ACQNET v6n027 (September 21, 1996) URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/serials/stacks/acqnet/acqnet-v6n027 ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 6, No. 27, September 21, 1996 ============================================ (1) FROM: Karen Muller SUBJECT: Vendor Performance Analysis (28 lines) (2) FROM: Lisa Redmond SUBJECT: Self-directed Teams (38 lines) (3) FROM: J. Ogburn & C. Fairley SUBJECT: RE: Acquisitions manual vs. acquisitions policy (118 lines) (4) FROM: Kim Hale SUBJECT: Textbook collection development or purchasing policies (20 lines) (5) FROM: Janet Flowers SUBJECT: Duplicate requests (16 lines) (6) FROM: Janet Flowers SUBJECT: Distributed Titles / Co-Publications (23 lines) (1)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 17:03:48 -0500 From: Karen Muller (American Library Association) Subject: Vendor Performance Analysis I'm sending this question to ACQNET on behalf of an ALCTS member who does not have e-mail access (oh, yes, they exist!); please respond to the list or to me, as appropriate. Has a public library done a recent vendor performance analysis, with particular reference to filling of orders for best sellers? If so, what were the standards used for evaluation and the methodology used to assess success? Nothing relevant has come up in a fairly comprehensive literature search, so we're seeking unpublished, or not yet published, results here. Thanks. Karen Muller Executive Director, ALCTS/LAMA 50 E. Huron Street Chicago, IL 60611 800-545-2433 x 5031 312-280-5031 fax: 312-280-3257 e-mail: KMuller@ALA.org (2)---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 16:14:44 -0600 (CST) From: Lisa M. Redmond (Univ. of St. Thomas) Subject: Self-directed Teams We are an academic library serving approximately 11,000 students, both graduate and undergraduate - with one main library and two departmental libraries, business and theology. Our Technical Services staff will soon begin the process of becoming a self-directed team. Our department, which is presently composed of 2 separate divisions, acquisitions and cataloging, under the leadership of the technical services' librarian, will become a team of 5.25 FTE staff members broken down as follows: 1.75 FTE professional catalogers, 1.25 FTE "copy" catalogers, 2 FTE acquisitions support staff and 0.25 FTE professional acquisitions librarian. We are neither gaining nor losing staff members due to our redesign; however, there will no longer be a departmental head. We are interested in hearing from similar Acquisition Departments who have undergone or are in the process of undergoing similar transformations. We are interested in consultant selection and any recommendations you'd be willing to share. We'd like to hear about your experiences and, finally, we'd like to hear about your end results. You may send replies to me at the following: lmredmond@stthomas.edu FAX: 612/962-5406 Address: Lisa Redmond O'Shaughnessy-Frey Library Center University of St. Thomas 2115 Summit Ave. St. Paul, MN 55105-1096 (3)---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 12:01:10 -0500 (EST) From: Joyce Ogburn (Old Dominion Univ.) Subject: RE: Acquisitions manual vs. acquisitions policy I would like to respond to the question, regarding acquisitions manuals and policies, asked by Waldomiro C. S. Vergueiro. My answer is tangential but relevant to the main substance of his question. One could model acquisitions management as having four governing categories: principles, policies, practices, and procedures. Principles are the guiding statements that inform the rest of the management of acquisitions, and are statements such as the ethical guidelines developed by the ALCTS Acquisitions Section. Policies are the rules that derive from principles, legalities, rules of the institution, the governing body, and so forth. Practices are interpretations and applications of principles and policies. Procedures are the prescriptions for getting the job done. Here is an example. The principle is "acquisitions strives to achieve its goals in a fair, legal, ethical, and expeditious manner." A derivative policy could be "all acquisitions activities comply with state and institutional regulations." An interpretive practice could be "establishing and maintaining an audit trail is the highest priority of acquisitions." A procedure could be "enter all orders in the system in the method described below." One could argue that all four of these categories should be covered in an acquisitions manual, or at least the manual should refer to other relevant sources, such as state and federal regulations. The line between acquisitions and collection development policies is often very fine. In the example that is given by Mr. Vergueiro, the statement on the order of priority of purchasing is a collection development policy. An equivalent acquisitions policy could be "acquisitions will acquire materials and set its priorities in accord with the priorities of collection development." There are acquisitions policies which can govern collection development activities or other functions of the library. If the acquisitions policy is "only officially designated personnel may serve as purchase agents and place orders or process payments on behalf of the library," then if collection development staff are not designated as purchase agents, they should not be engaged in these activities. Another acquisitions policy might be that "the library will deal only with authorized and reputable suppliers." Someone may request that an order be placed with an supplier known to the acquisitions staff as one who asks for prepayment and does not deliver the material. In this case, an order should