Data Driven Collection Assessment using a SerialDecision Database

Diane Carroll and Joel Cummings

Available online 4 November 2010

Carroll is Head of CollectWA 99164-3200, USA; eCummings is CollectionOwen Library, Washinge-mail: jcummings@wsu

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: Tmade to the evolution of(Animal Health), SarahSocial Sciences and Businto Nick Peterson of the Oof the MS Excel MergeMThe authors also apprecBlakesley of WSU Librar

0098-7913/$ – see frontdoi:10.1016/j.serrev.201

Washington State University (WSU) librarians expanded the concept of a comprehensive serialsdecision database (SDD) first proposed by Metz and Cosgriff1 in 2000. Information aboutsubscribed and unsubscribed serials was merged onto one spreadsheet from the integrated librarysystem and subscription agent, interlibrary and citation databases, as well as journal use sources.The SDD, used for selection and cancellation projects, evaluation of electronic journal packages, andcollection assessment, was recognized as a necessary serials management tool for WSU. There is aneed for the commercial development of products that will replace this manual way of organizinginformation critical to collection development. Serials Review 2010; 36:227–239.© 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The Problem

With the continuing financial crises looming over universitybudgets and library funding in particular, collection budgetshave become increasingly at risk for funding cuts. Every dollarneeds to be accounted for and evidence provided that the librarycollections funds were used in a wise and prudent manner. In thepast decades, an increasing amount of data relevant to serialscollection management has become available to librarians that canassist in providing the evidence needed to defend collectionbudgets.2 Paul Metz and John Cosgriff explained how they mergedinformation from faculty surveys, citation analysis, and othermeasurements of print usage into a Comprehensive SerialsDecision Database which resulted in bringing “together everythinga library knows or can learn about its resources.”3 John Gallagheret al.4 described their efforts to evaluate the value of journals atYale University by combining data from disparate sources. Theyconcluded that “it is crucial…for libraries to determine how bestto manage these resources, since failure to do so will result in thecontinued inefficient use of resources, and an underserved user-base whose perception of the value of the library will diminish.”This project illustrated the need for a systematic approach tocombining relevant collection development data from manysources for use by collection development librarians.

ions, Owen Library, Washington State University, Pullman,-mail: carroldi@wsu.edu.Manager for Agriculture, Engineering and the Sciences,ton State University, Pullman, WA 99164-3200, USA;.edu.

he authors would like to acknowledge the contributionsthe SDD byWSU Libraries collection managers, Vicki CroftFrench (Education) and Louis Vyhnanek (Humanities,ess). The authors would like to express their appreciationregon Health & Science University Library for developmentacro and to Cindy Ellis for theWSUWizard using MS Excel.iate the review and editing by Lara Cummings and Bethies.

matter © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.0.09.001

227

Products Available for Serials Assessment

This need for more complete analysis of serial data elements wasdescribed in 2009 by Robin Paynter. Paynter analyzed fourcommercial decision support systems which, like the SDD, wouldenable library staff to spend more energy analyzing data andmaking decisions rather than attempting to extract and collectdata: Serials Solutions' 360 Counter®, Thomson Reuters JournalUse Reports (JUR), Swets' ScholarlyStats and Ulrich's SerialAnalysis System (USAS)™.5 She described in detail the usagereports supported, the types of analyses, ability to upload customdata, reporting features and product support.

A successful commercial product would allow the merging ofgeneric serials knowledge base information with customizedinformation from the local library for titles both subscribed andunsubscribed regardless of whether they have been assigned anISSN. Evaluating these commercial products on just these twocriteria, ScholarlyStats is useful as a source of use data, but noother customized data can be uploaded. Use data can be uploadedinto JUR and combined with publication activity reports but onlyfor titles index in the Web of Science. The strength of USAS™ is itsserials information from the serials knowledge base Ulrich'sPeriodical Directory and that content allows uploading of threecolumns of data. Its weakness is that only three columns areavailable to upload customized local information and titleswithout ISSN, making impossible the matching and data uploadprocesses. Serials Solutions' 360 Counter ® is also a source of usedata that can be uploaded by the library staff or this service canbe purchased via the Data Retrieval Service. Serials Solutions' 360Core® is a serials knowledge base which allows local holdings tobe entered by provider. A combination of USAS™, acquired bySerials Solution in 2007, and Serials Solutions' 360 Counter®products with customized reporting has possibilities of creating aserials decision support system.6

New generations of Electronic Resource Management (ERM)systems also show promise of creating improved serials collectionassessment tools. Subscription services have extensive serialknowledge bases and the ability to add use data. SUSHI

Diane Carroll and Joel Cummings Serials Review

(Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative) protocol hasbeen incorporated into the COUNTER Code of Practice (ProjectCOUNTER).7 Implementation will allow the automated retrieval ofthe Project COUNTER compliant usage reports into many products,such as ScholarlyStats, Serials Solution's 360 Counter®, subscrip-tion services and ILS systems. For example, Swets who acquiredScholarlyStats in 2007 has integrated use data into its new ERMservice. This system is reported to “Manage licenses and evaluateacquired content, calculate and analyze the cost per use ofelectronic journals quickly and efficiently and provide full textaccess to your end users.”8 EBSCO recently announced EBSCONET®ERM ESSENTIALS™ that is designed to locate subscription history,details for electronic journal packages, review publishers' standardlicense details and terms of use. EBSCONET®Usage Consolidationservice is currently under development. It will load ProjectCOUNTER compliant use data using SUSHI to the ERM therebyallowing for cost per use calculations.9

Products currently on the market lack the functionality toproduce reports that include title, journal coverage years anddownload use data by provider. Without the coverage years, thelibrarian may not know the subscription status of the titles.Without the provider, a librarian may not know if the title is a paidsubscription or part of an aggregator collection. Librariansmanaging a collection need a list of subscriptions that reveals allof the nuances of subscription status, post-cancellation rights,coverage, format and provider in order to make effective decisionsabout selections, cancellations, formats, and providers.

