- Email: [email protected]
Doing more with less or doing less with less? Joint meeting of the Acquisitions Administrators Discussion Group and the Acquisitions Topics for Large Public Libraries Discussion Group
ALAMidwinter 1995- - ConferenceReports
345
without a leader; others do not, but it seems to be a natural function of teams that leaders will emerge where none are appointed. Some libraries have not had positive experiences with teams in which librarians and unionized staff are mixed, due to differing work philosophies. Critical elements needing special attention in a library where team organization is being considered are training, coaching, enabling, performance evaluation, and staff morale. Future of Original Catalogers: There is much work that will continue to be done by original catalogers, but increasingly they will do the most difficult original cataloging while supervising and teaching paraprofessional catalogers. Catalogers need continuing education in order to remain flexible and adaptable enough to keep up with the needs of the virtual information environment. Admires"trators should realize that catalogers' skills can be used to bring organizational structure to the huge amounts of random data found on the Intemet. For example, local home pages need to be created to point to individual resources on the "net." Keyword searching has many advantages, but it does not narrow searches in the way that subject searching does. Therefore original catalogers have important work to do in continuing to make subject headings responsive to users' needs. Libraries are not cataloging only for their own institutions as much now; some are cataloging various formats of the same work on one bibliographic record for their own institutions, but contributing separate records to a national database. Since more and more cataloging is being done by paraprofessional staff, it is incumbent upon professional catalogers to teach the specialized skills they have acquired; it is a concern that schools of library and information science continue to have a pool of experienced cataloging professors. Shifting~Changing Functions in Technical Services: Shrinking budgets are forcing technical services departments to be creative in continuing to provide necessary services. Some acquisitions and cataloging departments have been merged, calling for increased in-house training programs as staff take on new responsibilities; increased responsibilities can also call for upgrading of positions. Staff positions may be lost, but libraries have coped with these losses in various ways such as cutting back in gift processing, using more student employees, implementing more approval plans, shortening work shifts, and keeping duplicates where returning them has not proven cost effective. Outsourcing has been a trend in technical services in the nineties, in an atmmpt to use vendor services to accomplish some of the work as well but more efficiently: for copy cataloging, for original cataloging, for shelf preparation, and for acquisitions. Some libraries have cross-trained technical services and reference staff, finding that people gain new insights from a different perspective. Collection development has been taken on by technical services librarians in some places. These are some of the ways that librarians can be flexible in looking at traditional technical services functions. 0364-6408(95)00027-5
Anne McGreer Indiana University Libraries Monographic Processing Services Library E350 Bloomington, IN 47405 Internet: [email protected]
Doing More W'gh Less or Doing Less ;trzth Less? Joint Meeting of the Acquisitions Administrators Discussion Group and the Acquisitions Topicsfor Large Public Libraries Discussion Group At each Midwinter and Annual Conference, the Acquisitions Administrators, composed mostly of academic librarians, and the Acquisitions Librarians from Large Public Libraries hold separate meetings. At this Midwinter Meeting, it was decided that they would hold a joint meeting. The
346
ALAMidwinter1995-- ConferenceReports
intent of this joint meeting as expressed by the respective chairs, Nancy Slight-Gibney (Acquisitions Administrators Discussion Group) and Joanne Adetayo (Acquisitions Topics for Large Public Libraries Discussion Group), was to see if there were enough issues of mutual concern to have joint meetings on a continuing basis instead of separate meetings. In the audience of approximately 90 librarians, six were from public libraries. The particular issue under discussion was the need to rethink and review processes and procedures in acquisitions. Increasing cuts in budget and staff force acquisitions administrators to look at the acquisitions process to see how and what they usually do, as well as look beyond to identify what role others, for example vendors, could play. Within the library they look to see what traditional acquisitions duties could be done elsewhere. Traditional approaches must change. Acquisitions managers must look beyond traditional practices for some solutions. Miriam Palm, Principal Acquisitions Librarian from Stanford University Libraries, began the discussion by presenting Stanford's plan to "reengineer" technical services functions. Rather than a negative approach of doing less, Stanford is redesigning what they do to accomplish more effective results. A team consisting of 10 managers from both inside and outside the libraries met intensively during the fall months, aided by a consulting f'Lrmthat guided the process and provided analytical support. Requests for Information were sent to several dozen vendors, and members of the team visited many of the vendors on site. The team observed current workflow in all units, and conducted a "benchmark" customer satisfaction survey of the current processes. The result was a series of recommendations reflecting several principles including: minimizing physical handling of materials and handoffs; eliminating duplicate and