The University of Edinburgh

Where are our books : improving the recommendation to shelf process EVUGM September 5th 2003

Jeremy Upton

Bibliographic Services Manager, Edinburgh University

The University of Edinburgh

Aims

•Suggest why we should invest time and energy in improving the workflow from recommendation to supply to help current and future needs•How we might reach goal of single keyed/searched for information•Show how existing technology can suggest ways to move forward•Show how existing technology is highlighting current need

The University of Edinburgh

Outline of presentation

• Look at experience in Edinburgh University Library of setting up recommendation form

• Review of existing products on offer:Online selection AssistantReadinglist directVendor system

• Suggest how existing elements within Voyager could be utilized to provide the functionality needed by our users and staff

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University recommendation

form

• Summer 2000 still using triplicate paper forms, produced by external printers

• Pressure from academics to allow electronic submission of recommendations, highlighted in Library Strategy document

• Examples from other commercial products e.g. Amazon

• Pressure from Library staff in Acquisitions and other divisions to improve design of form

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University Recommendation form

Analysis of the work flow• Academic completes recommendation form• Form to liaison Librarian to approve spend• Form to Acquisitions Team to place order on system

either by keying or by importing data, catalogue checked

• Order placed

• Needed to be very careful analysis of audit/financial control

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University Recommendation form

Implementation• Took existing form and tried to replicate

electronically• Design work with Systems staff• One year trial with selected departments.

Comments fed into process• Comments from Library staff

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University Recommendation form

• Within one year, 78% (7386) of recommendations being received electronically

• Reduction in the number of keying mistakes• Easier for clerical staff to contact recommenders,

empowerment of staff to work through problems

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University Recommendation form

• Clear identification of recommenders Department/School affiliation for allocating correct fund

• Required form elements, ensuring all essential data present

• Legibility for staff: Edinburgh University Orders many non-English and non-Roman items

• World wide access to form: academics on research trips in the summer

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University Recommendation form

• Edinburgh University large complex organisation: helps to have controlled single method for recommendation

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University Recommendation form

Problems• Any change requires work to convince staff and users that

the change is worthwhile• Does not really give our recommenders the functionality

they need to track their orders:– Not possible to keep electronic copy of

recommendations– Recommenders not notified when books arrive– Budget holders cannot track how much is being spent

by individuals– No easy access to financial information about funds

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University Recommendation form

Library side• Still having to rekey/re-search for bibliographic

information to place orders• Aware could do more with the form but do not

have the in house resource to develop further, database products

• Constant need to update form, staff changes, University restructuring, only systems staff have knowledge of necessary software

The University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh University Recommnedation form

So

Have gone as far as we can with the resources BUT users still cannot easily track their books

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

Online Selection Assistant

• Produced by The Library Corporation http://www.tlcdelivers.com/tlccarl/index.asp

• Advertised as a “vendor neutral solution”• Offers much useful functionality to support the

recommendation process • Integrated into the financial management of the

process• Placing the acquisition of bibliographic data at the

start of the process

The University of Edinburgh

Online Selection Assistant

Many features duplicate what is available on Voyager but does have additional features:– Possible to control access to and ordering from

accounts by user– Cross database searching– Ability to add institution specific databases to

search options– Restrict database options by user

The University of Edinburgh

Online Selection Assistant

• Can help acquire a high quality MARC record looking across a defined set of databases using an agreed hierarchy

• Company has deals with commercial bibliographic data providers, cuts cost of access for Library customers

• EDI integrated and “last 5 days database”

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

Readinglist directhttp://www.readinglistdirect.co.uk/

• Primarily a product designed to manage reading lists

• Contains functionality which would be of value to the recommendation process

• Allows the capture of data from external databases to populate pre-existing forms

The University of Edinburgh

Readinglist direct

Future plans:• Allow passing of bibliographic information on to

liaison librarians for recommendation• Cross database searching• Direct feed from University registry of staff

details• Shared single authentication with University

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

Supplier Systems

• Book selection systems offered by most major book suppliers

• Academic staff are given access to system, access controlled by Library staff through accounts

• Recommendations can be passed through Library either for approval or rejection

• Recommendations can be used to place orders directly on vendor’s system or to produce brief MARC records for Library system, to be EDI’d later

The University of Edinburgh

Supplier Systems (cont.)

• Potential for using embedded order data to overlay with full MARC record when books delivered shelf ready

• Add local information, fund codes, location codes and these can be tied to individual user accounts as defaults

The University of Edinburgh

Supplier Systems

• Advantages– A smooth system supplied with quality

bibliographic data at the start of the process– No or limited technical support costs for

Libraries– Opportunities to influence suppliers– Options available for recommender to track

own recommendations

The University of Edinburgh

Supplier Systems

• Disadvantages– Management of the system has to be done in

house, control of passwords, checking contacts still valid

– Tied to single supplier: does not encourage competition

– Not all suppliers can supply all materials so potentially individuals have to be trained to use a variety of interfaces

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

Recommendation process: requirements

• Should be a system which is integrated, does not need Library staff to spend time making systems talk to each other

• Quality bibliographic data should be available at the start of the process

• Early inclusion of data on reading lists/course reserve

• Cross searching databases

The University of Edinburgh

Recommendation process: requirements 2

• Database of users regularly updated with minimum effort: no duplication of effort by Library staff

• Security: only approved users recommending material and accessing fund information. Security information available from pre-existent institution source

The University of Edinburgh

Recommendation process: requirements 3

• Tracking recommendations throughout process• Difference stages of approval for audit purposes• Automatic checking of whether item in stock

The University of Edinburgh

Why Voyager?

• Integration: an integrated solution, do not have to spend time making different systems talk to each other

• Cross database searching: EnCompass• SDI: EnCompass allows a user to rerun searches

against a database and show any new additions to the database

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

Why Voyager?

• Database of users regularly updated: already direct feed from University registry with email addresses

• Security: an approved Registry listing showing department affiliation. Edinburgh University looking at single sign on/authentication. This also to be part of EnCompass functionality

• Early inclusion of data on reading lists/course reserve

The University of Edinburgh

Why Voyager?

Would be need for enhancements (some suggestions on work of Scott Wicks at Cornell)

• Automatic searching of whether material in stock: match against OPAC and then import MARC record using rules found in cataloguing

• Tracking of recommendations: already visible in OPAC, could enhance with users being able to have linked access to recommendations AND email alerts

The University of Edinburgh

Why Voyager?

• Could use information in patron records to link access to information about funds to departments

• Automatic vendor selection based on set criteria

The University of Edinburgh

The University of Edinburgh

Conclusion

• Integrating selection process within Voyager best way to give users the service they want

• Much functionality already present• Purchasing of information will continue whether

electronic or print so worth investing in software• Metadata will increasingly be available at time of

purchase: need systems which can exploit this

The University of Edinburgh