Making Collection Management Manageable: A Three-Phase Approach to an Annual Subscription Review

Hannah Pearson
{"title":"Making Collection Management Manageable: A Three-Phase Approach to an Annual\n Subscription Review","authors":"Hannah Pearson","doi":"10.5703/1288284317143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Annual subscription reviews are a normal part of many libraries’ operations, but\n this process is time consuming and can be particularly challenging for institutions with\n small e-resources staffs. The approach pursued by the Michael Schwartz Library at\n Cleveland State University includes strategies other libraries may find helpful in\n moving beyond cost per use in their reviews. In early fiscal year 2019, the Michael\n Schwartz Library identified a need to systematically review all subscriptions annually.\n The library operates with a flat budget and cancellations are often required to manage\n inflation. Previously, subscription reviews were in response to immediate needs (e.g.\n budget cuts, changes in consortium offerings, etc.). Largely due to staffing and time\n constraints, examining the entire corpus of subscriptions was outside of the scope of\n past reviews. A new subscription review process was developed to prepare the library to\n make data-driven decisions regarding cancellations for the next fiscal year. The\n methodology developed for the new subscription review consisted of three phases with\n each phase narrowing the number of resources considered for cancellation. The first\n phase was an evaluation of resource performance from an acquisitions perspective and\n incorporated cost per use and annual price increases. In the next phase, subject\n librarians evaluated resources in their respective disciplines based on several criteria\n and were required to rank resources in order of retention priority. In the final phase,\n faculty were surveyed on content quality, frequency of use in instruction, and other\n criteria for those resources deemed “cancellation eligible.”","PeriodicalId":287918,"journal":{"name":"\"The Time Has Come . . . to Talk of Many Things\"","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"\"The Time Has Come . . . to Talk of Many Things\"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284317143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Annual subscription reviews are a normal part of many libraries’ operations, but this process is time consuming and can be particularly challenging for institutions with small e-resources staffs. The approach pursued by the Michael Schwartz Library at Cleveland State University includes strategies other libraries may find helpful in moving beyond cost per use in their reviews. In early fiscal year 2019, the Michael Schwartz Library identified a need to systematically review all subscriptions annually. The library operates with a flat budget and cancellations are often required to manage inflation. Previously, subscription reviews were in response to immediate needs (e.g. budget cuts, changes in consortium offerings, etc.). Largely due to staffing and time constraints, examining the entire corpus of subscriptions was outside of the scope of past reviews. A new subscription review process was developed to prepare the library to make data-driven decisions regarding cancellations for the next fiscal year. The methodology developed for the new subscription review consisted of three phases with each phase narrowing the number of resources considered for cancellation. The first phase was an evaluation of resource performance from an acquisitions perspective and incorporated cost per use and annual price increases. In the next phase, subject librarians evaluated resources in their respective disciplines based on several criteria and were required to rank resources in order of retention priority. In the final phase, faculty were surveyed on content quality, frequency of use in instruction, and other criteria for those resources deemed “cancellation eligible.”
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使收藏管理易于管理:年度订阅审查的三阶段方法
年度订阅审查是许多图书馆正常运作的一部分,但这个过程非常耗时,对于拥有少量电子资源员工的机构来说尤其具有挑战性。克利夫兰州立大学迈克尔·施瓦茨图书馆所采用的方法包括了一些策略,其他图书馆可能会发现这些策略有助于在评估中超越每次使用成本。在2019财年初,迈克尔·施瓦茨图书馆确定有必要每年系统地审查所有订阅。图书馆的预算是固定的,经常需要取消预算以应对通货膨胀。以前,订阅审查是对即时需求的响应(例如,预算削减,财团发行的变化等)。主要由于人员和时间的限制,审查整个订阅语料库超出了过去审查的范围。开发了一个新的订阅审查流程,使图书馆能够根据数据做出关于下一财政年度取消订阅的决定。为新的订阅审查所制订的方法包括三个阶段,每一阶段都缩小考虑取消的资源数目。第一阶段是从收购的角度评价资源的表现,并将每次使用的成本和每年的价格增长结合起来。在下一阶段,学科图书管理员根据几个标准评估各自学科的资源,并按保留优先级对资源进行排序。在最后阶段,对教师进行内容质量、教学使用频率和其他被认为“符合取消资格”的资源标准的调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A New Synthesis: Research Resources to Research Experiences The Time Has Come... To Build, Reflect, and Analyze Connections Between Qualitative and Quantitative Data Collections Data, Tools, and Strategy: Applying R, Tableau, and Excel to Print Assessment Acquiring E-books – Does (Should) Workflow Play a Role? A Collaborative Imperative? Libraries and the Emerging Scholarly Communication Future
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1