2009- current.  Massachusetts Library System (MLS) has issued an RFP which they hope will result in a unified, label-less, delivery service to over 500 libraries on nine separate ILSs.  The sorting is expected to rely on a link to each ILS at the sort center.  MLS courier and sorting operations are already efficient but the burden on library staff is increasingly unmanageable. The new system must reduce the staff workload inside the libraries while maintaining  the high quality of courier/sorting service MLS libraries have come to expect .

Several large library systems have implemented such systems, e.g., King County and Seattle Public in Washington, and New York Public, but this would be the first multi-ILS system.

The Request for Proposal (RFP) for Library Delivery and Sorting Services for Massachusetts Libraries was issued July 15, 2010 by the Massachusetts Library System and is available at http://wp.me/PXRJJ-3T.

I have been working with the Massachusetts libraries since 2008 when I did a statewide delivery and sorting analysis (with Melissa Stockton of Quipu Group).  I continued to work with them to develop this RFP and will be helping to evaluate the response and contract with vendor(s).

wccls.org

2009-current.   Conducting materials handling and collection management analysis. The project will address space shortage issues, materials handling workload, how to reduce turnaround time and expand services, and ways to improve central delivery and sorting.  The analysis will also include a comparison of RFID versus bar codes solutions and provide suggestions for how to implement AMH solutions into their libraries.

If you have ever wondered how materials handling automation could fit into your library environment, you might enjoy this study I did for a client.

I’m hoping you find the study useful because it describes all the factors that come into play making a strong argument for automated materials handling as a way to support better customer service and and improved work environment for staff.
While you’re at it, don’t miss this analysis I did for another client analyzing the benefits of automated check-in systems at a medium sized library (which already had some AMH components). This analysis showed that there are additional savings to be had by adding the automated check-in systems to the automation mix.

2009-current. Assisting with development of RFI/RFP to implement central, automated sort for all Massachusetts regional systems. This project is a follow-up to the delivery evaluation performed in 2008.

(PDF)
Final report of a cost comparison of materials handling operations at two very similar libraries: one with automated self check-in and library sorter, and the other using manual materials handling. The report (PDF) demonstrates significant savings at the library with automated checkin.

Do you understand that you can incorporate automated check-in machines and sorters for your library without taking on the enormous costs associated with RFID tags? Self check out is old news. Everyone is doing it (or should be) and they are getting a very high rate of self checkout use (85% and higher) with and without RFID. If you are NOT getting 85% self check on your machines it properly has more to do with where the bar codes are located, whether everything in your library is indeed self check out-able. It could also be an problem related to where you’ve located your machines and how well you are driving your customers to those machines (instead of the old circulation desks). Anyway, if you aren’t getting 85% self check on your self check machines, it isn’t because you are using bar codes, I assure you.

In fact, you can do most automation stuff with RFID tags as well as bar codes and that includes self check out, self check in and sorting.

Here’s where RFID really makes a difference: inventory and book drops. You may actually do inventory of your collections if they are RFID tagged because it is so much easier. And I’m convinced that more frequent inventories would be a good thing. Now that everyone is pulling so many holds/requests for customers, we’re seeing how frequently things are not where they belong. Frustrating, isn’t it? Well, guess what. That’s been the customer experience all along. Customers and staff both benefit from a tighter correlation between what the catalog says and what the reality on the shelves is. RFID could help with that.

Book drops can be RFID-enabled too. To be clear, I’m not talking about automated check in machines that work almost as well with bar codes as with RFID tags. An RFID-enabled book drop is literally a book drop that just checks in the item. No sorting happens because it is just a book drop. The reader reads the tags as they are dropped into the book drop and they get checked in (later in batches or in real-time if you have a connection to the ILS).

Automated self check in machines can be RFID or bar code based. With bar codes, the customer has to feed in each item with the bar code oriented properly so it can be read (although you can have a top and a bottom reader so they don’t have to be THAT fussy). Ideally, your automated check in machine is equipped with a sorter that AT LEAST separates Holds from Returns and maybe even puts Children’s material, Adult Fiction, NonFiction, and A/V material all in their own special bins. So, whether its bar codes or RFID tags, you are getting the benefit of instant check in (for the customer) and sorting (for the staff). And remember, that if you are sorting (which totally rocks), the items have to be fed in one at a time anyway so its not like the customer can just shove in a pile of books either way.

From my point of view, the RFID-enabled book drop is handy for customers but not nearly has useful as the automated check in that feeds right into a sorter. And that automated check in with sorter works very well with either RFID tags or bar codes (assuming bar codes are on the outside of your material).

So, please. Don’t collapse sorting and self service automation in with RFID. It just isn’t necessary. You may choose to implement RFID at the same time but hopefully its because you really want that inventory feature, or you want to have the security and identification of items all in one unit (the RFID tag) rather than using security strips for security and bar codes for identification. (Caveat: there are still some issues with how well RFID tags do the security thing especially with A/V material)

Another reason you may choose RFID now is because you’ve got a library full of nasty ‘ol bar codes stuck on the inside of your material instead of nice clean ones uniformly located on the outside of each item. If you’d need to rebarcode everything anyway, yes, then, you should definitely be considering RFID tags.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti-RFID. I think libraries are going to end up with RFID tags eventually. But it would be nice to wait for the standards to be in place (ISO and NISO data model standards) so that they are interoperable and will only work with library readers (read about Application Family Identifiers in the latest NISO report).

