Any issue with institutions accepting browser plugins?
Andrew: Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust was very amenable to the Lean Library plugin. Compliance and governance forms needed to be completed before we got to that point. But as the extension is not retaining any personal information whatsoever there was nothing for them to be concerned about. The only barrier we faced was our dependence upon old internet browser software. We were and are still using Internet Explorer within the NHS. This will run its course over time but getting Chrome installed on all PCs was the major hurdle we faced. Our increases in usage are even more impressive when viewed in this light. All the increase comes from a secondary, minority browser. When Edge or Chrome become the default browsers for the NHS we expect our usage to increase even further.
Has this (RA21 called them Access Brokers) become a crowded market?
Johan: There are more vendors offering browser extensions than a few years ago. This is a good thing because it means that it’s technology that is finally available for scholars. The current offerings vary widely in features, support, handling of user data etc. We like to think that our offering is the best available. Nevertheless, librarians should inform themselves on the various offering (while taking into account that vendor A is NOT the best source of info on vendor B’s product…) and decide what the best way forward is for their patrons.
What other automated connections are there between Lean Library and ERMs?
Currently, we support various authentication systems (proxies, SAML) and these ‘ERM’s’:
OCLC WMS Knowledge base
Straightforward KBART uploads