Search

OLE Project at ALA 2009 LITA Emerging Technologies Interest Group

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    What is OLE?The OLE project is intended to help libraries control their own destinies by shaping the technology systems that support their core mission, using technology that is open, flexible and governed by the library community. The OLE Project will produce a community source alternative to current ILSs, better suited to modern library workflows and designed to inter-operate with enterprise-level business and content applications beyond the library.======================Community Source AlternativeOLE will use open, flexible technology to produce a community-sourced alternative to current ILS. OLE will be open source software, but developed using a community source model. Community source limits initial development efforts to partners who have committed financial and/or human resources for the duration of the development cycle. Once the initial release of the software is deployed, one of the benefits of open source is that it allows developers to modify the code to meet their institution’s particular functional requirements. Ideally, those changes are funneled back to the larger OLE community and, where appropriate, incorporated into future releases.   ==============Planning Phase & International Participation:With support from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, an international group of research libraries began working with the library community in September 2008 to plan the project. Project participants are developing system requirements and an initial design document, to be ready in July 2009. The next steps are to develop a project proposal and seek funding for development of the OLE software. The aim is to have a reference implementation available by mid  2011.The planning phase project team consists of representatives from libraries of different sizes, public and private institutions and varied U.S. and international locations. Partners were chosen for their ability to contribute to both functional and technical planning for community source SOA projects, for their influence in the library community and for their experience in library innovation relevant to this project. By including a wide variety of people and institutions, we increase the likelihood that our design document will reflect the full range of library needs and that we will have a community highly motivated and well prepared as we move towards the build phase.

    Why OLE Now?Current ILS products are inadequate. This project grew out of a series of conversations about the problems libraries were experiencing with their current Integrated Library Systems. The closed, proprietary, tightly integrated systems that helped library efficiency 15 or 20 years ago now impose workflows that restrict rather than support the activities libraries need to do. Libraries are spending time and money trying to work around the systems they have purchased. There is a growing need for library systems to interact with other enterprise systems.Many libraries have implemented new enterprise student information systems, personnel directory management systems and purchasing systems since the current ILS systems were developed. Many colleges and universities have enterprise-wide course management systems which serve as critical access points to information and research projects, but the ILS typically does not integrate with course management systems. Libraries need to be able to interact with other enterprise systems in order to provide the best possible experience for learners and researchers.Vendor consolidation constrains choices.Many libraries also believe that current ILS’s are nearing the end of their lifecycle and will need to be replaced within the next few years. Given the number of vendors who have gone out of business, have been purchased or have fallen behind in their delivery of promised new systems, it seems likely that there will be fewer rather than more choices of ILS products offered by commercial providers in the future.Libraries need to control their own destinies.To remain strong in a rapidly changing information environment, libraries need to be able to modify their technology to fit evolving needs and to ensure that their technology systems support changing workflows rather than being controlled by outdated and inflexible systems. The current economic downturn makes it more critical than ever that libraries be able to change and adapt quickly. The OLE Project is intended to help libraries control their own destinies by shaping the technology systems that support their core mission, using technology that is open, flexible and controlled by the library community.A detailed rationale is available in the proposal document which is posted on our website. I hope you will take time to read it and will share your ideas by posting comments on the website or sending email to the OLE listserv.

    Why OLE Now?Current ILS products are inadequate. This project grew out of a series of conversations about the problems libraries were experiencing with their current Integrated Library Systems. The closed, proprietary, tightly integrated systems that helped library efficiency 15 or 20 years ago now impose workflows that restrict rather than support the activities libraries need to do. Libraries are spending time and money trying to work around the systems they have purchased. There is a growing need for library systems to interact with other enterprise systems.Many libraries have implemented new enterprise student information systems, personnel directory management systems and purchasing systems since the current ILS systems were developed. Many colleges and universities have enterprise-wide course management systems which serve as critical access points to information and research projects, but the ILS typically does not integrate with course management systems. Libraries need to be able to interact with other enterprise systems in order to provide the best possible experience for learners and researchers.Vendor consolidation constrains choices.Many libraries also believe that current ILS’s are nearing the end of their lifecycle and will need to be replaced within the next few years. Given the number of vendors who have gone out of business, have been purchased or have fallen behind in their delivery of promised new systems, it seems likely that there will be fewer rather than more choices of ILS products offered by commercial providers in the future.Libraries need to control their own destinies.To remain strong in a rapidly changing information environment, libraries need to be able to modify their technology to fit evolving needs and to ensure that their technology systems support changing workflows rather than being controlled by outdated and inflexible systems. The current economic downturn makes it more critical than ever that libraries be able to change and adapt quickly. The OLE Project is intended to help libraries control their own destinies by shaping the technology systems that support their core mission, using technology that is open, flexible and controlled by the library community.A detailed rationale is available in the proposal document which is posted on our website. I hope you will take time to read it and will share your ideas by posting comments on the website or sending email to the OLE listserv.

