OLE Project at ALA 2009 LITA Emerging Technologies Interest Group

July 11, 2009ALA Annual Conference Chicago, ILALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL

THE OPEN L IBRARY ENVIRONMENT PROJECT:

B U I L D I N G A N I L S F O R S E R V I C E O R I E N T E D A R C H I T E C T U R E I N T E G R AT I O N

John LittleDuke University

Beth Forrest-WarnerUniversity of Kansas

Robert H. McDonaldIndiana University

Carlen RuschoffUniversity of Maryland

Tweet our Session

Follow OLE on twitter @oleprojectTags

#ala09#ala2009#lita#etig#oleproject#totebag - snarky

ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL July 11, 2009

Poll Anywhere

3 Ways to Poll Text a code to 99503 = sms txt 99503 “code” Tweet a code to @poll = @poll “code” Go to http://poll4.com = enter “code”


http://poll4.com/

Poll #1

In ten years, if it isn’t digital, it will be invisible. Text a code to 99503 = sms txt 99503 “code” Tweet a code to @poll = @poll “code” Go to http://poll4.com = enter “code”

http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTMxODY4ODk2NQ


http://poll4.com/



OLE and Mellon

OLE has been funded by the OLE partners and the Andrew W Mellon Foundation’s Research in Information Technology Program

1. Technology that benefits one or more of the constituencies traditionally served by the Foundation.

2. Technology that benefits multiple institutions.

3. Technology that can realistically be developed by the grantee within the proposed timeframe and budget.

4. Technology that provides a significant cost savings.

5. Compelling, demonstrable technology for which funding is required to create fully shareable versions, expanded features, or improved reliability.

6. Technology for which intellectual property rights are available.

7. Technology for which there is a credible support and self-sufficiency plan.

8. Technology whose value can be objectively assessed.


Overview

What is OLE and What Has OLE Been Doing for 12 Months?

Community Source Software and Governance!Enterprise Level Management for Libraries!OLE Future Directions!Questions!


ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL July 11, 2009ALA Annual Conference Chicago, IL

OLE Overview

What is the OLE Project?Community source alternative to current ILSInternational participation from libraries and

consortia100+ institutions, 350+ individuals, 10+ regional

workshops, multiple webcasts and presentationsPlanning phase:

September ‘08 – July ‘09


Why OLE Now?

Our current library business technologies cost too much and deliver too little. We need to rethink our services and workflows, and to use technology that enables innovation rather than locking us into the status quo.


Our Institutions Change

Enterprise financial systemsEnterprise identity management systemsCourse management systemsLeverage local systemsCollaborative SystemsILS – More & Less

More external integration and collaboration Less internal, one-size-fits-all integration

Library technology systems have not kept pace with changing users and a changing information environment.

Our Users are Changing


Scenario

Economist researcherOLE Campus

Manages locations Manages resource subscriptions Integrated into

Course/Learning Mgt. System Accounting Identity (Student / HR) Consortia


Scenario

Professor uses one of many access portals OLE behind the scenesDiscovery enables access to full-text from various

remote and nearby localesRouting of physical materials enabled by OLEOn-demand purchases approved by patron


Scenario

Payment optionsDelays noted (Recall, purchase, delivery)


Scenario

GPS-enabledOriginal Search and mapping combined to highlight

locale of like resourcesOLE notes event-driven resource use for

recommender servicesSupports markup and social networkingMashups

OLE Principles


Flexibility Community Ownership Service Oriented Architecture Enterprise-Level Integration Efficiency Sustainability

Which of these do you see as being critical for the future of your library?

Poll #2

Which of these do you see as being critical to the future of your library?

http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/MzU5OTI3ODQz





Where we’ve been

Regional Design WorkshopsDid you or your staff attend a workshop?350+ people from 100+ institutions!Who attended?


Where we’ve been

Project team meetingsWebinarsCommunity information

sharingReview information on the

project website, oleproject.org

http://oleproject.org/

Where We Are Today?


Scope DocumentVisionPrinciplesFunctional ScopeArchitectureGovernance

http://oleproject.org/overview/project-scope


Where We Are Today?

Project Assumptions OLE will provide services that will help academic & research institutions

accomplish their core mission by improving the library’s ability to deliver its content and services throughout the institution’s activities.

OLE provides a transformative opportunity to the institution through its support of a more collaborative approach to research, teaching and learning.

OLE will enable libraries to be more of a component with the enterprise infrastructure raising the relevance of libraries to the organization’s mission

Libraries are core to the research institution. Adopting a model of community-source software development and a

technology infrastructure based on service orientation is, in itself, a strategic innovation for libraries and universities.

http://oleproject.org/overview/assumptions


Where We Are Today?

Project assumptions (cont.) Business workflows at peer libraries are more similar than

they are different. Libraries need to be able to leverage a dynamic information

environment to support the research and educational mission of their institutions

Digital formats will dominate our business processes. Collaborative and consortial activity is increasingly as

important to libraries as work at local institutions. Library business processes will increasingly involve

interactions with external service providers and consumers.

