Jodi Poe
Jacksonville State University, USA 0DU\%HYLV
Jacksonville State University, USA -RKQ%DXHU*UDKDP Jacksonville State University, USA
%HWKDQ\/DWKDP
Jacksonville State University, USA .LPEHUO\:6WHYHQV Jacksonville State University, USA
Copyright © 2008, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
ABSTRACT
0DQDJHPHQWRIHOHFWURQLFUHVRXUFHVLVDWLPHFRQVXPLQJDQGDWWLPHVDGLI¿FXOWSURFHVV$OWKRXJKWKH management of electronic resources is often seen as a strictly technical services endeavor, it should be considered a multifaceted process requiring all areas of the library. This chapter will provide a detailed DFFRXQWRIKRZRQHOLEUDU\KDQGOHVWKHHOHFWURQLFUHVRXUFHVPDQDJHPHQWZRUNÀRZLQDFROODERUDWLYH effort. It will be especially helpful for libraries working with a limited staff and resources and librar- ies trying to foster a more collaborative relationship between technical services and public services.
7KHREMHFWLYHDQGPLVVLRQRIWKHFKDSWHULVWRSUHVHQWVXFFHVVIXOOLEUDU\HOHFWURQLFUHVRXUFHVZRUNÀRZ concepts in a straightforward and realistic approach. It aims to provide useful information on current ZRUNÀRZDSSOLFDWLRQVSURFHGXUHVDQGLGHDVIURPSUDFWLFLQJOLEUDU\SURIHVVLRQDOVDW-DFNVRQYLOOH6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\-68WKDWZLOOFRQWULEXWHWRWKHOLWHUDWXUHDQGDUHDRIHOHFWURQLFUHVRXUFHVPDQDJHPHQW7KLV FKDSWHUZLOOSURYLGHFRQVLGHUDWLRQVIRUZRUNÀRZHQKDQFHPHQWVDQGGHWDLOWKHDGYDQWDJHVRIFHQWUDOL]HG ZRUNÀRZVDQGFROODERUDWLRQEHWZHHQXQLWV
6KDULQJWKH$OEDWURVVRI(5HVRXUFHV0DQDJHPHQW:RUNÀRZ
INTRODUCTION
“Water, water every where And all the boards did shrink;
Water, water every where,
Nor any drop to drink” (Coleridge, 1798).
Nowhere in the library world do these famous words from “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”
ring through clearer than in the management of electronic resources. As more and more of our resources move to an electronic environment, the deeper we get into trying to manage them. They are indeed all around us, and a lot of the time, we even begin to drown in them. However, if a library uses a collaborative effort, these resources will not take over the staff.
)XQGDPHQWDOFKDQJHVLQZRUNÀRZVIRUOLEUDU\
technical services procedures were set in motion with the introduction of integrated library sys- tems in the 1980’s. At that time, a rethinking of WUDGLWLRQDOZRUNÀRZVZDVQHHGHGLQRUGHUWRWDNH advantage of the tracking mechanisms offered by automation. For instance, moving tasks tradition- ally assigned to the cataloging and processing XQLWVVXFKDVWKHLGHQWL¿FDWLRQRIELEOLRJUDSKLF records, to the initial site of order in the acquisi- tions department allowed for better tracking. In a 1994 survey, Bevis and McAbee found that,
“Sixty-nine percent of the responding libraries stated that there had been or was a planned reor- ganization of nonprofessional staff because of … integration, and 81% reported that there had been a shift in nonprofessional tasks” (p. 36).
$V ZRUNÀRZV DQG SURFHVV DQDO\VLV HYROYHG to accommodate new technologies, the resources that these technologies were tracking were also evolving. E-resources, which in the not so distant past were anomalies are now commonplace pur- chases, and have easily been incorporated into HVWDEOLVKHGZRUNÀRZSURFHGXUHV0RUHRYHUWKH increasing number of resources moving to an electronic format, whether completely or partially forced librarianship to create an entirely new job:
the electronic resources librarian. JSU is aware RIWKHQHHGWR¿OOWKLVSRVLWLRQZKLFKFDQEHVHHQ in the fact that two of the authors of this chapter have electronic resources in their titles. The two electronic resources positions at JSU are classi-
¿HGLQWHFKQLFDOVHUYLFHVGXHWRRWKHUHOHPHQWV of the job. However, according to Fisher (2003), a majority of electronic resources librarian job descriptions include public service characteristics.
