HKALL: Overview and Status Update

Tony FergusonUniversity of Hong Kong LibrarianActing Director of IT in Learning

Background

April 2002, a JULAC taskforce with representatives from 8 institutions were charged to explore: The experience of other consortia employing user initiated

document delivery services

The use of software/utilities/systems which could be used by the JULAC Libraries

The resource implications (e.g. reduce ILL-based borrowing and lending but will likely see significant increase on circulation increase, etc.)

September 2002, an interim report recommended: That such a service was a good idea for HK

That a suitable software platform be selected and implemented

System Selection Prerequisites

The taskforce then went to work to figure out which system to recommend. They decided upon 5 “drop dead ”criteria. The system must:

1. Accept user initiated online interlibrary requests

2. Support unmediated interlibrary requests directly from users to lending libraries

3. Support book loans

4. Check incoming interlibrary requests automatically against the user’s own collection, and block that request if the requested item was available on the shelf

5. Supports Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK) characters

The Taskforce selected INNReach because

It was the only system to meet all criteria

CJK was a showstopper

Because all 8 institutions were already III customers, implementation would be much easier

More Background

Irrespective of the Taskforce’s findings, only 3 libraries were enthusiastic enough to try the system out. They ran an experiment from January to September 2004.

Remaining 5 adopted a “wait and see” approach

Their concerns included: Cost Impact on local collections and users Impact on library staff Possible threat of reduced funding

The three trial participants

Lingnan University (LU)

ca 400,000 physical vols City University of Hong Kong (CityU)

ca 1.1 million physical volumes

University of Hong Kong (HKU)

ca 2.3 million physical vols

Major Problems Encountered

1. Building the HKALL Union Catalogue - Matching CJK records problem

2. Three institutions needed to establish complimentary circulation rules and policies:

- Minimise policies that interfere with local circulation practices while still trying to maximise use of the mega collection;

- ensure that the policies would not undermine the interest of users in the owning libraries; and

- make the policies as simple as possible so that:

they are easily understood by both users and operational staff members;

operational procedures are simple and administrative costs are minimal;

they can readily include new participating libraries.

Reproduced from Innovative Interfaces: <http://www.iii.com/innreach/index.shtml#systemmgmt>

Scenario 1: A book is not owned by the local library

How HKALL Works

We do not have this title in our library. We search HKALL

Copies available at both CU and PolyU

Make request

Authenticate against local patron database

Title successfully requested!

Patron receives email pickup notice after the book is transferred to the borrowing site

Scenario 2: A book IS owned by the local library

We have 2 copies but both are checked out and one has 5 holds and the other has 3 holds. Check HKALL

UST has a copy available

Make request

Authenticate against local patron database

Book successfully requested.

Patron receives email pickup notice after the book is transferred to the borrowing site

Major Lessons Learned

1. Many more items borrowed using InnReach than traditional ILL (several hundred percent more)

2. Cheaper to process borrowing and lending transactions (40-45 percent cheaper)

3. Users loved it

Typical comments

“Excellent on the whole”

“… this scheme has been excellently carried out. With this scheme, resources in the universities can be better utilised.

“HKALL simply makes life easier. Thank you…….”

“It should include all eight institutions in HK.”

Post Experiment Major Events

Following many discussions the 8 university libraries decided to apply to the government’s University Grants Committee for funding

They requested hardware, software, and a limited amount of staff start up funds

They were awarded nearly all the requested funds

We began installation of software, figuring out what were the challenges, and solutions during the summer 2005

We had a soft launch September 1, 2005

Challenges that were solved or we learned to live with

Chinese character problems. Traditional and simplified Chinese records were not merging; Japanese variants had the same problem.

HKALL wanted to have call numbers in item records but some libraries didn’t put them there and so the system couldn’t find them. Innovative had to figure out a solution.

Sites didn’t want to all have the same borrowing profiles.

Findings so far

Super growth in amount of borrowing and lending

Social Science; Sci/Tech; Lang/Lit still most requested subjects

Super fastUndergrads and post graduate

students the largest users

Growth in Use: 3 Test Libraries

Items delivered September to November 2004 and 2005 compared (INNReach in place both years):

City U 350% increaseHKU 239% increaseLingnan U 237% increase

Subjects Borrowed (8 Libraries)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

September to November

Social Science

Sci/Tech

Lang/Lit

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Sept to November

Western

Chinese

Language of Materials Borrowed

Speed of Delivery (8 Libraries)

(Same day 99.7%)

Same Day

1+ Days

User Types

User Types

Undergraduates

Postgraduates

Sub-degreestudents

Academic staff

Non-academicstaff

Research staff

Undergraduates 53.7%

Postgraduates 24.4%

Sub-degree students 6.7%

Academic staff 6.6%

Non-academic staff 6.3%

Research staff 2.3%

Where are we now?

The program is so successful that we have to find another courier service

HKU is going to experiment with a RAPID non returnable INNReach related module.

We are about to replace the test hardware with new hardware

We will be loading new Innopac software that will effect INNReach

INNReach will be the borrowing system that will be used in our shared storage facility

Future issues: allow other HK or China libraries to join INNReach?

INNReach is the best example of DEEP COLLABORATION between academic institutions in Hong Kong!!!

Rapid Option

Works like INNReach1. Patron discovers they lack the needed journal2. Click to Rapid to search the Rapid catalogue – just like

INNReach3. Patr finds the title (hopefully)4. Patron provides the specific author, volume, issue,

page, etc. information5. Some supplementing of the citation takes place6. Information transferred to ILLIAD7. ILL staff process the request in RAPID8. Possible to create a HK pod in RAPID so that HK

libraries’ collections are first looked at.