Members: Lisa Horowitz (convenor), Bill Helman, Heather McCann, Anita Perkins, Darcy Duke

|| Completed || Priority || Locked || CreatedDate || CompletedDate || Assignee || Name ||
| F | M | F | 1256671072510 | | lisah@mit.edu | Follow up with MRG on DRA software (AP) |
| F | M | F | 1256671091280 | | lisah@mit.edu | Explore Google Apps for possibilities (HM) |
| T | M | F | 1256671099801 | 1263220794881 | lisah@mit.edu | Get a LibAnswers trial (LRH) |
| F | M | F | 1256671110505 | | lisah@mit.edu | Explore Questionpoint (BH) |
| T | M | F | 1256671137694 | 1263220791984 | lisah@mit.edu | Explore RT's potential (LRH) |
| T | M | F | 1256671145419 | 1263220798051 | lisah@mit.edu | Explore Hermes potential (LRH) |

1/11/10 Meeting

1. DRA Software (WRDS) is not available as an option. Wharton does not offer it out for other uses.
2. Heather and Bill will investigate Google Apps and QuestionPoint this week.
   1. Google Apps so far looks as though we could add info to Google's KBs, but they do not seem to offer a product that we could use for our own.
   2. QuestionPoint offers a collaborative and a local option. Also incorporates chat tools, screen sharing, and 24/7 collaborative coverage. Bill will investigate pricing model, whether we can redirect into RT, if we can participate without belonging to the collaborative, and whether our staffing model works with the product. (When investigated years ago, the QP product forced a staffing model that we did not have.)
3. Hermes
   1. as offered by IS&T is specifically intended for technical support. We would not be able to make it our sole KB. This means users would have to know when to query which KB.
   2. if we were to obtain the Hermes model (software) and develop our own instance, we would need the staff support to develop the product and to support it.
   3. The interface as it stands is not clean, and it is messy for us to add to it.
4. IS&T has no current plans to incorporate the KB within RT; they have developed Hermes for that purpose.
   1. It is possible that we could query IS&T or Best Practical (who support RT) to help us develop the KB portion for ourselves, but given that it's not our product (it's IS&T's), and that it would still require support, it still does not seem a viable option.
5. LibAnswers offers possibilities.

Benefits of LibAnswers:

• Clean interface.
• Works similarly to LibGuides.
• Inexpensive ($799/year; + $60/year for branding; + $449/year if we choose to use their statistical package)
• We could put all our FAQs into this, and all Q&As from the staff documentation.
• If we can redirect questions into RT, we would have total control over the KB.

Challenges:

• If we cannot redirect into RT, then we would be losing the value of sharing RT with other units and across the Libraries.
• Nothing would be automated; all answers would need to be input by staff.
• Staff time will be required for all answers input, developing questions and maintaining. Dewey's DRA staff model is an example of the kind of staff time that might be required.

||Completed||Priority||Locked||CreatedDate||CompletedDate||Assignee||Name||
|F|M|F|1263230706190|          |lisah@mit.edu|Investigate Google Apps (HM)|
|F|M|F|1263230719824|          |lisah@mit.edu|Investigate QuestionPoint (BH)|
|F|M|F|1263230734442|          |lisah@mit.edu|Share trial of LibAnswers with RISG on 1/20 (group)|