is demand-driven acquisition ready for prime time?
Post on 17-May-2015
896 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Is Demand-Driven Acquisition Ready for Prime Time?
Charleston ConferenceNovember 4, 2011
Michael Levine-Clark, University of DenverMichael Zeoli, YBP Library Services
DefinitionsPatron-Driven Acquisition (PDA)
Faculty Requests/InputUse Data
Demand-Driven Acquisition (DDA)Meets immediate need
Better Acronyms?IPA = Instant
Patron Access?
ESB = Easy Short-term Borrowing?
Why DDA?
Annual Book Production, 2009
DU Pur
chas
es
North
Am
erican
Sch
olar
ly (Y
BP)
All U
nite
d St
ates
Wor
ld (U
NESCO)
0200000400000600000800000
10000001200000
Books Cataloged 2000-2004 (126,953 Titles)
4+ uses; 18.8%
3 uses; 8.2%
2 uses; 12.8%
1 use; 20.6%
0 uses; 39.6%
Books Cataloged 2000-2004 (126,953 Titles)
4+ uses; $1,084,576
3 uses; $473,060
2 uses; $738,435
1 use; $1,188,418
0 uses; $2,284,53
2
Demand-Driven Acquisition GoalsBroaden the collection
More titlesMore publishersMore subjects
Match acquisitions to immediate demandPay at point of needPay for amount of needShort-term loansPurchase-on-demand
Redefining the CollectionEverything we can provide in a
timely manner
Ultimately, bounded only by budget
Is DDA ready for Prime Time?
Flying Carpets,
Exploding Snap Cards
& Blast-Ended Skrewts
PDA Articles: Must reach beyond parochial focus as libraries, publishers & vendors all go digital together
• The Print Monograph Universe (for context)• The Decline of Print & Move to e• Library Acquisitions & the importance of Front List• eContent Availability: the eAggregators & Publishers• Library & Publisher considerations
TopicsSteve’
s
YBP’s Print Monograph Universe
• 62,000 new titles annually– 44,000 Humanities & Social Sciences– 18,000 Science, Technology & Medicine
• 51,000 Trade, Professional, Associations (80% of Universe)
• 11,000 University Press (20% of Universe)– Oxford ~ 1,800– Cambridge ~ 1,300
YBP’s Customer Universe
US Libraries
Int’l Libraries
YBP
80% US AcademicLibrary Market
73% = US 65% Approval Plans25% Firm Orders 6% Standing Orders
Approvals
• 60% of YBP Customers use Approval Plans
• X000 Approval Plans in X000 Libraries– X000 Comprehensive Subject & Publisher Book Plans
– X000 UK Plans– Just 40 University Press Plans
• Approval Plan Profiling is a Discovery Mechanism– Profiling produces Metadata
– Profiling builds Custom Collections via Approval Plans
– Profiling underpins Integrated ebook Approval Plans
– Profiling underpins PDA
YBP’s Approval Plans(and What is an Approval Plan?)
• Major ARL Acquisitions Dept. reports that:– Book expenditures moved from 22% eBooks to
35% in last 6 months
• Last week of September (YBP): – Print Orders down 14%– eBook Orders up 44%
The Decline of Print
(Anecdotal Evidence)
Trends @ 8 ARL librariesRepresentative Library Comparisons
FY 2011 vs. FY 2010
Library Print% ∆
BYU -10%
U Calgary -7%
Duke 7%
U Iowa 5%
U Minnesota 5%
NYU 41%
U Ottawa 21%
UNC -7%
Large Academic Library ConsortiumPrint Titles acquired
2000 - 2011
Fiscal Year (July-June)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
09-1008-0907-0806-0705-0604-0503-0402-03 10-1101-0200-0199-00
# Books acquiredX 1,000
The Decline of Print Sales in Consortia
So where is the print going ?
• Integrated e/p Approval Plans: X Librarieso X individual plans
• Patron/Demand-Driven Plans: X Librarieso 4-6 New plans implemented weekly
• Multiple Consortial eRFP’s monthly (New business models required !)
• ebook sales grew by 150% in 2010, 400+ % in 2011…
More Trends @ 8 ARL librariesRepresentative Library Comparisons
FY 2011 vs. FY 2010
Library Print% ∆
eApproval% ∆
eOrders% ∆
BYU -10% 3017% 75%
U Calgary -7% 227% 307%
Duke 7% 471%
U Iowa 5% 640%
U Minnesota 5% 1127% 12%
NYU 41% 301%
U Ottawa 21% 16% 18%
UNC -7% 73% 63%
Head of Collections, State University:
“If university presses cannot find a way to participate in digital content, I will have to give them lower priority in our monograph collections budget.”
