Integrated library system

Library Document

1. Integrated library system
From Wikipedia, the f ree ency clopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Not to be confused with Library (computing) or Library system.
An integrated library system (ILS), also known as a library management system (LMS),
[1][2]
is an enterprise resource planning system for
a library, used to track items owned, orders made, bills paid, and patrons who have borrowed.
An ILS usually comprises a relational database, software to interact with that database, and two graphical user interfaces (one for patrons,
one for staff). Most ILSes separate software functions into discrete programs called modules, each of them integrated with a unified interface.
Examples of modules might include:
 acquisitions (ordering, receiving, and invoicing materials)
 cataloging (classifying and indexing materials)
 circulation (lending materials to patrons and receiving them back)
 serials (tracking magazine, journals, and newspaper holdings)
 online public access catalog or OPAC (public user interface)
Each patron and item has a unique ID in the database that allows the ILS to track its activity.
Contents
 1History
o 1.1Pre-computerization
o 1.21960s: the inf luence of computer technologies
o 1.31970s–1980s: the early integrated library sy stem
o 1.41990s–2000s: the growth of the Internet
o 1.5Mid 2000s–present: increasing costs and customer dissatisf action
o 1.62010s–present: the rise of cloud based solutions
 2Sof tware criteria
o 2.1Distributed sof tware v s. web serv ice
o 2.2Data entry assistance based on ISBN
o 2.3Bar code scanning and printing
 3See also
 4Ref erences
 5Further reading
 6External links
History[edit]
Pre-computerization[edit]
Prior to computerization, library tasks were performed manually and independently from one another. Selectors ordered materials with
ordering slips, cataloguers manually catalogued sources and indexed them with the card catalog system (in which all bibliographic data was
kept on a single index card), fines were collected by local bailiffs, and users signed books out manually, indicating their name on clue cards
which were then kept at the circulation desk. Early mechanization came in 1936, when the University of Texas began using a punch card
system to manage library circulation.
[3]
While the punch card system allowed for more efficient tracking of loans, library services were far from
being integrated, and no other library task was affected by this change.
1960s: the influence of computer technologies[edit]
The next big innovation came with the advent of MARC standards in the 1960s, which coincided with the growth of computer technologies –
library automation was born.
[3]
From this point onwards, libraries began experimenting with computers, and, starting in the late 1960s and
continuing into the 1970s, bibliographic services utilizing new online technology and the shared MARC vocabulary entered the market; these
included OCLC (1967), Research Libraries Group (which has since merged with OCLC), and the Washington Library Network (which
became Western Library Network and is also now part of OCLC).
[4]

1970s–1980s: the early integrated library system[edit]

2. Screenshot of a Dynix menu
The 1970s can be characterized by improvements in computer storage, as well as in telecommunications.
[4]
As a result of these advances,
‘turnkey systems on microcomputers,’
[4]
known more commonly as integrated library systems (ILS) finally appeared. These systems included
necessary hardware and software which allowed the connection of major circulation tasks, including circulation control and overdue
notices.
[5]
As the technology developed, other library tasks could be accomplished through ILS as well, including acquisition, cataloguing,
reservation of titles, and monitoring of serials.
[6]

1990s–2000s: the growth of the Internet[edit]
With the evolution of the Internet throughout the 1990s and into the 2000s, ILSs began allowing users to more actively engage with their
libraries through OPACs and online web-based portals. Users could log into their library accounts to reserve or renew books, as well as
authenticate themselves for access to library-subscribed online databases. Inevitably, during this time, the ILS market grew exponentially. By
2002, the ILS industry averaged sales of approximately US$500 million annually, compared to just US$50 million in 1982.
[5]

Mid 2000s–present: increasing costs and customer dissatisfaction[edit]
By the mid to late 2000s, ILS vendors had increased not only the number of services offered but also their prices, leading to some
dissatisfaction among many smaller libraries. At the same time, open source ILS was in its early stages of testing. Some libraries began
turning to such open source ILSs as Koha and Evergreen. Common reasons noted were to avoid vendor lock in, avoid license fees, and
participate in software development
[7]
. Freedom from vendors also allowed libraries to prioritize needs according to urgency, as opposed to
what their vendor can offer.
[8]
Libraries which have moved to open source ILS have found that vendors are now more likely to provide quality
service in order to continue a partnership since they no longer have the power of owning the ILS software and tying down libraries to strict
contracts.
[8]
This has been the case with the SCLENDS consortium. Following the success of Evergreen for the Georgia PINES library
consortium, the South Carolina State Library along with some local public libraries formed the SCLENDS consortium in order to share
resources and to take advantage of the open source nature of the Evergreen ILS to meet their specific needs.
[8]
By October 2011, just 2
years after SCLENDS began operations, 13 public library systems across 15 counties had already joined the consortium, in addition to the
South Carolina State Library. Librarytechnology.org does an annual survey of over 2,400 libraries and noted in 2008 2%
[9]
of those surveyed
used open source ILS, in 2009 the number increased to 8%,
[10]
in 2010 12%,
[11]
and in 2011 11%
[12]
of the libraries polled had adopted open
source ILSs. The following year's survey (published in April 2013) reported an increase to 14%, stating that "open source ILS products,
including Evergreen and Koha, continue to represent a significant portion of industry activity. Of the 794 contracts reported in the public and
academic arena, 113, or 14 percent, were for support services for these open source systems."
[13]

