“Library 2.0: Balancing the Risks and Benefits to Maximise the Dividends”

Library 2.0: Balancing the Risks and Benefits to Maximise the Dividends Brian Kelly, UKOLN University of Bath Bath, BA2 7AY UKOLN is supported by: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/conferences/bridging-worlds-2008/ This work is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 licence (but note caveat) Resources bookmarked using ' bridging-worlds-kelly-2008 ' tag Acceptable Use Policy Recording of this talk, taking photos, discussing the content using email, instant messaging, blogs, SMS, etc. is permitted providing distractions to others is minimised. Email [email_address] Blog site http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/

About Me
Brian Kelly:
National Web adviser to UK Universities and cultural heritage organisations
Based at UKOLN, a national centre of expertise in digital information management and located at the University of Bath
Involved in Web since January 1993
Current Information World Review’s Information Professional of the Year
Over 300 presentations given since 1997
Current area of interest include Web 2.0, Web standards and Web accessibility
Introduction

Using Tools I Talk About
Work activities use Web 2.0 technologies & approaches:
RSS feeds for structured information
Geo-location data
Exploitation of 3 rd party services
Openness of resources
Risk assessment / management approaches
Introduction Talks given Jan-Sept 2008 Note also use of blogs, video blogs, YouTube Twitter, …

About This Talk
This talk:
Provides a brief summary of Web 2.0 and Library 2.0, with some examples of its use
Describes barriers to the successful deployment of Library 2.0
Looks at ways of overcoming such barriers
Acknowledging the barriers
Risk assessment and risk management
Staff development, new media literacy, …
Embracing diversity
Cultural change
…

Web 2.0
What Is Web 2.0?
Marketing term (derived from observing 'patterns') rather than technical standards - “an attitude not a technology”
Web2MemeMap, Tim O’Reilly, 2005
Characteristics Of Web 2.0
Network as platform
Always beta
Clean URIs
Remix and mash-ups
Syndication (RSS)
Architecture of participation
Blogs & Wikis
Social networking
Social tagging (folksonomies)
Trust and openness
Web 2.0

Library 2.0
Library 2.0:
Term coined on LibraryCrunch blog
Definition available on Wikipedia
Also note:
Arguments about validity of the term
Quality issues regarding Wikipedia entry

Academic Library Example
University of Wolverhampton provide 5 blogs to support academic departments
An Electronic Resources Newsletter is driven by blog software. The information is available via:
RSS
Email

A Facebook page provides:
Brief factual information
Links to key resources on main Web site
Dynamic content embedded via RSS
Calendar information embedded via Google calendar
Ability for users to become ‘fans’

Google calendar is used:
For key library events
To allow event details to be embedded in a variety of sites, including pages on institutional Web site

National Library Example
National Library of Wales “ Shaping the future: The Library’s strategy 2008-2009 to 2010-2011 ”:
“ We propose taking advantage of new online technology, including … Web 2.0 services …
It is expected that the Library itself will provide only some specific services on its website. Instead, the intention is to promote and facilitate the use of the collections by external users, in accordance with specific guidelines.”
Example of use of Web 2.0 services embedded within a Welsh Assembly Government funded project

Research Library Example
NRC-CISTI (National Research Council of Canada and Canada’s National Science Library & Publisher) is engaging with Web 2.0’s opportunities :
Use of wikis to support collaboration by staff / researchers
Use of SOA approaches to integrate services
Popularity of Facebook in Canadian universities
and challenges :
Privacy laws (similar to EU)
Multi-lingual issues
Popularity of Facebook in Canadian universities 

Benefits of Library 2.0
Delivery Mechanisms (“network as platform”):
Global outreach : maximise impact of and engagement with ideas
Outsourced services : allowing organisations to focus on their strengths and small institutions to engage on more equal terms
Exploits infrastructure : the standards (e,g. RSS) & services (Google, Amazon, ..) now in place
User Benefits:
User can create content
Can comment on other’s content
Users no longer passive consumers of content

