redefining the 21st century collection
DESCRIPTION
Presentation from "Game Changers" conference hosted by OCLC in March 2012.TRANSCRIPT
Constance MalpasProgram OfficerOCLC Research
Redefining the 21st Century CollectionRedefining the 21st Century Collection
Game Changers
19 March 2012
OCLC Research: what we do OCLC Research: what we do
Special focus on libraries in research institutions:
in US, libraries supporting doctoral-level education account for <20% of academic libraries;>70% of library spending
changes in this sector impact library system as a whole; collective preservation and access goals, shared infrastructure, &c.
Supports global cooperative by providing internal data and process analyses to inform enterprise service development (R&D) and deploying collective research capacity to deepen public understanding of the evolving library system
OCLC Research: how we workOCLC Research: how we work
OCLC has a particular interest in understanding how the scope and scale of library service provision are changing, and a special responsibility to help libraries plan for and implement shared services. To advance thinking on these issues within and beyond the library community, OCLC Research has developed a dedicated program area that draws on OCLC’s unique research capacity and broad institutional reach, encompassing both quantitative analysis , community consultation and outreach . . .
RoadmapRoadmap
• Collections grid – shift in attention and resources
• Sourcing / scaling - group strategies for a changed environment
• Mega-regions – framework for exploring the ‘natural’ organization of the library system
Along the way, some illustrative examples of how the collections environment is evolving…
Please feel free to interrupt and ask questions!
Low Stewards
hip
High Stewards
hip
In few collectio
ns
In many collectio
ns
Collections Grid
Research & Learning Materials
Open Web Resources
Purchased materialsLicensed E-Resources
Special CollectionsLocal Digitization
Licensed
Purchased
Credit: Dempsey, Childress (OCLC Research. 2003)
Low Stewards
hip
High Stewards
hip
In few collectio
ns
Licensed
Purchased
Limited
High attention
Less attention
TacticalAspiratio
nal
Occasional
Intentional
Library attention and investment are shiftingIn many collectio
ns
OCLC Research, 2010.
Low Stewards
hip
High Stewards
hip
In Few Collection
s
In Many Collection
s
Academic institutions are driving this change
Licensed
Purchased
Redirection of library resource
today
+5 yrs
OCLC Research, 2010.
Low Stewards
hip
High Stewards
hip
In Few Collectio
ns
In Many Collectio
ns
Externalize non-distinctive operations, internalize value creation
Licensed
Purchased
organizational impact, institutional
reputation
‘commodity’ resources, less
distinctive value
collections of distinction, centers
of excellence
OCLC Research, 2010.
ALow
Stewardship
High Stewards
hip
In Few Collectio
ns
In Many Collectio
ns
Shared Infrastructure
Dspace, Fedora, Blackboard, Sakai
ContentDM, HathiTrust
Shared print,Shared storage
Group licensing, ArchiveITERM,
Portico, &c
OCLC Research, 2010.
Institution WebGroup
Third-Party
Public
Collaborative DSpaceTripod:
(Tri-collegelibrary catalog)
RePEc
BibliographicStandards
(LC Classification,MESH, LCSH)
OhioLink(resource sharing &
negotiation oflicenses &
subscriptions)
JISC CollectionsVTLS Virtua(hosted ILS)
worldcat.org
PubMed
Sou
rcin
gScaling
Mechanisms forexternalization
Where are groups and consortia in all this?Where are groups and consortia in all this?
• Leveraging economies of scale to support cost-effective externalization
• Supporting an expanding scope of collaborative activity
FromLibrary automationResource-sharing/ILLGroup licensingCoop. collection developm’t
ToShared printDigitization at scaleData curationImpact measures, advocacy
Can existing cooperative structures do all this?
Shared services build HE capacity
Third-party source, provisioning
Group (national) scale, impact
Institution WebGroup
Third-Party
Public
Collaborativ
e
CRKN
Sou
rce o
f P
rovis
ion
Scale of Benefit
Mechanisms forexternalization
Licensed / Electronic
JSTOR
PORTICO
Tennessee Electronic
Library
[Scrib’d
library.nu]
MeL
OCUL Scholars
Portal
LOCKSS
0 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 40,000,000 45,000,0000
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Library Materials Expenditures – derived from ARL 2008-2009 statistics
Lic
ensed C
onte
nt
as %
of
Lib
rary
Mate
rials
$
Harvard
Yale
U Illinois, Chicago
Michigan
Princeton
AlbertaAuburn
Columbia
Johns Hopkins
Majority of research libraries shifting toward
e-centric acquisitions, service model
Shrinking pool of libraries with mission and resources to sustain print preservation as ‘core’ operation – 25?