In fact, RFID poses some very interesting new ideas but if we treat it like a glorfied bar code, we don’t take advantage of some of the really innovative possibilities. The current generation of RFID tags are just that: glorified (and very expensive) bar codes.

Innovative possibilities? Consider the department store in Germany that is tagging their men’s clothes and then reading the tags in the fitting room to customize suggestions that help shoppers find other things they might like or which might be a nice addition to the outfits they’ve selected. Here’s the article from ZDNet.

Or what about the little device called the TellMate that helps visually challenged people identify objects that are difficult to identify by touch (e.g. credit cards and generic containers). Could blind customers someday have a device that reads titles out loud for them to help select DVDs perhaps?

These kinds of truly innovative applications get me to thinking about how we could might someday take advantage of RFID technology in libraries. But to do that, we have to agree on how to store data on the tags, how our customer’s privacy will be protected, how to ensure they are interoperable across vendors, how we can use them throughout the lifecycle of the item including during ILL transactions and delivery. And all that requires standards. Oh, and why not have the book publishers install them instead of having library staff do it. Once we get all these things in place, our creative juices can flow. “Stand here to get recommendations of other items you might like (based on what you have in your book bag now.” Okay, potentially creepy but also potentially cool.

In sum, choose RFID tags for the right reasons and those reasons are very limited right now. But stay tuned because there will someday be some very exciting reasons to choose RFID tags, just not yet. We’ve still got some work to do before everyone should be jumping on that bandwagon.

I’ve been a very very bad girl. No postings for over a month. Turns out when I’m trying to get a report of some kind written, I can’t post a blog entry. It feels like an adulterous act – like I’m cheating on my client. Writing….but not for them.

As always, in writing the report, I learned something. I learned that I could make a very conservative ROI estimate of 9-12 years for not just a a central sortation system for a medium sized library system but also for two or three individual library sorters. That’s a lot of automation with a pretty good payback. And it doesn’t take super high volume to make an economic argument in support of it.

In my ROI estimate, I ONLY counted the savings in time for the people in the library dealing with sorting items from the book drop bins and their internal delivery system and getting items to a “ready-to-shelve” state. There’s lots more reasons to use a sorter. Lots more ways it is beneficial to the library (fewer RSI injuries, faster turnaround for customers, less boring tasks) but I didn’t take any of that into account on my ROI calculations.

Oh, and in those calculations, I had automated check-in stations for the public. Not check-out. Check-in. Those were factored into my prices and figured into my ROI but the benefit for all concerned for automated check-in wasn’t included either.

Sorters and automated check-ins are coming. Both take some of the mundane clerical work that is mind-numbing (or opportunities for Zen meditation depending on your point of view) away from library workers and gives them opportunities to do other tasks that require creative human beings. They are great for customers too. Items get in and out faster. People like to be able to check in their items right away to clear their accounts. And it clears the way for the library to focus more on providing innovative customer service and programs.

To treat myself for having completed that report, I flew up to King County Library System and took at look at Matilda, their beloved central sort system. Wow. The system is incredible. They sort 7000-9000 items per shift. Here’s how it works. There’s a tote drop off and pick up area right at the loading dock that the delivery personnel interface with. They bring in stacks of totes on a hand truck and drop them on a platform for Matilda. She unstacks the totes and queues up the bins at four locations where human operators take out individual items and place them on a large oval conveyor system that is moving VERY fast. As in fast enough that I couldn’t do that job because I would feel sick to my stomach all the time. I couldn’t work in a microfilm library for the same reason. Zipping ahead on a microfilm roll just makes me want to hurl. Anyhoooo, back to Matilda. So the people put the items on the conveyor and the items are taken around to the other side of the oval where they are whipped into the right sort location. That part is absolutely miraculous. But don’t worry about damage, the items are whisked off the conveyor to a bin but it is a lateral whisk to a chute that then opens and drops them into the tote. Straight down, no manglation (new word).

When the sort totes are full,a human operator simply pushes them forward to another conveyor that takes the totes back to a giant stack of totes that Matilde uses for staging. She keeps track of all the totes in the stack.

When a driver comes in to begin his route, he tells Matilde what route he’s going to do and she gathers up all the totes the driver needs and brings them out, all nicely stacked in threes so the driver can pick up the stack with a hand truck without ever having to bend over to hoist a bin anywhere.

Any group of people who’ve bothered to name an automation system have done so because they have developed some kind of connection to the machine. Maybe you’ve named your car and you know what I mean. Well, the sorter is named Matilde and the folks that work with Matilde seem to have a very healthy and honest relationship with her. They have had to work hard to enjoy the efficiency of the system and they know about some of her idiosyncrasies. But they’ve figured out how to make it work for everyone. It takes a staff of 7 or so to do those 7000-9000 sorts each shift but they all seem to enjoy their time together. It’s really a site (sight?) to behold. If you ever get a chance to see it in operation and meet the folks there, I strongly recommend it.

And that’s the story of why I haven’t blogged for a month. Well, that’s part of the story anyway.