UCLA Library service hit the nail on the head

Rethinking How We Provide Bibliographic Services for the University of California

This article shows clearly how one of the big players and market leaders want to push the library systems forward. When I see writing like this it really inspires me, partly because it justifies the way I've been thinking about OPACs (online public access catalogues) in terms of Google and Amazon, but also because it pushes and inspires me to create better interfaces.

To find value in this article to first have to understand the value that libraries offer. I was brought up, with a weekly trip to our local library's children section, I remember clearly searching the shelves for the next illustrated treasure to take home. I even remember the green screen terminal the librarian used. Unfortunately not all my experiences with libraries have been so good, usually due to a lack of resources, but I think it instilled in me the need for universal access to the wealth of knowledge that we can find both through libraries and the internet.

At Talis I've learnt what libraries can offer that the internet can't; librarians, the proffessional information managers that have Google pegged everytime when you need that oscure bit of information, providing information from a recognised trustworthy source, rather than the result of a complex equation. Unfortunately I don't have a librarian inside my PC, so the next best thing should be the library OPAC; getting the user to the best information possible as quickly as possible.

Some of the interesting points are:

Provide an “I-want-this” button
I've always maintained that the user doesn't care how they get the material they want, so always give them the option. If the library can't provide it, find one that can or let them buy it from Amazon.

Our users expect simplicity and immediate reward and Amazon, Google, and iTunes are the standards against which we are judged. Our current systems pale beside them.
Indeed the interface should be simple and the complexity dealt with by the system. I'd love to have a single search option rather than searching against title or author or keyword. Thankfully we seen this implemented in Prism 3.

Bibliographic systems must add value to the interaction, using what is known about both the user and his/her request to provide intelligent advice and assistance.
Personalisation is the key and even more value is added her through user interaction. As with Amazon allowing the user to refine recommendations ultimately greatly improves the recommendations provided, but if no feedback is given recommendations are offered based on viewing and purchase history.
If the OPAC has access to information on things like saved searches, academic course or thesis details, favourite authors or bands, reviews which collect a negative or positive feedback, suddenly the well of user information to draw on is much deeper.

User-focused systems will never leave a user alone with failure, facing zero results with no alternative path.
There should never be no options available, suggest alternative spelling and provide the top results for that spelling, provide a search box and allow the user to remove any search limiters.

Navigating large sets of search results is particularly frustrating when many of the records retrieved are variations of the same work.
Large result sets are troublesome for both the user and the system. The system may struggle with the stress on the database and server, while the user maybe overwhelmed or frustrated with the huge task of looking through pages of results. Pagination has never really offered a good way of finding what needed, and is in my opinion one of the largest weaknesses in Google. UCLA suggest offering further logical subsets, which if provided in addition to the results could be a great way to assist in narrowing a search, combining the best from a Google type search and also from a Yahoo based directory style structure. Further reducing the results by grouping like results together could further screen simplicity.

We recommend working with OCLC to apply its OpenWorldCat technique to
expose all of its records, or at least all UC records, for discovery by search engines.
Currently if I type a book title into Google I will get Amazon as the first link or at least on the front page. If libraries want to be the information providers they need to be able to ensure that they have a link there. Amazon have the advantage as they hold one huge central resource, so for libraries to compete they need to open up a central resource like OCLC’s WorldCat to search engines. However this would also need to be backed up with the ultimate OPAC - quite a challenge. Could something similar be achieved with TalisBase and Prism?

Users who are accustomed to Google expect to enter one search and retrieve information pulled together from across the information space and presented in a single ranked list.
Create one ring to rule them all, or rather one interface should access all the library resources. In the same way as a user doesn’t care how they get the item they want (ILL or purchase) it is also fair to say that the average user does not care where the information they need comes from. The exception to this is obviously in the academic setting. However it is still important that all resources are used and here the library comes into it’s own as it should give priority to the resources that have higher “trust” value e.g. A professional journal would take precedence over Wikipedia, but a blog from the leading expert in that field might take priority over the journal.

You can Lorcan Dempsy's thoughts on the report over at their blog.