This article was downloaded by: [University of Tasmania]On: 03 September 2014, At: 03:25Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Serials Librarian: From the PrintedPage to the Digital AgePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wser20

Next Generation Library Automation: ItsImpact on the Serials CommunityMarshall Breeding aa Presenter ,Published online: 13 Mar 2009.

To cite this article: Marshall Breeding (2009) Next Generation Library Automation: Its Impact on theSerials Community, The Serials Librarian: From the Printed Page to the Digital Age, 56:1-4, 55-64, DOI:10.1080/03615260802679028

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03615260802679028

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

55

The Serials Librarian, 56:55–64, 2009Copyright © The North American Serials Interest Group, Inc. ISSN: 0361-526X print/1541-1095 onlineDOI: 10.1080/03615260802679028

WSER0361-526X1541-1095The Serials Librarian, Vol. 56, No. 1-2, Jan 2009: pp. 0–0The Serials Librarian

Next Generation Library Automation: Its Impact on the Serials Community

Next Generation Library AutomationVision Sessions

MARSHALL BREEDINGPresenter

In the upcoming years, we anticipate major changes in the realmof library automation. The upheavals have begun, with manydifferent movements challenging the models of library automationthat have prevailed for decades. The monolithic integrated librarysystem (ILS) continues to diminish in importance as libraries movetoward a transition to a loosely coupled suite of applications.While the ILS continues to play a role, though ever smaller, librariesare making investments in a new generation of automation prod-ucts, especially next generation interfaces more comprehensive inscope and better equipped to handle full-text electronic content.Electronic resource management (ERM) systems struggle as agenre of automation products designed to handle the specializedtask of helping libraries make sense of their explosively growingcollections of subscribed electronic content. Sparked by recentindustry events, libraries demand openness at a higher level thanever before, expressed through a tsunami of activity in the adoptionof open source library automation software and in demands foropen access to library data to enable better local control and inte-gration with third party products. Specialists in serials need to beaware of, and provide input into, the emerging visions of libraryautomation.

KEYWORDS library automation trends, integrated librarysystems, service oriented architecture, serials automation

INTRODUCTION

The realm of library automation has followed an evolutionary developmentpath of incremental change for several decades. The software used in librariestoday carries much of the same basic organization and design from the inte-grated library systems created more than three decades ago. Yet, libraries

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

56 Vision Sessions

have changed drastically since that time. Although it seems that the main-stream of library automation will continue along this path of gradualchange, there might also be a great opportunity in exploring some divergentpaths that involve creating a next generation of library automation softwareless tied to concepts and assumptions that have long since changed.

This essay describes some of the main features and trends of the currentlibrary automation scene. It highlights some of the business, technology,and product trends. The observations made in this essay are broadlyinformed by the author’s ongoing research that has been the basis of the lastseven editions of the “Automation System Marketplace” feature publishedannually in Library Journal, the data gathered and organized in LibraryTechnology Guides, and many other projects related to documenting andinterpreting the events, technologies, and products in the field of libraryautomation.

These trends should hold interest beyond systems librarians andadministrators involved with allocating resources related to technology. It’shelpful also for non-technical professionals and practitioners, such as thosespecializing in serials, to gain insight into and understanding of the largertrends playing out in library technology in order to ensure that their nichewithin the operations of libraries receives adequate attention as the automa-tion tools upon which they rely evolve or take new forms altogether.

THE CURRENT STATE OF THE LIBRARY AUTOMATION INDUSTRY

We live in a time of rapid change in the library automation arena.Although change has been a given throughout the history of libraryautomation, the shifts taking place now seem especially dramatic andtumultuous. Some of the dynamics currently taking place involve an accel-eration of the mergers and acquisitions that have resulted in fewer, butlarger, companies involved in library automation. The consolidation ofcompanies has resulted in the elimination of some of the available automa-tion products. This narrowing of options from the traditional vendors hasopened the door for open source alternatives and a new breed of compa-nies that base their business on the promotion, support, and developmentof these products.

