Library
David Baker
8.1 Introduction
Reg Carr was one of the first people to use the term “hybrid library”, but also to advocate, implement and define it:
“The dominant user view of a library is of a physical place. But libraries are services which provide organized access to the intellectual record, wherever it resides, whether in physical places or in scattered digital information spaces. The
“hybrid” library of the future will be a managed combination of physical and virtual collections and information resources.”1
He saw the hybrid library as:
“one of the most potentially valuable things to emerge from the LIS [library and information services] world in the 1990s...; and... one of [the] greatest challenges for the opening decade of this new millennium”,
not least as a way of managing
“all our massive and growing collections of traditional and digital materials in a coherent way, for the benefit of our users, by harnessing and exploiting the new technologies in appropriate ways.”
This chapter seeks to review the development of the hybrid library to date, to explore the issues associated with the implementation and management of the concept, and to consider future trends and developments in the field.
95
1 http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/librarian/malibu2001/malibu2001.htm
8.2 What is a Hybrid Library?
A hybrid library is here defined as an organizational entity that brings together a wide range of academic assets including metadata, catalogues, primary source materials, learning objects, datasets, digital repositories and physical resources in a structured and managed way. The library is a place to search for these assets, to discover their existence, to locate them and then, if required, receive them. Hybrid libraries are not necessarily be linked to a single physical space or a single organization, though many have grown and will continue to grow out of a physical entity or entities. The common denominator in a hybrid library, as opposed to a purely digital library, is that it has one or more physical bases, collections and services as well as digitally-based ones. The primarily physical elements of hybrid libraries are themselves increasingly areas encompassing a set of resources, facilities and services in which digital/web-based, as well as more traditional research and learning, can take place. But they will increas- ingly be just one part of a much larger organizational whole that places greatest value on maximum access whether in terms of timeframe or type. At the same time, “traditional” libraries, or traditional elements of primarily digital libraries, where Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is applied to the management of hard copies, their organization, access and delivery, will continue because digitization is not feasible, justifiable nor wanted or needed (Burnhill and Law, 2005), or a digital version could be generated on demand. In addition, there is currently a massive backlog of printed work that must somehow be linked to or turned into digital material.
8.3 Recent History
The United Kingdom Higher Education (UKHE) is a complex and varied sector, yet today there is a pervasive common denominator: the use of ICT to support teaching, research, managerial activities and the delivery of academic support services (Joint Information Systems Committee [JISC], 1995; Higher Education Funding Council for England [HEFCE], 1997). Until recently, there was a single “dominant design” in LIS – that of hard copy storage, access and delivery. However, as described elsewhere (Baker, 2004), by the early 1990s, the UKHE LIS sector had got to that final
“specific pattern stage of innovation ... [where it was] vulnerable to the possibility of a revolutionary new product introduction.” (Noori, 1990)
The development of Internet -based resources and services and the breakdown of the old dominant design was a “landmark” change (Kingston, 2000). On the one hand, new technology was being applied to existing markets; on the other, new markets were being tapped once new products and services were fully developed. Existing suppliers, such as traditional libraries and document delivery services (and, indeed, users) began to find it
“difficult to adapt to environmental changes with... an ageing product.” (Noori, 1990).
The Follett Report (Follett, 1993) changed the LIS landscape for ever, though developments in North America and Australia have also been significant (see, for example, Greenaway, 1997). Even before “Follett”, there were the begin- nings of a new, more integrated, more innovative approach to the “document delivery” elements of library provision that sought to bring all the various elements together under the control of the end-user rather than the inter- library loans librarian (Baker, 1991; Baker, 1992a; Baker, 1994a; Baker 1994b).
The Electronic Libraries (e-Lib) Programme (1995–2001) that emerged from the Follett Report sought to change the way in which UKHE LIS delivered func- tionality, services and content to their users, with special emphasis on IT delivery. The investment was substantial (£60m) and stimulated over 100 projects (Tavistock Institute, 1998, 2000; ESYS Consulting, 2001).
There were three basic phases to e-Lib:
Phase Description
1 The “let a hundred flowers bloom” period, with a wide range of programmes and projects being approved or commissioned in the wake of the Follett Report’s recommendations. The aim was to look at the many ways in which ICT could be applied to library services to best effect.
