/
Transforming Resource Sharing in a Networked Global Environ Transforming Resource Sharing in a Networked Global Environ

Transforming Resource Sharing in a Networked Global Environ - PowerPoint Presentation

pamella-moone
pamella-moone . @pamella-moone
Follow
404 views
Uploaded On 2017-05-05

Transforming Resource Sharing in a Networked Global Environ - PPT Presentation

A Pinhole Approach to Understanding ILL Costs and Trends or What a Dutch Master Can Teach Us About Analyzing Resource Sharing Data Dennis Massie Program Officer OCLC Research Introduction Asking big questions is the easy part ID: 544726

data sharing users ill sharing data ill users collection oclc library interesting nice actionable essential worldwide borrow potential compile

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Transforming Resource Sharing in a Netwo..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Transforming Resource Sharing in a Networked Global Environment • 10 August 2016

A Pinhole Approach to Understanding ILL Costs and Trends, or,What a Dutch Master Can Teach Us About Analyzing Resource Sharing Data

Dennis Massie

Program Officer, OCLC ResearchSlide2

Introduction: Asking big questions is the easy partSlide3
Slide4

Chapter 1: A “water, water everywhere” sort of problem…and some of the water is not freshSlide5

Declining OCLC

ILL statisticsSlide6
Slide7
Slide8
Slide9
Slide10
Slide11
Slide12
Slide13

Chapter 2: the borrow direct consortium to the rescueSlide14

As of December 2014:

Made up of

11 institutions

with sophisticated, innovative resource sharing operations

Some long-established members, some newer Involved in all manner of

consortial

arrangements

within and outside the group

Would serve as an excellent

illustration of current trends

in the research library communitySlide15

What numbers of borrows and loans has each institution executed in each of the various resource sharing venues in the past 5 years?

What factors determine the requesting method or model used for each request?How/why is all this changing over time?How will it most likely change in the future?

OCLC/Borrow Direct ILL StudySlide16

ARL vs Our Study

Why might the numbers differ?

Institutions with multiple libraries and with complex ILL set-up’s might not have reported all activity to us.

Both sets of data are self-reported, and possibly compiled by different people.

Potential fiscal/calendar confusion

Overall, study participants reported 97.9% of what was reported to ARL.Slide17

% ARL Numbers Reported to UsSlide18

Circ

-to-

Circ

is where the growth is.Slide19

Growth is due to new players.Slide20

Chapter 3: If the numbers won’t tell you why, ask the people behind the numbersSlide21

What is the strategic thinking behind the groups you join? Technologies you adopt? Workflows you establish?What forces are at work driving your choices?

Who are your users, and what needs do they hope will be met by your collection sharing services?What user experience do you offer? What do you aspire to offer?What would you like to learn from this data, or any data?

How will collection sharing evolve over the next 5 years?

6

Basic Questions for BD

ILLer’sSlide22

Automate the routine.Build in predictability.Push staff tasks lower in the hierarchy.

Introduce efficiencies, relax restrictive policies.Partner in concentric circles.

Strategic thinkingSlide23

Discovery is easier than delivery.Library users have

Amazoogle-type expectations.Library users want print when they read to learn.Even the richest libraries are buying less.ILL has a bad reputation

.The e-book revolution hasn’t come close to catching up with the e-journal revolution.

Forces at workSlide24

Graduate students, mostly. And some faculty.They want to borrow what’s in use at the home institution.

They expect extended loan periods.They don’t care where it comes from or how you get it.They want it yesterday.They think everything is fair use.

Users (the who and the what)Slide25

Currently being offered:A few fancy hidden algorithms

Some linking of systems with standards or Web servicesButtons on a Web page, describe each service, ask patron to chooseUnanimous aspiration:Single entry point for all interactions with library services

User experienceSlide26

What’s borrowed within vs outside the group.What % of borrowed items are already owned.

Effects of consortial borrowing on OCLC ILL traffic with those same partners.Per capita consumption of library services.Others’ budgets and workflows for purchase-on-demand.

Correlation between expenditures and collection-sharing activity.Why some constituents don’t use library services for their research needs.

They wish they knew…Slide27

Patrons will enjoy a more unified user experience.

Libraries will do more within consortia.Circulation will stop declining and possibly even show an uptick.The library will figure in a smaller proportion of a typical researcher’s material-gathering transactions.Print will maintain its popularity.

Special trusted partnerships will be needed for sharing scarce and valuable materials.