Simultaneous Development of Serial AssessmentDatabases

Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) librarians built an SDDbased on Metz and Cosgriff's work in 200010 to assess thecollection and change from print to electronic format. An overviewof the data included in this spreadsheet and how the use of thisinformation evolved through five annual updates (2001 to 2005)was reported at the Online Northwest Conference (2006).11 Thisdatabase provided objective information that allowed the OHSULibrary Collection Development Committee to make subjectivedecisions regarding journal matters.12

In 2003, Betty Galbraith discussed the development at WSU ofthe Microsoft Access® Collection Management Database that

Table 1. Number of titles added as the SDD was built and description of columns

Source of DataNumberof Titles

Unique TitlesAdded

Total Numberof Titles T

ILS-Bibliographic RecordMultiple SourcesILS-Order Records with

Invoices for FY08-094,101 4,101 4,101

ILS-Serial Records 3,713 1,536 5,637ILS-Electronic Resource

Management Records11,830 8,873 14,510

Subscription Agent 4,490 307 14,817

Citation Databases 4,383 1164 15,981

WSU Print Usage Data 628 92 16,073Interlibrary Loan 73 17 16,090Additional InformationCalculated Values

228

allowed librarians to make data driven journal retention andcancellation decisions for the Owen Science and EngineeringLibrary and the Fischer Agricultural Sciences library.13 Procedureson how to download order record information from InnovativeInterfaces, Inc. and standardize the data were developed by WSULibrary collections and systems staff. However, as data for journalassessment became available from more sources, it was discov-ered that information processed via this method had beensuperseded by the need for a model that would be able toincorporate the increasing complexity of serials management.Therefore in 2007, the first SDD created for the WSU Libraries wasa hybrid of the OHSU SDD and WSU Collection ManagementDatabase model. This article describes in detail the construction ofWSU's 2009 version of the SDD and illustrates how this system isan invaluable asset in shaping and managing the serialscollection.

Creating the SDD is labor intensive. The authors hope that thosedeveloping future ILS or serials management products willunderstand the need for a comprehensive serials decision supportsystem. The ability to upload local data, match it to generalinformation from a knowledge base, and create complex reportswould make this process much easier and less time consuming forindividual libraries.

Creation of the Database

The following section describes the creation of WSU's 2009 SDD.Detailed procedures, a sample SDD (eighteen titles) and copies ofthe Microsoft Excel (MS Excel) macros used to create the SDD canbe found on the WSU Research Exchange.14

Tools

MS Excel was chosen to create the SDD because of itsfunctionality and familiarity. In 2006, Nick Peterson of theOHSU Library designed a merge macro which allows elements tobe merged from two worksheets onto one by matching any dataelement, such as an ISSN or title.15 In 2007, Cindy Ellis of theWSU Libraries Systems Department created a macro to removeinitial articles, such as “A, An, and The,” and to remove periodsfrom the end of the titles exported from the Integrated LibrarySystem (ILS).16

on the sample SDD (tables 2 and 3)

able Description on Sample SDD

2A Bibliographic Record: Title; pISSN; eISSN2A Subscription Status; Library Location and Format2A Order Record: Number; Vendor; Location; First Paid Date

2B Order Record: Fund Code; 2009 List Price; Cost by Collection2B Serial Record: Number; Print Title Subscription Status2C ERM: E-access Provider; Coverage Dates and Download Use Data;

Post Cancellation Rights3A Subscription Agent: ILS Number; Publisher; Title Number;

Start Date; Expiration Date; Format; Frequency3B Citation: WSU Authored Papers; WSU Cited Papers;

WSU Authored Papers from Annual Reports3B Usage: Print Usage; Print Circulation3B Interlibrary Loan: ILL 1997 to Present; ILL Prior to 19973C Ulrich's Serials Analysis System: Subject; List Price; Publisher3C Calculated: Total Downloads/Use; Total Uses;

Journal Cost/Total Uses; Priority

thebibliograp

hic,

orde

r,serialsan

delectron

icresource

man

agem

entreco

rdsfrom

theILS

ption

Loca

tion

from

Ord

eror

chec

kin

reco

rd;form

atfrom

man

yso

urces

Inform

ationfrom

theOrd

erRec

ordin

theInnov

ativeILS.

This

isth

eba

seof

theserialsde

cision

databa

se

2009

Libr

aryloca

tion

andform

atOrd

erreco

rd#

Ven

dor

Loca

tion

FY09

first

paid

date

Intern

etviaScienc

eDirectejou

rnal

o101

7457

EBSC

OW

SUOnline

2/4/20

09AgS

ci-Prt

andon

lineviaHighw

ire

Amer

SocHorticu

ltural

Sci

o285

7182

EBSC

OW

SUAgS

ci12

/17/20

08

theInnov

ativeILS.

This

isth

eba

seof

theserialsde

cision

databa

seSe

rial

Rec

ord-

Add

itional

printtitles

that

may

not

hav

eor

derreco

rds

nSE

ACo

llec

tion

Anim

alHea

lth

Collec

tion

Serial

Rec

ord

Numbe

rPrintTitleSu

bscription

Status

$1,237

$1,370

c116

0801

ActivePu

rcha

se

ta mElec

tron

icResou

rceMan

agem

ent(E

RM)an

dSc

holarly

Stats

.Match

edby

ISSN

andtitle.

ERM

License

Recor

d

e20

08Sc

ience

Direc

tCo

verage

Science

Direc

tDow

nload

Use

2008

Pos

tCa

nce

llation

Rights

2002

-38

1SD

:Electron

icASH

S:Print

Data Driven Collection Assessment using a Serial Decision DatabaseVolume 36, Number 4, 2010

Sources of DataThe 2009 WSU SDD was created by merging journal informationfrom a variety of sources:

1. Integrated Library System (ILS) contributed data from thebibliographic, order, serial, and the Electronic Resource Man-agement (ERM) module, including the coverage database andresource and license records (Innovative Interfaces, Inc.).

2. Journal use datawas retrieved from locally collected print usagefor some titles, from commercially collected COUNTER down-load usage (Swet's ScholarlyStats), or directly from electronicjournal providers.

3. Subscription and general information about journals wascollected from serial knowledge bases, such as serials thesubscription agent's database (EBSCONET®) and USAS™.

4. The ILLiad™ system contributed title, ISSN and number ofrequested non-returnable interlibrary loans (ILL).

5. Citation databases provided data on the number of times WSUauthors hadwritten articles in a particular journal or had cited ajournal over a specific period of time (Web of Science®). Also,data from a locally compiled list of authored papers from aWSUannual reports database was included. The latter data wascollected from WORQS (WSU's Online Review and QuerySystem)—the annual review software used across the WSUcampuses.

6. Calculated values included total use; cost per use; percentage ofdownloads from aggregators, and priority assignments basedon usage.

Results of Loading Data SourcesData was merged into the 2009 WSU SDD in the following order:ILS records (bibliographic, order, serials, ERM); subscription agentdata; citation databases data; ILL data; journal use data; andUSAS™. The ILS was the core of the SDD and other informationwasadded to that initial list of titles. Starting with 4,251 titles culledfrom the ILS, the SDD grew to 16,158 titles when all sources of datawere added. Table 1 lists the data sources, the number of titlesadded as each source was merged and the table location on thesample SDD (tables 2 and 3).