Fisher (2003) conducted a study of job postings for electronic resources librarians which appeared in American Libraries during a 17 year period. The main component centered on reference services, instead of management. Of the 23 most cited characteristics, management/coordination was ninth on the list. However, Bednarek-Michalska (2002) developed a job description for electronic resources librarians that calls for this position to be located in the acquisitions department and notes the responsibilities of acquiring and managing electronic resources. The varying job descriptions and requirements attest that managing electronic resources should be more of a collaborative effort between technical services and public services librarians.
The time requirements for managing electronic UHVRXUFHVIRUFHVZRUNÀRZFKDQJHV6RPHRIWKH tasks involved in the process may very well be the responsibility of the paraprofessional staff.
Duranceau and Hepfer (2002) discovered this WUHQGLQWKHLUVXUYH\UHODWHGWRVWDI¿QJLVVXHVDQG electronic resource management. JSU’s Hous- ton Cole Library (HCL) distributes some of the managerial tasks to the paraprofessional staff as well. This frees up the time for the librarians to complete other requirements in the process.
LITERATURE REVIEW
While there are a number of articles available regarding managing electronic resources, the PDMRULW\ RI WKHVH DUWLFOHV GHDO ZLWK VSHFL¿F maintenance procedures for databases, e-jour-
73 6KDULQJWKH$OEDWURVVRI(5HVRXUFHV0DQDJHPHQW:RUNÀRZ
nals, e-books, and so forth. Additionally, there are several articles that provide insight into how VSHFL¿F GHSDUWPHQWV DFTXLVLWLRQV FDWDORJLQJ etc.) in libraries manage these resources. Unfor- tunately, there are few publications detailing the HQWLUHZRUNÀRZSURFHVVIURPVWDUWWR¿QLVK-RDQ Conger (2004) produced an article that illustrates the importance of collaboration throughout the entire electronic resource management process from management to customer service. Begin- ning with management, she details how a library should employ a collaborative decision-making process that includes input from key personnel, including the administration, in order to have the decisions more widely accepted and have the staff buy into the decisions. This type of environment will lead to more trust between the staff and the decision-makers. Conger ends with the need to use a collaborative effort with customer service, or public services librarians, to ensure the users have a good experience with the library and its resources. Richard Jasper (2002) has also produced an article that touches on the collaborative efforts by one academic library in managing electronic publications. This effort involves a number of librarians from various areas and departments in the library. The author sums up the basic necessity for the collaborative effort by stating:
“A collaborative, team-approach to managing electronic publications helps ensure that the nec- essary skills are brought to bear on the tasks at hand” (p. 356). He provides details for what each person does in the process and concludes with a poignant statement:
1RZ WKDW OLEUDULHV DUH SURYLGLQJ DFFHVV WR literally thousands of electronic resources, the likelihood of a single librarian or a single library department being able to manage the entire process of managing online resources avail- able seems very small. The key to successfully managing electronic resources is to identify a collaborative process in which key players know their respective roles and responsibilities, have some idea of how to back each other up, and
know where to turn when the “next question”
that needs to be addressed in solving an access problem touches on an area outside of his or her expertise (p. 360).
There are a number of publications that discuss VSHFL¿FZRUNÀRZVDQGSURFHVVHV(OOHQ)LQQLH Duranceau (1998) details the differences in the ZRUNÀRZVIRUSULQWDQGHOHFWURQLFMRXUQDOVDWWKH MIT libraries. She provides insights into the col- laborative approach the library staff undertook and the position they created to cover all of the requirements of electronic journals. Although the article primarily deals with acquisitions-re- ODWHGZRUNÀRZWKHLGHDVH[SUHVVHGFDQEHHDVLO\
translated to other areas of the library. Duranceau states: “Web-based serials require an entirely new ZRUNÀRZRQHWKDWLVQRORQJHUDVHULHVRIOLQHDU and standardized steps, but is rather a complex, cyclical, labor-intensive, variable, and team-based SURFHVV S ´ 7KLV LV WUXH IRU WKH ZRUNÀRZ involved with all electronic resources and is the SULQFLSOH EHKLQG WKH ZRUNÀRZ LQFRUSRUDWHG DW HCL. Another author, Kristin Gerhand (1998), continues this thread by providing insights into Iowa State University’s process of managing elec- tronic resources. Iowa State created an electronic resources coordinator position that is responsible for all aspects of electronic resource management.
