DOCSLIB.ORG

Operationalizing the BIG Collective Collection: a Case Study of Consolidation Vs Autonomy Lorcan Dempsey OCLC Research

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Operationalizing the BIG Collective Collection: a Case Study of Consolidation Vs Autonomy Lorcan Dempsey OCLC Research University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln August 2019 Operationalizing the BIG Collective Collection: A Case Study of Consolidation vs Autonomy Lorcan Dempsey OCLC Research Constance Malpas Independent Consultant Mark Sandler Novel Solutions Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons, Scholarly Communication Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Dempsey, Lorcan; Malpas, Constance; and Sandler, Mark, "Operationalizing the BIG Collective Collection: A Case Study of Consolidation vs Autonomy" (2019). Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc.. 119. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/119 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Copyright, Fair Use, Scholarly Communication, etc. by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Operationalizing the BIG Collective Collection: A Case Study of Consolidation $ vs Autonomy Lorcan Dempsey, Constance Malpas, Mark Sandler Operationalizing the BIG Collective Collection: A Case Study of Consolidation vs Autonomy Lorcan Dempsey OCLC Research Constance Malpas Independent Consultant Mark Sandler Novel Solutions in collaboration with © 2019 OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ August 2019 OCLC Research Dublin, Ohio 43017 USA www.oclc.org ISBN: 978-1-55653-099-9 DOI: 10.25333/jbz3-jy57 OCLC Control Number: 1112495814 ORCID iDs Lorcan Dempsey https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2925-8764 Constance Malpas https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9312-8294 Please direct correspondence to: OCLC Research [email protected] Suggested citation: Dempsey, Lorcan, Constance Malpas, and Mark Sandler. 2019. Operationalizing the BIG Collective Collection: A Case Study of Consolidation vs Autonomy. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. https://doi.org/10.25333/jbz3-jy57. Acknowledgements This paper was prepared with the oversight of Krisellen Maloney, Vice President for Information Services, University Librarian and Distinguished Professor, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, and Damon Jaggars, Vice Provost and Director of University Libraries, The Ohio State University. We were also grateful for advice from Wendy Lougee, University Librarian and Dean of Libraries, McKnight Presidential Professor, University of Minnesota, and Kim Armstrong, Director, Library Initiatives, Big Ten Academic Alliance (BTAA). Thanks also to Damon Jaggars for the conversation which began this work. Interviews were held with these BTAA Library Directors/Deans: Nancy Busch (University of Nebraska- Lincoln), Lisa Carter (University of Wisconsin-Madison), John Culshaw (University of Iowa), Barbara Dewey (Pennsylvania State University), Babak Hamidzadeh (University of Maryland), James Hilton (University of Michigan), Damon Jaggars (The Ohio State University), Krisellen Maloney (Rutgers University), Sarah Pritchard (Northwestern University), Joe Salem (Michigan State University), Carolyn Walters (Indiana University) (conversation, rather than full interview), John Wilkin (University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign). Additionally, we spoke to these colleagues in BTAA libraries: Janet Bishop, Associate University Librarian (AUL) for Content and Collections, University of Minnesota Libraries; John Butler, AUL for Data and Technology, University of Minnesota Libraries; Kate McCready, Director of Content Services, University of Minnesota Libraries; Rebecca Richardson, AUL for Collections, Purdue University; Andrea Salazar, Manager, Interlibrary Loan, Michigan State University; Gracemary Smulewitz, Head of Collection Services and Resources Sharing, Collection Development and Management, Rutgers University; Tom Teper, AUL for Collections and Technical Services and Associate Dean of Libraries, University Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Doug Way, AUL for Collections and Research Services, University of Wisconsin; Cherié Weible, AUL for User Services and Associate Dean of Libraries, University Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Thanks to David K. Larsen, Director of Access Services and Assessment, University of Chicago Library, for responding to enquiries. We also consulted with colleagues in related organizations, notably with Ian Bogus, Executive Director, ReCAP; Rick Burke, Executive Director, SCELC; Gwen Evans, Executive Director, OhioLINK; Mike Furlough, Executive Director, HathiTrust; Valerie Horton, Director, Minitex, University of Minnesota Libraries; Nancy Kirkpatrick, Executive Director/CEO, OhioNET; Kirsten Leonard, Executive Director, PALNI; Susan Stearns, Executive Director, Boston Library Consortium. At an early stage of this project, we benefited from insights and direction from members of a working group convened by BTAA, which included: Kim Armstrong, Director, Library Initiatives, BTAA; Rebecca Crist, Project Manager, Library Initiatives, BTAA; D.J. Hoek, AUL for Collections Strategies, Northwestern University; Bruce Barton, Shared Development Group Manager, University of