OCLC Research, 2011.
E / P
Is spending more on an individual basis a viable solution?
Cf. “Radical collaboration – new, drastic, sweeping and energetic…”
James G. Neal
46M print book titlesin North American libraries
~5M in shared storage
4.8M HathiTrust books
in WorldCa
t
[‘20M scanned’]
4.3M Google Books in WorldCat
Print preservation: it’s academic.Print preservation: it’s academic.
889M WorldCat holdings:~60% in academic libraries
(~25% in ARL libraries )Based on WorldCat statistics.
{
Game changer? Books in PlayGame changer? Books in Play
This doesn’t look like play…
Learning how to Play with Books
As devices and formats evolve, digital books are
becoming increasingly
congenial toys (and tools) for a new generation
6 in 10 students…
Institution WebGroup
Third-Party
Public
Collaborativ
e
Sou
rce o
f P
rovis
ion
Scale of Benefit
Mechanisms forexternalization
Purchased Collections
CIC SPA
NERD(Pr)Internet
Archive?
UC RLF
FLAREOhio Depository
WESTWRLC
Optimal locus of coordination, shared service provision will vary
Sou
rcin
g
ScalingInstitution Group Web
Internalized
Collaborative
Public
Third-Party
43
2
1
StraightExternalization
Self-Sufficiency
CollaborativeExternalization
Web-scaleExternalization
University of Chicago Mansueto Library
WESTCIC Shared PrintHathi PrintNN/LM Print ArchivingASERL Depository
New England Regional Depository
Google Books?
Institution WebGroup
Third-Party
Public
Collaborativ
e
Sou
rce o
f P
rovis
ion
Scale of Benefit
Mechanisms forexternalization
Digital / Digitized Content
ContentDM hosted
American Memory
Luna InsightArtStor
Fedora
DSpace
Kentuckiana Digital Library
HathiTrust
FCLA Digital Archive
Ohio DRC
Value lies in impact on institutional reputation – not (or less) on transforming publication
models
maximizing global reach
D
Shared infrastructure: a survival strategyShared infrastructure: a survival strategy
Source: University of California Systemwide Library and Scholarly Information Advisory Committee Library Planning Task Force Interim Report, May, 2011 .
UC libraries aim to achieve $15M in cost reductions in 2011-2012
In this climate, shared services must deliver real
impact
http://www.flbog.org/about/librarytaskforce/_doc/Unified-Library-Services-Business-Plan-Final-Report-From-the-Chancellors-12-22-11.pdf
A 22M Budget for a 21st Century Library . . .A 22M Budget for a 21st Century Library . . .
EP
D
Cooperative infrastructure: scaling upCooperative infrastructure: scaling up
http://www.creativeclass.com/whos_your_city/maps/#Mega-Regions_of_North_America
Orbis -Cascade
ASERLGWLA
University of Idaho
Johns Hopkins
Univ. of Maryland
SCELC
CIC
FCLA
NERL
7:1
3:1
6:1
9:1
3:1
3:1
3:1
2:1
3:1
4:1
5:1
3:1
Size and Density (holdings : publications) of Mega-region Collections
Where is aggregate library resource most abundant?
Where are changes in sourcing and scaling most likely to occur? OCLC Research, 2012.
How can we leverage existing networks to strengthen library cooperation?
OCLC Research, 2012.
For discussionFor discussion
• Accountability and assessment – how are consortia measuring and communicating the value of current investments in print, electronic and digital content?
• Impact and advocacy – what counts as adequate impact? Is cost saving enough? Are shared services enabling partners to ‘collaborate to customize’?
• Sourcing and scaling – where is cooperative action likely to deliver maximum benefit? When does externalization to third parties make sense?
Thanks for your attention.Thanks for your attention.
[email protected]@ConstanceM