Working together, librarians and vendors can solve the problems that hamper innovation Innovations from Google™ and Amazon® are clear wake-up calls that as a profession and an industry we need to do things differently. Automation vendors and librarians must work together to ensure that the profession is positioned to take advantage of changing culture and technology to assume a rightful place at the table where rich and diverse information resources will serve global users. To do so, library systems must no longer solely deal with the internal flows of cataloging, circulation, acquisitions, serials, and OPACs but rather must be compatible with other internal systems and, more important, external systems. As with any major change, there are two fundamentally different possible reactions: try and deny or delay the development, or take this opportunity and use it to redefine the role of the library in its community of users.

Where do we fit?

We don't expect that anyone believes for a moment that Google or Amazon will replace libraries. Instead, these web-based services are going to become another avenue for users to discover and subsequently want to use your library and its resources. We have an opportunity, indeed an obligation, to jump in to define how this will happen and implement a role for libraries and librarians. To do this well, we must have a relentless interest in and understanding of what users want to do with information and how they find it, place it in a personal context, use, and sometimes store and reuse it. Both Google and Amazon have shown that simplicity in searching is a virtue that everyone wants to emulate. As these tools access more and more library content, and do so with increasing sophistication, they will become the primary access point to information for the majority of users. We expect that this is just the tip of the iceberg. More and more choices will become available that pair usability and end user utility with core strengths derived from the rich infrastructures provided by libraries. In a new world, the notion of a library interface to information can and will be based on traditional OPAC strengths but presented in a much simpler and more user friendly format, supplemented with rich navigation and discovery tools. Together, as vendors and as librarians, we must provide library-specific functions that take advantage of the systems currently in place. In the past, much of what the library had to offer in the way of access and services was defined by what it owned. Interlibrary loan (ILL) and other mechanisms have enlarged library services, but in the digital era the information landscape that is available to a user is much, much larger than library holdings. We already know that through Google's link to OCLC's WorldCAT users can search and ascertain if the item they want is in your library holdings and available. But then what? We must assume that soon users will want to access your collection remotely. Are we prepared for that? If they want to borrow that item, do you have e-commerce capabilities to allow them to pay a usage and shipping fee? Can you implement an ILL transaction for them to their local library - all from within Google but using your library system? Not today. But we've seen enough of the future to know such things are coming, and as a profession we need to determine how we are going to make it all possible. First, we all need to work together to solve some problems.

A new consolidation

Consolidation takes many forms; it can come from inside the market, outside the market, or through vendor partnerships. In the end, consolidation is driven by the need to deliver more value to the information user. Consolidation from within the industry is the type most people expect. Yet that which comes from outside the industry may be more interesting. The merger of ISACSOFT and Bibliomondo shows firms, such as virtual learning companies (ISACSOFT), seeing the added value of libraries' ILS and metasearch technologies. As these products make their way into schools and businesses, it is likely this kind of consolidation will continue. The third method of consolidation is for vendors to increase their level of partnerships with one another. It's a challenge, but it is possible for vendors both to compete and cooperate. More important, when one firm comes up with a new product/service, it does not mean each vendor should feel the need to develop an equivalent product. Instead, we could establish a relationship to cross-license the product for multiple customer bases. Such cooperation requires standardizations to ensure that products become increasingly plug-compatible in order to provide the level of integration that librarians are accustomed to in their ILS products. We've seen cross-licensing in metasearch and link resolving products, yet cross-licensing between direct competitors is still rare. The benefits could be huge for the vendors, the profession, and thus the users. For this actually to happen, librarians must tell vendors that it is what they want to see. The "not invented here" syndrome is very real in all technology companies, and ILS vendors are no different. What is equally real is that any vendor that desires longtime survival listens to customers' needs.

What drives enhancements

All too often, libraries relegate participation in ILS user groups and/or enhancement processes to staff concerned more with the internal operation of the library than how the library integrates into the larger information landscape. As a result, the cost of enhancing and maintaining today's ILS and the price the market is willing to pay for the product have diverged wildly. These incremental steps (actually continuously diminishing steps) in back office functionality, combined with a more and more complex IT infrastructure supporting these developments, lead to more and more challenging economics. The end result does fairly little for end user functionality, ease of use, or utility. Library directors need to realize that participating in high-level discussions with the vendors of key automated systems is as essential as fundraising to ensure the future success of their library. Library conferences provide great forums for this communication, yet too few directors attend. For librarians to understand how they need to integrate into the larger information landscape, they first must spend equal amounts of time looking internally and externally. Seeking out discussions on the future at library conferences can be frustrating. Most sessions report on the past. The exhibit floor, where clues to the future can be found, is frequently all too empty. So attendees return home filled with more ideas of how things are being done, rather than how things will be done.