Takeup Of New Technologies
The Gartner curve
Developers Rising expectations Trough of despair Service plateau Enterprise software Large budgets … Early adopters
Chasm
Failure to go beyond developers & early adopters (cf Gopher)
Need for:
Advocacy
Listening to users
Addressing concerns
Deployment strategies
…
This talk now looks at approaches for avoiding the chasm and shaping the curve

Evidence of Perceived Barriers
Series of Web 2.0 workshops for UK cultural heritage organisations is providing evidence of the barriers to effective use of Web 2.0 services

The Barriers Barriers Sustainability of services Data lock-in Data protection, privacy, … Lack of expertise Lack of interest: colleagues Costs Accessibility Difficulties in selection Inappropriate content Does it deliver expected benefits? Lack of interest: users

The Barriers Are Real!
Personal example using Squirl.info:
A record of books I’ve read (data gathered from Amazon)
Others have complained
My data was exportable via RSS but (a) how usable is this and (b) how obvious is this solution? Barriers
Amazon interface broke in Feb 2008
But there is an export function …
… which is broken

Sustainability of the Services
“ Network as the platform”:
Great when it works
But:
Reliance on 3 rd party companies with no negotiated contracts
Uncertainties over reliability, performance and long term sustainability
It’s not just the small companies, either:
Twitter
Slideshare (Amazon dependencies)
Google apps (e.g. GMail)
Skype (when large MS updates released)
Barriers

Privacy, Data Protection, …
Digital cameras, mobile photos, camcorders, … are increasing volume of photos / videos being taken and being published online.
But what about issues such as:
Privacy
Data protection
Confidentiality
…
Barriers

Lack of Expertise & Resources
Further feedback on barriers (and possible solutions) has been obtained from workshops for cultural heritage organisations:
Lack of in-house expertise
Lack of support from management
Barriers

Inappropriate Content
Inappropriate content might include:
Spam comments on blogs
Pornography
Misleading information
Illegal content
…
Barriers Over 250,000 spam comments submitted to the UK Web focus blog from Nov 2006 – June 2008

Beware The IT Fundamentalists
We need to avoid simplistic solutions to the complexities:
Open Standards Fundamentalist: we just need XML
Open Source Fundamentalist: we just need Linux
Vendor Fundamentalist: we must use next version of our enterprise system (and you must fit in with this)
Accessibility Fundamentalist: we must do WAI WCAG 1.0
User Fundamentalist: must do whatever users want
Legal Fundamentalist: it breaches copyright, …
Ownership Fundamentalist: must own everything we use
Perfectionist : It doesn't do everything, so we'll do nothing
Simplistic Developer : I've developed a perfect solution – I don't care if it doesn't run in the real world
Web 2.0 : It’s new; its cool!
Barriers

The Librarian Fundamentalists
Librarians:
Think they know better than the user e.g. they don't like people using Google Scholar; they should use Web of Knowledge (who cares that users find it easier to use Google Scholar & finds references they need that way?)
Think that users should be forced to learn Boolean searching & other formal search techniques because this is good for them (despite Sheffield's study).
Don't want the users to search for themselves (cf folksonomies) because they won't get it right.
They still want to classify the entire Web - despite the fact that users don't use their lists of Web links.
Want services to be perfect before they release them to users. They are uneasy with the concept of 'forever beta' (they don't believe that users have the ability to figure things out themselves and work around the bugs).
Barriers

Accessibility Barriers
Accessibility of public sector Web sites:
In 2002, the European Parliament set the minimum level of accessibility for all public sector websites at Level Double-A.
Riga eInclusion Declaration agreed to promote inclusive e-government by 'ensuring accessibility of all public Web sites by 2010, through compliance with the relevant W3C common web accessibility standards and guidelines'.
But don’t many Web 2.0 services infringe WCAG 1.0 guidelines with, e.g., dependencies on AJAX technologies. Barriers

