wtscils598x08

I think libraries can effectively utilize the long tail of their collections only when the transaction cost of utilizing library collections is addressed. We often hear of users discovering materials on Amazon before checking if they're available at the local library. Why should this be the case? If libraries on the whole have a long tail collection that can match what Amazon offers, there is no reason why libraries should not be the first point of discovery. The transaction cost of using a library website is just too high at the moment. Users spend an awful lot of time trying to find their way around some of our poorly designed websites and library systems. Oftentimes, librarians are required to "teach" the user about the intricacies of their library systems so that he or she can use it effectively. A well-designed system should not even require a human intermediary in most instances.

Libraries may possess collections that sit in the long tail, but exposing these to the user is not what they have been doing well. Libraries have been wall gardens for too long. Recent efforts by the OCLC to make Worldcat records available in Google book searches are laudable and will definitely broaden access to long tail collections. Some libraries have also created browser plugins based on LibX that allow users to search catalogs directly for specific titles/authors while surfing the Web. The Australia Libraries gateway is another good example of aggregating the long tail and presenting it on a single interface. Libraries need to do these and more, they need to be ubiquitous at the point of need, online and offline, in order to truly utilize the benefits of the long tail.