Have you been following the showdown of Google vs. Microsoft? To catch up, read NY Times reporter Steve Lohr’s article. Simply put the clash is the result of the continuing overlap of desktop computing and Internet services and software. “Microsoft, of course, is the reigning powerhouse of computing and Google is the muscular Internet challenger. On each side, the battalions are arrayed: executives, engineers, marketers, lawyers and lobbyists. The spending and competition are escalating daily.” There are plenty of reasons to follow this clash but for librarians this morning’s article by Lohr is food for thought about the future of our business. He covers the history of two corporate battles from the past, mass-market retailing and automobiles, and points out that historically the defining battle was for talent. What caught my attention was that he noted, “… even more significant, those who came out on top, judging from history, had two more specific attributes. They were the companies, according to business historians, that proved able to adapt to change instead of being prisoners of past success.”
Does that sound like the debate we are all having as we discuss the future of libraries? Libraries are in the process of redefining ourselves from repositories of books to ever-evolving community and information centers but according to OCLCÂ’s study, Perception of Libraries and Information Resources 2005, the public seems to still cling onto our old image believing libraries are synonymous with books not information. A great conversation would either be to talk about the people we see as our great talent in the library world or how you or your library have shed the chains of the past and moving forward to the future. Have fun- share your thoughts! If you don't want to write your comments here, e-mail them to me directly: ndowd@njstatelib.org -Nancy
Categories: "Trend spotting"
Future of Libraries
Posts
2 comments:
Posted for Steve:
I think libraries cannot define themselves generally, but have to consider what their niche is within their particular community and within their technological, fiscal and personnel environment. I may have missed a couple things there, but really, my point is that some libraries may be a perfect match for their local situation by being "about books". Others may be able to become a civic hub, a partner with local governments, non-profits, schools, universities or businesses. The key is to scan those environments, find out what your community wants and needs, and set out to occupy some indespensible purpose for the community.
Does that mean being about books? Maybe. It may also be about something else. Those who get stuck defining themselves rigidly according to some normative criteria risk losing touch with the interests and priorities of their communities.
Being a place for books is something I just take as a given at this time, not only because I think the medium has not worn out its usefulness, but because I am pretty sure our public has a strong sense that books are a major part of our business. That's gotta be worth something...
But I also worry that getting stuck in the mindset of "being about books" can be dangerous. Libraries can be about a lot of things, depending on the community- a third place, a wireless hotspot, a source for free meeting space, a research center, etc.- and I need to be open to whatever the community tells me is important to them.
It is my professional responsibility to maintain an operation that understands the state of the art and that is responsive to trends in information technology. Those trends influence patrons' expectations of what our services ought to be and how they should be designed. My job is to respond as appropriately as possible to satisfy those expectations, which requires a solid grounding in the profession and a well rounded perspective on the community and where our organization fits in.
Post a Comment