Table2.

SampleSe

rialsDecisionDatab

asesh

owingtheresu

ltsof

load

ingda

tafrom

A.Inform

ationfrom

thebibliogr

aphic

andor

derreco

rdin

theSe

rial

Dec

isionDatab

ase

Titles

from

allda

taso

urces

ILSBibliog

raph

icreco

rdFrom

ILSan

dsu

bscri

agen

t

Title

pISS

NeISS

NSu

bscription

statusin

BiosystemsEn

gine

ering

1537

-511

015

37-512

9Cu

rren

tHortScien

ce00

18-534

5Cu

rren

t

B.O

rder

andSe

rial

reco

rdsinform

ationin

theSe

rialsDec

isionDatab

ase

Titles

from

alld

ataso

urces

Inform

ationfrom

theOrd

erRec

ordin

Title

FundCo

de20

09ListPrice

Hum/Soc

Collec

tio

BiosystemsEn

gine

ering

EL60

0$1

,237

HortScien

ce14

600

$1,370

C.Inform

ationfrom

ERM

cove

rage

databa

se,licen

sereco

rdan

dso

urces

ofjourn

alusage

da

Titles

from

alld

ataso

urces

Sampleof

cove

rage

datesan

ddo

wnload

usage

data

fro

bypr

ovider

Title

E-ac

cess

Pro

vide

rHighwire

Cove

rage

HighwireDow

nload

Us

BiosystemsEn

gine

ering

Elsevier

Scienc

eDirect

HortScien

ceHighw

ireAmer

Soc

Horticu

ltural

Sci

1990

-45

3

Data Elements

Many of these elements came frommore than one source. Some ofthe challenges involved with collecting and merging the data inthe SDD are addressed in this section.

Journal Titles

Current subscriptions were contributed to the SDD from ILSreports, print and online download usage reports and lists ofcurrent subscriptions from the serial agent knowledgebase.Sources of subscribed and unsubscribed titles included journalsrequested on ILL, journals with WSU authored papers or journalscited by WSU authors from the citation databases. Collecting fromthese sources resulted in the inclusion of journals of interest to theuser community regardless of whether the library subscribes to atitle or not (see table 2A).

ISSNThe unique identifier used most frequently to merge data in theSDD was the ISSN. The mixing of print (pISSN) and electronic ISSN(eISSN) in the same MARC field made use of the ISSN from thebibliographic record problematic. The SDD has a pISSN and eISSNcolumn to help with the matching, but frequently titles weremerged one by one because no ISSN was assigned or print and

229

Table 3. Sample Serials Decision Database showing the results of loading data from subscription agent and citation databases, iILLiadTM, Ulrich's andcalculating values

A. Information from subscription agent in the Serials Decision Database

Titles from alldata sources Sample of data available from subscription agents.

Title ILS Number Publisher Name Title Number Start Date Expiration Date Format Frequency

BiosystemsEngineering

o1017457 Elsevier 123-715-088 1/1/2009 12/31/2009 Online Monthly

HortScience o2857182 Amer SocHorticultural

Science

399-908-003 1/1/2009 12/31/2009 Print Irregular

B. Information from citation databases, Interlibrary loan, and print usage in the Serials Decision Database

Titles from alldata sources Web of Science® Local data Print usage ILLiad

Title

WSU AuthoredPapers from 2006-08(1 or more; Priority:

1N10; 3b5)

WSU Cited Papersfrom 2006-08(5 or more;

Priority: 1N40;3b10)

WSU AuthoredPapers from WSUAnnual Reports(2005-2008)

Print Usage 2008/Science libraries only

(1 or more;Priority: 1N250;

3b40)

Journal CirculationUse 2003-2008.Total/6 years

(Priority: 1N250;3b40)

ILL 2008;(Priority: 1N15;

3b10; 1997to present)

ILL 2008;Prior to 1997)

BiosystemsEngineering

6 37 7

HortScience 55 201 49 114 11 8 7

C. Data added to the Serials Decision Database from Ulrich's and Calculated Values

Titles from alldata sources Ulrich's Serials Analysis System Subject Calculated values for journals

Title

Ulrich's SerialsAnalysis SystemSubject (1/2009)

Ulrich's SerialsAnalysis System

List Price(1/2009)

USAS Publisher(1/2009)

Total downloaduse in 2008

Total RecordedUses for 2008

Journalcost/total uses Priority

BiosystemsEngineering

AGRICULTURE_CROPPRODUCTION AND

SOIL

$1,237.00 Academic Press 381 431 $2.87 1

HortScience GARDENING ANDHORTICULTURE

$400.00 American Societyfor Horticultural

Science

453 898 $1.53 1

Diane Carroll and Joel Cummings Serials Review

electronic ISSNs were undifferentiated in a single column fromtitles being added (see table 2A).

Acquisitions InformationOrder records included the subscription status, format of journaland location, and accounting information, such as cost, vendor,invoice paid date and fund code. Using the Innovative Interface'sreport export function, titles were selected that had an invoiceposted within the specified time period. However, because theresults included invoices posted from other time periods, theexported spreadsheet had unwanted information and jumbledcolumns. The ability to limit payments to just those made within aparticular time period was found only in the Innovative's legacycharacter-based system (Innopac). The exported spreadsheet haddata for just the desired time period in correctly labeled columns(see tables 2A and 2B).

Subscription StatusThe subscription agent database identified print titles that werepart of memberships or print packages (see table 3A). Manyelectronic journals had a serial record in the ILS but did not have anorder record because electronic journal packages had been postedon one order record which covered many titles. Therefore,coverage dates from the ERM were used to determine thesubscription status of many electronic journals. After coverage

230

dates were added to the SDD, titles without order records wereassigned a subscription status. Access to titles that were parts ofconsortial agreement shared title agreements were assigned“Consortial” instead of “Current.” Titles where current access(defined as less than one month embargo) was only from anaggregator were labeled “Current-Aggregator.”

Journal UsageTitle coverage dates from the ERM and downloads use data weremerged by provider and loaded into the SDD on the same rowallowing the total uses to be calculated (see table 2C). Mergingtitle, coverage and download use by provider was the single mosttime-consuming activity in creating the SDD.

Only one collection unit in the WSU Libraries counts in-houseprint journal usage. To gain additional information on print usage,the cumulative number of times a bound journal were checked outwas collected and divided by six years, the number of yearscirculation data had been collected in the ILS (see table 3B).