New market issues await

One need not look far into the future to see issues that need to be addressed quickly in order to leverage libraries forward. The need for seamless integration Libraries must integrate with other services, such as virtual learning, distance education, or web searching. They must facilitate simple and seamless movement from the virtual learning environment to the library and back. Given current technology, the architecture that will enable this is Web Services, a technology that's hot in the business world but finding much slower adoption in the library automation world. VIEWS (Vendor Initiative for Enabling Web Services) is a group of leading library vendors with disparate applications that are working to enable this architecture. Librarians should insist that their vendors be part of this initiative. Libraries will need to consider what the service model should be in this new environment. For example, will they need to shift more toward e-resources to deliver materials quickly? To meet new demands, where can libraries coordinate and cooperate and where must they support unique needs? Adoption of e-commerce Libraries and librarians have long chosen not to charge for products and services. Yet the seamless integration discussed above increasingly means that the people who use a library may well be from outside of the traditional tax- or tuition-paying user groups. Does this mean we deny service? Maybe. However, it might be better to render service for a fee. Can additional service paths be provided if the users are willing to pay for those services? Like any business, libraries need to segment users and understand the unique needs of each. Some users value convenience and are willing to pay for it. For others, access is more important but cost must be low. According to Joey Rogers ("No Sacred Cows," LJ 6/15/04, p. 40 - 41), "We have not given people the opportunity to invest their money and buy convenience [such as paying for book delivery]. In many families, there is more money than time." Institutional repositories This new technology represents an important development for libraries and one that, if not seized upon quickly, will soon bypass libraries entirely. Institutional repositories (IR) are being quickly adopted by IT departments and organizations other than libraries. Clifford Lynch states that "where adopted, [IRs] represent an organizational commitment to the stewardship of select digital content. Supplemented with organization, access, and distribution of those objects, an IR may include long-term preservation. It is not uncommon that when an IR is put in place by a department, the invited implementation team is IT staff, archivists, department managers, administration and a whole host of others." Librarians may be invited, but we've seen many instances where they are not included. Librarians instead concentrate on building digital library systems or digital asset management systems, which tend to be focused on collections, metadata, and library workflows. These projects, while using similar tools and products as IRs, don't allow the user to enter created content into the database, nor do they provide for easy metadata creation. Bottom line: this focus on internal systems and needs allows a new opportunity to pass that could greatly leverage libraries and librarianship into a larger role. Instead, libraries should reinvigorate digitization projects as part of a larger institutional repository. Librarians need to ensure they have a role in the adoption and deployment of this technology. Open source software Libraries, as is much of the IT world, are clearly moving toward the greater adoption of open source software. Many librarians want it, provided they can still have a commercial source for support, training, and documentation. Some firms have stepped up to offer this. However, if libraries want to realize the full potential of open source and its associated savings, they must understand that they need new systems to acquire and use these types of products. Procurements cost not only libraries money, they cost vendors money. Librarians require commercial vendors to jump through hoops: demonstrate the product, answer RFPs on the product, and then pose the same contractual terms, warranty terms, and maintenance terms that they receive with commercial software. Librarians don't realize how much this adds to the cost of the product.

How do we move forward?

We are all in this together - librarians, library users, and vendors. As a result, our need to partner is greater than it has ever been. We must jointly identify the problems and the solutions. The problems span a wide range of library operations, from the administrative offices to readers' services. If, as a profession, we jointly define a vision of the future, for each area, we can identify those obstacles that stand in the way of that vision and then devote ourselves to finding the solutions. Some areas demand immediate attention. System procurement processes The waste involved in these processes is enormous. It is generally agreed, even among vendors, that ILS products all basically do the same things and do them rather well. These basic functions account for 80 percent of product functionality. That part should become standardized, encapsulated, and called something like "ILS Spec Level 1." Then, rather than asking 50 pages of questions on this functionality, there should be one question: "Do you comply with ILS Spec Level 1?" The remainder of the RFP should allow the vendor to explain the uniqueness of its product and its vision of the future. Library internal processes/workflow standardization The level of flexibility vendors must design into their systems to support the incredibly diverse ways that libraries complete routine tasks is again very costly overhead that can no longer be afforded. There is a high-priority need to standarize all operational procedures to get a limited set of best practices that vendors can use. Forum to discuss high-level issues The library community, including its vendors, needs to focus on the end user and utility/usability while linking the current and past investments made by libraries in infrastructure to these new "interfaces." This will preserve what has been created but in a much easier-to-use package. Most important, this would encourage a move away from minor back-office upgrades toward major end user functionality. We urgently must move to a new level of partnership. Vendors want to partner with library directors to discuss big picture issues, concerns, and future needs. The objective is to plan jointly and create the products and services needed to leverage libraries and librarianship.

Competition and cooperation

There are new opportunities and risks facing our profession and businesses. For libraries, it is important to focus on the users, who are demanding information in many formats and through many channels. At the same time, budgets are shrinking, staff are aging, users are becoming more technologically advanced, and libraries and librarians are concerned with their roles in the greater information community. Google is transforming the landscape. Why were we all caught off guard by an "outside" vendor? Because the library industry has not been able to address adequately a visionary role for the library of the future. All of us in the library community must seize the opportunity to look to the future and plan for a new generation of library technology or risk being taken unaware by another outside vendor's "takeover" of the industry, and the future of our libraries.

---

Roland Dietz is President & CEO, Endeavor, and Carl Grant is President & COO, VTLS