Movingd2dto the networklevel
Lorcan DempseyOCLC
Rethinking access to information,IFLA Satellite Meeting,Boston, August 5-7 2008
Early television history museum, Columbus Oh
Credits
I am grateful to colleagues Ed O’Neill, Constance Malpas, Katie Birch and Jim Michalko for some slides, and to Dennis Massie and Matt Goldner for additional advice. Sam Smith did the network pictures.
OhioLink data from work in progress analysing historic circ data. Collaboration between OCLC and OhioLink.
Scott Wilson picture from his blog: WOBL – One Big Library on the Web. Influenced
by Dan Chudnov’s phrase, One Big Library.
NETWORK EVOLUTION
1. Print network: distribution to libraries which are close to users; good libraries are big libraries because access=collocation (80s)
2. Resource sharing. Cataloging/resource sharing/ejournals externalized to specialist services (90s-00s)
3. WOBL (one big library on the web). Library resource available in the idiom of the web (00s-). Global discovery/request supported by well-seamed logistics. Seamless policy-aware interaction between local, group, global.
SOME NUMBERS
1980s: +68%
1990s: +96%
Total Interlibrary Borrowing / Total Fulltime Students
At a Tier I ARL institution…
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Bo
rro
win
g t
ran
sact
ion
s p
er f
ull-
tim
e st
ud
ent
ARL Tier I Median ARL
Implementation of new local system puts OPAC access on hold; reliance on national union catalog increases visibility of collective collection -- temporarily
Information needs continue to exceed local collection capacity, even at the best-resourced institutions
At a Tier III ARL institution…
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Bo
rro
win
g t
ran
sact
ion
s p
er f
ull-
tim
e st
ud
ent
ARL Tier III Median ARL
Increased vulnerability to changes in information environment
limited purchasing powerlimited local infrastructure
Consortial lift … On demand research request
OHIOLINK
Subject Distribution
0 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000
Language, Linguistics, and LiteratureHistory and Auxiliary Sciences
Business and EconomicsPhilosophy and Religion
LawSociologyMedicine
Engineering and TechnologyArt and Architecture
EducationPolitical Science
Library Science, Generalities, andBiological Sciences
Physical SciencesGeography and Earth Sciences
MusicMathematics
PsychologyPerforming Arts
AgricultureComputer Science
Physical Education and RecreationChemistry
Anthropology
Circulation by Subject
0 1 2 3 4
Computer SciencePsychology
SociologyPhysical Education and Recreation
MedicineAnthropologyMathematics
Art and ArchitecturePerforming Arts
MusicChemistryEducation
Engineering and TechnologyBiological Sciences
Philosophy and ReligionPhysical Sciences
History and Auxiliary SciencesAgriculture
Language, Linguistics, and LiteratureBusiness and Economics
Political ScienceGeography and Earth Sciences
Library Science, Generalities, and ReferenceLaw
Hot Subjects
Computer Science (QA 75-76) Women, Feminism, Life Skills, Life
Style (HQ 1101-2044) Medicine: Special Subjects (R 690-
920) Buddhism (BQ) Nursing (RT) Broadcasting (PN 1990-1992)
Usage Distribution
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.001% 0.010% 0.100% 1.000% 10.000% 100.000%
% of Books
% o
f C
ircu
lati
on
12.86%(788,483
)
THE LONG TAIL
Library “Inventory”
20% head 80% long tail
Libraries aggregate supply at the local level…
“About the only places you could explore outside themainstream were the library and the comic book shop.”
Chris Anderson, “The Long Tail”
The long tail
Impact?
Systemwide efficiences
Aggregation of supply•Unified discovery•Low transaction costs
Aggregation of demand
Libraries and the long tail dynamic
Aggregate supply?
1.7% of circulations are ILLs (60% of aggregate G5
collection owned by one library only)
Aggregate demand?
20% of collection accounted for 90% of use
(2 research libraries over ~4 years)
Limited aggregation of supply at network level:Fragmented discoveryManagement data not usedHigh transaction costs – find it/get itFragmented inventory/shipping
But the global library resource is diffused across thousands of locations …
Leads to weak gravitational pull and low network visibility for libraries and library collections
Limited aggregation of demand at network level:Difficult to mobilize a large number of usersNot projected into user environments
University of Washington July-Dec. 2006/2007
100%increase in ILL requests via WorldCat
70% increase in borrowing within Summit consortium
WorldCat Local and Resource Sharing
Orbis Cascade
WorldCat Navigator
THE NETWORK AGEBehaviors in
Then: Users built workflow around libraries Now: Library must
build services around user workflow
Discovery happens elsewhere
Disclosure
Then: Attention abundant;
resources scarce Now: Attention scarce;
resources abundant
Use benefits from visibility
LibraryThing
Phase Discovery Logistics
Print network
Resource sharing
WOBL
Local
Union catalogDiscover/locate/request may be intermittent
Discovery elsewhere:Aggregate demand
Greater aggregate presence
Request anywhere
Cumbersome
Local/Group/Global
Cloud based logistics:
Aggregate supply: location/tracking/accounting
Move to collective collection ….
COLLECTIVE COLLECTION
Collective collection
• Visibility drives demand: discovery is global
• Pressure on space• Mass digitization• Rationalisation of off-site storage• Preservation of print becomes a big issue• ‘Optimal overlap’
– Yano/Ithaka work– 2:13; 6:0
IFM
THANK YOUhttp://orweblog.oclc.org
Top Related