Library Document

1. Integrated librarysystem
From Wikipedia, the f ree ency clopedia
Jump to navigationJumpto search
Not to be confused with Library (computing) or Library system.
An integrated library system (ILS), also known as a librarymanagement system (LMS),[1][2]
is an enterprise resource planning system for
a library, used to track itemsowned, ordersmade, billspaid,and patronswho have borrowed.
An ILS usually comprisesa relational database, software to interact with that database, and two graphical user interfaces(one for patrons,
one for staff). Most ILSes separate software functionsinto discrete programscalled modules, each of them integrated witha unified interface.
Examplesof modulesmight include:
 acquisitions(ordering, receiving,and invoicing materials)
 cataloging (classifying andindexingmaterials)
 circulation (lendingmaterialsto patronsand receivingthem back)
 serials (tracking magazine, journals, and newspaper holdings)
 online public accesscatalog or OPAC (public user interface)
Each patron and item hasa uniqueID in the database that allowsthe ILS to trackits activity.
Contents
 1History
o 1.1Pre-computerization
o 1.21960s: the inf luence of computer technologies
o 1.31970s–1980s: the early integrated library sy stem
o 1.41990s–2000s: the growth of the Internet
o 1.5Mid 2000s–present: increasing costs and customer dissatisf action
o 1.62010s–present: the rise of cloud based solutions
 2Sof tware criteria
o 2.1Distributed sof tware v s. web serv ice
o 2.2Data entry assistance based on ISBN
o 2.3Bar code scanning and printing
 3See also
 4Ref erences
 5Further reading
 6External links
History[edit]
Pre-computerization[edit]
Prior to computerization,library tasks were performed manually and independently from one another. Selectorsordered materialswith
ordering slips, cataloguersmanually cataloguedsourcesand indexedthem with the card catalog system (in which all bibliographic data was
kept on a single index card), fineswere collected by local bailiffs, and userssigned books out manually, indicatingtheir n ameon cluecards
which were then kept at the circulation desk. Early mechanizationcamein 1936, when theUniversity of Texasbegan usinga punch card
system to manage library circulation.[3]
While the punch card system allowedfor more efficient trackingof loans, library serviceswere far from
being integrated, and no other library taskwas affected by thischange.
1960s: the influence of computer technologies[edit]
The next big innovationcame withthe advent of MARC standardsin the 1960s, which coincidedwith the growthof computer technologies –
library automation wasborn.[3]
From this point onwards, librariesbeganexperimenting withcomputers, and, starting in the late 1960sand
continuing into the1970s, bibliographic servicesutilizing new onlinetechnology and the shared MARC vocabulary entered the market; these
included OCLC (1967), Research LibrariesGroup (which hassince merged with OCLC), and the WashingtonLibrary Network(which
became Western Library Networkand is also now part of OCLC).[4]
1970s–1980s:the early integrated library system[edit]

2. Screenshot of a Dynix menu
The 1970scan be characterized by improvements in computer storage, aswell asin telecommunications.[4]
As a result of these advances,
‘turnkey systems on microcomputers,’[4]
known more commonly asintegrated library systems (ILS) finally appeared. These systems included
necessary hardware and software which allowedthe connectionof major circulation tasks, including circulation control andoverdue
notices.[5]
As the technology developed,other library tasks could be accomplished throughILS aswell, including acquisition, cataloguing,
reservation of titles, and monitoring of serials.[6]
1990s–2000s:the growth of the Internet[edit]
With the evolution of the Internet throughout the1990sand into the2000s, ILSsbegan allowing usersto more actively engage withtheir
librariesthrough OPACsand online web-based portals. Users could log into their library accountsto reserve or renew books, as well as
authenticate themselvesfor access to library-subscribed online databases. Inevitably, during thistime, theILS market grew exponentially. By
2002, the ILS industry averaged salesof approximately US$500millionannually, comparedto just US$50 millionin 1982.[5]
Mid 2000s–present:increasing costs and customer dissatisfaction[edit]
By the mid to late 2000s, ILS vendorshad increased not only thenumber of servicesoffered but also their prices, leading to some
dissatisfaction amongmany smaller libraries. At the same time, open source ILS wasin itsearly stages of testing. Some librariesbegan
turning to such open source ILSsas Koha and Evergreen. Commonreasonsnoted were to avoid vendor lockin, avoid license fees, and
participatein software development[7]
. Freedom from vendorsalso allowed librariesto prioritizeneedsaccording to urgency, asopposed to
what their vendor can offer.[8]
Librarieswhich have moved to opensource ILS have found thatvendorsare now more likely to provide quality
service in order to continue a partnershipsince they no longer have the power of owningthe ILS software and tying down librariesto strict
contracts.[8]
Thishas been the case with the SCLENDS consortium.Followingthe success of Evergreen for the Georgia PINESlibrary
consortium, the SouthCarolinaState Library alongwith some local public librariesformed the SCLENDS consortium in order to share
resources and to take advantage of the open source nature of theEvergreenILS to meet their specific needs.[8]
By October 2011, just 2
years after SCLENDS began operations, 13 public library systemsacross 15 countieshad already joinedthe consortium,in addition to the
South CarolinaStateLibrary. Librarytechnology.orgdoesan annual survey of over 2,400 librariesand notedin 2008 2%[9]
of those surveyed
used open source ILS, in 2009 the number increased to 8%,[10]
in 2010 12%,[11]
and in201111%[12]
of the librariespolledhad adopted open
source ILSs. The followingyear'ssurvey (published inApril 2013) reportedan increase to 14%, stating that"open source ILS products,
includingEvergreenand Koha, continueto represent a significant portion of industry activity. Of the 794contractsreported inthe public and
academic arena, 113, or 14 percent, were for support servicesfor these open source systems."[13]
2010s–present:the rise of cloud based solutions[edit]
The use of cloud-based library management systemshas increased drastically since therise of cloud technology started. Somecommon
managementsystems includeInsignia Software, Libramatic,OCLC WorldShare,Alma, Aura Software andLibrarika.
Many modern cloud-based solutionsallow automatedcataloging by scanning a book'sISBN. Thistechnology waspioneeredby
Libramatic,[citation needed]
althoughit iscurrently in use by systems such as Insignia Software, BiblioMatikand Librarika.
Software criteria[edit]
Distributed software vs. web service[edit]
Library computer systemstend to fall intotwo categoriesof software:
 that purchased on a perpetual license
 that purchased asa subscription service.
With distributed software the customer can choose to self-install or to have the system installedby the vendor on their own hardware.The
customer can be responsible for the operation and maintenanceof the application and the data, or the customer can choose to be supported
by the vendor with an annual maintenance contract. Some vendorscharge for upgradesto the software. Customerswho subscribe to a web
(hosted) service upload datato the vendor'sremote server through the Internet andmay pay a periodic fee to accesstheir data.
Data entry assistance based on ISBN[edit]
Many applicationscan reduce a major portion of manual data entry by populatingdatafieldsbased upon theentered ISBN using MARC
standards technology via theInternet.
Bar code scanning and printing[edit]

