Investing in a time of desruptive change


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Investing in a time of desruptive change

  1. 1. Investing in a time of disruptive change…<br />Rachel Bruce, Programme Director, JISC<br />Niso, Library Resource Management Systems Forum, Boston, MA, USA, October 8-9 2009<br />Picture credits at the end<br />
  2. 2. Investing in a time of disruptive change…<br />My context<br />Changes<br />How we’ve responded and options for the way forward<br />
  3. 3. Mode of distribution<br />
  4. 4. e-everything<br /><ul><li>e-journals
  5. 5. e-books
  6. 6. e-learning
  7. 7. e-research
  8. 8. Born digital R & L</li></ul>= New processes<br />
  9. 9. The scale of the problem in relation to managing & sharing research data?<br />
  10. 10. Open Science, Open Educational Resources<br />
  11. 11. JISC & the British Library: Google Generation Report<br />
  12. 12. “Generation Y” “ … thinking and processing information fundamentally differently from their predecessors” (Prensky 2001, np). <br />“ …they trusted the results they got on Google above those from Librarians.” (Connaway/Radford)<br />Patience v want it now<br />Meta-search v full text<br />Complexity v simplicity <br />Logical linear learning v multi-tasking<br />Largely text-based v multi media<br />Learning from expert v figure it out yourself<br />Lynn Silipigni Connaway, OCLC,<br />Programs and Research <br />
  13. 13. Q. How do you see the future of libraries? Are they becoming obsolete?A. For scientific research, probably. There is a need for purchasing which should be done nationally by specialists but most of the rest will be web-based. (Peter Murray-Rust, Cambridge University )<br />” Libraries are providing these high growth fields [information provision to scientists] value in the acquisition of resources - for example licensing costly journal collections - but otherwise have been relatively absent from the workflow…”<br />The library is generally becoming less visible and the perceived dependency on the library reduced (humanities academics having more dependency than scientists). The report summarises this as ” although librarians may still be providing significant value to their constituency, the value of the brand is decreasing” ( Ithaka) <br />
  14. 14. “In fine weather I like to sit under a tree in local parklands”,<br />Student, University of Oxford – JISC, Responding to Learners<br />
  15. 15. The perfect storm<br />
  16. 16.
  17. 17. Chaos for eveyone<br />“…the current system is so brittle, and the alternatives are so speculative, that there’s no hope for a simple and orderly transition from State A to State B. Chaos is our lot; the best we can do is identify the various forces at work shaping various possible futures.”<br />Clay Shirky <br />
  18. 18. buildings<br />systems<br />Changes<br />people<br />
  19. 19.
  20. 20. What do we do with what we’ve got ?<br />
  21. 21. software is designed around institutional processes for managing local print collections – acquisition, accession, circulation, restricted loan, reservation - these were the automated manual systems. <br />electronic materials management and access to global resources requiring different processes which have been appended to these systems over time. <br />See – Electronic Resource Management, Open URL Resolvers, Metasearch engines. <br />
  22. 22. “Libraries can do much more to open up their metadata for re-use. Players such as OCLC and TALIS already offer platforms that enable library data to be re-used. OCLC’s Worldcat…enables the find this book in a library link from Google Scholar…begs the question of 180 or so separate OPACs alongside …M25, COPAC and SUNCAT. The costs of thisduplication must be considerable and the limitations of this approach increasingly frustrating to users of the Google Generation.”<br />
  23. 23. See the wood for the trees…<br />Connectedness, platform, network effect<br />(JISC/SCONUL LMS Study, 2008)<br />
  24. 24. TILE<br /> investigate Library 2.0 in UK HE<br />i.e. current library uses of Web 2.0 applications and services to identify the most significant related challenges (‘Pain Points’) facing library systems development & document using the methodology of the international e-Framework.<br />to propose a high level library domain model positioning these challenges in a library ‘business process’ context which might assist library service partners to develop a shared articulation of service objectives and functions.<br />
  25. 25. TILE Pain Point<br />Deriving Context<br />My<br />I.D.<br />From VLE or <br />Registry?<br />My<br />Activity<br />LMS/VLE/etc<br />Click streams<br />My<br />Studies<br />Modules from <br />VLE or VRE<br />My<br />Context<br />My<br />Networks<br />e.g. FaceBook<br />Subject <br />Networks<br />My<br />Responses<br />Bookmarks<br />Reviews <br />& Ratings<br />Not in initial <br />specification<br />My<br />Parameters<br />Incl. Location<br />& Override<br />My<br />Publications<br />Academic<br />Standing<br />My<br />Interests<br />Keywords<br />User controlled<br />HE ‘controlled’<br />Automated<br />
