LiUB consists of five libraries located at four campuses in three cities: Linkoping, Norrkoping and Stockholm. Four of them, located in Linkoping and Norrkoping, were involved in the process. During the years, there has been extensively book transports between different libraries. Sought after books were sent to the requested library, and then sent back to the owning library when returned. In December 2010 Linkoping University Library (LiUB) started to test Floating Collections as a new way of working with the collections. The test was coordinated with the implementation and change to Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), and every time a new bought book appeared or when a book was transformed into the DDC-collection the floating collection grew. Floating Collections means that a book doesn‘t belong to a certain library. It is shelved where it is returned and therefore it will stay where it is in most demand.

The placement of books will be user-driven and the sharing of books leads to reduced handling and therefore less wear and tear on items, and also a more economic acquisition method. The reduced handling is connected to reduced number of books in transport when the former routine of sending books back to an owning library is removed. In this case study we have looked at the complete implementation process; from the first discussion, the test-start, the evaluation of the method which includes a staff survey, and finally the Boards decision that Floating Collection will be a permanent way to work with the collections at LiUB. The methodological approach mimics YinΒ‘s (2009) case study model. We also compared LiUB‘s implementation with other libraries experiences in implementing Floating Collection, and to Library 2.0 (Casey & Savastinuk, 2007), as the user needs will decide where the books are shelved. Further, the study is connected to factors that affects the realignment in changing processes and resembles Kotter (1996) and Nutefall‘s and Chadwell‘s (2012) factors for successful realignment.

The study revealed that staff concerns and other experiences relating to Floating Collection at LiUB are similar to other libraries. A main issue for staff on the negative side is weeding routines, but on the positive side you will find advantages like more user-driven collection, a reduced number of books in transport and a reduced number of purchased items. Some of the negative effects that is expressed in the survey is probably depending on the transformation into DDC and not due to Floating Collection. An example is that the possibility to browse is lost, which is more likely due to DDC, since DDC categorize the topics in a very different way than the former classification system (SAB).