The Future of OPACs, ILSs &
ERMs
Emporia State University SLIM,
LI815
Lori Wamsley
OPACs by Jessica Gagnon
ILSs by Melody Bentfield
ERMs by Daphne Tseng

OPACS – Future Needs

User Friendly

Google

User Needs and Expectations

Searchability

Keyword

Boolean

Search Results

Relevance

Display

Book covers

Item Statuses

Carry over terms

More Search Results

Scroll Back

Colors – previously clicked

Highlight keywords

Call number browse feature

Self-Service

Intuitive

Web 2.0

Ease of use – no training!

Current ILSs
Pros

Open-Source

Proprietary

”Free” as in ”free”

Ease of use
beer and ”free”

Technological support speech

Vendor endorsement 
Growing vendor

Widely known support and
recognition

Bundled with other
programs

Modifiable to the
needs of the library

Current ILSs
Cons

Proprietary 
Open-Source

Vendor may choose 
Lack of technical
to discontinue support or know-how

Modifiable only to a for most libraries
certain point 
Not as widely known

Costly 
Not necessarily able

Vendors may choose to work with other
to dictate uses and platorms
licenses


ILS Emerging Trends

Recent ILS Development

WorldCat's new ILS

WorldCat Local

Eliminates many steps

Convenient

Monopoly?

What kind of control will OCLC gain
with this new development?

On the other hand...

A push for Open-Source still exists

Eliminates the middle-man and gives library
control

Will systems like Koha develop quickly enough
to provide a healthy balance of open vs. closed
systems?

Is there a future for the ILS?

As budgets decrease over time, what will be the
best long-term investment?

Will a ”web-scale” (Breeding, 2009) program
like WorldCat Local replace our current idea of
an ILS?

Will Open-Source programs attempt to meet
this growing demand to be more Google-like?

Why does library need ERMs?

multiple manifestations of the same resource,

maintenance of volatile URLs,

tracking and maintaining electronic holdings,

and making resources accessible from within
the library as well as remotely.

Issues: For the ERM system

Consortium support and functionality

Usage Data

Resource Succession

Data standards

Issues: For library world

user behavior and expectations

3% information seekers start with library
86% start with Google or other search engines

Find information anyplace anytime when he/she want

Disintegration of ILS

Pricing

Intellectual property

perpetual access and archiving

Let’s think about ERMs!

Can integrated library management systems
“sufficiently meet the complex management needs
of the online resources environment?”
(From:Beth Forrest
Warner)

Is user-friendliness best achieved by a simple,
Google-like interface that patrons say they want?
Or is it user-centered to educate users-teaching
them the best way to get the best results, even
though they do not like having to learn something
complicated?

Reference
Mi, J. & Weng, C. (2008). Revitalizing the library OPAC: Interface, searching, and display challenges.
Information Technology and Libraries, 27(1), 5-22.
Balas, J. L. (2007, October). Will the ILS Soon Be as Obsolete as the Card Catalog? Computers in Libraries, 27(9), 41-43. Retrieved July 7,
2009, from ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source. (Document ID: 1357959971).
Breeding, M. (2009, May). OCLC Enters Fray with New Library System. Library Journal, 134(9), 17. Retrieved July 7, 2009, from ABI/INFORM
Global. (Document ID: 1719635381).
Breeding, M. (2009, February). Opening Up Library Automation Software. Computers in Libraries, 29(2), 25-27. Retrieved July 7, 2009, from
ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source. (Document ID: 1639779191).
Breeding, M. (2008). Making a business case for open source ILS. Computer in Libraries, 28(3), 36-9.
Breeding, M.. (2007, November). It's Time to Break the Mold of the Original ILS. Computers in Libraries, 27(10), 39-41. Retrieved July 7, 2009,
from ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source. (Document ID: 1378980971).
Cibbarelli, P. R. (2008). Helping you buy ILSs. Computers in Libraries, 28(9), 6-9, 45-53.
Fischer, R., & Lugg, R. (2006). The real cost of ILS ownership. The Bottom Line, 19(3), 111-123. Retrieved July 7, 2009, from ABI/INFORM
Global. (Document ID: 1143400381).
Jewell, T. D., Anderson, I. et al., (2004) Electronic Resource Management: Report of the DLF Initiative,
Washington DC: Digital Library Federation. http://www.diglib.org/pubs/dlfermi0408/ (accessed July 19,
2009).
Yu, H, & Breivold, S. (2008). Electronic resource management in libraries : research and practice. Hershey,
PA: Information Science Reference,
Bluh, P. & Hepfe, C. (2006). Managing Electronic Resources:Contemporary Problems and Emerging Issues.
Chicago: Association for Library Collections and Technical Services, American Library Association.