  26. 26. Usage data and click streams<br />“ Supermarkets gain valuable insights into user behaviour by data mining purchases and uncovering usage trends. Further insights are gained by analysing purchasing histories, facilitated by the use of store loyalty cards.”<br />“ Librariescould gain valuable insights into user behaviour by data mining borrowing and uncovering usage trends. Further insights are gained by analysing borrowing histories, facilitated by the use of library cards.”<br />Dave Pattern, University of Huddersfield – TILE Workshop – December 2008<br />
  27. 27. Network level <br />workflow<br />Google, … <br />Personal<br />Workflow<br />RSS, <br />toolbars, .. <br />Institutional <br />Workflow<br />Portals, <br />CMS, IR, …<br />…<br />Integrated<br />local user <br />environment?<br />Library web <br />presence<br />Resource <br />sharing, … <br />library<br />Consumer environments<br />Management environment<br />Bought<br />Licensed<br />Faculty&<br />students<br />Digitized<br />Aggregations<br />Resource sharing<br />Dempsey – October 2007<br />
  28. 28. Above Business Requirements – Realms?<br />Corporation<br />Channel<br />Client<br />
  29. 29. Realm > Requirement > ProcessDecomposition Examples<br />Corporate<br />Build Assets<br />select, acquire<br />Manage Assets<br />ingest, curate, monitor<br />Exploit Assets<br />describe, enhance, expose<br />etc<br />Channel<br />Access<br />register, find, locate, deliver<br />Add Value<br />recognise, advise, contextualise, store<br />Client<br />Consume<br />register, find, access, reference, store<br />Contribute<br />comment, enhance, share<br />Example<br />Realm<br />Corporate<br />> Requirement<br />> Manage Assets<br />>> Process<br />>> Ingest<br />>>> Function<br />>>> Barcode books<br />
  30. 30. “[The challenge is] how can local institutional needs and for global discovery develop sympathetically and efficiently together “<br />“The difficulties [arise from] our changed requirements and the fact that we don't appear to be able to afford new systems to meet them; therefore traditional vendors don't develop those systems, and open source systems so far seem to replicate the old systems.”<br />
  31. 31. HEFCE funded SCONUL Shared Services feasibility<br />What, if any, opportunities exist to develop a shared service response (possibly Open Source) within the current LMS landscape<br />Whether there is a viable business case and delivery model to support any such opportunities<br />
  32. 32. 4 Library vendors 80% of the market<br /> Vendors are responding but current systems<br />not well placed for future scenarios. <br />Shared Services provide benefits not <br />generated by market forces.<br />Early draft, unpublished.<br />
  33. 33. 83 institutional responses<br />Minimal differences based on Institution focus (Research, Teaching, Specialist), Service type (e.g. Converged or not) or Library Management System.<br />Over 60% of the respondents are involved in or planning some form of shared services activity.<br />Whilst 89% stated they were open to ‘any arrangement that delivers benefits’, a significant number supported a governance mechanism operated by ‘a sector agency’ in the style of JANET (UK). <br />There was little appetite for an outside operator (17%) or even a single HEI (35%) leading and recruiting partners.<br />
  34. 34. 92% interest in a shared service undertaking e-Journals licensing;<br />92% interest in a shared service undertaking e-Books licensing;<br />84% interest in a shared system for Electronic Resource Management;<br />77% interest in a shared service undertaking Electronic Resource Management.<br />High level of readiness to consider Open Source software (30% with a further 45% neutral)<br />
  35. 35. Principal interest is clearly focused around electronic resource licensing and management and general cataloguing (all scoring 84% or greater interest)<br />Services that would facilitate more efficient and value added resource discovery fell in to the next group with over 50% interest<br />OPAC, search / locate, ILL<br />Open Data services<br />Support functions such as forums and help desk<br />
  36. 36. Administration<br />Registry, Finance<br />Learning &<br />Teaching<br />Research<br />Library<br />Domain<br />Infrastructure<br />Storage, Services, Security<br />
  37. 37. Shared Services options<br />Option 1 - ‘Do nothing’<br />Option 2 - ‘Advisory Service’<br />Option 3 - ‘Discovery to Delivery (D2D) Service’<br />Option 4 - ‘LMS Software as a Service (SaaS)’`<br />Option 5 - ‘e-Content Licensing Scheme with an Electronic Resource Management (ERM) platform’<br />Option 6 - ‘e-Content Licensing Scheme with ERM & D2D platform’<br />Option 7 - ‘e-Content Licensing Scheme integrated with a total Library Management & Services Platform’<br />Early draft, unpublished.<br />
  38. 38. Direction<br />of Travel<br />E-Books<br />Licensing<br />Phase 3<br />Phase 2<br />Local<br />Collection<br />Cataloguing<br />Phase 1<br />Electronic<br />Resource<br />Cataloguing<br />Electronic<br />Resource<br />Management<br />E-Journals<br />Licensing<br />Circulation<br />Search Locate <br />Deliver<br />E-content<br />Local Digital<br />Content<br />Management<br />Recommender<br />Services<br />Partner<br />Help Desk<br />Search Locate <br />Full Catalogue<br />Inter-Library <br />Loans<br />Print Journals<br />Acquisition<br />Patron<br />Help Desk<br />Acquire<br />Reading<br />Lists<br />Monographs<br />Acquisition<br />Manage<br />Service<br />Support<br />
  39. 39.
