Word just came down that aadl.org has been honored by the ALA as “best website” for libraries with budgets of $6,000,000.00 or more. Kudos to all the fine people I’ve been blessed to work with–what a rewarding project!
We’ve got a lot in store for the rest of this year. In many ways, it feels like we’re just getting started. Time willing, we can continue to serve our community by rolling out the new and exciting features they deserve.
We couldn’t have asked for a better group of people at the 2006 Library Camp, last Friday. Many of the attendees were from in-state, but several logged a good number of travel hours to get here. It was for those, especially, that I was nervous, hoping that the format would yield some discussion worthy of their troubles. It did, and I had a great time.
I apologize in advance that I’m leaving out a lot of (probably important) detail in this post. During the talks, I chose to put my laptop away and not take notes–I wanted to be as engaged as possible. My mind is not exactly clear at this moment, either. The time between then and now has consisted of Easter preparations, Easter itself and the wholesale carnage that ensues when a two, five, and seven year old are all in various stages of a candy binge.
Getting Started
Friday morning began with coffee and bagels (thank-you Talis!) and a short meeting to put together the agenda for the day. As an open space event, this meant that the attendees themselves were responsible for the day. As we went through introductions, I jotted down some of the topics people were throwing out which generally came in the form of specific ideas or reasons for attending:
From the final schedule, you can get a general sense of which topics were hot. Feeling a little like a kid in a candy store after this exercise, I took part in the two “Bridging the Gap” sessions.
Bridging the Gap
The title “Bridging the Gap” hearkens back to a blog post of mine about some of the deep divisions between tech and non-tech staff in libraries. Priming this discussion took very little effort, because it seemed to be something that resonates strongly on both sides of the aisle. The group’s numbers favored the techies (and, as I sometimes find, the techie non-techies or non-techie techies) but the discussion did not turn into a gripe session, as I had feared it might, rather a very candid discussion about where problems exist in our organizations and how to address them. A number of people had some very good things to say here and the time quickly slipped by.
There is a level of miscommunication and mistrust that seems to have saturated the relationship between library and IT staff. Many veteran librarians feel threatened by technology because they are not as adept at incorporating it into their profession as their greener counterparts. This feeling is entirely understandable. In fact, one library’s approach was to ask existing managers if they were comfortable, willing, and able to facilitate the appropriation of emerging technologies. If they were not, then their position would be redefined. In other words, someone else would take their leadership position. While my initial reaction was to think this policy was harsh, I have to wonder whether protecting people’s egos is worth sacrificing innovation.
Another participant has put a great deal of thought and effort into making the IT staff/rest-of-the-library relationship work. (I think it was Sean Robinson, Information Technology Manager for Allen County Public Library in Fort Wayne, IN) His approach was to radically transform the IT department in such a way that customer service became the modus operandi. By instilling simple policies like, “answer the phone with a smile on your face” to broader, more radical attitudes, such as “always say yes“, he has been able to earn back a good measure of trust from his users. How did he find out what was bothering them? He sent out an anonymous survey via HR asking staff what they hated most about IT. Among answers like, “you never return my calls”, or “it takes you forever to fix my problem”, was a very interesting comment, “You guys have all the control”. Even though it makes perfect sense, I had never really thought about the fact that we could be perceived that way–it’s a completely valid observation. In many ways, IT departments do have “all the control”. It stands to reason, then, that finding ways to put control back in the hands of staff can help to alleviate the problem. The “always say yes” policy is part of that initiative. My feeling is that, instead of blindly saying “yes”, however, we can work together to achieve a shared vision. By improving communication, we can improve service through the combining of ideas, alternatives, and possibilities.
The second part of the discussion focused on technology and the patron. We talked a little about the OPAC here, knowing that another session was forthcoming on the very topic. The general feeling was that many of our OPACs simply do not return friendly results. One comment was made along the lines of, “patrons shouldn’t need to be a librarian to search the catalog”. I feel very strongly about this as well. A great example is the fact that most author searches require last-name first. Someone mentioned that they wanted Amazon or Google-type searches that would do spell-checking and suggest alternatives.
On the matter of getting technical expertise into libraries, Sean Robinson posed another good idea–that libraries “pay it forward”. In other words, if one library has the expertise to accomplish something, then they could help another library complete the same with with the expectation that the second library would, in turn, help out another. I thought this was an incredibly inspired notion, and completely doable! I’ll be the first to volunteer…
Low-hanging OPAC fruit
A discussion about OPACs doesn’t take long to turn into a vendor-roast. Admittedly, there was a little of that going on here–mostly for the usual reasons, all completely valid. From an academic standpoint, access to research databases is also in need of attention. My thought was that, technically, the two things hampering innovation the most at this point are 1) the lack of a meaningful API into our ILS and 2) no standards-based, dynamic index for our research databases. Given those two tools, we could completely transform our interfaces into something truly new and unique.
The problems with our OPACs can be split into form and function. The OPAC interface needs a major face-lift while search functionality and results leave a lot to be desired (relevancy ranking, anyone?)