The Decline of Print(a final word)
Library Acquisitions & the importance of Front List
Example: Collecting all 2010 titles from 6 University Presses (781) in 3 academic market
segments
781 Unique Titles Total Acquired
Acq’d onApproval
Cornell Univ. 587 554
Emory 647 549
Harvard (Widener) 502 404
McGill 713 608
Northwestern 698 491
Penn State Univ. 533 452
Texas A&M 518 478
UNC Chapel Hill 711 684
Univ. of Calgary 386 278
Univ. of Ottawa 643 447
6 UPs on Approval Plans 2010 - ARL Libraries
6 UPs on Approval Plans 2010 - Mid-Size Libraries
781 Unique Titles TotalAcquired
Acq’d onApproval
Appalachian State 512 187
Bowling Green 325 287
Bucknell 456 223
Carleton Univ. (CA) 285 121
Hong Kong Baptist Univ. 307 103
Illinois State Univ. 362 333
Iowa State Univ. 595 279
Kent State 242 145
Tufts 552 360
Washington State 287 58
6 UPs on Approval Plans 2010 - College Libraries
781 Unique Titles TotalAcquired
Acq’d onApproval
Amherst 502 1
City Univ. Hong Kong 125 55
Clark 212 25
Colgate 539 381
College of Wooster 246 121
Gettysburg College 186 90
Smith 401 118
Wellesley 408 252
Wesleyan 452 0
William & Mary 409 290
Annual Acquisitions:Distribution by Imprint Year• Back list acquisitions• ‘First bite of the apple’ (implications for publishers?)
Example from same 6 University Presses in same 3 academic market segments
6 UP Titles Acq’d 2010 - ARL Libraries
2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 Older
Cornell Univ. 33 511 35 0 0 0
Emory 29 528 66 2 3 8
Harvard (Widener) 22 420 50 3 0 2
McGill 33 560 57 7 12 74
Northwestern 25 523 107 20 3 21
Penn State Univ. 21 470 40 4 4 7
Texas A&M 17 469 37 3 2 4
UNC Chapel Hill 33 602 60 3 2 3
Univ. of Calgary 23 428 63 3 0 3
Univ. of Ottawa 18 476 98 14 6 35
2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 Older
Appalachian State 16 358 133 31 6 16
Bowling Green 17 272 25 1 0 2
Bucknell 13 342 83 8 5 12
Carleton Univ. (CA) 9 186 58 7 0 20
Hong Kong Baptist 6 197 90 11 2 7
Illinois State Univ. 16 259 56 5 5 6
Iowa State Univ. 23 476 104 7 2 10
Kent State 9 165 56 2 1 1
Tufts 26 461 60 0 0 1
Washington State 9 180 95 19 2 5
6 UP Titles Acq’d 2010 - Mid-Size Libraries
2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 Older
Amherst 46 371 107 1 2 3
City Univ. Hong Kong 3 87 17 3 1 11
Clark 2 75 62 36 24 17
Colgate 24 451 58 1 0 0
College of Wooster 6 161 66 13 1 0
Gettysburg College 8 111 51 5 1 2
Smith 17 250 124 10 0 3
Wellesley 21 304 69 4 2 7
Wesleyan 17 349 88 9 3 10
William & Mary 17 291 78 19 3 6
6 UP Titles Acq’d 2010 - College Libraries
PDA Opportunity for Publishers & LibrariesYBP JULY 2010 - JUNE 2011 PDA Opportunity
Publisher New PrintTitles
SlipNotifications
SentNotifications% Ordered
Springer 3,261 1,177,454 4% Wiley 2,881 1,219,333 7% Oxford 2,146 921,359 11% Routledge 2,200 1,099,110 8% Cambridge 1,551 736,043 11% Palgrave Macmillan 1,310 1,006,981 8%
McGraw-Hill 637 218,244 6% HarperCollins 410 144,881 11% ABC-CLIO 409 214,167 8% Continuum 518 243,636 8% Brill (& Nijhoff) 573 197,895 8%
Penguin Putnam 447 169,820 13%
eContent Availability:
eAggregators & Publishers
Simultaneous Print - ebook Availability-
October 2009 2010 2011
Print Books
eBooks
Oct, Week 1 Oct, Week 2 Oct, Week 3 Oct, Week 41,300
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
09 – 10 – 11 09 – 10 – 11 09 – 10 – 11 09 – 10 – 11
# New Books
YBP ebook Availability Scorecard October 2011
-- Matching Simultaneous ebooks --
Publisher New PrintTitles
PastMonth
Last 16Months 2009 %
Springer 3,261 64% 33% 40% 24%
Wiley 2,881 59% 60% 41% 18%
Oxford 2,146 21% 23% 2% 19%
Taylor & Francis 3,066 59% 64% 47% 12%
Cambridge 1,551 44% 60% 22% 22%
Palgrave Macmillan 1,310 51% 31% 0% 51%
McGraw-Hill 637 25% 40% 37% -12%
HarperCollins 410 3% 8% 0% 3%
Continuum 518 70% 51% 8% 62%
Brill (& Nijhoff) 573 79% 25% 0% 79%
Penguin Putnam 447 0% 0% 0% 0%
Print & ebook Sales ComparisonYBP JULY 2010 - JUNE 2011 YBP-eAggregator Sales
Publisher New PrintTitles
YBP PrintUnits Sold
ebookSalesFY 11
% ebookSalesFY 11
% Growth 2010
