Library Automation Challenges for the Next Generation

							             Next-generation
             technologies for public
             libraries


                          Marshall Breeding
                          Director for Innovative Technologies and Research
                          Vanderbilt University
                          http://staffweb.library.vanderbilt.edu/breeding
Friday October 3, 2008
                          http://www.librarytechnology.org/
Syracuse, NY
Summary
This keynote session will help conference attendees
  think beyond the present & consider the kinds of
  features that libraries should expect in the next
  generation of automation systems. Breeding will
  discuss some of the broad trends that public
  libraries need to take into consideration as they
  build their technology infrastructure and their Web
  presence. He will include libraries' need to
  continually challenge their automation vendor
  partners to develop technologies that will help them
  fulfill their strategic mission in a rapidly evolving
  world.
Proposed topic
   In this keynote session, Marshall Breeding aims to help conference attendees think
    beyond the present and consider the kinds of features that libraries should expect in the
    next generation of automation systems.
   Delivering relevant services to library patrons has never been more challenging than in
    today’s times. Libraries compete for the attention of their ever more Web-savvy users in
    an ever more crowded landscape of information providers. Generational transitions have
    an impact on libraries: what types of services can a library offer to appeal to the
    members of millennial generation that don’t conflict with the needs of older library
    patrons? We’re seeing a new generation of library interfaces emerge that aims to deliver
    library content and services on the Web through a more modern approach that can be
    used effectively by both Web experts and novices.
   Breeding will discuss some of the broad trends that public libraries need to take into
    consideration as they build their technology infrastructure and their Web presence. We
    live in a phase of library automation characterized by demand for a more modern
    approach, especially on the user interface. The new generation of library automation
    makes several important departures from what came before. Web 2.0 continues to
    receive a lot of attention and has become an important ingredient in the new library
    interfaces, but should be considered in the context of other strategic technologies.
   Libraries need to continually challenge their automation vendor partners to develop
    technologies that will help them fulfill their strategic mission in a rapidly evolving world.
Library Technology
Guides
   http://www.librarytechnology.org
   Repository for library automation data
   Lib-web-cats tracks 37,000 libraries and the
    automation systems used.
    – Expanding to include more international scope
   Announcements and developments made by
    companies and organizations involved in
    library automation technologies
               Recent Upheavals
                    Industry Consolidation continues
                    Abrupt transitions for major library
                     automation products
                    Increased industry control by external
                     financial investors
                    Demise of the traditional OPAC
                    Frustration with ILS products and vendors
                    Open Source alternatives hit the
                     mainstream

Breeding, Marshall: Perceptions 2007 an international survey of library automation.
http://www.librarytechnology.org/perceptions2007.pl January 2008.
LJ Automation System
Marketplace
Annual Industry report published in Library
    Journal:
   2008:   Opportunity out of turmoil
   2007:   An industry redefined
   2006:   Reshuffling the deck
   2005:   Gradual evolution
   2004:   Migration down, innovation up
   2003:   The competition heats up
   2002:   Capturing the migrating customer
             ILS Industry in Transition

                Consolidation through mergers and
                 acquisitions have resulted in a fewer
                 number of players; larger companies
                Uncomfortable level of product narrowing
                Increased ownership by external interests
                Yet: Some companies and products continue
                 on solid ground

Breeding, Marshall “Automation system marketplace 2008: Opportunity Out of Turmoil”
Library Journal. April 1, 2008.
Library Automation M&A
History
Polaris in Context
   Focused on Public Libraries in the United States and
    Canada
   Has survived multiple generations of legacy system
    turnovers
    –   Model C Book Charger (1930)
    –   Gaylord System 100 Circulation (1975)
    –   GS 3000 Catalog Management System (1984)
    –   Gaylord System 400 Circulation (1988)
    –   Spectrum 400
    –   SuperCAT (1988)
    –   Galaxy (1988)
    –   Polaris (1997)
Product and Technology
Trends
   High demand for Innovation
   Conventional approach to the ILS
    under siege
   Proliferation of products related to e-
    content management
   New genre of discovery-layer
    interfaces
Public Library Emphasis
   Much more emphasis on physical collections than
    academic libraries
   In-person service valued: high touch vs high tech
   Diversity of users: full range of tech proficiencies as
    well as other demographics
    – Technical offerings must be accessible by all
   Need to share materials efficiently among branches
   High emphasis on resource sharing (consortial and
    regional borrowing)
Resource Sharing
   Very high demand to supplement local
    collections through multiple layers of
    resource sharing
   City / County Collaborations (some)
   Regional
   State-wide
   Exploring new models: shared ILS,
    distributed systems, union catalogs, virtual
    catalogs.
Combine and
Consolidate?
   What is the ideal configuration to use an ILS?
    – Single Library (including branches)
    – Shared regional system
    – Statewide ILS?
   Trend toward increased numbers of facilities
    sharing an ILS
    – Several examples of multiple consortia combining to share
      one ILS implementation
    – Many initiatives toward statewide ILS implementations
    – Internationally: some country-wide ILS implementations
      (e.g. COBISS in Slovenia)
   The days of the one-library ILS are fading
Scalability?