Libraries find themselves today intertwined with an automation industryundergoing considerable transition and turmoil. Libraries have becomereliant on integrated library systems produced by a clique of specializedvendors. The standard approach for acquiring these products involves sub-stantial up-front license fees, annual payments for software updates andsupport. The licensed software includes only the executable files; theunderlying source code remains the proprietary property of the vendor andis kept safely from competitors and customers.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Next Generation Library Automation 57

This model, although still well established, is no longer the only alter-native. Over the last few years, open source versions of library automationsystems have begun to find a following. The initial wave of interestemerged mostly from public libraries, but in recent months some academicand special libraries have also been choosing open source ILS products.The open source movement has forever changed the dynamics of thelibrary automation industry.

Three different open source library automation systems have become partof the competitive landscape: Koha, Evergreen, and OPALS (OPen-sourceAutomated Library System). Some other open source systems have beendeveloped in other parts of the world, but have not seen significant levelsof adoption in North America. Koha was originally developed in NewZealand beginning about 1999. One of the first libraries in North America toimplement it was the Nelsonville Public Library serving Athens County,Ohio. Some of the staff involved in implementing Koha in this library even-tually founded LibLime as a company to provide support, hosting, anddevelopment services surrounding open source library automation software.Evergreen was created by the Georgia Public Library System (GPLS) to sup-port the 152 libraries involved in the PINES consortium. This system wentinto production on September 5, 2006. Evergreen has also been adopted byother libraries and its original developers from GPLS formed Equinox Softwareas a company to provide support and development services surroundingthis product. OPALS was developed in the open source model by MediaFlex, targeting primarily K–12 school and special libraries. This system hasbeen implemented by many school districts and consortia of school districts.Most of these installations lie within the state of New York, but the softwarehas begun its spread to other geographic regions.

Some of the events over the last few years have diminished manylibraries’ confidence in the incumbent set of companies involved in producingcore automation software products. We have experienced a number ofmergers and acquisitions that have ultimately resulted in an uncomfortablenarrowing of the products available to libraries. In some cases libraries thathad recently invested in the purchase and implementation of a new automationsystem found themselves facing the need to migrate. Whether it was out oftheir own experience or in observing the plight of their peers, many librar-ies have acquired a sense of skepticism toward the incumbent companies.

Financial entities from outside the industry have bought their way intoa strategic role in shaping the direction of the companies that produce soft-ware for libraries. In an earlier phase, many companies sought investmentsfrom venture capitalists to help finance research and development efforts.Today’s library automation industry includes involvement from large privateequity firms capable of acquiring one or more entire companies. Transitionsthat in previous phases were carried out with a more gentle hand towardthe libraries involved have taken place recently with harsh expediency.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

58 Vision Sessions

Yet, it’s important to look at the corporate behavior and business strategiesof each of the companies individually. Although some have demonstratedsome fairly harsh business plans that have had negative consequences onlibraries, others have expanded their development efforts and have beenable to attract new library customers.

Despite the momentum that open source library automation has gainedrecently, it still represents a minority of the overall industry. The traditionalvendors continue to sell their products and services at levels that maintaintheir dominance in the market.

PRODUCT AND TECHNOLOGY TRENDS

The pressures that libraries face in meeting the expectations of their usershave never been greater. Libraries continue to provide access to their physicalcollections and provide services in person while their involvement in elec-tronic content and services to remote users has seen enormous growth. Thedevelopment and deployment of automation products over the last fewyears reflect these trends.

Sales of integrated library systems (ILS) represent a smaller portion ofrevenues in the library automation industry than in previous times. Amongthe major libraries in North America, most libraries have purchased an ILS.Fewer libraries find compelling reasons to shift from the ILS product of onevendor to that of another. Most ILS sales continue to involve replacingsystems that have slipped into legacy status, where they are no longer beingdeveloped. Despite these challenges, some companies continue to see salesof new ILS products, although at lower levels than in previous years.

Dissatisfaction with the current slate of ILS products runs high. Theareas of concern lie in their inability to manage electronic content and withtheir user interfaces that do not fare well against contemporary expectationsof the Web. As the operations of libraries become more complex, many feelthat they are not well served by the automation systems in which they haveinvested. The concept of the integrated library system emerged when librar-ies dealt primarily with print materials. Extending these library automationsystems to manage electronic content has proven to be difficult.

