A slide deck from 1997, illustrating an academic digital library consortium "project" and all of the things that went wrong with "it". More detail on my work website:
http://www.silversprite.com/?page_id=2242
2. LANES: Librarians Astronomy National
Electronic Service
3 partners
Integrated magazine and
subject gateway
Manager at Avonmouth site
1 director from each site
Technical development at
Leafborough site
Funded for 30 months, pilot
and launch in 18 months
3. Months 1 to 6: general faffing around
Project acronym - set up committee to
oversee suggestions for acronym
Project logo - hired graphic designer at
贈3,600 to come up with appropriate logo
rejected all 18 suggestions
project managers 11 year old son knocks up
LANES logo on his PC
4. Month 7: Project manager discovers...
lists of overseas conferences on various
Web sites.
Hmmm. Just do the one event in Honolulu -
they have an observatory there, bound to
bump into an astronomer at some point
5. Months 7 to 9: hiring staff
Interviewed at Avonmouth for a project
assistant, training officer, and end-user liaison
officer
Some very good candidates applied
however, candidates who got the jobs were:
friend of manager from library school days
ex-girlfriend who manager still had a crush
on
ex-convict cousin of manager (record for
actual bodily harm, breach of the peace)
6. Public relations disaster no.1 : email
To: <list name deleted>
From: <name deleted>
oh god not again; Ive just got yet another
request for a report from the JISC office - how
the hell are we supposed to do real work
when bombarded with report requests; what
can we fob them off with this time?
7. Months 10 to 14: getting down to work...
Many meetings held between Avonmouth and
Clydebank
Much late night discussion over a pint and
curry on the future of astronomical resource
access
Manager and directors ignore JISC organised
meetings and development workshops as
they clash with overseas events
Meanwhiletechnical staff at Leafborough
working furiously to build something
8. Months 15 to17: the consortium starts to
crack...
Technical staff not invited to meetings to
discuss technical implementations
One-way communication (management to
technical staff) regarding tasks and progress
Technical staff aggrieved at working 65 hour
weeks while manager jaunts around the world
Month 13 - technical staff headhunted by city
firm paying 3 times wages...
9. Public relations disaster no.2 : the launch
Spent 2,000 pounds on hiring celebrity to
launch the system
Lots of mock-ups and impressive powerpoint
slides...
but no system
Upon questioning, manager explains that pilot
system ready in a few weeks
10. Months 19 to 24: getting something
working...
Budget shot to pieces after launch - cannot
hire good technical staff to finish behind-
schedule pilot
got undergraduate students to do it as part
of their coursework; dodgy programming
ensues...
pilot system finished - but works only if:
you dont add any content
you dont delete any content
you dont change any content
11. Month 25: half-baked pilot system
launched...
Pilot appears - with all credit, appearance,
accountability going to Avonmouth University
Clydebank University throw a wobbler (What
about our input?) and pull out of the
consortium - nasty letters sent to the JISC
office
Party amongst the remaining staff (3) to
celebrate the launch
12. Month 26: shit, we need an exit strategy,
quick
Chickens coming home to roost
Manager and directors hadnt kept up with
technical developments (too many trips
elsewhere)...
LANES worked only on 1999 protocol and
standards technologies
consequently, cannot find partners to
collaborate with for e.g. interoperability, joint
bids for funding leading edge developments
13. Public relations disaster no.3 : copyright
Magazine had an article from another magazine, from
an author who claimed it was his own work
Magazine also contained an article slandering another
project
LANES hadnt investigated copyright implications
or checked factual accuracy of articles
Consequence - legal problems...
and vitriolic slanging match on public mailing list
14. Month 29 (of 30, remember): evaluation of
pilot
Team works out evaluation strategy, based on
the use of the system
Logs of the system are checked
to find that they have had 43 users in 3
months (of which 41 had only looked at it to
see how slanderous the infamous article was)
Reason: Pilot system launched with no
publicity or dissemination
15. Month 30: Dubious evaluation
Project managers family, friends, contact,
students, undergraduates, office cleaners etc.
press - ganged into using the system
Evaluation of the results indicates that either
the pilot system was bewildering, or the
testers did not have very good knowledge of
astronomy...
16. Lessons
all of the incidents in this presentation have
happened to various UK digital library
projects. Names have been changed or
omitted because legals.
Lessons to be learned: 1 of 1:
Communication
17. Take Heart
No matter how badly your VRE project is
doing
- there is always a Lottery funded project
somewhere that is doing worse