unnecessary steps; performing work where it makes the most sense; and encouraging risk-taking and innovation. The recommendations include making broader use of vendor services to acquire shelf-ready books with accompanying electronic data (covering bibliographic, fiscal, location and circulation, i.e. barcode, information) in a single data stream. This model would be applied to current imprints both f'um-ordered and selected from approval plans. A well-defined profile would minimize the number of items not wanted, and items would be deselected from the collection rather than returned. Items received without full cataloging copy would be cycled automatically through batch search services for fuller record notification. Modifications to local processing would consolidate the functions of receiving, copy cataloging and posting of payment; increase the use of standards-based technology to search several databases with a single command; redesign original cataloging workflow to use support staff more fully; decentralize some categories of catalog maintenance; and decentralize to service units as well as automate the serials receiving function. The report, issued in mid-January, is being widely discussed among all units, and implementation decisions are likely to be made by March. Jenny Lorentowicz, Director of Technical Services at the Mississauga Library System, was the next speaker. Lorentowicz, having worked in both academic and public libraries, had much to say about the nature of the two institutions and what they could learn from each other. She classified the differences between the two in this way: Academic libraries tend to be rigid; public libraries tend to be quick and dirty. As examples, she pointed out that public libraries use one purchase number for multiple rifles, while academics use one purchase order number per title. When public libraries enter the receipt data, it is much quicker to receive one p.o. for each batch of rifles. Why cannot academics adopt a similar approach? Public libraries will accept any edition of any fl0e. Academics demand that the book supplied match the bibliographic description on the order. Since everyone is faced with fewer staff, basic assumptions must be questioned. How many times must an item be counted as it moves through technical services. Can a random sample serve the same need? Why are serials checked in? If a title is not available to the patron, the patron does not care that it was checked in, only that it is not available. Her advice was to take a micro
ALAMidwinter 1995- - ConferenceReports
347
approach as well as a macro approach. Look at the small little things that you are doing and stop them. The time spent on all these little things adds up. There was ample time for questions, and the audience took advantage of this to hear further explanations of the Stanford Plan and also to delve into some of the practices and "quick and dirty" approach of the public library. Perhaps the most popular titles do not need to be checked in. It was suggested that perhaps duplicate subscriptions to popular rifles should be placed. Duplicate copies could fill in for missing issues. Claiming missing issues is both expensive and largely ineffective. The interest shown by these questions indicated that many acquisitions librarians are looking for new approaches and that the topic under discussion was both timely and important.
0364-6408(95)00029-1
Joseph W. Raker Head, Acquisitions Department Boston Public Library P.O. Box 286 Boston, MA 02117
A CRL Journal Costs in Academic Libraries Discussion Group The program of the ACRL Journal Costs in Academic Libraries Discussion Group, "Negotiating Prices and License Agreements for Networked Electronic Information," was held in the Pennsylvania Convention Center on February 4, 1995 from 2 to 4 P.M. on a cold, snowy day that made last summer's Miami location for ALA look good in comparison. The fact that a large hall was practically full testifies to the library profession's interest in this topic. The Discussion Group Chair and program moderator, Cindy I-Iepfer, Head of the Serials Department, Health Sciences Library, State University of New York at Buffalo, began by recounting pricing experiences from her own library. She described examples where the cited cost of accessing a single database was $54,000 in one case and $116,000 in another. One vendor wanted to count every bed in the hospital served by her library as a potential user! Hepfer then proceeded to introduce the panel of five speakers. First to speak was Trisha Davis, Head of the Continuation Acquisitions Division, Ohio State University. She addressed the variables that a library would like to see included in the pricing process. A series of overheads were effectively used to illustrate the fundamental issues. Davis emphasized that a pricing model should include five components: the product, the access method, the number of users, a user def'mition, and use capabilities or limitations. In the traditional print model, the product could be a book, the number of users would be one at a time, and use limitations are defined by copyright law. The access method and user definition are not applicable. Applying the model to a local use network, the product is a tape-loaded database, access is through dedicated terminals, the number of users is defined by the terminals, and the use capabilities and limitations are defined by the product along with the software, while user defmition is not applicable. This model was also illustrated for a traditional database, a CD-ROM product, and a wide area network database. She then proce~ed to elaborate a number of her model's components. The variables for an electronic product include: purchase or lease of the database/software; subscription term; frequency of updates; database medium (i.e., CD, disk, magnetic tape); product version (for various geographical areas); product edition (i.e., Sunday only); product features; and product functions. Access can be through a stand-alone workstation, a local area network, a local area distributed
