Library 2.0 is still considered a 'buzzword' by some, but is fast becoming a standard concept at conferences and user groups, in journals and the 'biblioblogosphere', as well as part of the curriculum in many SLIS programs. The debate has been heated, and while there are still some nuances as to what is meant when we use the term, it is most commonly thought of as this:

Library 2.0 is a loosely defined model for a modernized form of library service that reflects a transition within the library world in the way that services are delivered to users. With Library 2.0 library services are constantly updated and reevaluated to best serve library users. Library 2.0 also attempts to harness the library user in the design and implementation of library services by encouraging feedback and participation. Proponents of this concept expect that ultimately the Library 2.0 model for service will replace traditional, one-directional service offerings that have characterized libraries for centuries. The key principles of Library 2.0 are not just about access to books and information. It is about innovation, about people, and about community building, enabled through the participation that social computing brings. Source: Library 2.0.  Wikipedia 11/05/2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_2.0

While there are individual efforts that fall within the aegis of Library 2.0 in specific PALNI institutions, the collaboration and participation that so fundamentally characterizes Library 2.0 has thus far been missing within the consortium as a whole.  I think there are numerous valid reasons for this.

1. Everyone is busy! We all have more then enough work to keep us busy on a day to day basis, and it's difficult to find the time to participate in discussions and share what you are doing with everyone else.
2. Our projects & priorities differ according to our local environment.  While one library may be focusing on issues related to reference, another may be working specifically on tables and set-up.  We aren't always interested in something until it touches on a topic of issue that relates to what we are doing right now.
3. Change is stressful. If what we HAVE been doing works, why mess with a good thing? Especially when it involves learning new skills and technologies.
4. We don't have the resources! Pick one or more: Our funds, skill sets, staffing, work load, interest levels, IT department, or local institutional policies may inhibit or prevent us from trying new things.

I see these as just a few of the roadblocks and obstacles that we must overcome on our journey to integrating Library 2.0 concepts and tools within PALNI institutions. We know what is stopping us, but I am very interested in what is driving the necessity of change and what makes these options valuable and worth implementing. I think that we will find that the needs are there and that, after overcoming our objections and concerns, the means with which we can initiate positive change are within our grasp.

What are your thoughts? I know that you have opinions.