  40. 40. October 6, 2009<br />SkyRiver Connects Libraries With New Bibliographic Utility<br />New service offers clear, cost-effective choice over current marketplace offerings<br />Emeryville, CA—SkyRiver today publicly announces the launch of its new bibliographic utility service. Already in use in both public and academic libraries, SkyRiver provides a clear, low-cost alternative for cooperative cataloging.<br />
  41. 41. Making our assets available to the world<br />ma<br />Linked data <br />Resourceorientated<br />
  42. 42. Sustainable scholarship<br />Excellence in learning<br />
  43. 43. Keep your eye on the future<br />
  44. 44. Expect the Unexpected<br />
  45. 45. “We must digitise and democratise. … the point is not to turn our backs on the world but to make the most of this extraordinarily rich university setting in order to share wealth.”<br />Robert Darnton, Harvard University <br />“ Libraries are about the future of society and free and democratic access to knowledge; the challenge is how to do this in this new global environment…”<br />Sarah Thomas, University of Oxford<br />
  46. 46. References 1<br /> JISC SCONUL, Library Management Systems, Horizon Scan <br /> , JISC, Sharing and re-use of catalogue records<br /> SCONUL Shared Services Feasibility Study<br />Prensky, Marc. 2001. “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants.” On the Horizon 9(5). URL: <br />Connaway, L. Radford, M. 2007. “ Service Sea Change: Clicking with screenagers through virtual reference”<br /><br />, RIN, CIBER University College London<br /> Google Generation, JISC / BL, CIBER University College London<br />
  47. 47., Research Trends<br />, Students use of research content in teaching and learning, University of Central Lancashire , Centre for Research Informed Teaching<br />, , JISC Responding to Learners<br />, Towards Implementation of Library 2.0 and the e-Framework (TILE)<br />, Making our shared activity information count (MOSAIC)<br />, Volume 15, Issue 1, 2009, Academic Digital Libraries of the Future: An Environment Scan, Professor Derek Law<br />References 2<br />
  48. 48. Research data reports<br />Keeping Research Data Safe:<br />Dealing with Data: Roles, Rights, Responsibilities and Relationships:<br />OSI e-infrastructure:<br />UKRDS final report:<br />Spectra Final report:<br />Skills, Role & Career Structure of Data Scientists & Curators:<br />IPR and Licensing Issues in Derived Data :<br />
  49. 49. Image credits<br />Keep an eye on the future: Concept for augmented reality mobile phone: - Veritas Lux<br />Google Generation: - Éole<br />Web: - foxypar4<br />Tightrope: -Smiles Are Free is Taking Midterms Missing Flickr's photostream<br />Perfect Storm: - girlguyed<br />Rabbit in headlights: - greendragonflygirl<br />e-everthing: - yellowfilter <br />Changes/old book: - vmax1978<br />Penguins: Professor Derek Law. Other photos: Rachel Bruce<br />
  50. 50. Acknowledgements<br />Thanks to David Kay of Sero Consulting for the use of some of his slides from the studies he has led for JISC and SCONUL. <br />and to some JISC colleagues for their slides…and thanks to Lorcan Dempsey as I used one of his, and to Derek Law for the last picture.<br />