> Another item to consider is whether you need the print
> check-in for auditing purposes.  Some universities will require it whether it
> makes sense for you to do so or not.

The auditing objection is one that makes a lot of sense on its face, but
then kind of falls apart upon closer examination.

If you're a typical academic library, you have many more online
subscriptions than print ones.  Any auditing argument that applies to your
print subscriptions will apply equally to your online ones -- but if you
subscribe to, say, 1,000 print journals and 10,000 online journals, there's
no possible way to give every subscribed title the level of oversight that
you can give to your print titles.  So if you have auditors who insist on
print check-in and claiming, you need to ask them what they'd like you to do
about the online titles -- surely those should be checked in and claimed as
well.  But that's impossible without a massive increase in staff.

For what it's worth, I've now worked in two libraries that were audited.  In
one of them, we had eliminated check-in and claiming almost entirely prior
to the audit, and in the other we had eliminated those processes
substantially but not entirely.  In neither case did the auditor raise any
concerns about our procedures.

--
Rick Anderson
Assoc. Dir. for Scholarly Resources & Collections
Marriott Library
Univ. of Utah
rick.anderson@utah.edu
(801) 721-1687