Wisconsin-Madison; John Butler, AUL for Data and Technology, University of Minnesota; Brian Miller, Head, Interlibrary Services, The Ohio State University. Colleagues at OCLC contributed time, expertise and review: Matt Barnes, Matt Carlson, Jennifer Corsi, Annette Dortmund, Peggy Gallagher, Cathy King, Brian Lavoie, Clare MacKeigan, Dennis Massie, Mary Sauer-Games, Christa Starck, and Steph Waite. Thanks to the following BTAA colleagues who reviewed some or all of the document, and who of course are not responsible for (or who do not necessarily agree with) the views expressed here: Kim Armstrong, Melissa Eighmy Brown (Manager of Interlibrary Loan and Digital Delivery, University of Minnesota Libraries), John Butler, David K. Larsen, Wendy Lougee, Karla Strieb (Associate Director for Content and Access, University Libraries, The Ohio State University), Tom Teper, and Doug Way. Table of Contents OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION: THE BTAA, COLLABORATION, AND COLLECTIVE COLLECTIONS .......................................... 10 1.1 THE BTAA: AN EXEMPLARY UNION ....................................................................................................................... 10 1.2 WHAT IS A COLLECTIVE COLLECTION AND DOES BTAA HAVE ONE? .............................................................................. 12 1.3 CONSORTIA AND A COORDINATION SPECTRUM ........................................................................................................ 16 1.4 STRATEGY: MAXIMIZING EFFICIENCY AND IMPACT THROUGH COLLECTIVE ACTION ........................................................... 23 1.5 CHANGE AND CULTURE ...................................................................................................................................... 26 THE BTAA: A MAJOR ENTERPRISE ............................................................................................................... 28 2.1 THE BTAA RESEARCH ENTERPRISE ........................................................................................................................ 28 2.2 BTAA UNIVERSITY DIRECTIONS ............................................................................................................................ 30 2.3 BTAA LIBRARY EXPENDITURES ............................................................................................................................. 32 2.4 BTAA PRINT COLLECTIONS: STOCKS AND FLOWS ..................................................................................................... 35 EFFICIENT NETWORK FULFILLMENT: THE COLLECTIVE COLLECTIONS SERVICE ECOSYSTEM .......................... 42 3.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 42 3.2 CURRENT ECOSYSTEM ........................................................................................................................................ 45 3.3 COORDINATED ECOSYSTEM: A CONTINUUM OF APPROACHES ..................................................................................... 50 3.4 TARGET ECOSYSTEM .......................................................................................................................................... 56 OPTIMALLY DISTRIBUTED COLLECTIONS: THE COLLECTIONS ECOSYSTEM .................................................... 58 4.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 58 4.2 COLLECTION DIRECTIONS .................................................................................................................................... 59 4.3 RETROSPECTIVE AND PROSPECTIVE COLLECTION COORDINATION ................................................................................. 62 4.4 RETROSPECTIVE COLLECTION COORDINATION: RESOURCE SHARING ............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Case for County Law Library Consortia*
    LAW LIBRARY JOURNAL Vol. 111:3 [2019-14] The Case for County Law Library Consortia* Meredith Weston Kostek** This case study looks at the benefits found in joining statewide county law library consortia. Surveys of participating states show benefit use and preferences and indicate that while monetary benefits are found in statewide consortia, the biggest perceived benefit is in collaboration with other libraries in the network. Introduction .........................................................307 Literature Review .....................................................308 Methodology .........................................................310 Consortial History and Results by State ..................................311 California .........................................................311 Ohio ................................................................315 Massachusetts ......................................................319 Discussion ...........................................................322 Conclusion ..........................................................323 Introduction ¶1 Law libraries throughout the United States play an important role in access to justice. These libraries serve not only their local legal communities but also pro se litigants. This is especially true of government libraries, which include state, county, and court libraries. This study focuses on states’ county law libraries, which are frequently autonomous from one another. Would sharing costs, resources, and community knowledge benefit these libraries?
