It has been almost a month since I returned from the Charleston Conference: Issues in Book and Serial Acquisitions (they probably need to change the name of the conference to “Issues in Metadata and Online Journals”). I thought it was a great conference and learned a lot, which I will try to disseminate in the following paragraphs…
The conference opened with David Lankes, Director, Information Institute of Syracuse, Syracuse University. His session was on “New Librarianship.” He stated that the best days of librarianship are ahead of us and that we are the right profession, uniquely positioned to lead in the knowledge age. However, we won’t get there following current trends. “We as a profession have become so focused on the trees of standards and process that we are now at risk from missing the larger forest of opportunities. We need new librarianship unencumbered by artifact-centrality. I put in my notes the quote “A crisis is a terrible thing to waste.” He asks “What should be the future of libraries and librarians in a democracy?” He states that knowledge is not an artifact, knowledge is an active process. Knowledge is created through conversation: conversants, language, agreements, memory. He says “The mission of librarians is to improve society through facilitating knowledge creation in their communities.” We do this through Service, Leadership and Innovation. He ended with the quote “Change is like heaven. Everyone wants to get there but no one wants to go first.”
Each year, there seems to be a buzz word of something happening in the industry. This year, the buzz word of the conference was the whole concept of “just in time” ordering instead of “just in case.” Now, it is called a “Demand-Driven Acquisitions Model” or “User-Centered Acquisitions.” There were a few sessions on this topic and I was able to attend two of them.
One of them was “Use is King: User-Centered Acquisitions.” This presentation was given by Albert Joy and Peter Spitzform, both from the University of Vermont. They essentially said that with budget cuts, they needed to report expenditures with greater regularity and couldn’t justify things that weren’t questioned before. They posed the question “can we show what we buy today will be useful in the future?” They are buying books “just in case” and no one is using them. Previously, there were three assumptions to book buying: 1) Library collections exist in isolation, 2) There is a common search strategy, and 3) Monographic materials go quickly out of print. We know now those assumptions no longer hold true. Books that are born digital don’t go out of print. Many publishers are on their way to offer modern digital formats of front list titles.
In response to all this, in 2007 the University of Vermont developed a model where they load MARC records (provided by their vendor) into their ILS system. The MARC records also link out to Google Books for more information for the patron. There is an “Order on Demand” button next to the items. If a patron wants the book, they click the button and have for the patron within 4 days. They pay list price plus overnight shipping for these titles. They have estimated this model has saved them $50,000. One issue is that the librarians are also placing orders through this system for books they think the library needs. Overall, for the Univ of VT, Order On Demand provides a more dynamic way to provide material.
The other session I attended on the subject was “Rethinking Monographic Acquisition: Developing a Demand-Driven Purchase Model.” This session was given by Michael Levine-Clark from the University of Denver, Stephen Bosch from the University of Arizona and Kim Anderson and Matt Naumann from Blackwell. I was looking at my notes from this and the abstract from the program and I think the abstract can best sum up this session. It states “Librarians must reconsider how they collect monographs. Traditionally, academic libraries purchase as many books as possible to support their curricular and research needs, without much consideration of use. Even though 40% or more of books in most academic libraries never get used, this model makes sense in a world in which books go out of print, shelf space is available, and collections budgets are stable. But the world has changed: as publishers shift to an electronic publishing model, books will not go out of print; libraries are under pressure to convert shelf space to study space; and libraries have fewer and fewer funds to purchase books annually.” Does this sound familiar to any of you? The University of Denver developed a demand-driven acquisitions model with their book vendor, Blackwell Book Services. “Records for books that show up as forms on the approval plan will be loaded into the catalog, allowing users to discover them and purchase as needed. The library will pay Blackwell for profiling and metadata and will order books from the fastest and cheapest source.” (ouch). They do continue to receive some books on approval as well. “The University of Arizona’s development and past implementation of similar approaches to demand-driven business models including short term loans for e-books leading to purchase, demand-driven plans for streamed video content, as well as continuing demand-driven programs for e-books which is now extending into print monographs.”