Rather than redesign these systems from the ground up, we have seena proliferation of add-on modules to provide functionality for managingmany aspects of electronic content. In addition to the core integrated librarysystem, libraries routinely purchase OpenURL link resolvers, federatedsearch platforms, and electronic resource management systems.

Libraries have shown a strong interest in a new generation of discovery-layer interfaces that work more like some of the popular destinations on theWeb such as Amazon, moving away from the older style of Web-basedcatalogs. These new interfaces allow libraries to offer a greatly improved

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Next Generation Library Automation 59

environment for their users while maintaining their current core libraryautomation systems.

Web 2.0 concepts have become a major influence in libraries. Thisapproach to the Web focuses on collaborative and social interactions andworks toward increased user involvement. Libraries have taken to Web 2.0enthusiastically; blogs and wikis have become commonplace on librarywebsites, library resources have been opened up to input from library usersto allow tagging, rating, and reviewing content, and librarians have becomeactive participants in online social networking sites. An important compo-nent of the new discovery-layer interfaces involves the adoption of Web 2.0concepts.

EXTENDING THE CURRENT MODEL OF LIBRARY AUTOMATION

The current model of library automation as seen in the integrated librarysystem has been evolving for several decades. This model of the ILS wasdeveloped at a time when libraries dealt primarily with physical collections.The classic model of the ILS has been fairly constant since the earliest daysof library automation: cataloging, circulation, serials control, acquisitions,and an online catalog. Although each of these modules has evolved signifi-cantly over time and gained sophisticated and nuanced functionality, theyremain fairly sharply focused on the physical collection of the library.

One of the fundamental trends that has reshaped libraries for the lastdecade or longer involves increased involvement in electronic content.Managing physical collections remains an important component of libraries,but, over time, is becoming a smaller proportion of the whole. Almost alllibraries face a hybrid mission of supporting both print and electroniccollections and providing services appropriate to each medium.

Given the traditional ILS focus on physical collections, libraries havehad to go outside the ILS to gain the automation tools needed to manageand provide access to their collections of electronic content. We have seenthe development of new components that function independently of theILS, such as the link resolvers, federated search, electronic resource man-agement systems, and digital asset management systems. The ILS itself hasnot been reworked to handle this functionality natively.

The current phase of library automation involves a strong interest in a newgeneration of library interfaces. These new products go by a number of namessuch as next generation catalog or discovery interface. They aim to provide auser interface for library collections better suited to today’s Web-savvy users.Some of the features that have become standard expectations in these productsinclude relevance ranking of search results, presentation of facets for narrowingsearch results, enrichment of displays with images of cover art, and Web 2.0features giving users the ability to review, rate, and tag materials.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

60 Vision Sessions

These discovery-layer interfaces are not necessarily just replacementsfor the online catalog module of the ILS. They provide a single point ofentry for library users into a broad range of content and services providedby the library, serving as the front end for many different components of thelibrary’s automation environment. The Web-based online catalog may continueto function as a specialized tool for searching the library’s print collection.

The scope of the next generation discovery-layer interfaces includessearching all types of content held within the library collection: books,journal titles, journal articles, and multimedia content, just to name a few.It’s typical for libraries to offer separate interfaces for each of these collections,each available from the library’s website. These interfaces might include theonline catalog from the ILS for access to books; an A–Z list of electronicjournal titles, often generated from the OpenURL link resolver; a listing ofeach of the content products offering aggregated collections of journal articlesand other content; a federated search utility for searching multiple contentcollections simultaneously; digital collections of images and other multimediacontent. These separate interfaces result in a disjointed approach thatrequires library users to select the format of the content before they searchby concept or term. The new discovery-layer interfaces aim to provide asingle point of entry into all the collections of the library, hopefully provid-ing a more coherent way for users to gain access to content across all thecategories of collections.

A VISION OF NEXT GENERATION LIBRARY AUTOMATION

I think that it’s time to begin to think beyond the current slate of libraryautomation systems, including both the traditionally licensed and opensource versions. Given that libraries have dramatically changed what theydo over the last decade or so, could they be better served by automationsystems that were designed anew, rather than evolved from times past?