Where We Are Today?


ILS Market

Community Source

Governance


Why OLE Now?

Current ILS products are inadequate

Growing need for library systems to interact with other enterprise systems

Vendor consolidation constrains choices

Libraries need to control their own destinies

Current Academic ILS Market

Ex Libris/Endeavor - 1465 Voyager - 862 Aleph 500 – 603

Innovative Interfaces - 1163 Millennium – 1163

SirsiDynix - 1076 Unicorn - 740 Horizon/Symphony – 336


Legacy ILS Functionality


Circulation Acquisitions

Cataloging Serials

Staff Interfaces:

Public User Interface:

Data Stores:

Functionalmodules:

Vendor Based ePurchasing

Vendor Based Metadata Enhancement

Current ILS


Legacy ILS Functionality

+eContentModule

+Advanced DiscoveryInterface

Circulation Acquisitions

Cataloging Serials

FederatedSearch/

AdvancedDiscovery

OpenURLLinking

Electronic Resource

Mgmt.System

Unified Workflow Interface for Staff

Learning Mgmt./Campus Portal Feeds

Proxy/VPN for eContent Access

SOA Models for ILS?


CompositeApplications

Data Stores:

ReusableBusiness Services

Rule OrientedWorkflow Process

Community Source Projects

In traditional open source development the software code is made available for inspection and modification from the beginning of a project. In contrast to open source development, in so-called 'community source' projects, such as Sakai, Kuali or the Symbian Foundation, a consortium of institutions or commercial companies sign an agreement, by which they decide to contribute a certain amount of financial or human resources, and get in exchange exclusivity in influencing the development of the project during an initial closed stage.


From JISC OSS Watchhttp://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/communityvsopen.xml


Open Source Projects

From - http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource

Community Source and OLE

Community Source Projects Have sustainability over the course of the product

development Invest in the community of practice for long-term support

and development Fosters innovation and shared knowledge Coordinates institutional goals rather than individual

goals of the community of practice Mitigates risk among peer institutions rather than in a

single entity or vendor



Governance Options

Institution-based e.g. University of Michigan DLXS e.g. LOCKSS

Community-based More established: Sakai, Kuali Emerging: DSpace, Fedora Commons

Try to join an existing organizational framework? Where do libraries fit in an enterprise academic environment?


Build Plan Recommendations

Governance

LIBRARY


KUALI – Community Source

Kuali Foundation

Kuali FinancialBusiness Management System

Kuali StudentStudent Management System

Kuali CoeusResearch Administration System

Kuali RiceMiddleware for SOA service bus integration


More on Kuali Foundation

Founded as non-profit in 2004 Colorado State University and San Joaquin Delta College

currently running Kuali Financial

Article The Next Open Source Movement – InsideHighered.com July 6, 2009 "I think it's (kuali) going to be good for the industry," he said.

"It's going to force vendors to understand that institutions don't like vendor lock-in. You can't talk to an institution that enjoys being locked in and this will force all of us in the industry to really understand that.”Jack Kramer – Sr. VP SunGard Higher Education


Further Readings on Kuali

Kuali Foundationhttp://www.kuali.org

Business Officer Magazine – May 2009http://www.nacubo.org/Business_Officer_Magazine/Magazine_Archives/May_2009/

InsideHigherEd.com – July 2009http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/07/06/kuali

Open Source in Open Education – from Opening Up Education by Iiyoshi, Kumar, and Brown

http://books.google.com/books?id=gWrHFmAYX5EC&pg=PA1&dq=opeingin+up+education&lr

=


http://www.kuali.org/

http://www.nacubo.org/Business_Officer_Magazine/Magazine_Archives/May_2009/

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/07/06/kuali



Poll #4

Should library systems be better integrated with campus business & learning systems?

http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTE5NTEyMjk2OTE





Enterprise Level Interactions

Library business systems need to be better integrated and interoperable with campus business and learning systemsLibraries must interact with and leverage other key

campus systems, including financial, HR, student information, identity management, course management, and content repository systems


Transforming Teaching & Learning

39


Curating and Preserving Our Content

40


Leveraging Enterprise Systems & Content

• Better interoperability and integration with:• Campus identity management systems

• Leverage both on-campus and externally (consortiums)• Better ability to work with trusted peers (ex. Shibboleth)

• Campus HR and Student systems• Why copy faculty and student information into the ILS?

• Campus financial & purchasing systems• Take advantage of existing vendor information, invoice management, bill paying,

etc.• Course management & content repository systems

• Leverage library investments through better integration of content, both purchased and created on campus, into courses

• Will require difficult discussions of policies and workflow, but pay-off is potentially more secure data (fewer copies), more efficient processes, and better use of campus investments


Creating Options

42

OLE: New Methods, New Models


Defining New Functionality

Redefining the Old

Poll #5

Has your campus implemented any form of SOA?http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_poll

s/LTIxMDgxMzA1Mzc


http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTIxMDgxMzA1Mzc

http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTIxMDgxMzA1Mzc

What is SOA?


