In the past few weeks there were a lot of emails posted to a closed discussion list for customers who use Endeavor’s Voyager system that expressed various degrees of dissatisfaction with the software and the company. The discussion grew out of the need for customers to vote on enhancements for the next major release of the software. The list of possible enhancements was pared down quite a bit and another mitigating factor was that the enhancement process had been defunct, basically, for the past few years.
A lot of excellent points were made by many of Endeavor’s customers. Among them was the desire for more open, interactive communication between the company and its customers. One suggestion for improving this communication was for the company to publish a blog. There had been some movement on Endeavor’s part to do this last year but for whatever reason, nothing happened.
Basically what people see as problematic with the software, and how it is supported, parallels in many ways what I’ve heard customers of other systems vendors complain about. Customers feel that basic functionalities aren’t there, that development of improvements is slow to non-existent, that there is an increasing sense of lack of return on investment. Sometimes I get a little frustrated with those who complain so much about Voyager because many of them seem to think that Voyager is far worse than other systems when in fact, it isn’t. Not that it is “the best” or perfect; far from it. But there is a bit too much of the “grass is greener on the other side of the fence” type of thinking. For instance, there is a perception that one main competitor, Aleph 500 from Ex Libris, is a much better product. The fact is, it has its particular strengths but it also has a large number of flaws, and Aleph customers find a lot to complain about, too.
I am not saying that we as customers should just be satisfied with the software we have. Rather, I am saying that we should realize that it’s not just one vendor or one product in the library marketplace that is problematic. As far as I can tell, having worked closely with three or four of the major systems vendors’ products, none of them is even close to being excellent at what they are supposed to do. I strongly believe that we need to continue to push for improvements but also understand a broader perspective about library software and the forces at work in the marketplace. Sometimes we as customers get so caught up in our own pet peeves and widgety functionality that we think is so important, that we completely lose sight of the broader landscape in terms of shifts in technology, in market demand, in user needs and expectations, etc.
The worst part of it is that many of the discussions we have with or about the vendors we use only serve to expose a pretty ugly side to our profession. For years on the closed discussion list for Voyager there has been a small handful of librarians who take every opportunity they can to make this discussion list a stage where they express how much they think they know and how much they despise the company and/or its software. I don’t have a problem with people expressing frustrations and venting in face-to-face venues. I also think a lot of what they have to complain about is legitimate and noteworthy. What I have a huge problem with is the lack of professionalism these individuals show in how they approach the problem. I believe that the dialog between library vendors and customers should be mutually respectful with a focus on issues rather than individuals, and with a balanced perspective of give-and-take. Sadly, in some quarters, this is completely lacking and as a result, the behavior and attitudes of a few librarian colleagues taints the whole profession.