While the process is managed by one person, this person collaborates with all other areas of the library to ensure a quality collection with opti- mum access and constant communications of all things related to electronic resources. The author states, “The unpredictability of ERs [electronic resources] also prevents us from writing a simple, RQHVL]H¿WVDOOSURFHGXUHIRUKDQGOLQJWKHP´S 282). HCL believes that is true as well, which is the reason there is constant communication between all parties involved. Gerhard (1998) also states:
“The fact that ER [electronic resource] manage- ment crosses not only departmental but divisional lines complicates the situation… ” (p. 282).
Since the management of electronic resources begins with acquisitions, crosses over to cata-
6KDULQJWKH$OEDWURVVRI(5HVRXUFHV0DQDJHPHQW:RUNÀRZ
loging, and trickles down to the public services OLEUDULDQV WKLV RQH VWDWHPHQW FOHDUO\ LGHQWL¿HV why a collaborative effort must be used when dealing with these resources. Furthermore, Peggy Johnson (2004) discusses the selection process and suggests that it should not be “… as linear as a form or checklist implies. Decisions require continuing interaction” (p. 211). She suggests that a collaborative effort should be incorporated dur- ing the review process. Conger (2004) also agrees with this type of collaboration. Johnson expands on this idea by providing an example of a com- mittee consisting of people from each area of the library. This committee would allow each person to present their expertise from the various areas of the library, which will help the library select the best resources. Duranceau (1998) discusses this type of committee at MIT. The Networked Elec- tronic Resources Discussion Group (NERD) was established to assist with purchasing decisions.
While Duranceau does not indicate any negatives with this group effort, Johnson does not imply that this collaboration will work without problems.
Instead, she describes some possible drawbacks:
“bureaucratization” (p. 212) of the selection process, cumbersome work due to the size of the committee, complicated issues over consortium deals, and issues of individuals feeling left out of the process or that their opinions do not matter. It is important to note some of these since they may DSSHDULQRWKHUDUHDVRIFROODERUDWLYHZRUNÀRZV Carol Montgomery (2004) demonstrates the nec- HVVDU\ ZRUNÀRZ FKDQJHV IRU HDFK GHSDUWPHQW in the library when the W. W. Hagerty Library at Drexel University converted to an electronic journal collection. Although her article does not discuss a collaborative approach, it does illustrate KRZZRUNÀRZVDUHFKDQJLQJDQGUHLWHUDWHVKRZ Drexel, like most universities, created a position VSHFL¿FDOO\IRUHOHFWURQLFUHVRXUFHV
7KHUHDUHVRPHDUWLFOHVWKDWGLVFXVVVSHFL¿F collaboration efforts but not the entire manage- ment process. John Dupuis and Patti Ryan (2002) provide insight into the collaborative efforts of two
public services librarians in managing electronic resources. These efforts involve putting aside their own subject specialties and compromising to develop the best collection for the library. Even though this article does not discuss the entire process for managing these resources, it provides good suggestions on how a small staff can work together to produce excellent results. The authors present methods used at York University to over- come the challenges of both limited staff and time and detail how the collaborative effort yielded positive results. Jeannette Ho (2005) describes how one academic library uses an integrated, Web-based form to encourage a collaborative environment for electronic resource maintenance.
The integrated library system in place at Texas A&M University Libraries includes the form as part of the Web-based catalog, which is accessible to all users. Users, including the public services librarians, can submit requests that are routed to the technical services librarians indicating correc- tions or enhancements for the library’s catalog and :HEVLWH:KLOHWKLVDUWLFOHGRHVQRWVSHFL¿FDOO\
discuss collaboration starting at the beginning of the process, it does offer a good suggestion on beginning the collaborative effort.
There are a number of articles that do not ad- dress the management of electronic resources, but do discuss collaborative efforts. Naomi R.
