Library Postpones Debut of Hollis II

Library officials expected the Harvard On-line Library Information System (HOLLIS) to be replaced by a brand-new system more than four months ago, but due to technical problems, library officials said they have no idea when the changeover will take place.

After a nearly identical system floundered when it was installed at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) this fall, Harvard administrators chose not to renew a contract with the system's architect.

Harvard signed a letter of intent in June 1998 with Data Research Associates (DRA), a St. Louis-based firm that designs library computer systems. The letter said that the parties had agreed to negotiate a contract for Harvard to purchase DRA's Taos system.

Following what officials termed a series of failures, Harvard chose not to renew its agreement with DRA.

"The letter of intent has expired. We renewed it once," Robinson said.

Under the plan agreed upon in 1998, the new system, which would be known as HOLLIS II, was supposed to be operational by July 1999.

The letter also contained performance criteria for DRA's work at UCLA, which Harvard now says the firm failed to meet.

"[The performance criterion] was to have the system up and running, and they still don't have the system up and running. By any measurable standard they are not fully operational," said Tracey Robinson, assistant director for systems management for the Harvard University Library.

UCLA signed on with DRA to provide it with a new integrated library system called ORION2, similar to Harvard's HOLLIS. But the new system, which was supposed to be running by Sept. 27, is still not on-line.

Last-minute modifications to the system "had the unintended effect of dramatically slowing response times on the online catalog to an unacceptable level," according to a UCLA library web site.

At the same time, UCLA's original system, ORION, is disabled due to Y2K difficulties. Since ORION could not recognize due-dates after December 1999, it could not keep track of circulation and had to be shut down.

UCLA is left without a library computer system until ORION2 comes on-line and administrators have not announced a new anticipated start date.

In a November library bulletin, Pforzheimer University Professor and Director of the University Library Sidney Verba '53 said the Taos system remains "a potential system for us, but not one to which we can yet make a commitment."

The announcement also said Harvard was exploring other options. According to Robinson, those included systems created by the Ex Libris group and CTI, a Canadian firm.

The problem, Robinson said, is that

no "next-generation" system has ever been successfully installed at a major university. The Taos system is already installed and functional at many smaller libraries.

The UCLA library has a database of approximately four million records. Even this number is far below Harvard's needs.

Robinson said Harvard's current bibliographic records are around nine million, but they grow by a rate of 200,000 per year. The original HOLLIS II plan called for a system that could handle 10 million records, so it could be used for at least 10 years.

"We've been looking at other options all along, there are just no strong alternatives," Robinson said.

Students and librarians, meanwhile, don't seem to be in any hurry to replace HOLLIS with something newer.

"I don't know how it would be better. I like [HOLLIS]. Actually, I've never had any problems," said Jesse F. Goldman '00.

"I can usually find what I'm looking for, usually in conjunction with Hollis Plus," said Alisha H. Creel '02.

And librarians said they appreciated HOLLIS's speed and the fact that it was custom-designed especially for Harvard.

"We all are very familiar with it and it's a good system...it's very speedy," said Joe Bourneuf, head reference librarian for Widener Library.

According to a 1998 DRA press release, the firm anticipated the contract with Harvard would be worth more than $1 million.

The original HOLLIS, which was in development since the 1960s, has been in use since 1985.

But it is not in danger of Y2K difficulties, according to Robinson. Most of the date problems have been worked out by now.

"There's no reason to think it is going to break or stop working...we don't have any concerns that it won't be able to survive," Robinson said.

Verba said in the University Library announcement that "a prudent 'watchful waiting' is our most viable--indeed, our only--alternative."