Chipping in – Reflections on and Predictions for Library RFID.

1. Chipping in – Reflections on and Predictions for Library RFID. Mick Fortune Library RFID Limited

2. Today I shall mostly be talking about… The story so far RFID - a missed opportunity for libraries? Where do we go from here?

3. …but first Library 24 – Verona Automated Receiving – Maastricht Book sorter – Lyngby, RFID enabled smartphone, USA Smart Shelves, Singapore

4. Future, or Futurama? RFID enabled IPhone + Available from Amazon =

5. The story so far

6. How did it all begin? Self service has two main requirements – rapid circulation and security Library RFID has two key attributes – multiple transaction handling and onboard security So - a match made in heaven?

7. Rapid Growth Based on data from the annual RFID survey on LIB-RFID

8. Surveys show that librarians mostly seek advice from… other librarians. This may have created a “me too” effect that has driven our record investment in RFID BUT the obvious and immediate benefits of self service may have obscured the underlying problem of interoperability. What inspired such growth?

9. A Happy Coincidence or… How libraries first encountered RFID has tended to shape their thinking about what it can do. What suppliers sold before RFID has tended to influence the type of solutions they offer. A Series of Unfortunate Events?

10. Development has been slow Librarians feel they want more from RFID – but are not sure how to get it. RFID companies want to offer more – but often need LMS help to develop. Lack of common RFID standards discourages LMS from developing functionality IT skills often absent from libraries.

11. (Dis)integrating Solutions RFID suppliers have tended to develop their solutions in isolation. LMS “integration” is mostly limited to using an outdated serial protocol (SIP). Self service was relatively easy and effective -but has been delivered by sacrificing interoperability. A Google search will find dozens of ideas for using RFID in the library – almost all unique.

12. There are many misconceptions… It threatens jobs It’s too complex It’s very simple Just a smart label - a “Barcode on Steroids” • It threatens privacy

13. …and an (un)comfortable assumption? The lack of data standards was recognised as a problem as early as 2003 in both the USA – “If the possibility exists that more than one vendor’s RFID system will be used, RFID interoperability standards must be developed and adhered to.” http://www.lincolntrail.info/RFIDInConsortialEnvironment.html and in Germany, “All existing RFID systems use proprietary technology which means that if company A puts an RFID tag on a product, it can't be read by Company B unless they both use the same RFID system from the same vendor." [RFID Journal 2003]. Quoted by Mats G. Lindquist at IFLA Berlin, Chair, IFLA's Information Technology section

14. A missed opportunity?

15. Have we aimed too low? Concentration on self-service has limited our ambition. Pace of UK adoption has been frenetic, but development has been slow. Suppliers too busy with self-service Little engagement from LMS Global market now developing using standards - and may rapidly overtake UK

16. Hobson’s Choice • 97.8% of RFID installations buy their entire RFID solution from a single supplier. • There is (almost) no competition once an RFID supplier is chosen. • Many new products now available – but all proprietary. • Most RFID companies are committed to change this – but most librarians aren’t

17. What is to be done? • Change the way it works • Common Data Standard • Common Communication Framework • Change the way you buy

18. A Common Data Standard Currently every RFID supplier uses their own. New installations are insisting on ISO 28560-2 and the UK Data Model Five Four UK RFID companies have pledged to support the new standard. Four Three of them claim “interoperability” will be available for new installations. Only one has produced fully compliant tags.

19. A Common Communication Framework Four Three RFID companies are working with BIC to develop a new communication framework. Only a few LMS suppliers have shown any interest in the work. 3M have announced the development of SIP 3.0 NCIP still considering a separate protocol for self-service.

20. Change the way you buy Procurement needn’t be a major undertaking Frameworks mitigate against change and increase costs. Best practice and procurement guidelines are available. Buy what you want – from whom you wish!

21. Where do we go from here?

22. The Chip Manufacturer’s View “RFID Puts Librarians Where They're Needed Most” • RFID technology is simple, robust and inexpensive. Each RFID label has a unique identification number and can be programmed with additional information such as type of media and storage location. • The tag is "re-writeable" so libraries don't have to replace a book’s digital identification tag when updating a book's status or flagging a book for reservation. In addition, libraries are finding new ways to take advantage of tagged items, such as gathering statistics on what items are most often used. http://www.ti.com/rfid/shtml/apps-asset-tracking-library.shtml

23. The RFID Supplier’s View “RFID Alliance to Unlock Library Potential”* • The benefits …could be instrumental to the wider public use of library facilities ... • Importantly for existing customers of the Alliance suppliers, each has committed to supporting their historical customer base with the move to the new standard as and when it should be required. • With the Alliance agreement in place, and with ISO/DIS 28560-2 setting the standard for all future tags,the next logical step is for libraries to act on this to further improve their services. *Joint statement by 2CQR, 3M, Bibliotheca, D Tech, Intellident and Plescon - 2009

24. The Librarian’s View? “Currently I would see the main advantage of a data model as when/if we change supplier for our tags/equipment. One of my concerns would be what happens to the 800,000 books we have tagged using a propriety data model.” (email from an unnamed University Librarian – May 2011)

25. The Market is Changing • Mergers and partnership deals continue apace • 3M and Lyngsoe (US) August 2010 • Bibliotheca and ITG (USA) April 2011 • Bibliotheca and Intellident (UK) June 2011 • Consolidation of data models now makes sense for corporations too • More open market = greater competition

26. …and so should the service RFID creates intelligent stock – using it only for self-service fails to deliver full ROI. Consider automating accessions and returns, use wearable devices to manage stock, explore the possibilities of smart shelves and displays, interactive books – all now being deployed – but unavailable to most.

27. A Simple Manifesto for RFID? Standardise on a single data model (UKDM) Support the work being done to improve communication between LMS/RFID So that, All suppliers can read each other’s tags Competition increase Costs are reduced Purchasing becomes more straightforward Innovation is encouraged Service is improved

28. Thank You! Mick Fortune Library RFID Ltd. t. +44 1865 727411 m. +44 7786 625544 e. mick@libraryrfid.co.uk w. www.libraryrfid.co.uk b. www.mickfortune.com/Wordpress