“Best of Show” Virtual Conference February 25, 2015

Carlen Ruschoff, Ted Fons,Liz Brown, Cathy Giffi

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Discovery & Access –Issues & Solutions

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Introduction

• Library Perspective

• Service Provider Perspective

• Recommendations

• Publisher Perspectives

• Publisher Implementation

• Summary

• Discussion

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

http:

//w

ww

.osti

.gov

/hom

e/os

tiblo

g/th

read

/pub

lic%

20ac

cess

White Paper Working Group------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

White Paper Focus------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) Discovery of content licensed/purchased by libraries

2) Data exchange between publishers, service providers and library

3) Data standards and improved work flow to optimize discovery and access in libraries

• Focus on data exchange between publisher, service provider and library

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Key Findings------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Libraries need metadata and holdings data

to provide patron access

• Data quality, the use of data standards and a consistent workflow are key

• Both the library and publisher ROI for eContent depends on improvements in the supply chain

Imag

e: h

ttp:/

/libe

rate

dlea

rnin

gtec

hnol

ogy.c

om/w

ordp

ress

/wp-

cont

ent/

uplo

ads/

2011

/02/

iSto

ck_4

1007

9_ac

cess

-key

.jpg

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Identified Problems-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Library PerspectiveUser Access Failure

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Data are incomplete or inaccurate– Missing or incorrect identifiers– Errors in metadata & links

• Bibliographic metadata and holdings data are not synchronized

• Discovery metadata not available

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Library PerspectiveHigh Processing Costs

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Knowing which titles are in the package–Having a clear list of titles & holdings–Inconsistent title info

• Keeping the data up-to-date–Timely updates to refresh the data

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Access Breakdown-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

USER Librarian

Acquisitions IT Metadata

Platform Provider

Subscription Agent

KB ProviderPublisher

Why Should Service Providers Care?-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quality of Service

• A key criteria for judging the quality

of a product is the satisfaction of the

users

• Data quality has a direct impact on

the satisfaction of the end user

– Data quality can be the difference

between success and failure for the

end user in the path from citation to

full text. oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Why Should Service Providers Care?-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Title

Content availability: fulltext: 1997-03 -fulltext: Volume:2;issue:2 -

Data Received by KB

Recommendations-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Recommendations I------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Problem: Data are incomplete or inaccurate

Recommendation: Improve bibliographic metadata and holdings data

Use e-identifiers

Provide consistent collection information

Verify data before sending

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Recommendations II------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Problem: Lack of synchronization between metadata and holdings data

Recommendation: Synchronize bibliographic metadata and holdings data

Follow a schedule

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Recommendations III------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Problem: Libraries receive data in multiple formats

Recommendation: Use consistent data formats Use KBART and MARC standards

Provide change management records

Provide direct holdings data to service providers

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Why Should Publishers and Aggregators Care?

-------------------------------------------------------------

Why Should Publishers Care?------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Risk of product/package cancellation

• Libraries measure success through demand

• Demand is measured in usage & cost per use

– Purchase Price ÷ Low Use = High cost per use

– Staff Costs ÷ Low Use = Higher cost per use

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Why Should Publishers Care?------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loyalty and relationships

• People want their content to reach the intended

audience.

• Aggregators need to keep content providers happy

• Continued success attracts content creators

(authors, editors, etc.) and providers (publishers).

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Publisher PerspectiveProblems and Issues

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Publisher provides data for collections, but KBs often are missing collections.

• Aggregators often have to rely on data of varying quality from individual publishers.

• Publishers have to manage which books go in what channels.

• Inflexible legacy systems/workflows can make fixes and development hard.

• Some Link Resolver systems/workflows are better than others. Data not always used in the same way or as publisher intends.

Publisher PerspectiveProblems and Issues

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Important to stay ahead of the curve on new technologies and standards– Everything is changing quickly, development takes a while!– Just when you thought you were out, they pull you back

in! • Some customers needs are conflicting. Publishers data

needs to fit as many people’s needs as possible.– Custom solutions are too expensive

• Sometimes publishers don’t know what a customer needs.– May think everything is okay when more needed.

But, what is more expensive?We do not have access to the

full text of this book

Can customer please ask KB to use our title-level holdings API? and until they do so, update the collections, which can be found

here

(sales mrg) @ product mgr: Customer purchased certain books package, but

books from another collection package are included by Provider!, What should we

suggest?

(helpdesk) We checked your subs, you have not purchased

this book

Wiley say we have not purchased this.

@Library: If this is true, can you remove record?

Hello Elsevier, Have we indeed not purchased this book?

(sales mgr) We checked your subs, you have indeed not purchased this book, it is part of a package you decided not to buy.

