Why did you become a librarian?

“I love to read!” Is the most common answer to the question of why you became a librarian. Sometimes longtime librarians sigh a little at this and start going on about how libraries are about so much more than books and reading these days.

That is correct, but stop a minute and think about what a love of reading and books imply.

1. Reading opens the mind. Avid readers are more open to new impressions and have a wider view of the world.

2. Readers can concentrate. In an age where the attention span of most people are on the downswing it is a desirable trait to be able to concentrate and follow a whole novel to the end.

3. Readers are information seekers. If you love reading (or are reading dependent) you have to start looking for new books and authors pretty soon. This leads to reading of reviews, looking at genres and in general developing habits of searching out information about books and authors that are useful in many situations in life and work.

4. Reading is social. This comes as a surprise to most, but think about it. Yes the act of reading itself is solitary, but the minute you have finished a good book, what do you most want to do? Talk about it to anybody willing to listen. We have book clubs, bookblogs, book prizes, author events, literary lunches etc etc… – this is a good thing to have in your portfolio when you applies for a number of jobs. The ability to talk enthusiastically about something is usually a plus when you apply for jobs.

5. Analytical ability. To read you have to decode text and meaning. Pretty useful when you want to understand and learn.

Useful stuff for librarians right? So I have come to the conclusion that I DO want readers as librarians and other staff in my library.

I know that what I have listed are unevenly distributed among readers, but it is only my opinion and experience, not research, so I’ll let it stand:-)

Feel free to argue in the comments.

Arkivert i:Future, Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, librarians, readers, Reading

iPad and libraries – some thoughts

OK, congratulations to all fellow Apple fanboys and girls The iPad looks good and I would love to get my hands on one. In fact on thursday I  got word from the ICT-department at work that they pre-ordered one for me. (I might have mentioned the upcoming device once or twice in the previous months and had a fairly long discussion with the head of ICT services that morning) Have I told you how great these guys are?

Even if I look forward to getting my hands on the iPad, or “padda” (toad) as it is rapidly becoming known in Norway and Sweden, one of my first reactions to Steve Jobs presentation of the iPad was  that this is Apple´s gift to Google. It will take very little effort to top this. Just add a camera and flash support to a touch screen with the Android operating system and you have a iPad killer. On the purely technical/OS side of the device that is. What probably will sell the iPad is the ease of use for non-techies.  A lot of blogposts and twitter comments have called this the first true “everybody computer.”  They might have a point. My iPod touch is equally popular with my three-year-old, my ten-year-old and myself,  who all use it in many different ways. A larger device appeals to all of us.

But like so many people I am more fascinated with the services embedded in the iPad than the hardware. iBooks and the iTunes-like book buying opportunities are what makes the iPad a  must have for me, more that the weight, screen, OS or other apps.

It will certainly be interesting to see what new iPad apps that will come in the coming months. One thing I am sure of is that we will all be surprised by the diversity of apps and the uses to which the iPad will be put to. And another thing to watch out for is the plethora of iPad-like devices that will hit us like a tsunami in the coming year. There will proably be two main schools competing with Apple, the Android school where the Google Android operating system for smartphones will be ported to a tablet, and the Windows 7 school, where Microsoft will try to match the ease of use of the iPad with tons of features and a “whole operating system”  to rival the limited OS on the iPad. My guess is that the Android school has a better chance, but that none of the competing schools have a chance against Apple when it comes to opening up the market of those who previously have not used computers very much, and people who simply want a few features to “just work”

For libraries the iPad will have little immediate impact. What it probably will do, if it is a hit in the marketplace, is that it will fuel reader demand for e-books. I predict that it will be a slow development, but maybe too fast for many librarians. When the demand for e-books is for Nora Roberts latest romance novel, rather than some science fiction blockbuster or main stream popular science non-fiction, and the person wanting the e-book is the harassed mother with three kids running around her at the library desk, then e-books will have arrived in the library. This could happen if the iPad really hits it off with the public.

For libraries there are two main challenges:

1. How do we get content from the library to the iPad and similar devices, and can libraries use iBook or the AppStore as a delivery method? I think there will be several opportunities, and that binding libraries to a cooperation with Apple to get in through the iBook store probably will be difficult and even counterproductive. There are at least two avenues to go, either create an international LibraryBook app (open source of course), that will work on any operating system, or cooperate with the creators of any of the open source apps that are out there to deliver books through them. Both avenues has their pros- and cons, but I believe that to secure a future for the library brand it would be a good idea to develop a special library app.

2. Will the iPad and iPad like devices  change the media habits of readers? Very likely. The iPod and iPhone has both changed a lot of behaviour and expectations from library users, and how other devices are viewed and used. I expect to see increasing demand for content on tablets from readers and probably pressure on the library to deliver certain types of content, i.e. ebooks.

I’m looking forward to getting my hands on an iPad and try it out in my library.

