The names are changin', deals are a-happenin', and the grant money is flowing.

More Names
I sometimes wonder if there is still a niche market left in the library automation industry. If I had been smart, I would have started selling business cards. From an environmental angle, I wonder how many landfills we are filling up with all the old ones. Get ready to start seeing some new cards soon.

Some name changes make sense. Others, I am never so sure about. Here are the bigs ones this season.

ProQuest has a new name. It's ProQuest. Nope, you read that right. Took me a second, too, but as you will recall, Cambridge Information Group bought ProQuest a little while back. ProQuest has more recognition and rolls off the tongue a little easier, I guess. That's quite a suite of products that company controls now, so I think we can expect some interesting changes in the future.

In case you did not realize it, SirsiDynix's announcement about "Rome," preceded the selection of an actual name for the product. SirsiDynix Symphony is "the company’s new integrated library system that blends the best features of SirsiDynix Unicorn and SirsiDynix Horizon 8.0/Corinthian to offer the most impressive array of library and consortium management solutions available to the library community." I don't think the new name clears up any of the market confusion, so I will try to do that here. The name is new, but until I see something technically new, it's still an upgrade for the Unicorn ILS. The company should start having some fun with naming new releases, though. Is this SD's first symphony? Imagine an entire release dedicated to music uniform titles.

Here's one I like. Xrefer has changed its name to Credo Reference. I always thought Xrefer sounded too much like "cross reference"...apropos for a reference resource, but not descriptive of the company. Credo now offers 273 reference titles from nearly 60 publishers.

Granted...
You may have heard that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has given another $12.6M to WebJunction. The money will "allow OCLC to replace and add software—including a new learning management system, content management system and portal software—that will provide added functionality and flexibility for WebJunction members and community partners." I might not have described OCLC as hurting for money, exactly, but you have to give props to the folks at WebJunction. They have created community and resource sharing tools for libraries that rival (quite well) those that have come before them. They also have a pretty nice website.

Deals with wheels
LibLime has announce a distribution deal with PALINET. The open source library system Koha will be available to PALINET members at a discounted price. The software has been around long enough now to be available as both Koha Classic and Koha Zoom. Crawford County Federated Library System (CCFLS) in Pennsylvania chose LibLime to support their new Koha ZOOM system in 2006. The open source ILS wave is swelling.

Well, back to the exhibit hall....

My first day in Washington for the ALA Annual Conference. I was born in this city and have so far not been reminded why I wanted so badly to leave. It's nice when the nostalgia lingers. D.C. is a great city, but it can also be hard to live in a place where the barometer changes substantially every 4–8 years. I grew up in the burbs, but I still miss things about this place—the culture, serious politics, and some of the people. I miss the Washington Post.

As I write this, I am actually squatting on the exhibit hall floor—it's amazing what a smile and a press pass will get you into. Of course, the exhibits don't open until Saturday, so I am just enjoying watching things get set up. It's all carpets, electrical power, and trash cans at this point. No candy, contests, and freebies. No business cards, smiles, and awkward eye-shifting to badges as names and place of origin are trying to be recalled or discovered.

I'm going to have a busy conference, so I'm not sure how much time I will have to blog. If there's any big news, I'll try to get it up here as soon as I can. I've already heard a rumor or two, but I will try to be more journalist than blogger, and wait for the official press releases.

Big thumbs up on the wireless at the conference. Happy 100th birthday, American Libraries, and cool T-shirt.

SirsiDynix gets a CEO
I am speeding off to D.C. for ALA, but I would be remiss to not get this announcement out first, since I have been clamoring for it both on- and offline. SirsiDynix has named a new CEO (pdf). Interesting news is that it will be a name that some librarians will recognize—Gary M. Rautenstrauch. Rautenstrauch recently held several executive positions at Baker & Taylor, including CIO, VP of Operations, and CEO. Rautenstrauch was replaced by Richard Willis when the company was sold to Willis Stein & Partners back in 2003. He followed B&T with short stints as CEO at Blackwell's Book Services and Advanced Marketing Services.

It's good to hear that Mr. Rautenstrauch will be at ALA this year, given SirsiDynix's recent (and somewhat controversial) decision to abandon Horizon 8.0 development for improvement of the Unicorn platform, rebranded Rome (Rome, a product code name, still awaits final branding). SirsiDynix will likely need Rautenstrauch's market experience to get them through a time of difficult transition.

Rautenstrauch will be joined in the Provo, Utah, office by a new CFO, Douglas R. Maughan. Look for more news and announcements from SirsiDynix in the booth at ALA!

Someone cares
Speaking of names familiar to librarians . . . Carl Grant, most recently of VTLS, has resurfaced after a very brief hiatus to join the open source provider community. Care Affiliates will be led by some familiar names from the vendor community—Grant, Lou Leuzzi (formerly of Endeavor), and Ron Passmore (Dynix, Ex Libris, and VTLS).

Care has turned to Index Data as a technology partner, and lists open source affiliates Thornton Staples (UVa. and FEDORA developer) and information architect Ezra Schwartz. Care will offer consulting and technology services based on open source software solutions.

“Lou Leuzzi and I want to build a different kind of company, one that works as partners with libraries to jointly develop great ideas, provide needed solutions in an open environment, and to do it in an affordable and caring way. The company name is a deliberate reflection of the approach we will follow in working with libraries. We Care.”

This makes the growing library open source industry very interesting. Care joins service and technology companies Index Data, LibLime, and Equinox. In fact, Care will even be sharing a booth with both Index Data and LibLime! Anyone in this space should envy the executive leadership that Care will offer. In my experience, successful open source technology solutions benefit from strength in leadership, marketing, and operational experience.