Addressing Barriers
How do we address such barriers:
Ignore them and take risks
Refuse to engage with Web 2.0
Or adopt a balanced approach:
Assess and manage risks
Staff development
New media literacy / Transliteracy
Evidence-based policy-making
Clarification of purposes of services
Re-interpretation
Sharing solutions
Clarification of responsibilities
Possible Solutions

Interoperability Issues
What happens if Social Web services host your data and:
You can’t get the data back out?
You only get the unstructured or poor quality data back out?
You can’t get the comments, annotations, tags out?
There’s a need to:
Ensure data export capabilities or
Upload data from an alternative managed sources
Understand limitations of data export / import and make plans around limitations
Perhaps accept limitations
Possible Solutions

Sustainability Concerns …
What happens if Social Web and Library 2.0 services:
Are unreliable?
Change their terms and conditions (e.g. start charging)?
Become bankrupt
Things to remember:
Services may be unreliable e.g. Twitter
Market pressure is leading to changes to T&C – & paid-for services may become free (e.g. Friends Reunited)
Banks may go bankrupt too – but we still use them
Need for risk assessment and risk management
Possible Solutions

.. In Troubled Economic Times
What if the worst case scenarios occur?
Externally-hosted Web 2.0 providers : What if the services provided by Google, Yahoo, etc. prove uneconomic and the services are shut down or the terms and conditions changed, with perhaps free-to-use services becoming subscription services?
Our information providers : What if the services provided by individuals within our institution, who use Slideshare, Flickr, del.icio.us, etc. aren’t sustainable because the individuals may face redundancy, early retirement, etc.?
Our institutions : What if the economic downturn affects the sustainability of the IT services provided within our institutions?
Our national services : What if the national services provided for our communities are similarly adversely affected, with users preferring the services provided by the global services?
Our funding organisations : What if our funding bodies have less funds available, and are forced to stop or reduce the level of funding provided to national or institutional services?
Our user communities : What if our users expectations or interests change?
Web 2.0 In Troubled Economic Times , UK Web Focus blog, 24 Sept 2008

Managing Expectations
IAVE (International Association of Volunteer Effort) was “ founded in 1970 by people who saw volunteering as a means to make connections across cultures ”
But the IAVE Social network:
Only has 4 members
And no discussions
Possible Solutions

Support Issues
I don’t have the time to:
Understand it all
Use the technologies
Embed technologies in daily working practices
Train my colleagues
Common Craft video clips
You can:
View them at work
Listen to the podcast on the Tube
Use them in training
Possible Solutions

Maintaining Blog Enthusiasm
Had a blog for a while and lost your enthusiasm?
Worried that you won’t have anything interesting to write about?
The comments on the content of the blog were very pleasing for me:
Invariably relevant and thought provoking. Informed opinion that is not opinionated.
Entries and variety very interesting.
Excellent, I can’t remember reading anything that I thought was a waste of my time.
Informative and thought-provoking — it’s good to read a blog about ‘web 2.0′ that manages to raise interesting questions rather than being dogmatic about the ‘right’ way to do things.
marvellous - timely, detailed, open, and invitingly humble!
Have an online survey to solicit feedback – the feedback may reinvigorate you Possible Solutions You are not alone – there are many resources which provide advice on topics to blog about But perhaps blogging isn’t for you – not everybody has to blog, as I have discussed on my Seesmic video blog

Deployment Strategies
I want to do use the Social Web but:
The IT Services department bans it
The council bans it
My boss doesn’t approve
Area of interest to UKOLN:
“ Just do it”
Subversive approach – ‘Friends of Foo’ if Foo can’t use it
Encourage enthusiasts
Don’t get in the way
UKOLN briefing papers available (with CC licence). More to be released shortly. Possible Solutions