   The viable size of an implementation
    not as much an issue as in earlier
    phases of computing
   Hardware scales almost infinitely
   Major ILS products scale almost
    infinitely
Opportunities for the
underserved
   Many libraries in the United States operate with no
    automation system or use PC-based systems with
    no Web access or resource sharing options
   Many libraries run outdated systems
   Current models put automation out of the reach of
    public libraries with small local tax base
   Large-scale automation efforts can offer affordable
    (or free) access to these libraries
   Compare: Number of un-automated public libraries
    in the UK: 1
Web 2.0 / Collaborative
Computing
   Currently implemented ad hoc
   Many libraries putting up blogs, wikis, and
    fostering engagement in social networking
    sites
   Proliferation of silos with no integration or
    interoperability with larger library Web
    presence
   Next Gen: Build social and collaborative
    features into core automation components
Results of industry
turmoil
   Disruptions and business decisions to
    narrow options have caused major shifts in
    the library automation industry
   fueled the open source movement and
    created a huge market for companies
    supporting open source ILS
   Influx of business towards companies with
    reliable track record
   Traditionally licensed and open source ILS
    alternatives will coexist in the ILS arena
Open Source ILS enters
the mainstream
   Earlier era of pioneering efforts to ILS
    shifting into one where open source
    alternatives fall in the mainstream
   Off-the-shelf, commercially supported
    product available
   Still a minority player, but gaining
    ground
    – Next LJ Automation System Marketplace
      article will update the score
Impact of Open Source
ILS
   Library automation industry cannot be
    complacent
   Some libraries moving from traditionally
    licensed products to open source products
    with commercial support plans
   Disruption of ILS industry
    – new pressures on incumbent vendors to deliver
      more innovation and to satisfy concerns for
      openness
   New competition / More options
More Open Systems
   Pressure for traditionally licensed products to become more
    open
   APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) let libraries access
    and manipulate their data outside of delivered software
   A comprehensive set of APIs potentially give libraries more
    flexibility and control in accessing data and services and in
    extending functionality than having access to the source code.
   Customer access to APIs does not involve as much risk to
    breaking core system functions, avoids issues of version
    management and code forking associated with open source
    models.
Opportunity out of the
Upheavals
   More options
    – Commercial + Open Source
   More vendors
    – New open source support companies provide
      new competition
   More library involvement
    – Libraries re-energized to make significant
      contributions to the body of library automation
      software
   Traditionally licensed and open source
    automation systems will co-exist. We have
    an interest in the success of both
    alternatives.
Next-Generation Library
Interfaces
or... Delivering tomorrow what we
needed yesterday
     Troubling statistic
       Where do you typically begin
        your search for information on
        a particular topic?
       College Students Response:
        89% Search engines (Google 62%)
        2% Library Web Site (total respondents -> 1%)
        2% Online Database
        1% E-mail
        1% Online News
        1% Online bookstores
        0% Instant Messaging / Online Chat



OCLC. Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources
(2005) p. 1-17.
         Usage + / - from 2005 to
         2007
                                       +5%

                                                                   -10%
                                                +30%




           +14%
                                        “The unfortunate exception is
                                        the use of library Web sites;
                                        usage has dropped from 2005 to
                 +19%
                                        2007.”
Source: Sharing, Privacy and Trust in our Networked World. OCLC 2007
Crowded Landscape of
Information Providers on
the Web
   Lots of non-library Web destinations deliver
    content to library patrons
    –   Google Scholar
    –   Amazon.com
    –   Wikipedia
    –   Ask.com
   Do Library Web sites and catalogs meet the
    information needs of our users?
   Do they attract their interest?
The Competition
The best Library OPAC?
Better?
Better?
Better?
Demand for compelling
library interfaces
   Urgent need for libraries to offer
    interfaces their users will like to use
   Move into the current millennium
   Powerful search capabilities in tune
    with how the Web works today
   Meet user expectations set by other
    Web destination
Inadequacy of ILS OPACs

