Bibliographic control is a major component of the Library of Congress’s mission, to collect, preserve and provide access to knowledge. The Library works with the broader library community to develop cataloging guidelines, and it endeavors to involve the community as it considers any changes. This was demonstrated through a collaborative, multi-year effort to study the future of bibliographic control, which culminated with the publication of “On the Record: Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control.” The report and its recommendations are the subject of the following article.
Libraries are looking at ways to catalog the avalanche of both print and digital materials that come to them for classification and control, and library managers worldwide recognize the need to examine critically the role of the catalog and its relationship to other methods of finding information. The Library of Congress took the lead in assembling an independent group to study the future of bibliographic control.
Background
At the annual conference of the American Library Association in New Orleans in June 2006, Associate Librarian for Library Services Deanna Marcum announced her intention to convene an advisory group to consider how bibliographic control will be applied in the digital environment. In light of advances in search-engine technology, the popularity of the Internet and the influx of electronic information resources, Marcum believed that an outside group should be formed to examine these issues.
“It will give us an opportunity to begin thinking collectively about the future,” said Marcum. “I don’t want to have a national referendum on cataloging decisions one by one. Instead, I want us to engage in higher-level thinking about the broad issues and then begin working them through with our colleagues in the library community.”
In November 2006, Marcum officially convened the Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, and she solicited professional associations and organizations to nominate members. Co-chaired by José-Marie Griffiths of the School of Information and Library Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Olivia Madison of the Iowa State University Library, the group included representatives from the public and private sectors.
“I agreed to chair this group because these issues are facing all libraries,” said Griffiths. She termed it an important opportunity for different sectors of the information profession to examine a common problem and recommend solutions that will benefit librarians and users.
Building on the work and results of the Library’s Bicentennial Conference on Bibliographic Control for the New Millennium in 2000, the group was tasked by Marcum to:
- Present findings on how bibligraphic control and other descriptive practices can effectively support management of and access to library materials in the evolving information and technology environment,
- Recommend ways in which the library community can collectively move toward achieving this vision, and
- Advise the Library of Congress on its role and priorities.
Working Group
During its inaugural meeting at the Library of Congress Nov. 2–3, 2006, group members concluded that, rather than planning a single summit meeting on the future of bibliographic control, it would schedule three regional meetings during 2007 to gather materials and solicit input for its report.
The Working Group also organized issues and affected parties into three broad categories: Uses and Users, Structures and Standards, and Economics and Organization. Each category was the focus of one regional meeting in 2007. The meetings were preceded by distribution of a background paper that gave an overview of the current environment in which bibliographic control operates.
Members of the Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, convening at the Library to meet with Deanna Marcum and Library of Congress James Billington, included, from left, Brian Schottlaender, Janet Swan Hill, Sally Smith, José-Marie Griffiths Lorcan Dempsey, Robert Wolven, Richard Amelung, Judith Nadler, Olivia Madison and Clifford Lynch. - Beth Davis Brown
The meetings were held in Mountain View, Calif., at Google headquarters; Chicago, at the American Library Association’s headquarters; and in Washington, D.C., at the Library of Congress.
Public comment was solicited via a website and at regional meetings held throughout the summer of 2007. In August 2007, the working group met at the University of California, San Diego, and with the facilitation of consultants Karen Coyle and Nancy Fallgren drafted the preliminary report.
Preliminary Report Presented to Library Staff
The production of bibliographic records in the digital age must be made more efficient through the cooperation of many agencies and vendors, through the sharing of these records, and through the use of data produced during all phases of the overall supply chain. This was the Working Group’s theme as it briefed a capacity crowd of Library staff in the Coolidge Auditorium on Nov. 13. (The presentation was also webcast live and is accessible online).
“I am very pleased with the approach taken by the working group,” Marcum said. “Instead of focusing solely on the Library of Congress, the members of the group looked at the bibliographic ecosystem and thought deeply about the contributions that can and should be made by all of its parts.”
Olivia Madison, representing the Association of Research Libraries, agreed.
“We recognize that you do not have the resources to do everything,” said Madison. “These recommendations are not for the Library of Congress alone but are intended for the entire library and library vendor communities.”
The draft report was mounted on the Working Group website on Dec. 1, 2007. Comments were solicited through Dec. 15, 2007. The working group reviewed and incorporated the feedback into its final report, which was presented to Marcum on Jan. 9, 2008.
Final Report
“On the Record: Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control” made 108 recommendations to the Library of Congress, other libraries, and the larger bibliographic community subcategorized in the following areas:
- Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production for all libraries through cooperation and sharing of bibliographic records and through use of data produced in the overall supply chain.
- Transfer effort into high-value activity. In particular, provide greater value for knowledge creation by leveraging access for unique materials held by libraries that are currently hidden and underused.
- Position technology by recognizing that the web is libraries’ technology platform as well as the appropriate platform for standards. Recognize that users are not only people but also applications that interact with library data.
- Position the library community for the future by adding evaluative, qualitative and quantitative analyses of resources. Work to realize the potential of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) framework.
- Strengthen the library and information science profession through education and through development of metrics that will inform decision-making now and in the future.
Marcum discussed the report at the American Library Association’s mid-winter meeting in Philadelphia in January 2008. She focused on the recommendations that called for more collaboration and cooperation on the part of the Library and cited the work already being done on that front.
Working Group Members
- José-Marie Griffiths (co-chair) School of Information and Library Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
- Richard Amelung for the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL)
- Diane Dates Casey, Janet Swan Hill, and Sally G. Smith for the American Library Association (ALA)
- Brian E.C. Schottlaender, Olivia M.A. Madison (co-chair), and Judith Nadler representing the Association of Research Libraries (ARL)
- John Latham for the Special Libraries Association (SLA)
- Robert Wolven for the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC)
- Daniel Clancy for the Google Company
- Jay Girotto for the Microsoft Corporation
- Christopher Cole for the National Federation of Advanced Information Services (NFAIS)
- Diane Boehr for the Medical Library Association (MLA)
- At-large members: Clifford A. Lynch, Coalition for Networked Information (CNI); Lorcan Dempsey, OCLC