    [Show full text]
  • Reordering Ranganathan: Shifting User Behaviours, Shifting Priorities
    ISSN (Print): 0972-2467 SRELS Journal of Information Management, Vol 52(1), February 2015, p. 3–23 ISSN (Online): 0976-2477 Reordering Ranganathan: Shifting User Behaviours, Shifting Priorities Lynn Silipigni Connaway* and Ixchel M. Faniel OCLC Research, OCLC, Dublin, Ohio, USA; [email protected], [email protected] Abstract S.R. Ranganathan’s Five Laws of Library Science provide a broad framework for designing and evaluating library programmes, activities and services. The laws continue to be extensively cited even today suggesting their continued revolution, currently available resources and services, and user behaviours. The idea has been to suggest how libraries andrelevance. librarians This can paper better attempts connect to to interpret those behaviours. the five laws After in examining the present the daychanging context roles of informationof the Five Laws abundance, on the basis digital of recommendations for realizing the intent of the laws have also been made. findings of recent research, the paper suggests reordering and reframing of the Five Laws of Library Science. A number of Keywords: Digital Environment, Five Laws of Library Science, Information Seeking Behaviour, Information Services, Web- Based Information Services. 1. Introduction Ranganathan, like Melville Dewey, came on the scene at a time when information was scarce; preserving library When Ranganathan proposed his Five Laws of Library collections was a major professional concern of librarians. Science, he came out with a comprehensive framework “Books are for use” was the driver. Dewey’s classification and guideline for evaluating library programmes, library system was essentially meant to help library users activities, and for formulating library policies and understand how to access materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Observations on Scholarly Engagement in the 2008 Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives Program
    Observations on Scholarly Engagement in the 2008 Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives Program Council on Library and Information Resources March 2010 Introduction As defined by CLIR, the “Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives” program aims to identify and catalog hidden special collections and archives of “potentially substantive intellectual value that are unknown and inaccessible to scholars.” By providing resources for cataloging key hidden collections and by facilitating the linking of online records, the program also aims “to construct a new research and teaching environment of national importance.” Inherent in the program’s design is a conviction that its success will depend on the ability of the library and archival communities not only to participate actively in the creation of this new environment by processing and cataloging hidden collections, but also by forging new connections with scholars. In a sense, the program is attempting to answer the call of scholars, such as Anthony Grafton, who have written of the pressing need “to bring librarians and scholars, planners and users together…to fashion what we now need … libraries that can regain their place as craft ateliers of scholarship….”1 The “Cataloging Hidden Special Collections and Archives” program is aiming ambitiously to help design, populate, and build these new “ateliers of scholarship,” hybrid physical and digital spaces requiring recalibrations of relationships between librarians, archivists, and scholars. Now entering its third grant cycle, the “Hidden Collections” program is continuing to provide a novel opportunity to observe and describe approaches to scholarly engagement as currently practiced within a diverse set of U.S. libraries and archives.