Interlibrary LoansA spreadsheet of title, ISSN and publication year of journal articleinterlibrary loans that were requested over five times in 2008 wasseparated by publication year of the requested article—1997 topresent and before 1997 (see table 3B). This data was loaded in theSDD in two columns so the importance of acquiring a current

Data Driven Collection Assessment using a Serial Decision DatabaseVolume 36, Number 4, 2010

subscription could be differentiated from the need to acquirearchival access.

Authored and Cited PapersThe number of articles authored byWSU scholars was retrieved bysearching the Web of Science® (including Science Citation IndexExpanded, Social Sciences Citation Index and Arts & HumanitiesCitation Index) for Washington State Univ or 99164 in the addressfield. Both the journal and the cited references were included inthe exported spreadsheet. Three years of authored and citedarticles (2006–2008) were included in the 2009 WSU SDD toprovide current data because a single year's was thought to be tooshort of a time frame for many titles. All journals that containedWSU authored articles were included in the SDD, while onlyjournals with five or more references cited by WSU authors wereincluded in the SDD (see table 3B).

WSU also collected references to authored papers during theinstitution's annual faculty review process (see table 3B). This datawas added to the SDD for 2005–2008 without removing duplicatesbetween local data and Web of Science® data or adjusting forduplicate reporting from multiple authors at WSU. This informa-tion was valuable as not all WSU authored articles were located injournals indexed in the Web of Science®.

Calculated ValuesIn the SDD, all uses (ILL,Web of Science®, print use, electronic articledownloads) were totaled in one column. The cost was divided bytotal uses (table 3C). When a title had no uses, the cost per use waslisted as the full cost of the title. The percentage of download usefrom aggregators was calculated by summing the uses fromaggregator collections divided by total uses and the percentage ofuse from JSTOR was calculated by dividing JSTOR use by total uses.

Priority AssignmentTitles were assigned to a high, medium or low use category or nouse data (priority 1, 2, 3 or 4 respectively; see table 4). To start, alltitles were assigned a priority 4 and then any individual dataelement raised the title's priority to a 1, 2 or 3 (see table 3C). Toillustrate, a journal may be a Priority 1, if it exceeded one of thefollowing thresholds: 15 interlibrary loan requests, 250 down-loads, 40 WSU cited papers or 10 WSU authored papers.

Maintaining the Serials Decision Database

The first time the SDDwas created atWSU has been described in theprevious section. The development followed this time table. InMarch 2006, a meeting of collection managers to review dataelements to be included was held. Data specific to WSU wasreviewed and priority parameters were established. The Head ofCollections worked with WSU staff to learn how to download order

Table 4. Assignment of priority based on data elements in the SDD

High use(1)

Medium use(2)

Low use(3)

Number of WSU authored papers from2006 to 2008 (Web of Science®)

N10 5 to 10 b5

Number of WSU cited papers from2006 to 2008 (Web of Science®;5 or more)

N40 10 to 40 b10

Print usage N250 40-250 b40Full text/PDF download usage N250 40-250 b40Interlibrary loan requests over the

last 12 months (1997 to present)N15 5 to 15 b5

231

records from Innovative and to use the wizards developed there.Procedures were written for all new processes. The first version wascompleted by one person and was ready for review in July 2006.

Maintaining and updating the SDD occurs throughout the year.For example, in 2010 the following occurred.

• January—Replaced WSU authored and cited papers with themost current three year (2007 to 2009); replaced interlibraryloan, circulation and print use data from 2008 with 2009 data

• February and March—Matched electronic journal 2009 use datawith coverage years by title and provider andmerged into the SDD;calculated cost/use with 2009 costs; total uses and assign priority;added subject headings, list price and publisher from USAS™

• April, May and June-SDD was available for review by collectionmanagers and selectors with 2010 price estimates

• July—Finished merging all order records with payment informa-tion from FY08-09 and close the SDD for 2009. Renamed the fileand created a column for cost estimates for 2010. Estimated allcosts based on knowledge of contracts and inflation estimates.Created a column for actual costs that will replace estimatedcosts as invoices are received throughout the year. Collectionmanagers used the estimated costs when working to meet acancellation target.

• August—Collection managers and selectors presented informa-tion to faculty on possible cancellations for 2010, format changesor additions; Serial vendor information was added to the SDD.

• September—Decisions on all changes in format or cancellations/additions were given to the Head of Collections on a copy of theSDD. Detailed information from the SDD with the changes wasgiven to the acquisitions staff by September 15.

• October 1—Acquisition staff submitted changes to serials vendoror directly with publisher.

• November and December—The serials staff managed all changesresulting from print cancellations and additions; the Head ofCollections used the SDD to report to the ERM team to close aholding for an electronic journal or remove the title becausethere were no post-cancellation rights.

Activities with the SDD that occurred throughout the yearincluded loading order records with new payment information atleast quarterly and more often towards the end of the fiscal year. Itwas also used to keep notes in a comment column of collectionrecommendations such as title transfers, the ability to cancel printbecause post cancellation rights have been obtained, etc.

Technical services staff members have assisted with harvestingdata from other sources and merging electronic journal use datawith coverage data. This information was given to Diane Carrollwho merged the data into the SDD. The SDD is backed upfrequently but the master copy is held by one person. The macrosand wizards have increased productivity and time needed toupdate the SDD; however, it is very labor intensive. All of Marchwork time was spent on meeting the deadline of April 1 to finishthe SDD. Merging the electronic journal use and holdings was inessence an audit of the collection. Data can be manipulated usingMS Excel filters that revealed information that needed to beinvestigated and reported. For example, prices that were muchhigher than estimated, unintentional duplicate copies, title withstats that were not loaded in ERM, new titles added as part ofmemberships, titles now available online that were not listed inour ERM, etc. Updating the SDD often gets side tracked intoinvestigating these situations since it is unlikely they will come tolight in other ways. This can significantly add to time included inupdating the SDD, however, acquisitions staff report that problemsrevealed in the SDD were rarely duplicates of problem theydiscover using their own quality control procedures.

