Rhiannon Shoults-Wilson and Sam Link
MLIS 7505
Dr. Fatih Oguz
13 June 2009
WorldCat Local: Current and Future Uses in Libraries
Background
WorldCat
Local is an emerging technology which came about as the result of
collaboration between the University of Washington libraries and OCLC,
the non-profit company behind OpenWorldCat and WorldCat.org. In 2005 OCLC reported that 84% of information users begin their search at a
search engine, and only 2% begin at a library page (De Rosa, 2005, p.1-17). Librarians within the system observed the use of Google,
in particular, as the beginning point of information seeking. While
some lamented the limited capabilities of Google, it was realized that
in order
to remain competitive, there would have to be change on the network
level to make the library system a primary starting point for
information seekers (Ward, Shadle, & Mofield, 2008, p. 5). Among the strategic directions of the UW Libraries
strategic plan for 2010 is “Enhance user services,” with the associated
initiative to “Build or integrate new tools and services for
information discovery and delivery." After laying out the requirements
for a new search system which would be user-centric, include resources
beyond the physical library, and incorporate the library’s workflows
without causing confusion for the user, the UW Libraries approached
OCLC in the summer of 2006. The resulting platform came to be known as
WorldCat Local (Ward et al, 2008, p. 5).
OCLC
was chosen by UW Libraries because of their previous platforms Open
WorldCat and WorldCat.org. Open WorldCat had demonstrated their ability
to work with large corporate institutions by being integrated into
search engines such as Yahoo! and Google, and had thus required close
work on the requirements lain out by those corporations (Ward et al.,
2008, p. 7). WorldCat.org demonstrated OCLC’s ability to create
original content and a functional and user-centric search system
(Ward et al., 2008, p. 7).
Features
WorldCat Local can be described as a local
implementation of WorldCat.org, which has been modified to reflect the
individual library’s brand and feel. Like WorldCat.org, WorldCat Local
searches the entire WorldCat database, but has been modified to show
local delivery options unique to the implementing library (Ward et al.,
2008, p. 7). This global search is then linked to the local catalog
either via OCLC holdings symbols being attached to the library’s
records, or utilizing
a link resolver application. These records are then displayed, and
selecting an individual record brings up the availability of that item,
and options such as holds or interlibrary loans to make it possible for
the user to easily acquire the material (Ward et al., 2008, p. 7). In
an effort to further incorporate electronic resources, WorldCat Local
can import OAI records and convert them to MARC so that they may be
used in the system (Ward et al., 2008, p. 8). In addition to these
user-centric features, WorldCat Local also provides direct access to
multiple article databases, and thus can incorporate article and
journal searches into book searches seamlessly, reducing the need to
learn two separate search systems to locate research materials, and can
then use the library’s link resolver to link to actual article content
(Ward et al., 2008, p. 8).
WorldCat
Local utilizes a Google-style free-text box for searching, creating a
familiar interface for the user and again making a user-friendly
environment. To further add to the functionality, the platform has
inherent multilingual support and support for non-Roman characters
(Ward et al., 2008, p. 8). The records are organized using tabs, a
familiar feature from web browsers and multiple websites, and
individual records have further tab divisions, as well as incorporating
tools such as Google Books which a user may already have experience
with (Ward et al., 2008, p. 9). The acquisitions options are phrased in
friendly, common-use language – “Get This Item” – allowing the user to
move into the library’s workflows without confusion (Ward et al., 2008, p. 10).
In a sign of the growing cross-over between libraries and Web 2.0
technology, WorldCat Local allows the user to easily link to the record
on their social-networking page, such as MySpace or del.icio.us, and
allows for the posting of user reviews and other user-generated content
within the WorldCat Local system (Ward et al., 2008, p. 10).
The
Web 2.0 features of WorldCat Local are the ones which the users at UW
Libraries have been most vocal in requesting. WorldCat Local supports
starred user ratings, the export of citations to citation management
software, and the sharing of located materials on social networking
sites (Ward et
al., 2008, p. 11). There have also been a Google gadget and a Facebook
widget developed to further incorporate WorldCat Local into Web 2.0
functionality (Ward et al., 2008, p. 11).
WorldCat
Local utilizes a ranking hierarchy in the display of located records to
enhance the user experience (Ward et al, 2008, p. 8). Materials local
to the user are displayed first, followed by consortia materials, and
finally materials drawn from the wider WorldCat database. In addition,
individual records provide information on ILL and hold availability,
with the option of also including a “Buy Me” link to either Amazon.com
or Baker & Taylor so that the user may purchase the item directly
if they feel such a need for it (Ward et al., 2008, p. 8-9).