    Behind the scenes the process appears seamless and effortless but the discovery interface, working with OLE, enables …

    Poll: Which of the following do you see as being very important for the future of your library? (use the six things Mike talked about as one word descriptions of what OLE offers, e.g. flexibility, community ownership, service orientation, enterprise level integration, efficiency, sustainability)briefly describe how OLE addresses each of these six things.Principles that underlie the OLE framework are:Flexibility: Supports a wide range of resources, accessed by a wide range of customers, in a variety of contexts, and provides structures for extending and adding new types of resources, customers and contexts. Community ownership: Designed, built, owned, and governed by and for the library community on an open source licensing basis; sustained by the community with the assistance of a thriving vendor marketplace; evolving over time through transparent processes that enable and respond to input and innovation from the community. Service Orientation: Developed using the methods of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) and implemented with Web Services to be a modular and technology-neutral framework that ensures the interoperability of library business systems and accommodates a diversity of solutions without the risks posed by single source providers. Capable of customization to support local needs. Enterprise-Level Integration: Designed to adapt to and integrate with other enterprise systems such as research support, student information, human resources, identity management, fiscal control, and repository and content management. Efficiency: Provides a modular application infrastructure that integrates with new and existing academic and research technologies and business processes for improved efficiency and effectiveness of the institution, and which meets current and future business needs of the community. Sustainability: Creates a reliable and robust framework for the identification, documentation, innovation, development, maintenance, and review of software necessary to furthering the operation and mission of libraries.

    Regional Design Workshops- Held from November ‘08 through January ’09- Goals Share OLE and its long-term objectives with a broader library audience Introduce the concept of SOA and BPM Identify the most critical library processes Create workflows of those processes which will be synthesized by the core project team Envision the system of the future (Blue Sky). What would it look like? Create a buzz and get buy-in from universities not currently involved in the projectPoll: How many of today’s participants attended a Regional Design Workshop? 350+ people from 95 institutions at 11 regional workshopshttp://oleproject.org/workshops/

    - Meet regularly (conference calls, document sharing, face-to-face) Group meets in person every two months for intensive work sessions Last two meetings: January at Lehigh University, March at University of Kansas==================== Webinars are used to provide updates to the greater community and gather feedback and input Every 6-8 weeks So far: 350+ individuals from 170+ institutions in webcasts==================== Community Information sharing - Interaction with broad audience at 25+ conferences, panels

    1st Year Deliverable that will be implementable – ERM module – Resource Sharing – Acquisitions – Show more Kuali RiceSay we have a business plan and we are ready to share it -

    Why OLE Now?Current ILS products are inadequate. This project grew out of a series of conversations about the problems libraries were experiencing with their current Integrated Library Systems. The closed, proprietary, tightly integrated systems that helped library efficiency 15 or 20 years ago now impose workflows that restrict rather than support the activities libraries need to do. Libraries are spending time and money trying to work around the systems they have purchased. There is a growing need for library systems to interact with other enterprise systems.Many libraries have implemented new enterprise student information systems, personnel directory management systems and purchasing systems since the current ILS systems were developed. Many colleges and universities have enterprise-wide course management systems which serve as critical access points to information and research projects, but the ILS typically does not integrate with course management systems. Libraries need to be able to interact with other enterprise systems in order to provide the best possible experience for learners and researchers.Vendor consolidation constrains choices.Many libraries also believe that current ILS’s are nearing the end of their lifecycle and will need to be replaced within the next few years. Given the number of vendors who have gone out of business, have been purchased or have fallen behind in their delivery of promised new systems, it seems likely that there will be fewer rather than more choices of ILS products offered by commercial providers in the future.Libraries need to control their own destinies.To remain strong in a rapidly changing information environment, libraries need to be able to modify their technology to fit evolving needs and to ensure that their technology systems support changing workflows rather than being controlled by outdated and inflexible systems. The current economic downturn makes it more critical than ever that libraries be able to change and adapt quickly. The OLE Project is intended to help libraries control their own destinies by shaping the technology systems that support their core mission, using technology that is open, flexible and controlled by the library community.A detailed rationale is available in the proposal document which is posted on our website. I hope you will take time to read it and will share your ideas by posting comments on the website or sending email to the OLE listserv.