2 This was a time of turning projects into products or services, and of ensuring a complete portfolio of activities that covered the whole spectrum of library activities. The emphasis was frequently on scalability, and on co-operative solutions.
3 This was the integrative phase, designed to bring together the various strands and initiatives, and to continue the push towards viable and coherent digitally-based services.
Though the Follett Report concentrated on the “electronic” library, there was also a widespread recognition that the rich “legacy” of print-on-paper collec- tions could not be ignored and needed to be retro-engineered into the digital future that was being predicted and planned, if not yet implemented. Hence phase 3 began to develop the concept of the “hybrid” library, and initiated projects that would provide the best of both worlds traditional and electronic to the end user. JISC Circular 3/97 states:
“the challenge [was] to bring together technologies ... plus the electronic products and services already in libraries, and the historical functions of our local, physical libraries, into well-organized, accessible hybrid libraries.”2
In a 1995 Delphi study carried out for the University of East Anglia, the author suggested that:
“many elements of traditional provision would remain alongside newer approaches. With development in e-journals, etc. researchers may become more self-sufficient and visit the library less often, but students are likely to continue to see it as a place to work and get help. Integrating print and electronic provision successfully will require careful planning, and skilled training/coaching of students to ensure that they make full use of both new and traditional media.”
(Baker, 2004)
2 http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/services/elib/papers/circulars/
Reg Carr stated that the library sector was:
“looking to integrate new technologies into the library service array, to enable the hybrid library to extend its services beyond the existing range, and in particular to facilitate resource discovery beyond the physical limitations of the physical library, both locally and much more widely.”3
But the development of the hybrid model was not just about a single library or collection: it was about recognizing the growing power of the Internet and the need to bring together resources regionally, nationally and even internation- ally as well as locally. One of the outcomes of e-Lib was thus the Distributed National Electronic Resource (DNER). Reg Carr saw the DNER as a kind of national hybrid library and one that allowed the presentation of national services in a local context.4
Much of what was predicted, proposed and planned in the 1990s has already come to fruition, for there have been significant changes in academic library services and more broadly in the way in which people access and use informa- tion. Further major change is almost inevitable over the next few years. The remainder of this chapter looks at the key issues and challenges facing the UKHE sector, and its librarians in particular, as the hybrid library develops further.
8.4 Content and Usage
“The ‘Library’ is being de- and re-constructed, with a digital future being seen as the norm in many environments.” (Baker, 2005).
The potential of the Internet offers the possibility of universal access to every- thing, as evinced by the DELOS vision:
“Digital libraries should enable any citizen to access all human knowledge anytime and anywhere, in a friendly, multi-modal, efficient, and effective way, by overcoming barriers of distance, language, and culture and by using multiple Internet-connected devices.”5
Scholarly communication now spans everything from primary data through various versions to final product in its “bound volume” state. The journal article (rather than the journal or the journal issue itself) is now the unit of e- publishing or usage in some areas, and is breaking down further into fragments of articles for student usage. The take-up of e-books is less robust at this stage, though mass digitization programmes are beginning to tip the balance and recent research (Higher Education Consultancy Group, 2006) has suggested that the potential for this form of e-publishing is now considerable.
3 http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/librarian/malibu2001/malibu2001.htm 4 http://www.jisc.ac.uk/pub99/dner_vision.html
5 http://www.delos.info/
The author argues elsewhere (Baker, 2005) that, ultimately, the shape, nature and speed of these changes in the scholarly communications process will be driven by quality assurance and integrity and peer review requirements in scholarly publication will remain a key variable in terms of future change and development. At the present time, there are still concerns about quality assur- ance “on-line”, especially with continued and worsening “information over- load” and increasingly blurred boundaries as to “publication”.