345
without a leader; others do not, but it seems to be a natural function of teams that leaders will emerge where none are appointed. Some libraries have not had positive experiences with teams in which librarians and unionized staff are mixed, due to differing work philosophies. Critical elements needing special attention in a library where team organization is being considered are training, coaching, enabling, performance evaluation, and staff morale. Future of Original Catalogers: There is much work that will continue to be done by original catalogers, but increasingly they will do the most difficult original cataloging while supervising and teaching paraprofessional catalogers. Catalogers need continuing education in order to remain flexible and adaptable enough to keep up with the needs of the virtual information environment. Admires"trators should realize that catalogers' skills can be used to bring organizational structure to the huge amounts of random data found on the Intemet. For example, local home pages need to be created to point to individual resources on the "net." Keyword searching has many advantages, but it does not narrow searches in the way that subject searching does. Therefore original catalogers have important work to do in continuing to make subject headings responsive to users' needs. Libraries are not cataloging only for their own institutions as much now; some are cataloging various formats of the same work on one bibliographic record for their own institutions, but contributing separate records to a national database. Since more and more cataloging is being done by paraprofessional staff, it is incumbent upon professional catalogers to teach the specialized skills they have acquired; it is a concern that schools of library and information science continue to have a pool of experienced cataloging professors. Shifting~Changing Functions in Technical Services: Shrinking budgets are forcing technical services departments to be creative in continuing to provide necessary services. Some acquisitions and cataloging departments have been merged, calling for increased in-house training programs as staff take on new responsibilities; increased responsibilities can also call for upgrading of positions. Staff positions may be lost, but libraries have coped with these losses in various ways such as cutting back in gift processing, using more student employees, implementing more approval plans, shortening work shifts, and keeping duplicates where returning them has not proven cost effective. Outsourcing has been a trend in technical services in the nineties, in an atmmpt to use vendor services to accomplish some of the work as well but more efficiently: for copy cataloging, for original cataloging, for shelf preparation, and for acquisitions. Some libraries have cross-trained technical services and reference staff, finding that people gain new insights from a different perspective. Collection development has been taken on by technical services librarians in some places. These are some of the ways that librarians can be flexible in looking at traditional technical services functions. 0364-6408(95)00027-5
Anne McGreer Indiana University Libraries Monographic Processing Services Library E350 Bloomington, IN 47405 Internet: [email protected]
Doing More W'gh Less or Doing Less ;trzth Less? Joint Meeting of the Acquisitions Administrators Discussion Group and the Acquisitions Topicsfor Large Public Libraries Discussion Group At each Midwinter and Annual Conference, the Acquisitions Administrators, composed mostly of academic librarians, and the Acquisitions Librarians from Large Public Libraries hold separate meetings. At this Midwinter Meeting, it was decided that they would hold a joint meeting. The
346
ALAMidwinter1995-- ConferenceReports
intent of this joint meeting as expressed by the respective chairs, Nancy Slight-Gibney (Acquisitions Administrators Discussion Group) and Joanne Adetayo (Acquisitions Topics for Large Public Libraries Discussion Group), was to see if there were enough issues of mutual concern to have joint meetings on a continuing basis instead of separate meetings. In the audience of approximately 90 librarians, six were from public libraries. The particular issue under discussion was the need to rethink and review processes and procedures in acquisitions. Increasing cuts in budget and staff force acquisitions administrators to look at the acquisitions process to see how and what they usually do, as well as look beyond to identify what role others, for example vendors, could play. Within the library they look to see what traditional acquisitions duties could be done elsewhere. Traditional approaches must change. Acquisitions managers must look beyond traditional practices for some solutions. Miriam Palm, Principal Acquisitions Librarian from Stanford University Libraries, began the discussion by presenting Stanford's plan to "reengineer" technical services functions. Rather than a negative approach of doing less, Stanford is redesigning what they do to accomplish more effective results. A team consisting of 10 managers from both inside and outside the libraries met intensively during the fall months, aided by a consulting f'Lrmthat guided the process and provided analytical support. Requests for Information were sent to several dozen vendors, and members of the team visited many of the vendors on site. The team observed current workflow in all units, and conducted a "benchmark" customer satisfaction survey of the current processes. The result was a series of recommendations reflecting several principles including: minimizing physical handling of materials and handoffs; eliminating duplicate and unnecessary steps; performing work where it makes the most sense; and encouraging risk-taking and innovation. The recommendations