on Down to Business by Jim Arter

Jim Arter — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:00:37 +0000

There is no doubt that Arts & Culture contribute to the health and well being of any community, state and country. However, a focus on the arts as a mere source of revenue and financial gain for any group is shortsighted myopic tunnel-vision. The primary purpose of the arts is self expression that provides joy, meaning, and new perspectives on the lives we are living. If profit and financial gain are side bars of works of art so be it, all the better. But let us not confuse filling our bank accounts with fueling our spirits and enhancing quality of life. The power and richness of the arts goes beyond the cost of a front row seat or someone sitting in the balcony. Art like the rain can nuture all who thirst for beauty and goodness regardless of the cost of admission or profit gained by the impresario

Comment on Objects in Mirror Are Closer Than They Appear by raylyons

raylyons — Tue, 26 May 2009 17:28:23 +0000

Of course you are correct, Dheeraj! On one level, my message is that people shouldn’t be mystified by figures, attributing more precision to them than they really have. (Especially business profit and loss statements!) On another level my message is that “everything is relative–including the idea that everything is relative!” Like Godel’s theorem. As for the 3 repetitions, I offer them more as incantations than emphases–though I suppose those boil down to the same thing, huh?

Comment on Objects in Mirror Are Closer Than They Appear by Dheeraj Kattula

Dheeraj Kattula — Mon, 25 May 2009 20:26:34 +0000

“There are no such things as hard facts and figures. There are no such things as hard facts and figures. There are no such things…”

Are you not saying this as a Hard fact? Repeating it thrice for emphasizing the hardness.

Comment on Objects in Mirror Are Closer Than They Appear by Dheeraj Kattula

Dheeraj Kattula — Tue, 05 May 2009 22:48:40 +0000

You are absolutely right.
Validity of a test is more important than Reliability/ Repeatability.