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

RFID, books and Library 2.0 – The missing link?

One thing I have missed in the Library 2.0 discussion is the link between the physical library and the digital dimension. Yes, we use our OPAC to show what items we have, and Casey Bissons WordPress OPAC shows a possible future for the OPAC, but the actual link between the physical book and the catalog record is not a very strong one. Now I wonder if RFID might not be the missing link.

Consider the following points:
1. In the future most consumer goods will have RFID tags.

2. Consumers will want to have information about the goods and some smart guy starts a database with consumer information. Just by "bipping" a RFID tag a person gets information about the item she is considering purchasing. She can herself choose which database she wants to get the information about the item from.
3. The demand for RFID readers with net capability increases and rapidly every PDA and mobile phone will have one.

4. Consumers will start writing reviews on all types of goods, canned food, sneakers, baby-toys etc. and build consumer networks, exactly like we see on Amazon and other Web 2.0 instances right now.

What are some of the implications of these points?

1. RFID readers integrated into everyday computing will give people access to information about an item without inputting information manually.

2. As libraries are increasing the use of RFID as identifiers in books this gives us some possible opportunities.

3. Identifying and getting information about an physical item in the library will be extremely easy for the average user. (today you usually go from virtual reference to the physical item, not the other way)
4. By allowing comments in the catalog and letting users with RFID readers comment directly from their PDAs and mobile phones our databases becomes far more valuable to our communities.

5. Harvesting comments from other libraries can give a really interesting insight into an item as part of the "library experience".

6. The library will of course lend out RFID capable PDAs to those who does not have them.

This is a pretty far out idea, and completely dependent on the proliferation of RFID readers into common devices, but not, do I feel, impossible. And it is a possible solution to the problem of linking data and physical item. And that link is, in my opinion, vital to the future of libraries.

 

Update March 27 – NOKIA have developed mobile phones with RFID readers for the Duch health service provider Allevo to use in home based services. The RFID chip in a home will give a care-giver access to information relevant to the person beeing served without carrying the information, or filling out forms.  

Arkivert i:Books, OPAC, RFID

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:-)

Arkivert i: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

Arkivert i:Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, OPAC

The Web 2.0 challenge to the OPAC

The presentation I really wish I had attended at the ALA midwinter: Designing an OPAC for Web 2.0 by Casey Bisson of Plymouth State university. (Presentation in Flash)
This is the best summing up of both the challenges and opportunities the OPAC faces in the Web 2.0 world I have seen so far. My first reaction was really just WOW! This guy has really thought this through and then he goes on to show us that he can walk where he talk. I especially liked the way he shows how relevant information can be integrated into the search result page, and of course permalinks, trackback and comments. The way of Bisson is a good example of how Library 2.0 can contribute to both the development of libraries and a wonderful addition to the social web. The example shows how useful a catalog can be, and also how libraries must open up their reservoirs of content and led others use and mix the information we have created to their own needs and ends.

This is really to good to be true. I’m about to talk about the same topic on friday when I get to say my thing at the “Knowledge Organization Days” at the Oslo College dept. of Library and Information Studies. The topic is Should the library catalog meet the Google-challenge and if so, how? Since I’m probably the poorest cataloger in Norway there has to be another reason they asked me, and I think writing about Library 2.0 has something to do with it. Anyway, mr. Bissons presentation has made it easy for me to focus on what can be done and some of the questions that needs to be asked if we are to continue to make our main tool, the catalog, a relevant feature of the library in the future.
It’s about people, not technology

Found this thanks to Panlibus.

Arkivert i:Library 2.0, OPAC, Web 2.0