|  |
|
Libraries look to balance technology, cost and usefulnessBy Tom Storey
As she browses the site, items similar to those she is viewing are brought to her attention. If she wants, she can create a personal description online and a wish list of things she would like to own. She also can build a personal network of favorite people to receive opinions and recommendations from those she trusts. There’s a tab that’s labeled “Joan’s Store” and a flashing treasure chest that blinks “Joan’s Gold Box.” There’s a wizard that lets her fine-tune or expand her personal profile. And there’s a feature that helps her track the items she recently viewed, the searches she recently made and the product categories she recently visited. When Joe Martin logs on to the Web, he uses a version of Google customized to his needs. He sets a filtering option, an interface language, a search language, a record display option and a host of other preferences. He selects a Google service—search the Web, look for images, browse Google Groups or search for products with Froogle. He subscribes to Google News and Google Web alerts and he uses some of the emerging services, such as Google Answers, a reference service, or Google Desktop, a search service that scans the e-mail, files, Web history and chats on his computer. He also uses Google Personalized for search results based on his interests. Joan and Joe represent a growing number of today’s information consumers who demand a highly personalized search experience. Search engines and Internet sites define their information horizon, and they use these services with advanced features and functions as their launching points for information gathering. In the quest to serve the information consumer, libraries face competition from the sophisticated profiling and personalization technologies of search engines, e-tailers and Internet service providers. How can they make the search experience at the digital library as exciting and as personal as the experience at Web bookstores and search engines? Do they need to? Should they adopt information profiling techniques? What about the confidentiality of library records? What is personalization?
In today’s world of information overload, many users rely on personalization and similar technologies as a way to filter and organize the data most important to them. Eric Lease Morgan, Head of the Digital Access and Information Architecture Department, University Libraries at Notre Dame, has helped develop MyLibrary, an open-source, Internet-based library service, over the past seven years. Morgan believes that the move toward a service economy has changed the way people use, gather and disseminate data, information and knowledge. “Now, more than ever, libraries must compete for people’s attention,” he says. “Expectations have changed, and people are bringing these expectations to the library. As I listen to students and faculty on the Notre Dame campus, I increasingly hear, ‘I want a portal. I want a service like Amazon.com.’ MyLibrary makes that possible.” Used by about 25 libraries, MyLibrary is a customized portal that allows library users to control what and how much information is displayed to them. Users create an account and fill out a detailed profile that includes name, e-mail address and primary academic interests. If a user identifies psychology as an interest, for example, MyLibrary highlights psychology-related books, databases, electronic journals and Internet sites, as well as the librarian in charge of psychology resources. Librarians who have tested and used the system at the University of Notre Dame think MyLibrary should become a part of the way most libraries provide Web-based services. The system solves more problems than it creates, they say, reduces information overload and saves time for the reader as well as the librarian. “Library resources need to reflect the different ways patrons approach information gathering and use,” Morgan says. “They need to be organized from the patron’s point of view.” Daniel Mattes, Library Director for the Federal District of Mexico City, agrees with Morgan. “Users now expect this type of service, and one of the reasons why libraries are sometimes viewed as ‘out of date’ is because we fail to offer this type of automated, proactive service,” he says. “It’s also especially important at my library, since our students don’t really have a history of library use. This is in part cultural—Mexicans in general aren’t big readers—and in part generational—our students tend to get information from Google and other electronic sources.” Mattes believes that “my library” type services, where one can have a digital space for information of personal and/or professional interest, is quite interesting from a user’s perspective. “I also like the idea of sending alert type information on new acquisitions to users, providing that they are in agreement. One should always avoid sending unwanted information to patrons—we are not trying to sell them things that they don’t want or need.” What’s involved with personalization? “Our Web team could do it all, but, realistically, it would be a significant investment in time and energy and we have to ask ourselves if it is a proper use of our limited resources, and what the lost opportunities would be,” she says. Candreva and her Web team explore the issues of personalization almost daily. Some of the questions they ask themselves: Do we have what it takes to costeffectively compete? Should we compete? What advantages would the library receive by using the technology? What can the library offer that no one else can? What is the return the library would want—more Web site hits, more circulation, more “buzz”? She has often thought about trying, in the library catalog, a “people who have checked out this book have also checked out these books” recommendation. Surveying customers, determining requirements and studying nonprofit Web sites that use personalization techniques would help libraries, including hers, determine what personalized functionality to pursue, she says. Among the features she believes would be easy and inexpensive to implement, as well as used by users, in a MyLibrary Home Page are:
Shirley K. Baker is Vice Chancellor for Information Technology and Dean of University Libraries at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. She leads the University’s libraries and its information technology planning and has more than 30 years of experience with technology at Washington University, Northwestern University, Johns Hopkins University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and AT&T. She also is a delegate to OCLC Members Council and serves on the OCLC Research Advisory Committee. Baker recommends finding a balance between technology, cost and usefulness. She says that libraries need to choose the personalization technologies that best suit the needs of their users. “We should be asking, ‘What problems do users have that the technology can solve?’” After talking to and watching how students and faculty were using the library Web site, Washington University Libraries implemented My Library Accounts to let users renew items, place holds, search my catalog, receive e-mail alerts for library items of interest, save favorite searches and create personal reading histories. My Library Accounts is available on the opening library Web page and can be bookmarked by the user. Extending the personal touch “People know the information they desire is in libraries but our systems are too difficult to use, too difficult to relate to,” he says. “By designing our library Web sites from the patron’s point of view, we are more likely to meet our patrons’ needs and retain them as users.”
|
When
Joan Smith logs on to Amazon, she is greeted with, “Hello Joan Smith. We
have recommendations for you.” When she clicks the text, she goes to a
screen with recommendations for new releases, bargains and items coming soon—all
of which are specific to her interests and based on her buying history.