Sutherland and Valarie P. Adams (2004) pro- duced such an article in which they provide good examples and reasons for cooperation between public services and technical services librarians by detailing their experiences at the University of Tennessee-Chattanooga. The authors discuss how the cooperation between the two areas led to a better understanding of each area: public services librarians understood the reasons for following the cataloging rules and the technical services librarians understood why there was a QHHGWREHÀH[LEOHZLWKVRPHRIWKHORFDOFDWDORJ- ing practices. The cooperation that they detail will ensure a quality catalog that will also be easy to use and understand. In the end, Sutherland and
75 6KDULQJWKH$OEDWURVVRI(5HVRXUFHV0DQDJHPHQW:RUNÀRZ
Adams (2004) summarize the cooperation concept with one statement: “the key lies in regular com- munication and in interaction with colleagues in a variety of settings” (p. 14).
BACKGROUND
JSU is a medium-sized, public comprehensive uni- versity offering both undergraduate and graduate programs. It was founded in 1883 as Jacksonville State Normal School. Its purpose in 1883 was to provide a preparatory education for citizens of a rural Alabama county and the surrounding areas. The mission and the student population of the university have changed over time. The cur- rent enrollment is approximately 9,000 students.
The university hosts students from all over the United States and from almost every corner of the globe. Its institutional borders have expanded.
It is no longer bound to the twelve acres of land it originally sat on—it has grown beyond actual physical space.
This is also true for HCL. The library’s collec- tion has grown beyond its physical space, too. It has expanded from books, journals, newspapers, and microforms to include electronic resources such as CD-ROMs, databases, Websites, e-jour- nals, and e-books.
ORGANIZATION
The library is staffed with fourteen professional and nineteen paraprofessional employees and has a collection of over 650,000 titles. The library’s organizational chart is illustrated in Figure 1.
Library public services are scattered through- out the library, a thirteen-story building divided into eight subject divisions managed by subject specialist librarians. Each public service librarian is responsible for reference, collection mainte- nance and development, supervision of student employees, departmental liaison activities, and instruction for the respective subjects on their ÀRRU 8VHU VHUYLFHV LH FLUFXODWLRQ ,// DQG reserves) are centralized in the lobby of the build- ing. A centralized reference desk is found on the VHFRQGÀRRU
Library technical services are centralized in the basement of the library. Technical Services consist of six librarians and seven paraprofession- als. Technical service librarians are responsible for acquisitions, collection development, government documents, cataloging, and processing. In addi- tion to the aforementioned professional duties, all librarians are required to participate in scholarly and service activities.
University Librarian
Head of Public Services
Head of Technical Services
User Services Subject Specialist Serials/Acquisitions
Circulation Reserves
Government Documents
Electronic
Resources/DE Cataloging
AV Systems
)LJXUH+RXVWRQ&ROH/LEUDU\RUJDQL]DWLRQDOFKDUW
6KDULQJWKH$OEDWURVVRI(5HVRXUFHV0DQDJHPHQW:RUNÀRZ
PUBLIC SERVICES/TECHNICAL SERVICES COLLABORATION
This explosion of electronic resources has created a new workload requirement: management. Man- agement of electronic resources is a time-consum- LQJDQGDWWLPHVDGLI¿FXOWSURFHVV$OWKRXJK the management of electronic resources is often seen as a strictly technical services endeavor, it should been considered a multi-faceted process requiring all areas of the library. Bergman (2005) IRXQGWKDWWKHZRUNÀRZVXUURXQGLQJPDQDJLQJ HOHFWURQLFUHVRXUFHVGRHVQRW¿WLQWRDQHDWSDFN- age belonging entirely to the realm of technical services librarians or public services librarians.
7KHZRUNÀRZFXUUHQWO\LQSODFHDW-68LVMXVWVXFK a practice. The management of electronic resource ZRUNÀRZLVDFROODERUDWLYHHIIRUWEHWZHHQSXEOLF service and technical service librarians. At JSU, the public services librarians collaborate with the technical services librarians in order to provide a substantial collection of electronic resources and to make this collection available to the users as quickly as possible. It is this collaboration that PDNHVWKHZRUNÀRZLQLPLWDEOH7KHFROODERUD- tive effort begins with the review process, both trial reviews of databases, e-journals, and so forth and reviews of freely accessible materials such as Websites, extends through the acquisi- tions, administration, cataloging/bibliographic control, marketing, training, and ends with the assessment of the resources. No matter what ZRUNÀRZDOLEUDU\XVHVIRUHOHFWURQLFUHVRXUFHV good communication at each stage in the process is paramount since there is no physical trail of ZKHUHWKHLWHPLVLQWKHZRUNÀRZXQWLOLWJHWV to the bibliographic control stage (Mitchell &
Surratt, 2005).