   Most Online Catalog modules provided
    with an ILS subject to broad criticism
    as failing to meet expectations of
    growing segments of library patrons.
   Not great at delivering electronic
    content
   Complex text-based interfaces
   Relatively weak keyword search
    engines
Interesting Note
   Vary large numbers of libraries running Unicorn,
    Horizon, Millennium, Aleph, Voyager have elected
    to replace or supplement the integrated OPAC with
    another product.
   Very few libraries using Polaris have elected to
    supplement its Online Catalog module with a third-
    party application
    – Longview Public Library
    – Ouachita Parish Public Library
   Phoenix Public – Already had Endeca-based catalog
    in place when they selected Polaris to replace Carl
Disjointed approach to
information and service
delivery
   Books: Library OPAC (ILS module)
   Articles: Aggregated content products, e-
    journal collections
   OpenURL linking services
   E-journal finding aids (Often managed by
    link resolver)
   Local digital collections
    – Photographic collections, local history, genealogy
      resources, etc.
   Metasearch engines
Change underway
   Widespread frustration with most of the current
    OPACs. Many efforts toward next-generation
    catalogs and interfaces.
   Movement among libraries to break out of the
    current mold of library catalogs and offer new
    interfaces better suited to the expectations of
    library users.
   Decoupling of the front-end interface from the
    back-end library automation system when
    necessary
   Eventual redesign of the ILS to be better suited for
    current library collections of digital and print
    content
Next-Generation
Interfaces:
Scope and Concepts
Working toward a new
generation of library
interfaces
   Redefinition of the “library catalog”
   Traditional notions of the library
    catalog questioned
   Better information delivery tools
   More powerful search capabilities
   More elegant presentation
Redefining the “catalog”
   More comprehensive information discovery
    environments
   It’s no longer enough to provide a catalog limited to
    print resources
   Digital resources cannot be an afterthought
   Systems designed for e-content only are also
    problematic
   Forcing users to use different interfaces depending
    on type of content becoming less tenable
   Libraries working toward consolidated user
    environments that give equal footing to digital and
    print resources
Comprehensive Search
Service
   Current distributed query model of
    federated search model not adequate
   Expanded scope of search through
    harvested content
    – Consolidated search services based on metadata
      and data gathered in advance (like Open
      Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata
      Harvesting or OAI-PMH)
   Problems of scale diminished
   Problems of cooperation persist
   Federated search currently operates as a
Web 2.0 Flavorings

   Strategic infrastructure + Web 2.0
   A more social and collaborative
    approach
   Web Tools and technology that foster
    collaboration
   Integrated blogs, wiki, tagging, social
    bookmarking, user rating, user
    reviews
   Avoid Web 2.0 information silos
The Ideal Scope for Next
Gen Library Interfaces
   Unified user experience
   A single point of entry into all the
    content and services offered by the
    library
   Print + Electronic
   Local + Remote
   Locally created Content
   Integrated resource sharing: local >
    consortium > global (OCLC?)
Interface Features / User
Experience
   Simple point of entry
    – Optional advanced search
   Relevancy ranked results
   Facets for narrowing and navigation
   Query enhancement – spell check, etc
   Suggested related results
   Navigational bread crumbs
   Enriched visual and textual content
   Single Sign-on
Relevancy Ranking

   Web users expect relevancy ordered results
   The “good stuff” should be listed first
   Users tend not to delve deep into a result
    list
   Good relevancy requires a sophisticated
    approach, including objective matching
    criteria supplemented by popularity and
    relatedness factors.
New Paradigm for search
and navigation
   Let users drill down through the result set
    incrementally narrowing the field
   Faceted Browsing
    – Drill-down vs up-front Boolean or “Advanced
      Search”
    – gives the users clues about the number of hits in
      each sub topic
    – Ability to explore collections without a priori
      knowledge
   Visual search tools
Query / Result
Enhancement
   “Did you mean?” and other features to
    avoid “No results found”
   Validated Spell check
   Automatic inclusion of authorized and
    related terms
   More like this – recommendation
    service
   Make the query and the response to it
    better than the query provided
Enriched content
   Rich visual information: book jacket images, rating scores,
    etc.
   Syndetic Solutions ICE ($$$$)
   Amazon Web Service (AWS)
     – Recent changes in term of use seem to preclude
       use by libraries
   Google Book Search API
     – Released March 13, 2008
     – Liberal terms of use
   No open content approach (yet)
      Personalization / Single
      Sign-on
   Customized content and service options based on
    personal preference and profile of user
   Persistent sign-on – horizontal and vertical
    – Seamless navigation in and out of appropriate sub-systems
           ILL / ILS patron requests, federated search, proxy services
    – Credentials follow as user navigates among Web site
      components
    – ILS / Interlibrary Loan / proxy services / shopping cart / etc
    – Carry sign-on into and out of institutional resources
   Ability to select and save content; initiate requests;
    customize preferences, etc.
      Deep search
   Entering post-metadata search era
   Increasing opportunities to search the full contents
     – Google Library Print, Google Publisher, Open Content
       Alliance, Microsoft Live Book Search, etc.
     – High-quality metadata will improve search precision
   Commercial search providers already offer “search inside
    the book”
   No comprehensive full text search for books quite yet
   Not currently available through library search
    environments
   Deep search highly improved by high-quality metadata
See: Systems Librarian, May 2008 “Beyond the current generation of next-generation
   interfaces: deeper search”
Amazon: Search inside
the book
Beyond Discovery

