My library recently implemented WorldCat Local as the default catalog/discovery interface for our collections. I learned about a new book today, so I went to the our new catalog to see about getting a copy. I typed the title of the book (“bright sided”) into the WorldCat Local search box and clicked search. The first page of  search results gave me 4 articles that appear to provide reviews of the book. You can see for yourself the remaining 6 results, all articles, none of which appear to have anything to do with either the book or the terms I searched. For example, the title of the 5th item is:  “The physical state and plasma biochemical profile of young calves on arrival at a slaughter plant.”  When I do an Advanced search and enter my terms as Title, the book shows up as the 5th item in the results list (below the reviews and the “fold”,  so I must scroll down to discover this).

When I do a keyword search on the terms “bright sided” in the old catalog interface, I get the response “no entries found” and a prominently placed button that I can click on to pass my search through to our consortial catalog, Summit, where the book comes up as the first item in the results list.

This seems like a pretty common use case: person finds out about a new book and goes to the library to see if they can borrow a copy. Which catalog interface performs better for the user? I’d say the old catalog since it tells me immediately that my library does not own the book in question, and provides an easy way for me to repeat my search in the consortial catalog, where the book is found immediately, and I can request it immediately. Because WorldCat Local automatically promotes hits for items owned by my library to the top of the results display, regardless of any other measure of relevancy to the search, the WorldCat Local interface plunges me into confusion and leaves me there wondering where to go next to find the answer to the relatively simple question: can I borrow this book? Ironically, the free WorldCat.org interface actually does a better job of answering my question than subscription-based WorldCat Local because the book appears as the first hit in the results list, and it shows libraries near me (based on my IP address) that own the book.

Perhaps the “show me first what my library owns” algorithm that is the main product distinction/selling point of WorldCat Local works better with fuzzier, topical keyword searches. I don’t know, I haven’t really researched that.  It sure doesn’t seem to offer the best approach  for known item searches, however, especially in cases where the local library doesn’t own a given title (or doesn’t have holdings attached properly in WorldCat).