“One of the key lessons learned by the JISC through investment in a range of programmes to enhance access to research and learning resources ... is that we are operating in an environment where users interact with a variety of digital and non-digital objects. In searching for high quality ... resources in networked envi- ronments they will encounter an array of electronic records pointing to both orig- inal items, a book, manuscript or painting, and records leading to digital and increasingly born digital resources, a satellite data stream, multimedia essay, or digital art work. In all of these cases [users] will need to be confident about the quality of the information that they are accessing and have the skills of judgement and understanding in place to assess and utilize what they find...” (JISC, 2002) There is already much useful information and evidence about user behaviour and the user psyche, thanks to studies such as EDNER (Brophy, 2004). EDNER recognized a particular challenge with regard to the phenomenon of
“satisficing” or the practice of accepting less than the best in terms of search results. The best may be “the enemy of the good”, but the over-immediacy of the Internet often leads to a lack of critical evaluation of search results on the part of staff as well as students. On the one hand, there is still a need to build quality and kitemark controls; on the other, the ability to find unreliable sources and evaluate them critically is seen as a vital part of study. Users need to feel in control, and in any case personalization and customization tools fit well with new approaches to learning. But personalization doesn’t mean working alone, and facilitation of group work and social interaction is always likely to be a prerequisite. This is where the library as physical space remains especially valuable.
Effective, user-friendly access to libraries, their content and services, then, is of paramount importance. There is a need for ever-more intuitive and deep search tools that ensure the widest possible interlinked, interoperable and unified access to content from a range of sources, through resource-access integrations.
These tools need to cope with various formats and discrete and disparate sources to allow for the maximum integration of physical and e-holdings and to offer the ability to guess implied meanings and to rationalize semantic options.
In a research context, the increasing move towards personalization and custom- ization via the Internet needs to include the ability to annotate, manipulate, and follow trains of thought from unstructured, raw data to finished product.
Research within the JISC-funded Virtual Norfolk project, for example,6 has shown that the take-up of learning materials is significantly enhanced if indi- vidual end-users can manipulate content for their own learning and teaching
6 http://virtualnorfolk.uea.ac.uk/
requirements. This approach relies on the developed of fusion services capable of bringing together relevant material, arranged according to numerous different objectives or characteristics, and crucially, as determined by the user.
Technology tools must therefore allow end-users to access a variety of mate- rials and to generate customized learning or research pathways to them. Much user behaviour revolves around popular search engines, because the interfaces provided are perceived as comfortable to use with fit-for-purpose results. Neil Beagrie comments:
“although many wider public consumer trends may seem remote to the academic sector, they do have parallels in, and provide a broader context for, developments.”
(Beagrie, 2005)
Certainly, EDNER and similar studies suggest that simplicity at the point of contact works best. Metadata becomes the key in what should be an uncon- sciously managed research environment: an overload of unprocessed, un- categorized data will always be disconcerting; users have increasingly high expectations of library delivery and all but the most determined won’t bother if they cannot access information seamlessly, easily and properly. Tools and services are still required that will make the collection and organization processes easy without sacrificing quality control, and which will ensure effec- tive presentation to the user by enabling the core search-discover-locate- receive functions to take place easily, efficiently and transparently. But behind the interface there must be relevant content, of whatever kind and, as already noted, the richness of our traditional library collections as for example at the Bodleian Library need to be kept to the fore, hence the long-term validity of the hybrid library concept .
8.5 Integration
The e-Lib programme’s hybrid library initiative was about integration, and seamless, end-user driven access to a wide range of previously disparate resources and services the desired outcome. Digital developments offer even broader opportunities for integration between academic library and parent institution and between learning, teaching, research and scholarly activity, not least through integrated provision. In most cases, the hybrid library will bring together content and services from a range of suppliers, both commercial and non-commercial. In the hybrid and even more so the digital library, physical location is increasingly immaterial and formats are diverse, and integration needs to be underpinned by shared and common standards, interoperability and open access, with all initiatives using the same concepts and terminologies.
There is much work and experience on which to build, both nationally and internationally, but single-point access to everything is still a long way off. The CREE project (Awre, 2005) concluded that there is a need for further investiga- tion into both internal/external integration (including the integration of Open Archives Initiative (OAI) materials) and interoperable technology use. The ability to cross-search over a wide range of different kinds of objects and
resources from a whole variety of sources and the value of it also needs more research.