Arkivert i:E-books, Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, Web 2.0, iPad

The culture of Nice

Michael Stephens wrote about the “culture of no” and how it stops innovation and development. Today at a seminar for librarians I was in a foul mood and sat observing my fellow librarians as they discussed the future of libraries and librarians.   The one thing that jarred my nerves the whole day was the prevalent culture of nice. Everybody was nice, libraries are nice, they don´t want to make too much fuss, don´t want to upset the boat etc. I was frigging mad when I left and felt a great need to vent my feelings lest they ruin the rest of my day. I´m in a mood where I´m about to give up on librarians. At least the norwegian version. They are so averse to conflict and so hesitant about development that I despair of any real development and a chance for the libraries in the 21st century. Right now libraries have all the characteristics of the Dodo. Fat, complacent and resisting change even when it comes in the form of a club to the head.

Right now I believe that few libraries will survive the next seven years. (thank Dawkins I´m usually mistaken when I predict the future).  The libraries that adapt and change with the times and their users will fare well and have a bright future. The rest, well its a organization eat organization world out there, and most will dissapear in a cloud of Google.

I am dissapointed in my fellow librarians who totally ignores their professional duty to actually explore and understand the information universe their users live in. Business as usual is not a good way to handle kids who can find the information they need elsewhere and free wi-fi is no longer a selling point.

I´m getting depressed thinking about the way most librarians reject any idea that challenges the status quo and demands professional development. Just the discussion on Library 2.0 in Norway is enough to make me want to change business. What the H**L is wrong with librarians that make them discuss the frigging NAME and  how a “majority” prefer to perfect Library 1.0 before moving on (after they take retirement) to 2.0. GET REAL!

I´m dissapointed and depressed and sad. Better get home to the kids.

Arkivert i:Hype or Hope?, Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, Norway, Users

Secret conference?

I have been busy these last three months trying to get the conference “Digital og Sosial 2.0″ – Digital and social 2.0 – in Bergen, Norway. It will be a two day conference where librarians will meet and discuss Library 2.0 in a norwegian setting and from the norwegian perspective. The conference blog for those of you who read norwegian.

Arkivert i:Conferences, Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, Norway

IFLA 2.0

Reading Michael Stephens blogpost on ALA 2.0 I started thinking about library organizations and how web 2.0 can improve relations between members and organization and between organization and the world at large. I wrote a post on the Norwegian Library Association (NBF 2.0 - in norwegian) and having slept on the issue came to the conclusion that this was way to narrow thinking. The whole issue with web 2.0 and library 2.0 and hence Library Association 2.0 is that borders no longer count, national organizations are fine from both a social and professional viewpoint, but the real potential lies in the international possibilities that web 2.0 offers. Therefore the title of this blogpost: IFLA 2.0. IFLA, the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions has so far, from where I stand, been an organization for the bigwigs on the national library scene. The director and president of the Norwegian library association, the directors of the lagest academic and public libraries and some people with special skills or papers to present. The membership fee is high and the benefit of becoming a member hard to see unless you have the budget to travel to the annual conferences around the world. This could now change. There is so much to be said for an internationalization of the library association work. I feel that I have more in common with Michael Stephens, Jenny Levine, Karen Schneider, Sukhdev Singh, Bonaria Biancu, and other Librarian 2.0s than I have with a majority of my fellow members of the Norwegian Library Association.

I would love to be a member of an organization that organized the people that looks at what makes libraries work and how they can develop on an international scale. These people are the ones I want to meet and discuss with, online in Second Life or World of Warcraft, on conferences like Internet Librarian and in any IM or chat session you can name. I have discussed with many interesting people on the Library 2.0 gang podcast and know from experience that I have a LOT to learn from others.

I know that a lot of the members of IFLA comes from developing countries and that the issues of web 2.0 and technology are completely outside the immediate problems and challenges that face the librarians of Nigeria, Peru or Vietnam. At the same time I think that some types of technology have the potential of solving some of the problems facing librarians in these and other developing countries. I would love to exchange experiences and understanding with librarians from all over the world. I know I would become a far more knowledgeable person from this, and I hope that some of my understanding will contribute to the knowledge of others. I think that what we now need is a truely international library organization for individual librarians using web 2.0 technology to exchange knowledge and fuel professional development. Either IFLA could take this ball and run with it, or this will expand and develop on its own just from the need of a critical mass of people. When you have that need it will drive the establishment and future of such an organization.

Arkivert i:IFLA, Librarian 2.0, Library Associations 2.0

Going with the flow

Usually libraries and librarians are considered to be a little “outside” the main flow of society and the world at large. In many ways this is a good thing. Libraries are built to stay and exist for a long time and has a different role to play than other enteprises such as many non-profit operations or commericial companies. Libraries will survive both Web 2.0, library 2.o and other memes that flow around us. But at the same time it is important that libraries are aware of the flow and follow what is going on. A good librarian 2.o will observe actual behavior and broad trends in the community that the library belongs to and try to respond with appropriate services both by adapting existing services and developing new services. The librarian 2.o will see the possibilities and opportunities for the library in the current development and find the right place for the library within that development.