IWMW 2006 & Risk Management
Since IWMW 2006 we’ve taken a risk management approach to its evaluation of Web 2.0 technologies:
Agreements : e.g. in the case of the Chatbot.
Use of well-established services : Google & del.icio.us are well-established and have financial security.
Notification : warnings that services could be lost.
Engagement : with the user community: users actively engage in the evaluation of the services.
Provision of alternative services: multiple OMPL tools.
Use in non-mission critical areas: not for bookings!
Long term experiences of services: usage stats
Availability of alternative sources of data : e.g. standard Web server log files.
Data export and aggregation: RSS feeds, aggregated in Suprglu, OPML viewers, etc.
Possible Solutions

New Media Literacy
Information Literacy:
Can the library users assess and use the information they find using well-established retrieval tools
New Media Literacy / Transliteracy:
Can the library users assess and use the information they find using a diversity of tools
Are the users aware of the ethical aspects covering creation, use and reuse of content (copyright, plagiarism, …)
Users covers senior managers and policy makers & not just conventional library visitors, students, …
Possible Solutions Shouldn’t libraries be taking a leading role in developing and implementing new media literacy strategies

Re-interpreting Accessibility
Web 2.0 services may not comply with WCAG 1.0 accessibility guidelines:
But many Web 1.0 sites fail to comply too
The guidelines themselves are flawed
We can:
Make use of WCAG 2.0 guidelines (much better)
Seek to address the accessibility of the purposes of the digital services, rather than the digital resources themselves:
Blended accessibility for blended learning
Holistic accessibility
See papers of Accessibility 2.0, Holistic Accessibility, …
Possible Solutions

Re-interpreting Preservation
The JISC-funded PoWR project sought to engage with the preservation implications in a Web 2.0 environment
The project has used blogs and wikis to support its work
Possible Solutions

Is Web 2.0 Different?
Implications of Web 2.0 for Web site preservation:
Use of 3 rd party services (‘ network as platform ’)
Content  collaboration and communication
Richer diversity of services (not just a file on a filestore/CMS/database)
More complex IPR issues
Let’s look at:
Case study 1 - Wikis
Case study 2 – Blogs
Case study 3 – Reusing data
Case study 4 – Disposable data
Case study 5 – Slideshare
Web 2.0 Possible Solutions

Case Study 1: A Public Wiki
WetPaint wiki used to support various workshops
Approaches taken:
Open access to all prior to & during event (to minimise barriers to creating content)
Access restricted to WetPaint users after event
Access later restricted to event organisers
Web 2.0 Many aspects of Web site curation are to do with implementing such best practices, rather than implementing technical solutions See JISC PoWR blog post Possible Solutions

Case Study 2a: Blog Migration
How might you migrate the contents of a blog (e.g. you’re leaving college)?
This question was raised by Casey Leaver, shortly before leaving Warwick University
Web 2.0 Possible Solutions

Case Study 2a: Blog Migration
She migrated her blog from blogs at Warwick Univ to Wordpress
Web 2.0 Note, though, that not all data was transferred (e.g. title, but not contents) so there’s a need to check transfer mechanisms Possible Solutions

Case Study 2b: The Individual’s Blog (1)
Auricle blog:
Launched Jan 2004 by head of e-learning team, Bath
High profile & public visibility by early adopter & evangelist
Today:
It’s gone
Lost after evangelist left, new staff arrive, new priorities, …
Possible Solutions

Case Study 2b: The Individual’s Blog (2)
Auricle reborn:
Further Google revealed the blog has been reborn
New domain (www.auricle.org/)
New engine (Wordpress) & look and feel (but old engine still available)
New content being added
Old content still accessible
Preservation is helped by:
Continued access
Motivated & skilled owners
Possible Solutions

Case Study 3: Reusing Data
Blog post in Facebook. Possible concerns:
It’s not sustainable
You’ve given ownership to Facebook
Web 2.0
Response:
The post is managed in WordPress; Fb displays copy (to new audience)
Fb don’t claim ownership – they claim rights to make money
It’s not the service, it’s how you use the service
Possible Solutions