Despite the physical division between “techni- cal” and “public” services in the library, manag- ing electronic resources is one of many shared responsibilities. The mission of the HCL is to provide information services and bibliographic resources to support the scholarly and informa-
tional needs of the university community. To meet user expectations better, the public service librarians’ responsibilities at JSU have evolved to include four major professional areas. All areas are both interchangeable with and interconnected to one another. For example, effective reference is impossible without a sound collection and vice versa. The four areas are: (1) reference, (2) collection management and development of their respective subject areas, (3) instruction, and (4) liaison activities. Liaison activities include a structured liaison partnership between univer- sity teaching faculty and library faculty which includes appointment letters, a list serve, and formal communications between librarians and departmental liaisons. An informal relationship between librarians and teaching faculty is also encouraged and expected as part of their liaison activities job responsibilities.
Additionally, these four professional areas for the public service librarians are dependent on and mirror the four technical services profes- sional responsibilities to: (1) Provide the correct bibliographic data and access points; (2) order, pay, and process the materials requested; (3) deliver or notify the public services librarians of new information sources; and (4) process non- library faculty request and inform them of new information sources. (Figure 2)
IDENTIFICATION OF RESOURCES The initial process in any library materials acqui- VLWLRQSURFHGXUHEHJLQVZLWKWKHLGHQWL¿FDWLRQRI resources. All resources, regardless of format, are discovered through similar means: professional review selection tools such as &KRLFH or Library Journal, print or electronic advertisements, fac- ulty requests, telephone marketers, professional recommendations, and sales visits. Although the usual selection criteria that are applied to print materials such as scope, relevancy, price, and so forth, should also be applied to the selection of
77 6KDULQJWKH$OEDWURVVRI(5HVRXUFHV0DQDJHPHQW:RUNÀRZ
electronic books, journals, and databases, there are additional factors that should be considered due to the nature of the electronic format. Some, but not all of these are: the level of ownership (is the resource a subscription purchase with renewal obligations or will the library have perpetual ac- cess rights); annual maintenance fees, platform or access fees; licensing agreements; levels of publisher technical support; levels of in-house technical support; vendor reliability for content integrity; and possible subscription cancellation opportunities for print resources.
REVIEWING ELECTRONIC RESOURCES
At HCL, the management of electronic resources EHJLQVLQWKHWHFKQLFDOVHUYLFHVDUHDVSHFL¿FDOO\
acquisitions, where the majority of the resources in the collection begin their journey. A trial review of an electronic resource generally begins the ZRUNÀRZSURFHVV)RUPRUHFRVWO\SURGXFWVWKDW PD\UHTXLUHPXOWL\HDU¿VFDOFRPPLWPHQWVVXFK
as publisher or aggregator database, or publisher journal packages, it is highly recommended that a preview or trial be requested from the vendor.
In some instances, the vendor will initiate the trial themselves. An in-house review of an elec- tronic resource is a relatively simple process to accommodate, without the consideration of the physical items to track and return if the product is not accepted. Whether the HCL staff requested a trial or the vendor initiated the trail, the review process normally takes a month, but sometimes it can be longer.
Coordination of the responsibilities for monitoring current database trials is essential for HI¿FLHQF\DQGRUJDQL]DWLRQ$ZHOOHVWDEOLVKHG ZRUNÀRZSDWWHUQIRUWKLVSURFHGXUHZLOOHQVXUH that all trials are given equal attention. If the li- EUDU\KDVDQLQGLYLGXDOVSHFL¿FDOO\UHVSRQVLEOHIRU maintaining electronic resources in the library’s catalog, active coordination between this person and the acquisitions unit is an effective way to maintain reliable trial information. At HCL, the distance education/electronic resources man- ager (DEERM) is responsible for this part of the ZRUNÀRZ
2. Collection Management/
Acquisitions
4. Liaison/
University Ordering 1. Reference/
Bibliographic Control
3. Instruction/
Delivering Resources Library Technical and
PublicService Collaboration )LJXUH/LEUDU\FROODERUDWLRQ