Monday, July 8, 2002, 4:01:40 PM, you wrote: >> In terms of ILL versus rush purchase of monographs, yes, a lot of collection >> development and acquisitions is based on speculative use ... but that's >> where skill, knowledge of collections and communities of users creates an >> indefinable factor which cannot be quantitatively or qualitatively expressed. RA> I'm not suggesting that patron requests should entirely take the place of RA> librarian-led collection development. But I do think that they could RA> largely take the place of ILL with nothing but beneficial results. I'm glad there is another realist around who isn't afraid to experiment with new ideas. Of course collection development by knowledgable professionals is important. However, much of what we do in collection development is filling in the cracks between what various departments order. We who are working with specific academic departments also spend significant chunks trying to filling in the cracks between the highly specialized interests of Professors X, Y, and Z. I work with faculty members in chemistry and physics, and there are several who could each spend the entire budget for the department with their particular specialized requests. >> Some libraries are >> not allowed have instutional credit cards which makes dealing with places >> like B&N.com or Amazon.com next-to-impossible -- nor do those vendors have >> everything in print immediately available, and items which are >> out-of-print >> or which are relatively rare because of short publication runs are also >> difficult to get shipped rush. Rather than relying on a vendor's >> concept of >> 'rush' or on a true inability to be able to produce a desired item in a >> short time, ILL is one sure way of getting what the patron wants in as >> speedily as possible. There are no universal answers for all libraries, or for all materials. However, many libraries do have those options, and many of the books being requested on ILL are available quickly from either a mass market outfit, one of the OP dealer networks, or direct from the publisher. (My wife just retired from being a librarian with a Fortune 50 high tech company, and I can assure you that most publishers will FedEx you a book overnight if you phone them and give them a credit card number. Yes, in her case cost was often no object, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't at least consider all the options, and use the tools that are appropriate for each situation.) RA> Let me share with you the proposal I've submitted to the library RA> administration here at Nevada: Please let us know how it goes. RA> When a patron makes an ILL request, instead of immediately pursuing a loan RA> from another institution, we will forward that request to Acquisitions. If RA> a copy can be purchased immediately -- either from a standard new-book RA> vendor or an out-of-print dealer -- we will buy it on a rush/notify basis. Excellent. We should all do that. (And, yes, I'd have limits, since there will always be those of us who worry about the "what if's" of the world.) RA> If a copy is not commercially available, we will send the request back to RA> ILL and follow the usual ILL procedure. In my experience on both sides of RA> the library-vendor relationship, it is usually possible to get a book _very_ RA> quickly -- assuming you're willing to pay for speed. This often means going RA> straight to the publisher for in-print titles. Absolutely, as I noted above. RA> PRO RA> 1. This will get most requested books to patrons faster, and they'll be able RA> to check them out for the standard circulation period instead of the more RA> restrictive ILL loan period. This is a big plus. In addition, you'll have the book in the collection permanently. If one person wanted it, that increases the odds that another one will want it too. RA> CON RA> 1. This will slow down the processing of ILL requests, since they'll be RA> diverted to Acquisitions before being processed. (Our ILL manager thinks the RA> delay would probably be about 24 hours, though I think we could make it RA> shorter; also, it should dramatically reduce the number of ILL requests we RA> end up handling.) Not a problem. Most of the time taken up with obtaining books isn't the day or two of processing, it is the shipping time (yes, except for those who have a good courier system, and the item is available in the courier network of libraries) RA> 2. We would end up acquiring books that are of little interest to anyone RA> other than the individual requestor. (On the other hand, you could argue RA> that we're already acquiring books that are of interest to no one at all.) As noted above, I'll bet that half of the orders you ever get from faculty are of interest to no one except the requester. Yes, a few will get assigned for class or end up on syllabi or bibliographies, but not many. RA> It occurs to me that we're now edging away from the scope of SERIALST, but I RA> think the principle we're discussing has broad applicability to both RA> monographs and serials. Yes, the principles are the same. And, just to keep it closer to topic, I'll bet that for those faculty who want an entire issue, or a number of articles from an issue, you might get some of those from a back-issue dealer for less money and faster than you could get it on ILL. This wouldn't work for most article requests, but we all see those where someone wants a "theme issue" or just multiple articles from an issue. Of course you could then get into the worries about whether or not you'd have to keep the single issue so obtained, which could take a few committees months to worry over. Personally, for a single issue, I'd give it to the patron, the same as I would the photocopies of the articles if obtained through traditional means. Personally, I think that "interlibrary loan" (or "document delivery", or whatever other trendy name you wish) is all a part of "collection development" or "resource acquisition" or other new name of your choice. cheers dan -- Dan Lester, Data Wrangler dan@RiverOfData.com 208-283-7711 3577 East Pecan, Boise, Idaho 83716-7115 USA www.riverofdata.com www.gailndan.com Stop Global Whining!