Alan Gray (Darien Public Library) offered a number of great thoughts on approaching vendors, suggesting that many of the open-source tools now being developed could somehow be leveraged in such a way that vendors would have to take notice and react. The problem with open-source solutions, however, is that even though the software is free, implementation can be impossible for a library without much of a tech staff and support is almost non-existent.
On the subject of open-sourcing code: While I write much of my code modularly so that it can be reused by other people, most of the code behind AADL’s website is highly customized and cannot simply be dropped into place at another site. One of my goals is to get closer to the object model, so that the code can be reused. Much of the code written in libraries is highly site-specific and cannot be transplanted without a lot of work. Can we write code with portability in mind?
So what can we focus on now? Ryan Eby talked about the judicious use of iframes and javascript to embed dynamic content. Those have a number of drawbacks, however, and amount to “lipstick on the pig”. He used III’s screen file tokens as an example.
Many libraries would like to do a complete overhaul of their websites, like AADL, but are not able to due to technical or staffing constraints. Therefore, they fall back to shoe-horning new features in here and there at the expense of cohesiveness.
Web 2.0/Library 2.0 — What’s next?
I wasn’t sure what this discussion was going to do, or where it would go. I think someone started the discussion by simply throwing out, “so, what now?”
We talked a little about physical spaces and the way they shape the library experience. Alan Gray filled us in on some of the amazing things Darien Library is doing in their new building to foster a closer relationship with the patron. Apparently, they are installing reference “pods” where reference librarians can have one-on-one sessions with people. They’re also experimenting with some IP telephony products.
We heard from the folks at South Lyon who have been featured in both the New York Times and Library Journal for their use of the tablet PC. Hearing them talk, I couldn’t help being reminded that it’s not just the technology that transforms, but how it’s implemented and how committed we are to making it work.
I spoke a little bit about how we handle tech support here at AADL. I mentioned that we have an internal IRC server with a support channel and a web client for our help-desk folks. This allows them to field problems directly to a large number of technical staff.
We talked, quite frankly, about the term Library 2.0, and it seemed to me that most people present had very little problem with the name itself and simply wanted to talk about the ideas behind it. As one person said, “we need to call it something…” We also addressed the “change-or-die!” ideology. Basically, I don’t think libraries will wither away to nothing if we don’t take advantage of emerging technologies and opportunities (the key being opportunity). I do think, however, that we run the risk of missing the boat and relegating ourselves to a myopic role in our communities that will be difficult to break out of if we don’t take advantage of emerging trends–that includes popular culture. Someone else felt that perhaps we are making too much of this and that this kind of talk was part of a larger “culture of fear” that exists in America. It was mentioned that we need to continually reinvent ourselves, just like the business world does. Separating value from fad is difficult, but we shouldn’t ignore the trends.
We spoke a little bit about rising circulation, harnessing the long tail, setting up a Netflix model for patron holds, and a few other material-related topics, such as circulating laptops.
Many thanks to Les Orchard who bailed me out and did a quick intro to del.icio.us.
Wrap-up
Honestly, I wish the entire day had been filmed, or recorded, or both. I was struck by how fast time went by. Because virtually everyone in every discussion played an active role, a heck of a lot was accomplished. Unfortunately, it doesn’t lend itself to easy blogging because there were no slides, no prepared remarks and very little time to write. As we discussed at the end, the open spaces idea could translate very well to other locales, if you’re so inclined, I’d suggest one in your area.
links:
Library 2.0 Wiki -> Library Camp 2006
The unLibrarian
Les Orchard’s OPML notes (neat-o!)
Ryan Eby
Last year, I blogged a talk that University of Michigan's John Wilkin gave to our staff during our annual staff training day. I found the talk to be very interesting as he covered the Google digitization process from the University's perspective. His thoughts are particularly useful because he's not a Google employee so he's not spouting the company line, yet he is, in every way, an insider to the entire digitization program.
At any rate, he's speaking again tonight at AADL. If you're in the area and have the evening free, I'd highly recommend his talk. From the AADL website:
What does the UM/Google partnership to digitize the UM Library mean; what significance will this have for libraries, researchers and the public; and why is this so controversial? Through this project, UM hopes to guide more users: to their local libraries; to digital archives of some of the world's greatest research institutions; and to out-of-print books they might not be able to find anywhere else--all while carefully respecting authors' and publishers' copyrights. This event is the Library Director's program for 2006.
Each year, AADL Director Josie Parker chooses a current topic of community, state or national concern to highlight at a special program during this national week of celebrating libraries.
His talk will be at the Downtown branch in the Multi-Purpose Room. Regretfully, I'll be missing it due to prior commitments.