    [Show full text]
  • Library Resources Technical Services
    Library Resources & ISSN 0024-2527 Technical Services January 2006 Volume 50, No. 1 The Future of Cataloging Deanna Marcum Utilizing the FRBR Framework in Designing User-Focused Digital Content and Access Systems Olivia M. A. Madison Serials Lauren E. Corbett Becoming an Authority on Authority Control Robert E. Wolverton, Jr. Evidence of Application of the DCRB Core Standard in WorldCat and RLIN M. Winslow Lundy Use of General Preservation Assessments Karen E. K. Brown The Association for Library Collections & Technical Services 50 ❘ 1 Library Resources & Technical Services (ISSN 0024-2527) is published quarterly by the American Library Association, 50 E. Huron St., Chicago, IL Library Resources 60611. It is the official publication of the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services, a division of the American Library Association. Subscription price: to members of the Association & for Library Collections & Technical Services, $27.50 Technical Services per year, included in the membership dues; to nonmembers, $75 per year in U.S., Canada, and Mexico, and $85 per year in other foreign coun- tries. Single copies, $25. Periodical postage paid at Chicago, IL, and at additional mailing offices. ISSN 0024-2527 January 2006 Volume 50, No. 1 POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Library Resources & Technical Services, 50 E. Huron St., Chicago, IL 60611. Business Manager: Charles Editorial 2 Wilt, Executive Director, Association for Library Collections & Technical Services, a division of the American Library Association. Send manuscripts Letter to the Editor 4 to the Editorial Office: Peggy Johnson, Editor, Library Resources & Technical Services, University of Minnesota Libraries, 499 Wilson Library, 309 19th Ave. So., Minneapolis, MN 55455; (612) 624- ARTICLES 2312; fax: (612) 626-9353; e-mail: m-john@umn.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Library Association Mosaic '16 Poster Abstracts
    Medical Library Association Mosaic ’16 Poster Abstracts Abstracts for the poster sessions are reviewed by members of the Medical Library Association Joint Planning Committee (JPC), and designated JPC members make the final selection of posters to be presented at the annual meeting. 1 Poster Number: 1 Time: Sunday, May 15, 2016, 2:00 PM – 2:55 PM Painting the Bigger Picture: A Health Sciences Library’s Participation in the University Library’s Strategic Planning Process Adele Dobry, Life Sciences Librarian, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA; Vessela Ensberg, Data Curation Analyst, Louise M. Darling Biomedical Libary, Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library, Los Angeles, CA; Bethany Myers, AHIP, Research Informationist, Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library, Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library, Los Angeles, CA; Rikke S. Ogawa, AHIP, Team Leader for Research, Instruction, and Collection Services, Louise M. Darling Biomedical Libary, Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library, Los Angeles, CA; Bredny Rodriguez, Health & Life Sciences Informationist, Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library, Louise M. Darling Biomedical Library, Los Angeles, CA Objectives: To facilitate health sciences participation in developing a strategic plan for the university library that aligns with the university's core mission and directs the library's focus over the next five years. Methods: The accelerated strategic planning process was planned for summer 2015, to be completed by fall 2015. The process was facilitated by bright spot, a consulting group. Seven initial areas of focus for the library were determined: Library Value and Visibility, Teaching and Learning, Research Process, Information and Resource Access, Relationships Within the Library, and Space Effectiveness. Each area of focus was assigned to a working group of 6-8 library staff members.
    [Show full text]
  • It's Who Libraries Serve
    It’s Not What Libraries Hold; It’s Who Libraries Serve Seeking a User-Centered Future for Academic Libraries WHITE PAPER | JANUARY 2020 AUTHORS Gwen Evans, MLIS, MA OhioLINK, Executive Director [email protected] Roger C. Schonfeld Ithaka S+R, Director, Libraries, Scholarly Communication, and Museums [email protected] OhioLINK: In service to your users We are excited to share this white paper, “It’s Not be relevant to address our needs as we enable What Libraries Hold; It’s Who Libraries Serve— users in their research, learning, and teaching. Seeking a User-Centered Future for Academic Libraries,” our next step in envisioning library Through this process, our instincts have proven business needs in the context of integrated library correct: As our members’ scopes of service systems. You, our members, are the first to see continue to widen, integrated library systems it. As a preface, I want to explain its genesis, what maintain a narrow focus on the acquisition, it is and isn’t, and why we think it is important management, and delivery of objects. Our needs to you, your institution, and those you serve. have outpaced existing offerings. Access based on a narrow stream of products is no longer We know the business of higher education is enough. We need systems that support the ROI dramatically changing. Libraries are doing much of higher education institutions and provide great more than managing collections to support value to the range of our users, from students to teaching, learning, and innovative research; world-class researchers. Our focus is enabling we are managing services and products, and their collective activities and aspirations in then some—all while higher education is under their ever-expanding methods and forms.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Public Libraries Annual Report for Local Fiscal Year 2018