    Stage one (O in Ian’s graphic)Denial.Stage two (1 in Ian’s graphic)The vendor begins to make use of open source software internally as part of its ongoing research and development process, realizing that it can save money on non-differentiating code and improve interoperability.Stage three (2 in Ian’s graphic)There is a realization that open source is a two-way street and that to get the most out of the software it is using the vendor needs to contribute back to the process, helping to improve the overall quality of the code and making further savings on not having to support forked code.Stage four (3 in Ian’s graphic)The vendor begins to champion specific projects, and the open source approach in general, as it begins to see the full value of collaborating with partners and competitors in the development process.Stage five (the right side of the dotted line)Up until now the process has been largely led by engineering. The realization of greater value pushes the vendor over a line to realize that open source engagement needs to be business-led, rather than engineering-led. It begins to engage in multiple projects and realizes the true business benefits of open source engagement.That’s my take anyway. Ian will no doubt have more insight. One of the reasons this works so well is that you can think of a vendor engaged in community-led open source development and pretty easily plot them on this chart.As Ian notes in the comments below, the chart can also be used to track the engagement in open source communities of enterprise users, as well as vendors.Here’s an interesting experiment: where would you place Microsoft?

    Building community first allows flexibility for long-term development and provides a strategy for sustainability

    One of the first steps in working towards a service oriented architecture is creating a map of our desired business processes. Before we do that, we need to have an overview of what we do, and especially what we do that is a required process for any future system. To do this, and the major goal of this workshop, we need to create business process models.Business process modeling is essentially a way to write down what we do. We start from a high level and describe the functions we perform and then we break these down into step by step descriptions. We’ve already created our list of core and significant processes, so we know what we’ll be dissecting.Our next set of exercises involves taking some of those processes and describing it in detail which will include each step, contingencies that happen during the process and start and end points

    Here’s an example of a process being modeled. There is no sound. This uses a system called business process modeling notation which involves using boxes, triangles, and arrows to model out the process. Although you may certainly model your process to this detail, it is not necessary. We’re more concerned that you write down the steps.

    Here is an example of a process. As you can see, this group used boxes and arrows to show how the process worked and where dependencies caused things to change (top broken off process and bottom broken off process).

    What will our environment look like in 2 years – less vendors – less options – where can we manage legacy content?

    Which of these would be the most important to your organization?

    Add Rice Image with Library Label – Fade from reference model which is now familiar to the rice imagesHow will we fit with the academic enterprise in the next 2 – 5 years -

    Develop Build ProposalReiterate Mike’s key points=================Upcoming presentations/eventsOLE Workshop (April 22) (Indianapolis, IN) – One day workshop at the IUPUI University Libraries in Indianapolis, IN sponsored by the Indiana University System Libraries, Purdue University Libraries, and the University of Notre Dame Hesburgh Libraries. The purpose of this workshop is to provide a forum for representatives of Indiana and Midwest regional academic and research libraries and related institutions to discuss and provide feedback on the current state of the OLE Project Planning Document. Register online atCNI - Coalition for Networked Information (April 6-7) (Minneapolis, MN) – Robert McDonald & Beth Warner, project briefing focusing on update since December and potential for build phaseEducause Enterprise (May 6-7) (Indianapolis, IN) – Robert McDonald, Michael Winkler, Beth Warner, presentation to primarily upper-level IT administrators and staff on OLE and potential build phaseNJLA - New Jersey Library Association (April 29-30) (Long Branch, NJ) – OLE reps will participate in a panel discussion.CANVAS GROUP FOR MORE COMPLETE LIST (see Events page)=========================Project Team Meeting – MayMay 28-29, Duke University – Finish polished draft of design document and project report==========================Draft design document – JuneWill be available for comment on OLE website============================Feedback Currently seeking feedback on new documents – Scope, Assumptions, revised Reference Model, revised/new process diagrams, etc Get complete list Emphasize that we really seek, value and encourage community feedback============================Final design document and project report – July 2009The OLE Project will provide a fully vetted planning document for a community sourced information management system to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation by July 2009. ============================

    impossible to estimate for OLE, but empirical data from other CS projects suggest adopters may realize 35% (lrg. Institution) – 90% (small institution) annual savingsEarly adopters will incur higher costsProven middleware can or will reduce the risks of exposure of sensitive data and improve auditability and compliance of software dataKuli Rice – can be used as a foundation for further enterprise integration, new opportunities for collaboration

