2nd Hong Kong Innovative Users Annual Meeting Results of Programme Evaluation Programme organization Grade Responses Percent Graph 25 34% 32 43% 15 20% 2 3% 0 0% Total Number of Responses: 74 Programme publicity Grade Responses Percent Graph 15 21% 30 42% 25 35% 2 3% 0 0% Total Number of Responses: 72 Days for the programme Grade Responses Percent Graph 12 16% 22 30% 36 49% 2 3% 2 3% Total Number of Responses: 74 Time for presentations by individual libraries Grade Responses Percent Graph 7 9% 27 36% 35 47% 5 7% 0 0% Total Number of Responses: 74 Time for group discussions Grade Responses Percent Graph 5 7% 19 27% 31 44% 13 18% 3 4% Total Number of Responses: 71 Time for presentations by III Grade Responses Percent Graph 11 15% 20 27% 33 45% 7 9% 3 4% Total Number of Responses: 74 Time for Q & A sessions Grade Responses Percent Graph 3 4% 16 22% 28 38% 19 26% 7 10% Total Number of Responses: 73 Presentations by individual libraries Grade Responses Percent Graph 22 30% 29 39% 20 27% 3 4% 0 0% Total Number of Responses: 74 Group discussions Grade Responses Percent Graph 8 11% 26 37% 29 41% 4 6% 3 4% Total Number of Responses: 70 Presentations by III Grade Responses Percent Graph 8 11% 19 26% 35 48% 6 8% 5 7% Total Number of Responses: 73 Q & A sessions by III Grade Responses Percent Graph 5 7% 16 23% 31 44% 12 17% 7 10% Total Number of Responses: 71 Location Grade Responses Percent Graph 41 55% 21 28% 9 12% 2 3% 1 1% Total Number of Responses: 74 Audio-Visual facilities Grade Responses Percent Graph 46 62% 24 32% 4 5% 0 0% 0 0% Total Number of Responses: 74 Air conditioning Grade Responses Percent Graph 27 36% 31 42% 12 16% 4 5% 0 0% Total Number of Responses: 74 Conference lunch Grade Responses Percent Graph 10 16% 15 24% 27 44% 8 13% 2 3% Total Number of Responses: 62 Refreshments Grade Responses Percent Graph 9 13% 20 28% 31 44% 9 13% 2 3% Total Number of Responses: 71 Additional Comments and Suggestions It may not be feasible for the size of the conference to have separate presentations targeted on difference audience, however, it would be good to have something such as ""round table"" discussion on systems administration designated to systems staff who would be more interested in ""behind the scene"" implementation. The conference was well organized and went very smoothly." Too much time was spent on III's presentation and introducing their product and services. Miss Katrina Anderson's presentation was indeed very detail. But I wonder how many participants are actual regular contacts who would use her team's services. Although group discussion was arranged this year. And each group was given the opportunity to voice out and share their experience and difficulties in their own area of works with other participants. But more time is still needed. Don't put UGC library presentation after III presentatio & QA session. The theme of HKIUG should be on their input, not to show our inhouse development. Let them have a chance to answer our questions one by one. Otherwise, why do we need to prepare the list so earlier ?" Suggest to revise the structure: One day per module for: 1. Q&A by III (arrange at least 2 hour for III representative to publicize questions they received and present the answers in the venue), 2. Group discussion for users, 3. Hand-on seminars on their new products" Why is it called IUG meeting ? Some of the presentation topics have nothing to do with the INNOPAC system. I prefer to include topics of various areas that are of interest to librarians than just INNOPAC.  Some presentations by individual libraries are impressive while those presented by III are rather business in nature. The Q&A sessions by III are too short that most of the problems encountered by the libraries are unanswered. Though III promised to send replies to the libraries concerned individually, other libraries may encounter the similar problems as well. " Overall, the Conference was very successful and the venue and organisation was very good. However, we do not need III just to have sales talks but to give us indepth information into new products and developments. We also need time to discuss our own problems with them with people available who have the expertise and provide answers to questions and problems. We do not need III to give us an overview of the company and their maintenance staff but need concrete answers to questions. A request came from the management to group talks on new developments and products together in order for Directors to attend and not waste time. " Thank You! I thought it was great. Nice opportunity to learn more about our vendor plus see what others are doing in the area. Tony Ferguoson I hope to see a few examples in the presentations by III. Cataloging Internet Resources