    TEXAS PUBLIC LIBRARIES ANNUAL REPORT FOR LOCAL FISCAL YEAR 2018 This report is due to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission by April 30, 2019. We strongly urge libraries to report no later than March 31, 2019, to provide time to make any necessary revisions. The Texas State Library and Archives Commission participates in a national public library data collection system. The purpose of this system is to ensure the collection of comparable data in all states. The data is used for the creation of a composite report on the public libraries of the United States and for state-to-state comparisons by the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). This report is also used to accredit Texas public libraries and some data elements are used for that purpose. Accreditation-related questions are marked within the questionnaire (). Definitions are important to ensure comparability of data from different libraries and states. Please refer to the definitions as this survey is completed. Reporting libraries should not leave any items blank. Estimates are important if exact data are not available. For All questions relate to the library's local fiscal year 2018: the year that ended in calendar year 2018 and included January 1, 2018. If there was a change in the fiscal year, please contact LDN staff to update that information. All information must be entered into LibPAS, the online data collection portal at https://tx.countingopinions.com. Texas State Library - Library Development & Networking (LDN) Contacts Valicia Greenwood ([email protected]) Stacey Malek ([email protected]), 512/463-5465, or toll free in Texas 800/252-9386.
    [Show full text]
  • Hi! Good Morning, All, and Thanks for Joining Us. I'm Karl Blumenthal. I'm a Web Archivist for the Internet Archive's “A
    Hi! Good morning, all, and thanks for joining us. I’m Karl Blumenthal. I’m a web archivist for the Internet Archive’s “Archive-It” service and partnership community. And to begin our discussion of of collaborative web archiving I’d like to introduce a little bit of web archiving’s history and how in fact it was collaboration among many different archivists, technologists, and organizations that made the practice what it is today, and indeed how the lessons learned from that early collaboration are just as vital and important to new web archivists and their subjects today as the ever were, which I think Amy and Sam can then demonstrate in even more living color. So before we dig any deeper into this topic we can first just agree on some specific terminology. What we mean when we say “web archiving” is something like this: its the process of collecting, preserving, and ultimately enabling end-user patron access to materials originally published to the web. There are myriad reasons why libraries and archives perform this labor, but in general, you may find: that the materials you have traditionally collected in print, bound and serial forms, have increasingly shifted to a web-based publishing paradigm--that local organization or academic department might no longer send you their materials on paper but instead may share it all online; and indeed your organization itself may need to meet its own records retention mandate by preserving materials only published to its website or even the website itself; increasingly web archiving is a means to preserve and provide enduring access to events and conversations that exist entirely online, like movements with social media presences.
    [Show full text]
  • Newark Public Library System Job Description
    Job Description Bookmobile Driver/Clerk Department: Outreach Services Reports To: Outreach Supervisor Job Classification: Full-Time, Regular, Non-Exempt, Salary Range $11.00-$18.00/hour Job Summary: The Bookmobile Driver/Clerk prepares and drives the Bookmobile to and from public and private schools, daycares, preschools, senior sites, and community stops; provides library service and interacts with personnel at designated sites/facilities; assists with basic maintenance of the bookmobile, and provides clerical support to the Outreach Supervisor. Mission: We will serve our community by providing fun and educational experiences through our customer- focused staff and technology. The Bookmobile Driver/Clerk supports that mission by ensuring that members of the community (who are unable to come into the Library) have access to that same world of ideas and information via bookmobile and outreach services. Personal & Professional Attributes: All Licking County Library employees are expected to exercise sensitivity when working with others, display common sense and good judgment, actively promote the Library to the public, uphold the highest level of confidentiality, honesty and integrity, and represent the Library in a positive and professional manner at all times. Core Technology Competencies: All Licking County Library employees must have a demonstrated working knowledge of computer operations, standard office equipment (copiers, faxes, etc.) and must be able to perform simple searches on the Library’s online catalog. In addition, all employees must be able to prepare basic documents using a word processing program and have the ability to comprehend and explain to others all Library services including those relating to e-media and e-media devices.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching and User Satisfaction in an Academic Chat Reference Consortium
