Mixpanel Project Topologies (NDE Analytics)
See Best Practices for Decision Pages and Tags for groups
Legend: not started IN PROGRESS STALLED decided
Status | IN PROGRESS |
|---|---|
Description | As part of the migration to Primo NDE, SILS will need to choose one of two options for managing Primo analytics: “Independent institutions” or “Centralized”. |
Decision summary |
|
Owning group | Discovery |
Approver |
|
Consulted |
|
Informed |
|
Decision-making process | Discussion and consensus |
Priority | Medium |
Target decision date | september 2026 |
Date decided | [type // to add Date] |
Recommendation
Impact
Stakeholder group | Impact |
|---|---|
Discovery |
|
SILS OT | data retention; user privacy |
SILS OC | potential administration |
Reasoning
Background
Mixpanel is a product analytics tool used to track how users interact with a system like NDE. It captures specific actions (events) such as searches, record views, and link clicks, along with contextual details (properties) like institution, resource type, or search scope. This allows libraries to analyze user behavior patterns rather than just aggregate counts, providing insight into how discovery is actually being used.
In an independent model, each institution manages its own Mixpanel setup, defining its own events and data structure, which allows flexibility but results in data that cannot be easily compared across sites. In a centralized model, institutions agree on shared event definitions and tracking standards, enabling cross-institution analysis and reporting, but requiring coordination and limiting local variation.
Independent vs Centralized Mixpanel
This is a data governance and implementation model decision, not just technical setup.
Independent Mixpanel
Each institution runs its own analytics setup.
Structure:
separate Mixpanel projects per IZ
each institution defines its own:
events
properties
dashboards
Implications:
full local control
no required coordination
data is not inherently comparable across institutions
Example:
Berkeley tracks
search_performedDavis tracks
searchExecuted
→ same concept, different data → cannot aggregate cleanly
Centralized Mixpanel
All institutions contribute to a shared analytics model.
Structure:
shared project or coordinated projects
common:
event names
property definitions
tracking logic
Implications:
enables cross-institution comparison
requires agreement and coordination
less local flexibility
Example:
all institutions use
search_performedall include
institution,scope,resource_type
→ data can be aggregated and compared
Core Difference
Aspect | Independent | Centralized |
|---|---|---|
Control | Local | Shared |
Coordination | None | Required |
Data comparability | Low | High |
Flexibility | High | Lower |
Setup complexity | Lower | Higher |
Options Considered
Aspect | Independent Mixpanel | Centralized Mixpanel |
|---|---|---|
Setup effort | Lower; each IZ can implement quickly without coordination | Higher; requires upfront agreement on events, properties, and structure |
Ongoing maintenance | Decentralized; each IZ maintains its own setup | Shared responsibility; changes require coordination |
Flexibility | High; institutions can track whatever they want | Lower; must adhere to shared definitions |
Data consistency | Low; events and properties may differ across IZs | High; standardized schema across all institutions |
Cross-institution comparison | Difficult or unreliable | Straightforward and meaningful |
Governance overhead | Minimal | Significant; requires agreement and change control |
Speed of changes | Fast; local decisions only | Slower; changes may need consortium approval |
Risk of drift over time | High; schemas diverge further | Lower; shared standards reduce drift |
Quality of analytics | Variable; depends on each IZ | More consistent and reliable overall |
Troubleshooting | Localized; easier to isolate issues | More complex; issues may affect multiple IZs |
Long-term value | Limited for consortium-wide insights | Strong for system-wide analysis and decision-making |
Dependencies
Questions to consider
Ex Libris Documentation
Action Log
Action/Point Person | Expected Completion Date | Notes | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|