What a fun time to be watching the ILS industry!

I will make no apologies, for what is a blog if not self-promotion?

Innovate or die?
Many of you might have already heard that I am moderating a debate at ALA Annual Conference in Washington, D.C., titled "The Ultimate Debate." For the record, I didn't give it that name. In fact, I am a even a substitute moderator for the event, doing a good turn for my overbooked and much more unflappable colleague Roy Tennant.

I don't particularly like superlatives (it comes from reading a lot of press releases)—where does one go from "Ultimate"? Oh well. But I do like this panel and I love the topic, so I hope you will join me and the debaters—Karen Schneider, Joe Janes, and Stephen Abram—as we discuss "Do Libraries Innovate." For pre-debate rabble-rousing, see the LITA-L list archives!

"The Ultimate Debate: Do Libraries Innovate"
Saturday, June 23, 2007 ~ 1:30 p.m.–3:30 p.m.
Renaissance Mayflower (MAY) Grand Ballroom

Is there a vendor in the house?
On Sunday at ALA, Marshall Breeding and I will take to the riser with a group of technologists from some of your favorite vendors. Unlike some other panels, we have asked the CEOs to stay away and send their CTOs, technologists, and product specialists for a more technical discussion about the state of library automation and a look toward the future. The panel is co-hosted by American Libraries and the Exhibits Round Table and will take place on the LIVE! @ your library Reading Stage in the Exhibit Hall.

This group is not meant to be exclusive, but was kept to a relatively small number so that it would be a good session. It's not a vendor bashing, but expect some hard and direct questions! Here's the panel:

Oren Beit-Arie, Ex Libris
Jabe Bloom, TLC
Taco Ekkel, Medialab
Betsy Graham, Innovative Interfaces
Robin Murray, OCLC
Berit Nelson, SirsiDynix
Rob Styles, Talis

This is the first of what I hope might be an annual event. So come one, and come all.

"Speaking Technically: A Conversation about Cutting-Edge Library Automation and Technology"
Sunday, June 24, 2007 ~ 10:30 a.m.–noon
Exhibit Hall ~ LIVE! @ your library Reading Stage

This is the third and final installment of "What's Next" for the library automation marketplace. Time to review: Major consolidation of the library automation market, the emergence of viable open source software solutions and new business models for supporting them, and a somewhat rancorous and impatient customer base that fears that profit and efficiency have out-gunned innovation and service. This is the making for a dangerous cocktail. What's a vendor to do? What's a library to do?

The Prod
IMHO, I suspect that most libraries are going to sit tight. As have been mentioned many times, the pain and expense of moving systems is in the move itself. This gives vendors a little time (a little time) to breathe and think. If you want to make an organization move, you have to use more carrots and fewer sticks. So far, I see mostly sticks.

Some vendors, including the open source providers, will still be moving quickly to capitalize on discontent, and they will likely reap some rewards from that. Some libraries will want to take some risks, make a statement, or just try something new. Witness: University of Washington and WorldCat Local, British Columbia and Evergreen, the eXtensible Catalog project led by the University of Rochester, and PennTags.

Business Is Business
Back to consolidation and a dirty truth that no one ever wants to talk about: Most humans have an instinctive self-preservation reaction to change. The mergers and product announcements instill selfish reaction—"How will this affect me?" How do you think it feels to be working for a vendor when this happens? Dozens of people have lost their jobs in the last several months. And there will be more. We can be disappointed about a development opportunity missed, another path trod down a dead end, and time wasted, but at least most of us are not looking for new jobs in a shrinking market.

Ken Chad, a colleague who has been around the ILS (or LMS, as they say in the UK) block a time or two, has been writing and commenting on equity ownership in the marketplace. He has also asked the question of why equity firms are interested in a market that is not that rich.

So why would these underperforming companies be of interest to, for example, private equity investors who will need a good short-term return on their investment? Well precisely because they are underperforming there is scope for cost savings through product rationalisation and staff reductions especially when a merger takes place.

–Ken Chad, CILIP Gazette, March 2007

It has been suggested to me, on occasion, that ownership does not matter. I don't believe this. Though it's true that equity ownership in this space is nothing new, I think who owns your vendor is important. I also do not mean to lump all equity firms together in one pile, just as I would not talk about two founder-owned CEOs interchangeably (despite the fact that I think these folks share several characteristics...but that is a topic for another day). I only mean to say that ownership structure and motivation are important factors in assessing directions for libraries.

Private equity firms will no doubt add to a company's efficiency and (perhaps) profitability (keeping in mind that some of "efficiency" is a euphemism for "downsizing"). Other privately held companies will be competing with those that are cost cutting and still providing competitive product. Will any of these companies innovate? Can they afford to? Someone will ask....do we need them to?

My answer to that last question remains a firm "yes." Not every library is going to embrace open source or try to build something on their own. Some still want a "library-in-a-box" and not a platform that supports openness, modularity, and integration with 2nd-tier products and services. On the other hand, a lot of libraries want all of those things. I think the chips will go to the company that can do both. I don't think either the open source side or the proprietary side are there yet.

Who will fund research and development in this new era? If we're already paying a vendor, how much of that money is going into R&D and how much into operations? Is this new era one of continued co-dependence or co-development? If it's the latter, how do we make sure that we are asking for the right things?

No Sitting on Hands
The challenge for libraries is realizing that perfect is the enemy of good. We will have to take the risks that matter. We will have to formulate exit strategies for IT solutions, or embrace decisions to stay the course. I myself have to tear down the poster on my wall that reads: "Indecision is the key to flexibility."