At the same time there are different flows, one in society at large, others in subsets of that society, local culture, ethnic groups or professions (like librarianship). The flow in the profession of librarianship is often a counterflow to the larger society flow in that libraries and librarians have a perspective that should last longer and have a broader range than more narrow concerns of today.

Arkivert i:Librarian 2.0

On the nature of 2.0

I have worked hard on my Library Lab project, but had a nagging feeling that something was wrong. There was two problems with how I first envisioned it. And as my feeling of discomfort with the work increased I started to look at It was top-down and centrally managed and funded, and secondly it did not take into account the “nature of 2.0″ as I now see it. First of all, let’s try to define 2.0-ness:

Web 2.0 and Library 2.0, and any other 2.0 you care to mention, rests on the basis of participation and development that starts from the ground. Social networks of people who all invest a little of their time, intelligence/knowledge and effort to make something that is greater than the sum of the parts.

Forgetting this, or just letting old habits rule, led me into the trap of trying to organize a project from the top. The Library Lab I envisioned would have a salaried project manager, a lot of management and organization, and would try to “make” people work on “approved” projects. How wrong is that?

So hopefully I have learned a lesson or two, and the New Library Lab project proposal will contain more 2.0-ness. Basically I now see a network that is supported but left to grow from the interest and abilities of the people in the network. Initially I think it will be important to have a critical mass of people and projects, so I thnk that the main effort will be in connecting people and spreading the word. The project manager is replaced with a facillitator who smoothes the way for the participants by setting up a CMS, getting in touch with people, finding and destroying bottlenecs (Bottleneck terminator – that is a title I want on my business card:-)), and lastly challenging the network and hope that something happens.

The thing is, I really want this network to incorporate people from outside the library sector. Not just library system vendors, or the odd friend of the library, but real library users and non-users, people from local Linux User Groups, students, High-school teachers and any other interested person. The main challenge will be connecting to the people who are interested. Sounds like marketing might be a greater challenge than the technical stuff.

Arkivert i:Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, Library lab, OPAC, Users, Web 2.0

Powershift

Does anybody remember the 1980′s? Way back then in the last few decades of last century there was a very popular author, Alvin Toffler, who wrote several books about the future, mostly for business and marketing people. In the book “Powershift – Knowledge, Wealth, and Power at the Edge of the 21st Century” he describes the erosion of authority and the rise of a critical mentality among employees, soldiers, students, pupils and the general population.

I have revisited his thinking and found something I believe is interesting. Today we can see some of the development that Toffler predicted on the internet. It is most easily seen in the way blogs have influenced traditional media, wikis have revolutionized the encyclopedia business and how web 2.0 moves the power of creation and control from the few to almost everybody.

This powershift is, in my opinion, at the core of the Library 2.0 concept. In the Talking with Talis podcast, “meet the Library 2.0 gang”, Scott Plutchak challenges the Library 2.0 enthusiasts to show him what makes Library 2.0 any different from the underlying principles of good old-fashioned librarianship? I did not have a good answer to him then, but I believe I am closing in on what I believe to be the one concept that changes the way we so far have worked to fulfil the task that society has given us, and that we use Libraries as the tool to accomplish.

The thing that I believe to be at the core of Library 2.0, and the one characteristic that marks it as different from the basic “way of the library” so far, is the shift in power between user and librarian. This shift in power is evident in the emergence of “superpatrons” in different libraries, users who use their knowledge of web 2.0 to change, mutate and utilize the services the library offers online and combine them with other resources to construct new, hitherto unimagined services.

Why is this different? The library have so far in history been the domain of the librarian. No matter how we have strived to make the library more user friendly, introduce user panels or focus groups to get input, or how we have tried, in vain, to change the preception of the library from a a place with books, to an information source, we have been in control. Nothing changes in the library unless the librarians says so!

Well, this will now change. The control and power in the library will move from the librarian to the user. This means for instance that the library owner, the municipality, county, university, business or corporation will “mess” with the library, demand more return from the resources invested, and make changes in the way the library is run, i.e. put a non-librarian in charge of the library, make guidelines for purchase desicions etc.

And of course, the library user will make changes. These will first be felt online, where they will use library created data to create their own content or mashups. Library Thing is a perfect example of something that uses library data to an end that was not envisioned by the librarians who produced them, and indeed taking the traditional opac a step further. To quote the Library thing blog:

And who knew so many people would care about figuring out MARC fields?

Arkivert i:Librarian 2.0, Users

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

Arkivert i:Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, OPAC

Another norwegian take on Library 2.0

Magnus Enger who just finished his Masters degree in documentation science have decided to start writing in english, and his first post on Library 2.0 is just facinating and provides a much needed perspective from a new and fresh viewpoint (information/documentation science).
I think his tentative conclusion is a great step forward in finding a fundamental starting point for the development of a coherent Library 2.0 philosophy:

My tentative conclusion then, is that Library 2.0 is all about librarians trying to come to terms with the changes that are evident all around us, and beginning to think about how our own documents (secondary and systemic), and the services connected with them, should and could adapt to the demands from, and opportunities offered by, the new environment surrounding us.

Thank you Magnus. Keep up the good work!

Arkivert i:Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0