| 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? |
