ACQNET v1n072 (May 8, 1991) URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/serials/stacks/acqnet/acq-v1n072 ACQNET, Vol 1, No. 72, May 8, 1991 ================================== (1) FROM: Christian SUBJECT: Donating serials to libraries, ethics (14 lines) (2) FROM: James Mow SUBJECT: Acquisitions profession, purchasing (50 lines) (3) FROM: Barbara Winters SUBJECT: Tenets of acquisitions, acquisitions profession (49 lines) (4) FROM: Richard Jasper SUBJECT: ALCTS reorganization (16 lines) (1) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 08 May 91 12:22:39 EDT From: Christian Boissonnas Subject: Donating serials to libraries, ethics "Despite the publishing community's double standard [differential pricing] and the outlandish library subscription costs, it is certainly unethical to have individuals subscribe [to periodicals] and then have them pass the journal along to the library. Such a gift should not be accepted even if there is no collusion involved, i.e., if it is merely an innocent and generous gesture on the part of a private subscriber." Hauptman, Robert, _Ethical Challenges in Librarianship_. Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1988. p. 24. Any comments? Anyone? Anyone? (2) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 May 91 13:20:19 CDT From: James Mouw Subject: Acquisitions and collection development As I ponder the topic of the relationship between acquisitions and collection development, my attention is constantly pulled to the question: In the absence of collection development responsibilities, what makes the acquisitions librarian a professional librarian? Or, what makes library acquisitions different from general purchasing operations? This general area may merit some discussion. I'll start. The professional librarian has the following roles in acquisitions: 1. The acquisitions librarian must have a thorough understanding of overall library operations as they affect the acquisitions department, and must be able to coordinate the acquisitions operation with overall library operations. This coordination of activities is especially critical for collection development and cataloging. The complex nature of library organizations implies that the acquisitions librarian must have the training and experience necessary to understand and assimilate the overall goals of the organization at both the operational and philosophical level. 2. The acquisitions librarian must have a working knowledge of the book trade in general and must understand publisher practices as they affect the library's ability to purchase needed materials. This is specialized knowledge that is gained through years of experience as well as training. This knowledge is not usually found in a general purchasing agent. To paraphrase Linda Vertrees of Chicago Public Library, "Books aren't like rock salt". I have had fine working relationships with purchasing agents, but I have never met one who had the vaguest idea of the problems faced daily by acquisitions librarians. 3. The acquisitions librarian keeps abreast of current developments in the library and publishing fields through professional reading and by attendance at conference and other professional development forums. The specialized nature of our field implies that we spend a fair amount of time in this area. It is unreasonable to expect any general purchasing agent to have the time necessary to pursue these activities at any level other than the most basic. 4. The acquisitions librarian forms partnerships with publishers and vendors as they pursue common goals and discuss commmon issues of concern. 5. The acquisitions librarian seeks to enhance the knowledge in the field through professional interaction and through publication and scholarly research. These five are off the top of my head. What do you all (Y-all?) think? (3) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 May 91 09:59 EDT From: Barbara Winters Subject: Thoughts on Joyce Ogburn's tenets of acquisitions I've hesitated to speak to Joyce's tenets because my thoughts aren't fully formed. That, plus the stream-of-consciousness nature of e-mail communication, make me wary of putting this in writing. Sometimes I read back what I've written to ACQNET and frankly hope you, my colleagues, will quickly forget I've written it. Having said that, .... I applaud what Joyce is trying to do, and I hope all of us will provide input. During the time that the Acquisition Administrators' Discussion Group was being convened, someone (either Joe Barker or I -- I think he did it; he seems to think I did it [you did it, Barbara. I remember it. C.]) declared that acquisitions was "emerging as a subprofession." We've all been coining the "subprofession" term since. While we acquisitions types talk about the term, however, I'm not sure we're clear yet on the concept. At the AADG meeting of 1/9/90, Joe Hewitt (in discussing his seminal article "On the Nature of Acquisitions") said that acquisitions is not **yet** a subdiscipline but that the potential for a discipline is there -- and that it would be a discipline based on a specialized focus on publishers and publisher distribution systems. Joyce has begun to put together the theory of the discipline (in the same manner in which all sciences have defined their theory) with these tenets. She has taken the first major step in defining the role of the professional acquisitions librarian. We have up till now often let others define our roles for us -- either implicitly or explicitly -- and have often only reacted to those definitions. We have to stop letting this happen. We have to take time away from admittedly demanding operations to define our own role, to come to know in our own minds what we are, and to set our own agenda. I believe that the new ALCTS organization will be better able to support us in this work. But the work is OURS. Let's recognize the substance of what we do and not just the mundane processes with which we're involved. As you know, I'm always in favor of **doing** something -- a very dangerous characteristic for a bureaucrat. I believe that those of us who are interested in helping Joyce refine her tenets should get together informally in Atlanta (I will even be so bold as to suggest a time and place if there's enough interest) to begin a serious discussion of whether or not we're a discipline, what our tenets ought to be, and so forth. I will even go so far as to suggest that we put together a position paper that will establish our definition of the role of the acquisitions professional. I'll quote Joe Hewitt again: The responsibili- ty for the effectiveness of the formation of acquisitions as a subdiscipline -- wherever it is and however it's organized -- is ours. [In an aside Barbara wondered if this posting might not sound a tad too evangelical and asked me to edit if I thought people would resent her fervor. I didn't. I thought it was great as written. So, if you resent it, blame me, not her. C.] (4) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 08 May 91 09:11:38 EDT From: Richard Jasper Subject: ALMS etc. Thanks, Joyce, for having read far enough through my Sunday afternoon tome on acquisitions/collection management tension to see the stuff about serials. I'm not necessarily advocating merging the two sections, just pointing out that all this talk about merged acquisitions-serials units on the homefront suggests thinking it through ALCTS, too. As for the horrible name: ALMS, the name, is on the ballot. You can vote for it or against it. Presum- ably, if we all vote against it, we'll still have a separate acquisitions section, just one without a name. Then maybe we could have a contest to come up with a name that we like? ***** END OF FILE ***** END OF FILE ***** END OF FILE ***** END OF FILE *****