    Favorites, Groups & Events

    OLE Project at ALA 2009 LITA Emerging Technologies Interest Group - Presentation Transcript

    1. July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      The Open Library Environment Project:
      Building an ILS for Service Oriented Architecture Integration
      Robert H. McDonald
      Indiana University
      Beth Forrest-Warner
      University of Kansas
      Carlen Ruschoff
      University of Maryland
      John Little
      Duke University
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    2. Tweet our Session
      Follow OLE on twitter @oleproject
      Tags
      #ala09
      #ala2009
      #lita
      #etig
      #oleproject
      #totebag - snarky
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    3. Poll Anywhere
      3 Ways to Poll
      Text a code to 99503 = sms txt 99503 “code”
      Tweet a code to @poll = @poll “code”
      Go to http://poll4.com = enter “code”
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    4. Poll #1
      In ten years, if it isn’t digital, it will be invisible.
      Text a code to 99503 = sms txt 99503 “code”
      Tweet a code to @poll = @poll “code”
      Go to http://poll4.com = enter “code”
      http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTMxODY4ODk2NQ
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    5. OLE and Mellon
      OLE has been funded by the OLE partners and the Andrew W Mellon Foundation’s Research in Information Technology Program
      Technology that benefits one or more of the constituencies traditionally served by the Foundation.
      Technology that benefits multiple institutions.
      Technology that can realistically be developed by the grantee within the proposed timeframe and budget.
      Technology that provides a significant cost savings.
      Compelling, demonstrable technology for which funding is required to create fully shareable versions, expanded features, or improved reliability.
      Technology for which intellectual property rights are available.
      Technology for which there is a credible support and self-sufficiency plan.
      Technology whose value can be objectively assessed.
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    6. Overview
      What is OLE and What Has OLE Been Doing for 12 Months?
      Community Source Software and Governance!
      Enterprise Level Management for Libraries!
      OLE Future Directions!
      Questions!
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    7. OLE Overview
      • What is the OLE Project?
      • Community source alternative to current ILS
      • International participation from libraries and consortia
      • 100+ institutions, 350+ individuals, 10+ regional workshops, multiple webcasts and presentations
      • Planning phase: September ‘08 – July ‘09
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    8. Why OLE Now?
      Our current library business technologies cost too much and deliver too little. We need to rethink our services and workflows, and to use technology that enables innovation rather than locking us into the status quo.
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    9. Our Institutions Change
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      Enterprise financial systems
      Enterprise identity management systems
      Course management systems
      Leverage local systems
      Collaborative Systems
      ILS – More & Less
      More external integration and collaboration
      Less internal, one-size-fits-all integration
    10. Our Users are Changing
      Library technology systems have not kept pace with changing users and a changing information environment.
    11. Scenario
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      Economist researcher
      OLE Campus
      Manages locations
      Manages resource subscriptions
      Integrated into
      Course/Learning Mgt. System
      Accounting
      Identity (Student / HR)
      Consortia
    12. Scenario
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      Professor uses one of many access portals
      OLE behind the scenes
      Discovery enables access to full-text from various remote and nearby locales
      Routing of physical materials enabled by OLE
      On-demand purchases approved by patron
    13. Scenario
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      Payment options
      Delays noted (Recall, purchase, delivery)
    14. Scenario
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      GPS-enabled
      Original Search and mapping combined to highlight locale of like resources
      OLE notes event-driven resource use for recommender services
      Supports markup and social networking
      Mashups
    15. OLE Principles
      • Flexibility
      • Community Ownership
      • Service Oriented Architecture
      • Enterprise-Level Integration
      • Efficiency
      • Sustainability
      Which of these do you see as being critical for the future of your library?
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    16. Poll #2
      Which of these do you see as being critical to the future of your library?
      http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/MzU5OTI3ODQz
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    17. Where we’ve been
      • Regional Design Workshops
      • Did you or your staff attend a workshop?
      • 350+ people from 100+ institutions!
      • Who attended?
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    18. Where we’ve been
      • Project team meetings
      • Webinars
      • Community information sharing
      • Review information on the project website, oleproject.org
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    19. Where We Are Today?
      • Scope Document
      • Vision
      • Principles
      • Functional Scope
      • Architecture