The specifics of the tabbed system are
on the record level. Each record has five tabs which link to further
information concerning the material. The “Libraries” tab shows where
the item is held and available on the ranked scale of local, consortia,
and WorldCat. Further details concerning the item are available under
the “Details” tab, along with acquisitions information for the
material, availability, and link-sharing Web 2.0 capabilities. The
“Subject” and “Editions” tabs provide the obvious content of subject
heading listings for the item and the various editions available.
Finally, the “Reviews” tab combines user-generated reviews of the item
with those pulled from professional sources, allowing the user to gain
an overview of opinions of the work both from peers and professionals
at a glance (Ward et al., 2008, p. 9-10).
Advantages
The greatest advantage to using WorldCat Local is that users do not have to duplicate their search in different tools such as a local catalog, a consortial catalog, WorldCat, article databases, and institutional repositories to find all appropriate information, nor do they have to understand the differences between the different tools. Users also don't have to understand the complexities of library workflows. They don't have to consider when they need to initiate a consortial request versus an interlibrary loan request and find the separate forms for that. The system has the workflows programmed in and is able to make the differentiations for the user and create the proper type of request for the user to receive his or her item (Ward et al., 2008, p. 11-14). This ease in search and placing materials requests has led to a significant increase in interlibrary loan and consortial requests at the UW Libraries since implementation of WorldCat Local. The librarians at University of Washington believe this to be because users are finding items they weren't previously and because they find it easier to place requests (Ward et al., 2008, p. 24).
One aspect of this single interface is that article and book content are searchable through the same space - this is one of the most requested features by users (Ward et al., 2008, p. 8). WorldCat Local launched with the ability to search only the five OCLC databases already indexed in WorldCat - GPO, ArticleFirst, MEDLINE, ERIC, and the British Library (Online Computer Library Center [OCLC], 2008, p. 8). However, OCLC is constantly working on expanding the amount of searchable databases through WorldCat Local. It was recently announced that OCLC had reached an agreement with EBSCO that will allow libraries that subscribe to WorldCat Local and to EBSCO databases to search those databases through the WorldCat Local interface (OCLC, 2009a). This will vastly expand the amount of articles available, making the service more valuable.
The inclusion of Web 2.0 features such as user reviews and the ability to make and share lists is another major advantage to the WorldCat Local service. These are the types of features that web-savvy users expect in websites, but incorporating them into OPACs and other search tools can be very expensive (Ward et al., 2008, p. 11). A packaged service like WorldCat Local makes providing these services more affordable. The WorldCat Local service is particularly affordable since OCLC's recent announcement that libraries that subscribe to FirstSearch WorldCat will automatically be eligible for a free "quick start" version of WorldCat Local. This version of the service is fully functioning, with the locally branded interface and simple search of the full service (OCLC, 2009b). The major feature missing from the "quick start" version of the service is the library's implementation assistant - the OCLC employee assigned to assist the library with making a thorough, smooth transition to the WorldCat Local service.
WorldCat Local is a service that is very customizable for its users. The multiple languages available for the interface are one aspect of this. Another is the user's ability to limit his or her search to just a local library, the library and its consortia or even to a particular library branch, rather than including the entirety of WorldCat's holdings in a search (OCLC, 2008, p. 6). This is an important feature for ensuring that users aren't overwhelmed by search results.
OCLC has been releasing monthly updates to the WorldCat Local service based on user feedback (Ward et al., 2008, p. 39). It is a well-maintained service, and OCLC has demonstrated a commitment to expanding and developing the service.
Disadvantages
Most libraries that implement WorldCat Local have to undertake records cleanup to make their holdings matched to those of OCLC. This is because WorldCat Local searches the WorldCat database, so if records in a library's catalog have not been properly linked to WorldCat via an OCLC holdings symbol or other service, search results will be incorrect (Ward et al., 2008, p. 7). Depending on a library's cataloging practices, this can be a minor to major undertaking. It is often most complex when dealing with e-serials (Ward et al., 2008, 36). If a library is using the full WorldCat Local service, they will be assigned an implementation manager who can help to make this process as seamless as possible (Ward et al., 2008, p. 27). The free "quick start" service that comes with FirstSearch WorldCat does not involve an implementation manager - this is something that a library must consider when deciding if one of the WorldCat Local services is right for them.
OCLC has limited the amount of display customization that library's can do, in an effort to maintain the basic WorldCat design in all implementations (Ward et al., 2008, 31). As WorldCat Local is, at its heart, a commercial software product rather than an open source project, the amount of customization available and the direction of development will ultimately be controlled by OCLC. Many libraries are used to this aspect of commercial software implementation, but those wanting a fully customizable product should look elsewhere.