Agriculture

facu

ltyfortitles

unde

rco

nsiderationforcanc

ellation

centof

nload

sJSTO

R

Perce

ntof

download

sfrom

Agg

rega

tors

WSU

Auth

ored

pape

rsfrom

WSU

Annual

Rep

orts

(200

5-20

08)

WSU

Auth

ored

pape

rsfrom

2006

-08W

ebof

Science

®

WSU

Cited

pape

rsfrom

2006

-08W

ebof

Science

®

Print

usage

2008

Totaldo

wnload

usesin

2008

Ulrich's

Serials

Analysis

System

Subjec

t

EART

HSC

IENCE

S_GEO

LOGY

3BIOLO

GY_

ZOOLO

GY

9BIOLO

GY_

ZOOLO

GY

EART

HSC

IENCE

S_GEO

PHYS

ICS

39%

41

346

BIOLO

GY

87%

175

AGRICU

LTURE

Diane Carroll and Joel Cummings Serials Review

Spreadsheet versus Relational Database

The 2009 SDD was a single spreadsheet of serial titles listed inrows with consistent metadata. It permitted users with a basicunderstanding of MS Excel to quickly obtain data about subsets ofthe entire collection by an elementary combining of filters onavailable columns. This capability enabled librarians to repurposesubsets of the data contained in the SDD for a variety of uses.Additionally for the more advanced user, the simple structure ofthe database makes it elementary to convert the SDD into a formthat was usable by MS Excel's pivot table and charting functions.Pivot tables and charts allow the SDD users to analyze data fromdifferent columns against each other and perform awide variety ofcalculations on that data and display these data in summary chartsand tables. This simple structure also allows for additions anddeletions of columns, or new data elements, as needed. Forexample, in 2009 iteration of the SDD several columns of data fromthe serials record relating to binding were added to assist thePreservation and Binding Task Force to analyze and make bindingdecisions.

A relational database, such as MS Access, has advantages in itsease of merging data; however, merging on ISSN or titlesregardless of whether using a spreadsheet or relational databaseis prone to errors due to confusion over print and eISSNs, absentdata, ISSN changes over time, and other issues. Viewing the data onone spreadsheet allows for quality control checks and helps to finderrors when matching the newly added information. The SDDmaster copy was updated and backed up by one person whileother used copies for analysis. While MS Excel and MS Accessenable users to manipulate detail in sophisticated ways, MS Excelwas chosen since it would present a shorter learning curve foremployees, be easier to use, and therefore be of greater value tothe libraries.17

Minor problems that require careful attention when analyzingdata in the SDD emerged. For example, subscription informationfrequently was not wholly independent of other titles on the list.For example, many individual serial titles were included inpackages (i.e., memberships, “big deals,” parent-child bundles)Therefore, cost, usage data, and other information about individualtitles may not appear in the same row as the title, but rather withthe parent title for the package.

Table5.

Sampleof

abbrev

iatedSD

Dprov

ided

toScienc

e,En

gine

eringan

d

Title

Pullman

Campu

sLibr

aryloca

tion

andform

atCo

st/total

uses

Onlineac

cess

Per

dow

from

AAPG

Mem

oir

Owen

-Prt

$33.90

Acarologia

AgS

ci-Prt

$98.82

ActaZo

olog

ica

Intern

etvia

Wile

y$1

10.01

Adv

ancesin

Geo

physics

Owen

-Prt

$223

.07

African

Journa

lof

Ecolog

yIntern

etvia

Wile

y$2

1.61

Retain

Online

Accessvia

Agg

rega

tor

Agricultural

History

Intern

etvia

Metap

ress

$0.88

Retain

Online

AccessviaJSTO

R

Use of the Database

The SDD has proven itself to be an invaluable asset in shaping thecollections, making individual selection and cancellation decisions,managing the budget, marketing and assisting with serialsmanagement.

Cancellations

The primary use of the SDD by collection development librarianshas unfortunately focused on annual serial cancellation projects.Following are two examples of how the SDD was customized forpresentation to library selectors and faculty from the science,engineering and agriculture and for the humanities and socialsciences.

In the first example, the science collection manager developed apreliminary cancellation list with extensive analysis of the SDD inconsultation with science selectors. The selectors then dissemi-nated this information to faculty in relevant departments. First thetitles and costs were itemized as part of the Web site introducingthe cancellation process (see Appendix 1).

232

Data Driven Collection Assessment using a Serial Decision DatabaseVolume 36, Number 4, 2010

An abbreviated version of the SDD was linked to the messagesent to WSU Faculty so they could download and review moredetailed data (see table 5). This spreadsheet displayed the title,current format, cost per use, percentage of download use fromaggregators or JSTOR, citation data, print and electronic journaldownload usage, and subject from USAS™. An additional columnwas added by the collection manager to give a predicted fate ononline access to titles in the advent of cancellations. In the caseswhere Ulrich's Subject field was blank, the collection managermanually added a subject term.

Given this information, individual faculty members in therelevant departments and colleges replied with comments andconcerns about potential cancellations to the collection manageror individual selectors. Once this input had been collected from theScience, Engineering and Agriculture faculty, the science collectionmanager led a final cancellation meeting with the scienceselectors. The science collectionmanager gathered Journal CitationReport data and data from the SDD and by use of mail merge,formatted the data into a layout that was then converted indirectlyinto a PowerPoint presentation (see fig. 1). The science selectorsthen used this collective session to make decisions about whichserials to cancel. This group method has worked well for severalyears, and the science selectors have appreciated discussingjournal issues as a group. By using the SDD information incombination with faculty input and JCR data, they have been ableto make thoughtful and well-rounded decisions.

In the second example, the humanities and social sciencescollection manager provided faculty with a spreadsheet with twotabs or worksheets. The first worksheet labeled Master List, listedall titles in humanities and social science titles to which WSULibraries had a subscription. In addition, faculty in each subjectarea was given a second worksheet of titles associated withsubscription costs in their academic area for their review. Manytitles were purchased as part of packages or memberships and didnot have an individual price. Faculty was concerned when they didnot see those titles in their subject areas. Providing the big pictureof all subscriptions on the Master List provided more complete

Figure 1. Augmentation and alternative communication: AAC.

233

information for the faculty about the entire collection. Facultymembers were asked to evaluate the paid subscriptions in theirsubject areas.

Data and labels from the SDD were reorganized or simplified.The library location and format was altered to include informationabout back file access via JSTOR (see table 6). The priority columnwas relabeled to “Summary of usage information.” Priority 1 and 2were assigned “High Use,” priority 3 to “low use” and priority 4 to“no use data.” Subjects from USAS™ were changed to the name ofthe department and a new column labeled “Priority”was added forinput by faculty. Evaluation of the humanities and social sciencescollection was completed in the spring. Allocations and cancella-tion targets were announced later, and the lower priority titleswere reviewed as a cancellation list was developed.

In conclusion, these approaches provided a means to buildconsensus on challenging and sometimes emotionally chargedcancellation decisions. Sharing portions of the SDD with facultyhelped them to set their priorities while demonstrating that thelibrary was making evidence-based decisions. Providing objectiveinformation in addition to input from faculty gathered for thatcancellation project gave the librarians the ability to make difficultchoices between journals with greater confidence.