      • Governance
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    20. Where We Are Today?
      • Project Assumptions
      • OLE will provide services that will help academic & research institutions accomplish their core mission by improving the library’s ability to deliver its content and services throughout the institution’s activities.
      • OLE provides a transformative opportunity to the institution through its support of a more collaborative approach to research, teaching and learning.
      • OLE will enable libraries to be more of a component with the enterprise infrastructure raising the relevance of libraries to the organization’s mission
      • Libraries are core to the research institution.
      • Adopting a model of community-source software development and a technology infrastructure based on service orientation is, in itself, a strategic innovation for libraries and universities.
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    21. Where We Are Today?
      • Project assumptions (cont.)
      • Business workflows at peer libraries are more similar than they are different.
      • Libraries need to be able to leverage a dynamic information environment to support the research and educational mission of their institutions
      • Digital formats will dominate our business processes.
      • Collaborative and consortial activity is increasingly as important to libraries as work at local institutions.
      • Library business processes will increasingly involve interactions with external service providers and consumers.
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    22. Where We Are Today?
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      • ILS Market
      • Community Source
      • Governance
    23. Why OLE Now?
      • Current ILS products are inadequate
      • Growing need for library systems to interact with other enterprise systems
      • Vendor consolidation constrains choices
      • Libraries need to control their own destinies
      July 11, 2009
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
    24. Current Academic ILS Market
      Ex Libris/Endeavor - 1465
      Voyager - 862
      Aleph 500 – 603
      Innovative Interfaces - 1163
      Millennium – 1163
      SirsiDynix - 1076
      Unicorn - 740
      Horizon/Symphony – 336
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    25. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Legacy ILS Functionality
      Public User
      Interface:
      Circulation
      Acquisitions
      Vendor Based ePurchasing
      Functional
      modules:
      Cataloging
      Serials
      Vendor Based Metadata Enhancement
      Data Stores:
      Staff Interfaces:
    26. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Current ILS
      Legacy ILS Functionality+eContentModule+Advanced DiscoveryInterface
      Learning Mgmt./Campus Portal Feeds
      Proxy/VPN for eContent Access
      Circulation
      Acquisitions
      OpenURL
      Linking
      Federated
      Search/
      Advanced
      Discovery
      Electronic
      Resource
      Mgmt.
      System
      Cataloging
      Serials
      Unified Workflow Interface for Staff
    27. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      SOA Models for ILS?
      Composite
      Applications
      Reusable
      Business
      Services
      Rule Oriented
      Workflow Process
      Data Stores:
    28. Community Source Projects
      In traditional open source development the software code is made available for inspection and modification from the beginning of a project. In contrast to open source development, in so-called 'community source' projects, such as Sakai, Kuali or the Symbian Foundation, a consortium of institutions or commercial companies sign an agreement, by which they decide to contribute a certain amount of financial or human resources, and get in exchange exclusivity in influencing the development of the project during an initial closed stage.
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      From JISC OSS Watch
      http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/communityvsopen.xml
    29. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Open Source Projects
      From - http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource
    30. Community Source and OLE
      Community Source Projects
      Have sustainability over the course of the product development
      Invest in the community of practice for long-term support and development
      Fosters innovation and shared knowledge
      Coordinates institutional goals rather than individual goals of the community of practice
      Mitigates risk among peer institutions rather than in a single entity or vendor
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    31. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Governance Options
      • Institution-based
      • e.g. University of Michigan DLXS
      • e.g. LOCKSS
      • Community-based
      • More established: Sakai, Kuali
      • Emerging: DSpace, Fedora Commons
      • Try to join an existing organizational framework?
      • Where do libraries fit in an enterprise academic environment?
    32. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Build Plan Recommendations
      Governance
      LIBRARY
    33. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      KUALI – Community Source
    34. Kuali Foundation
      Kuali Financial
      Business Management System
      Kuali Student
      Student Management System
      Kuali Coeus
      Research Administration System
      Kuali Rice
      Middleware for SOA service bus integration
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    35. More on Kuali Foundation
      Founded as non-profit in 2004
      Colorado State University and San Joaquin Delta College currently running Kuali Financial