include making broader use of vendor services to acquire shelf-ready books with accompanying electronic data (covering bibliographic, fiscal, location and circulation, i.e. barcode, information) in a single data stream. This model would be applied to current imprints both f'um-ordered and selected from approval plans. A well-defined profile would minimize the number of items not wanted, and items would be deselected from the collection rather than returned. Items received without full cataloging copy would be cycled automatically through batch search services for fuller record notification. Modifications to local processing would consolidate the functions of receiving, copy cataloging and posting of payment; increase the use of standards-based technology to search several databases with a single command; redesign original cataloging workflow to use support staff more fully; decentralize some categories of catalog maintenance; and decentralize to service units as well as automate the serials receiving function. The report, issued in mid-January, is being widely discussed among all units, and implementation decisions are likely to be made by March. Jenny Lorentowicz, Director of Technical Services at the Mississauga Library System, was the next speaker. Lorentowicz, having worked in both academic and public libraries, had much to say about the nature of the two institutions and what they could learn from each other. She classified the differences between the two in this way: Academic libraries tend to be rigid; public libraries tend to be quick and dirty. As examples, she pointed out that public libraries use one purchase number for multiple rifles, while academics use one purchase order number per title. When public libraries enter the receipt data, it is much quicker to receive one p.o. for each batch of rifles. Why cannot academics adopt a similar approach? Public libraries will accept any edition of any fl0e. Academics demand that the book supplied match the bibliographic description on the order. Since everyone is faced with fewer staff, basic assumptions must be questioned. How many times must an item be counted as it moves through technical services. Can a random sample serve the same need? Why are serials checked in? If a title is not available to the patron, the patron does not care that it was checked in, only that it is not available. Her advice was to take a micro
ALAMidwinter 1995- - ConferenceReports
347
approach as well as a macro approach. Look at the small little things that you are doing and stop them. The time spent on all these little things adds up. There was ample time for questions, and the audience took advantage of this to hear further explanations of the Stanford Plan and also to delve into some of the practices and "quick and dirty" approach of the public library. Perhaps the most popular titles do not need to be checked in. It was suggested that perhaps duplicate subscriptions to popular rifles should be placed. Duplicate copies could fill in for missing issues. Claiming missing issues is both expensive and largely ineffective. The interest shown by these questions indicated that many acquisitions librarians are looking for new approaches and that the topic under discussion was both timely and important.
0364-6408(95)00029-1
Joseph W. Raker Head, Acquisitions Department Boston Public Library P.O. Box 286 Boston, MA 02117
A CRL Journal Costs in Academic Libraries Discussion Group The program of the ACRL Journal Costs in Academic Libraries Discussion Group, "Negotiating Prices and License Agreements for Networked Electronic Information," was held in the Pennsylvania Convention Center on February 4, 1995 from 2 to 4 P.M. on a cold, snowy day that made last summer's Miami location for ALA look good in comparison. The fact that a large hall was practically full testifies to the library profession's interest in this topic. The Discussion Group Chair and program moderator, Cindy I-Iepfer, Head of the Serials Department, Health Sciences Library, State University of New York at Buffalo, began by recounting pricing experiences from her own library. She described examples where the cited cost of accessing a single database was $54,000 in one case and $116,000 in another. One vendor wanted to count every bed in the hospital served by her library as a potential user! Hepfer then proceeded to introduce the panel of five speakers. First to speak was Trisha Davis, Head of the Continuation Acquisitions Division, Ohio State University. She addressed the variables that a library would like to see included in the pricing process. A series of overheads were effectively used to illustrate the fundamental issues. Davis emphasized that a pricing model should include five components: the product, the access method, the number of users, a user def'mition, and use capabilities or limitations. In the traditional print model, the product could be a book, the number of users would be one at a time, and use limitations are defined by copyright law. The access method and user definition are not applicable. Applying the model to a local use network, the product is a tape-loaded database, access is through dedicated terminals, the number of users is defined by the terminals, and the use capabilities and limitations are defined by the product along with the software, while user defmition is not applicable. This model was also illustrated for a traditional database, a CD-ROM product, and a wide area network database. She then proce~ed to elaborate a number of her model's components. The variables for an electronic product include: purchase or lease of the database/software; subscription term; frequency of updates; database medium (i.e., CD, disk, magnetic tape); product version (for various geographical areas); product edition (i.e., Sunday only); product features; and product functions. Access can be through a stand-alone workstation, a local area network, a local area distributed