Journal Selection

Unsubscribed titles were added to the SDD from WSU authoredpapers, WSU cited journals or articles borrowed on interlibraryloan. Article download data was collected for unsubscribed titlesthat were accessible by library users when IP ranges wereregistered for the product. For example, open access titles (BioMedCentral), titles available via aggregators with or without embar-goes, titles included in JSTOR, previously cancelled titles for whichsome online access was maintained by post cancellation rights, ortitles for which there was a free trial period were recorded in theSDD. Unsubscribed titles in Priority 1 were evaluated for additionto the collection.

The separation of interlibrary loan data by date (articles prior to1997 and articles thereafter) allowed the selector to decide if a

Table 6. Sample of abbreviated SDD provided to Humanities and Social Science faculty to prioritize titles

Humanities andSocial SciencesJournal TitlesApril 2009

Library Locationand Format

Summaryof Usage

Information

WSU Authoredpapers from2006-08 Webof Science®

WSU Citedpapers from2006-08 Webof Science®

TotalRecordedUses for2008

Journalcost/usefor titleswith use

data

2009Estimated

Price(Total)

Priority(Rate as1, 2, or 3) Hum/Soc—Topic

Advertising Age HollTerrReserve-Prt and

online via EBSCOhost

High Use 3 2,287 $0.07 $165 Communications

Advertising Ageand Point

HollTerr-Prt No Use Data $0 Communications

Advertising RedBooks. Agencies

HollTerr-Prt No Use Data $1,785 Communications

Adweek HollTerr-Prt andonline via EBSCOhost

High Use 210 $1.58 $331 Communications

African ArchaeologicalReview

Internet viaSpringerLink

Low Use 7 $56.81 $398 Anthropology

AmericanAnthropologist

HollTerr-Prt andonline via Wileyand backfilesvia JSTOR

High Use 2 59 4,290 $0.12 $507 Anthropology

AmericanAntiquity

HollTerr-Prt andonline via JSTORbackfiles only

High Use 4 114 2,726 $0.09 $243 Anthropology

AmericanEthnologist

HollTerr-Prt andonline via Wileyand backfilesvia JSTOR

High Use 11 870 $0.46 $398 Anthropology

American Journalof PhysicalAnthropology

Internet viaWiley

High Use 4 38 288 $7.78 $2,240 Anthropology

Diane Carroll and Joel Cummings Serials Review

current subscription and/or online archive would satisfy thefaculty's need for a given title.

Aggregators and Package Agreements

The SDD has provided the WSU Libraries with a simple methodto examine data for aggregators and packages and to evaluate ofthe importance of consortial and other serial agreements. Forexample, librarians used the SDD extensively during theselection of a general full-text aggregator as part of the processconducted by the State of Washington's Co-operative LibrariesProject (CLP). In this instance an extensive free trial of one

Table 7. Analysis of number of titles, cost, cost per download for titles included i

Permanent collection subscriptions

Current print,microform

Currentprint and

aggregator ⁎

Current printand JSTORarchive ⁎⁎

Current printand online

C

Number of titles 2,575 489 154 531Cost $377,709 $48,614 $47,246 $274,329 $3Download - 149,519 88,558 106,612 8Cost per

download$146.68 $99.42 $306.79 $2.57

Number of titles 18% 3% 1% 4%Cost 9% 1% 1% 7%Download 9% 6% 7%

⁎ Current print and Aggregator: Cost was for print titles; Downloads were includedCost per download was the cost of the print subscription.⁎⁎ Current Print and JSTOR Archive: Cost was for print; JSTOR costs were inclusubscription.⁎⁎⁎ Other: Permanent included non-current subscription with post-cancellationsubscription and other archives such as Nature; Access only includes aggregator colNot all titles in aggregator collections were added to the SDD.⁎⁎⁎⁎ Current Aggregator: Currentb=one month embargo; Costs for aggregators⁎⁎⁎⁎ Open access use includes providers where WSU IP addresses were registere

234

aggregator and paid access to a second aggregator provided theWSU Libraries with data that enabled the librarians to evaluatethese two major full-text databases. The difference in numbersof titles, or subjective analysis of the content of these differenttitles, was done by analyzing spreadsheets made available by therespective companies. An analysis of local usage and citationdata allowed the librarians to make a decision using informationgleaned from the SDD. The differences between the products asthey related to WSU use made the potentially challenging job ofconsensus building within the libraries relatively easy—evenwhen considering dramatic impacts the decision would haveacross the WSU library system. In this process, the SDD was used

n the 2009 SDD

Access only

urrentonlineonly Other ⁎⁎⁎

Currentconsortial

Currentaggregator ⁎⁎⁎⁎

Openaccess ⁎⁎⁎⁎⁎ Other ⁎⁎⁎

4,678 1,736 1,918 1,264 780 532,163,119 $38,300 $0.00 $34,290 $0.00 $40,11961,281 45,155 132,280 123,430 3,615 71,897$3.67 $0.85 $0.00 $0.28 $0.00 $0.56

32% 12% 13% 9% 5% 4%79% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1%54% 3% 8% 8% 0% 5%

in Access Only Total as only the print were part of the permanent collection

ded in Permanent Collection Other; Cost per use was the cost of the prin

rights, JSTOR archives downloads that were not associated with a currenlections that do not list usage by title and non-current aggregator title access

paid for by statewide program and were not included in the total cost.d.

;

t

t.

Table 8. Number and percentage comparisons of titles held permanently oraccess only in the WSU collection

Permanent Total Access only Total Total

Number of titles 10,163 4,494 14,657Cost $3,949,317 $74,409 $4,023,726Download 1,101,606 480,741 1,582,347Cost per download $3.59 $0.15 $2.54

Number of titles 69% 31% 100%Cost 98% 2% 100%Download 70% 30% 100%

Data Driven Collection Assessment using a Serial Decision DatabaseVolume 36, Number 4, 2010

to identify high use titles to which the institution would loseonline access to due to the change in aggregator. Selectors addedsubscriptions as thought necessary based on the analysis of theSDD data to ensure continued access to these titles and a smoothtransition period.