[tags] Google, Wilkin, Books, OCR, Ann Arbor, AADL [/tags]
I was reading a trackback the other day to my post, Library 2.0 websites: where to begin from Michael Dunne. He makes several very good points, but one, in particular, caught my attention as something I really haven't articulated yet to myself or others. On the subject of the social OPAC, he writes:
I have to confess I think he may be right, our library web sites are not places where you want to spend any time, and our OPACs are not fun places to be either. But then again, why should they be? Why should our library web site be a place where our students want to spend time? Is there something missing from their university experience that only our web site can provide? Why this fear, this sense that, unless we soon get up to speed we are all doomed?
First, I want to be clear that I don't think we are doomed if we choose not to implement social software in our OPACs. Libraries will not cease to function if we don't address the shortcomings of our online catalogs. It is very clear to me, however, that the OPAC is an empty vessel, waiting to be filled. Since their inception, OPACs have done the job intended by usurping the card catalog with stoic efficiency. Let's be honest, though and admit that something special slipped out into the ether when those large, cumbersome drawers were toted out and replaced by luminescent portal we now know as the catalog station. That's just the way it goes.
Much of what we lost was not due to function, but to form. Nothing will replace the look, feel, and smell of a dusty, old, age-cured card catalog, but it's been a decade, or two since we made the switch and I think it's okay to consider making our OPACs special. 
We've got a unique opportunity now as the planets of technology, internal discussion, and market penetration align. Perhaps now is the time to overcome institutional inertia and do something unexpected, if not radical. A social element belongs in the OPAC, our users are waiting for it and they'll soak it up like sponges if we give it to them. Web 2.0 provides both technology and a cauldron of ideas as to how to apply it. At the same time, a conversation that was once a distant murmur is gathering strength and it promises to disrupt policies and attitudes libraries have, for so long, conditioned themselves to be reflexive about. The public, meanwhile, has become inured with technology and complexity.
Let's not forget the role libraries play in a community. Perhaps the view from inside sometimes is only a view of ourselves reflected back at us, when in fact, the truth is that the public comes to us in need. Sometimes that need is small, casual. Sometimes it's the type of need that transcends record authority and can only be redressed by another in similar need. Are we really the final say on what the best resources are if someone wants help with teen pregnancy, domestic abuse, or cystic fibrosis? Can all of our collective training tell that needful person exactly what material best suits their situation?
Of course not. Our OPACs cannot be the golden kiosks we all want, but by inviting participation in the stewardship of a community resource, we can begin to build unique meta-collections that slide value, pertinence, and humanity into the search process. It may be that in that moment when a patron is about to turn away from the library, something catches their eye--a tag, a comment, some marginalia, perhaps, that puts the patron in front of the material they truly need.
The key component in growing social OPACs is community. Once you put the community you service into the process of delivering content back out into the very same community, you initiate a loop that will become exponentially richer over time as those neural connections glom on to each other. Findability is not the goal, but the activity and the experience which is why I say that OPACs have the potential to be fascinating places to visit and browse. They will not embody the comforting, muffled presence of the old card catalog. No, they'll be their own individual entities--borderless, shapeless creatures that somehow fit the people they represent.
That's a goal truly worth striving for.
[tags] library, librarians, library 2.0, web 2.0, OPAC, tagging, social software, search engines [/tags]
Through ALA's Adopt a Gulf Coast Library, Ann Arbor District Library has joined with Jefferson Parish Public Library to help raise funds for the rebuilding of their Belle Terre branch.
This press release was sent out today:
The Ann Arbor District Library, through the American Library Association’s Adopt a Gulf Coast Library Program, has been matched with a public library in Louisiana, with the purpose of providing assistance to a branch library severely damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Funds raised by AADL will go directly to the Jefferson Parish Library to help rebuild the severely damaged Belle Terre Branch.
Individuals who wish to donate may do so at any circulation desk in the Ann Arbor District Library system. Checks should be made out to the Friends of Jefferson Parish Public Library with ‘Belle Terre’ noted in the memo. AADL will forward the funds directly to this Louisiana Library which is so much in need. If individuals prefer, they may also mail checks directly to:
Friends of Jefferson Parish Public Library
P.O. Box 9391
Metairie, LA 70055The Belle Terre Branch of the Jefferson Parish Library system closed after Hurricane Katrina ripped two large holes in the roof of the building. Before the damage could be repaired, Hurricane Rita occurred, dumping more rain into these gaping holes. The entire collection, as well as all computers, furniture, shelving, and content, was lost.
All sixteen locations of the Jefferson Parish Library system, which borders New Orleans on both sides of the river, suffered immense damage from Hurricane Katrina and the further ravages of Hurricane Rita’s winds. Nearly a quarter million items from the Library system’s collection have been lost.
Eager to offer assistance, the Ann Arbor District Library joined the American Library Association’s ‘Adopt a Library Program, which provides an opportunity for libraries of all types in the US to provide assistance to these libraries in need.
This is an excellent opportunity for the Ann Arbor Community to directly assist in rebuilding a library that is still suffering from this natural catastrophe.
The Downtown Library is located at 343 South Fifth Avenue in Ann Arbor. For more information, call the Library at 327-4560.
