Tomorrow's technologies:

best bets and likely losers

Marshall BreedingDirector for Innovative Technology and ResearchVanderbilt University LibraryNashville, TN USA

a deep look at how university libraries should be responding to the possibilities and pitfalls of the developing technologies, predicting some winners;

the demise of the LMS?  Scope: Higher Education

Themes

http://www.librarytechnology.org Repository for library automation data

Expanding to include more international scope

Announcements and developments made by companies and organizations involved in library automation technologies

Library Technology Guides

Started building database in 1995 Most comprehensive resource for tracking

ILS and other library automation products Serves as a directory for general public Specialized tool for tracking LMS and other

automation products 39,530 Total libraries listed 4,745 UK Libraries listed

Lib-web-cats

Annual Industry report published in Library Journal:

2009: Investing in the future 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

LJ Automation System Marketplace

ILS Product Satisfaction

Industry Consolidation Abrupt transitions for major library automation products

Frustration with ILS products and vendors Increased ownership by external interests Increased industry control by external financial investors

Demise of the traditional OPAC New genre of discovery interfaces Open Source products hit the mainstream

New wave of companies based on open source service and support

Upheavals in the library automation arena

Breeding, Marshall: Perceptions 2008 an international survey of library automation. http://www.librarytechnology.org/perceptions2008.pl January 2009.

Traditional LMS companies◦ Talis DS/Axiell, Innovative, SirsiDynix, Ex Libris

Library cooperatives◦ OCLC

E-Content Tech / Content companies◦ Serials Solutions – EBSCO

Open Source service companies◦ LibLime, BibLibre, IBM?, Oracle?

Gambling on Commercial Partners

Prepared to make investments in new technology?

Strategy to maximize profits by reducing costs?

Technology Strategy◦ Roadmap?◦ New technology or new marketing?◦ Can’t keep repackaging outdated

Betting on Commercial Partners

Capacity for Research and Development Understanding of higher education and

library missions and culture Track record of positive partnerships Adequate resources for service and support Forward looking technology components Roadmap into the next generation Solid business model Focus on investment High customer retention

High cards

Aging technology without next-generation roadmap

Stagnant business model◦ Revenue based on maintenance or new sales?

Focus on cost cutting Diminishing customer base / personnel High rates of customer defections Low level of customer confidence

Low Cards

Personnel Growth Comparison

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000Comparison of SirsiDynix and Ex Libris

Composite Endeavor + Ex Libris

Composite Sirsi + Dynix

ILS Products in UK Academic Libraries

Innovation below expectationsConventional ILS less tenableProliferation of products related to e-content management

New genre of discovery-layer interfaces

Product and Technology Trends

Is the OPAC module of the LMS a sure bet? Is the time ripe for new discovery systems?

Gambling on the OPAC

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?

Crowded Landscape of Information Providers on the Web

The Competition

Better?

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

Demand for compelling library interfaces

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 Lack of good relevancy sorting Narrow scope of content

Inadequacy of ILS OPACs

Silos Prevail◦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

ETDs, photos, rich media collections

◦Metasearch engines All searched separately

Disjointed approach to information and service delivery

Discovery addresses a broader scope than any single automation system or repository

User interfaces require quicker replacement cycles

Back-end systems involve longer transitions

Separation of Discovery From Back-end Systems

Attempt to collapse silos or draw appropriately from each silo

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 User contributed content

The Ideal Scope Discovery Layer products

New-generation interface Harvested local content Vendor-supplied indexes of library content

◦ E-journals, databases, e-books◦ Book collections beyond local library collections

Pre-populated discovery services

Indexing the full corpus of information available globally Or at least major portions

Google aims to address all the world’s information Not quite comprehensive – partial harvesting of any given

resource Discovery Layer Products for libraries aim to address all

content collected by libraries: Print Remotely access electronic content: e-journals, e-books,

databases, licensed and open access. Local special collections: digital and print.

Addresses the comprehensive body of content held within library collections

Comprehensive, unified

Web scale discovery

Entering post-metadata search era Increasing opportunities to search the full contents

◦Google Library Print, Google Publisher, Open Content Alliance, etc.

◦High-quality metadata will improve search precision

Commercial search providers already offer “search inside the book” and searching across the full text of large book collections

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”

Deep search

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

Beyond Discovery to Fulfillment / Delivery

Initial products focused on technology◦ AquaBrowser, Endeca, Primo, Encore, VUfind◦ Mostly locally-installed software

Current phase focused on pre-populated indexes that aim to deliver Web-scale discovery◦ Summon (Serials Solutions)◦ WorldCat Local (OCLC)◦ EBSCO Discovery Service (EBSCO)◦ All hosted services

Discovery product Trend

Local discovery provides flexibility for libraries to create customized access to collections

Web-scale discovery emphasizes unified access and broad scope

Web-scale vs local discovery

New Discovery Service Consolidated index harvested from many

sources◦ ProQuest, Gale, etc◦ 300,000,000 articles represented◦ Full-text search + Citations

Local catalog data harvested, real-time link to holdings

Other local repositories harvested Others available through metasearch

Summon from Serials Solutions

Existing service in pilot stage for new discovery service

WorldCat.org data + ArticleFirst (30 million articles)

Agreement with EBSCO to load EBSCOhost citation data into WorldCat

Pursuing agreements with additional content providers

WorldCat Local discovery service

No-cost option to FirstSearch subscribers No reclamation to reconcile local ILS with

WorldCat One ILS supported; must be among

supported products Program to expose thousands of libraries to

WorldCat Local as a discovery option

WorldCat Local quick start

Massive pre-harvested index of e-journal content

Worldcat.org Locally harvested metadata

EBSCO Discovery Service

Is the conventional library management system a safe bet moving forward?