Table 9. Calculation of cost per cited papers for publisher and packages and selec

Collections or Packages fromthe 2010 SDD

Cost/citedpaper

2010 SDD Wfrom 20

BioMed Central $0 1Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) $0 50PubMed Central $0 100National Academy of Science $1 200American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular

Biology (ASBMB)$2 150

American Phytopathological Society $2 150Ecological Society of America $3 50Science (AAAS) $5 200Emerald $5 100Nature (Nature Publishing) $5 150American Physical Society $8 200BioOne $9 150Highwire $10 5000American Chemical Society $10 5000American Institute of Physics (AIP) $13 300American Association of Cancer Research (AACR) $15 1Cell Press $16 150PsycArticles $16 150University of Chicago Press $17 100American Medical Association (AMA) $22 1Ovid LWW Total Access $22 100Oxford University Press $24 300Atypon $25 50IOPscience Extra $32 200IngentaConnect $34 50Palgrave $36 1Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) $37 1Wiley $38 OvePortland Press $48 1ScienceDirect $49 OveSpringerLink $52 5000Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) $56 1Sage $57 150Cambridge $63 50ECS Digital Library $64 1MetaPress $64 1American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) $64 1Nature Publishing (except Nature) $65 150Royal Society $69 1Royal Society of Chemistry $92 1Project MUSE $93 1American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) $101 1Taylor and Francis $179 50IEEE $258 50SPIE $458 1Duke University Press $1,269 1

235

Collection Assessment by Ownership and Format

The WSU Libraries has canceled approximately $750,000 of itssubscriptions since the first SDD was developed in 2007. The librarymust support the information needs central to the mission of WSUand one way to accomplish that was to rely less on purchasing titlespermanently and pursuing access to materials without permanentownership. Those included open access journals, shared titlesavailable through consortial agreements, and subscriptions toaggregator collections. “Permanent” was defined as titles whereonline or print access would be retained up to point of cancellation.Table 7 compares the download usage of titles in the 2009 SDDbased on their format and ownership status. It includes only titlesthat were current subscriptions or had download use data (14,657of 16,090 titles in the SDD). Print subscriptions were broken downinto detailed categories of current print only, current print andonline, current print and JSTOR archive, current print online accessvia aggregator collection. The term “other” included non-current

ted titles from lowest to highest cost

SU Cited papers07-2009 (ISI) Cost range Type of purchase

to 499 Open Access Membership0 to 999 Open Access Membership0 to 1499 Open Access None0 to 2499 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual title0 to 1999 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual title

0 to 1999 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual title0 to 999 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual title0 to 2499 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual title0 to 1499 $1,000 to $19,999 Package0 to 1999 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual title0 to 2499 $20,000 to $39,999 Individual title0 to 1999 $1,000 to $19,999 Packageto 10,000 $80,000 to $99,999 Individual titleto 10,000 $40,000 to $59,999 Package0 to 3499 $40,000 to $59,999 Individual titleto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual title0 to 1999 $20,000 to $39,999 Individual title0 to 1999 $20,000 to $39,999 Package0 to 1499 $20,000 to $39,999 Individual titleto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Package0 to 1499 $20,000 to $39,999 Package0 to 3499 $60,000 to $79,999 Package0 to 999 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual title0 to 2499 $60,000 to $79,999 Package0 to 999 $20,000 to $39,999 Individual titleto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual titleto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Packager 10,000 Over $300,000 Packageto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual titler 10,000 Over $300,000 Individual title and title sharingto 10,000 Over $300,000 Individual title and title sharingto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Package0 to 1999 $100,000 to $149,999 Package0 to 999 $40,000 to $59,999 Packageto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Packageto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual titleto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Package0 to 1999 $100,000 to $149,999 Individual titleto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Individual titleto 499 $20,000 to $39,999 Packageto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Packageto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Package0 to 999 $100,000 to $149,999 Individual title0 to 999 $100,000 to $149,999 Packageto 499 $20,000 to $39,999 Packageto 499 $1,000 to $19,999 Package

Diane Carroll and Joel Cummings Serials Review

titles with downloads uses where online access was eitherpermanent or access only.

This analysis helped to answer difficult questions. WSULibraries subscribed to 2,575 titles that have no online access ata cost of $377,709 (table 7). When the print only titles wereevaluated by assigned priority, only 129 of the titles were priority1 or 2. They were the most vulnerable part of the collection andwill most likely continue to appear in high numbers on potentialcancellation lists. Only 531 titles were print and online subscrip-tions. Print was canceled for most titles that have post cancellationrights over the last eight years. However, an additional 643 printsubscriptions have archival online access (JSTOR) or aggregatoraccess. When a print subscription was not available online exceptfor the archival access in JSTOR, the current print subscriptionbecame vulnerable to cancellation because of low use of the printor no record of use. The samewas also true of the current print thatwas not available online except through an aggregator. Eventhough online access through aggregators was unstable, withbudgets strained, many cancellation decisions made were thelesser of two evils. The SDD with the priority analysis helped tochange some lower use titles to access only while protecting thosetitles that are critical to the university's mission.

The permanent collection included online only titles thatwere 32% of the number of titles within the collection and 79%of the serials collection budget; print was 18% of the titles and9% of the budget; and print and online were 8% of the titles and9% of the budget (table 7). The total for permanent access was69% of the collection and 98% of the budget. Access only titlesrepresented 31% of the titles and only 2% of the budget (see table8). Not included in the cost was an aggregator package purchasewith state funds through the CLP. The cost per downloadwas $3.89for titles permanently held and $0.15 for access only titles,however 70% of the uses came from permanently held titles at30% from access only (table 8). The role once filled by ILL justdecades ago, where ILL was the nearly exclusive method ofobtaining materials not subscribed to by an institutions library,now appears to be shared with access to sources of journal articlesthrough aggregators and consortia agreements.18

Collection Assessment by WSU Authored andCited Papers

Cost per download use for packages can be easily obtained byusing a commercial service. With the SDD, a less common analysisof publisher titles and packages can be calculated: cost per citedpaper. Table 9was created from the 2010 SDD and reflects costs for2009, and titles referenced by WSU authors in their 2007 to 2009publications. The total number of cited papers in the SDD was127,596. Table 9 presents information on 78% of those papers. Theaverage cost per cited paper was $32.

About 43% of the cited papers were fromWiley, ScienceDirect andSpringerLink and these ranged from $38 to $52 per cited paper. About30% of the cited papers cost $10 or less per cited paper and includedOpen Access journals, titles from Highwire Press, AAAS, Emerald, avariety of society publications, the American Chemical Society, andBioOne. Science and Naturewere $5 per paper cited by aWSU author.Nature publicationswithout the titleNaturewere $65 per cited paper.Analysis of cost per referenced paper will be added to the decisionmaking process for the next cycle of cancellations at WSU in FY11.

