WorldCat Navigator & the future of library services on the Web Katie Birch Kyle Banerjee ALA 11 July 2009

Overview The current state of library services, particularly resource sharing Introduction to WorldCat Navigator Results with the Orbis Cascade Alliance The future of networked library services Q&A

Where are we going? The best way to predict the future is to invent it. ~ Alan Kay Computer scientist, known for his early pioneering work on object- oriented programming and graphical user interface design.

YouTube - j r hartley

Choice “Increasingly the mass market is turning in to a mass of niches. That mass of niches has always existed, but as the cost of reaching it falls – it’s suddenly becoming a cultural and economic force to be reckoned with.... many of these kinds of products have always been there, just not visible or easy to find.” - Chris Anderson, The Long Tail

Timeline… 1980’s1990’s2000’s2010’s Stand alone ILS Dial-up service OPAC Web enabled OPAC Licensed content Consortia sysems OpenURL resolvers Federated search Electronic resource management Web 2.0/3.0 Cloud computing New paradigm: networked library services

How resource sharing often works today The players: LibrariesUsersPartnersData Academic Public School Single library Library group Consortia State library National library Corprate library Global libraries Kids Young students Students Teachers Researchers Parents Job seekers Readers etc., etc. ILS vendors ILL vendors Publishers Aggregators Search engines Study sites Social sites MashUps Coders Bloggers Catalog Content Local data Holdings Policies Procedures History Management

Print eContent Digital Local OPAC Local Library Group catalog ILL search User Library Group Global Libraries Link vendors Publishers Hosts Book vendors Search engines Social sites Blogs How resource sharing often works today The process:

How library services often work today Print eContent Digital Local OPAC Local Library Group catalog ILL search User Library Group Global Libraries Link vendors Publishers Hosts Book vendors Search engines Social sites Blogs THIS IS A MESS

The result…

Libraries Users Partners Data How resource sharing often works today The goal:

What Navigator does… Discovery Seamless search Real-time availability Local branding Group relevancy results Navigator Request Engine Request management based on policies Uses real time availability to build smart unlimited lender strings Single interface for consortia and ILL requests Cooperation with ILS vendors and integration with ILLiad Libraries Users Partners Data

What Navigator does… Patron Interface 3-becomes-1 Staff Interface 2-becomes-1 Circulation Integration The data working harder Libraries Users Partners Data

Circulation integration details Place hold NRE Received action – Bib record & patron update NRE Shipped action - Check out items NRE Returned action - Check in items

Efficiency gains with Navigator Request Engine ILL staff Without NRE 205 seconds x 1,481 items per month = hours Library staff Without NRE 105 seconds x 1,481 items per month = hours With NRE 170 seconds x 1,481 items per month = hours With NRE 55 seconds x 1,481 items per month = hours hours per month 14.4 hours per month Time savings Total time savings: 420 hours per year Source: MNLink

WorldCat Navigator Meeting at ALA Annual 2009 Orbis Cascade Alliance and WorldCat Navigator Kyle Banerjee Digital Services Program Manager Orbis Cascade Alliance

WorldCat Navigator Timeline & process What works, what doesn’t work (yet) Final thoughts Overview

Membership, programs, & strategic agenda Oregon & Washington Private & Public, 2-year & 4-year Colleges, Universities, Community colleges Members serving 600 – 42,000 students (FTE)

36 Members 7 Puget Sound 5 Eastern 2 Central 2 Southern 20 Willamette Valley Cascade Range Central Oregon Comm. College Central Washington University Chemeketa Community College Clark College Concordia University Eastern Oregon University Eastern Washington University George Fox University Lane Community College Lewis & Clark College Linfield College Mt. Hood Community College Oregon State University Oregon Health & Science Univ. Oregon Institute of Technology Oregon State University Pacific University Portland Community College Portland State University Reed College Saint Martin’s College Seattle Pacific University Seattle University Southern Oregon University The Evergreen State College University of Oregon University of Portland University of Puget Sound University of Washington Walla Walla College Warner Pacific College Washington State University Western Oregon University Western Washington University Whitman College Willamette University

Major Programs Electronic Resources 62 libraries in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Hawaii Databases, ejournals, ebooks, etc. Northwest Digital Archives 31 libraries and archives in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Alaska EAD finding aids, union database, digital content Summit Resource Sharing System 36 academic institutions in Oregon and Washington 9.2 million unique titles, 28.7 million items WorldCat Navigator INN-Reach All members use III Integrated Library System

Major Programs Conferences & Workshops ARL/ACRL Institute on Scholarly Communication Code4Lib Northwest Cooperative Collection Development YBP agreement Distributed Print Repository Courier Service 280 libraries served through 80 dropsites in Oregon, Washington, & Idaho 400,000 packages per year Digital Services Digital collections, institutional repositories, etc.

Summit Fulfillments: FY03-08

What do we care about? Service Training Satisfaction

How do we get those things? Global Regional Local ILS Simplify, streamline, and automate repetitive tasks Identify common operations and redundancies Work at the highest appropriate level

A resource sharing platform Discovery experience based on WorldCat Group catalog (a multi library version of WorldCat Local) Delivery based on Navigator Request Engine (NRE) WorldCat Navigator

Consortial borrowing support More trust and efficiency than ILL Shared information: barcodes, paging slips Any valid patron anywhere can place unmediated requests Load balancing Requests based on real time availability Interfaces with existing ILS Local, consortial and ILL requesting through one form Circulation Gateway allows NRE to “talk” to your local ILS when standards based protocols are not supported Hosted at OCLC What makes Navigator special?

