Sharing Our Collections : Looking to the Future

Sharing Our Collections : Looking to the Future

Sponsored by the LLAMA SASS / RUSA STARS Cooperative Remote

Circulation Committee

Flexibility and Collaboration : Floating Collections in the Arapahoe Library DistrictJanet Schneider, Smoky Hill and Eloise May Libraries, Manager of Programming and Customer Service --Public Library consortia member Ebook Collection Sharing : The Orbis Cascade Demand Driven Acquisitions Project Linda Di Biase, Orbis Cascade Alliance Demand Driven Acquisitions Program --Academic Library consortia member

The Next Generation ILS : How Will It Support Collection Sharing in the Future? Carmit Marcus, Ex Libris Director of Product Management and Partnerships--ILS Vendor representative


Sponsored by the LLAMA SASS / RUSA STARS Cooperative Remote Circulation Committee

Floating Collections in the Arapahoe Library District

Janet Schneider Smoky Hill and Eloise May Libraries, Manager

of Programming and Customer Service

Why Floating Collections?

• More effective use of collection dollars• Savings due to reduced wear and tear on collection• Decreased deliveries between libraries• Decreased handling of individual items by library staff• Materials on shelf and ready to be circulated sooner• Need to purchase fewer copies = able to purchase more titles• Constantly changing on-shelf collections=more variety• Ergonomic strain is reduced• Patrons help define collections at their local library

So how did we get there?

Successful Implementation

Successful Implementation = Internal & External Collaboration

At every level within the organization

Getting There

Our Decision-Making Model

Responsibility rests with one individual in management• To make the decision• To communicate the decision• To ensure that the decision is supported

Why?• To avoid consensus decision-making

And Then…..

First Steps

Collaborating and Overcoming Obstacles Begins!

Collaborative Steps

1. Research completed to guide decision-making2. Director of Library Services decides to implement 3. Collaboration begins with:

Executive DirectorDeputy DirectorLibrary Services DirectorAdministrative Services DirectorLibrary Services Managers (5 people)Administrative Services Managers (4 people)

To review the decision and provide input for changes

Collaborative Steps

Next Stop – Leadership Council

• Consisting of the previous management group• Plus supervisors and coordinators

Input gathered and decision finalized

And then…

Collaborative Steps

Next Stop – All Staff of Arapahoe Library District

• Decision is announced to all staff • Informational purposes • Not for discussion – that comes as we begin implementation

And then…the work of project collaboration begins!

Collaboration and Implementation

Step One: Convene Implementation Team• 5 people identified in critical areas of the organization

Step Two: Decide who to involve • Who are they and what role do they play in the organization?


Who?Library Material Services (Tech Services) including:• Collection librarians• Catalogers and processers• Couriers• VendorsDigital Services (IT)• Millennium Administrator


Who?

Library Staff:• Librarians• Patron Service Specialists• Materials Handlers (Pages)

Have We Forgotten Anyone?


How Will We Reach Everyone?

Road Shows – to all libraries & to Support Services• The implementation team visited all of the facilities• We knew we didn’t have all the answers• We shared what we knew from the research• We listened to concerns and questions


Did We Learn Anything?

YES!

We identified the concerns that staff had and as a result:• We changed the paging priority on our paging lists• We began a blog for anyone to post on• We developed a list of FAQ’s and posted the answers

as soon as we had the answer

Collaboration & Overcoming Obstacles

The first step in overcoming obstacles is to acknowledge them -all part of the collaboration processWhat were the obstacles?• Required a basic paradigm shift in how we delivered service• Overcoming the long-held concept of discrete collections by location and and moving to a District-wide collection• Perceived collection imbalances and redistribution process• Trust among staff at different libraries – “What will they do to us?”• Shifting workloads and work responsibilities

Collaboration was the key to overcoming theobstacles!

Collaboration From Beginning to End…

& Beyond

Are we done with collaboration and floating our collection?

No – we are now in the maintenance phase and collaboration is more important than ever!

