1 / 26

Current State of Library Organizations in Dealing with E-Resources

Current State of Library Organizations in Dealing with E-Resources. Impact of E-Resources North Carolina Serials Conference April 16, 2004. Presented by Janet L. Flowers Head of Acquisitions. Academic Affairs Library University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Janet_Flowers@unc.edu. Themes.

bcovin
Download Presentation

Current State of Library Organizations in Dealing with E-Resources

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Current State of Library Organizations in Dealing with E-Resources Impact of E-Resources North Carolina Serials Conference April 16, 2004

  2. Presented by Janet L. Flowers Head of Acquisitions Academic Affairs Library University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Janet_Flowers@unc.edu

  3. Themes • Natural area for serials realm • Focus upon provision of intellectual content • Technical now under better control than public presentation and training

  4. Organization • Requires a cast of thousands! • Very time-consuming • Absorbed by existing staff in their existing but redefined positions mainly

  5. Organization • Worked to death but very effective!! • Some aspects of handling e-resources better done by experts (e.g., acquisitions, cataloging) • Only one with a separate department for e-resources (a public library) • Created a Department of Electronic Resources and Services • In January 2004!

  6. Organization • Approaches • Evolutionary • Improvisational • Muddling • Experimental • Based upon existing staff : skills and interests

  7. Organization • Division of Responsibilities: Pros and Cons of Consolidated vs. Decentralized

  8. ConsolidationPros • Continuity and Consistency

  9. Consolidation Cons • Workload too much for one person • Delays if relying upon one person • So much reliance upon one person problematic for communication • One case where staff member had to access email while on medical leave to keep processes going

  10. Decentralization Pros • Use of specialized skills • Spreads workload around • Better understanding among all staff regarding issues • Better decision-making regarding selection and budgetary choices because of greater understanding

  11. Decentralization Cons • Possibility of miscommunication • Need for trust among parties regarding work done and respect for

  12. Factors Affecting Way Organizations Evolved • Retirements!—either happened or waiting for! • New hires—if only! • Maturing of process • Codification of processes • Move cautiously • Much consensus and librarian involvement in decision making

  13. Factors Affecting Way Organizations Evolved • Unions • Slow down needed changes • Inhibits flexibility • Local staff in place • Their skills • Their interests • Library Directors!! • Their interest in e-resources!! • Their style regarding change

  14. Needs • More technical help • Catch up on making free e-resources available • Help with maintenance issues • Renewals • Broken Links • Package Deal

  15. Needs • Trainers to help public • Removal of non e-resource related duties from those who are doing add on work

  16. Future Directions • E-resources themselves • Government documents • Increasing amounts in this format • Less print available and collected

  17. Future Directions • Organizational Responses to e-resources • Older librarians becoming more adept at using technology • Serials Units refocused from print to electronic • Traditional technical services (i.e., print) roles will be outsourced

  18. Future Directions • In house library staff will focus on providing access to digital content • Move from checkin • Maintenance activities (url links, list checking, reconciliation) • Job descriptions will need to be rewritten

  19. FutureDirections • More prominent role in outreach to public regarding use of e-resources • Vast changes have outstripped patrons' ability to comprehend and navigate • More BI packages (one place had cut back on reference librarians!)

  20. Future Directions • Serials Librarians more involved in assessment and evaluation of online resources prior to purchase decision • Will replace retiring librarians with those knowing new technologies

  21. Future Directions • Budget Impact • Smaller libraries moving more to consortial • Fewer multi-year contracts • More centralization of state-wide resources • Possibly more cancellation of big deal packages • Less duplication of print and online • Cancellation of print due to space crunches

  22. Conclusion: My Thoughts • Librarians have coped well with the ambiguity and the huge volume. • Until the volume flips towards more digital than print, we still must contend with a hybrid environment.

  23. Conclusion: My Thoughts • Rate of change will vary depending upon a number of factors • Size and nature of library's print collections • Funding • Library Directors -especially new ones • Patron Demands • Staffing (size and abilities) • Changes in the Academy

  24. Crystal Ball • Yet more changes • Continuing high level of work • Need for the expertise and energy of serials librarians to meet the challenges

  25. Sea Change • In the way we do business • In the way we provide information • In who does what

  26. Presented by Janet L. Flowers Head of Acquisitions Academic Affairs Library University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Janet_Flowers@unc.edu

More Related