BudgetThe SDD was useful in forecasting inflation based on the contractterms for titles within the collection instead of using a generalizedinflation forecast for all academic serials. Customized cancellation

236

targets were projected in August for the overall collection budgetbefore renewals were submitted to the subscription agent inSeptember. During the fiscal year, payment information replacedestimated costs and enabled the library staff to track expendituresand to predict problems that could, if not noticed ahead of time,become crises. Conversely the data could reveal opportunitiesbefore it was too late to take advantage of them. By employingsubject data obtained via Ulrich™, the SDD can show collectiondevelopment librarians where their funds are having the mostimpact and that information can be used to support requests for re-allocations or attempts to secure additional funding for these areas.

Above all else, the SDD enabled the library to explain its value tothe University, demonstrating what the value the University getsfor the money that is allocated for the library's collection's budget.It has been especially valuable in an era where the popular andeven sometimes library personnel perception is that the value ofthe library is declining, when the data would strongly suggest thatthe value of the library to its academic users is increasing.

For example, in 2007, low use titles were identified in severalpackage deals. A list of both the subscribed titles and shared accesstitles with citation and usage data was presented to the Deans atWSU. Upon seeing the numbers they contributed funding fromtheir own budgets to allow the libraries to keep the packages forseveral years, thus saving several hundred titles from cancellationthat year. This list produced by the SDD during an extremely tightbudget year was easy to create and had a very high impact. Facultyappreciated receiving this straightforward, objective data.

MarketingThe SDD can also be used to inform the user community of high-use journals and the efforts made by the library to match theirresearch, teaching and outreach needs. In August 2009 an articlefrom WSU Today19 was well received as faculty and otherstakeholders became more aware of this data-driven approach tosupporting WSU research and ensuring that is used mosteffectively (see Appendix 2).

Conclusions

With increasingly complex data available for managing both printand online serials and declining budgets, there is a strong need for amethod of organizing serials data beyond what was available froman integrated library system. In the future, all ILS will need togenerate reports that integrate information about journals from allrecords and allowdata generated fromother sources to beuploaded.There is also a need for an ILS or other commercial product tocompile data from various sources easily, so less time can be spentcoordinating the data and more time can be devoted to analyzing it.

A method of creating priorities has been suggested here, but theadaptability and different methods of analyzing data available tousers of the SDD has not been explored in depth. However, theability to analyze library collections using data driven measuresenabled by the SDD further enables librarians to demonstrate thevalue of their collections at a time of tremendous change in librariesand increasing budget pressures felt by academic institutions.While these quantitativemeasures are not the exclusivemeasure ofvalue to academic libraries, for libraries to effectively serve theeducational and researchneeds of their institutions this data drivenapproach should form the foundation of collection management.The SDD is one solution that can assist in shaping collection formatsand determining ownerships, as well as facilitating consensusbuilding by a providing communication tool based on objectiveinformation to make difficult subjective decisions.

Data Driven Collection Assessment using a Serial Decision DatabaseVolume 36, Number 4, 2010

Appendix 1. Announcement of potential cancellations for 2010.

237

Appendix 2. WSU Today article “Database helps Libraries manage journals.”

Diane Carroll and Joel Cummings Serials Review

238

Data Driven Collection Assessment using a Serial Decision DatabaseVolume 36, Number 4, 2010

Notes

1. Paul Metz and John Cosgriff, “Building a Comprehensive Serials DecisionDatabase at Virginia Tech,” College & Research Libraries 61, no. 4 (2000):324–334.

2. Andree Rathemacher, “E-journal Usage Statistics in Collection ManagementDecisions: A Literature Review,” Chap. 6 in Library Data, ed. Darby Orcutt,(Santa Barbara: ABC-LIO, LLC, 2010), 72–89.

3. Metz and Cosgriff, “Building a Comprehensive Serials Decision,” 324-334.

4. John Gallagher, et al., “Evidence-Based Librarianship: Utilizing Data from allavailable Sources to make Judicious Print Cancellations Decisions,” LibraryCollections, Acquisitions & Technical Services 29 (June 2005): 169–179.

5. Robin A Paynter, “Commercial Library Decision Support Systems: An AnalysisBased on Collection Manager's Needs,” Collection Management 34 (January2009): 31–47.

6. Paynter, “Commercial Library Decision Support Systems,” Collection Manage-ment, 31-47.

7. “Introduction to Release 3 of the COUNTER Code of Practice for Journals andDatabases (Published August 2008). http://www.projectcounter.org/code_practice.html (Accessed August 22, 2010).

8. “ERM as a Service. Powered by SwetsWise.” http://www.swets.com/web/show/id=3124136/langid=42 (Accessed August 22, 2010).

9. EBSCONET® ERM ESSENTIALS™ Fact Sheet. http://www2.ebsco.com/en-us/Documents/prodServices/EBSCONET_ERM_Essentials_Fact_Sheet.pdf (AccessedAugust 22, 2010).

10. Metz and Cosgriff, “Building a Comprehensive Serials Decision,” 324-334.

239

11. Diane Carroll, “Evaluation and Management of Print and Electronic JournalsUsing a Serials Decision Database,” (paper presented at the 23rd AnnualOnline Northwest Conference, Corvallis, Oregon, February 10th, 2006), http://www.ous.edu/onlinenw/2006/program.html (Executive Summary accessAugust 22, 2010).

12. Ibid., 15.

13. Betty Galbraith, “Journal Retention Decisions: Incorporating Use-Statistics as aMeasure of Value,” Collection Management 27 (May 2003): 79–90.

14. Diane Carroll, “Procedures for creating a serials decision database.” https://research.wsulibs.wsu.edu:8443/jspui/handle/2376/2277, (accessed August22, 2010).

15. Diane Carroll, “Procedures for creating a serials decision database. Use ofExcel Merge Macro to merge holdings and use stats for ejournals.” https://research.wsulibs.wsu.edu:8443/jspui/handle/2376/2277, (accessed August22, 2010).

16. Cindy Ellis and Diane Carroll, “WSU Wizard using Excel.” http://research.wsulibs.wsu.edu:8080/dspace/handle/2376/2246, (accessed August 22,2010).

17. “Using Access or Excel to manage your data.” http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/help/HA010429181033.aspx, (accessed August 22, 2010).

18. Joel Cummings, “Full-Text Aggregation: An Examination of MetadataAccuracy and Implications for Resource Sharing,” Serials Review 29 (Spring2003): 11–15.

19. “Assisting faculty, saving money. Database helps Libraries manage journals.”WSU Today Online. Monday, Aug. 24, 2009. http://wsutoday.wsu.edu/pages/Publications.asp?Action=Detail&PublicationID=15305&PageID=21 (accessedAugust 22, 2010).