Social features are one of the greatest advantages to using WorldCat Local. However, for users to use most of these features they must create a separate WorldCat.org account. There is no way for a user to use these features with his or her library account information, which could potentially be confusing or annoying. OCLC is pursuing integrating OpenID into WorldCat (OCLC, 2008, p. 4), which would allow another option for logging in, but would not fully deal with this issue.
A usability issue with WorldCat Local is the fact that call numbers and availability are not visible from the main search results screen, they are only accessible from the individual item record. This could potentially create more time-consuming searches, particularly as there is no way to restrict searches to currently available items only (OCLC, 2008, p. 8).
Another implementation issue that a library must consider with WorldCat Local is the relationship between its local catalog and a consortial catalog, if applicable. If both exist, the library must designate which one will be searched in specific instances. The UW Libraries, for example, chose to have the system always query its consortial catalog, and that has led to some issues that needed to be resolved. Inconsistencies between the two catalogs led to certain items being hidden from search results, for instance. They also had some problems with overloading the consortial catalog's server (Wade et al., 2008, 30-31).
While recent agreements between OCLC and database providers such as EBSCO as discussed above have greatly expanded the amount of articles that will be searchable through WorldCat Local, it is still the case that most libraries will have databases that are not included in the service. This could lead to confusion in users who may not be aware of other search services. WorldCat Local is not likely to ever fulfill the same functions as a well-constructed federated search tool, though it does have many features that federated search does not.
Current Implementations
WorldCat Local is currently in use in many libraries, including the University of Washington Libraries (http://www.lib.washington.edu/), Lincoln Trail Library System (http://www.ltls.org/linc.html), Ohio State University (http://library.osu.edu), Macalester College (http://www.macalester.edu/library/), and the California Digital Library (http://melvyl.worldcat.org).
Future Applications
OCLC recently announced they are expanding WorldCat Local to include automation features more traditionally seen in an integrated library system such as circulation, delivery, and acquisition. This cloud computing service will provide automation features at a network level. This service could potentially reshape the automation field, as these are services generally provided by commercial ILS vendors at a very high price (Breeding, 2009a). OCLC has added the ability to include a barcode number with an item's
WorldCat holdings information, paving the way for a web-based circulation
system (Breeding, 2009b). The ability to obtain these automation services from
OCLC could be very appealing to libraries that already subscribe to
many OCLC services, for increased interoperability.
The automation services from OCLC could also lead to increased adoption of the WorldCat Local service itself. WorldCat Local has to be customized to work with integrated library systems individually. It currently works with Innovative Interfaces Millennium, Innovative Interfaces INN-Reach, SirsiDynix Horizon, Ex Libris Voyager and Ex Libris Aleph, and OCLC is working on compatibility with others (OCLC, 2008, p. 3). This makes many libraries currently unable to adopt WorldCat Local even if they would like to. OCLC's automation services will be designed to work with WorldCat Local, giving another incentive to try them out.
Conclusions
WorldCat Local has the potential to be a powerful tool for libraries, combining searches for books and articles both locally held and worldwide into one interface, and integrating Web 2.0 features and connections to social sites. Currently, in order to determine if WorldCat Local is a good option for adoption, a library must consider if it is compatible with its ILS, how well-maintained their catalog records are in terms of their integration with WorldCat, and if they are comfortable with a commercial service with limited customization, among other things. As OCLC develops WorldCat Local further and introduces their web-based automation services, the adoption criteria will develop along with it. WorldCat Local is an emerging technology library professionals should follow with interest.
Breeding, M. (2009, April 23). In Challenge to ILS Industry, OCLC Extends WorldCat Local To Launch New Library System. Library Journal. Retrieved June 8, 2009, from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6653619.html.
Breeding, M. (2009, April 28). Breaking Down the Components of OCLC’s New Library System. Library Journal. Retrieved June 8, 2009, from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6654793.html.
De Rosa, C. (2005). Perceptions of libraries and information resources. Retrieved June 11, 2009, from http://www.oclc.org/reports/2005perceptions.htm.
Online Computer Library Center. (2008, November). FAQ: WorldCat Local. Retrieved June 8, 2009, from http://www.oclc.org/services/brochures/212632usf_worldcat_local_faq.pdf.
Online Computer Library Center. (2009, April 7). OCLC and EBSCO partnership offers library patrons online access to full text of authoritative electronic journals. Retrieved June 9, 2009, from http://www.oclc.org/news/releases/200922.htm.
Online Computer Library Center. (2009, April 23). OCLC announces "quick start" version of the OCLC WorldCat Local service. Retrieved June 9, 2009, from http://www.oclc.org/news/announcements/announcement355.htm.
Ward, J., Shadle, S., & Mofield, P. (2008, August). WorldCat local at the University of Washington libraries. Library Technology Reports, 44(6), 4-41. Retrieved June 11, 2009, from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text database.