      Article The Next Open Source Movement – InsideHighered.com July 6, 2009
      "I think it's (kuali) going to be good for the industry," he said. "It's going to force vendors to understand that institutions don't like vendor lock-in. You can't talk to an institution that enjoys being locked in and this will force all of us in the industry to really understand that.”
      Jack Kramer – Sr. VP SunGard Higher Education
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    36. Further Readings on Kuali
      Kuali Foundation
      http://www.kuali.org
      Business Officer Magazine – May 2009
      http://www.nacubo.org/Business_Officer_Magazine/Magazine_Archives/May_2009/
      InsideHigherEd.com – July 2009
      http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/07/06/kuali
      Open Source in Open Education – from Opening Up Education by Iiyoshi, Kumar, and Brown
      http://books.google.com/books?id=gWrHFmAYX5EC&pg=PA1&dq=opeingin+up+education&lr=
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    37. Poll #4
      Should library systems be better integrated with campus business & learning systems?
      http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTE5NTEyMjk2OTE
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    38. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Enterprise Level Interactions
      • Library business systems need to be better integrated and interoperable with campus business and learning systems
      • Libraries must interact with and leverage other key campus systems, including financial, HR, student information, identity management, course management, and content repository systems
    39. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Transforming Teaching & Learning
      39
    40. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Curating and Preserving Our Content
      40
    41. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Leveraging Enterprise Systems & Content
      • Better interoperability and integration with:
      • Campus identity management systems
      • Leverage both on-campus and externally (consortiums)
      • Better ability to work with trusted peers (ex. Shibboleth)
      • Campus HR and Student systems
      • Why copy faculty and student information into the ILS?
      • Campus financial & purchasing systems
      • Take advantage of existing vendor information, invoice management, bill paying, etc.
      • Course management & content repository systems
      • Leverage library investments through better integration of content, both purchased and created on campus, into courses
      • Will require difficult discussions of policies and workflow, but pay-off is potentially more secure data (fewer copies), more efficient processes, and better use of campus investments
    42. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Creating Options
      42
    43. OLE: New Methods, New Models
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Defining New Functionality
      Redefining the Old
    44. Poll #5
      Has your campus implemented any form of SOA?
      http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTIxMDgxMzA1Mzc
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    45. What is SOA?
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Service Oriented Architecture
      Service
      System capabilities that provide access to functions and data are appropriately exposed to other components (applications, devices, networks, etc.)
      Oriented
      Uses “open” interoperability protocols
      Architecture
      In its purest form, it’s the connection of systems (simple or complex)
    46. SOA Video
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    47. Poll #3
      In your opinion, is SOA and the interoperability that it offers a good idea?
      http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTMwNTc1ODE4Mg
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    48. What is BPM?
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      • BPM = Business Process Modeling
      • Design approach
      • BPM process
      • What needs to be done
      • How to do it, in what order, and contingencies
      • Separate from the systems and services that do the work
      • Mid-level detail
      • Necessary before determining shared processes as part of SOA
    49. Example of a Modeling Process
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-Mbr31f2dg(no sound)
    50. Process Example
      Select entity / obtain metadatahttp://oleproject.org/overview/ole-reference-model/select-entity/select-entity-obtain-metadata/
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Process Module: Select Entity
      Process Title: Create Metadata
      Definition: Process where metadata is created to supplement that which was obtained or when metadata is not available to be obtained.  The metadata created will support the activity that leads to the decision to select or reject an entity for inclusion in the environment.
      Use Cases: Metadata being obtained may include descriptive (e.g. a review of the entity), holdings (e.g. what is available and being considered for acquisition), authority, financial, or other types. The metadata may be harvested from or deposited by another system
    51. Select Entity/Create Metadata
      51
    52. Select Entity/Deliver Resource
      52
    53. OLE Reference Model
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    54. Poll #6
      In five years, most enterprise systems will be run in the cloud.
      http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTYzNTcxMTIyMQ
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    55. OLE: Next Steps
      Theory to Reality
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    56. Build Plan
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      • Use Existing Pieces