WorldCat Local

WorldCat Group record view

Navigator uses a hybrid model Library Shared CatalogUnion Catalog

Navigator Request Engine

Motivations for the migration A better patron experience More things that patrons need are not physically in the library, so improved discovery is needed Patron shouldn’t need to know where something is before searching for it or ordering it. A patron that needs two books should use the same mechanism to request both One set of credentials gets you everything Strategic benefits Move towards network level services and reduction of redundant systems and workflows Standards based solution essential for long term viability and bringing disparate services together Leadership opportunity Partnership with OCLC

Timeline March 2008 Board decision to work with OCLC to develop Navigator Implementation Team and workgroups formed October 15 WorldCat Navigator delivered November Work out bugs, get trainers and staff up to speed December 1 Showtime!

What did we spend our time doing? Holdings reclamation WorldCat Local and Navigator depend on accurate holdings data Configuration In NRE: Request managing locations, shelf and pickup locations, notices, institutional patrons, paging slips, holds, etc Hundreds, possibly thousands of parameters At local sites (varies with ILS): network connectivity, indexing, reclamation, accounts, holds, paging slips, firewall, load tables, templates

How we spent our time (continued) Training/Communication Hundreds of staff affected Circ/ILL reconfiguration Faculty and patrons need to be informed Managing the jitters Developing components “Resolver Resolver” ILL Resolver Batch paging slips

The “Resolver resolver”

Paging slip

Navigator helps everyone play nice Load balancing ensures all institutions benefit/contribute Before automated load balancing, only 11% institutions have received/shipped ratio between 0.9 and 1.1. Huge disparities. Worst ratio is 9:1 After using automatic load balancing for two months 86% of membership has shipped/received ratio between 0.9 and 1.1 About 3/5 of libraries have ratio between 0.95 and 1.05 Worst ratio is 1.1 (11 items received for every 10 lent) Expect rates to improve with time

Side effects Varies by institution Consortial borrowing is down ILL is up, particularly for nonreturnables. Some institutions report increased use of electronic resources. Staff workload manageable at all sites Fulfillment rates down. Consortia wide since going live is 82%. Worst institution is 75%. Fulfillment times are up Relatively few complaints

Navigator at a glance Works!Needs improvement Patron experience Discovery of Summit & WorldCat materials Integrate local, consortial, ILL borrowing Redirection of ILL and OpenURL requests Local electronic holdings Edition selection needs to be more intelligent Staff experience Place holds Load balancing Paging Autocreate temp bibs and items Barcode tracking Automatic check out/in OpenURL in alerts More elegant pick up anywhere and visiting patron functionality Renewals Speed of some screens

Next steps The network ILS Do we really need to search, download, and catalog the same record 36 times? Should authority control, serials publication patterns, vendor data, etc really be that different at different institutions? Network circ allows easy formation of arbitrary groups Shared catalog Best level to deliver service may be at consortial rather than global level Resource sharing requires compatibility Standardization at service and protocol level Must play well in mixed environments

During periods of rapid change Expect people to go through these stages 1.Skepticism and unfavorable comparisons between old ways and new 2.Finding a groove 3.Learning to leverage strengths of new systems/methods Make it work, make it fast, make it slick (in that order) Don’t fixate on or sweat the small stuff Keep your eye on the prize

Transforming ideas into reality Be practical No solution can require everyone to move at the same time Hard part is connecting the future to the present as it is Progress requires upsetting the status quo Collaborative efforts cause discomfort and local change Know the difference between moving incrementally to accommodate complexity and doing things halfway to appease those who raise concerns Evolutionary change need not be slow

WorldCat Navigator Meeting at ALA Midwinter 2009 Orbis Cascade Alliance and WorldCat Navigator Kyle Banerjee Digital Services Program Manager Orbis Cascade Alliance

Web 2.0: Data and tools Without the data, the tools are useless; without the software, the data is unmanageable. ~ Tim O’Reilly on Web 2.0. Source: Wikimedia.org

It is computer power, however, that is bringing libraries to a precedent-shattering socio-technological change... as (users) increasingly seek access to catalogs linked to electronic files of information by using personal computers in home, school and office... The functions of librarians, as distinct from libraries, will, however, almost certainly enlarge intellectually as well as usefully. Where we’ve been headed all along ~ Fred Kilgour, “The Online Catalog Revolution,” 1983

OCLC’s vision OCLC exists to create systemwide efficiencies in the management of libraries and to increase their impact in compelling user environments. The key to each of these goals in a Web environment is scale and the delivery of the benefits of scale to as many libraries and library users as possible.

Where we’re headed… Patron Interface 3-becomes-1 Staff Interface All request management through ONE SINGLE UI Circulation at the network level The data working even harder Libraries Users Partners Data

Efficiency gains in the future User Partners Data L L L U WorldCat Local Content Resource sharing for all formats E-content License manager Libraries WorldCat.org U Google Facebook

Networked library services: Why do it? Patron satisfaction Library visibility on the web Staff workflow improvements Reduce total cost of ownership Future opportunities for cooperation and connection

Libraries User Partners Data The best way to predict the future is to invent it.

Questions? ? ?