I’ve been talking to a lot of librarians recently.
I’m currently on the road in the UK spreading the word about new issues in RFID – Privacy, the impact of Near Field Communication (NFC) and something that regular readers of the blog will already know a good deal about – the Library Communication Framework (LCF).
Since the beginning of the year I’ve been speaking to heads of service in academic and public libraries beginning in Glasgow and now working my way south via Wallsend, Beverley and Preston. I was also very pleased to be invited to run a CPD session for academic librarians in the South East during March.
One of the many things I’ve learned along the way is that the procurement guide that Mark Hughes and I wrote for the National Acquisitions Group and Book Industry Communication back in 2011 is still being widely used by librarians seeking to buy or extend their RFID solutions.
Flattering though this is it is also somewhat alarming! There have been many changes since 2011 – most of them flagged up on this blog – which were not addressed in the original guide. Anyone still using it, particularly anyone issuing it without amending the sample questions to reflect local circumstances and/or requirements, is unlikely to be taking full advantage of the new services, standards and benefits that have appeared over the last 4 years, not to mention the danger of making expensive mistakes.
Realising how dated the guide had become I withdrew it from all my sites last year. My plan is to produce an updated version for publication next year but in the meantime there is one particular innovation that I really think ought to be included in RFP you may be planning – RFID or otherwise.
I refer of course to my pet project – the Library Communication Framework (LCF).
The framework was developed over two years by suppliers from both the RFID and LMS (ILS) markets working together with librarians and assisted by consultants from Book Industry Communication (BIC). A great deal of information has already been published about LCF both in print and on the web. I wrote an article for CILIP’s Access journal that contained an explanation of why it was needed and what it is last year and there is a more detailed explanation on the BIC site.
Put simply it is nothing less than an attempt to create a more interoperable environment for library applications. Using it RFID system can speak unto RFID system – and both can speak to the Library Management System. It’s not an API or a web service (although both are supported) it’s simply a set of standard data elements and values that can be implemented in whatever way best suits developers. The LCF is completely open and supplier independent and the whole process is managed by BIC on behalf of the library community.
The framework will grow as new functionality is added and as new application providers come on stream. A management team and website is already in place to make it simple for developers to add new elements and data as required but unlike SIP quality controls will ensure that it maintains its integrity as it develops.
All of this is discussed in detail elsewhere so today I just want to suggest a few additional questions that you should be considering adding to any tender or RFP you might be about to issue – whether based the original guide or not.
Many suppliers are already using LCF to develop new functionality so it’s worth checking to establish whether the one you are inviting to sell you a solution is one of them so I would consider asking,
- How is your commitment to the Library Communication Framework demonstrated in your future product development plans/roadmap?
- What specific functionality are you achieving today via LCF?
Functionality developed using LCF can be readily transferred to any other supplier that supports it while functionality that has been specifically developed by a particular combination of RFID and LMS (ILS) supplier is less likely to be available if you change either so if you’re buying a new RFID system consider asking,
- Which functions of your system have been implemented or made possible using integration methods that are unique to your current LMS (ILS) – RFID supplier (i.e. using API’s and/or customised code rather than defined open standards such as SIP2/NCIP/LCF)
- What specific functionality will be lost if we choose to change our LMS (ILS) in future?
- What services and costs might we have to budget for, in the event we chose to change our LMS (ILS) in the future?
Obviously it would be sensible to ask essentially the same questions of any potential LMS (ILS) provider.
The whole area of interoperability has been a bugbear for librarians and providers alike for many years now. LCF seeks to put this right by presenting developers with the choice of using a more open means of implementing their solutions. In the UK all the major RFID suppliers now support both data standards and the LCF.
Readers from outside the UK – or those with systems that were installed pre-2011 might therefore consider asking a couple more questions:
- Are there any proprietary elements of your solution that might prevent another supplier from interoperating with solutions provided by your company?
- Please provide details of sites where your solutions work alongside other RFID applications/systems in the same library.
Hopefully anybody currently struggling with procurement using an RFP will find this helpful however if you’re buying through one of the many framework agreements out there I can only wish you ‘good luck’ since – so far as I am aware – none of these issues are addressed by any of them.