Between:

• Collection Librarians and Library Staff @ all levels• Library staff @ each facility – for collection maintenance and redistribution• Couriers and library staff

Ongoing Collaboration

1. Launch of floating collections was a non-event2. Library staff more aware of overall collection3. Library staff more invested in collection4. Collection is viewed as a District-wide resource5. Benefits of floating have been achieved

Positive Outcomes through Collaboration

If you have more questions about the process ofcollaboration in implementing floating collections or about floating collections in general@ Arapahoe Library District contact:

Janet [email protected]

In Closing

mailto:[email protected]

Demand-Driven Acquisitions in a Consortial Environment

The Orbis Cascade Alliance ExperienceLinda Di Biase, DDA Team Chair

Orbis Cascade Alliance

37 academic libraries in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington– 6 community colleges– 16 private 4-year colleges– 14 public 4-year colleges (large & small)– 1 Health Sciences institution– Total FTE: 250,000+– No central funding source

The Cooperative Vision and E-books?

The Alliance had a vision of “many libraries, one collection” BUT

• Individual libraries were purchasing single e-book titles or collections

• Purchased e-books were not available to all Alliance libraries

The Vision and E-books: New Directions

In 2010 ...• E-book Investigation Team formed• Team recommends EBL’s DDA model, in

partnership with YBP, our preferred book vendor

• Alliance Council charges Implementation Team

Implementation Team Charge

• Leverage existing relationship with YBP to create “an entirely new e-book consortial purchasing model”

• Address access, collection development, financial & technical issues

• Develop equitable funding model• Evaluate to determine ongoing viability

Initial Funding

• $231,000• All libraries participate• Funds collected based on familiar model used

for e-resource purchases• Contributions range from $2.5K to $15K

DDA Pilot on Fast Track!

• January 2011: First team meeting• July 2011: Implementation date!

In between ...• 15 publishers come on board• Profile set up with YBP• Workflows mapped for discovery options• Training offered to public service & technical service

librarians

Spending Plan

• Impacted by content pool, short-term loan (STL) threshold, and negotiated multiplier

• Initial content pool: 1,700 titles (all subjects, $250 cap)

• Initial STL threshold: 10• Multiplier of 5

DDA Pilot – Course Change

The problem: Spending at a far lower rate than predicted• September: STL trigger to purchase lowered

to 5• October: 10,000 records added to the pilot

(2009-2010 imprints)• November: Council extends pilot to July 2012

with a further $231K

Challenges

• Range of experience with e-books & DDA among libraries; marketing issue

• Differing perceptions of value • Technical issues• Constant need to monitor expenses

Opportunities

• Decrease requesting activity for p-books with its associated costs

• Libraries can avoid p-/e- duplication via YBP if they choose

• Next generation ILS may help• Demonstrate to publishers that we don’t want

e-journal “big deal” model for e-books

From Pilot to Program!

• Jan.-Feb. 2012: Pilot evaluation• Feb. 2012: Team recommends ongoing

program, proposes choice of annual budgets: $550K (status quo) or $1 M (expansion)

• Change funding model to 30% even split/35% FTE/35% materials budget

• Council agrees to program with FY13 budget of $750K, increasing to $1M in FY14

Not Out of the Woods Yet ...

• Projected to run out of $$ in May• Raised STL purchase threshold back to 10• Considered suppressing discovery of pre-2011

content, HOWEVER ...– Discrepancies btwn EBL & OCLC pub dates– Suppression easily achieved in 1 day in local

catalogs, but longer using OCLC’s KB– Bottom line: Public Svcs consequences unacceptable

Resolution

• $30K bridge loan from Alliance

• Fiscal realities will inform future expansion of DDA content

Some Statistics (July 2011-May2012)

• 15,527 titles available to users• ~ 100 new titles added per week• 482 titles purchased• 9,814 titles have been accessed 70,500 times

(this includes free browsing) • 7,128 titles had 17,621 STLs• $472,228 spent

Spend by Week

STL drop 5 Retro load STL increase 10 $30K infusion

7/1/11-7/22/2

011

8/5/2011

8/19/2

011

9/2/2011

9/16/2

011

9/30/2

011

10/14/2011

10/28/2011

11/11/2011

11/25/2011

12/9/2011

12/23/2011

1/6/2012

1/20/2012

2/3/2012

2/17/2012

3/2/2012

3/16/2012

3/30/2

012

4/13/2012

4/27/2

012

5/11/2

012

5/25/2

012$0.00

$5,000.00

$10,000.00

$15,000.00

$20,000.00

$25,000.00

$30,000.00

$35,000.00

In Closing

• Thanks to Greg Doyle for some slides• For more information, go to:

http://www.orbiscascade.org/index/demand-driven-acquisitions-pilot

• Or contact:– Greg Doyle, Alliance ER Coordinator

[email protected]– Linda Di Biase, DDA Team Chair [email protected]





The Next Generation ILS : What Is the Future of Collection Sharing?

