The proliferation of information available on the Internet has led to "information overload." It is impossible for libraries to classify every website (nor would they want to). Library users often turn first to web search engines such as Google for electronic information rather than consulting the library, because of the speed and convenience involved. In some cases, this type of searching produces the desired results. However, with little or no authority control of websites, searchers will find information that is inappropriate or misinformed. As Mary E. Jackson stipulates; "Libraries must gear up to provide a competing level of convenience while retaining the authority and quality of information delivery for which they have been traditionally known."²⁰

There are many issues for libraries to consider before implementing a library portal. These include the relationship between a portal and an OPAC. Some libraries may offer a portal option as part of their current OPAC, while others might provide it as a separate resource or even include the OPAC as a part of the portal. In academic institutions, the library portal may be a module of the wider campus or institutional portal.

These options all present their own challenges. Andrew K. Pace warns of the danger that portals might "unintentionally" replace OPACs. He also points out that portals mean "more work for subject specialists, more work for systems librarians, and more work for library publicity."²¹ Libraries must therefore consider the implications for OPAC use, staff time and finances and balance this against how much the user needs a portal. There are benefits for library users being able to search from a single interface but with the Z39.50 protocol, this is already possible in some libraries.