Moving
d2d
to the
network
level
Lorcan Dempsey
OCLC
Rethinking access to
information,
IFLA Satellite
Meeting,
Boston, August 5-7
2008
Early television history museum, Columbus Oh
Credits
I am grateful to colleagues Ed O’Neill, Constance
Malpas, Katie Birch and Jim Michalko for some
slides, and to Dennis Massie and Matt Goldner for
additional advice. Sam Smith did the network
pictures.
OhioLink data from work in progress analysing
historic circ data. Collaboration between OCLC
and OhioLink.
Scott Wilson picture from his blog:
WOBL – One Big Library on the Web. Influenced
by Dan Chudnov’s phrase, One Big Library.
NETWORK EVOLUTION
1. Print network: distribution to libraries which are
close to users; good libraries are big libraries
because access=collocation (80s)
2. Resource sharing. Cataloging/resource
sharing/ejournals externalized to specialist
services (90s-00s)
3. WOBL (one big library on the web). Library
resource available in the idiom of the web (00s-
). Global discovery/request supported by well-
seamed logistics. Seamless policy-aware
interaction between local, group, global.
SOME NUMBERS
Total Interlibrary Borrowing / Total Fulltime Students
1990s: +96%
1980s: +68%
At a Tier I ARL institution…
1.8
Implementation of new local system puts
1.6 OPAC access on hold; reliance on
national union catalog increases visibility
1.4 of collective collection -- temporarily
Borrowing transactions per full-time student
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
Information needs continue to exceed
0.2 local collection capacity, even at the
best-resourced institutions
0
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
ARL Tier I Median ARL
At a Tier III ARL institution…
7
6
Borrowing transactions per full-time student
5
Increased vulnerability to changes in
information environment
limited purchasing power
4 limited local infrastructure
3
Consortial lift …
On demand research request
2
1
0
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
ARL Tier III Median ARL
OHIOLINK
Subject Distribution
Anthropology
Chemistry
Physical Education and Recreation
Computer Science
Agriculture
Performing Arts
Psychology
Mathematics
Music
Geography and Earth Sciences
Physical Sciences
Biological Sciences
Library Science, Generalities, and
Political Science
Education
Art and Architecture
Engineering and Technology
Medicine
Sociology
Law
Philosophy and Religion
Business and Economics
History and Auxiliary Sciences
Language, Linguistics, and Literature
0 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000
Circulation by Subject
Law
Library Science, Generalities, and Reference
Geography and Earth Sciences
Political Science
Business and Economics
Language, Linguistics, and Literature
Agriculture
History and Auxiliary Sciences
Physical Sciences
Philosophy and Religion
Biological Sciences
Engineering and Technology
Education
Chemistry
Music
Performing Arts
Art and Architecture
Mathematics
Anthropology
Medicine
Physical Education and Recreation
Sociology
Psychology
Computer Science
0 1 2 3 4
Hot Subjects
Computer Science (QA 75-76)
Women, Feminism, Life Skills, Life
Style (HQ 1101-2044)
Medicine: Special Subjects (R 690-
920)
Buddhism (BQ)
Nursing (RT)
Broadcasting (PN 1990-1992)
Usage Distribution
100%
% of Circulation
80%
60%
40%
20%
12.86%
(788,483)
0%
0.001% 0.010% 0.100% 1.000% 10.000% 100.000%
% of Books
THE LONG TAIL
Library “Inventory”
20% head 80% long tail
Libraries aggregate supply at the local level…
“About the only places you could explore outside the
mainstream were the library and the comic book shop.”
Chris Anderson, “The Long Tail”
The long tail
Systemwide
efficiences
Aggregation of supply
•Unified discovery
•Low transaction costs
Aggregation of demand
Impact?
Libraries and the long tail dynamic
Aggregate supply? Aggregate demand?
1.7% of circulations are ILLs 20% of collection accounted
(60% of aggregate G5 for 90% of use
collection owned by one (2 research libraries over ~4
library only) years)
But the global library resource is diffused
across thousands of locations …
Limited aggregation of supply at network level:
Fragmented discovery
Management data not used
High transaction costs – find it/get it
Fragmented inventory/shipping
Limited aggregation of demand at network level:
Difficult to mobilize a large number of users
Not projected into user environments
Leads to weak gravitational pull and low
network visibility for libraries and library
collections
WorldCat Local and Resource Sharing
University of Washington July-Dec. 2006/2007
70% increase in
borrowing within
Summit consortium
100% increase in ILL
requests via
WorldCat
Orbis Cascade
WorldCat Group catalog on .org
Navigator
VDX for intra-
consortia requesting
Circulation
interoperability
OCLC network
Behaviors in
THE NETWORK AGE
Then: Users built workflow around
libraries
Now: Library must build
services around user
workflow
Discovery happens
elsewhere
Use benefits from visibility Disclosure
Then: Attention abundant;
resources scarce
Now: Attention scarce;
resources abundant
Google
Facebook
Google
Facebook
LibraryThing
Phase Discovery Logistics
Print network Local Cumbersome
Resource sharing Union catalog Local/Group/Global
Discover/locate/
request may be
intermittent
WOBL Discovery Cloud based
elsewhere: logistics:
Aggregate demand
Aggregate supply:
Greater aggregate location/tracking/ac
presence counting
Request anywhere Move to collective
collection ….
COLLECTIVE COLLECTION
Discovery
D2D logistics
Inventory logistics
Collective collection
• Visibility drives demand: discovery is global
• Pressure on space
• Mass digitization
• Rationalisation of off-site storage
• Preservation of print becomes a big issue
• ‘Optimal overlap’
– Yano/Ithaka work
– 2:13; 6:0
IFM
http://orweblog.oclc.org
THANK YOU