The implementation of the Aleph 500 system was not the first experience with an integrated library system in the National Library, but the second one. On the basis of our experience – both positive and negative – with the preceding Aleph 300 system in 1995, the reorganisation of existing library procedures was considered to reach enhanced efficiency in usage of available resources in the best way: the new system combined with the capacity of our staff. Despite the limitations of the historical Klementinum building and restrictions of our budget, we tried to do our best to simplify the workflows. To achieve the goal we had – and still have – to move several departments to new locations and to refurbish large areas in the library.

Before we started our second integrated library system implementation, we had evaluated very carefully our former experience with Aleph 300 implementation in 1995. We were also in close contact with some libraries in our country and abroad, the experience of which could be inspiring or warning for us.

1. The implementation of the Aleph 500 was preceded by a very careful and detailed analysis of library processes. The analysis resulted in some 30 detailed schemes for processing of various groups or types of documents. These workflows contained also the numbers of documents processed and they formed the backbone of the schemes. All the library procedures were considered with special attention paid to their complexity and context. Not only the highlights but also the weak points of the Aleph 500 were taken into account during the modelling of new workflows. In case of conflict, the comfort of library users – both local and remote – was used to overbalance the comfort of librarians. The heads of the departments were deeply involved in the project from its very beginning. Thus this optimized way of library automation became a common task for all of them. The possibility of seeing each department in the whole context was extremely important for assessment of different solutions and for making decisions – everybody could see and understand not only how the discussed or accepted solutions could influence his/her own department, but also the other ones. At the very beginning, all the participants prepared the desirable model of automation of all the procedures and workflows. In case of sharing the procedures by neighbouring departments, the responsibility of one of them for their results was established only at the very end. The regular and open communication resulted not only in deep engagement of library management into implementation of the library system itself, but also in better understanding the procedures and problems by the departments concerned. In many aspects, we had managed to integrate library procedures even before the Aleph 500 implementation, which was very useful and enabled us later mainly to concentrate on problems resulting from system bugs and/or solutions not acceptable for us, while the organisation of library procedures did not complicate our life at this difficult stage.

2. We were deeply convinced that the new system must be implemented into entire processing lines, i.e. acquisition, bibliographic description, subject cataloguing, local collection and remote resources management and administration, and library services, at the same time. Also the technical equipment and training had to be on the same level in all the departments involved. We were aware of the fact that weak points at any department would negatively influence the complex solution.

3. As much data as possible had to be stored in the common database in order to be widely available for authorized users, both the library staff and readers. Special attention was paid especially to important data available only in paper documentation of particular departments and accessible only on place. This paper documentation had to be reduced so that only that of limited circulation or importance might continue in this classical form.

4. We tried to minimise print outputs. They were almost completely abandoned with the only exception of those serving as legal certificates on document existence and/or their delivery from/to different departments. Printouts of cataloguing cards and local documentations were dramatically reduced.

5. We decided to accept important organisational changes allowing for simplification of library procedures and document workflows. The most important change was the integration of bibliographic description of foreign literature – including foreign Bohemica – into foreign acquisition. This was the first step leading to the establishment of a complex foreign literature unit in the near future, which would consist of acquisition, bibliographic description, and subject cataloguing. It was not possible to achieve this goal now, since establishing of such a unit requires already existing strong and comprehensive subject authorities together with dominance of copy cataloguing. Neither the first nor the second precondition can be fulfilled now: building of subject authorities – subjects – is only at the very beginning in our library and the original cataloguing remarkably prevails even over foreign literature. However, even this partial organisational change resulted in a remarkable simplification of the physical workflow of foreign monographs. It did not include special formats and electronic resources, since these documents required special description and handling.

It is not reasonable to accept a similar solution for Czech monographs, since some procedures are more complicated and complex there: the National Library has a key responsibility for acquisition and cataloguing of the national production; therefore, the original cataloguing will be always prevailing. In the organisational line we moved the collections building from the acquisition department to other departments and accepted some solutions leading to a better system control of physical document workflows. It is important to stress that we were able to simplify physical document workflows dramatically. The cataloguing departments used to be dispersed on different floors and distant locations of Klementinum and the documents had to be transferred during their processing sometimes several times within a large area. To avoid this situation and concentrate cataloguing departments at one place it was necessary to find extra funds for refurbishment of many offices. We managed to do this at the very end of 2000. Some sixty people had to move to completely different locations, which was far from being easy and of course resulted in some delay in processing. However, the new arrangement has already brought its fruits: the processing seems to be more effective and faster now. The new offices – unlike the old ones – are equipped with furniture suitable for the prevailing work with PC. The same refurbishment of offices should continue in other departments in 2001.

We have been evaluating consequences of the new arrangements resulting from optimizing library procedures since July 2000. No remarkable problems have appeared after half a year since the system implementation thanks to the efforts given to modelling and discussing the processing lines before the introduction of the new system. The library management evaluates results and consequences of the new arrangement regularly and it tries to solve the problems of particular departments.

The Aleph 300 library system, which had been used in the NL since 1995, proved not to be sufficient especially for automated circulation. It had also serious limitations for librarians. The changeover to a new system was limited by budget restrictions; therefore, the grant received from the Ministry of Culture was necessary to be combined with our resources to purchase Aleph 500 at the very end of 1999. In comparison with Aleph 300, the new system was almost completely new: with RDBMS Oracle, client–server architecture, and graphical user interface. All this looked promisingly from the point of view of our users, but it was more demanding for librarians’ skills and for additional investments. Most of our librarians had to be retrained, most of workstations needed to be upgraded or even completely replaced, and a new server needed to be purchased.

The best possible term for the main catalogue conversion was July, the beginning of holiday time. However, not only the main electronic catalogue was built in Aleph 300, but also some other databases. The aim was to convert all of them into the new system.

Already in March, we put into production the database containing analytical descriptions of Czech journals and newspapers, the second largest of our databases. This frequently used database had been built in the CDS/ISIS system, the predecessor of Aleph 300 in the National Library. The remote access was provided to users by an everyday data conversion to Aleph 300. This was considered as a provisional stage and made us speed up the conversion of that database to Aleph 500. The conversion of the Slavonic Library electronic catalogue went in parallel. Though this library is an administrative part of the National Library, it is almost autonomous from the point of view of Aleph implementation. Its catalogue was upgraded to Aleph 500 in May. The other divisions could use the experience of the Slavonic Library for planning the main catalogue conversion of the main catalogue.

The ISN database was converted during the fall. This database contains description of books and musical scores, publishing of which is announced to the national ISBN and ISMN agencies. The work on the definition of the library of librarianship literature database and on the data conversion for it has also started and it will be completed in 2001.