There remains, too, a need for work on both institutional and subject portals, redefined and refocused in the context of overall trends and a clearer agreed position within the developing Information Environment. The CREE project (Awre, 2005) examined the use of Internet search tools in portal/non-portal environments. By developing and promoting standards for a conformant portal framework, search tools can be adapted as portlets that can sit beside each other within an institutional portal. CREE is also important for its information on behaviour. A range of variables sways users, notably: context, subject, and type of resource important in developing personalizable portals.
But the fundamental issue in terms of integration is of join-up from the start.
Earlier electronic and digital library developments were cumulative – incre- mental and single advances that did not create innovation over the whole spec- trum but were, arguably, part of a “reverse product cycle”. (Barras, 1986)
“The key point to stress with regard to the reverse product cycle is the fact that the new product or service comes at the end of the cycle rather than at the beginning.
The drive for improvement begins with increments and it is the cumulative effect of improvement and innovation that leads to the discontinuity of radical change through the appearance of a new dominant design.” (Baker, 2004)
Prior to e-Lib phase 3 and later, integration was often an afterthought. Hybrid libraries don’t work without real integrative approaches. Given that current work in one area (as for example content creation) will spread into other areas, it is of paramount importance that integration is at the heart of future library development. The emphasis should be on innovative integration from the point of view of the user rather than the service provision, with long-term market research from the start. (Baker, 2005)
8.6 Engagement and Embeddedness
There appears to be a good deal of “sign up” to the concept of the hybrid library and its implementation, but “on-the-ground” reality suggests that realizing this vision is not so straightforward. Experience from the FAIR project7and the conclusions of EDNER (Brophy, 2004), for example, show that the wealth of information already available in digital form is underutilized, let alone mate- rial in hard-copy format. Inevitably, institutions will need to be convinced of the worth and benefit of new developments; yet ultimately, local implementa- tion and exploitation of library tools, assets and services will be the key to sector-wide success. There are still many cultural issues to be addressed before optimum utilization is achieved even though, as Reg Carr put it, the hybrid library projects that were at the heart of e-Lib phase 3 aimed to:
7 http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=programme_fair
“address the ... human resource implications and issues, such as staff training and development for the enhancement of key skills [together with] ...institutional take-up of ...models as they were developed, as evidence of their long-term value.
”8
Many current strategies and policies talk of “widest possible access”, albeit
“within publishing constraints”, which could be significant. The ability to offer widespread access to material is dependent on managing access rights, further developing tools, middleware, and links back to local collections and cata- logues virtual or otherwise. The strategic rhetoric is supportive of working together, but collaboration will work best only where there is both enlightened self-interest between institutions, subjects and areas and a high degree of trust in relation to security, integrity, authenticity and quality in particular. But
“it is important to bear in mind that it is not only users of electronic services and resources who are going through a process of cultural change in exploring new ways of accessing and using resources. Providers of services of interest to learning and research both commercial and publicly funded are clearly also helping to mould and shape this new environment. These stakeholders have a real and vested interest in ensuring that the information and resources they provide can be accessed through and integrated with national frameworks.” (JISC, 2002)
Even within the library community, there are political and cultural issues that tend to encourage the setting up of barriers. These militate against the kinds of collaboration and co-operation that are required if end-users really are to have seamless access to what (at the provider end) are a whole series of distributed and disparate sets of resources.
“Growth in genuinely collaborative collection management would probably be the best indicator of deep resource sharing. However, we are doubtful that change can be brought about in this are if any initiative is left as voluntary, and recom- mend that the RSLG and the funding bodies consider the case for central action and associated incentives.” (Schofieldet al., 2001)
8.7 Economics
We remain short of economic models that will help us to plan strategically the management of the future hybrid library . White and Davies (2001) comment that:
“The advantages of electronic access and/or the opportunities for extending access to a wider range of titles is gained at significant cost either in cash terms or as a proportional increase in spend. We all know too well that library budgets are not infinitely elastic and priorities regarding materials and other inputs have to be established. Whether such strategies are desirable, or can be afforded still remain questions to be addressed by individual institutions... The entire issue of information and document access will continue to exercise managers on a range
8 http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/librarian/malibu2001/malibu2001.htm