3. With most software, users can eliminate some manual entry by using a bar-code scanner. Some software isdesigned, or can be extended
with an additional module, to integrate scanner functionality.Most software vendorsprovide some type of scanner integration, andsome print
bar-code labels.
See also[edit]
 Libraryand information science portal
 List of next-generation library catalogs
 Database management system
 Public library ratings
References[edit]
1. Jump up^ Adamson, Veronica, et al. (2008). "JISC & SCONUL Library Management Systems
Study" (PDF). (1 MB). Shef f ield, UK: Sero Consulting. p. 51. Retriev ed on 21 January 2009. "... a
Library Management Sy stem (LMS or ILS 'Integrated Library Sy stem' in US parlance)." Some
usef ul library automation sof twares are: KOHA ,Greenstone ,Libsy s, and granthlay a.
2. Jump up^ Tennant, Roy (16 April 2008). "Picking When to Jump, Part 2". Library Journal. Reed
Business Information. Retrieved 20 January 2009. Across the pond they use the term library
management systems (LMS) for what we call the integrated library system (ILS).
3. ^ Jump up to:a b Wallace, Patricia M. (1991). Gary M. Pitkin, ed. Library Systems Migration: An
Introduction. Westport, CT: Meckler. pp. 1–7 [3]. ISBN 0-88736-738-0.
4. ^ Jump up to:a b c Wallace, Patricia M. (1991). Gary M. Pitkin, ed. Library Systems Migration: An
Introduction. Westport, CT: Meckler. pp. 1–7 [4]. ISBN 0-88736-738-0.
5. ^ Jump up to:a b Kochtanek, Thomas R. (2002). "1 - The Evolution of LIS and Enabling
Technologies". Library Information Systems: From Library Automation to Distributed Information
Access Solutions. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. p. 4. ISBN 1-59158-018-8.
6. Jump up^ Kochtanek, Thomas R. (2002). "1 - The Evolution of LIS and Enabling
Technologies". Library Information Systems: From Library Automation to Distributed Information
Access Solutions. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. p. 5. ISBN 1-59158-018-8.
7. Jump up^ Ganseman J (2015). Refactoring a Library's Legacy Catalog: a Case Study (PDF).
IAML 2015. New York City, USA.
8. ^ Jump up to:a b c Hamby, R.; McBride, R.; Lundberg, M. (Oct 2011). "South Carolina's
SCLENDS optimizing libraries, transforming lending". Computers in Libraries. 8. 31: 6–10.
9. Jump up^ Perceptions 2008: an International Surv ey of Library Automation.
Library technology .org. Retriev ed on 2013-08-17.
10. Jump up^ Perceptions 2009: an International Surv ey of Library Automation.
Library technology .org. Retriev ed on 2013-08-17.
11. Jump up^ Perceptions 2010: an International Surv ey of Library Automation.
Library technology .org. Retriev ed on 2013-08-17.
12. Jump up^ Perceptions 2011: an International Surv ey of Library Automation.
Library technology .org (2012-01-28). Retriev ed on 2013-08-17.
13. Jump up^ Automation Marketplace 2013: The Rush to Innov ate. Library Journal on
thedigitalshif t.com (2013-04-13). Retriev ed on 2014-02-03.
Further reading[edit]
 Olson, N. (2010). Taken for Granted - The Construction of Order in the Processof Library
ManagementSystem Decision Making (Vol. 45). Göteborg / Borås: Valfrid publishing. [1]
 Rubin, Richard E. Foundations of Library and Information Science. New York: Neal-Schuman
Publishers, Inc., 2004.
External links[edit]
 MARC Records, Systems and Tools: Network Development and MARC
StandardsOffice, Library of Congress
 Higher Education Library Technology,(HELibTech) a wiki that coversmany aspectsof library
technology and liststechnologiesin use in UK Higher Education
 Key resources in the fieldof Library Automation
Categories:
 Library automation