      • RICE Middleware
      • Kuali Nervous System (KNS)
      • Kuali System Bus (KSB)
      • Kuali Enterprise Workflow (KEW)
      • Kuali Enterprise Notification (KEN)
      • Kuali Identity Management (KIM)
    57. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Build Plan
      • Use Existing Systems
      • Existing Data Feeds
      • Open ERM Data
      • Shared Database Feeds
      • Existing Discovery Tools
      • WorldCat Local
      • LibraryFind
      • VuFind
      • Blacklight
      • XC (eXtensible Catalog Tools)
    58. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Build Plan
      • Outsource Coding
      • Model – Kuali Coeus
      • Single Project Manager (MIT)
      • Kuali Coeus outsources code to India-based software development firm
      • Build Plan for OLE will outsource code to Bulgarian-based software development firm
    59. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Build Plan
      • Mellon Foundation Matching Funding
      • Two Year Timeline
      • Year 1 Deliverables (will focus on one of these)
      A fully functioning core of services and framework – the OLE Core & Components
      Management of Electronic Resources Services
      Leased eContent
      Owned eContent
      Peer Resource Sharing Services
      Sharing content – peer to peer
      Sharing workflow – consortial
      Acquisitions Services
      Will be the same as MER
      Will add EDI/Direct MER
      CRM
      Unique service in this space
      Service to whole institution
      Track usage and needs of clients over time/looking for an LTR
    60. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Build Plan
      • Two Year Timeline
      • Year 2 Deliverables
      • Integrations
      • EDI/local ERP
      • discovery interface (broker for multi-discovery use)
      • data migration services
      • registries and utilities
      • Orchestrations
      • define workflows to match relevant, local resource set
      • determine optimum dataflows including effort distribution and sharing
      • Functional Scope
      • meet the business needs of a research or academic library
      • allow things to be turned off
    61. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Academic Enterprise (ERP)
      Academic Enterprise
    62. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Library as Enterprise App
      ERP
      Library
      PCH
      HR
      FIN
      ER
      Acq
      P2P
      KNS/KSB
      KNS/KSB
      Library as Academic Enterprise Partner
    63. OLE Reference Model
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    64. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Business Plan
      • Have a vetted business plan
      • Want to share with others
      • Will setup individual discussion for interested parties
      • Actively Seeking Build Partners
      • Looking for Consortia-led Partners
    65. OLE Build Phase
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      • Find Build Partners – Spring
      • Upcoming events/presentations
      • Project team meeting – May
      • Draft design document – June
      • Ongoing community input and feedback
      • Final design document & project report for Mellon Foundation and Public – July
    66. Risks of Participation
      No CS project has yet failed, but failure …
      Achieve consensus
      Acquire sufficient resources
      Deliver software of adequate functionality
      Problems could arise with contract software
      Adoption
      Build sufficiently large vendor services community
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    67. Benefits of Participating
      Cost Savings
      Annual (35 – 90 percent for other CS projects)
      Migration costs remain the same or diminish somewhat
      Access to emerging technologies
      Use monetary resources in a productive and directly influential fashion
      Leverage ROI on campus for enterprise systems
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    68. Benefits of Participation
      Secondary
      Exposure
      Staff enrichment
      Productivity
      Focus on culture of strategic innovations and innovative technologies
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    69. Cost of Participation
      Cash Contribution
      HR Contribution
      Commitment to run some portion of the OLE software
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    70. Cash Contributions
      $5.2 Million total partner contribution
      7 partners - $185K / year
      6 partners - $216K / year
      5 partners - $260 / year
      Consortia
      Spread out the costs
      Spread out the influence
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    71. Questions?
      ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
    72. ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL
      July 11, 2009
      Invest in Your Community?
      Thank you!
      Send comments or additional questions to
      robert@indiana.edu - john.little@duke.edu - rushoff@umd.edu - bwarner@ku.edu

    + John LittleJohn Little, 4 months ago

    custom

    686 views, 0 favs, 3 embeds more stats

    The Open Library Environment Project (OLE Project): more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 686
      • 430 on SlideShare
      • 256 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 27
    Most viewed embeds
    • 253 views on http://oleproject.org
    • 2 views on http://oleproject.org:80
    • 1 views on http://www.libraryjournal.com

    more

    All embeds
    • 253 views on http://oleproject.org
    • 2 views on http://oleproject.org:80
    • 1 views on http://www.libraryjournal.com

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories

    Tags

    more
    -->
    Search
    RSS Feed
    What's new?

    © 2009 SlideShare Inc. All Rights Reserved