Next Generation Library Catalogs

"WorldCat Local Task Force Report to LAMP" by Boock, Chadwell, and Reese details the process involved in changing to a new library catalog system. In this extensive report, it becomes clear why so many libraries are still stuck with systems them seem like they were developed in the 1980's. There are no easy options available and meticulous research is needed before a library decides to make a move that will affect all aspects of its operations. The best alternative might be, in some cases, to wait until catalogs catch up to more commercial competitors, but if we wait to long, these competitors will only be that much farther ahead.

"Toward a Twenty-First Century Library Catalog" by Antelman, Lynema, and Pace discusses North Carolina State University's attempt to increase the functionality of their library's catalog. They did this by using software developed by Endeca that mimics a more commercial web site, than the traditional, stagnant catalog. The new system improved the catalog's utility with relevance-ranked results like users are used to on sites such as Google, new browsing options so that students could gain the advantages offered by physically scanning the library shelves, and exposed subject vocabularies. The move to this new system improved user success, but I wonder if they might have been missing out by not including more Library 2.0 elements while they were in the process of revamping their system.

"New Generation of Catalogues for the New Generation of Users: A Comparison of Six Library Catalogues" by Merčun and Žumer addresses the issue of including 2.0 features within library catalogs. In their analysis of five next generation catalogs, plus one traditional catalog, and the Amazon.com interface, the authors discovered that the libraries that focused on increasing functionality over including Library 2.0 components received more positive feedback from their users. It seems that NCSU was wise in choosing to go in the direction they did. They can always add new interactive features after developing a strong foundation. Merčun and Žumer also point out another reason for libraries' hesitation to adopt next generation elements like personalisation: providing this feature requires an invasion into users' privacy. It's a tough balance. I think it must ultimately be up to our users to choose if they want the advantages presented by these components at the sake of their privacy.