Global reach, local touch

I was reminded by the editor of the norwegian library journal “Bibliotekaren” (The librarian) (PDF) of the former IFLA-president Barbara J. Ford and her motto for her 2001 IFLA presidentship. It got me thinking about IFLA and what the organization could do for those who never will get funds or a positions that would allow them to travel to an IFLA conference (WLIC). A comment by Ian Smith from IFLA on my last post on IFLA 2.0 promted a lot of thought on how IFLA could use social networks to become more open to individual and virtual members.

First and foremost I wish that all librarians could easily get in touch with colleagues in other countries who work in simular libraries and with simular issues. It would be great to have a Facebook-like social forum for international librarians where people could discover all the differences and likeness that exists between librarians from different parts of the world.

You no longer need to travel to get to know people, have conversations and enjoy a professional and social relationship with librarians from around the world. Today social software can facilitate professional development online in a way that has been hitherto impossible. If IFLA taps into the potential of allowing virtual members and creates an arena for them to meet outside of WLIC, then they will have done the world of librarians the greatest favor ever:-) (Especially if virtual members pay a smaller fee, but don’t get any paper publications in the mail)

I also hope IFLA can initiate the development of professional resources with a practical focus that is written by “ordinary” working librarians and collaborations between librarians from different parts of the world. Maybe a wiki-like system or more like Google Documents where participation and contributing is open to all. Especially since a lot of potential virtual members comes from countries where there is a great need for practical professional development, but little resources to purchase professional publications. An open system for professional publications would be a great membership benefit. And I would bet that there is a lot to learn from the same librarians when it comes to solving problems and running libraries in adverse conditions. If this information was shared freely and in a dedicated network it would truly make IFLA an international members oriented organization.

Filed under: IFLA, Library 2.0, Library Associations 2.0, Web 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.

Filed under: Librarian 2.0, Library 2.0, Library lab, OPAC, Users, Web 2.0

Sold out – to the Man!

Yes, I have sould out. Really! To the Man! The norwegian national agency for archives, libraries and museums have asked me to write a proposal for a library 2.0 project, they’ll even pay me to do so! So, I’m sold, soul and body to the people who might let library 2.0 really happen here in Norway. If they accept my proposal it will be a project under the Norwegian Digital Library (NDL). I have long critizised the NDL for beeing to concerned with underlying structural issues (not that they are not important, but…) and forgetting the everyday lives of library users and workers. I have repeatedly asked for a more 2.0 approach where NDL invites people to participate and make the whole project visible and useful for library users.

I have proposed that NDL initiates and runs a blogging tool for libraries, a wiki like the Library success, widgets and toolbars, and just try to tap into all that energy and lively creativity that just sits around and waits for a challenge.

Anyway, as they say here in Norway: He who shouts in the woods gets pine needles in his mouth:-) So they challenged me back, saying that if I think all this is so important then I should write up a proposal and if the like it they’ll fund it! Wow, talk about challenge.

So these days I’m hard at work writing a proposal which have the working title: The library lab. The concept is a network and clearinghouse of small Web 2.0 projects which will try to collect and network all library hackers, librarians or users, who are interested in contributing. If somebody needs funding to do a small web 2.0 thing, the library lab can contribute with something e.g. funds for people to take time off from work or buy some piece of equipment.

The project also has a fairly large educational component, where the aim is to spread the word on library 2.0 and make more people able to use the basics to improve the services at their libraries, and even enable a few more hackers if possible. There will be conferences to kick this off and hopefully we can get a scandinavian feel to this as time passes.

My mind is bursting with ideas and I’m trying to get them down on screen as soon as possible, then get everything into a passable project proposal and then wait for the desicion. No matter the outcome it has been great to meet and communicate with people so high up in the system who gets the idea of Library 2.0. If this fails I probably was not the right person to write the proposal, but others will come who will do the job better and the, whatch out!

Filed under: Library 2.0, Library lab, Users, Web 2.0

Library 2.0 = MyLibrary?

Michael Stephens is collecting Library 2.0 definitions, and asked for mine. Since I'm not at all clear on what my definition is, what I came up with was based on what was going on in my mind at the time. It was good to get challenged on this and it is probably time we start to search for a definition, but at the same time I don't want to get too hung up on the search for a definition. There is still a lot of discussion, thinking and just goofing around that must be done.

Here is what I wrote:

Library 2.0 is an reaction from librarians to the increasingly library relevant developments in ICT (web 2.0 and social software) and an environment that is saturatedwith information available through new and more easily accessible channels. The reaction comes in the form of increased openness and trust towards library users, both online and in the library, and in the development of new communication channels and services that are more in tune with social developments.

What is wrong with this picture? Well, for one thing it is totally library- and librarian-centric, which is NOT what Library 2.0 is about. Secondly it does not incorporate the things I think are most important about how Web 2.0 can help libraries improve their service and how to accomplish their mission. The involvement of library users in all aspects of the library and the customization and individualization of library services.

Think of it as MyLibrary

(I got the idea for the name from my son, who whenever we entered the local public library would exclaim: MY library in a very proprietory manner and then run around as if he owned the place. The name MyLibrary is already taken, by a very nice little project at the University Library at Notre Dame),

a space where the individual user finds everything she wants tailored to her taste and needs. A library service on the web that is a combination of LibraryThing, Netvibes, IM-reference and Aquabrowser adapable to the individual needs and of course it should not be library dependent, but could incorporate content and services from all kinds of library-enteties. Comments, tagging and wiki-like features would also be part of this MyLibrary concept. And OF COURSE it would be possible to incorporate all MyLibrary features into other pages, like blogs, wikis and just plain startpages that people create for themselves. 
If I should write a new definition of Library 2.0 it would go something like this:

Library 2.0 is the natural evolution of library services to a level where the library user is in control of how and when she gets access to the services she needs and wants.

Filed under: Library 2.0, Users, Web 2.0

Trough of disillusionment

A very useful visialization of the development of understanding of new technologies:

From Information Visualization blog

UPDATE: One thing that struck me when I looked at this was the placement of blogs. I would say that blogs are further along the curve that web 2.0. Blogs have certainly entered the mainstream, and I believe that the usefulness seems to be recognized by a growing number of people.  

Filed under: Hype or Hope?, Web 2.0

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.

Filed under: Library 2.0, OPAC, Web 2.0