The Invisible Mainstrean: E-resources in Workflows and Organizations
Matthew Barnes - R2 Consulting
JBK Summary:
This was a good presentation of the print/electronic paradox, because it didn't just go over the stuff everyone in the room knew - that the number of people assigned to print resource processing is an inversion of the number of e-resources coming in to the library. The presenter attempted to explain why the inversion exists, and showed some of the process that his consulting firm advises libraries to go through in order fix the problem.
The Print Inversion Paradox
In other words - Why aren't more folks reassigned from legacy print to manage high-demand electronic resources?
From 75% print / 25% electronic to 60% electronic / 40% print
Could argue that 60% of staff should work on e in this new environment
Problem 1 - print is tangible, esp. in intimidating piles of backlogs, and has political consequences when donated by a high-profile person - the impulse is to clean it up first.
Other reasons:
-Inertia
-Change resistance, through fear, inadequate skill set, coasting
-Political resistance
-Nostalgia and romanticism about print
-Failure to recognize that e-resources ARE the mainstream - Barnes and his colleagues see that this is the main reason
The impact:
-The sanity of your e-resources librarian
-Access nightmares, through out of date holdings, broken links, inconsistent delivery
-Backlogs of order placement, contracts, configuration
-Lack of visibility, esp. w/order status (The Black Hole of Acquisitions - no one knows what happens to their orders)
-Evaluation
Gives an example of a library that spent 10K/year on an e-resource; 3 years after initial subscription, the e-resource person finally discovered that access to the resource had never been turned on. 30K wasted.... Gives a context for upcoming recommendations - is anything that you're still doing with print resources going to save 30K? Devoting more work and personnel to e-resources is going to save money; you have to quantify in your own organization how much print processing is costing you.
The first step in solving the invisible mainstream:
Taming the Print Beast
Barnes recommends NOT hearing all these steps and going home and doing them - emphasizes this is a process that you have to go through to bring the organization along with you. Otherwise it won't work.
Assumptions:
-Patrons prefer electronic access in most fields of study
-Additional employee headcount is unlikely
-Those working on print usually don't feel that they have the time to help out
-Reallocating staff will:
--be politically sensitive
--be difficult due to skill set
--take time
5 steps of workflow redesign:
-understand the current environment - there's usually a reason things are the way they are
-identify best "possible" practices - the best, most realistic thing to do
-demonstrate the benefits - to individuals and the organization - critical to success
-enable the organization
-adjust and implement changes
What is the workflow saying?
-Let the workflow "speak" - perform a workflow audit; establish a "big picture" with flowcharts, key measures, specific costs
-What's getting done? At what cost? (example - the cost of an individual original catalog record)
-What's not getting done? At what cost?
Traditional print workflow:
-Resource ID
-Transfers
-Withdrawals
-Offsite storage
-Archiving
-Digitization
-Discard/Donate/Book sale
EResource workflow:
Most of the above, plus trials, licensing, access maintenance, etc
Ways to reduce hours on print monographs:
-Maximize vendor consolidation
-Fully leverage approval plans
-Implement electronic selection and ordering
-Implement electronic invoicing
-PromptCat (WCCP) + shelf-ready
-Accept duplicate call numbers
-Control quality via sampling
-Reduce gifts
Ways to reduce hours on print serials and standing orders:
-Reduce print subscriptions
-Reduce check-in and claiming
-Reduce binding
-Bind incomplete
-Reduce effort on unsolicited titles
-Consolidate standing orders
-Outsource cataloging for reference
Discovery happens elsewhere:
-The library website is not the front-door
-Why should catalogers do things the same way when the library catalog is not the main method of discovery?
Cataloging & discovery:
-Accept DLC and PCC copy w/o editing
-Create and electronic review shelf
-Catalog to the level needed
-Outsource authority control
-Increase expertise with non-MARC metadata
-Control quality via sampling (again)
The flip side - decloaking electronic resources:
Increase visibility of e-resources.
Eliminate the hub factor - one person dealing with this topic - fine at the beginning b/c don't need much process, but does not scale at all when workload increases.
Dispersing to a wider group of people makes the work scale, but processes must be much more formal.
Recognize the mainstream:
-define the process that IS and then define the process that SHOULD BE
-Be quantitative: time, direct/indirect cost, backlogs in licensing, description, access, etc (don't try to do all alone)
-Account for patron preference
-Account for usage (demand)
-Establish a shared vision and priorities - sometimes through a strategic plan - this helps you decide what to say no to, even if it sounds fluffy
Selection, trials and renewals:
-Use standard request form, not email
-Make the request queue and status of requests visible to relevant parties (JBK thought - maybe through a ticketing system?)
-Always set alerts for trials (through an ERM, for example)
-Publicize trials to patrons
-Set formal criteria for renewals - don't just subscribe and forget
-Conduct rolling reviews of current subscriptions
Acquisition:
-Licenses:
--develop a way to prioritize - have a group do this, not the hub person
--make review as rules-based as possible - allow younger staff/librarians to practice with the rules on simpler licenses
--track and report status
-Use a single general fund for large purchases
-Consolidate around a single workflow management tool (ERM)
-Eliminate shadow systems
The ERMS in workflow:
-Enables a shared view for Acq, licensing, workflow mgt, alerting, usage reporting
-But not a complete selection-to-access solution; yet another DB to maintain; likely with not reduce staffing requirements
Resource discovery:
-Make a strategic choice about discovery gateway:
--union catalog
--WorldCat
--Google Scholar/GBS
--Meta/Federated search
-Choose a single KB for linking (JBK comment - this is an argument for loading print titles into the link resolver KB)
-If using OPAC, move to multiple records for P and E
Access:
-Proactive - use link checking software like OCLC's Link Evaluator
-Reactive - Use a trouble ticket system to track and report (example of a small college that made a Report a Problem blog - progress on problems was visible and clear; great PR tool)
-Add a "report a problem" link to resources
E-Books:
-Still waiting on the wave...
-Ebooks can't be easily slotted into traditional workflow channels
-Monograph vendors are making significant strides toward integrating ebooks
(Speculates that troubled economic times will bring ebooks into the mainstream; many libraries that are facing cuts are looking at avoiding print monographs if at all possible)
Conclusions:
-Still an imbalance in resources dedicated to managing electronic resources
-Print workflows must be streamlined to free resources for the electronic mainstream
-Electronic workflows must be enhanced to improve efficiency and visibility
-Expect the workload of e-resource personnel to only increase
Comments