   Fulfillment oriented
   Search -> select -> view
   Delivery/Fulfillment much harder than
    discovery
   Back-end complexity should be as
    seamless as possible to the user
   Offer services for digital and print
    content
Library-specific Features

   Appropriate relevance factors
    – Objective keyword ranking + Library
      weightings
    – Circulation frequency, OCLC holdings,
      scholarly content
   Results grouping (FRBR)
   Collection focused (vs sales-driven)
Enterprise Integration

   Ability to deliver content and services
    through non-library applications
   Campus portal solutions
   Courseware
   Social networking environments (eg.
    Facebook)
   Search portals / Feed aggregators
Interoperability

   Decoupled interface implies data
    synchronization
   Mass export of catalog data
   Hooks back into the ILS for holdings
    and patron services
    – Real-time availability
Architecture and
Standards
   Need to have an standard approach
    for connecting new generation
    interfaces with ILS and other
    repositories
   Proprietary and ad hoc methods
    currently prevail
   Digital Library Federation
    – ILS-Discovery Interface Group
Syndicated Discovery
(Shopping)
   Emphasis on delivering materials,
    regardless of provider
   Amazon: combination of direct sales
    and partner store fronts
   Libraries: Provision of content from
    local collections
E-Commerce Model:
Amazon
Fulfillment
   Emphasis on transparent access to content
    regardless of provider
   Amazon: patent on one-click buying
   Libraries: tedious request process for
    reserving materials, requesting materials
    from another branch, placing interlibrary
    loan requests
   Challenge: Work more like Amazon and
    Lands End
eXtreme Usability
   Need for radically improved workflows for
    the library Web presence
   Interfaces that guide library patrons through
    complex collections
   Tools that make it effortless for libraries to
    take advantage of library services
   Interfaces where users can be engaged in
    the content and not bogged down in the
    mechanics of navigation.
Smart and Sophisticated

   Time to start thinking about a new
    generation of ILS better suited for
    current library collections and
    missions.
   Much more difficult than old gen
    OPACS
   Not a dumbed-down approach
   Wed library specific requirements and
    expectations with e-commerce
New-Gen Library
Interfaces
Current Commercial and Open
Source Products
Example: Phoenix Public
Library
   Endeca Guided Navigation
    – Search engine specializing in Web-based
      e-commerce
   Serves as front-end interface to ILS
    – Now Carl, soon Polaris
   Powers the entire library Web site
   High cost, High effort approach
AquaBrowser Library

   Queens Borough Public Library
    – http://aqua.queenslibrary.org/
   Fronts VTLS Chameleon ILS (was
    Dynix classic)
OCLC WorldCat Local

   OCLC WorldCat customized for local
    library catalog
    – Relies on hooks into ILS for local services
    – Tied to library holdings set in WorldCat
   University of Washington Libraries
    http://uwashington.worldcat.org/
   University of California Melvyl Catalog
LibraryThing for Libraries

   Not a full next-gen interface
   Provides a way to add tagging to
    existing interfaces
   Deal with social tagging critical mass
    problem
eXtensible Catalog

   University of Rochester – River
    Campus Libraries
   Financial support from the Andrew W.
    Mellon Foundation
   http://www.extensiblecatalog.info/
Challenges for Polaris
   Polaris Web OPAC already embodies some
    of the characteristics of next-generation
    interfaces
   Continue to expand the capabilities of the
    Polaris Web OPAC so that libraries do not
    need to invest time and money in
    replacement interfaces
   Strong progress already:
    – Faceted Navigation, relevancy ranking,
   Extend scope to non-ILS resources
Questions and
Discussion