Carmit Marcus - Director of Product Management and Partnerships, Ex Libris

Future Collection SharingBackgroundNew efficiencies in resource sharingJoint collection development

• Maximize cooperation, integration and sharing between institutions in a network, while supporting each institution’s particular workflows and standards, and maintaining local privacy and ownership of data

• Standardizing and streamlining the connection points to make them seamless and reliable, regardless of the participating library systems

The challenge

• Group of institutions with relationships/collaboration in a specific library business area (e.g. collection development, resource sharing, remote storage)

• Each institutions can be part of many networks in multiple business areas

What is a collaborative network?

• Collaboration can be done on: • Data - Institutions can work together by exposing

and/or sharing their data and providing services for this data

• Processes - Institutions can work together by coordinated process and/or creating joint processes to gain efficiencies

Two forms of collaboration

• Institutions will make use of a collaborative zone, where shared data will be managed

• Each institution manages its private (library) zone, using its internal standards and workflows

• Each institution controls what of its data it is willing to share with other network members

The Alma approach

• Collection sharing is incorporated within the Alma Fulfillment framework

• Goals of Smart Fulfillment• Extend and simplify services for end users - systems and

standards become transparent • Improve traditional circulation, link resolution, and access

management processes• Reduce and eliminate ownership and format constraints• Highlight immediately available resource• Maximize integration with other systems• Shape Collection Development

Resource Sharing

End user experience

• Supporting Selection• Gaining efficiencies in the acquisition

processes • New acquisition method - PDA

Joint collection development

• Today’s systems start with acquisitions• Beginning the process at collection

development allows a broader look across shared collections

• Selection functions will support subject-specific workflows within local and shared collections

Selection

Create selection item

ACQ request

Selector Vendor OtherEvents

Enrichment

Evaluate for Acquisition

Defer Trial Approve Reject

Selection

Auto generateorder line

Approvedselection

Review

Edit &complete

Approve& send

Reject

Selection to Order

• Selectors working in a network of institutions may make purchasing decisions for other institutions in the network

• Selected item can be acquired for any one of the institutions in the network that permits acquiring on behalf of it

• Selector decides to which institutions to acquire the selected item

Collaborative selection

Selection

My Library

Network Libraries

Peer Libraries

Selection

Gaining efficiencies in acquisitions—shared dataShared vendor file; shared license file; ability to activate for other institutions

Acquisitions

60

Institution A

Catalog

Inventory

The Trial

Partner 1

Partner 3

Regional Catalog

Partner 2

Searching the network

61

Searching the network

Shared holdings notification

Current workflow:• Candidate ebook titles loaded into the catalog• Usage creates automated purchase

Challenges in today’s systems• Managing candidates• Ongoing record loads• Identifying candidates• Deleting candidates but not purchased titles

• Tracking purchases/expenditures

PDA/DDA in Alma

Alma

RepositoryVendor

Discovery

• Vendor candidate e-books records (with URLs) are loaded into Alma repository• Alma publishes candidates to discovery• Users discover and use e-books, triggering purchases• Vendor delivers PO via EOD & invoice via EDI•Candidate e-books that are not in use are removed from repository and from discovery

DDA in Alma

DDA Configuration

Questions?

• Chelle Batchelor (Moderator/Program Chair)[email protected]

• Linda Di Biase (Orbis-Cascade)[email protected]

• Carmit Marcus (Ex Libris)[email protected]

• Janet Schneider (Smoky Hill and Eloise May Libraries)[email protected]






http://connect.ala.org/node/180995/

Sharing Our Collections : Looking to the Future

Documents

Transcript of Sharing Our Collections : Looking to the Future