Will Open Source LMS overtake propriety products

Evergreen, Koha, OLE?

Gambling on the LMS

Favours print inventory Electronic resources managed separately

Traditional Library Management Systems

Traditional ILS◦ Cataloging◦ Circulation◦ Online Catalog◦ Acquisitions◦ Serials control◦ Reporting

Modern approach: ◦ SOA◦ Business process modeling

Breaking down the modules

Service oriented Architecture Openness

◦ Open APIs, Open Source Web services Cloud storage and services Flexible XML data models Web-based interfaces (Staff and patron) Mobile apps and interfaces

High card Technologies

Monolithic hard-coded systems MARC-based metadata model Client/Server computing

Low card technologies

Sure thing, or risky proposition?

Open Source

Open Source Interest

A Continuum of Openness

Closed Systems

CirculationAcquisitionsCataloging

Staff Interfaces:

End User Interfaces:

Data Stores:

Functionalmodules:

No programmable Access to the system.

Captive to the userInterfaces supplied by the developer

Programmer access:

Standard RDBM Systems

CirculationAcquisitionsCataloging

Staff Interfaces:

End User Interfaces:

Data Stores:

Functionalmodules:

Database administrators can access data stores involved with the system:

Read-only?Read/write?

Developer shares database schema

Programmer access:

Open Source Model

CirculationAcquisitionsCataloging

Staff Interfaces:

End User Interfaces:

Data Stores:

Functionalmodules:

All aspects of the system available to inspection and modification.

Programmer access:

Open API Model

CirculationAcquisitionsCataloging

Staff Interfaces:

End User Interfaces:

Data Stores:

Functionalmodules:

Core application closed.

Third party developers code against the published APIs or RDBMS tables.

Programmer access:

Published APIs

Open Source / Open API Model

CirculationAcquisitionsCataloging

Staff Interfaces:

End User Interfaces:

Data Stores:

Functionalmodules:

Core application closed.

Third party developers code against the published APIs or RDBMS tables.

Programmer access:

Published APIs

Open APIs Open Source Open Data Models

Open systems

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

Web 2.0 / Collaborative Computing

Fundamental assumption: Print + Digital = Hybrid libraries

Traditional ILS model not adequate for hybrid libraries

Libraries currently moving toward surrounding core ILS with additional modules to handle electronic content

New discovery layer interfaces replacing or supplementing ILS OPACS

Working toward a new model of library automation◦ Monolithic legacy architectures replaced by fabric of SOA

applications◦ Comprehensive Resource Management

Rethinking library automation

“It's Time to Break the Mold of the Original ILS” Computers in Libraries Nov/Dec 2007

Library Management system◦ Cataloging, Circulation, Serials, Acquisitions, OPAC

Link resolver with e-journal knowledgebase Electronic Resource management system Digital collections Institutional repositories Discovery Environments

Unsustainable library business automation model

Current LMS model replicates portions of business systems of colleges and universities◦ Authentication and authorization◦ Financial systems

Current LMS model does not integrate as well with HE infrastructure◦ Virtual Learning Environments, Course Management

Systems Curating or Managing non-library content for the

broader organization Current automation systems provide little support

for public services◦ Customer relationship management

Doing less and doing more

OLE Project◦ Funded by the Research in Information Technology program of

the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation◦ 1-year project to produce the requirements for a new approach

to library automation◦ Will embrace the service-oriented architecture◦ Business process modeling based on library workflows

unconstrained from existing legacy software◦ Possible follow-on project to build and open source reference

implementation Ex Libris URM

◦ Mentioned publically but not formally announced◦ Working toward new platform that better integrates print and

electronic content Probably will be based on some existing products

Projects to Recast the LMS

Service Oriented Architecture

http://www.sun.com/products/soa/benefits.jsp

Legacy ILS + e-content modules

FederatedSearch

Circulation Acquisitions

Cataloging Serials

OpenURLLinking

Electronic Resource

MgmtSystem

Staff Interfaces:

End User Interfaces:

Data Stores:

Functionalmodules:

SOA for library workflow processes

Data Stores:

ReusableBusiness Services

CompositeApplications

Granulartasks:

Extend WorldCat Local to include◦ Circulation◦ Delivery◦ Acquisitions◦ License Management

Positioned as Web-scale, cloud computing model, cooperative library system

Pilot sites being finalized; general availability in 2010

WorldCat Local automation platform

Amazon.com = federated groups of sellers sharing common infrastructure

Unified from end-user perspective Web Services, cloud computing model Modern user interfaces High level of usability

◦ Discovery, Fulfillment Web 2.0 features

◦ User-contributed ratings and reviews

E-commerce comparison

Cannot continue to throwing in chips on a losing hand Current automation models reinforce the library as an

independent silo of automation and information systems Can we bet on new technologies that will place libraries

more at the heart of higher education organizations? Will current LMS products evolve to better serve modern

Libraries? Will new transformative products based on new

automation products emerge?

Final Wagers

Questions and discussion