1 / 75

SUSHI and COUNTER

SUSHI and COUNTER. Understanding the Data Around Us: Gathering and Analyzing Usage Data NISO Usage Data Forum Dallas, TX November 1, 2007 Oliver Pesch EBSCO Information Services opesch@ebsco.com. Overview. Background Update on COUNTER SUSHI Looking ahead. Overview. Background

virginie-michel
Download Presentation

SUSHI and COUNTER

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. SUSHI and COUNTER Understanding the Data Around Us: Gathering and Analyzing Usage Data NISO Usage Data Forum Dallas, TXNovember 1, 2007Oliver PeschEBSCO Information Services opesch@ebsco.com

  2. Overview • Background • Update on COUNTER • SUSHI • Looking ahead

  3. Overview • Background • Update on COUNTER • SUSHI • Looking ahead

  4. Usage Statistics • Usage data importance grows with e-collections • Collection management • Budget management

  5. Usage Statistics • Usage data importance grows with e-collections • Collection management • Budget management • Credibility and consistency… • Different vendors using different terminology • Inconsistencies in processing lead to over counting • Formatting differences make comparison challenging

  6. Usage Statistics • Usage data importance grows with e-collections • Collection management • Budget management • Credibility and consistency… • Different vendors using different terminology • Inconsistencies in processing lead to over counting • Formatting differences make comparison challenging …COUNTER…

  7. Usage Statistics • Usage data importance grows with e-collections • Collection management • Budget management • Credibility and consistency… • Different vendors using different terminology • Inconsistencies in processing lead to over counting • Formatting difference comparison challenging • Consolidation and meaningful reporting… • Many vendors and reports to process • Collection-level views needed …COUNTER…

  8. Usage Statistics • Usage data importance grows with e-collections • Collection management • Budget management • Credibility and consistency… • Different vendors using different terminology • Inconsistencies in processing lead to over counting • Formatting difference comparison challenging • Consolidation and meaningful reporting • Many vendors and reports to process • Collection-level views needed …COUNTER… …Usage Consolidation tools (ERM)…

  9. Usage Statistics • Usage data importance grows with e-collections • Collection management • Budget management • Credibility and consistency… • Different vendors using different terminology • Inconsistencies in processing lead to over counting • Formatting difference comparison challenging • Consolidation and meaningful reporting… • Many vendors and reports to process • Collection-level views needed • Retrieving and processing… • Obtaining reports is time consuming • Formatting and other adjustments still needed …COUNTER… …Usage Consolidation tools (ERM)…

  10. Usage Statistics • Usage data importance grows with e-collections • Collection management • Budget management • Credibility and consistency… • Different vendors using different terminology • Inconsistencies in processing lead to over counting • Formatting difference comparison challenging • Consolidation and meaningful reporting… • Many vendors and reports to process • Collection-level views needed • Retrieving and processing… • Obtaining reports is time consuming • Formatting and other adjustments still needed …COUNTER… …Usage Consolidation tools (ERM)… …SUSHI…

  11. Overview • Background • Update on COUNTER • SUSHI • Looking ahead

  12. Update on COUNTER Peter Shepherd Director COUNTER October 2007

  13. Background • Understanding usage • Different approaches • Role of usage statistics • Usage statistics • Should enlighten rather than obscure • Should be practical • Should be reliable • Are only part of the story • Should be used in context • COUNTER • Achievements • Current status • Future challenges

  14. So how are we getting there? • ICOLC Guidelines for statistical measurement of usage of web-based information resources • National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS) Electronic access and use-related measures • NISO – Z39.7 (Library Statistics) • ISO – 2789 (library statistics) and 11563 (library performance measures) • MESUR – investigate metrics derived from the network-based usage of scholarly information • COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of NeTworked Electronic Resources)

  15. Why COUNTER? • Goal: credible, compatible, consistent publisher/vendor-generated statistics for the global information community • Libraries and consortia need online usage statistics • To assess the value of different online products/services • To support collection development • To plan infrastructure • Publishers need online usage statistics • To experiment with new pricing models • To assess the relative importance of the different channels by which information reaches the market • To provide editorial support • To plan infrastructure

  16. COUNTER Codes of Practice • Definitions of terms used • Specifications for Usage Reports • What they should include • What they should look like • How and when they should be delivered • Data processing guidelines • Auditing • Compliance

  17. COUNTER: current Codes of Practice 1) Journals and databases • Release 1 Code of Practice launched January 2003 • Release 2 published April 2005 replacing Release 1 in January 2006 • Now a widely adopted standard by publishers and librarians • 70 vendors now compliant • 10,000+ journals now covered • Librarians use it in collection development decisions • Publishers use it in marketing to prove ‘value’

  18. COUNTER: current Codes of Practice 2) Books and reference works • Release 1 Code of Practice launched March 2006 • 8 vendors now compliant • Relevant usage metrics less clear than for journals • Different issues than for journals • Direct comparisons between books less relevant • Understanding how different categories of book are used is more relevant

  19. Journal and Database Code of Practice Usage Reports • Journal Report 1 • Full text article requests by month and journal • Journal Report 2 • Turnaways by month and journal • Database Report 1 • Total searches and sessions by month and database • Database Report 2 • Turnaways by month and database • Database Report 3 • Searches and sessions by month and service