Case Study 4: Disposable Data
Twitter – example of a micro-blogging application
Facebook status messages is another related example
Web 2.0
Issues:
Will Twitter be sustain-able over a long period?
What will happen to the data?
What about the IPR for ‘tweets’?
What about institutional uses?
Possible Solutions

Many twitterers regard their tweets as disposal
I tend to use Twitter as a ‘virtual water cooler’ – sharing gossip, jokes and occasional work-related information with (mainly) people I know
And I exploited Twitter’s free delivery of SMS messages when it was available in the UK
Web 2.0 You could make use of clients which manage your tweets (e.g. treat like email) But you should develop your policies first, prior to exploring technologies Possible Solutions

Skype (or your preferred VoIP application) are growing in popularity
Web 2.0
Issues:
Is the digital data (the call) preserved?
What about the video and the IM chats?
Possible responses:
Am I bovvered?
I didn’t bother with analogue phones, why should I worry now?
Possible Solutions

Case Study 5: Slideshare
What happens to your slides if Slideshare disappears?
Recommended approach:
Master copy held on managed environment
Info on master on title slide and metadata
CC licence & download available – many copies
Possible Solutions benefits management KEY

The Amplified Conference
Amplified conferences provide opportunities to explore risk assessment / management approaches:
Sharing slides (in advance): will people listen?
Live broadcasting : who is listening; should I be cautious?
Recordings of audio / video : what if I look terrible; sound terrible; make mistakes?
The back channel : what if people ask difficult questions; irrelevant questions; …?
Talking (and sharing) photos : what about privacy; data protection; …?
How’s it funded? There are cost implications
Problems : What if things go wrong? Things can go wrong!
Possible Solutions “ Using Networked Technologies To Support Conferences ”, Kelly, Shabajee and Tonkin, EUNIS 2005 proposed an AUP framework

Applying Risks Generally
Web 2.0
May fail (and some have failed)
May be mission critical
Therefore:
We shouldn’t use
We should develop / deploy services within the organisation
Then we’ll be safe
Banks (1.0)
May fail (and some have failed)
Are mission critical
Therefore:
We shouldn’t use
We should manage our money ourselves
Then we’ll be safe
There are risks in just doing things in-house:
Risks of lagging behind; risks in changes to in-house resources & priorities; risks imposed by external funders; risks in lack of interest by our users; risks that staff will leave; …
Possible Solutions

But Who Takes the Risks?
We’ve done risk-taking previously e.g. assessing OPAC vendors; assessing open source software; ...
But now:
No formal contractual agreements
Services registered by individuals
Possible strategies:
Top-down approach: services must be approved
Laissez faire approach: anything goes
Flexible approaches:
Blog author should make mangers aware (cf BBC)
Departmental risk audits of use of 3 rd party services
Sharing of risks
…
Possible Solutions

Conclusions
To conclude:
Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 can deliver tangible benefits
But there are risks
And there are risks in doing nothing or sticking with existing approaches
The risks need to be assessed
The risks need to be managed
Sharing the risk assessment and risk management strategies fits in with the Web 2.0 philosophy

Questions
Any questions

http://ramblinglibrarian.blogspot.com	18
http://ramblinglibrarian.blogspot.jp	2
http://ramblinglibrarian.blogspot.in	2
http://ramblinglibrarian.blogspot.ca	1
http://ramblinglibrarian.blogspot.co.uk	1
http://ramblinglibrarian.blogspot.com.es	1
http://ramblinglibrarian.blogspot.com.br	1

“Library 2.0: Balancing the Risks and Benefits to Maximise the Dividends”

by bridgingworlds2008 on Oct 15, 2008

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

7 Embeds 26

Statistics

“Library 2.0: Balancing the Risks and Benefits to Maximise the Dividends” — Presentation Transcript