Springer 3,261 10% 308%
Wiley 2,881 11% 147%
Oxford 2,146 3% 237%
Routledge 2,200 9% 190%
Cambridge 1,551 5% 299%
Palgrave Macmillan 1,310 3% 353%
McGraw-Hill 637 17% 170%
HarperCollins 410 0% 23%
Continuum 518 4% 1210%
Brill (& Nijhoff) 573 3% 151%
Penguin Putnam 447 0% -40%
Library & Publisher considerations
• All content is not available:– By Publisher– By Aggregator
• Print assumptions & paradigms blind us:– Publisher list has limited use– Expenditure & revenue models upside down
• PDA is not the only Flying Carpet.– eApprovals– eSeries– PDA– Collections
Thank you -
Michael ZeoliYBP Library Services
GlossaryThe Blast-Ended Skrewt is a hybrid creature bred by Rubeus Hagrid in the autumn of 1994, by crossing Manticores and Fire Crabs. Whether Hagrid used magic or somehow got the two to mate is unknown. Newly-hatched Skrewts look like pale pale, skinny deformed shell-less lobsters. They have legs sticking out at odd angles. They are about 6 inches long and occasionally sparks fly out their end propelling them forward a few inches. Exploding Snap Cards were specially made for the game of Exploding Snap, such that the cards may blow up at any time. They are occasionally used to build a house of cards, which can get interesting.
Flying Carpets rather than brooms are the standard magical means of transportation in Asia and the Middle East. Flying carpets are illegal in the UK and on the Registry of Proscribed Charmable Objects. In other words, carpets are now defined in Britain as a Muggle artifact illegal to enchant, so it is not lawful to import them.
What We’ve Done at DU
netLibraryColorado Alliance of Research
Libraries
1999-2005
First use free
Purchase on second use
Shared access
Purchase ILL RequestsPrice
Publisher
Publication Date
eBook Library (EBL)Began May 2010
Loaded 42,000 records into catalog (now 60,000)
No budget for FY 2010
Budgeted $150,000 for FY 2011
The EBL ModelFirst five minutes free
STL for three usesOne day or one week10-15% list price
Purchase on fourth useList price
DU EBL Data (5/1/10-6/30/11)
Actual List
325 titles purchased $23,753 $23,753
3,599 titles with at least one STL
$49,171 $236,037
6,477 titles with at least one browse
$0 $473,378
Total (10,076 titles) $72,924 $733,168
Savings $660,244
Cost Per Transaction
Purchase Type
Total Cost Cost per Transaction
STL $49,171 $9.21
Autopurchase $23,753 $73.09
Transactions by Month
May
-10
Jul-1
0
Sep-
10
Nov-1
0
Jan-
11
Mar
-11
May
-11
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
TransactionsAutopurchaseSTL
Relation to Print Holdings
13.7%
8.0%
6.0%0.8%
0.5%
0.7%70.3%
Same Edition
Same Edition Checked Out
Earlier Edition(s)
Earler Edition(s) Checked Out
Library Use Only
Other
No Print
What We Want to Do at DU
A Multi-Format ModelE-Books from multiple
vendors/publishers
Print booksWhen electronic not availableWhen electronic not desired
Managed by YBP
The FutureE-Books on demand
Local print-on-demand option
Make accessible all that we can afford
Budget GoalsCommit most of the
monographs budget
Spend the same to access more titles
Long-Term Management
Filling the PoolApproval process
Broader criteria
Inclusion rather than exclusion
Adding/Removing RecordsDiscovery is key
Must be automatic
Approval vendor
MARC record service
Pool MaintenanceRules for
Length of time in poolRemovalReplacement
Removal of TitlesRemoval because of content,
quality
Removal because of financial risk
Rules for temporary removal
Rules for permanent removal
Use Shapes the PoolTitles that are used get to swim
a bit longerRemoving titles = unhappy
users
A Permanent CollectionSome titles are core
Establish criteria for permanent/longer-term availability
Title-by-titleSeriesPublisherSubject
Role for VendorsFill the pool
Provide discovery tools
Remove/replace content
Comprehensive reporting
QuestionsWhat about stewardship?
Will DDA work for consortia?
Thank YouMichael Levine-ClarkUniversity of Denver
michael.levine-clark@du.eduMichael Zeoli
YBP Library Servicesmzeoli@ybp.com
top related