not be placed. The acquisitions policy is in place to protect the library and its resources. (Of course, this outcome should be explained to the requestor). In the case of policies for accepting gifts, there are acquisitions policies that apply here as well. They may have more to do with processing and audit trails than the appropriateness of the gift to the collection. Policies should be in place to ensure that the processing of gifts is not overwhelmed by sheer numbers of materials that are unlikely to be added to the collection. Policies should also be established that ensure that the gifts can be tracked and accounted for. These policies should be established within the context of the principles established for how the library interacts with the public and donors. My experience is that librarians often think of policies as belonging to a department instead of a function or program. Acquisitions may be the name of a department, but it is primarily a fundamental activity of the library, and acquisitions policies should apply to the function, not the department. It is the obligation of everyone and every department in the library to enforce and follow any library policies. If we can avoid thinking of policies as being departmental and instead as programmatic, as in the interest of the library and not an individual department, perhaps the perception of policies as being political and territorial can be diminished. Joyce L. Ogburn AUL for Information Resources and Systems Old Dominion University Library Phone 804-683-4189 Fax 804-683-5767 ogburn@shakespeare.lib.odu.edu ***************************************************************** Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 15:30:14 -0400 From: Craig Fairley (information Dynamics) Subject: Re: Acquisitions manual vs. Acquisitions Policy RE: Waldomiro de Castro Santos Vergueiro (Univ. of Sao Paulo) Subject: RE: Acquisitions manual vs. Acquisitions Policy Having developed more than one acquisitions manual, I must side with my colleague who wants to put policies and procedures together. There are several reasons for this: First, this allows the organization to ensure that procedures are consistent with policy. Second, they give the staff a greater understanding of WHY they do what they do. Learning procedures by rote can be problematic. Third, it empowers staff to be able to make rational and consistent decisions when faced with a situation that is not covered by the procedures. We all know that no two orders are the same. Finally, it is often difficult to distinguish between policies and procedures. Is it a policy or a procedure that the acquisitions staff decides to choose vendor X for this book and vendor Y for that book? Sometimes you can set up your manual in such a way that policies and procedures are documented in parallel on the page, or the section begins with a policy, followed by procedures set in place to support the policy. Craig Fairley Information Dynamics 2165 Margot Street Oakville, Ontario Canada L6H 3M5 (905) 842-1406 (4)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:44:14 -0500 (CDT) From: Kim Hale (Columbia College) Subject: Textbook collection development or purchasing policies I am working on a draft textbook purchasing policy, but would like to see examples of both collection development and/or purchasing policies from other academic institutions. If you have an existing policy and would be willing to share, it will be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Kimberly Hale Acquisitions Librarian/Coordinator of Collection Development Columbia College Library 624 South Michigan Avenue Chicago, IL 60605 (312) 663-1600, x5355 (voice) (312) 663-1707 (fax) (5)---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 10:12:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Janet Flowers (UNC-Chapel Hill) Subject: Duplicate Requests Our Acquisitions and Collection Development Departments are working together to identify and reduce the number of duplicate requests submitted. Our percentage of duplication for FY 95/96 was 25%; we must reduce this! We know that we are not alone in facing this dilemma. Therefore, I would very much like to know what other libraries (especially large research libraries) are doing. What is the "going rate" in other libraries? How do you manage to keep the number/percentage down, if you do? Whose responsibility is it to eliminate the "obvious" duplicates? Thank you in advance for any tips that you can share! Please respond to me and I will summarize for the list. Janet Flowers ***************************************************************** Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 10:16:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Janet Flowers (UNC-Chapel Hill) Subject: Distributed Titles / Co-Publications I am also very interested in finding out how other libraries are handling the bibliographic control of distributed titles and co-publications. We are finding an increasing number of these being identified through multiple selection sources. This, of course, is one factor in our higher duplication rate. On the other hand, the bibliographers are quite concerned that we not have gaps in the collection. How are others coping with the desire to not miss a title but the equally compelling (at least from Acquisitions' point of view) desire to not receive multiple order requests for the same title? Thank you for your advice on this matter. Janet L. Flowers Head of Acquisitions Academic Affairs Library University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27514-8890 919-962-1120 FAX: 919-962-4450 ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 6, No. 27 ****** END OF FILE ******