2010s–present: the rise of cloud based solutions[edit]
The use of cloud-based library management systems has increased drastically since the rise of cloud technology started. Some common
management systems include Insignia Software, Libramatic, OCLC WorldShare, Alma, Aura Software and Librarika.
Many modern cloud-based solutions allow automated cataloging by scanning a book's ISBN. This technology was pioneered by
Libramatic,
[c itation needed]
although it is currently in use by systems such as Insignia Software, BiblioMatik and Librarika.
Software criteria[edit]
Distributed software vs. web service[edit]
Library computer systems tend to fall into two categories of software:
 that purchased on a perpetual license
 that purchased as a subscription service.
With distributed software the customer can choose to self-install or to have the system installed by the vendor on their own hardware. The
customer can be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the application and the data, or the customer can choose to be supported
by the vendor with an annual maintenance contract. Some vendors charge for upgrades to the software. Customers who subscribe to a web
(hosted) service upload data to the vendor's remote server through the Internet and may pay a periodic fee to access their data.
Data entry assistance based on ISBN[edit]
Many applications can reduce a major portion of manual data entry by populating data fields based upon the entered ISBN using MARC
standards technology via the Internet.
Bar code scanning and printing[edit]

3. With most software, users can eliminate some manual entry by using a bar-code scanner. Some software is designed, or can be extended
with an additional module, to integrate scanner functionality. Most software vendors provide some type of scanner integration, and some print
bar-code labels.
See also[edit]
 Library and information science portal
 List of next-generation library catalogs
 Database management system
 Public library ratings
References[edit]
1. Jump up^ Adamson, Veronica, et al. (2008). "JISC & SCONUL Library Management Systems
Study" (PDF). (1 MB). Shef f ield, UK: Sero Consulting. p. 51. Retriev ed on 21 January 2009. "... a
Library Management Sy stem (LMS or ILS 'Integrated Library Sy stem' in US parlance)." Some
usef ul library automation sof twares are: KOHA ,Greenstone ,Libsy s, and granthlay a.
2. Jump up^ Tennant, Roy (16 April 2008). "Picking When to Jump, Part 2". Library Journal. Reed
Business Information. Retrieved 20 January 2009. Across the pond they use the term library
management systems (LMS) for what we call the integrated library system (ILS).
3. ^ Jump up to:
a
b Wallace, Patricia M. (1991). Gary M. Pitkin, ed. Library Systems Migration: An
Introduction. Westport, CT: Meckler. pp. 1–7 [3]. ISBN 0-88736-738-0.
4. ^ Jump up to:
a
b
c Wallace, Patricia M. (1991). Gary M. Pitkin, ed. Library Systems Migration: An
Introduction. Westport, CT: Meckler. pp. 1–7 [4]. ISBN 0-88736-738-0.
5. ^ Jump up to:
a
b Kochtanek, Thomas R. (2002). "1 - The Evolution of LIS and Enabling
Technologies". Library Information Systems: From Library Automation to Distributed Information
Access Solutions. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. p. 4. ISBN 1-59158-018-8.
6. Jump up^ Kochtanek, Thomas R. (2002). "1 - The Evolution of LIS and Enabling
Technologies". Library Information Systems: From Library Automation to Distributed Information
Access Solutions. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. p. 5. ISBN 1-59158-018-8.
7. Jump up^ Ganseman J (2015). Refactoring a Library's Legacy Catalog: a Case Study (PDF).
IAML 2015. New York City, USA.
8. ^ Jump up to:
a
b
c Hamby, R.; McBride, R.; Lundberg, M. (Oct 2011). "South Carolina's
SCLENDS optimizing libraries, transforming lending". Computers in Libraries. 8. 31: 6–10.
9. Jump up^ Perceptions 2008: an International Surv ey of Library Automation.
Library technology .org. Retriev ed on 2013-08-17.
10. Jump up^ Perceptions 2009: an International Surv ey of Library Automation.
Library technology .org. Retriev ed on 2013-08-17.
11. Jump up^ Perceptions 2010: an International Surv ey of Library Automation.
Library technology .org. Retriev ed on 2013-08-17.
12. Jump up^ Perceptions 2011: an International Surv ey of Library Automation.
Library technology .org (2012-01-28). Retriev ed on 2013-08-17.
13. Jump up^ Automation Marketplace 2013: The Rush to Innov ate. Library Journal on
thedigitalshif t.com (2013-04-13). Retriev ed on 2014-02-03.
Further reading[edit]
 Olson, N. (2010). Taken for Granted - The Construction of Order in the Process of Library
Management System Decision Making (Vol. 45). Göteborg / Borås: Valfrid publishing. [1]
 Rubin, Richard E. Foundations of Library and Information Science. New York: Neal-Schuman
Publishers, Inc., 2004.
External links[edit]
 MARC Records, Systems and Tools : Network Development and MARC
Standards Office, Library of Congress
 Higher Education Library Technology,(HELibTech) a wiki that covers many aspects of library
technology and lists technologies in use in UK Higher Education
 Key resources in the field of Library Automation
Categories:
 Library automation