Whither ILL? Wither ILL: The Changing Nature of Resource Sharing in an Age of

Electronic Content

Northwest Interlibrary Loan and Resource Sharing Conference

Portland, OregonSeptember 13, 2013

Michael Levine-Clark, University of DenverLenny Allen, Oxford University Press

ILL is a vitally important library service!YES!

We must have the right to loan our ebooks to another library!

NO!

End vs. Means

• Goal should be to get our users access to the broadest possible collection, as fast as possible, to respond to curricular and research needs

• ILL solves that goal for tangible items• There are better options for digital resources

Collection Building in the Print World

• You snooze, you lose– Books go out of print, so

crucial to buy at point of publication

• Approval plans

• Speculative purchasing– High publishing output– Low budgets– Low use

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alancleaver/4293345629/

Annual Book Production

Books Cataloged 2000-2004 (126,953 Titles)

ILL in the Print World• Solves multiple problems

– Can’t buy everything – Books go out of print– We don’t know what our users will need– Often the book my user needs is sitting unused on

another library’s shelves– ILL is convenient, fast, reliable– ILL is often the only way to get a book

http://www.flickr.com/photos/emdot/502476008/

Process from the User’s Perspective

1. Identify the book2. Search the catalog (not available)3. Request via ILL4. Wait a while (hopefully not too long)5. Receive a notification that it’s arrived6. Go to the library to check the book out7. (Perhaps) renew the book8. Go to the library to return the book

Process for the Borrowing library

1. Receive request2. Verify in local catalog3. Search, request4. Wait5. Receive the book from another library6. Notify student7. Wait8. Return book to the lending library

Process for the Lending Library

1. Receive the request2. Check for location, availability3. Pull the book, check it out4. Pack the book and mail it5. Wait6. Receive the book (hopefully)7. Unpack, check back in8. Return the book to the shelf

Problems with the Current Model

• From the student’s perspective– Need to wait– (may not be intuitive)

• From the libraries’ perspective– Expensive

• Staff time• Mailing costs• ILL fees

• From the lending library’s perspective– Book is now unavailable for local users

Still the Best Model for Print

• Relatively fast• Relatively reliable• Relatively efficient• Relatively cheap• Solves those problems

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bowena/2632507358/

ILL For E-Resources?

1. Identify the e-book2. Search the catalog (not

available)3. Request via ILL4. Wait a while (hopefully

not too long)5. Receive a link (or PDF)6. Perhaps link expires

http://www.flickr.com/photos/teddo/120756115/

ILL for E-Resources (Library Process)

Borrowing Library1. Receive request from

student2. Verify in local catalog3. Search, request4. Wait5. Receive a link or PDF from

another library6. Notify student

Lending Library1. Receive request from

borrowing library2. Check rights for ILL3. Send a PDF or link, perhaps

also turning off access locally

What’s Wrong with that Picture?

• Student has to wait• Work for ILL staff in two

libraries• Students at lending

library may lose access

• All of that makes sense for tangible items, but not for e-resources

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kareneliot/2710464400/

The Ideal

• Immediate access– Student has what they

need while the project is still fresh

• Low cost (or at least lower cost)

• Unmediated (or at least minimally mediated)

• On the platform that makes sense

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mlibrary/7958951352/

Toward a Model

• Short-term loan• Via e-book aggregator(s)

• Via publisher platform(s)

• Via a third party (OCLC)

• Via library discovery tools

Low cost, brief accessInfrastructure exists

Multiple places to goEven more places to go

Even more contentIdeal for widest content,

easiest workflowUnmediated, intuitive

Short-Term Loan (STL)

• Offered already by major aggregators– EBL, ebrary, EBSCO

• Variable length– One day to one month

• Fraction of list price• Only requires licensing

• Limited to certain titles• Requires working with many vendors

Third Party

• Need to have STL capability built into system across multiple vendors/publishers

• Would still require licensing• Single source

– One search– One invoice– One workflow

• Mediated

STL Via Library Discovery Interface

• Unmediated– Immediate access

• Requires library to load records for vast numbers of titles– Financial risk?– Is this collection development?

• Isn’t this the logical end point of Demand-driven acquisition?

A Hypothesis• Any given student can only use n books (or other

resources) in a given year• Libraries can provide more and more books and

see increased use, but at some point they will surpass the number of books (or other resources) their students can use

• If the budget will cover n books per student, then a library can provide an infinite number of titles via STL without ever being in danger of overspending.

Articles!

• Same principles apply– Immediate access– Price point– Workflow– Discovery

Buy In

• Librarians– Collection development vs ILL is a meaningless

(and confusing) distinction– ILL is a wonderful process – but not the ideal

solution given evolving access models• Publishers

– Make ALL content available via an STL model– Through a third party– At affordable prices

We Should be Demanding

• That publishers provide STL capabilities for all books and articles– At costs equal to or cheaper than ILL costs

• That there be easy methods for integrating these into our discovery tools (unmediated) or a third-party system (mediated)

• That our users always get what they need, immediately (or very close to it)

ILL in an Age of Electronic Content

A Publisher Perspective

25

• What we hear from libraries:

– Make everything available via DDA• Budgets are tight • Instant access, (virtually) seamless user experience – when

unmediated• Only pay for content that is actually used• So if there is proven user demand, we’ll pay for it

ILL in an Age of Electronic Content

A Publisher Perspective

26

• What we also hear from libraries

– Allow for ebooks to be shared via existing ILL process– But ebook ILL clearly presents certain challenges for

publishers

– And doesn’t ILL represent a very specific form of

user demand?

27

• STL could make digital ILL sustainable for both publishers and libraries

– Publishers receive revenue for content that has shown clear demand by the end user.

– The library is able to provide instant access to the patron requesting the content at lower cost than traditional print ILL

– End user receives content they want at the moment of need

– Allows for a shift in cost to ownership when demand is repeated

– Allows for a shift in revenue from shipping to the Academy

Short Term LoanShort Term LoanA Potential Win Win Solution?

Sustainability

28

• Scholarly publishing is at a critical juncture• How do we remain viable businesses even as we:

– Maintain a massive print infrastructure

– Develop and evolve an efficient ebook supply chain• File conversion• File warehousing• File delivery• Metadata

STL: Future Considerations

29

• Still very early days for ebooks and ebook sales models• And still relatively early for ebook sales data as PA, DDA, or

STL• Do we have the right parameters in place for STL?• Do we have the right pricing models in place?• How many loans should trigger actual purchase?

Thank You

Michael Levine-Clarkmichael.levine-clark@du.edu

Lenny Allenlenny.allen@oup.com