Service Oriented Architecture

ServiceSystem capabilities that provide access to functions and data are appropriately exposed to other components (applications, devices, networks, etc.)

OrientedUses “open” interoperability protocols

ArchitectureIn its purest form, it’s the connection of systems (simple or complex)

SOA Video


Poll #3

In your opinion, is SOA and the interoperability that it offers a good idea?

http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTMwNTc1ODE4Mg




What is BPM?


• BPM = Business Process Modeling• Design approach• BPM process

• What needs to be done• How to do it, in what order, and contingencies• Separate from the systems and services that do the

work• Mid-level detail

• Necessary before determining shared processes

as part of SOA

Example of a Modeling Process


• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-Mbr31f2dg (no sound)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-Mbr31f2dg

Process Example

Select entity / obtain metadatahttp://oleproject.org/overview/ole-reference-model/select-entity/select-entity-obtain-metadata/


Process Module: Select EntityProcess Title: Create MetadataDefinition: Process where metadata is created to supplement that which was obtained or when metadata is not available to be obtained. The metadata created will support the activity that leads to the decision to select or reject an entity for inclusion in the environment. Use Cases: Metadata being obtained may include descriptive (e.g. a review of the entity), holdings (e.g. what is available and being considered for acquisition), authority, financial, or other types. The metadata may be harvested from or deposited by another system

http://oleproject.org/overview/ole-reference-model/select-entity/select-entity-obtain-metadata/

http://oleproject.org/overview/ole-reference-model/select-entity/select-entity-obtain-metadata/

Select Entity/Create Metadata51

Select Entity/Deliver Resource52

OLE Reference Model


Poll #6

In five years, most enterprise systems will be run in the cloud.

http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/LTYzNTcxMTIyMQ




OLE: Next Steps

Theory to Reality


Build Plan


Use Existing Pieces RICE Middleware

Kuali Nervous System (KNS) Kuali System Bus (KSB) Kuali Enterprise Workflow (KEW) Kuali Enterprise Notification (KEN) Kuali Identity Management (KIM)


Build Plan

Use Existing Systems Existing Data Feeds

Open ERM Data Shared Database Feeds

Existing Discovery Tools WorldCat Local LibraryFind VuFind Blacklight XC (eXtensible Catalog Tools)


Build Plan

Outsource Coding Model – Kuali Coeus

Single Project Manager (MIT) Kuali Coeus outsources code to India-based

software development firm Build Plan for OLE will outsource code to

Bulgarian-based software development firm


Build Plan

•Mellon Foundation Matching Funding•Two Year Timeline

Year 1 Deliverables (will focus on one of these) A fully functioning core of services and framework – the OLE Core & Components

①Management of Electronic Resources Services Leased eContent Owned eContent

②Peer Resource Sharing Services Sharing content – peer to peer Sharing workflow – consortial

③Acquisitions Services Will be the same as MER Will add EDI/Direct MER

④CRM Unique service in this space Service to whole institution Track usage and needs of clients over time/looking for an LTR


Build Plan

Two Year Timeline Year 2 Deliverables

Integrations EDI/local ERP discovery interface (broker for multi-discovery use) data migration services registries and utilities

Orchestrations define workflows to match relevant, local resource set determine optimum dataflows including effort distribution and

sharing Functional Scope

meet the business needs of a research or academic library allow things to be turned off


Academic Enterprise (ERP)

Ac

ad

em

ic E

nte

rpris

e


Library as Enterprise App

Library ERP

KNS/KSB KNS/KSBAcq P2P ER HR FIN PCH

Lib

rary

as

Ac

ad

em

ic

En

terp

rise

Pa

rtne

r

OLE Reference Model



Business Plan

Have a vetted business planWant to share with others

Will setup individual discussion for interested parties

Actively Seeking Build PartnersLooking for Consortia-led Partners

OLE Build Phase


Find Build Partners – SpringUpcoming events/presentationsProject team meeting – MayDraft design document – JuneOngoing community input and feedbackFinal design document & project report for Mellon

Foundation and Public – July

Risks of Participation

No CS project has yet failed, but failure … Achieve consensusAcquire sufficient resourcesDeliver software of adequate functionalityProblems could arise with contract softwareAdoptionBuild sufficiently large vendor services community


Benefits of Participating

Cost Savings Annual (35 – 90 percent for other CS projects) Migration costs remain the same or diminish somewhat

Access to emerging technologiesUse monetary resources in a productive and directly

influential fashionLeverage ROI on campus for enterprise systems


Benefits of Participation

Secondary Exposure Staff enrichment Productivity Focus on culture of strategic innovations and innovative

technologies


Cost of Participation

Cash ContributionHR ContributionCommitment to run some portion of the OLE

software


Cash Contributions

$5.2 Million total partner contribution 7 partners - $185K / year 6 partners - $216K / year 5 partners - $260 / year

Consortia Spread out the costs Spread out the influence


Questions?



Invest in Your Community?

Send comments or additional questions to

[email protected] - [email protected] - [email protected] - [email protected]

Thank you!