In 5 years…Slide28

Circ

-to-

Circ

is where the growth is.Slide29

Growth is due to new players.Slide30

Chart OCLC ILL interactions in detail as new members joined Borrow DirectIsolate returnables

and non-returnablesOverlay expenditures and demographics onto collection sharing data

Next steps/further studySlide31

Newbie OCLC ILL Interactions with Borrow Direct PartnersSlide32

Chapter 4: If having one pinhole view is good, isn’t having two, by definition, twice as good?Slide33

As of December 2015:

Made up of

14 institutions

with sophisticated, innovative resource sharing operations

Some long-established members, some newer Involved in all manner of

consortial

arrangements

within and outside the group

Would serve as an excellent

illustration of current trends

in the research library communitySlide34

They: VolunteeredOwned the process

Profited from my Borrow Direct experienceOpted to track purchase-on-demandShare a member with Borrow DirectSet up their consortial borrowing process to run through ILL rather than Circulation

CIC ILL StudySlide35

Per-Student Expenditures, 2012 NECS Survey

IviesPlus

CICSlide36

Total

sharing activity is going

down.Slide37

traffic is way, way up

.Slide38

Other

Consortial

Borrowing: Down-

ish

.Slide39

Free online, POD of non-

returnables

up.Slide40
Slide41

Chapter 5: the oclc ill cost calculator – a different type of pinholeSlide42

Megan

Gaffney, University of DelawareJustin Hill, Temple University

Ralph LeVan

and JD

Shipengrover

, OCLC Research

Margarita Moreno, National Library of

Australia

Moi

!

Working

GroupSlide43

Our aspirations for the calculator

Provide

fresh

data about current models

Help establish best practices

Facilitate comparison to anonymized peers

Support evidence-based decision-makingSlide44

Use Cases

Users want to

know

:

Their resource sharing unit costs

How those costs evolve over time

How their costs compare with peers

Users would like to

project

:

The financial impact of joining a consortium

Of buying a certain piece of equipment

Of implementing a new serviceSlide45
Slide46

You’ll keep sensitive information to yourself.

E

nter salary for each staff person and estimate what percentage should be applied to each type of request.Slide47

The system calculates Staff costs and reports only totals for

each category.

You’ll enter the salary data and review the system-calculated totals on private worksheet tabs that only

you

will see.Slide48

You’ll send in only totals by Staff category.

On a “staff totals” tab, re-type the numbers calculated by the system and then

delete

the tabs containing salary information for individual staff members.Slide49
Slide50

Megan Gaffney, University of Delaware

Justin Hill, Temple University

Margarita Moreno, National Library of Australia

Lars Leon, University of Kansas

Brian Miller, The Ohio State University

David Larsen, University of Chicago

Jenny Lee, University of California, Los Angeles

Ronald Figueroa, Syracuse University

Matthew Sheehy, Brandeis University

Josh Steans, University of Wisconsin-Stout

Don Pawl, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs

Beta Testers – October 2015-presentSlide51

Which staff should we include?Circ? Offsite storage? Mail room? Work study?

How should we define an unfilled request?From the patron’s POV? The ILL system’s?Should we count delivering own stuff to own patrons?What about costs covered by confidentiality agreements?

What about costs that we simply can’t come up with?

Recent issues tackled by the BetasSlide52

Next 4

months:Beta testers will gather and submit their dataOCLC software engineer will build database and reporting functionsBeta testers will test reportsNext 6 months:

“Early interest” folks will be invited to submit dataEventually

We’ll open it up to everyone

We’ll work with various groups and organizations to encourage use

Google

OCLC ILL Calculator

for more information.

Birthing an ILL Cost CalculatorSlide53

Conclusion: Wouldn’t the “drinking from a firehose” metaphor be faster?Slide54
Slide55

Interesting is nice, Actionable is essentialSlide56

Compile worldwide collection sharing data

Interesting is nice, Actionable is essentialSlide57

Compile worldwide collection sharing data

Get to know our users – and potential users

Interesting is nice, Actionable is essentialSlide58

Compile worldwide collection sharing data

Get to know our users – and potential users

Learn more about what’s being shared

Interesting is nice, Actionable is essentialSlide59

Compile worldwide collection sharing data

Get to know our users – and potential users

Learn more about what’s being shared

How old?

How widely owned?

What subjects? Languages?

Interesting is nice, Actionable is essentialSlide60

Compile worldwide collection sharing data

Get to know our users – and potential users

Learn more about what’s being shared

How old?

How widely owned?

What subjects? Languages?

Explore what “

managed scarcity”

will mean when more institutions are depending upon fewer copies

Interesting is nice, Actionable is essentialSlide61

Compile worldwide collection sharing data

Get to know our users – and potential users

Learn more about what’s being shared

How old?

How widely owned?

What subjects? Languages?

Explore what “

managed scarcity”

will mean when more institutions are depending upon fewer copies

Discover

predictive relationships between data

elements

Interesting is nice, Actionable is essentialSlide62

Compile worldwide collection sharing data

Get to know our users – and potential users

Learn more about what’s being shared

How old?

How widely owned?

What subjects? Languages?

Explore what “

managed scarcity”

will mean when more institutions are depending upon fewer copies

Discover

predictive relationships between data

elements

Measure the impact that

collection-sharing activity

has on

the ability of

parent organizations

to fulfill

their mission

Interesting is nice, Actionable is essentialSlide63
Slide64

Thanks for listening.

Dennis MassieProgram Officer, OCLC Researchmassied@oclc.org

IFLA Resource Sharing & Document Supply Satellite Meeting