  20. Code of Practice for books • Book Report 1 • Number of successful requests by month and title • Book Report 2 • Number of successful section requests by month and title • Book Report 3 • Turnaways by month and title • Book Report 4 • Turnaways by month and service • Book Report 5 • Total searches and sessions by month and title • Book Report 6 • Total searches and sessions by month and service

  21. Journal Report 1Full text article requests by journal Html and PDF totals reported separately

  22. COUNTER Audit • Independent audit required within 18 months of compliance, and annually thereafter • Audit is online, using scripts provided in the Code of Practice • Auditor can be: • Any Chartered Accountant • Another COUNTER-approved auditor • ABCE is the first COUNTER-approved auditor • Industry-owned • Not-for-profit • Independent and impartial • Part of ABC (Audit Bureau of Circulations) • Providing website traffic audits for over 150 companies and certifying over 1400 domains • Have successfully completed test audits on COUNTER usage reports

  23. ABCE Audit fees

  24. COUNTER: deriving metrics from Journal Report 1 • Local metrics • For libraries and library consortia • At journal, collection and publisher level • To compare the cost-effectiveness of journal subscriptions • To assess the value of Big Deals • Global metrics • For authors, funding agencies, libraries and publishers • At journal, collection and publisher level • To compare quality and value

  25. COUNTER: ‘local’ metrics • JISC (UK Joint Information Systems Committee) • Funded by UK higher education funding councils • Supports higher education in the use of information and communications technologies (ICT) • Access to information and communication resources • Advice on creation and preservation of digital archives • Implications of using ICT • Network services and support • Research to develop innovative solutions • National overview of online journal usage • Develop a reliable, widely applicable methodology • Use COUNTER Journal Report 1 ‘article full-text requests’

  26. Local metrics: an example • COUNTER data was analysed in relation to: • usage range • Price band • Subject category • Metrics derived from this analysis • Trend in number of full-text article downloads • Full text article requests per title • Full text article requests per publisher package • Full text article requests per FTE user • Most requested titles • Usage of subscribed vs.. unsubscribed titles • Cost per full-text article downloads • Cost per FTE user • Summary report available at: www.ebase.uce.ac.uk/projects/NESLi2.htm

  27. Local metrics: an example • Growth in full-text article downloads • Publisher A: 12%- 208% • Publisher B: 12%- 59% • Publisher C: 23%- 154% • Publisher D: 22%- 81% • Cost per full-text article download • Publisher A: £0.97- £5.26 • Publisher B: £0.70 - £2.91 • Publisher C: £0.80 - £3.29 • Publisher D: £0.45 - £2.26

  28. COUNTER: ‘global’ metrics • Impact Factor • Well-established, easily understood and accepted • Endorsed by funding agencies and researchers • Does not cover all fields of scholarship • Reflects value of journals to researchers • Over-emphasis on IF distorts the behaviour of authors • Over-used, mis-used and over-interpreted • Usage Factor • Usage-based alternative perspective • Would cover all online journals • Would reflect value of journals to all categories of user • Would be easy to understand

  29. COUNTER: Membership • Member Categories and Annual Fees (2008) • Publishers/intermediaries: $825 • Library Consortia: $545 • Libraries: $412 • Industry organization: $412 • Library affiliate: $165 (non-voting member) • Benefits of full membership • Owner of COUNTER with voting rights at annual general meeting, etc. • Regular bulletins on progress • Opportunity to receive advice on implementation • Vendors: no compliance fee; reduced price audit fees

  30. http://www.projectcounter.org Apply for COUNTER membership

  31. Overview • Background • Update on COUNTER • SUSHI • Looking ahead

  32. SUSHI: Objectives • Solve the problem of harvesting and managing usage data from a growing number of providers. • Promote consistency in usage formatting (XML) • Automate the process

  33. SUSHI: What is it? • An XML Message • Methods to transfer the message between two systems • Implemented as a Web service • Using SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol)

  34. SUSHI : The Exchange • Report Request <Requester> <Customer Reference> <Report Definition> • Report Response • <Requester> • <Customer Reference> • <Report Definition> • <Report as payload>

  35. SUSHI: Architecture • The next series of slides graphically show a SUSHI transaction • Library system requests a usage report • SUSHI client makes the request • SUSHI server processes request • SUSHI server prepares COUNTER report • SUSHI server “packages” and returns response • SUSHI client processes COUNTER report

  36. The Library and Content Provider’s systems are both connected to the internet. Library Content Provider Internet

  37. The SUSHI client is software that runs on the library’s server, usually associated with an ERM system. Library Content Provider ERM Internet SUSHI Client

  38. The SUSHI server is software that runs on the Content Provider’s server, and has access to the usage data. Library Content Provider ERM Internet SUSHI Client SUSHI Server (web service) Usage Data

  39. When the ERM system wants a COUNTER report, it sends a request to the SUSHI client, which prepares the request. Library Content Provider ? ERM Internet Request SUSHI Client SUSHI Server (web service) Usage Data

  40. The SUSHI request is sent to the Content Provider. The request specifies the report and the library the report is for. Library Content Provider ? ERM Internet Request Request SUSHI Client SUSHI Server (web service) Usage Data

More Related