So, this whole “just in time”/ “demand-driven purchase model” does not sound like we can expect an increase in sales for 2010. This session touched on how this will affect vendors. They stated that the problems faced by publishers will also apply to book vendors and that vendors will have to replace lost revenue. They also stated that vendors may be able to develop a better business model, such as charge an annual subscription price for these services and improve the supply chain. We are definitely going to look into how we can provide MARC records to those customers who want or have to move to a demand-driven purchase model.
The 9th Annual Health Sciences Lively Lunch presentation was given by Pat Thibodeau from Duke University and it was entitled “Transformational Change.” Pat discussed the many changes going on at her library and the challenges and impetus for change. She also states that there are opportunities for transformation. “Unfreeze behaviors, mind set; reset user expectations; no longer the Status Quo; realign with institutional priorities / user needs.” The Old Mantra was “Information access anywhere, anytime” and the New Mantra is “right content, to the right people, at the right time.” She also discussed the changes going on in Collection Development (electronic only, just-in-time, patron driven and data driven) Technical Services (stop or limit cataloging, focus on accessibility, focus on unique collections) and Space and Facilities (reduce or eliminate stacks, invite in others/share the facility, new uses for space). The lunch session ended with an open discussion on how other libraries are handling all these changes. That is what is so great about this conference. Everyone speaks freely about budgets, resources, vendors and publishers. One publisher even asked the audience if anyone still looks at the print catalog they publish every year. Everyone said “no.”
I attended a couple other sessions about approval plans. One was “Early Adopters, Early Adapters: Vendors and Libraries Create the Print and e-Book Approval Plan.” Libraries are moving to eBook approval plans because print materials are not circulating, eBook use increases monthly and they allow student access from different time zones 24/7. One of the items discussed is “why did this take so long when eBooks have been around for years and why now?” Bob Nardini of Coutts discusses that it has taken a while to do this because the acceptance of eBooks had to mature and they needed a customer who wanted to do it. The reason to do it now is “because we think our future in business depends on it” and “to learn how to do it. Just because you know how to do print doesn’t mean you know eBooks.” I know first hand, it is not easy. We have begun to integrate ebrary titles into our approval plans. It is a learning process and I am open to suggestions.
On the same subject of approval plans, I attended “Can Library Values be Outsourced?” Bibliographers from YBP, Coutts, Blackwell and Ingram discussed that they did think library values could be outsourced and that decisions made by bibliographers are not strictly commercial. I have always thought this since I am responsible for over 30 approval plans. I feel as if I am an extension of each library’s collection development department. This was the first session I ever attended where everyone on the panel had a job exactly like mine (another reason I love this conference). It was nice to know I am not alone and that all vendors value their customers and take the selections they make on their approval plans very seriously.
There were other sessions I attended and so many others I wanted to attend. One session I was not able to attend because it conflicted with something else was “Towards Resolving Chaos in the e-Book Supply Chain.” The abstract stated “Whether and how the ISBN should identify each different version of an e-book is becoming a contentious issue. There seems to be a huge mismatch between how publishers are identifying and describing e-books and what libraries actually require.” I think that is a huge problem. For example, for our WCP/PromptCat customers, if you purchase an eBook, what # do I transmit to OCLC? Do I send the eBook ISBN# or the ebrary identifier?
There was also a session that I thought was interesting because I had never heard of this before. It was “Start Worrying about the Theft of Shelf Books and Media.” The session discussed how people are stealing books, buying a “discard” stamp and selling the book online. Some thieves specialize in asking for unrecognized rare items through interlibrary loan. How horrible!
In summation, I feel as if I have a lot of work ahead of me this year. Vendors/Matthews will have to change their business model as libraries are changing. We will have to work with our customers to provide more than just books; metadata is important to provide too. Our role will not just be to sell books but to sell the discoverability of the items. At one session they said better metadata = more sales, and I think that is correct. If anyone is interested in starting a cooperative program using this demand driven purchasing model, please let me know. The quote from Alan Kay that Pat Thibodeau used at the Health Sciences Lively Lunch sums this conference up for me. “The best way to predict the future is to invent it.”