One of the fundamental assumptions of the next generation libraryautomation would involve a design to accommodate the hybrid physicaland digital existence that libraries face today. This environment wouldinclude inherent support for all the ways that libraries deal with collectionsand services. It would not extend software intended to manage physicalinventory to handle print, nor would it give primacy to digital content. Allformats would stand on equal footing.

Given that different libraries have different proportions of physicalversus digital content, having a system that handles both should make iteasier to allocate resources appropriately. One of the difficulties that librar-ies face today involves finding ways to allocate staff to deal with increasinglevels of electronic content, often having to wrest them away from theentrenched workflows surrounding print materials. When the automation

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Next Generation Library Automation 61

environment addresses print and electronic content in a more unified andintegrated way, personnel do not necessarily have to be uprooted to accom-modate transitions in collections.

It’s not that I necessarily believe that the legacy systems cannot evolveto meet the needs of today’s libraries. These systems will likely continue tobe used in libraries for many years to come. There may be benefits, how-ever, in the creation of an alternative option of one or more new automa-tion environments that have the opportunity of a fresh start based on thework that takes place in libraries today.

One of the key characteristics of today’s library automation systems liesin the way that it’s organized into the standard set of modules: cataloging,circulation, serials control, acquisitions, and online catalog. It may be thatthese functional modules no longer provide the best way to organize thework that takes place within libraries. We should at least be open to thepossibility that a fresh look at building automation systems for currentlibrary operations might end up with something other than the traditionalmodel.

In today’s technology environment, one of the major trends involvesthe emergence of service-oriented architecture (SOA) as the preferredapproach for building software applications. SOA provides an automationenvironment for an organization based on fairly small units of functionalityimplemented as Web services. Each Web service performs a discrete task,using communications protocols such as SOAP (Simple Object AccessProtocol) or REST (REpresentational State Transfer). Automation systemsbased on SOA can be thought of as composite business applications createdfrom a number of Web services. This architecture ideally provides a greatdeal of flexibility for an organization. If each of the business systems of anorganization follow SOA, high-level interfaces can be created that draw ondata and functionality spanning many different applications provided bydifferent vendors implemented across multiple units of the organization.

In an academic library environment, SOA would provide a basis forinteroperability not only within different applications implemented by thelibrary, but also with the business systems of the university. The acquisitionsprocess of the library might be based on software that interacts with thelibrary-specific software for bibliographic control and with the university’sbusiness systems for vendor and payment functions.

A new generation of library automation software created on top of theservice-oriented architecture would present the opportunity to reassessmany of the fundamental assumptions that constrain the effectiveness of thelegacy automation systems. Rather than having a number of modules thatreside within an integrated library system that manage the print inventoryand a number of separate applications that specialize in various aspects ofelectronic content, any new automation environment would weave togetherbusiness services that span both types of content.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

62 Vision Sessions

The creation of an automation environment based on SOA involves ananalysis of the workflows performed by personnel in the organization andby the users of the system. This analysis would yield an understanding ofnew ways that the individual tasks performed by library staff and usersmight be assembled in ways that yield more efficiency than possible whenshoe-horned into the prevailing ILS modules and add-on applications.

This new generation of library automation may take some time toemerge. Most of the automation products available continue to build on andextend the existing foundation. There are some initiatives in the earlyphases that may result in at least some of the benefits associated with breakingaway from the traditional models.

One project, called the Open Library Environment (OLE), with proposedfunding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, aims to take a fresh lookat library workflows and create a set of requirements that can form the basisof a new library automation environment based on SOA. Duke Universitywill lead the multi-institutional OLE initiative with other core participants toinclude Kansas University, Lehigh University, the National Library of Australia,the Library and Archives Canada, and the University of Pennsylvania. MarshallBreeding will also serve as part of the leadership group. Advisory partici-pants include the University of Chicago, Wittier College, the University ofMaryland, the ORBIS Cascade Alliance, and Rutgers University. One or moreof the traditional library automation vendors have also indicated some levelof planning of next generation automation along these lines, although noformal announcements have been made as of this writing.

