Vendor Records: A Brief Survey

2007 OCLC CJK Users Group Meeting

Karen T. WeiUniversity of Illinois

March 24, 2007

The Survey

Purposes: Originally, to collect vendor records information for UIUC purposes (we are exploring vendor records in all languages); to share findings with the Users Group

Survey sent out electronically in January 2007 with follow-up as late as early March

Total survey sent: 43 Total survey received back: 38 Return rate: 88%

Does your East Asian Library use vendors records for: 38

Acquisitions only: 7 Cataloging only: 2 Acquisitions/Cataloging: 2 Neither: 27 29% uses vendor records 71% does not use vendor records

Do you use vendor records for: 11

Chinese: Acquisitions: 7 Cataloging: 2 Japanese: Acquisitions: 4 Cataloging: 3 Korean: Acquisitions: 1 Cataloging: 0

If you use Chinese vendors, whose records do you use?

CIBTC: Acquisitions: 6 Cataloging: 2 CNPITC: Acquisitions: 6 Cataloging: 2 Shanghai Library: Cataloging (CJCAT): 1

5 libraries use both for acquisitions

If you use Japanese vendors, whose records do you use?

Kinokunya: Acquisitions: 2 Cataloging: 3 TRC from RLG: Acquisitions: 2 Issedo, Gannando, JPTC: Acquisitions: 1

If you use Korean vendors, whose records do you use?

Panmun: Acquisitions: 1 Eulyoo – One library is providing

them with training so that they can send brief records in the future

Are there fees involved for acquisitions records in:

Chinese: Yes: 1 No: 6 Japanese: Yes: 2 No: 2 Korean: No: 1

Are there fees involved for cataloging records in:

Chinese: Yes: 2 No: 0 Japanese: Yes: 3 No: 0

Are you satisfied with the quality of the acquisitions

records in:

Chinese: Yes: 7 Note: so far Japanese: Yes: 4 Korean: Yes: 1

Are you satisfied with the quality of the cataloging records in:

Chinese: Yes: 2 Note: Each vendor is different; some are satisfactory,

some require checking for authority work; with modifications and localization by both the Chinese librarian and cataloger

Japanese: Yes: 3 Note: Mostly ok; some minor problems with subject

headings; but no authority work is contributed

Have you experienced any problems in loading vendor

records into your local system?

No problems: 5 Note: loading one record one at a time; can

revise some minor problems

Yes: 5 Note: initially; lots of problems but solved and

settled at long last; only in the beginning stage; it is also possible when there is a shift in staff; correct some typos; record transferring

What is your local system?

Voyager: 12 III: 10 Ex Libris: 7 Sirsi: 6 Aleph: 1 Horizon: 1 Gladis: 1

If you are not currently using vendor records, how likely are you in using them

in the near future? Highly likely: 6 Likely: 4 Not Likely: 8 Don’t know: 7 Did not answer: 2

Reasons for not considering the vendor records (1)

Quality control: concerned about quality of subject headings and classifications

Compatibility with local systems: Need efforts/times to resolve issues between US, China, Japan, and Korea; complication in loading

Workflow issues: if vendor records are not received in time that will affect our workflow; need to review workflow in addition to solving the technical difficulties; concern on limitation on records supply

Systems priorities; need their assistance to test and/or implement vendor records

Reasons for not considering the vendor records (2)

May not be cost-effective Not satisfied with Chinese test records Smaller collection; no need for vendor records Have trained cataloging staff in house Can’t create order records in RLIN anymore

and OCLC does not allow acquisitions records Our library’s system does not support CJK

input or display Already outsourced to OCLC Have not had discussion Decision made by Library administration

Comments/Experiences to share (1)

Takes resolve/time to fine-tune the download and merging of records though it is cost-effective in the long run

Even if libraries chose to use vendor records, they still need professionals to oversee the project and perform quality maintenance

Received excellent initial bibliographic records from CNPITC

Not too strict on acquisitions records as they will be replaced eventually; for cataloging records vendors need to follow AACR2r rules

Vendor records are great service; save time and quality is better than the ones that our students create

Would love to hear from other libraries experience

Comments/Experiences to share (2)

Will have vendor records for Chinese e-books Successfully test-loaded vendor records from

CIBTC and Beijing Guotu into Voyager May look at Japanese vendor records as more

Japanese books have only provisional records from Waseda University or no records at all

May outsource CJK acquisitions/cataloging because of shortage of quality CJK librarians

Doubt the quality of vendor records first; short acquisitions records may be acceptable; if vendors do not produce fast enough it will affect workflow

Thank You!

Special Thanks To:

Arizona; ASU; Brown; Chicago; Columbia; Cornell; Duke; Emory; Florida; Harvard; Hawaii; Illinois; Indiana; Iowa, Kansas; LC; Michigan; Minnesota; North Carolina; Oregon; Ohio State; Penn State; Pittsburgh; Princeton; Stanford; Texas; UBC; UC-Berkeley; UC-Davis; UCLA; UC-Riverside; UCSB; UCSD; USC; Virginia; Washington U at St. Louis; Wisconsin; Yale