| survey discussion |
| Survey report results as of last Friday; 22 responses out of 32 (66% response rate). Next round of survey to go out to NAAN registrants. RS: will there be any changes to the survey? Answer: Yes, if we wish. KW: need to make clear in question about org size how many people in your business are you aware of that use ARKs (eg, participants, employees); ie, how many people actually depend on ARKs? KE: what is the question that we really want answered? RS: Regarding 54% don't assign ARKs, perhaps the question should have three response choices: yes; no, we never have; no, but we used to RS: for Q8, concerned that so few people indicated LYRASIS or DuraSpace membership, which calls into question the strategy of hosting AITO with those organizations; should rework this question because we can't tell who is really "no"; how abouty * only L * only D * both L and D * neither * don't know Q9 Priorities RS: very clear marching orders, seldom is it this clear; shows that promoting ARK understanding and usage is high priority; what is the timing of the next survey? answer: 3 weeks RS: perhaps the starting assumption that for next round, is that orgs will have less current engagement with ARKs JK: results may be skewed by expressions of interest compared to those who have registered; also, some key EOI people didn't fill out the survey RS: let's make sure questions are designed to capture best info, eg, why did you register to use ARKs? For next meeting's agenda * new questions or changes to existing questions for next * how do we distinguish between people who are less engaged or more engaged? |