    Communications in Information Literacy Volume 14 Issue 2 Article 2 12-2020 Teaching and User Satisfaction in an Academic Chat Reference Consortium Kathryn Barrett University of Toronto Scarborough Library, University of Toronto Libraries, [email protected] Judith Logan John P. Robarts Library, University of Toronto Libraries, [email protected] Sabina Pagotto Scholars Portal, Ontario Council of University Libraries, [email protected] Amy Greenberg Scholars Portal, Ontario Council of University Libraries, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/comminfolit Let us know how access to this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Barrett, K., Logan, J., Pagotto, S., & Greenberg, A. (2020). Teaching and User Satisfaction in an Academic Chat Reference Consortium. Communications in Information Literacy, 14 (2), 181–204. https://doi.org/ 10.15760/comminfolit.2020.14.2.2 This open access Research Article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). All documents in PDXScholar should meet accessibility standards. If we can make this document more accessible to you, contact our team. Barrett et al.: Teaching and User Satisfaction in an Academic Chat Reference Consortium COMMUNICATIONS IN INFORMATION LITERACY | VOL. 14, NO. 2, 2020 181 Teaching and User Satisfaction in an Academic Chat Reference Consortium Kathryn Barrett, University of Toronto Judith Logan, University of Toronto Sabina Pagotto, Ontario Council of University Libraries Amy Greenberg, Ontario Council of University Libraries Abstract This study investigated 299 chat reference interactions from an academic library consortium for instances of teaching and compared these against other characteristics of the chat, such as question content, staff type, user status, user satisfaction, institutional affiliation, length, and shift busyness.
    [Show full text]
  • Criteria for Eligibility
    Public Library Determination – Eligible Public Library Determination – Eligible Academic Library Determination – Eligible Library Consortium Determination – Eligible Library Kiosk Determination – Eligible Bookmobile/Outreach Vehicle Determination The Kentucky Department for Libraries & Archives makes determination of “public library”; “eligible public library”; “eligible academic library”; “eligible library consortium”; “eligible library kiosk” and “eligible library bookmobile/outreach vehicle” status for LSTA, E-rate, state aid and other purposes based upon the following criteria. In case of doubt, the commissioner or his designates has final authority to issue such a determination. Determination Criteria: 1) A "Public Library" provides free access to all residents of a county, district, or region, without discrimination. It also meets the following minimum criteria: 1(a) the library is established under one of following statutory sections: KRS 65.182, KRS 65.210, KRS 65.810, KRS 67.715, KRS 173.010, KRS 173.310, KRS 173.470, or KRS 173.710. 1(b) the library has an organized collection of printed or other library materials, or a combination thereof; 1(c) the library has paid, trained staff; 1(d) the library has an established schedule during which services of the staff are available to the public; 1(e) the library has the facilities necessary to support such a collection, staff, and schedule; 1(f) the library is supported in whole or in part with public funds. 2) An “Eligible Public Library” is an entity which: 2(a) meets the definition
    [Show full text]
  • Collective Collection Building and DDA
    Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Charleston Library Conference Collective Collection Building and DDA Kerry Scott University of California, Santa Cruz, [email protected] Jim Dooley University of California, Merced, [email protected] Martha Hruska University of California, San Diego, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/charleston Part of the Library and Information Science Commons An indexed, print copy of the Proceedings is also available for purchase at: http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/series/charleston. You may also be interested in the new series, Charleston Insights in Library, Archival, and Information Sciences. Find out more at: http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/series/charleston-insights-library-archival- and-information-sciences. Kerry Scott, Jim Dooley, and Martha Hruska, "Collective Collection Building and DDA" (2013). Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284315306 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. Collective Collection Building and DDA Kerry Scott, Head, Research Support Services, University of California, Santa Cruz Jim Dooley, Head of Collection Services, University of California, Merced Martha Hruska, Associate University Librarian, Collection Services, University of California, San Diego Abstract Many librarians have advocated for the use of demand-driven acquisition (DDA) as an important money- saving approach
    [Show full text]