Talis white paper on Library 2.0

Just as I was about to leave work yesterday a new item popped up on my Bloglines notifier, Panlibus had a new post, so I “just checked” instead of closing down as I should have. A new white paper: Library 2.0, – the challenge of disruptive innovation.(PDF) appeared in Adobe reader, and I just had to sit down and read. Here are two of the many things that really caught my attention:

What good librarian would choose to hand ‘truth’ down from the shelves to those who then passively consume it, rather than engage in a dialogue with participative lifelong learners? Is it not preferable to help users build their understanding of the world around them with reference to a wealth of experiences from across formats, media, contexts, and their analogue and digital manifestations?

and

Remixing library services
Fundamental to the changes we anticipate for libraries is a shift from the delivery of a library service just within the library building, or simply from a library’s own web site. Consequently, as well as continuing to offer services to those who come to us, we need to reach beyond the boundaries of the library space, and begin pushing services out to people in the places where they are already interacting. For example, new technologies and new attitudes make it eminently feasible to break the OPAC down into a set of functional components, and to make each of those components available for inclusion in almost any page on the web, whether library-focussed or not. The OPAC itself is enriched by this approach, and the services formerly available only via the OPAC become far more widely available, and consequently far more valuable.

I really love it when somebody says what I have had mulling about in my head for so long, but have been unable to express in such a clear and interesting way.

The first quote is a great way to clarify on of the main issues with Library 2.0, that the central issue to look at and improve is the relationship between library/librarian and users, and accepting that the power is shifting to the user. In Library 2.0 there is a willingness to embrace the new opportunities to involve users in creating a better service on their own terms.

The last quote about the OPAC really resonates with a debate about library portals going on in Norway just now. I’m really in favor of a solution where the bits of any library service that is relevant are incorporated into any place where the user finds it useful. I really like the idea that library services becomes a part of a more complex service universe instead of a single library portal where only the most dedicated will go and find what they need. The recent linking between several national library holdings and Google Scholar is a typical example of the thinking that libraries need to be integrated into existing and popular services. Wonderful work and very interesting to see where this development will go. I am especially interested in how the users of these services will react.

The Talis paper is very interesting, a good read, and easily accessible for all interested in the Library 2.0 discussion. The parts where the paper discusses Talis own technology are very useful for those of us that have to make desicions on ILS development and challenges both us librarians as customers, and all ILS vendors as suppliers. I hope that Norwegian ILS vendors read and learn. I for one will think about what issues I will raise with my own ILS vendor to try to bring our system into the Library 2.0 world.

And yes, I did manage to pick up my son from school before it closed:-)

Filed under: Blogging, Library 2.0, OPAC

The library as a lab?

The experimentation and development going on in libraries around the world makes me think that one charatcteristic of Library 2.0 is that the library functions as a laboratory for development. This can take many forms. The OPAC experimentation that Casey Bisson does with WordPress, Ann Arbor Public Library and their superpatron does stuff with Amazon APIs that makes me sit up and think, and elsewhere other experiments are changig the library both in the electronic and physical world. If we start to regard change as a “normal” situation as I suspect you have to do in a lab, then maybe we can have a go at realizing what Michael Casey wrote about having to live with constant change. This sounds slightly threatening to me, so thinking about the library as a lab and myself as a slightly demented scientist/librarian helps me accept the concept of change as a permanent fixture of library life and even enjoy the process. No lightning-rods on the roof yet… Of course the next step is to let the library be a lab for library  users as well. Start having video recording and editing equipment in the library. Let kids play around with it and publish the result on the library webpage or videoblog. Of course everyone is welcome to record their podcast in the library sound-studio or try out other new technologies as the library makes the latest stuff available to users (after letting the library staff play around with it first). Experiment with interfaces, both in the physical world and virtually. Let the users comment, on the blog or on the desk, invite comments as you change and try out things, don’t just present the final product. You let yourself wide open to critisism, but also to valuable input that might improve what you try to do, or let you drop a failed idea before you spend too much resources on it.

— I think I’ll just go out and move some shelves around

Filed under: Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, OPAC

What’s in a name

Shakespeare always says it better. This is the only time I will adress the issue of the “Library 2.0″ name. A lot of people seems to react confrontational and negatively when they hear the words Library 2.0. And so far as I have gathered it is not about what Library 2.0 stands for, although there seems to be a lot of confusion about that as well, but merely the adding of “2.0″ to the word “Library” seems to provoke some people. I think I can understand some of this. By collecting and naming a series of different ideas and trends as one “movement” there will be those who feel that the old has been rejected and judged failing. I do not think so, but I can see how this can be interpreted by anyone who does not feel comfortable with comparing their own experiences with the issues that Library 2.0 address. However, the name is a coincidence, it could just as well be called “the new librarianship” or “future libraries” or any other name that identifies these ideas and the discussion as different from what has gone before.

The general thing though, is that I refuse to waste any more effort on the debate over the name. Anybody who dislikes the name are free to find other names, ignore the debate, or just read and comment and discuss the ideas and underlying principlies instead of the name.

Some of us likes the name Library 2.0, which signifies an upgrade while still retaining the core of what came before. The Library 2.0 concept recognizes that we live in a time where the lifestyle of the people who use libraries are in a state of change and probably will remain so. By involving the people who use libraries in the creation and deliverance of our services we both enhance the quality of what we do, and we do a better job of fulfilling our mission.

Filed under: Library 2.0

Library 2.0 and books

Yesterday I enjoyed a great discussion about Library 2.0 that was recorded by Talis and will be published as a podcast later. But one thing really struck me during the discussion. When I mentioned that I thought books where a really important part of Library 2.0, there was several groans around the table. Not surprising, since the discussion on Library 2.0 usually centres around users and electronic services and books may be seen as the anchor that we drag with us as we move into the brave new world of Library 2.0.
To me the possible success of Library 2.0 as a concept lies in a widespread acceptance by library workers in all types of libraries, and to achieve that the people discussing Library 2.0 has to acknowledge that libraries are also about books. When you enter any library in the world today, even the new fantastic public library in Seattle, what do you see? Books! The OCLC perceptions of libraries and information resources (chapter 4. Libraries – a “universal” brand? PDF) shows us how central to the image of the library books are. We cannot throw this image to the side and talk only about e-resources and services. Books are here for the long run and if Library 2.0 is to have any meaning to the average librarian, it has to address books and how Library 2.0 can enhance and improve our real-time, physical-world services.
How can the Library 2.0 thinking influence book circulation? One thing that I think needs to be adressed is the involvement of the library user in all facets of book handeling in libraries, from selection (I believe this is where we have a great opportunity to really engage our users), cataloging (tagging, user comments) and in displaying, reccomending (one tip I read the other day, let there be space on bookmarks for comments that can be passed on to the next reader). What if every book has a space for physical comments? (Maybe a new use for the old pockets that used to be glued to the back of library books?) There must be tons of things that can be done to improve how we collect, distribute and promote books in libraries, and I believe that some of the underlying ideas in Library 2.0 can be of use in this process.

Filed under: Books, Library 2.0