IMPLICATIONS FOR SERIALS SPECIALISTS

The emergence of new models of library automation provides an importantopportunity for the serials community. Much of the work toward new prod-ucts developed under a new set of assumptions is in early phases of designand conceptual analysis. This presents the possibility for those with a deepunderstanding of serials management, to influence, or even help invent, anew approach to the management of this type of content.

The design of a new generation of library automation presents theopportunity to review and revise many of the fundamental assumptions inthe way that library personnel carry out work related to serials. Are thereaspects of the work that must currently be handled in separate systems thatcould be performed more efficiently in a more integrated environment?

Much of the work involved in developing the design of a service-oriented business application involves a close study of the specific tasks, theworkflows connecting these tasks, and the ways that data are handled. Afresh look at the way that the workflows involved in handling serials contentmight be organized might yield interesting results.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Next Generation Library Automation 63

Serials represent some of the most complex components of librarycollections. The transition from print to electronic distribution of this type ofcontent presents significant challenges to efficient automation. Any worktoward building next generation automation systems must be informed bythose with deep expertise in each of the functional areas of the library andfrom specialists in each of its collection types. Those involved in buildingnew or evolving old automation systems need input from serials specialiststo ensure that the next generation of librarians benefits from better automa-tion tools than have been available in current and previous times.

In the automation systems of today, serials content suffers from anespecially disjointed state of affairs. In the legacy models of library automation,management of serials information is handled by several separate systemswith an insufficient level of interoperability. The serials module of the ILSprovides title level bibliographic control and tracking of individual printissues, with features such as predictive check-in, claims, and routing.Payment and procurement of serials titles takes place through a variety ofapplications, including the serials module, acquisitions module of the ILS,and the business systems of the parent institution. Many libraries employOpenURL link resolvers to help manage access to and among all the differente-journals to which the library subscribes. Subscriptions to electronic journalsmay be handled through an electronic resource management system, whichin turn may involve complex data interchange relationships with the serials,acquisitions, and cataloging modules of the ILS, the link resolver, and variouspublic interfaces. MARC record loading services represent a fairly primitivelevel of interoperability between external e-journal management systemsand the ILS.

Due to the inflexibility of the original design of the ILS and the waythat separate modules have been developed to handle the management ofe-journals, the current picture of the management and access of serials contentlooks like a tangled mess. A fresh start at designing a library automationenvironment for serials might yield a much more coherent and efficientapproach to their management and access. The current bifurcated automationprocesses where tasks pertaining to serials are split onto different productsfor print and digital makes it difficult to allocate personnel proportionallyaccording to the priority and volume of activity. For some libraries, the per-sonnel dedicated to tasks such as check-in and claiming of print journalsmay be disproportionately high relative to the impact on library users whilethe staff dedicated to facilitating access to electronic content remains belowadequate levels.

Today’s realities of hybrid electronic and print distribution, aggregatedpackaging of content, and complex terms of access and ownershipexpressed through license agreements bear little similarity to the models ofprint subscriptions that prevailed when the mold of the ILS was established.It seems likely that automation environments involving serials content would

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014

64 Vision Sessions

look much different than what we have today if designed without thebaggage of the legacy systems currently entrenched in libraries.

We have also noted the transition to a new generation of discovery-layer interfaces. One of the key concepts of these interfaces involves abroader scope of content. Unlike the online catalogs that dealt primarilywith the involved access to the inventory of content managed within theILS, these new interfaces may span many other content sources. Eitherthrough federated search or harvested metadata, these interfaces ideallyinclude access at the article level, presenting many interesting challengesthat must be solved to ensure the success of these new interfaces. For librariesthat deploy this new style of interface, it’s important that those involved inserials be mindful of how their work is represented in this larger, oftenmessier environment in addition to how it looks in the more structuredonline catalog of the ILS.

A new generation of library automation may take some time to unfurl.In the meantime we can expect continued improvements in the currentproducts. It may take more than incremental changes to result in an auto-mation environment that produces a set of tools that fully enables librariesto meet the challenges they face with ever more complex collections.

CONTRIBUTOR NOTE

Marshall Breeding serves as the Director for Innovative Technology andResearch at Vanderbilt University and is the creator of Library TechnologyGuides (www.librarytechnology.org).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

asm

ania

] at

03:

25 0

3 Se

ptem

ber

2014