@Elsevier, can you ask KB to remove this from the

package? We need accurate data!

(Sales mgr) @ customer: can you please tell KB to use the right package info, available

here? We will do the same.

(Product mgr) @ KB: Can you please use correct packages? Using our Title-level holdings

API would prevent these issues across the board!

So, Then, Why Should Publishers Care?------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Good data = happy customers– Customers know what they’ve purchased, can find it on

their KB/Discovery Service.– Increased usage!– Increased sales!

• Sales + good usage = happy authors, editors, & content creators who’ve found a good outlet for their work.

• Result: Utopia.– Happy customers, happy users, happy sales team, happy

data team, happy management…happy publisher!

PUBLISHER PERSPECTIVECathy GiffiDirector, Strategic Market AnalysisWiley

THIS ISSUE IS IMPORTANT TO PUBLISHERS.

Why This Matters to Publishers

Why This Matters to PublishersResearchers Can’t Find Content Low Usage.

Why This Matters to PublishersResearchers Can’t Find Content Low Usage.Low Usage Librarians Cancel Titles.

Why This Matters to PublishersResearchers Can’t Find Content Low Usage.Low Usage Librarians Cancel Titles.Librarians Cancel Titles Publishers Make Less Money.

Why This Matters to PublishersResearchers Can’t Find Content Low Usage.Low Usage Librarians Cancel Titles.Librarians Cancel Titles Publishers Make Less Money.

$25BSource: Outsell

It Takes a Village to Improve Discovery

Sales Support

Channel Marketing

Product Data Mgmt

Project MgmtCorporate CommsDigital Product

Mgmt

Account Mgmt

HERE’S WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW.

Baseline

1. Partner with discovery systems, link resolvers, and individual libraries to make sure what’s needed is supplied and problems are addressed in a timely manner.

2. Continuously supply clean metadata via KBART reports.3. Provide rich metadata: structured article and chapter-

level metadata, including abstracts.4. Provide an ONIX feed for book-level metadata.

What has Springer Done?-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Spent three years doing large clean ups of our metadata and improving our MARC Records

• Implemented first KBART Phase I and now KBART Phase II Title Lists

• Made sure that our KBART and MARC records are synched

• Created holdings lists for our customers in the KBART Phase II format

• Work with Link Resolvers, Discovery Services and Libraries to make sure we are supplying what is needed.

What has Elsevier done to optimize discoverability---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rich metadata

With all relevant search and discovery tools

With Knowledge bases & link resolvers

E-mail subscription to be alerted of discontinuation, new, transferred titles

Structured article and chapter level metadata

Abstracts for books chapters

Structured Full Text XML for 3P’s to access content as soon as available, including AIP

Onix feed for book-level metadata

MARC records

API for automated exchange

Title level data – not package level!

KBART format holdings reports available

Customer holdings information

Cooperation and coordination

oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.html

Wiley’s Year of MetadataYOU SAID• MARC records are missing information,

or in some cases, missing altogether.• Some DOIs are not resolving.• Some DOIs in the MARC records are

not registered with CrossRef.

WE ACTED• Checking regularly to see

that all Online Books and Reference Works have MARC records.

• Implemented tighter monitoring of DOIs.

• Instituted a new policy that changes the submission rate to CrossRef, which should dramatically increase the chance of success of submission.

BUT THIS ISSUE IS BIGGER THAN JUST DIRTY DATA.

MARC records take 4-6 weeks to create.

No one has cracked the advance notification of forthcoming titles nut.

We need to tackle improving the discovery experience for researchers coming via Google

and Google Scholar.

HERE’S WHAT’S IN THE WORKS.

In the Hopper

Elsevier has a program in beta that some libraries are participating in that allows for greater customization of MARC records.

Assisting OCLC with the transition of “Collection Sets” to Collection Manager. Investigating an API for holdings data.

And most importantly…

Technical Services Librarians Wanted

It Takes a Village to Improve Discovery

Sales Support

Channel Marketing

Product Data Mgmt

Project MgmtCorporate CommsDigital Product

Mgmt

Account Mgmt

TELL US HOW WE’RE DOING.

We Want To Hear From YouHow are we doing?I haven’t had problems with Wiley.No change; I’m still having the same problem. Help! Much better!

We plan to keep them busy, but from your perspective, what three things would you like to see our new technical services specialist prioritize?

Schedule time with us, and tell us more:• http://wiley.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8ff5ZuRbtnwL4bz

THANK YOU.

Q&A and Discussion------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------oc.lc/econtent and www.oclc.org/go/econtent-access.en.htm

Alexandra de Lange, Elsevier; Carlen Ruschoff, U Maryland; Suzanne Kemperman, OCLC; Theodore Fons, OCLC